Message to our British and European comrades
There is no final victory, as there is no final defeat. There is just the same battle. To be fought, over and over again. So toughen up, bloody toughen up.”
— Tony Benn
As a movement that participated in the last European elections and succeeded through our “Electoral Wings” and our European Spring coalition to gather 1,5 million votes for a Green New Deal for Europe, but failed to elect a single MEP, we know all too well what it means to campaign restlessly and lose. The day after is not easy. But despair and melancholy is the dearest friend of the bigots and national populists. When there are bad results, the stakes are even higher, but so is the need for greater determination.
Without knowing your enemies and your false allies, their techniques and their strategies, there is no way out of the current crisis of global capitalism that is leading the climate’s collapse. Instead of supporting progressives and the change they represent, the Establishment always chooses to protect the class interests and further accumulation of wealth and inequality that it depends on to survive. Even a Johnson government with its catastrophic Brexit was a better choice for the ruling class than the prospect of a Labour victory that promised a long-term fight against their interests.
In moments of historic change, when the results of the Left are disappointing and the stakes (with Nationalist Populists like Johnson, Trump, Netanyahu or Bolsonaro in power) are even higher, the Left has to rethink and critically reflect on what can only be described as an appalling failure to defeat people and policies that are obviously not only anti-social but also aimed against the planet itself. The point is not to “learn” from the Nationalist Populists – right wing populism won’t be defeated by left-wing populism. But we need to understand and use technology, language, and emotions in a much more constructive, relatable and productive way if we want to win.
There is no democracy without real public debate and freedom of speech. Billionaire-owned media (including social media platforms) are the enemy of democracy: our political system cannot function in an ecosystem where money guarantees the reach of any information, regardless of how untrue or misanthropic it might be. New, uncompromisingly progressive policies, leading to new uncompromisingly independent media, are needed.
We need clear positions. No middle-of-the-road politics. What happened to Labour is a sort of repetition of what happened in Catalonia: instead of progressives using a good opportunity, a possibly useful crack in the fossilised status quo, this opportunity is derailed through political events that we do not respond to with sufficient determination (in this case Brexit, in Catalonia: independence). The more undecisive progressives are, the more decisive will be the victories of the national populists.
In the dark days of defeat, the biggest enemy is what the great German philosopher and victim of the Nazi regime Walter Benjamin called “left-wing melancholy”. We are with Jeremy Corbyn, the thousands of activists and millions of voters who supported a bold vision and a Green New Deal that DiEM25 is also advocating for the whole of Europe. Perhaps this day in England is bleak, but it too shall pass.
Rethink, organise, take a stand: Carpe DiEM!
By Srećko Horvat and Erik Edman
DiEM25 voted to support The Labour Party – now it's time to show our support
The United Kingdom general election is the most significant of our lifetime.
On December 12, UK voters can either choose a socialist, green Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn and (DiEM25 Advisory Panel member) John McDonnell, or they can subscribe to a Brexit that plays into Trump’s hands, austerity and further privatisation under Boris Johnson’s Conservatives.
DiEM25 members, after careful deliberation, have overwhelmingly agreed that a Labour-led government and a defeat of the Tories is the only way of taking a ‘Hard Brexit’ off the table, ending austerity and implementing the Green New Deal in the UK. Read DiEM25’s position in full here.
Our plan for this election involves you
The results are very much on the edge and members of DiEM25 can play an important role in determining the outcome of the UK election on December 12!
DiEM25 members voted to campaign in favour of the Labour party or, in constituencies where the Greens, SNP or Plaid Cymru have greater chances of defeating the Tories, to campaign also for those parties.
Wherever you live in the UK, in Europe or in the world, you can help deliver a progressive government in Britain.
How to help – two ways:
- Record a short video to show that DiEM25 members support the Labour Party
Campaigners in the UK are making #videosbythemany – short selfie videos to show their solidarity with Labour. DiEM25 has a unique perspective – our members often live outside their home country, and many are EU citizens in the UK, or UK citizens in the EU, for whom this ‘Brexit’ election is crucial, and UK democracy is at stake.
Make your own short video (approximately 10 seconds) expressing what makes you, a member of DiEM25, want to support a UK Labour government!
