excerpt from Revolution of the Thirsty

… as images of the uprising filled my television screen, I was surprised that commentators seemed unaware of the water crisis, and of the global geopolitical pressures that had made the crisis all but certain. The American media focused mainly on internal corruption and oppression. They did not report on the role of the international superpowers in influencing the Mubarak regime to privatize the country’s public land and water; they did not report, for instance, that since the 1990s the World Bank has argued that privatization enhances “efficiency” and has mandated the policy as a condition for making loans; and that in 2004 this mandate led the Egyptian government to privatize its water utilities, transforming them into corporations which were required to operate at a profit, and which thus began to practice “full cost recovery,” passing along the cost of new infrastructure through rate increases. [7]

Within months of privatization, the price of water doubled in some areas of the capital, and citizens started to protest. At one demonstration in northern Cairo, in 2005, “angry residents chased bill collectors down the streets.” [8] Those who could not afford the new rates had little choice but to go to the city’s outskirts to collect water from the dirty Nile River canals. [9] In 2007, protestors in the Nile Delta blocked the main coastal road after the regional water company diverted water from farming and fishing towns to affluent resort communities. “The authorities sent riot police to put down these ‘disturbances,’” wrote Philip Marfleet, a professor at the University of East London, even as “water flowed uninterrupted to the gated communities, and to country clubs and upmarket resorts of the Mediterranean and the Red Sea.” [10] In the next few years such demonstrations only grew in intensity. As activist Abdel Mawla Ismail has noted, “Thirst protests or intifadas, as some people have called them, started to represent a new path for a social movement.” From this path the revolution that consumed the nation in 2011 seems inevitable. People can live in poverty for a long time; they cannot live without water.

…

Egypt’s boom in luxury suburbs began in the 1990s with the first wave of privatization of government agencies and public land. Vast swaths of desert were sold at bargain prices to friends and relatives of President Mubarak, who also received guarantees of infrastructure like roads, electricity and water lines. [11] These insider deals led to outrageous claims of water rights, like the assurance of unlimited fossil groundwater to a Saudi prince who wanted to grow food in the Sahara. International companies vied for contracts to build water treatment facilities. To be sure, life in the Saharan suburbia was not always as idyllic as advertised; developers of gated communities typically promised reverse osmosis filtration, but many found it cheaper to hook up to municipal water lines — and notoriously unreliable state-run water treatment plants — than to build dedicated facilities. [12] Still, residents paying up to $350 monthly in maintenance and utility fees expected clean water to flow freely when they turned on the tap, and more often than not it did. A recent study of two Cairo suburbs found that 69 percent of residents in Sixth of October City and 42 percent in New Cairo had tap water available at all times. [13]

All the while, as water was flowing and taxpayer money shifting to the exurban oases, millions of residents of old Cairo struggled with little access to sanitary facilities. The ostentatious water wealth that made possible the “greener side of life” was becoming a symbol of government corruption. The Revolution of the Thirsty was gathering strength.”

Read the article in full! highly recommended

on the 45th anniversary of the murder of Che Guevara, a man who linked issues, believed in struggle for justice and lived a life filled with hope and grounded in solidarity, on the anniversary of his death, let’s think of the many other ‘Che Guevara’s who are around us today, who have touched and inspired us today.  Let’s talk about them.

Yalla, tell me of the Che Guevaras in your life.

A few weeks ago, at a regional conference in beautiful Tunis (which is another discussion), I shared tea with almonds with a colleague from Kuwait.  Naturally, our conversation meandered to Lebanon, my home.

“Ah,” he said, “I go to Lebanon every summer; I have a home there.”

Immediately, I thought of the Metn, the glorious pine forests and their intoxicating smell, the red-roofed stone homes, the curving roads, the terraced agriculture — and how all of it is changing rapidly.  The pine forests having to battle against, not only the increasing forest fires, but, much more dangerously, the urbanization. They are being cut down, replaced with guady, large villas — some even with swimming pools — to house summer visitors.  Their swimming pools contribute to water scarcity for the farmers who are still, with extreme difficulty, trying to survive. And, in the process, and with thanks to the absentee policies of the Lebanese government, the cost of the land has sky rocketed.

“How lucky for you,” I said. “I cannot afford a home in my mother’s village. I cannot afford to buy land in the mountains. I – and many many others like me – can barely afford to rent an apartment in our own country.”

“Yes… but Lebanon is so beautiful. Particularly Beirut.”

I sighed inwardly.  After 7 months living in Cairo, I have grown wary of people claiming to love Beirut.  What draws them – all too often – to my capitol are the very things that push me away.

“What do you find beautiful about Beirut?,” I asked him.

“Just look at those new buildings!” There was no sarcasm in his tone.

“Those buildings,” I said. “You mean, the over-priced, million-dollar-plus apartment high-rises that block out the view of the sea to everyone else, that encroach along the coast, that contribute to inflation? Or do you mean the hotels that have stolen the public coast?”

“Well… You have Zaitouna Bay. That is wonderful,” he continued.

“aH. Zaitouna Bay. A privately-owned, overly-priced, exclusive area for restaurants and shops in which we are not allowed to rest on the grass. That was built on reclaimed land – and thus is legally public property. That Zaitouna Bay?

“Look,” I continued. “What is important is that a country be for its citizens, first and foremost. The coastline should be for all, not to be limited to those who can afford to pay the $20 entrance fee to swim in their own sea.  We should be able to own land in our own country.  A country should serve its people, and not become a tourist-spot for others.”

