It is all lies that PBS is an independent media. It is just propaganda. Same with BBC.
When I came to live in N America in the mid 1980's , I was shocked that the media here was worse than the apartheid-era type I had left behind.
Mitayo Potosi
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: ugnet_: Open Letter to all those who want African and Human Liberation
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 10:21:39 EDT
To the limited degree we have been able to organize our movement(s) we have realized success, although it does not always seem evident.
But all we have to do is look at the reaction of our enemies, because we will
see that they spend a lot of energy studying and analyzing the impact of
peoples' struggles for national and social liberation, to sharpen their systemic
responses to these struggles. If I may, let me give you a few quick examples.
I. Cambridge University
Cambridge University in the UK has a special academic program totally devoted
to the issue of land as a central economic factor. I have excerpted a
section from their web site:
"We are a specialised department within Cambridge, devoted to the
multidisciplinary study of land, property, the environment and resource management. Our
two primary disciplines are law and economics."
"We have a full, three year, undergraduate degree course (known as the Tripos) and we have a strong postgraduate programme."
"Our teaching has been certified by an independent Panel from the Government's Quality Assurance Agency as being of the highest quality."
"We are a small department by Cambridge standards, with a lively and active
group of staff and students, operating within an intensive research-oriented
environment. Yet we have over 40 teaching and research staff, including:"
"economists with specialist interests ranging from urban and regional
economics to housing, from environmental economics to property markets, and from
agricultural economics to the economics of less developed countries;"
"lawyers with interests that include real property law, environmental law, land tenure and aboriginal rights, land-use planning law, public and constitutional law and central and local government."
" planners, urban geographers, statisticians and econometricians."
http://www.landecon.cam.ac.uk/about.htm
I think we should pay close attention to their emphasis on areas such as
"agricultural economics to the economics of less developed countries" and "land
tenure and aboriginal rights", because they speak directly to the current
issues being waged in various international fora and on the ground in many places
around the world
For example the relationship between possession and use of the land and
indigenous rights is raging in various localities, Zimbabwe, Azania/South Africa,
Namibia, Kenya, Brazil, Palestine, Australia and even here in the US (for
example the just struggles of the indigenous peoples of the North American
continent, and those of Hawaii).
The issue of agricultural economics has been a vocal point of trade and
related talks between the so-called developed world, i.e., most of the world, and
the capitalist powers.
The question of the general economic uses of land has been a hotly contested
issue in states such as Nigeria, where significant sections of the population
are unhappy with the way the transnational corporations conduct their
petroleum discovery and extraction activities. Similar concerns about petroleum, and
other extraction industries such as the mining of precious and strategic
metals, the use of precious resources such as water and plant life, have been
voiced in other countries across the globe.
The lesson I think we should learn from the approach of institutions such as
Cambridge, because it is important to recognize that Cambridge's interest in
these areas is not an isolated phenomena, is that we must develop more
efficient and comprehensive institutions to study our struggle and advance our own
knowledge and expertise in these areas as means of sharpening the production of
our organizations and institutions at every level.
My second example is the Public Broadcasting System here in the USA.
II. PBS programming
PBS has several very revealing programs that speak to the struggle between
the majority of humanity and capitalism. I wish to cite two here; one is called
"Commanding Heights" the second is called "The Wind of Change: The End of
Colonialism in Africa"; the first tries to demonstrate that what is
euphemistically called globalization is the logical outcome of the political economic
struggles and development of the 20th century; the second attempts to prove that
the African Liberation Movement and the drive for a United States of Africa,
launched with the independence of Ghana, faltered because of the ill
preparedness of the Africans and because of the "cold war".
To give you an idea of the spurious orientation of the Commanding Heights
series examine the following quote on Nkrumah and the imperialist coup against
the CPP government:
"....State-owned companies and public authorities mushroomed in all fields.
So did mismanagement and graft. The price was most painfully felt in the
countryside as Nkrumah used cocoa revenues, controlled by the official marketing
board, to cover the growing losses of public companies. The imposition of
unrealistically low cocoa prices on farmers, combined with the bloated organization
of the marketing board, devastated the industry. Many farmers switched crops
altogether; others found ways to smuggle their cocoa through neighboring
countries, where better prices were offered. Ghana lost its mantle as the world's
largest cocoa producer. Its currency reserves depleted, it fell back on barter
trade and loans from the Soviet bloc."
"Nkrumah became increasingly remote, preferring to focus on grand schemes of
African unity than on running the country. He turned the country into a
one-party state in 1964, and took to indulging in a sordid cult of personality,
dubbing himself Osagyefo, "the Redeemer." It did not take long for resentment to
set in. He evaded several assassination attempts. On January 22, 1966, he
inaugurated the Volta Dam, proudly pressing the button that released power into the
new national grid unaware that even this project would be only half a
success. Ghana's bauxite mines would never be developed; the smelter found it more
economic to process bauxite imported from Jamaica. The inauguration would be his
last moment of glory."