Don’t forget to say where you live and take the video in front of some landmarks of your town e.g. “I am X – I live in X,Y – I stand with the Labour Party of Jeremy Corbyn – because XYZ”
Share on Twitter/Facebook and tag:
#videosbythemany @DiEM_25 @DiEM25UK - Join Labour Campaign Efforts! Make your ‘Plan to Win’!
Whether you live in the UK or not, there are many simple actions you can take to help convince UK voters to choose Labour.
Visit ‘My Plan to Win‘ to create your own plan of how you can help Labour in the next days:
Share your ‘Plan to Win’ with friends in the UK, encouraging them to make theirs and commit to few small actions before December 12. If you live in the UK, the best thing you can do is talk to voters.
To find out which marginal seats are most crucial to win, and what canvassing events are going on there, visit: www.mycampaignmap.com/
A win for Labour is a win for Europe. Let’s get to work!
Carpe DiEM!
The much-needed vision of a post-capitalist world
Since 2010, Greece has been the canary in the mine regarding the financial crisis. It’s been the laboratory of neoliberal and hard austerity policies that have been decomposing the social network and scratching away any remainder of the social state, while giving rise to far-right movements and parties as well as to increased xenophobia, fascism and misanthropy. Since summer, the government of New Democracy has epitomized these trends, particularly with its slogan of “back to normality”. Such a slogan seems nothing but a cover for the rise of a police state and the new (but also very old) dogma of “law and order”. [Read more here and here].
But Greeks resist. Through huge anti-fascist protests, anti-repression concerts but also in everyday life, the progressive components of society fight very hard for human values, human rights and solidarity. Even watching the hundreds and thousands of people resisting brings hope. However, hope means uncertainty and uncertainty also means fear. And we, progressives, need not to be consumed by fear. The response to our fears and uncertainties should not only be resistance. As Naomi Klein, DiEM25 Advisory Panel member, elegantly summarised in the title of her book, “No is not enough”. Our response should come with a big bold vision for a new, just world.
Neoliberalism and capitalism have deprived us from our imagination. Thatcher’s “There is no such thing as society” marked the transition from the social to the individual with detrimental effects on our language, our culture, our understanding of our communities. Living in our own silos, we struggle to infuse ourselves with solidarity. As fear takes over, we lose sight of where we are heading and a neoliberalism-centered malfunctioning social support network pushes us even further into individualism. We are made to focus on our own personal survival, while we abandon our dreams and struggles for a just society. An economic crisis that became a social crisis suddenly becomes a crisis of imagination.
As Greeks refuse to give up, all Europeans refuse to surrender. Thus, we not only resist but also dare to imagine a better future. As Yanis Varoufakis put it “we must move beyond calls for more democracy…we must now inspire people with a vision of what follows capitalism”. Let not Greece again be another canary in the mine of what follows in Europe: a police state, a Europe with borders and a strict authoritative EU. In DiEM25, we believe in our common house, we believe there is a place for our post-capitalist vision. As the recent DiEM25 Prague Assembly manifested, we do believe in collective action, in solidarity and in hope to deal our fears and our uncertainties.
Let’s work together!
Aris is a member of DiEM25 and coordinator of the New York City Collective
Activists gather to help define DiEM25's strategy to take on the EU Establishment
Last weekend 300 activists from across Europe gathered under the motto “How to save the EU and the planet?” in order to present and discuss their proposals for the future of the movement in a unique participatory process.
In just over three years, DiEM25 has achieved a great deal: a transnational movement has been established to tackle the various crises that are disintegrating the European Union. The European Spring was the first pan-European coalition to stand united behind a common progressive political programme in EU elections.
In the summer of 2019, nine members of the Greek electoral wing (ΜέΡΑ25) won seats in the Greek national parliament. In May 2019, shortly after the European elections, the campaign for a Green New Deal for Europe, a series of courageous and concrete measures to cope with the climate crisis and to transform our energy system, was developed with the help of scientists, experts and NGOS from all over Europe.
Given the problems still to be solved in Europe, this however cannot spell the end of the movement. DiEM25 has another five years to reach its goal, the full democratisation of Europe.