…

Meanwhile, there is a campaign in Lebanon to reclaim the commons, to enforce the law that states – clearly – that the beaches are public property.  That campaign — Masha3 — is illustrated here: Finding Common Ground

“In flagrant disregard of the Lebanese law that states that the sea is public property, the publicly owned land reclaimed from the sea adjacent to Beirut’s downtown area is being gradually transferred to the rampant property developer Solidere, a private company renowned for its elitist and exclusive developments.

In a bid to retain the remaining reclaimed land, the Masha3 (Arabic for commons) movement aims to unite and organize efforts to reclaim it for public use.”

For more on the commons-campaign, refer to their facebook page

And about that Zaitouna Bay, the brilliant Mohammed Zbeeb has this article in today’s English Al-Akhbar

Zaytouna Bay, the luxury seafront development built on reclaimed land along Beirut’s downtown coastline, is the embodiment of everything worth resisting in Lebanon: corruption, the theft of public property, the destruction of the city’s history and seafront, and the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots.

The entity responsible for the Zaytouna Bay project is the Beirut Waterfront Development company, which built on the old Normandy landfill by artificially extending the coastline in an environmentally damaging process known as “reclamation.” Beirut Waterfront Development is jointly owned by Solidere, the private company of two former Prime Ministers – Rafik and Saad Hariri – and Stow Capital partners.

Read the article in full here: “Public Property…for the rich only”

The struggle continues… to create a country for the people

I visited Tunisia recently.  [Note: I will refer to Tunisia as 'Tunis' because that it is its name in Arabic.] Tunis el-Khadra’ – Green Tunis.  I expected to like it; I didn’t expect to love it, to feel at home amidst its people and amidst the calm, relaxing natural beauty of the country.

For the five days I was there, I awoke (with one exception) quite early to walk on the beach.  I walked from the hotel (Ramada Plaze, in Gammarth) to the beach.  There was no fence separating one part of the beach from the other.

I shared the beauty of the sunrise, every morning, with a few local fishermen (who were looking, quite unsuccessfully, for salmon), and a young man who played with his dogs, and two joyful independent stray dogs.

The hotel was a good distance away from the coast. No house claimed the coast. No fence. No fee.  Rather, the beach, the sea, the coast line were – and are – clearly for all, for the public, for the people.

..

During the time that I was there, a woman was raped by the police.  She was found in a car with her boyfriend when the police apprehended her and raped her while in custody.  The judge then charged with indecent behavior (due to her actions in the car with her boyfriend).  Appalling.  Yes.

Yet – the response from the Tunisian society was beautiful!  All the media stood with her. No one claimed she had asked for it, or brought it on herself. No one attempted to justify the acts of the police.  No one attempted to justify the action of the judge.  There in lies the beauty, the hope, the inspiration.  I am no longer shocked by crimes of the police or judicial system; is it the response of the people that I look to.

On a Tunisian talk show, the female and male hosts had four guests, two men and two female.  All of them were consistent in their objection to violence against women.  The discussion was not a debate, a presentation of different perspectives. Rather, it was a logical, rational, and passionate discussion about what to do now, why did the police behave this way, how the girl – and others – can be protected, what people should do… It was inspirational!

I remembered a Lebanese talk show. (Unfortunately, I don’t remember the particular tv show).  The topic was domestic violence. The host had invited two men and two women – to discuss the issue. The women, quite pathetically, argued that domestic violence was wrong, and the men, with the encouragement of the host, argued that domestic violence was fine, that they beat their wives and they were right to do so.  Domestic violence – for that show – becamse a perspective, a viewpoint!

Tunis remains the Arab country with strong legislation for women – and thus for society as a whole.

…

Even now, with people agitating against Tunis being pushed into the hands of the “Muslim Brotherhood,” even now, with difficult struggles for economic justice, I see in Tunis what I dream of for Lebanon, for all the Arab countries.

Yes, perhaps my eyes and heart are clouded with the beauty of the country, the wonderful warmth and easy-nature of the people, the sweet sound of the Tunisian accent, the rich food. Perhaps I am romanticizing the country. Allow me that romance. Allow it for a moment.

Coming from Lebanon, I realize that the most basic of rights — the right to the commons, the right to be safe from harm, the right to be treated as a full human being — are not that pervasive.  Coming from my childhood in Bahrain, and my youth in North Carolina, the same applies.

The struggle for equality continues in Tunis, yes.  May the Left in Tunis continue to grow in strength. May Tunis continue to inspire us all. May we all continue to inspire each other.

So, last night was the second of the so-called presidential debates. I say, ‘so called,’ because only the Democrat vs Republican are allowed on these televised debates. Absent and silenced are the many “third-parties” (The Green Party, the Libertarian Party, the Justice Party) – Absent and silenced were open questions from the floor in this second so-called debate.  Absent and silenced was an assessment of how much these two fellows (Romney and Obama) actually agree.

Check out these links:

• Secret Debate Contract Reveals Obama and Romney Campaigns Exclude Third Parties, Control Questions
• The Lame Rules for Presidential Debates: A Perfect Microcosm of US Democracy: Secret collusion between the two parties, funded by corporations, run by lobbyists: all the ingredients are there
• Expanding the VP Debate: Third-Party Candidates Challenge Biden & Ryan on War, Economy, Healthcare
• Third Party Candidates Join in Real Time on Democracy Now!’s Live Coverage of [First] Presidential Debate
• Glenn Greenwald: Presidential Debates Highlight “Faux Objectivity” of Mainstream Journalists

Meanwhile, after this second alleged debate, folks will discuss who actually “won” — and typically it is not the issues that are brought up here but the style and wit and eloquence of the speaker.