"On February 24, as he stopped in Burma on his way to China at the start of a
grand tour aimed at solving the Vietnam conflict, army officers intervened at
home and took power. "The myth surrounding Kwame Nkrumah has been broken,"
announced an army colonel on the radio. Nkrumah did not learn of the coup until
he arrived in China. Premier Zhou Enlai, unsure of the protocol to follow,
went ahead and hosted an eerie state banquet in his honor. Nkrumah ended up
taking up exile in Guinea, where another experiment in "African socialism" was in
progress. Guinea's president, Sekou Toure, his own rule increasingly repressive
and arbitrary, endowed Nkrumah with the title of "co-president." Nkrumah made
regular shortwave broadcasts to Ghana, published ideological treatises, and
plotted a triumphal return to power until he grew ill and died in 1972, still
in exile. The "political kingdom" had crumbled as fast as it had been built.
"The Redeemer," who had once inspired a continent, had fallen far from grace."
From Commanding Heights by Daniel Yergin and Joseph Stanislaw. Copyright ©
1998 by Daniel A. Yergin and Joseph Stanislaw. Reprinted by permission of
Simon & Schuster, Inc., N.Y
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitextlo/prof_kwamenkrumah.
html
This vicious slander and libel disguised as scholarship was written without
any reference to the fact that even the US government itself has released
documents showing the dominating role of the British and US governments in the
coup. There is no question in my minds that the authors of these specious
fallacies were aware of the truth facts and chose to ignore truth; as I firmly
believe, did those who put together the "Commanding Heights" program, because it fit
their ideological and organizational needs to do so.
The following excerpt sums up the general position advocated by Commanding
Heights, and will further illuminate the program's position on Pan-Africanism
and the contribution of Nkrumah and the CPP, and by extension all those who
fight for true liberation and human justice.
"But in the 1970s, with Keynesian theory at its height and communism fully
entrenched, economic stagnation sets in on all sides. When a British grocer's
daughter and a former Hollywood actor become heads of state, they join forces
around the ideas of Hayek, and new political and economic policies begin to
transform the world."
"As the 1980s begin and the Cold War grinds on, the existing world order
appears firmly in place. Yet beneath the surface powerful currents are carving
away at the economic foundations."
"Western democracies still struggle with deficits and inflation, while
communism hides the failure of its command economy behind a facade of military
might. In Latin America populist dictators strive to thwart foreign economic
exploitation, piling up debt and igniting hyperinflation in the process. In India
and Africa bureaucracies established to end poverty through scientific planning
spawn black markets and corruption and stifle enterprise."
"Worldwide, the strategies of government planning are failing to produce
their intended results. From Bolivia and Peru to Poland and Russia, the
free-market policies of Thatcher and Reagan are looked to as a possible blueprint for
escape. One by one, economies in crisis adopt "shock therapy" -- a rapid
conversion to free-market capitalism."
"As the command economies totter and collapse, privatization transfers
economic power back into entrepreneurial hands, and whole societies go through
wrenching change. For some the demands and opportunities of the market provide a
longed for liberation. Others, lacking the means to adapt, see their security
and livelihood swept away. In this new capitalist revolution enlightened
enterprise and cynical exploitation thrive alike. The sum total of global wealth
expands, but its unequal distribution increases, too, and economic regeneration
exacts a high human price."
"With communism discredited, more and more nations harness their fortunes to
the global free-market. China, Southeast Asia, India, Eastern Europe and Latin
America all compete to attract the developed world's investment capital, and
tariff barriers fall. In the United States Republican and Democratic
administrations both embrace unfettered globalization over the objections of organized
labor."
"But as new technology and ideas drive profound economic change, unforeseen
events unfold. A Mexican economic meltdown sends the Clinton administration
scrambling. Internet-linked financial markets, unrestricted capital flows, and
floating currencies drive levels of speculative investment that dwarf trade in
actual goods and services. Fueled by electronic capital and a global workforce
ready to adapt, entrepreneurs create multinational corporations with
valuations greater than entire national economies."
"When huge pension funds go hunting higher returns in emerging markets,
enterprise flourishes where poverty once ruled, but risk grows, too. In Thailand
the huge reservoir of available capital proves first a blessing, then a curse.
Soon all Asia is engulfed in an economic crisis, and financial contagion
spreads throughout the world, until Wall Street itself is threatened. A single
global market is now the central economic reality. As the force of its effects is
felt, popular unease grows. Is the system just too complex to be controlled, or
is it an insiders' game played at outsiders' expense? New centers of
opposition to globalization form and the debate turns violent over who will rewrite
the rules."
