Recommended: Blame It on Fidel (2006)

Quote of the day – Oh, FFS

“‘Kissinger’s official biographer’, writes the man Kissinger first asked to be his official biographer, ‘certainly gives the reader enough evidence to conclude that Henry Kissinger is one of the greatest Americans in the history of the republic,…’”

[Source]

From an unofficial biography.

(They’re all men, by the way: neoliberal men, neoconservative men, imperialist men, biographical men, Islamist men, secular-nationalist men, ambitious men, historiographical men, critical men, theoretical men, anti-imperialist men,... It’s a regular club.)

Historical quote of the day

“You’re going to be puking up everything in your guts, you shitty intellectual.”

- policeman’s comment to Benaissa Souami, 27-year-old Algerian political science student, prior to his torture in Paris by the DST (Direction de la Surveillance du Territoire), led by Roger Wybot, in 1958; from his testimony reported in Gangrene, compiled by Béchir Boumaaza, published in 1959 by Éditions de Minuit and immediately seized by the French government, which also destroyed the printing plates

The best art I saw in 2014

We’re now well into February, but I still have a couple of categories to go in my 2014 favorites series.

Chilean artist Francisco Tapia’s work remains my favorite individual piece of 2014. The two others are museum exhibits.

The first is almost a punchline – “You know you’re in Maine when…” “…you’re viewing ‘Andrew Wyeth: The Linda L. Bean Collection’ at the Ogunquit Museum of American Art.” It doesn’t get much Mainer than that, unless maybe you’re there snacking on blueberries with Stephen King and a lobster named Bog. A beautiful, wistful exhibit in a gallery overlooking the sea.

The small museum is in a pretty, peaceful location, and I enjoyed their permanent collection quite a bit. My favorite piece was a 1979 sculpture, “The Tyrant,” by Clark Fitz-Gerald. Unfortunately, and inexplicably, they didn’t have any images of it in the gift shop and I can’t find a decent picture online.

The second was the “Degenerate Art: The Attack on Modern Art in Nazi Germany, 1937” show at the Neue Galerie in New York. The exhibit, so popular they had to extend its run, was extremely well done. It presented the history clearly and set the works (present and missing) in their historical context. One painting I was compelled to return to and ultimately had to tear myself away from was Lasar Segall’s stunning “The Eternal Wanderers”:

[Source]

I read some reviews of the exhibit later and one concern some reviewers expressed, and which had crossed my mind at the time, was that because the show presented some art that was favored by the Nazis alongside the works they hated, it could lead to the message that art can or should be judged in these terms - if fascists liked it, it’s not good art, and vice versa. It’s a valid concern. The exhibit did show how the Nazis often (mis)interpreted art not on the basis of its political content or the artist’s “race” or politics but on its formal qualities. So an artist doing religious pieces in an expressionistic style, for example, could be persecuted for producing grotesque images or for denigrating or mocking religion, even if he was apolitical (or sympathetic to fascism) and even if he saw his work not as a criticism but as a celebration. The Nazis, unwittingly, were “right” in the sense that many of these works promoted a dangerously humanistic attitude; but that wasn’t the basis for their fearful rejection of these modernists. So it’s a complicated matter, and they probably could have done a better job in addressing it. Overall, though, a tremendous exhibit.

In related news, the Neue Galerie will host “Gustav Klimt and Adele Bloch-Bauer: The Woman in Gold” beginning on April 2 and coinciding with the April 3 release of the movie Woman in Gold starring Helen Mirren:



(I don't know how good the film is. The trailer isn’t especially promising, and the early critical reviews are negative. On the other hand, it can’t be worse than The Monuments Men. Come to think of it, I learned of both stories through The Rape of Europa, which I would recommend quite highly.)

US government continues to try to overthrow Venezuelan democracy; Latin American resistance continues to grow and organize

The US government has added new sanctions to Venezuelan officials as part of its ongoing campaign to overthrow the democratically elected government of that country. The liberal New York Times continues to shamelessly propagandize on behalf of that campaign.

This film, “Imitation and Copy” – not free of propagandistic intent itself, but providing useful history – describes how many of the techniques employed by the US government in league with obedient or incurious journalists and the Latin American Right today are a continuation of those used to successfully oust the democratically elected Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973 and install the murderous Pinochet regime:



(This is what you’re a part of, New York Times. Be proud, as you apparently are of fawning over Henry Kissinger’s book in your list of the best of 2014.)

There’s no sign that the US government will pull back on its campaign against the people of Latin America or the Caribbean. But there is resistance. Last week, CELAC, the organization of governments in the region formed in 2011 to contest the US-dominated OAS, met and signed the Belen Document, explicitly rejecting US imperialism in the region:

The CELAC is the first time than [sic] 33 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have been united in a regional organisation without the presence of the US and Canada. The organisation brings together governments from differing and even conflicting ideological orientations, including the rightwing governments of Mexico and Colombia and the socialist administrations in Venezuela and Bolivia.

