Bulletin N° 787

We recommend Ken Russell’s classic film adaptation of the D.H. Lawrence’s novel, which depicts social relationships in rapidly industrializing societyafter World War I, at the time of the rise of Fascism in Europe, and before the second impersonal, anonymous, industrial-scale murder of millions of people in capitalism’s Second World War. Starring Alan Bates, Oliver Reed, Glenda Jackson, and Jennie Linden.

"Women in Love"






25 February 2018

Grenoble, France



Dear Colleagues and Friends of CEIMSA,


There are two written records - one an historical account; the other an important literary achievement – that shed light on conditions that gave rise to German Fascism. We will continue to look at Fritz Stern’s account in Einstein’s German World (1999); then we will turn briefly to Christopher Isherwood’s character portraits in his novel, Berlin Stories (1935).


The liberal insights found in Stern’s history of 20th-century Germany are instructive today. In Chapter 8, where he criticized the much acclaimed book by Harvard historian Daniel Goldhagen, Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust (1997), Stern cites British historian Sir Lewis Namier, who once remarked:


the historical approach is intellectually humble; the aim is to comprehend situations, to study trends, to discover

how things work: and the crowning attainment of historical study is a historical sense – an intuitive understanding

of how things do not happen.(p.274)


Stern takes serious issue with Goldhagen’s metaphysics in this book. When, for example, he writes in Willing Executioners that, “German society . . .  was axiomatically anti-Semitic” and that therefore “It is . . . incontestable that the fundamentals of Nazi anti-Semitism . . . had deep roots in Germany, as part of the cultural cognitive model of German society, and was integral to German political culture . . . . It is incontestable that this racial anti-Semitism which held the Jews to pose a mortal threat to Germany was pregnant with murder.” Stern challenges Goldhagen’s hypothesis: “I would say unprovable and implausible.”(p.276)


But was anti-Semitism the sole or even the most important bond between Hitler and the Germans? Was it responsible

for the failure of Germans to protest the first terrorist measures of the regime, the suppression of civil rights, the

establishment of concentration camps in March 1933? The existence of the camps was made public specifically

because they were intended to destroy political enemies and to intimidate potential opposition. From the very

beginning the Nazis used every vicious means of humiliation and terror – in public and sometimes , within the

insulated realm of the camps always – against all opponents, real and imagined, German or German Jew, man or

woman. They unleashed their pent-up savagery on Socialists and Communists (with the greatest brutality if they

happened to be Jews as well). Men were beaten in these camps, and murdered – yet silence was pervasive among the

Germans, who had begun to exult in their society’s outward order and slowly returning prosperity and power. Would

Goldhagen not acknowledge the likelihood of some link between Germans so sadistically falling upon their fellow

Germans and their treatment of people whom they came to demonize – Jews and Slavs in particular?(p.278)


Goldhagen’s book was on the New York Time’s best seller list for many weeks in the United States.


Note: Stern’s critical book review was first published in the autumn 1996 issue of Foreign Affairs. 



On the question of Zionism, Stern ( 1926- 2016) emphasized the accomplishments of the Manchester University chemist Chaim Weizmann (1874-1952), who succeeded Theodor Herzl (1860-1904) as the apostle of Zionism. With the advent of Hitler and following a quarrel with Albert Einstein for his public criticism of Zionist policies in Palestine, Weizmann wrote that, “Einstein seems to be acquiring the psychology of a prima donna who is beginning to lose her voice.”(p.248) There is no question, that Weizmann had exhibited opportunistic genius in his calculations to wed Zionism to British imperialist interests.


   Weizmann had made friends with and pro-Zionists of some of Britain’s great leaders, but no manner of ingenious persuasion would have prevailed but for this invocation of British self-interest; he kept insisting that after the defeat of Turkey and the assumption of British control over Palestine, a Jewish presence there would serve British interests. Meanwhile and immediately he served British interests at home. He had developed a new method for obtaining acetone, a vital ingredient in the manufacturing of heavy artillery, especially for the Royal Navy. The British government asked him to organize the production of acetone according to this technique. Weizmann threw himself into this new assignment in London, which enhanced his standing with the British establishment and added stature to his unofficial standing in the Zionist world. Thus the Great War, which saw the paroxysm of rapacious nationalism, proved as well to be the great historic chance for Weizmann and for Zionism.