Bob Witanek spoke – with style and wit and eloquence -  on his facebook status, as to who actually won last night’s debate:

And the winner is . . . well, let’s start with the losers: 1. The victims of US warfare for the next 4 years that one or the other imperial POTUS will carry out, including those blown up by drone bombs, tomahawk, 2300 pounders, bunker bombers, white phosphorus – as well as those strangled by sanctions imposed based upon lies and deception; 2. those whose suffering including starvation, worker super exploitation, death from curable disease and from lack of access to potable water, various other forms of super oppression by the sharpening of exploitation enforced by the full mechanisms of imperialist meddling and intervention; 3. those domestically whose standard of living will continue to free fall due to rising food, energy, medical, insurance and dropping compensation, employment levels – as well as retracting safety net – so the loser is most of the population of the world and nation – all will lose – some more than others – SO THE WINNER IS: The billionaire corporate owners on whose behalf the the current or next president will serve for the next 4 years.

And to add to all of it: the greatest threat facing our planet wasn’t even discussed: climate change.

There is much that to be said in the aftermath of the bombing Friday afternoon in Beirut.

I can speak of the tendency to elevate the killed public figures to sainthood, and then use their deaths for political objectives.

I can speak of the hypocrisy of the response. (As As’ad Abu Khalil wrote: There was a car bomb in Damascus a few months ago that killed a Syrian  intelligence chief.  Western media and governments hailed the bombing as a heroic act that killed a villain.  There was a car bomb in Lebanon yesterday  against a Lebanese intelligence chief.  Western media and governments denounced  the bombing as a heinous terrorist act that killed a good guy.)

I can speak of Georgette Sarkissian, the 42-year old mother who was killed by the bomb while she was going home to heat food for her children.  Georgette, who has been forgotten by the politicians. Georgette, the martyr that represents all martyrs, the victim that represents the horror and insanity of these crimes.  Wissam Hassan is not the martyr of all Lebanon; Georgette is.

I can speak of the harm that is yet to come, the further divisions in an already-divided country, the possibly negative ramifications it will have on Syria.

I can also speak of the additional crime committed by the-oh-so-moral Israeli government on the next day: the kidnapping and assault of the Gaza Aid Ship Estelle, and the ongoing, illegal, occupation of Gaza’s sea and imprisonment of the Palestinians in Gaza. (http://www.juancole.com/2012/10/gaza-aid-ship-estelle-commandeered-by-israeli-navy-israel-kidnaps-european-members-of-parliament.html)

In many ways, the crimes are continuing against our people…

I can speak of it all… but for now, I just wish to say: taHya Surya

تحيا سوريا… كل سوريا … من فلسطين للبنان لسورية

May we liberate ourselves from violence, sectarianism, and occupation.

The struggle continues

Amidst the US drones, amidst the ongoing and escalating talk of war and sanctions against Iran, amidst the growing war in Syria, amidst the horrific occupation of Palestine

Amidst the GMOs and Monsanto crimes against farmers

Amidst it all…

I share this questionnaire from Wendell Berry

that picture: http://www.unartforpeace.org/e/5581 is from a Palestinian child in Lebanon

There is a great deal I have wanted to write about over the past few months, from the farce of the US elections (choice between Pepsi and Coca Cola) and the repression of real choices by refusing third parties access to the debates, to the ongoing civil rights and democratic struggles in Egypt and Lebanon and Bahrain…, to, of course, the ongoing — yes ongoing — assault against Palestinians (Gaza and otherwise). I tweeted on those issues, and you all can follow me on tweet at: https://twitter.com/rania_masri

What I am discussing here is what I cannot discuss on twitter: a speech I recently gave to the League of Arab States (LAS).

This past Sunday (December 2), I gave a 30 minute presentation to the Ministers of Social Affairs at the LAS on MDG goals with respect to “Palestine.”  What is MDG? See here: Millennium Development Goals.  I put Palestine in quotation marks because I was asked to give a talk on MDG goals (status and challenges) in Palestine but I was told to only speak about the West Bank and Gaza Strip.  I could not speak about Ramle or Haifa or Jaffa or Safad or any of the other.  Thus I would not be speaking about Palestine.  The West Bank and Gaza Strip, regardless how beautiful they are, do not constitute Palestine and will never constitute Palestine.

Here is the paper I submitted – in Arabic – can be accessed here (here)

and here is the paper in English –here

I raised two questions that remained (naturally) unanswered:

(1) Why must there be a need for tunnels between besieged Gaza and Egypt? Why can’t the borders be open, if we truly regard both lands as Arab, if we claim to stand with Palestinians?

(2) What is the objective of the League of Arab States: to place bandages or to work for the liberation of the land and the end of apartheid?

…

Sadly, the Palestinian Minister spoke of the great Arab efforts in Palestine. Yet, when I asked her to name one tangible thing the Arab governments have done, she could give no example.

As I told her: if words could liberate Palestine, we would be in Haifa.

It is the Christmas Season.

These days mean different things to different people. I don’t want to talk about the commercialization of the season.  Let’s set that aside for now.

Whether you believe in the Christian story — the birth of our lord Jesus Christ — or you believe in the Pagan story — a celebration during the darkest days (i.e. winter solstice), either way, the root is the same:  these days speak of hope, of light, of ease of spirit, of love, and, fundamentally, of faith: faith that tomorrow will be better, tomorrow will be brighter…

So for these few days, we bow our heads — to a God, to the magical beauty of Nature — and to the gentle and strong bond of love between family and friends, and the potential of love between strangers.

For these few days, we remind our hearts that hope, faith, is the driving force, the fuel of love, of our todays and tomorrows.

