The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

The politics of Greta Thunberg

Greta Thunberg has so far played an exemplary role in the climate movement. But sooner or later she may have to make a difficult choice on how to go forward


11/11/2021

I’ve been watching a lot of documentaries about climate change activists lately – it seems to be the latest trend, particularly in German cinema. They introduce us to a number of inspirational activists, who are serious about wanting to change the world. But most of these activists share the same political flaw – they see change coming from getting a seat at the table where government representatives talk about “blah, blah, blah”.

One of these films is Now in which young environmental activists are excited when the UN invites youth delegates to a session on climate change. Another is Dear Future Children in which Hilda from Uganda relishes her invitation to speak at the Copenhagen Climate Summit. It may be worth mentioning that the film’s other main characters, Rayen and Pepper are resisting police tear gas in Chile and Hong Kong respectively.

Let me be clear. These filmsand others like them – are good, sometimes great, and offer a realistic view of the current state of the climate change movement. The trouble is that many activists appear to want to transcend the fact that the Great and the Good are ignoring their demonstrations by allowing themselves to be co-opted by the governments and big business who are the cause of the current environmental crisis.

And then there is Greta

Not so Greta Thunberg. For a few years, she has been following a strategy of both acknowledging that Climate Summits are happening and calling them out for what they are. Her recent intervention dismissing the “blah blah blah” of the COP26 summit in Glasgow is just the latest of a series of statements in which she speaks truth to power.

One note about style in this article. I am not going to refer to Greta as “Thunberg” like a dispassionate journalist. She is one of us, a comrade in arms. We may disagree on individual points of theory, but she is a passionate and courageous fighter. who is on our side. I’m going to call her Greta.

Let’s look at Greta’s record in the 3 years after she sat outside the Swedish parliament with her now famous “Skolstrejk för Klimatet” placard. In Katowice in 2018 at the COP24 summit, when Greta was still 15, she said “I don’t care about being popular. I care about climate justice and the living planet. Our civilisation is being sacrificed for the opportunity of a very small number of people to continue making enormous amounts of money.”

In January 2019, she tweetedI was given the opportunity to speak at a lunch in Davos today… On the panel was Bono, Christiana Figueres, Jane Goodall, Will.i.am and Kengo Sakurada. #wef.” From “lunch in Davos” to “Bono” there are enough trigger warnings here for us to expect the worst. But here’s what she actually said in the video attached to the tweet:

Some people, some companies, some decision makers in particular have known exactly what prices and values they have been sacrificing to continue making unimaginable money, and I think many of you here today belong to that group of people.”

In September 2019 at the UN climate action summit, Greta said: “We are at the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is the money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you!” So, yes, Greta has attended climate summits, but never at the cost of her own silence. She has regularly and consistently called out the organisers of the summits for the inadequacy of their response. She has refused to help them pretend that everything is ok.

The run up to COP26

How did Greta react to the recent COP26 climate summit? In a speech at a Youth4Climate meeting in Milan before the summit started, Greta complained that “of course, we need constructive dialogue, but they’ve now had 30 years of blah blah blah and where has that led us? … They invite young people to meetings like this to pretend that they are listening to people. But they are not. They are clearly not listening to us. And they never have.”

Around the same time, she wrote in the Guardian: “The climate and ecological emergency is, of course, only a symptom of a much larger sustainability crisis. A social crisis. A crisis of inequality that dates back to colonialism and beyond. A crisis based on the idea that some people are worth more than others and, therefore have the right to exploit and steal other people’s land and resources … It’s naive to think that we could solve this crisis without confronting the roots of it.”

In an interview around the same time, she said “Nothing has changed from previous years really. The leaders will say we’ll do this and we’ll do this, and we will put our forces together and achieve this, and then they will do nothing. Maybe some symbolic things and creative accounting and things that don’t really have a big impact. We can have as many COPs as we want, but nothing real will come out of it.”

Greta’s attacks on the system have made her resistant to being co-opted by even the most liberal politician to greenwash what they have actually done in office. In the same interview, she was asked what she thought about New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern speaking out about climate change being a matter of “life or death”.