   By 1917, the Lloyd George government, itself but recently constituted, faced a desperate situation. The Germans had resorted to their ultimate weapon, unrestricted submarine warfare, and British losses on the high seas imperiled British subsistence. It was not certain that the country could hold out until American power could be thrown into the balance.


   Meanwhile another battle had been going on for some time: the competitive exploitation of national discontent behind enemy lines. Germans encouraged rebellion not only in Ireland but in all possible areas of the British and Russian empires. The allies, somewhat less cynically, sought to rally the national minorities within enemy lands, especially those of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The subversion of Arabs against their Turkish rulers was an important, exotic enterprise  - of great potential importance to Zionists. Some British liberals – here I think especially of R. W. Seton-Watson – had long studied and championed the demands of the Czechs, the Poles, and the South Slavs. For Britain now to champion their cause during the war was expediency gilded by principle ; the Americans came to take up the cause out of missionary zeal and a tinge of domestic political opportunism. Even as the Allies drew up plans for their own aggrandizement, they promised liberation to peoples outside their dominion. In many ways, the promise of national self-determination, however noble in the abstract, was to become the poisoned culmination of liberal hopes.


   Already in peacetime, Weizmann had urged on leading British politicians the moral imperative of a Jewish homeland. I am thinking of Balfour, Lloyd George, Churchill, Mark Sykes, Robert Cecil and the great South African Jan Smuts. The war lent urgency to this demand just as his own scientific-practical talent in the service of British munition-making confirmed his loyalty. He now persuaded some of these same leaders that support of Zionism was to Britain’s immediate and long-term advantage: it would rally Jewish opinion in Europe and the United States at a time when the Germans were making serious efforts to claim Zionism for themselves and to play a pro-Jewish card in the parts of Eastern Europe they had newly conquered. Above all the British believed that support of Zionism would wean American Jewry from its pro-German (because largely anti-Russian) stance.(pp.236-238)


. . .


   The Balfour Declaration of November 1917 marked the triumph of Weizmann’s early hopes. It was, in the words of a well-known diplomat-historian, Sir Charles Webster, ‘the greatest act of diplomatic statesmanship of the First World War.’ Here was a British commitment, a charter for the homeland. Weizmann knew perfectly well just how much British self-interest  had inspired the declaration. As a leading historian recently pointed out, ‘The British were . . . determined to retain control of Palestine, once they had conquered it . . . to strengthen their position in a region deemed vital to the defensive system of the Empire.’ Weizmann assumed that there was and would remain an identify of interests between a powerful Britain and an emergent Jewish presence in Palestine, an identity of interests that would begin with a British protectorate over Palestine and ultimately promote Jewish statehood. He failed to foresee the decline of British power and self-confidence – but then only in retrospect do we see that the Great War desperately weakened the empire that had just endured its greatest trial. A country in decline, saddled with doubts about the imperial mission and with stirrings of guilt about the Versailles Treaty, would prove an uncertain protector of Zionism.(pp.239-240)



The unforgettable character portraits composed by Christopher Isherwood (1904-1986) in his book, Berlin Stories, reveal the social and psychological cost of Fascist activities in Berlin between 1929 and 1933, the same period in which my mother, a precocious young graduate from Kansas State University, had lived and studied in this city. The constant fear was palpable, and the meaning of life more or less limited by day-to-day survival tactics, with frequent attempts at escape from the dreary scenes of violence. Isherwood's memorable characters include the aging English gentleman, Authur Norris, whom we come to discover, is financially caught in the struggle between Nazis and Communists; then there is the protagonist, William Bradshaw - the author himself - who had just graduated from Cambridge University and had come to Berlin to teach English and to perfect his German language skills. He writes this account of his life in Berlin in the first person. Other characters include prostitutes, like Anni and Olga; pimps, like Otto Nowak; thieves - both small and big - like Gerhardt and Schmidt; political militants from the left and the right and the in-between, like Kuno, Bayer and Rudi; Anglophone expatriates like Friz Wendel and Helen Pratt and Sally Bowles; then there is his unforgettable landlady, Fraulein Schroeder; and the local police; and, of course, mysteriously behind the scenes, lurk the industrialists and the bankers and corrupt politicians, like Prignitz, Kuno, and van Hoorn, who remain amoral and ever ready to pickup large profits as opportunities appear in the looming European crisis.