“Beyond ideological borders and the politics that separate us, there is a diverse America...(the strength of CELAC) is to have achieved unity in diversity, based on respect, solidarity and helping each other in the joint construction of Latin America and the Caribbean,” said Maduro.

During the summit, the Pro-Tempore presidency of the organisation was officially passed over from Costa Rica to Rafael Correa of Ecuador, who applauded Venezuela and Nicaragua's initiative to have US colony, Puerto Rico, occupy a seat at CELAC's next summit. He stated that the action would “demonstrate that America is a region free of colonialism”.

“CELAC must play a protagonistic role in accompanying the process of decolonisation in the Latin American and Caribbean region. In general, it should be the “go to” organisation for the resolution of conflicts or long standing issues which affect the countries in the region,” stated the Ecuadorean president.

...With the exception of the French Caribbean islands, the United States has directly and indirectly intervened or occupied all Latin American and Caribbean countries since the early 19th Century. More recent examples include support for attempted coups against the leftist governments of Venezuela (2002), Ecuador (2010) and Bolivia (2008), as well as for the successful coups against Manuel Zelaya in Honduras in 2009 and Fernando Lugo, the leftist “Priest of Paraguay” in 2012.

As Mano Singham reported today, Latin America is also standing strong against torture. This year really is potentially a turning point in struggles for democracy and social justice.

“It's over. You are all free of debt.”

My favorite artwork of 2014.

Democracy Now!



and others reported a couple of weeks ago on the work of Chilean artist, Papas Fritas (Francisco Tapia). In the context of the occupation of the (now closed) for-profit University of the Sea, Tapia retrieved the papers on which student debts were recorded. He then burned them and displayed the pile of ashes in his van.

Tapia said his plan was hatched after reading press accounts that Universidad del Mar students were being forced to pay debt even after the university was shut down.

In a statement delivered to a Chilean court, Tapia defended his action. He claimed to have smuggled the documents to Santiago, where he began to investigate the credit files, case-by-case, student-by-student. By day Tapia would investigate the financial situation and life struggle of a single student. Then in the evening, he would destroy the documents related to that particular debt. “Every night, like a ritual, I burned the documents that detailed the debt.”

...The ashes have since been converted into a mobile art exhibit built into the sides of a Volkswagen camper van. The back window of the van holds a video screen so that Tapia's message can be played to crowds of curious onlookers.

The van, laden with ash, has toured the streets of Santiago and Valparaiso, and even went on display at the GAM – a prominent Santiago art gallery and cultural centre. When Chilean detectives, wearing white body suits, attempted to confiscate the fine grey dust as evidence, they too were incorporated into the exhibit's PR blitz and listed as “media partners.”

It’s a wonderful political act, but a beautiful work of art as well. The best art challenges what Theodor Adorno called the “hegemony of the existent,” making people aware of new possibilities of freedom. This work accomplished that both symbolically and materially. Symbolically, the ashes represent not destruction but liberation from a necrophilous system that denies living human possibilities in the name of profit and power (Chile’s current educational system has its origins in Pinochet’s authoritarian, neoliberal regime). Materially, his actions offer students the possibility of freedom from the grip of unjust debt.

Best movie I’ve seen in some time

Pablo Larraín’s No, starring Gael García Bernal:



The trailer gives a somewhat misleading impression – the film itself has a more nuanced sensibility about the use of advertising and marketing in politics than it implies. (In this, I suppose it’s perfectly suited to the subject of the film. :))

I also loved the music:

HONDURAS UPDATE, 9-13

I haven’t done a Honduras update for a while, thinking it better to point people to the best sources of regular information on developments there. But reading some recent articles online inspired me to collect some of the news and compile it into a short update. Mark Weisbrot’s recent Al Jazeera op ed is heartening. Around the anniversary of the coup that overthrew the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende in Chile and put in its place the murderous regime of Augusto Pinochet, it’s important to be aware not only of the continuing efforts to obtain some modicum of justice and accountability for the victims of the coup and dictatorship but also of the positive democratic changes that have been sweeping through Latin America. Weisbrot argues that “Forty years on, much of Allende’s dream has come true”:

President Richard Nixon was clear, at least in private conversations, about why he wanted the coup that destroyed one the hemisphere’s longest-running democracies, from his point of view:

"The main concern in Chile is that [President Salvador Allende] can consolidate himself, and the picture projected to the world will be his success ... If we let the potential leaders in South America think they can move like Chile and have it both ways, we will be in trouble."

The ironic thing, and one that the world can now celebrate 40 years on, is that Nixon later turned out to be right about his "domino theory" of Latin America. When the US tried but failed to overthrow the democratically elected government of Venezuela in 2002, it ended up losing control over most of the region, especially South America. Allende died in the coup, but his dream lived on and much of it has been fulfilled….