On Friday evening the tone for the event was set with a panel discussion of local organisations and scientists. The panelists were later available for interviews and questions:
- Daniela Platsch – Economist and Politician (Germany/Austria)
- Srećko Horvat – Philosopher, Activist and Cofounder of DiEM25 (Croatia)
- Alena Krempaská – Political Scientist, Institute of Human Rights (Slovakia)
- Paweł Wargan – Political analyst and Coordinator of the GNDE Campaign (Poland)
- Kate Wiseman – Extinction Rebellion Coordinator, (Czech Republic)
- Robin Maialeh – Economist (Czech Republic)
Saturday and Sunday were dedicated to the further development of the movement. Nine proposals in three different categories were presented and voted on in an extraordinary transnational and participatory process:
- Increasing our support
- Advancing an effective movement.
- Influencing and winning
The motions that received the most votes of the 300 eligible voters at the meeting will be submitted again to all those eligible to vote in an online All Members Vote (AMV).
The Coordinating Collective submitted a motion, to strengthen the pan-European vision of the movement. A vision to put the world’s first transnational political movement at the centre of the European political stage.
Yanis Varoufakis said:
DiEM 2.0 must plan for POST-CAPITALISM. We have been criticised, justly I think, of appearing to tinker at the edges of an unreformable, catastrophic, rentier-based, financialised capitalism. DiEM 2.0 must develop our program for overcoming capitalism. Our Green New Deal must be recognised as the first stepping stone to a better future. We must now inspire people with a vision of what follows capitalism and our Green New Deal: a proper democracy where no one can buy shares in a company in which they do not labour; where there are no private banks but, instead, the central bank provides free digital accounts to every citizen; a society that grants a trust fund to every baby born. Of course, this is not the time or the place to articulate DiEM’s POST-CAPITALISM pillar fully. Its seeds are already in our program and manifesto. DiEM 2.0 must water these seeds so that soon we can harvest a post-capitalist agenda around which young and old from across Europe, indeed for beyond Europe, can organise.
At the end of the two intensive working days in the beautiful Prague University, delegates had the opportunity to attend a private screening of the film adaptation by Costas Gavras of the book “Adults in the Room” by DiEM25 co-founder Yanis Varoufakis.
After the screening, there was a question and answer session on the topic of the goings on in the Eurogroup in 2015. The Q&A was moderated by Erik Edman, member of DiEM25’s Coordinating Collective, and counted with the participation of Michelle Ray-Gavras, the film’s producer, as well as Spiros Derveniotis, MeRA25 Communications Coordinator and Danae Stratou, visual and installation artist.
Be part of our growing movement. Join us! Visit diem25.org/join to sign up in seconds.
Photo (C) Ian Cassidy and Honza Macháček
After a series of blunders, will Spain’s new coalition government turn a page?
DiEM25 wishes the new Sanchez government well and welcomes the prospect of the PP, Ciudadanos and Vox staying in opposition. Although we don’t forget that Sanchez made a serious mistake in calling an election that ended up weakening the PSOE-Podemos coalition while boosting Vox.
Leftists cannot but feel relieved when a progressive government emerges from an election in which the extreme Right was the only genuine winner.
At the same time, we cannot ignore that both parties have previously failed to stand firm to the pressure of powerful multinationals, oligopolies, financial capital and the mass media.
On the one hand, Sanchez and PSOE remain committed to full obedience to the Troika and the unsustainable economic and social policies of austerity for the many and socialism for the very few (mainly the bankers) stemming from the Eurogroup. Their submission to neoliberal policies, as is often the case with social-democratic parties in Europe, ultimately fed Vox, the extreme Right.
On the other hand, Podemos did much damage to the progressive cause when, in the summer of 2015, they endorsed SYRIZA’s surrender to the troika against the will of 62% of the Greek voters while, at the same time, damaging themselves as a radical and alternative Left.
They also harmed the progressive cause in Spain and Europe by refusing to develop a coherent progressive agenda for Europe (that includes a full programme for a Green New Deal, for how to manage the Euro crisis, monetary policy of the ECB and so on).