So, in hope, in faith, in solidarity, I wish you all a season of love, and of a coming Spring that would lead us closer to liberation — liberation from occupation, from capitalism, and from irrationality.  A coming Spring that would lead us closer to the beauty that we can be

From CommonDream’s article entitled “Climate Impacts Poised to Decimate Human and Earth Systems, says Leaked IPCC Draft“

A draft of a global scientific review on how human and natural systems are expected to respond to the growing threat of climate change has been leaked and its contents—though not wholly unexpected to those who have followed climate science news in recent years—are nonetheless both alarming and devastating.

Titled, Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability, the leaked document is the draft version of the second installment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s latest review of the global scientific consensus on the global warming and climate change.

[Yes, go that link {Climate Change 2014} and you can download the leaked draft]

Offered with varying degrees of scientific consensus and confidence, what follows is a partial list of the key impacts of climate change contained in the leaked IPCC draft assessment:

• Climate change will reduce renewable surface water and groundwater resources significantly in most dry subtropical regions, exacerbating competition for water among sectors
• A large fraction of terrestrial and freshwater species faces increased extinction risk under projected climate change during and beyond the 21st century, especially as climate change interacts with other pressures, such as habitat modification, over-exploitation, pollution, and invasive species
• Due to sea-level rise throughout the 21st century and beyond, coastal systems and low-lying areas will increasingly experience adverse impacts such as submergence, coastal flooding, and coastal erosion
• By 2100, due to climate change and development patterns and without adaptation, hundreds of millions of people will be affected by coastal flooding and displaced due to land loss
• Ocean acidification poses risks to ecosystems, especially polar ecosystems and coral reefs, associated with impacts on the physiology, behavior, and population dynamics of individual species
• Without adaptation, local temperature increases of 1°C or more above preindustrial levels are projected to negatively impact yields for the major crops (wheat, rice, and maize) in tropical and temperate regions, although individual locations may benefit
• Heat stress, extreme precipitation, inland and coastal flooding, and drought and water scarcity pose risks in urban areas for people, assets, economies, and ecosystems, with risks amplified for those lacking essential infrastructure and services or living in exposed areas
• Major future rural impacts will be felt in the near-term and beyond through impacts on water supply, food security, and agricultural incomes, including shifts in production of food and non-food crops in many areas of the world
• Global mean temperature increase of 2.5°C above preindustrial levels may lead to global aggregate economic losses between 0.2 and 2.0% of income

[Note: I'm quite sure the above figure of economic losses is controversial and that it could quite easily be rated as higher than that figure.  What discount rate did they use? How was human life calculated? etc.]

• Until mid-century, climate change will impact human health mainly by exacerbating health problems that already exist (very high confidence), and climate change throughout the 21st century will lead to increases in ill-health in many regions, as compared to a baseline without climate change
• Climate change indirectly increases risks from violent conflict in the form of civil war, inter-group violence, and violent protests by exacerbating well-established drivers of these conflicts such as poverty and economic shocks
• Throughout the 21st century, climate change impacts will slow down economic growth and poverty reduction, further erode food security, and trigger new poverty traps, the latter particularly in urban areas and emerging hotspots of hunger

[But no worries. We can go back to focusing our energies on the latest pop song and whether this warlord or that warlord is better]

By the way, very little of what is predicted by this leaked IPCC draft is new.  Flannery spoke of it in his excellent book Weather Makers – as did so many other scientists.

So what are the world leaders doing about this catastrophe to come?

According to a new (and very unsurprising) report by UNEP, released yesterday, - “Should the global community not immediately embark on wide-ranging actions to narrow the greenhouse gas emissions gap, the chance of remaining on the least-cost path to keeping global temperature rise below 2°C this century will swiftly diminish and open the door to a host of challenges. … Even if nations meet their current climate pledges, greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 are likely to be 8 to 12 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent (GtCO2e) above the level that would provide a likely chance of remaining on the least-cost pathway.”

Also not surprising. Climate change scientist Kevin Anderson said as much (and more), as did a few other climate change experts. They bemoaned that the goal of greenhouse gas reductions was itself too low (and even that wasn’t reached!)  So what did Anderson say we need? A REVOLUTION!

Visualizing Palestine does it again! (Actually, I’m not quite sure if VP are the authors of this new video. Electronic Intifada (in this link: http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/video-funny-and-devastating-response-lies-israels-danny-ayalon) claims they are the authors, but their own website and the youtube video itself doesn’t give them credit.)

In this short and charming video – they respond to (some of) the lies of Israel’s deputy minister of Foreign Affairs, Danny Ayalon.

Check it out: The real truth about Palestine

http://youtu.be/MBYkBqY1-LM  <– click here for the video

John Severino has written a beautiful, powerful, holistic essay – that merits distribution: Another Kind of Revolution - The Mapuche’s Struggle for the Land

“True revolutions do not happen overnight, and they are not delivered by politicians. The kind of transformation that ends exploitation, misery, and the destruction of the environment, and that allows people to organize their own lives and fulfill their needs in freedom and dignity comes about in an altogether different kind of way.

Outside of the media spotlight and the halls of power, the Mapuche are creating just such a transformation.

John Severino presents a critical issue. First, he removes the socialist governments of south american – be they in Bolivia or Brazil – from their pedestal, then he powerfully discusses an important movement for equality — an indigenous struggle that has a different view of the environment than one espoused by the dominant systems…

Note this particular statement, and the myriad of issues it contains:

“In the 1970s, the progressive Allende government had consolidated a great quantity of public land and was preparing to dole it out as individual plots to poor Chileans. This would have eased the poverty of the urban poor, but it might also have spelled the end of the Mapuche and their collective system, in which land is not a commodity but the inheritance of the entire community.