Like any good literature, the essential elements in this autobiographical story are to be found by reading between the lines, in the nuances from living a life in daily terror. Below is one scene in which Isherwood captures the ‘banality of evil’ that characterized life in Berlin even before the Nazi seizure of power.


   Early this evening I was in the Büllowstrasse. There had been a big Nazi meeting at the Sportpalast, and groups of men and boys were just coming away from it, in their brown or black uniforms. Walking along the pavement ahead of me were three S.A. men. They all carried Nazi banners on their shoulders, like rifles, rolled tight round the saves – the banner-staves had sharp metal points, shaped into arrowheads.


   All at once, the three S.A. men came face to face with a youth of seventeen or eighteen, dressed in civilian clothes, who was hurrying along in the opposite direction. I heard one of the Nazis shout; ‘That’s him!’ and immediately all three of them flung themselves upon the young man. He uttered a scream, and tried to dodge, but they were too quick for him. In a moment they had jostled him into the shadow of a house entrance, and were standing over him, kicking him and stabbing at him with the sharp metal points of their banners. All this happened with such incredible speed that I could hardly believe my eyes – already, the three S..A. men had left their victim, and were barging their way through the crowd; they made for the stairs which led up to the station of the Overhead Railway.


   Another passer-by and myself were the first to reach the doorway where the young man was lying. He lay huddled crookedly in the corner, like an abandoned sack. As they picked him up, I got a sickening glimpse of his face – his left eye was poked half out, and blood poured from the wound. He wasn’t dead. Somebody volunteered to take him to the hospital in a taxi.


   By this time, dozens of people were looking on. They seemed surprised, but not particularly shocked – this sort of thing happens too often, nowadays. ‘Allerhand . . . .’ they murmured . Twenty yards away, at the Potsdamerstrasse corner, stood a group of heavily armed policemen. With their chests out, and their hands on their revolver belts, they magnificently disregarded the whole affair.(pp.200-201)


Such scenes of violence had a numbing affect on people living in Berlin during the much compromised Weimar Republic, when self-deception was the rule, and the ‘new normal’ had become self-censorship.



The 22 items below are presented as a harbinger of the approaching new phase of the crisis in which we find ourselves today. Certainly, we are not looking at the reenactment of European events of the 1930s, but this, in itself, is hardly reassuring, for "the first time is tragedy; the second time is farce . . . . "




Francis Feeley


Professor emeritus of American Studies

University Grenoble-Alpes

Director of Research

University of Paris-Nanterre

Center for the Advanced Study of American Institutions and Social Movements

The University of California-San Diego






Watch: How Imperialism is Being Redefined as a Liberal Ideal: Former UK Ambassador to Syria


by Peter Ford

Peter Ford, former ambassador to Syria (2003-6) speaking at the “Imperialism on Trial” symposium in Derry, Ireland. He describes the weasel words and manipulative language used to redefine old ideas of imperialism as a liberal ideal.  “Defending human rights”, he says, is simply a modern construct of the Victorian meme of the “White Man’s Burden” – the mendacious idea that the countries invaded by the British Empire needed and welcomed the invaders as a civilizing and educational force.





Trump Sets Deadly Precedent by Hiding Rationale

for Bombing Syria


Our president must be restrained before he does the same thing for North Korea.
by Marjorie Cohn


Pressure is mounting as the Trump administration continues to refuse to reveal its legal justification for bombing Syria in April 2017, despite increased scrutiny from Democratic senators and a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Virginia) wrote a letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on February 8, 2018, requesting a copy of the State Department memo containing the Trump administration's legal justification for the US attack against Syria on April 6, 2017, when it bombed the Shayrat military airbase with 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles. At the time of the bombing, Trump suggested that he ordered the launching of the missiles in retaliation for a sarin gas attack at Khan Sheikhoun, allegedly ordered by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The Syrian government, however, denied responsibility for the chemical attack. Meanwhile, Defense Secretary James Mattis admitted earlier this month he has "no evidence" Assad ordered the use of sarin gas against his own people.





