The Secret Country: The First Australians Fight Back - 1986
(Warning for Aboriginal peoples and Torres Strait Islanders: contains footage,images and voices of those now deceased)
In 2014 this history still stays secret, educate yourselves.
Apr. 18 2014
A federal judge on Thursday declined to toss out decade-old lawsuits that accuse IBM Corp. and Ford Motor Co. of supporting apartheid by letting their subsidiaries sell computers and cars to the South African government.
The three lawsuits seek to hold IBM and Ford responsible for race-based injustices including rape, torture and murder under apartheid, a system of race-based segregation and discrimination against nonwhites that ended 20 years ago.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled on the legal reach of the statute under which the plaintiffs are suing, the Alien Tort Statute. The 1789 statute originally was enacted to prosecute pirates and was revived in recent decades to permit lawsuits in the United States against those who violate human rights abroad.
Thursday’s ruling from Judge Shira Scheindlin in Manhattan allows plaintiffs to file amended complaints that fit within the reach ruled upon by the Supreme Court.
Emails seeking comment from Armonk-based IBM and Dearborn, Michigan-based Ford weren’t immediately answered.
Close to 80 companies initially were named in the lawsuits, filed about 12 years ago, and the vast majority of those claims were rejected.
A district judge threw out the lawsuits in 2004, saying he did not have jurisdiction. He noted that Congress had supported and encouraged business investment in South Africa as a way to achieve greater respect for human rights and a reduction in poverty. And he cited vigorous objections to the lawsuits by the U.S. and its allies.
The U.S. had said the lawsuits posed a foreign policy problem, threatening to inflame U.S. relations with South Africa. The South African government had said the cases interfered with its rights to litigate such claims itself, though it later reversed its position.
This semester I went to the White Privilege Conference in Madison, WI for my honors seminar about examining privilege. I made a poster about the behaviors of particular white female musicians who appropriate other cultures as a means of identity and sexualize/objectify WOC as a means of displaying sexual agency and social power. All under the guise of “empowerment”.
This is my take on the knowledge I found through seminar and readings, (esp. online articles) so in no way do I claim these ideas or concepts as my own.
- Robert E. Pierre and Jon Jeter, A Day Late and a Dollar Short (via wretchedoftheearth)
Reblogging again/Forever reblog cause it’s true!(via knowledgeequalsblackpower)
Junius Stinney was the youngest person in America to be executed on death row in 1944 at age 14. He was quickly accused by the (white) police of ‘killing’ two little (white) girls with lack of evidence. His conviction and sentencing opened and closed in one day. There were no witnesses called and there was no transcript of the trial details and black people were not allowed inside the courtroom during that time.
[I always repost this because i don’t want anyone to forget about him!]
The sexualisation of Indigenous women has been and continues today to one of the means by which white males exercise their control and reinforce their white privileged position in Australian society. The black female body has been represented in the West as an icon of sexual deviance since the 18th century. White men sexualised Australian society by inscribing onto Indigenous women’s bodies a narrative of sexualisation separated from whiteness.
Indigenous women’s presence in predominately white social domains is often consciously or unconsciously interpreted by white men as signalling sexual availability. Although white women may be propositioned in the same space, their whiteness means that they will not be approached as often and a rebuff is likely to be interpreted as an insult to the male’s ego rather than as a challenge to the white patriarchal supremacy
- Aileen Moreton-Robinson, Talkin’ Up to the White Woman. University of Queensland Press, Brisbane, 2000. (via wocinsolidarity)
Watch this, then read Glenn Loury’s landmark essay on race and the transformation of criminal justice.
Thank God someone finally said this. I’m so sick of stating that Western intervention and invasion of other countries fuels terrorism only for people to respond 'They did 9/11 first!'
In 1953 the UK & the US staged a coup of the democratically elected leader of Iran and installed a dictator who was more to their liking. Today the US continues to support brutal dictators (such as in Saudi Arabia) where it suits them to do so. Palestine has been occupied for decades. The list of Western imperial foreign policies over the past decades could go on and on.
9/11 was not only only a result religious extremism and it certainly was not because 'they hate our freedoms.' Terrorism is often primarily politically motivated and anyone who is serious about preventing it had better take some fucking notice of this fact.
- John Fuegelsang (via companyofyou)
That’s because what you’re describing aren’t preferences, but systematic prejudices enforced on the population often through various forms of media. You’re describing White supremacy. You’re describing a pervasive and toxic anti Black woman sentiment.
Him: I don’t date black women. It’s just a preference.
Me: Based on what?
Him: Nothing, it’s just how I feel.
Me: Impossible, deliberate aversions come from somewhere.
Him: Its just a preference, that’s all.
Me: No, a preference is preferring broccoli to asparagus. You can say that because asparagus will always taste the same, even when prepared differently.
Me: And we’re not always the same at all. There are hundreds of millions of us and we’re each completely different from the next. If an employer said not hiring Black people was a preference would you agree?
Him: No, but that’s based on stereotypes.
Me: … And what is yours based on, facts?"
Oh, bitch. Read down!
Oh my Lordy yes