DiEM25 will be watchful in the hope that the PSOE-Podemos new government doesn’t reinforce the twin authoritarianisms of (a) the establishment and (b) the neo-fascist, xenophobic ‘anti-establishment’.
In conclusion, DiEM25 calls upon PSOE and Podemos to focus on forging a comprehensive radical Europeanist manifesto. We invite both parties to consult our Green New Deal for Europe, which would provide excellent inspiraton for this.
Should liberal capitalism be saved?
“Should liberal capitalism be saved?” was the topic of a truly enlightening debate between Yanis Varoufakis and Martin Wolf at the Financial Times last week, at an event marking the fiftieth anniversary of the death of Harold Wincott.
As expected, Martin Wolf gave a glowing endorsement of private enterprise, citing the staggering reduction in absolute poverty, the meteoric rise in Chinese GDP per capita, the abysmal failure of East vs. West Germany or North vs. South Korea, and similar well-known points. He stressed privatisation and de-regulation of labour markets as key components of this success, while admitting the need for a minimum wage, less protection of intellectual property and, above all, greater restrictions on mergers and acquisitions and tighter regulation of the financial system.
His insistence on greater redistribution of income and state provision of essential public goods came as a surprise to some of the audience, but during the whole of his speech as well as the Q&A he regularly stated his belief that things have gone quite well, there is no reason for alarm, and everything would sort itself out somehow in the end – maybe through more state regulation, as it seems we always alternate between periods of lighter and heavier state regulation, while relying on the engine of capitalism.
Based on nothing but his general optimism, Wolf avowed not having any concern about the threat that money and the xenophobic right pose to our democracy, and while he freely admitted that he had no hopes that capitalism would solve the problem of climate change, he did not seem particularly concerned about this prospect once he had assigned its solution to the realm of the state. If people had hoped to hear some concrete solutions from him, they were disappointed.
On the topic of climate change, Yanis Varoufakis passionately defended the idea of a Green New Deal, whether at the European or the international level, which would channel 5% of GDP every year into the green transition — combating climate change and creating lots of well-paying jobs in the process. If the European Investment Bank issued green bonds to finance this, and the ECB stood ready to prop up green bonds if necessary, or alternatively if the IMF financed this through the implementation of Keynes‘ idea of an International Clearing Union, this would be an example of how capitalism’s existing tools could be used for progressive purposes. Of course Varoufakis also agreed with Martin Wolf’s assessment that we need to regulate banks, redesign the Eurozone’s architecture, fight poverty through redistributive politics and so on.
Unlike Wolf, he didn’t stop there. Vindicating Marx’s prediction, he pointed out that the chasm between those who own shares in a company but don’t work there, and those who work there but don’t share in the company’s profits, has widened considerably since Adam Smith’s time and that this would accelerate even more in the coming decades, as AI and robots allow the capital owners to produce even more with even less workers. However, workers who have been laid off cannot buy anything. Given this outlook, the question is no longer whether we should save capitalism but whether it could even be saved. Varoufakis seems to think that in the long term the answer is No.
That is, while in the short term we should redeploy capitalism‘s tools in order to lessen suffering, we simultaneously need to work towards a post-capitalist liberal society which will eventually allow humans to spend their time philosophising while robots do all the work.
One of the elements could be a Universal Basic Dividend (UBD), similar to a Universal Basic Income but based on a part of companies‘ shares entering a public wealth fund. Or corporations on whose direction nobody could vote except those who work there. States that no longer collect personal income tax or VAT but only land and corporate taxes. There is no space to list all the transformative ideas for the short and long term that Varoufakis presented either during his talk or during the Q&A.
As philosopher Slavoj Žižek once said, it is a remarkable sign of our times that even the brightest minds would rather fathom the end of the world than plan for the demise of capitalism.
The majority of the conservative minds assembled at the Financial Times certainly saw the continuation of capitalism as a given, no matter the title of their debate. And yet the mood seemed different at the end of the event than before. Some were disconcerted to find that, on today’s pressing questions, the establishment had nothing substantive to offer, while the Marxist, brought in as a foil, had provided ample food for thought.
I visited Julian Assange in prison, what can you do?
“Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love.”