Greta’s response was typical: “She looks sceptical. ‘It’s funny that people believe Jacinda Ardern and people like that are climate leaders. That just tells you how little people know about the climate crisis.’ Why? ‘Obviously the emissions haven’t fallen. It goes without saying that these people are not doing anything.’ In April, it was revealed that New Zealand’s greenhouse-gas emissions had increased by 2% in 2019.

Greta in Glasgow

Greta did not participate in COP26. A few months before the conference started, she made a statement saying: “Of course I would love to attend the Glasgow #COP26. But not unless everyone can take part on the same terms … Inequality and climate injustice is already the heart of the climate crisis.” The point became moot after Greta was not invited to attend. Instead, she attended a number of demonstrations and addressed the press on her own terms.

At a march in Glasgow, Greta said: “It is not a secret that COP26 is a failure” and addressed the culpability of world leaders: “The leaders are not doing nothing, they are actively creating loopholes and shaping frameworks to benefit themselves and to continue profiting from this destructive system. The COP has turned into a PR event.” Pointing at the crowd, she continued: “Our leaders are not leading. This is what leadership looks like”.

Also speaking in Glasgow was Barack Obama, who was hailed by many journalists when he told young people: “You are right to be frustrated. Folks in my generation have not done enough to deal with a potentially cataclysmic problem that you now stand to inherit.” Yet the solution that Obama offered was to “Vote like your life depends on it, because it does.”

But many climate change activists are disenfranchised because of their age. And let’s remind ourselves – Obama was US President for 8 years. During this time he told the audience at a gala for Rice University’s Baker Institute “I know we’re in oil country and we need American energy. You wouldn’t always know it ,but it went up every year I was president… Suddenly America is the largest oil producer. That was me people … say thank you.”

Greta’s continued interventions give a clear sign that Obama and Ardern’s greenwashing are clearly inadequate (and this is before we get to governments run by conservatives and climate change deniers). She has a different vision of where our strength lies. As long ago as 2018 she was arguing: “If solutions within this system are so difficult to find, then maybe we should change the system itself … The real power belongs to the people.”

There is a dialectical relationship between Greta’s appearances at demos and the climate change movement. Her appearances and statements help mobilise the demonstrations, and the main reason for the size of her public platform is the large movement behind her. But can this last forever?

Quo vadis Greta?

In the 1980s, long before they had an international hot single, the anarchist pop group Chumbawamba wrote a song, Ulrike, about Ulrike Meinhof, leading member of the Red Army Fraction (RAF, popularly known outside Germany as the Baader-Meinhof group). In the song, they asked: “Who wants to be a Green MP? I don′t”.

This is not the place for a detailed discussion of a 1970s ultra-left organisation, but briefly: the RAF tried to continue the mass movement of 1968, and retained a substantial amount of popular support (including from my CDU-voting German teacher). But as the active movement went down, they increasingly resorted to desperate acts of individual terrorism.

In the absence of a mass movement, prominent supporters of the RAF variously ended up as the SPD Interior Minister, a member of the Nazi NPD, and indeed a Green MP. The party leaders either committed suicide or were murdered by the State in Stammheim prison, depending on whose version of history you believe.

What has this to do with Greta Thunberg? The Guardian reporter Simon Hattenstone remarked “Career-wise she always tells Svante [her father] she’d love to do something that’s nothing to do with climate, because it would mean that the crisis has been averted. But they both know it’s a fantasy.” For the moment, at least, there seems to be little chance of Greta relinquishing her activism to become a Green MP or work for an NGO.

And yet we should still ask the question: what would happen to Greta if the climate change movement dies down? Another recent film Aufschrei der Jugend, about Fridays for Future Berlin, shows how the lack of obvious gains for the movement has led a number of activists to drift off into travelling the world or (shock, horror) finishing their studies. We can’t guarantee that the climate demonstrations can sustain their current size.

We could approach a fork in the road where Greta is forced to take a decision that she has not yet had to make: does she move to the right and allow herself to be co-opted or to the left and risk losing some of her support?