When the rightwing Pinochet took over in a US-backed coup in 1973, he gave all those lands to international forestry companies, and Wallmapu was covered in a monoculture desert of identical pines and eucalyptus, exotic trees that depleted the water table, damaged the soil, and replaced the native species that were the basis for Mapuche medicine, silvaculture, and religion.”

This indigenous movement struggles to maintain their holistic, sustainable philosophy of the Earth.

“Land, in the Mapuche struggle, is a transcendent concept. It is not simply a plot of terra firma demarcated by a set of boundaries, as it is in the liberal Enlightenment thinking that constitutes the earth-hating religion of the West. Land is a living, inalienable thing that serves as the basis for the community’s existence.

“Accordingly, their struggle for the land is not a campaign to win property titles so they can farm it, sell it, or build a hotel on it, however they please. It is a war between two different worldviews, a battle to restore their traditional relationship with the land in opposition to all the invisible structures of Western society that in the name of liberty make free life impossible.

“Within this struggle, there is no alienation between means and ends, and no separation between political, economic, and cultural solutions. How could we possibly expect a system based on political hierarchy to bring economic equality? Or a system based on commodification to allow cultural self-determination?

Note the critique of the often-lauded Bolivian constitution:

Most Mapuche I know are highly critical of the much acclaimed Constitutional process in Bolivia that has taken unprecedented steps to guarantee the rights of indigenous people. Those rights, in the end, are just words on paper. The same government programs exist to ensure that people think of themselves as Bolivian first and indigenous (Quechua, Aymara, etc.) second, because a government without loyalty is nothing. And the same market structures exist to force everyone to sell their land, their culture and their time to tourists, mining companies, agribusiness, just to be able to eat and have a roof over their heads. No political party, no matter how progressive, will block those structures, because a government without investors is a coup waiting to happen.

And note the steadfastness of the movement:

… the Mapuche in struggle are not demanding anything, they are taking it.

And resisting police brutality and trumped-up charges and ongoing repression.

But note the critical – and devastating – role of NGOs!

Chile, desperate to project the image of a country governed by due process, can repress the Mapuche with a combination of old-fashioned brutality out of the public eye, and a constant barrage of charges designed to exhaust and impoverish any community that takes a stand. Even with a relative absence of convictions on false charges, the effect is to discourage other communities from rising up. Such a tactic can only work if the state can also offer a positive incentive. This is where NGOs and charities come in, imposing the logic of progress and development to “help” those who agree not to help themselves. Communities that do not take back their lands get charity projects. Communities that are in the process of taking their lands back do not.

And how do we define poverty? development? progress?

For Mapuche communities in resistance, bettering their circumstances means implementing their own solutions at a local level, it means being able to feed themselves directly, independent of the price of bread or whatever cash crop they are supposed to grow, it means healthy land, clean air and water, traditional medicine and nature-based religion.

But according to the logic of development, someone who works eighty hours a week to be able to afford half the things they need is technically richer than someone who meets all their own needs outside of a money economy. Poverty statistics focus single-mindedly on income in dollars. According to the economists, someone who doubles their income but has to buy four times as many things that they used to get for free, is less impoverished. The development that economists boast of has been the destruction of subsistence and the imposition of precarity and dependence. With this kind of development in mind, the Chilean government is demolishing “informal” housing and building huge subsidized apartment blocks. What greater joy can there be than building your own house and living in it without having to pay anyone, and what greater misery than having to move into a tiny apartment that you have to work a job to maintain? This is considered progress in the war on poverty.

I rarely, very rarely, take so many excerpts from an article, but this article is such a gem that I have difficulty resisting.

The Mapuche struggle reveals a way of looking at land and freedom that totally upsets the dominant worldview. In their conception of land and their practice of direct action, means and ends find harmony, problems of political exclusion, economic alienation, and cultural commodification meet with a unified solution, and questions of health, spirituality, education, housing, food security, and environment blend and become indistinguishable.

The severe consequences and obstacles faced by the Mapuche reveal another truth about revolution. It does not happen overnight, and it does not fall from the sky (or other high places). Revolution is never easy. This awareness has been painfully lacking among the glowing spectators of the popular movements in Venezuela, Bolivia, Brazil, and Argentina, or the so-called Color Revolutions of the former Soviet Bloc, among participants and critics alike of the Occupy movement, and commentators to the Arab Spring who thought that everything was over once the dictators fell.

The Mapuche struggle arises out of its own particular history and landscape. The rest of us can neither join it nor imitate it. But we can undermine the impunity with which governments, businesses, and charities attempt to bulldoze it beneath the joint discourses of Progress and Terrorism. We can question our relationship to the structures and worldviews that continue to try to erase or colonize the Mapuche and other indigenous peoples closer to home. And we might reexamine the very place we consider to be home, the political structures and narratives that have been imposed on it, and the histories of peoples who once had a different kind of relationship with it. We might think about our relationship with the land, with anyone who might have been dispossessed of that land, and what a real revolution, in those circumstances, might look like.

Thank you, John. For more from John Severino, go to his blog: http://chileboliviawalmapu.wordpress.com

You have probably already read about Syria’s drought — a drought that some argue (a bit too simplistically) contributed to the uprising in Syria.

Well, here’s news about Jordan’s drought.

In both cases – as is usually the case – climate change serves a threat multiplier, exacerbating the current environmental (and economic) problems.

excerpt:

Among the driest countries in the world, Jordan has an average of 145 cubic metres of water available per person annually (the water poverty line is 500 cubic metres). Its average annual precipitation is 111 millimetres.