"Yet prosperity continues to spread with the expansion of trade, even as the
gulf widens further between rich and poor. Imbalances too dangerous for the
system to ignore now drive its stakeholders to devise new means to include the
dispossessed lest, once again, terrorism and war destroy the stability of a
deeply interconnected world."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/lo/story/index.html
PBS has another program that is aimed specifically at the struggle for Pan-Africanism -- "The Wind of Change: The End of Colonialism in Africa"
The local PBS station in Chicago is running it on Mon. Aug. 25 from 10-11 p.m, and Aug. 30 at 3:30 am. (Timed to compete with the various Garvey commemorations perhaps...)
This is how they bill it:
"In 1957, Ghana would become the first country to challenge the colonial
order by gaining independence from Britain. Emboldened by Ghana's success, Dr.
Kwame Nkrumah, Ghana's first leader, launched his campaign for the complete
independence of the African continent. Between 1958 and 1964, 26 African nations
gained their freedom from colonial rule. But this rising optimism would soon
fade, as Cold War rivalries broke out across the continent. This documentary
chronicles the chaotic impact of decolonization in Ghana, Guinea and the Congo.
Within a week of independence in June 1960, the Congo would split into three
factions, backed by the United States, the Soviet Union and Belgium, with United
Nations peacekeeping forces in the middle. For Guinea and Ghana, the outcome
was not much better. Nkrumah was eventually overthrown, and Guinea's Sekou
Toure would face economic isolation."
http://www.pbs.org/cgi-registry/whatson/template.cgir?s=WTTW&t=0&p=24667&c=d&;
d=2003-08-25
This is how PBS describes the offering
"At the end of World War II, the United States had emerged as a new world
power. For Europe, this was the beginning of the end of their colonial rule;
between 1958 and 1964, 26 African nations gained their freedom. A new group of
empowered men was leading the way — Dr. Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana, Ahmed Sekou Toure
in Guinea and Patrice Lumumba in the Belgian Congo. But the rising optimism
would soon fade, as Cold War rivalries erupted throughout the continent. THE
WIND OF CHANGE: THE END OF COLONIALISM IN AFRICA chronicles the chaotic impact
of decolonization in Ghana, Guinea and Congo."
"On March 6, 1957, Ghana became the first country to challenge the colonial
order by gaining independence from Britain. Vice-President Richard Nixon and
Dr. Martin Luther King attended the independence celebrations. Emboldened by
Ghana’s success, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, Ghana’s first leader, announced his campaign
for the complete independence of the African continent. He dreamed of a
United States of Africa — where all of Africa would be united under a single flag.
Nkrumah’s popularity soared as his successes inspired nationalist leaders
across Africa."
"In a blunt address to Charles de Gaulle of France, Ahmed Sekou Toure of
Guinea declared, “We would prefer liberty in poverty to opulence in slavery!” One
month later, on September 28, 1958, the citizens of Guinea voted for complete
political and economic independence from France. With the departure of the
French, however, Guinea was faced with a financial crisis. "
"Monitoring the departure of the British in Ghana and the French in Guinea,
the Belgians became increasingly alarmed. In 1959, without any preparations,
the Belgians announced that their colony of Congo would be granted independence.
Within one week of independence, the country spiraled out of control. An army
mutiny threw out the white officers, leaving no one in place to train the
Africans. Violence spread through the streets, forcing the white citizens to
flee. As Sir Brian Urquhart (United Nations, Congo 1960-1964) observed, “It was a
huge country the size of the whole of Western Europe with a very complicated
kind of infrastructure, completely without anyone at the switch.” "
"Events in west and central Africa did not go unnoticed in other parts of the
continent. When British Prime Minister Harold MacMillan arrived in South
Africa, the atmosphere was tense. In a carefully worded speech, MacMillan informed
the South African Parliament that a “wind of change” was sweeping the
African continent, and this would have to be accommodated."
"The road to independence for these African countries, however, would not be
smooth. Faced with a struggle of world powers, the African leaders and their
people would witness years of violence and bloodshed, as their dreams of a
united Africa dissipated."
"THE WIND OF CHANGE: THE END OF COLONIALISM IN AFRICA is the tragic story of
a continent wrapped in optimism, conspiracies and Cold War entanglements."
http://www.pbs.org/previews/WindofChange/
Clearly the emphasis here is the permanent demise of Pan-Africanism and the
obfuscation of the role of neo-colonialism, particularly in the disingenuous
way that they separate the roles of the US and the former colonial powers such
as Belgium.
Nevertheless, the fact that such efforts have to be made show the strength
and resilience of Pan-Africanism and the objective of achieving our United
States of Africa. Far from being beaten we have survived the onslaught of
neo-colonialism and general imperialism and continue to fight until this very moment.
The critical question is: will we seize the moment and increase our
ideological and organizational capabilities? The answer to this question will decide
the issue, not what the enemy does or does not do. As always I thank you for
your attention, and welcome any comments.
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