― Julian Assange
The last time I saw Julian Assange, exactly one year ago, when he was still at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, I didn’t know yet that the next time I would see him would be in a high-security prison.
I didn’t visit as a journalist, as a lawyer, nor as a family member – I came as a friend.
But not only as a friend – I’ve also visited Julian as a member and one of the co-founders of DiEM25, the movement that has continuously stressed that the freedom of Julian Assange is a European issue, a precedent that might have dire consequences for democracy and freedom of the press in Europe. And of course – his life.
To be completely honest, I wasn’t prepared for a prison visit. I wasn’t prepared because I didn’t know if the visit will take place at all up until the very last moment. But more importantly, I simply couldn’t: how can you possibly be prepared for visiting a friend in prison?
It’s not that those of us who had previously visited Julian at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London were not prepared for a situation like this. But no one could have quite imagined that it would be as brutal as it actually was. That he would be dragged out of the Embassy, after his asylum was revoked as if he was a war criminal and not an arbitrarly detained publisher as the UN has ruled in 2015 and UN officials repeated multiple times.
Then Ecuador handed over all his belongings, including legal notes and two manuscripts, to the United States. Julian ended up in Belmarsh prison where he served his bail sentence until September 22, after which he’s been kept there solely for the purpose of the extradition to the US. His prison conditions have not changed, he is still basically in solitary confinement, 23 hours in his cell, facing extradition to the US where he’s charged for espionage and 175 years in prison sentence.
The last time I met him (and CIA will probably know the exact date) was in November 2018. The only thing I can still recall now is that it must have been November, because there was an exhibition of Antonio Gramsci’s “Prison Notebooks” on display in London for the first time – actually just a few corners away from Knightsbridge.
It was a rather strange synchronicity, a sort of temporal and spatial “return of the repressed”, namely, a fatal reminder that Julian might end up in prison too. Gramsci, who was one of the greatest political minds of the 20th century was imprisoned by the Italian Fascist regime of Benito Mussolini in 1926, and compiled the notebooks while he was in prison, in 33 volumes, between 1929 and 1935. These are an important contribution to 20th century political theory and philosophy, including pertinent insights into the architectures of power, hegemony, institutions, state, organisation.
As I was visiting Julian in the Embassy last November, I couldn’t get rid of the thought that he is, just like Gramsci, a political prisoner whose thoughts about the complex issues and challenges of the early 21st century were of great value for the cognitive mapping of our crazy world.
Whether he was thinking or speaking about the role of institutions and the importance of transparency, about technology or geopolitics, Julian was always not only the best informed one but also someone who’s ability to “zoom out”, to grasp and understand the “big picture”, connecting all the dots (and facts) has certainly led to a better understanding of today’s world. From various military interventions to military coups, from war crimes to human rights violations.
Clearly, from the beginning of his imprisonment, Assange, just like Gramsci, decided that his struggle will not end there. But unlike Gramsci, Julian is still not able to write prison notebooks, and we hope he won’t be writing them in prison. But that depends also on you.
As I was standing in the waiting room of the prison, I looked at the seated families that gathered and waited for their numbers to be called in, to finally meet their beloved ones.
I don’t know them, but I could have seen their worried faces, even faces of small children, who were passing by the guards with control dogs in between the waiting room and meeting room – probably with similar anxieties and feelings as myself.
Yet, I was not visiting a criminal. Of that I was sure. The real criminals were those whose war crimes he, Julian Assange, exposed and who want him in an even worse high-security prison than this one, in the United States of Donald Trump. It is sufficient to watch “Collateral Murder” again, in order to understand why they want him extradited. Or why they (some familiar faces) even thought of assassinating Assange:
I visited Belmarsh prison with Julian’s father, John Shipton, a humble, committed and determined man, whose graceful gestures and even-tempered voice led me through the prison in a protective way as if it wasn’t him who is in a more difficult situation than myself.
With his thoughtfulness, he reminds me of Julian. And it must be hard for him, him who moved to England to be close to his son, him who travels across Europe to meet with lawyers and supporters, but he was strong. And as we were standing there, a wife of a prisoner came up to John to say her husband supports Julian and that the isolation they are putting him through-departing him from other prisoners is inhumane.