Prime areas for agricultural cultivation, such as rain-fed areas, are shrinking, in part because of urbanisation and development. Between 1975 and 2007, according to research by Dr. Awni Taimeh from the University of Jordan, grain-cultivating areas decreased by 65 percent and vegetable-cultivating areas by 91 percent.

Farmers in Abu Waleed’s area have meanwhile noticed changes in weather in recent years. Along with a decrease in rainfall, temperatures have risen, leading to more pests and bugs and shifting growing seasons.

full article available here: Jordan’s Farmers Struggle to Weather Climate Change

Environmental Justice – a term born out of the struggles in the United States (specifically, in NC) whose focus is on the fair distribution of environmental benefits and burdens.  In other words: he who pollutes be the one who gets the pollution.  All too often, it is the poor and vulnerable communities in the world that face the burden of environmental mismanagement – from pollution to landfills – while they are not the perpetrators.

Climate change is the most extreme form of environmental injustice our earth has known.  The Global North pollutes and transforms our atmosphere and creates this greatest experiment known as climate change.  The Global South faces the overwhelmingly burden of these horrors.

A report released this week documents the countries most at risk from climate weather events.

“The report, launched this week in Warsaw at the UN climate talks, showed the Philippines rising dramatically up the global risk index list, supporting the government’s claims that typhoons are becoming stronger. Between 1992 and 2011, the Philippines ranked 14th, but over the past 13 years it has been the seventh worst-hit country behind Honduras, Myanmar, Haiti, Nicaragua, Bangladesh and Vietnam.

Germanwatch calculates that more than 530,000 people have died as a direct result of some 15,000 extreme weather events between 1993 and 2012. The thinktank said: “Eight of the 10 countries most affected by extreme weather between 1993-2012 were developing countries in the low-income or lower middle-income group, while only two were upper middle-income countries.“

The report is available here:  Global Climate Risk 2014

We see it in The Philippines now.  Reports estimate more than 600,000 refugees.  An unknown number of people have killed – with numbers ranging from 4,000 to 10,000 killed.  (For pictures of before and after, go here)

While some may argue whether Typhoon Haiyoon is caused by climate change, scientists have told us clearly: climate change does cause storms to become stronger.

Anne Peterman, executive director of the Global Justice Ecology Project, which runs the climate-connections.orgblog, was quoted in the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) on November 8 as saying:

“With Typhoon Hiayan ripping through the Philippines, we are once again staring climate catastrophe square in the face. This typhoon, with winds up to 230 mph is being called the strongest cyclone ever to make landfall. But it is likely just the beginning.

“The report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change this past September was once again clear in its warning that a warming globe means more unstable weather. The waters of the Pacific that fed this typhoon were unusually warm, lending tremendous energy to the storm.

“Typhoon Haiyan is ravaging the Philippines only a few days before the opening of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Warsaw, Poland on Nov. 11, where once again it is predicted that no concrete action to limit climate change emissions will take place.

“But this storm should be a wake up call to the UN negotiators in Warsaw regarding the concrete impacts of their decades of inaction.

“Typhoon Haiyan is once again demonstrating how countries in the Global South sit directly in the path of the consequences of greenhouse gas emissions historically put out by the Global North.”

It is not just storms ravaging our lands, but also harm to our oceans.

“The rate at which the world’s oceans are acidifying is “unprecedented,” scientists warn in a new report.

Too much acid in the ocean is bad news for sea life. Acid eats away at calcium carbonite, the primary ingredient of shells and skeletons that many ocean animals depend on for survival. The rate may be faster than at any time in the last 300 million years, they say. The report, which will be launched Monday at the UN climate talks in Warsaw, is based on research presented by over 500 international experts on ocean acidification who convened at The Third Symposium on the Ocean in a High CO2 World in September 2012. According to their summary of findings, human-caused CO2 emissions have already caused a 26 percent-increase in ocean acidification since the start of the Industrial Revolution. If current rates of CO2 emissions continue, the report projects a 170 percent-increase in acidity levels by 2100.

The report states that “The most comparable event 55 million years ago was linked to mass extinctions of calcareous deep-sea organisms and significant changes to the surface ocean ecosystem. At that time, though the rate of change of ocean pH was rapid, it may have been 10 times slower than current change.”

With increased acidification, the scientists predict “far-reaching effects.” Ecologically and commercially valuable species like coral communities and mollusks are likely to suffer, and that will bring “cascading” effects, some of which are already noticeable.”

Pause. Let that sink in.

Now remember: as the conservative UNEP presented in a recent report, given how governments have been responding to the climate change crisis (i.e. with barely any response), the 2 degree C rise in temperature will be upon us.

So, as Daphne Wysham, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies and director of the Genuine Progress Project, was quoted in yesterday’s press release by the IPA, who should pay?

“Just as the tobacco industry was eventually forced to pay for the health care costs of tobacco smokers, we need to get the fossil fuel industry to pay for the enormous humanitarian response in the aftermath of superstorms like Haiyan, which recently ripped across the Philippines killing thousands. We must move from a de facto policy of promoting voluntary individual donations and government assistance in the aftermath of superstorms — as though it is charity in response to an ‘act of God’ — to a policy of financial obligation by the perpetrators of this climate chaos: the oil, gas and coal industries. Government inaction on climate change, and continued support of the fossil fuel industry, has deadly consequences. Until the polluter pays and pays heavily, the cost of these consequences will only rise.”

But a larger question arises: there is much that can’t be compensated. How does one compensate for loss of species, loss of human life, loss of home? There is not enough money for that kind of compensation.

Still: there is – most definitely – enough money for assistance, for building adaptive mechanisms, for supporting community resilience.