How the US Bullies North Korea, 1945-Present


For more than seven decades, US policymakers and military strategists have bullied, intimidated and ultimately tried to isolate the self-professed Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (a.k.a., North Korea). It is particularly instructive to examine official Congressional, CIA and Pentagon sources relating to North Korea’s motivations. These often paint a much more honest picture of events than mainstream media.

The official sources, conspicuously absent from mainstream US and European media, strongly and consistently suggest that threats and aggression on the part of Western countries, in this case the USA, are met with threats and aggression by weaker states; in this case, North Korea. From this we learn that if we want peace or at least de-escalation, it pays to pursue diplomacy and to stick to international agreements. We also learn that US elites are committed to global military domination at any cost, not to peace.



(Con’d.) . . .





Syria strikes back as Israel discovers

its warplanes aren’t invincible


by Rania Khalek


Israel has long been the unchallenged bully in the Middle East, but now Tel Aviv will face consequences for its temper tantrums. That was the message from Damascus last weekend when the Syrian army shot down an Israeli F-16. The dramatic escalation happened as Israel claimed one of its warplanes was in Syrian airspace to intercept an Iranian drone that had been operating in Israeli territory. But, in reality, the Iranian drone was intercepted in the Golan Heights, which is Syrian land that has been illegally occupied by Israel since 1967. Of course, this didn’t stop major western publications like the Wall Street Journal from referring to the Golan as “Israeli airspace.” Nevertheless, the mainstream media was left in disbelief by the incident—the New York Times, for example, was startled to discover that “Israeli jets aren’t invincible.”

As usual, Israel painted itself as a victim of irrational Arab aggression. However, in fact, Syria was clearly acting in self-defence against repeated Israeli violations of its sovereignty. Even the head of the Israeli Air Force Air Division confessed that his country has carried out "thousands of operations in Syria" in the last year alone. This fact was missing from most mainstream news accounts, which portrayed Israel as a non-interventionist bystander in the Syrian conflict. That couldn’t be further from the truth. Not only has Israel repeatedly bombed Syrian government installations, it has also armed Jihadist rebel groups in the Golan Heights, coordinated with Al-Qaeda’s Syria affiliate against government forces and provided medical treatment to Al-Qaeda and Islamic State-linked rebels before sending them back into battle.





US Aggression in Syria – an Imperialist Blueprint



Information Clearing House Editorial, 23 February 2018


Syria’s prolonged conflict and misery going into its eighth year is no accident. It is by design. American imperialist design.

First though, we note the increasing reprehensible absurdity in this conflict. Turkey, which invaded Syria nearly a month ago in violation of Syria’s sovereignty, this week accused Damascus of “terrorism” after the Syrian government sent forces to defend the northern area near Afrin under assault from Turkey. Meanwhile, US forces, again illegally occupying Syria in violation of international law, claim to be fighting terrorist militia. Yet more often than not, the Americans are affording protection to various terrorist groups. Then when Syrian state forces advance to clear the terror groups, the US claims it is acting in “self-defense” by massacring whole units of the Syrian army. Further absurdity is due to France, which has been bombing Syria illegally along with the US and Britain, warning Iranian militia, who are legally present in Syria owing to Damascus’ approval, that they have to withdraw from the country.





Watch: Palestinian Killed

By Israeli Occupation Force Soldiers



by Tamara Nassar


A Palestinian man died after he was beaten by Israeli soldiers in the occupied West Bank city of Jericho early Thursday.

Yasin al-Saradih, 33, was arrested from his house at approximately 2 am, Eid Barahmeh, head of the Palestinian prisoners club in Jericho, told the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

Israeli forces notified the family of al-Saradih’s death two hours later.

The Israeli military changed its story about the events surrounding al-Saradih’s death after a video emerged showing soldiers striking him.

The video shows a number of soldiers gathered around al-Saradih, some apparently beating him while he is on the ground. They then drag his body away. The video does not show al-Saradih posing any threat to them.





Finkelstein on Gaza: Who or What Has a Right to Exist? 





Gaza ‘On Brink Of Collapse’

As Residents Remain ‘Caged In’



by Norman Finkelstein

"Seventy percent of the people of Gaza are refugees. More than half are children. They're trapped, there's no way out," author Norman Finkelstein





Blowback: How Israel Went From Helping Create Hamas to Bombing It


by Mehdi Hasan





Palestine Is Still the Issue



John Pilger returned to the West Bank of Jordan and Gaza, and to Israel, to ask why the Palestinians, whose right of return was affirmed by the United Nations more than half a century ago, are still caught in a terrible limbo - refugees in their own land, controlled by Israel in the longest military occupation in modern times.