When we finally entered the room and I came closer to the table where Julian was sitting, he stood up and we immediately and spontaneously hugged. And it was the strongest hug we have ever exchanged. For apparent reasons. Last time we saw each other he was at the Ecuadorian Embassy, now he was in a high-security prison.
Last time we talked he still had an uncertain future, this time it was quite clear – unless he is freed, he might die in prison, to repeat the words of his father John Shipton, and Nils Melzner UN Special Rapporteur on Torture who recently warned that Julian’s life is now at risk. Everyone should read what Craig Murray has written about in “Assange in Court“. So obviously most of our conversation – surveilled all the time, of course – pertained to his situation and the danger he is facing.
Even though he has visibly suffered since the last time saw each other, even though he has lost 15 kilos in weight, and even though his life might be at risk, Julian was fully focused. Perhaps he was pausing more than usual, taking more time to gather his thoughts, sometimes struggling, visibly shaken by difficult prison conditions, but at the same time he used his usual dark humor, unexpected analogies and abstract thought. We talked about how his case was not just about him – although it is clearly about his life – how it is about human rights, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and last but not least, democracy.
He was really glad to hear about all the actions and events organised by his supporters across the world, from the WE ARE MILLIONS exhibitions across Europe to the Australian endeavours to bring Julian home. Just later that day, John and I joined a protest, in front of the UK Home Office where hundreds of people gathered for the concert by rappers M.I.A. and Lowkey.
I know how much Julian loved M.I.A.’s song “Paper Planes” and I wished he could have been there. In the Embassy, even if the situation was far from ideal (let’s never forget, he was in “arbitrary detention”), we would listen to music from time to time. Besides M.I.A., there was also Rage Against the Machine, so earlier that day in prison I mentioned that RATM is reuniting – and he smiled.
As I was going to Belmarsh prison I was thinking whether this information was relevant at all, should I mention it? It seemed totally irrelevant having in mind the short time we would have together during the visit, but at the same time, these are the kind of news that can make someone smile. Even for a brief moment.
Once you exit the high-security prison, once you are suddenly back “outside”, back to “your normal life”, while he is still “inside” waiting for a letter or another short visit, most of his time completely alone in his cell, what you’ve just been through hits you like a belated arrow: why is Julian not able to exit these doors? Why is he not able to spend time with his family and friends, to recover from the 10 years of persecution? Why is he not free to go to a concert by Rage Against the Machine? Why is he not teaching at a UK University, definitely a better way of using his talents, instead of suffering in prison? And so many other questions.
That short moment of happiness was perhaps a message in a bottle from a better – and still possible – future, but what about the rest of the 23 hours in his solitary cell? He said I should tell you that he uses his time in a cell to walk and think, around 10-15 km each day, imagining he is walking across Europe.
He reads the letters, although they are still coming in with much delay. And he is grateful to everyone. And even in this difficult situation, he said it is not just about him, it is about the very essence of democracy.
But it is also about him. It is about his life.
So what can you do?
Don’t wait, do whatever you can. And do it now.
Write him a letter about the “outside” world (with facts about relevant events and how concretely you are helping him), force your MPs to take action and ask your political parties what they are doing to protect freedom of the press and prevent the extradition of Julian Assange, organise and join protests; write to NGOs and individuals who deal with human rights and press freedom and ask them what they are doing to free Julian; donate to his defense fund and make sure to join DiEM25 as we will continue to stand with our member Julian Assange and fight until he is free.
Together, we can win!
Democracy under attack in Kashmir
DiEM25 is watching with growing alarm the recent developments in Indian Administered Kashmir (“IAK”) and what they more broadly represent and signify from a transnational perspective.
On August 5, 2019, the BJP-led central government of India effectively abrogated Article 370 of the Indian constitution. Article 370, which had been in place for approximately seventy years, constitutionally memorialised and guaranteed IAK’s autonomous status within the framework of the Indian state and was the bedrock of IAK’s legal relationship with the Indian state.
In addition, and contemporaneously with the abrogation of Article 370, the Indian central government downgraded the status of IAK from a constituent state of India to a union territory and divided IAK into two parts. Read against the backdrop of United Nations Security Council resolutions that provide for the right of self-determination to the people of IAK and bilateral agreements between India and Pakistan, the functional effect of India’s actions on August 5 is the annexation of IAK.