Will it happen? Not likely. Not likely so long as we – the people of conscience – acquiesce to our feelings of fatalism. Not likely so long as we look for bandages to this crisis when what is needed a revolution. An economic revolution, in which we set aside this nonsense about continual economic growth and constant “wants” and build an economy that serves our needs, an economy built on equity and justice, an economy that recognizes – as its foundation – the finite gifts from the environment. A political revolution, in which the minority do not rule the lives of the majority but rather the major decisions are taken by the majority directly.  A spiritual revolution – where we, as individuals and communities, feel we have ‘enough things’ and realize that what is missing is enough love.

A revolution.

And there are pockets of that revolution already.

No matter how much the leaders in the US want to impose ignorance, there is growing awareness of the truth. Example: Though their representatives in Congress continue to deny it, majority of Conservative voters have no doubt that warming planet is causing significant changes

The environment tells us again and again that we are all connected.  We are all connected. Interdependent. What harms one of us, harms us all. There is no “there” and “here” — it is all “here.” There are so many studies that attest to this simple truth.

And here is one more study.

The total deforestation of the Amazon may reduce rain and snowfall in the western US, resulting in water and food shortages, and a greater risk of forest fires.

Princeton University-led researchers report that an Amazon stripped bare could mean 20% less rain for the coastal Northwest and a 50% reduction in the Sierra Nevada snowpack, a crucial source of water for cities and farms in California.

…

Deforestation across the Amazon rainforest has increased by more than a third over the past year. Research has shown that climate change, especially a spike in the global temperature, could wipe out as much as 85% of the forest. Deforestation and other key environmental issues will be under the spotlight this week as the United Nations Climate Change Conference negotiations taking place in Warsaw, Poland.”

And what can we expect from this next UN Climate Change Conference? Likely, more hot air. Politicians have rarely, if ever, led people towards justice. It is people who lead the path to justice and politicians who follow.  We have to lead.

What a country. While we lack a government because the Saudis cannot compromise on who will be in the government, and while the current spokespeople of this country proudly abstain the country from voting on foreign affairs, there will still – nevertheless –  be an official parade for Independence Day!

Independence Day?

And while we have traffic jams and congestion on normal days, still there will be some road closures today (a typically busy day) to have a practice run for the Independence Day parade on the 22nd of November.

And while we are among the top countries in the world in debt (as a proportion of our GDP), still, money can be found for the pomp of an Independence Day Parade.

Lebanon is a country with a sense of irony, truly.

What a country.

Meanwhile, Lebanon continues to reprint its currency, making it endlessly more colorful and more like monopoly-money.  Perhaps that is the only act of clarity – since Lebanon is, in so many ugly ways, a monopoly.

Another bombing. Another act of terrorism. Of terror.

Today, around 9.30 in the morning.  Two bombings – a minute or so apart – targeting the Iranian Embassy in Beirut. And targeting civilians in a vibrant neighborhood.

As of this hour, 23 people are known to be killed. More than 140 wounded.

The terrorists are known. They claimed responsibility. Another wing of Al Qaeda – Kataeb Abdallah Azzam.    (Founded originally by a Saudi.  Taken responsibility for crimes in Egypt as well. Probably funded by Bandar bin Sultan.) Their objectives for this crime? Officially, according to their press release, to force Hezbollah out of Syria  - and – to get the Lebanese government to release Al Qaeda prisoners in Lebanese jails.

But I don’t want to talk about the politics of the situation. Or the financiers of these criminals and their puppet masters.  Not now.

Now, I want to pause the world.  It scares me how calmly we hear the news and go on, in Lebanon.  How work proceeds as normal.  We stop for a few minutes, we feel some pain, and then we go on.  Work proceeds.  Conversations go on.

23 families will never be the same.

And they haven’t been the only ones.  This is the fifth bombing in Lebanon in the past few months.

..

Now, I want to pause and remember: these terrors in Lebanon are not unique.  In Syria, people are facing car bombs and attacks regularly.  And in Iraq, car bombs have become a regular occurrence (since 2003, thank you US gov’t).

Lebanon. Syria.

Iraq.

How to stop these horrors.  How to stand together.

…

The day began with a terrorist attack in Lebanon.

And in the evening, there is another terrorist attack.

The Israeli military attacks Gaza. Again. Besieged, imprisoned, isolated Palestinians in Gaza. Israel terrorizes Palestinians in Gaza with SEVEN military airstrikes in the PAST ONE HOUR. There lies the grand terrorist of the region – the Israeli Terrorist Occupying Apartheid Army.

For more on this latest Israeli terrorist crime (paid for by US$) – see: Live Report from Gaza Hospital: As Civilian Toll Mounts, Israel Again Bombs Palestinian Journalists

..

Until when?

We pause for the killed. We pause for the living.

And we resist. We continue to resist – somehow, somehow – the crimes of occupation, oppression, violence…

Andrea Sears interviewed me last night about the latest bombings in Lebanon.

Bombing In Lebanon Marks an Escalation of Violence in the Middle East <to hear the interview>

So, there is this polluter-pays principle.

And, now we clearly now who the ‘polluter’ is with regards to climate change.

According to a new study – published today in The Guardian - “Just 90 companies [with headquarters in 43 countries] caused two-thirds of man-made global warming emissions. Chevron, Exxon and BP among companies most responsible for climate change since dawn of industrial age.“

“There are thousands of oil, gas and coal producers in the world,” climate researcher and author Richard Heede at the Climate Accountability Institute in Colorado said. “But the decision makers, the CEOs, or the ministers of coal and oil if you narrow it down to just one person, they could all fit on a Greyhound bus or two.

Half of the estimated emissions were produced just in the past 25 years – well past the date when governments and corporations became aware that rising greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of coal and oil were causing dangerous climate change.