Israeli Soldier's Breaking the Silence



Avner Gvaryahu, Breaking the Silence's executive director interviews to BBC HARDtalk with Stephen Sackur.





From: "Moshé Machover" <ananmoshik@icloud.com>
To: "Moshé Machover" <mmachover@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, 23 February, 2018 12:34:12 PM


Please see information below.



From: Arie Finkelstein 


Date: 23February2018 at 10:13:45 GMT

To: undisclosed-recipients:;






I scanned several pages regarding Matzpen.











Masha Gessen: Russiagate Has Become a Conspiracy Trap Obscuring How Trump Is Damaging Nation








Human Rights over Religious Rites in Iceland


Iceland's mooted circumcision ban sparks religious outrage










Political theorist and activist Clara Zetkin (1857-1933). (Mr. Fish / Truthdig)

by Chris Hedges


In 1923 the radical socialist and feminist Clara Zetkin gave a report at the Communist International about the emergence of a political movement called fascism. Fascism, then in its infancy, was written off by many liberals, socialists and communists as little more than mob rule, terror and street violence. But Zetkin, a German revolutionary, understood its virulence, its seduction and its danger. She warned that the longer the stagnation and rot of a dysfunctional democracy went unaddressed, the more attractive fascism would become. And as 21st-century America’s own capitalist democracy disintegrates, replaced by a naked kleptocracy that disdains the rule of law, the struggle of past anti-fascists mirrors our own. History has amply illustrated where political paralysis, economic decline, hypermilitarism and widespread corruption lead.





Capitalism as Obstacle to Equality and Democracy:

The US Story



by Richard D. Wolff


The Cold War displaced the legacies of the New Deal. Time and Trump are now displacing Cold War legacies. Where capitalism was questioned and challenged in the 1930s and into the 1940s, doing that became taboo after 1948. Yet in the wake of the 2008 crash, critical thought about capitalism resumed. In particular one argument is gaining traction: capitalism is not the means to realize economic equality and democracy, it is rather the great obstacle to their realization.





Capitalist Utopia




If Extreme Capitalism is What Connects America’s Problems, Why Can’t Americans Figure it Out?

by Umair Haque


Here’s a tiny question. What links kids massacring each other at school, no functioning healthcare or retirement, no safety nets, no mobility or stability, the average person having less than $1000 in savings? They’re uniquely American problems, of course — and what connects them is extreme capitalism. No, they’re not the results of capitalism alone, as in sole cause and effect, of course culture and history play a role — but we’d be foolish not to see that capitalism is the thread weaving them together.





The Parkland High School Shooting

(February 14, 2018)



§  U.S. Military Trained Florida School Shooter to Be “A Very Good Shot”



·        Emma Gonzalez’s Powerful Speech Demanding Gun Control



·        “The Time to Act Is Now”: Florida School Shooting Survivors Confront Trump, Rubio on Gun Control



·        “Young Karl Marx” Director Raoul Peck Responds to NRA Chief Calling Gun Control Activists Communists






From: Jim O'Brien
Sent: Friday, 23 February, 2018
Subject: Marilyn Young Memorial Lecture; links to recent articles of interest; H-PAD broadsides




To members and friends of Historians for Peace and Democracy,


As a reminder, tonight from 6 to 8 pm Eastern time, a roundtable on "The Korean War Today" will constitute the first annual Marilyn Young Memorial Lecture at D'Agostino Hall, NYU Law School, 108 W. 3rd St., New York. It will be livestreamed at  http://www.law.nyu.edu/livestreamb


At the end of this message, following the links to recent articles, is a repeat of an announcement of H-PAD's series of "Broadsides for the Trump Era."