Insidiously, India’s actions on August 5 have the veneer of formalistic democracy as they were taken by the elected Indian parliament and the Indian president.
A closer examination reveals, though, the democratic hollowness of these actions.
- First, the Indian central government neither consulted with nor obtained the consent of the people of IAK.
- Second, in the lead up to August 5, tens of thousands of additional Indian military personnel were deployed to IAK, which is already the most densely militarised area in the world.
- Third, from August 5 until today, the Indian state has:
- Blocked most, if not all, inbound and outbound communications to and from IAK;
- Engaged in a massive wave of preventive arrests and detentions without due process;
- Stifled journalists from freely reporting on the situation in IAK and otherwise censored their work; and
- Ruthlessly used draconian laws to suppress dissent and inspire fear.
Moreover, even domestic Indian politicians have been prevented from traveling to IAK to understand first-hand what is happening there. Unfortunately, the events of August 5 are not an aberration in the history of IAK. They are, in one sense, simply another chapter in its tragic history, namely, a multi-generational struggle for democratic rights, the right to self-governance and rule, and the right to self-determination that is firmly grounded in international law and that has been met by relentless state violence and repression. In another sense, they are a pivotal moment for IAK, mainly because of who initiated them, the BJP.
A longstanding plank of the BJP’s political platform has been the abrogation of Article 370 and the integration of IAK into the Indian state. In defense of the actions on August 5, the BJP has put forward a number of arguments, primarily focused on socio-economic development. These arguments strain credulity, though, in light of the BJP’s roots in the fascist ideologies of the 1930s, the rhetoric and actions of its members (including, but not limited to, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the 2002 Gujarat pogrom), the widespread lynching of Indian Muslims, the targeted attacks on minority communities in India, and the imminent disenfranchisement of millions in Assam. Rather, a more tethered interpretation is that the actions on August 5 are an integral piece of a larger BJP plan to create a highly centralised, Hindu majoritarian and Hindu supremacist Indian state.
For Europeans, the seriousness of the events of August 5 was underscored by the recent European parliamentarian visit to IAK. At the end of October, nearly twenty-five members of the European parliament toured IAK at the invitation of the BJP. Aside from the incongruity of foreign politicians traveling to IAK while life there remains under siege and the farcical narrative of normalcy the BJP intended to promote through the visit, what was telling was whom the BJP invited.
More than a third of the members were from far-right parties, with six of them belonging to National Rally and two of them belonging to Alternative for Germany. This composition makes clear that the BJP expected a sympathetic audience and potential allyship from those who domestically in Europe espouse and advocate for illiberal, authoritarian, xenophobic, and Islamophobic policies.
The importance of the events of August 5 as a data point cannot and should not be overlooked. It is demonstrable evidence of the linkages of fascist and supremacist movements around the world and their common cause. As committed and principled democrats, DiEM25 accordingly publicly stand in solidarity with the people of IAK. Their struggle is DiEM25’s because democracy under threat anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.
Photo (C) Getty Images
Greek police storm Athens University and fire teargas at students
MeRA25 members currently in custody without charges.
Students at the Athens University of Economics and Business have been arrested by the police during a standoff after a peaceful demonstration. Members of MeRA25 present at the demonstration have also been detained.
Thomas Achtaridis, a student and MeRA25 member reached out to our office in Athens calling for help as the police fired tear gas into the building where he was.
We dispatched MeRA25 and DiEM25 members Kostas Daskas and Maria Karakitsou to assist, but they were taken in by the police, who had begun arresting people at random.
The police are refusing to let MeRA25’s legal counsel meet with Kostas Daskas, who remains in custody without formal charges.
MeRA25 Member of Parliament and DiEM25 co-founder Yanis Varoufakis is denouncing these violent actions by the authorities as atrocious, for even in the bleakest days of the country’s political repression, the police never dares deny access to legal counsel to a detainee.
MeRA25 MPs, Sophia Sakorafa and Kleon Grigoriadis, are currently at police headquarters.
(Developing story – updates to follow)