The struggle continues, but the changes have been enormous. Weisbrot cites Honduras as one of the “weaker countries” where democratizing efforts have suffered setbacks, referring to the 2009 coup and the conditions since. But, as Suyapa Portillo Villeda points out, Honduras appears again to be “on the brink of change”:

…[T]his year’s election [voting will be on November 24th] has nine candidates running for president, including one woman, Xiomara Castro de Zelaya. Castro is the candidate of the new party LIBRE (Freedom and Refoundation) and has a great potential to win. Change comes in that the biggest contender for the president is a woman and from a new party, breaking the 100 year old bipartisan ring of rule (between the Liberal Party and Nationalist Party) that has ensnared Honduras for most of the 20th century and nearly strangled i[t]s democratic potential. The opportunity to destroy bipartisanship and to choose a new option for a new era is a change in itself. A woman president at the same time would also break with the old, as women have historically occupied low places in the Honduran political system. Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, the new party proposes a new set of social and economic policies that look to the future with a progressive and modern agenda, bringing Honduras current with the modern world. The new agenda marks the beginning of democratization and progress that has only just begun.

Honduras Culture and Politics has been following the campaigns, and, while the media – local and international – haven’t exactly been kind to Xiomara Castro, she’s leading in the polls.

All of this suggests how fragile and fleeting are the victories of the Right in Latin America, despite the brazenness and brutality with which they’re “won.” They can still destroy and intimidate and bribe and terrorize, but the political landscape has transformed and they face increasing difficulty holding on to their political gains. Force won’t work, and neither will propaganda. The movements for democracy and social justice in the region are too strong and dynamic.

9/11: The fight for justice in Chile…and the US

Today is the 40th anniversary of the US-backed coup that overthrew the elected government of Salvador Allende in Chile and installed the brutal dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. The commemorations, it seems, are as much about the present as they are about the past, which is as it should be.

Democracy Now! has been focusing on the efforts to get justice for the families of journalist Charles Horman (I’ve written about this case before)



and singer Victor Jara





They link to Peter Kornbluh’s article in The Nation about the role of the US government – primarily Nixon and Kissinger – in the coup. Kornbluh is also interviewed about recently declassified documents providing further evidence of their complicity.



These struggles for justice rely on the US public to develop a willingness to listen and to criticize our nation’s past and present.

(Unfortunately, the Vatican isn’t discussed.

Neither is Friedrich von Hayek.)

Missing: extradition update

I wrote several months ago about the 1982 film Missing, mentioning current efforts underway in Chile to extradite a US military officer in connection with the murders of Charles Horman and Frank Teruggi.

The Center for Constitutional Rights, which has been involved with the case since the 1970s when it filed a lawsuit against Henry Kissinger and others, reported recently that:

In a groundbreaking development, the Supreme Court of Chile has approved a request by an investigating judge to extradite retired U.S. Naval Captain Ray E. Davis for his role in the killings of two U.S. citizens, Charles Horman and Frank Teruggi. Davis headed the U.S. military mission at the embassy in Santiago during the 1973 military coup. Horman and Terrugi were secretly arrested, detained and executed by the Chilean military in the days following the coup, and Davis is accused of having provided information to Chilean intelligence on the two men. The request to extradite Davis came as part of a lawsuit brought in Chile by Charles Horman’s widow, Joyce Horman.

Missing, epistemic injustice, and victim-blaming

I don’t know how I failed to see the 1982 Costa-Gavras film Missing

before this week.* It’s splendid. Here’s a summary of the film, and here’s a report from this past December about a Chilean judge’s call for the extradition of the former head of the US Military Group, Navy captain Ray Davis, for complicity in the murders of Charles Horman and Frank Teruggi.

The main subject of the film is Horman’s father, Edward (played by Jack Lemmon), but his wife Beth (played by Sissy Spacek) is also a central figure.** The movie follows, very believably, the elder Horman’s political awakening, as he comes to realize the reality of Latin America and what the US government does there.

But two other, related aspects of the character’s development, touched upon in the summary I linked to above, also caught my attention. The first is epistemic injustice. When he arrives in Chile, Ed repeatedly challenges and discounts Beth’s ideas, not particularly - it doesn’t seem - because she’s a woman, but because she’s young and the couple have been living an unconventional life. He dismisses her suspicions about US officials and the government’s intentions in Chile as paranoia, and becomes angry and impatient with her hostility toward embassy officials.