Links to Recent Articles of Interest

“The 9/11 Hijackers Were Iraqis, Right? Teaching in a Time of Wars”

By Rebecca Gordon, TomDispatch.com, posted February 22

On the author’s experiences over the years teaching about the 9/11 attacks


“U.S. Empire Still Incoherent After All These Years”

By Nicolas J. S. Davies, Consortium News, posted February 20

Applies a 2003 analysis of the US “new imperialism” to the intervening years


“McMaster of War”

By Dave Lindorff, London Review of Books blog, posted February 19

On the background of President Trump’s national security adviser, who insists that a military strike against North Korea be considered as a “serious option


“Russia Isn’t the Only One Meddling in Elections. We Do It Too”

By Scott Shane, New York Times, posted February 17

Contains many specifics of the past several decades


“President’s New Budget. Stark Vision of GOP Reality. Attention Must Be Paid”

Articles by Robert Greenstein, Ryan Koronowski, Brett Samuels, and Fred Kaplan, Portside.org, posted February 15


“If America ‘Won the Cold War,’ Why Is There Now a ‘Second Cold War with Russia’?: The Ongoing Role of False Narratives and Historical Fallacies”

By Stephen F. Cohen, The Nation, posted February 14

The author is a professor emeritus of Russian history and politics at Princeton University and New York University.


“North Korea Is More Rational Than You Think: An Interview with Bruce Cumings

Canadian Dimension, posted February 7

Bruce Cumings teaches history at the University of Chicago.


“Lie after Lie: What Colin Powell Knew about Iraq 15 Years Ago and What He Told the UN

By Jon Schwartz, The Intercept, posted February 6


“Memory and Meaning in the Representations of the American War in Vietnam”

By Fran Shor, Critical Education, posted February 13

The author is a professor emeritus of history at Wayne State University.


"The War That Will Not End”

By Andrew J. Bacevich, New York Times, posted January 31

A review essay on Steve Coll’s new book Directorate S: The C.I.A. and America’s Secret Wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan

Thanks to Rusti Eisenberg and an anonymous reader for suggesting articles included in the above list. Suggestings can be sent to jimobrien48@gmail.com.



Broadsides for the Trump Era


Historians for Peace and Democracy (H-PAD) is pleased to announce the publication of five broadsides, collectively called Broadsides for the Trump Era. You can access them on the H-PAD website, here https://www.historiansforpeace.org/broadsides-for-the-trump-era/ This is a new series of brief, printable handouts that summarize important historical events, movements, crises, and more that form the backdrop for our current political situation. And please check back at this site for additions in the near future!


The five broadsides, their authors, and a short summary of each is below.


Geoff Eley is a professor of history at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. His broadside, “Is Trump a Fascist?" addresses this question and draws on historical comparisons to determine what fascism is, and whether or not the current administration is, indeed, fascist.


Linda Gordon is a professor of history and a University Professor of Humanities at New York University. Her broadside explores The Ku Klux Klan of the 1920s” and examines what the Klan was, its ideology, constituency, use of violence, and accomplishments, and women and the Klan. 


Jeremy Kuzmarov, is the Jay P. Walker assistant professor of history at the University of Tulsa.  His broadside explores the political myths, interests, and impact of the “The U.S. War on Drugs” from its origins in the 1910s to today.


Robert Oppenheim is an associate professor in the Center for East Asian Center Studies at the University of Texas at Austin. His broadside “North Korea and Nuclear Weapons” discusses why North Korea developed nuclear weapons, the potential for eliminating or slowing its production of them, and whether or not North Korean has cheated on nuclear agreements.


Ellen Schrecker is a retired professor of American history at Yeshiva University. Her broadside, McCarthyism, 1947-1960,” answers key questions about McCarthyism, such as what was it, who sponsored it, how did it end, and what were the long-lasting results.

Margaret Power, co-chair, marmacpower1@gmail.com


Note: You are receiving this email as a member or friend of Historians for Peace and Democracy (see https://www.historiansforpeace.org/). If you no longer wish to receive these occasional messages, send an email to h-pad-request@historiansforpeace.org?subject=unsubscribe.




From: Monty Kroopkin
To: ucsdcoopsandcollectivesalumni@earthlink.net
Sent: Friday, 23 February, 2018 6:36:28 AM
Subject: Saturday, Re-introducing Collective Resistance San Diego; Community Potluck, noon to 3, 2/24/18



Fellow Workers, Friends,


Please come to our Collective Resistance San Diego (CRSD) community potluck and please bring a friend.

We have been working to build CRSD since November 2016.