All but seven of the 90 were energy companies producing oil, gas and coal. The remaining seven were cement manufacturers.

See the interactive chart here:

So: The ones that have pushing this world – our Earth – further and further into a trajectory of a 5 degree C rise in temperature –  are so few as to fit on one or two buses, and none of them can claim ignorance (although “several of the top companies on the list had funded the climate denial movement”)!

And, yes, I wrote: a 5 degree rise in temperature.

According to a report published two days ago:

“Global CO2 emissions are projected to rise 2.1 percent higher than 2012, the previous record high, according to a new report released Tuesday by the Global Carbon Project. This increase is slightly less than the 2000-2013 average of 3.1 percent, said lead author Corinne Le Quéré of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research in the UK.

These hard numbers demonstrate that the U.N. climate talks have failed to curb the growth in emissions. And there is little optimism that the latest talks known as COP19 here in Warsaw will change the situation even with the arrival of high-level ministers Wednesday.

Global emissions continue to be within the highest scenario of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). “This is a five-degree C trajectory. It’s absolutely tragic for humanity to be on this pathway,” Le Quéré said.

Remember the documentary – An Inconvenient Truth? Well, the danger that Al Gore discussed in his award-winning documentary were about a 2 degree C rise in temperature.  Not a 5 degree C rise.

We need to also remember that these 90 companies are represented by governments (many of whom claim to be leaders of democracies). And it is these governments who are also deciding who will live and who will die.

Yesterday, the executive director of the Philippines Climate Change Commission, Mary Ann Lucille Sering, gave a moving address  to her fellow climate change delegates at the U.N. climate summit in Warsaw, Poland. “Every time we attend this conference, I’m beginning to feel that we are negotiating on who is to live and who is to die,” Sering says.

But other governments are not meekly standing by.

As reported by Democracy Now “A group of 133 developing nations have walked out of a key part of the climate talks in Warsaw, Poland, amidst a conflict over how countries who have historically emitted the most greenhouse gases should be held financially responsible for some of the damage caused by extreme weather in nations with low carbon emissions. The United States, Australia, Canada and other industrialized countries are pushing for the issue — known as loss and damage — to be put off until after the 2015 climate talks in Paris.

Venezuela is part of this group, as is China and India.

“When you see developed countries being so bold to tell you that they are not even considering reducing their emissions, that they are not even considering paying for the costs that those inactions have on the life of others, that is really rude and hard to handle it politically,” says Claudia Salerno, the lead climate negotiator for Venezuela, which is a member of the G77+China group that walked out. “We are heading to a point in which countries are not ready to take responsibility for their acts, and in this case, even more pathetic, they are not wanting to be.”

And these governments are doing more than simply refusing to be held financial accountable.

Leaked Memo Reveals U.S. Plan to Oppose Helping Poor Nations Adapt to Climate Change

Fortunately: Salerno explains one way how these governments are responding: “So, Venezuela next year will host the first formal social consultation of every single social movement involved in the climate change agenda, with three preparation processes in advance of that pre-COP. And then, for the first time, instead of having ministers listening to each other’s the same statements and stubbornness, we are going to have ministers listen to their people about what is the kind of ambition and the kind of agreement the world wants to have—but the world’s side, not the governmental approach.”

The struggle continues…

So, today more of this country is draped in flags than is usually the case.   Today marks 70 years of Lebanon’s independence. (Yes, I’m surprised as well.   Independence? Sovereign country?) Wrapping themselves up in the flag, is this slogan: Love Lebanon? Love no one else. Hmm… The original slogan was: Love Lebanon? Love its production.  Now that slogan made sense: one could easily see how supporting national production could be regarded as love for the country since it may support livelihoods.

But, ‘love Lebanon and so love nobody else’?  How is that idea translated into actions? What does it mean to “love no one else”?  Support only Lebanese, and so ignore any problems that non-Lebanese in Lebanon, and deny the interdependence and the relationships among them? So – since domestic workers in Lebanon are non-Lebanese, then I should set aside the crimes committed against them and the fact that they are “suicided” at an average of one a week, even if their actions are a result of the behaviors of Lebanese and of the deeply problematic legislation towards domestic workers? They aren’t Lebanese, so, I should be indifferent? And I should be indifferent towards the 1.5 million (and growing) Syrian refugees in Lebanon?

Love Lebanon and only Lebanon: does that mean that I should be indifferent to the crimes and pains of others outside these (quite arbitrary) borders? So, indifference to the ongoing horrors committed against Palestinians (throughout the land of Palestine), to the violence (in all its many forms) committed against Syrians?  or should I only care if and when the pains reach into Lebanon?

Love Lebanon and only Lebanon: does that mean when asked whether I want to contribute to the relief efforts for The Philippines, that I should shrug and say “no, of course not, can’t you see all the pain that *we* are going through here”?

Loving Lebanon and only Lebanon would result in the illusion that Lebanon is an island – all onto itself, self-sufficient and independent. It propagates arrogance and xenophobia and isolation. It denies the strength and beauty that comes from honest solidarity.

And it fails to understand what love means.

When we really love, love cannot be limited.  Loving results in more loving, and not less.

If I am love to Lebanon, then I am to love the migratory birds that rest in Lebanon – and thus to love all the countries on those birds’ pathway.  If I am to love Lebanon, then I am to dream for it to become an egalitarian society – with economic, environmental, and political justice;  equality and justice are – by their very nature – grounded in being rights for all, and developing them is empowered by learning and connecting and working with others, and developing networks of solidarity.

One cannot love Lebanon and only Lebanon.  That is not love.