The second is victim-blaming. Early in the film, Horman follows precisely the same tendency with regard to his son, Beth, and their friends that I was talking about last week. He fires questions at Beth, demanding to know what Charles had done to make himself a target, and suggests that Beth is also partially responsible for what’s happened due to her noncooperation with officials. He begins with the assumption that they must have done something wrong to draw the attention of the coup regime, and that even if they hadn’t committed any overt acts, it was their choice not to follow the conventional route and political immaturity that put them in harm’s way. He aggressively challenges their choices, blaming them for failing to take some imaginary path that would have kept them safe and secure.

Horman changes on both counts. As he comes to a better understanding of the situation, he also starts to listen to Beth more seriously and to treat her as a reliable source and teacher rather than a silly idealistic child or an interrogation subject. At some points, in fact, he and Beth even change roles, with her educating and comforting him and helping him face the situation as he begins to appreciate his own political naïveté. As he deals with the US and Chilean governments, he comes to view them as untrustworthy and suspect. He also turns his anger on those who have victimized his son and others and the system they (and he) support, and tries to appreciate his son’s motives rather than dismissing them as quixotic or frivolous.

The film asks its audience to make this journey with Horman, to overcome their own political innocence. This is as important now as it was three decades ago when the film was released – not only has the evidence for the case presented in the film grown, but the US government’s pattern of behavior in Latin America hasn’t changed. But the reason for talking about epistemic injustice and victim-blaming tendencies in general is that it can help us to avoid these habits of thought and action from the start, so that we don’t have to travel that route endlessly in our daily lives or the political realm. Being cognizant of these tendencies and cultivating epistemic virtues (in ourselves and our institutions) can open us up to experiencing that political awakening in every case, without needing to be prodded and cajoled into it or having the evidence shoved in our faces.

*Wikipedia says a State Department lawsuit led to its being withdrawn from the US market until 2006, after the suit was dismissed. This would explain why I hadn’t seen it, but it sounds questionable, there’s no citation, and I haven’t been able to confirm the claim.

**For a political thriller from 1982, the film is remarkably gender-aware. There are several female characters, and they’re far from window dressing. There are even indications of the Catholic, patriarchal nature of the coup itself. In one chilling scene early on, Charles and his friend Terry (played by Melanie Mayron) are in a bus line shortly after the coup. Some women are yanked from the line by soldiers and pulled over to a military vehicle. When Terry asks what the men are saying to the women, Charles translates: they’re telling them that women in the country will wear skirts. They’re then shown cutting the women’s pants with scissors.

(Delayed) Justice for Kidnappings in Argentina and Spain

In other legal news, after many years, Jorge Videla and Reynaldo Bignone (already in prison for life) and six other officials in the Argentine military junta have come to trial for the kidnapping of hundreds of babies from people who were persecuted – jailed, tortured, murdered – by the regime during Argentina’s “Dirty War.”

While the children were adopted by families friendly to the military leadership, their parents were rarely heard from again.

Female political prisoners were kept alive during their pregnancies, only to be summarily killed after giving birth, often dropped alive and naked into the sea from military aircraft.

The trial will involve hundreds of witnesses and last several months.

In Spain, meanwhile, the pressure continues to build for a full national investigation of the baby-stealing ring that began after the Civil War, when children of opponents of the dictatorship were kidnapped and adopted. (This was the subject of the book/film The Lost Children of Franco several years ago.)

Military psychologist Antonio Vallejo-Nagera built the ideological framework for the practice of taking children from their parents. He saw Marxism as a form of mental illness that was polluting the Hispanic race and advocated that children of leftists be removed and re-educated, a process he termed "separating the wheat from the chaff."

An unknown number of infants were taken from women's prisons. In addition, some Republican child evacuees were repatriated without their parents' consent and interned in Social Aid homes for schooling in religious and nationalist ideology. Many were adopted by right-wing families.

In the Spanish case, the involvement of priests and nuns seems clear; I don’t know if this was also the case in Argentina, though there is of course evidence of Church complicity more generally.*

Speaking of justice and the recovery of historical memory, I’m looking forward to seeing Patricio Guzmán’s new film, Nostalgia for the Light:



It’s showing in New York for the next couple of weeks, and he’s making appearances there. (He’s made some pro-Church films in the past, but the ones I’ve seen haven’t been. Hope this one isn’t all goddy.) ...By the way, why are these documentaries so expensive? Why don’t they put them on iTunes and elsewhere online and go for quantity? That way they could get their message out to more people far more quickly….

*Note - of Christian von Wernich:

On 9 October 2007 the court found him guilty of complicity in seven homicides, 42 kidnappings, and 32 instances of torture, and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

As of 1 February 2010 von Wernich has not been penalised by the Catholic Church and is permitted to officiate as priest at Mass in prison. On his conviction his superior, bishop Martín Elizalde, apologised for von Wernich being "so far from the requirements of the mission commended to him" and said "at the appropriate time von Wernich's situation will have to be resolved in accordance with canonical law", but never again referred to the issue in public.

Well, knock me over with a rusty thurible. I’m shocked.