INVITATION: Re-introducing Collective Resistance San Diego

Community potluck, sponsored by Collective Resistance San Diego

When: Saturday, February 24 at 12 PM - 3 PM

Where: U.N.I.T.E. H.E.R.E. Local 30, 2436 Market St, San Diego, California 92102






"Collective Resistance San Diego, is an alliance of several organizations in the San Diego revolutionary Left. We are holding this potluck to celebrate a year of organizing, re-introduce ourselves to the wider Left community and the San Diego community, and to develop next steps to building a united and strong Left in San Diego and beyond.

"We will have food and drink for all. This is a potluck, so all are encouraged to bring food and drink if they are in a position to do so.

"Our Agenda for the discussion is as follows:

1. Short History of CRSD - 10min
2. The organizational members of CRSD, -20min
Who we are and why we are member so CRSD
3. Our Plan for coming year -20min...
- Legal Defense Committee
- Community Self Defense
- Fundraising
4. Open discussion -20min


"Collective Resistance San Diego"


Image may contain: 6 people, people standing, people on stage, people walking, crowd and outdoor




Dear Francis,

In the latest step in the drive by the US ruling class to censor the Internet, the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) on Thursday published its order abolishing Internet neutrality in the governmental Federal Register, initiating a 60-day countdown for the order to come into force.

The FCC’s ruling represents a far-reaching attack on the democratic rights of the entire population and public access to the Internet. Beginning April 23, multibillion-dollar corporate behemoths, such as Verizon and AT&T, will be free to restrict access to or completely censor Internet sites as they see fit.

Read the full report on the WSWS

There is growing opposition among workers and youth to internet censorship. The International Youth and Student for Social Equality (IYSSE) spoke with students on campuses in the US who denounced censorship and talked about the power of the Internet to organize opposition and disseminate information outside the control of the corporate and state media.

Patrick, an undergraduate student at University of New Mexico, said, “Information is shared online more than in print. The Internet is a really important place. And once one step is taken towards censorship, when will it stop? It’s a slippery slope. Another party will come into office and take that censorship even further. The phrase ‘I disagree with that’ is now being turned into ‘fake news.’ What will news be at that point?”

Anthony, a computer science major at the University of Michigan Flint and a lifelong resident of the city, expressed skepticism of the mainstream media: “Most of the mainstream media, Fox News for example, should come with a label, ‘for entertainment purposes only.’ They aren’t really interested in the truth. They want the story they want, and that’s it. They talk about fake news—even though they were the creators of the story of ‘weapons of mass destruction.’ That was a lie. And what did that get us? Years of bloody war.”

Full article: Opposition grows among students and youth to Internet censorship

See also: Sincerely,
The World Socialist Web Site
Organizing Resistance to Internet Censorship: Public Meetings

More meetings are being scheduled. Contact us to help organize one in your area

Syracuse, New York
Friday, March 2, 3:00 p.m.
Beauchamp Library
2111 S. Salina St.

Los Angeles, California
Saturday, March 3, 3:00 p.m.
Delancey Street Foundation, El Camino Room
400 N. Vermont Ave.

University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Monday, March 12, 7:00 p.m.
Union Ballroom West
2200 E Kenwood Blvd
Milwaukee, Wisconsin

San Diego State University
Tuesday, March 13, 7:00 p.m.
Storm Hall West Room 011
San Diego, California

University of California - Berkeley
Wednesday, March 14, 7:00 p.m.
Barrows Room 20
Berkeley, California

Eastern Michigan University
Monday, March 19, 7:00 p.m.
EMU Student Center Room 330
Ypsilanti, Michigan

University of Florida
Wednesday, March 21, 7:00 p.m.
Reitz Student Union Room G320
Gainesville, Florida

Wayne State University
Tuesday, March 27, 7:00 p.m.
Student Center Room 384
Detroit, Michigan

New York University
Wednesday, March 28, 7:30 p.m.
Kimmel Center Room 905/907
New York City, New York

Western Michigan University
Thursday, March 29, 7:00 p.m.
Bernhard Center Room 212
Kalamazoo, Michigan

University of Michigan
Tuesday, April 3, 7:00 p.m.
Michigan League Hussey Room
Ann Arbor, Michigan

SUNY Geneseo
Tuesday, April 3, 6:00 p.m.
Newton 209
Geneseo, New York