Appeal to workers

We recently saw a development in her politics when she invited striking workers to join her at the COP26 protests. Referring to ongoing strikes by Scottish rail and bin workers, she tweeted: “Climate justice also means social justice and that we leave no one behind. So we invite everyone, especially the workers striking in Glasgow, to join us. See you there! #UprootTheSystem @fff_glasgow”.

This is not just a vague intersectional attempt to bring different campaigns together. It was also an appeal to the climate movement to work with the people who do have the power to stop capitalism in its tracks.

Workers responded in kind. Refuse and Cleansing Convenor Chris Mitchell tweeted from the GMB account: “This is a message of thanks and solidarity to Greta Thunberg, who tweeted yesterday inviting every striking worker to rally in Kelvingrove Park on the 5th of November to march from there to George Square in solidarity for climate justice and social justice, where no one gets left behind.”

As James Plested argues in an article entitled Why Greta Thunberg is cooler than you:

“The other thing that makes Thunberg so cool is what she says about our side in the climate struggle. Unlike the leaders of the more mainstream currents of the environment movement, whose approach centres on mobilising people at best only as a kind of adjunct to the ‘real work’ of behind the scenes lobbying, Thunberg has again and again laid out a perspective for change that puts ‘people power’ front and centre.”

We don’t know where Greta will end up, but for the moment, her role in the climate movement is exemplary. But history is made by movements, not individuals. This is why it is essential that the whole of the climate change movement recognises who our allies are and who are our enemies. At the moment, we could do worse than listening to some of Greta’s speeches.

Single Mothers Don’t Need Pity or Contempt – They Need Support

Without the sustained picture of poor pitiful single mothers, many women would no longer be living with their partners


08/11/2021

Back when my teenager was a very small child, a married colleague came by to visit my little flat in Rigaer Straße in Berlin-Friedrichshain. I was renting two rooms at €279 (those were the days, hey!) “Your ex pays for this flat, right”, she asked. “How”, said I, “Do what?”

The colleague was Irish, just a little older than me. And married to a German guy called Nils. “Nils told me”, she said, “how it works in Germany. He said that you don’t pay your rent on your own. Your ex pays for you. Now he’s got to pay for two flats, because you’ve decided to leave him! I dunno, I feel kinda sorry for him.” You could literally smell her disapproval – but I was more confused than anything else. “Paul’s still a student”, I said. “And he doesn’t have to pay anything. Actually, it’s the Job Centre who pays the rent right now.”

I am a social scrounger, not a gold digger!

GET IT RIGHT, BITCH, I thought. I’m a social scrounger, not a gold digger. Why did Nils say something so strange? My colleague seemed about to shudder.

“I could never do this myself!”, she said. She was almost shivering with fear. “Live on your own! With your children! Without a man! Compleeeeetely alone. It’s just terrifying! Alone in bed every night – so cold, the very idea! No-one who you can call when the washing machine isn’t working. Oh, absolutely. I would have to…:” now she whispered very quietly, so that the children wouldn’t hear. “…kill myself!” I nodded.

This wasn’t the first time that I’d heard something like this. And I find this pity people openly feel for single mothers, really interesting. It’s always pity, never empathy. Pity mixed with contempt. The poor single mother, alone with the kids. Alone with the washing. Alone in a cold bed. Alone, alone, alone. You feel pity for these poor women – these wretched women. With their empty lives in their cold flats, in their cold beds!

I think it’s a problem when people feel sympathy or pity for others – without any real empathy for their problems or curiosity about what the realities of their lives are. If people were truly interested, if people had any kind of curiosity for the reality of single mothers’ lives in Germany, they’d know that our beds are really not that cold – mine isn’t, at any rate.

Our problems have nothing to do with loneliness!

Like many other single mothers in Germany, I live in a WBS flat – that is a flat with a ‘Wohnberechtigungsschein’, which entitles you to subsidized housing. A three-room apartment. This mean I don’t have my own bedroom – I sleep in the living room. So, almost every night, at around three o’clock in the morning, my toddler runs from his bedroom into the living room, jumps on to my sofa bed, and informs me that sleeping alone just isn’t “comfy”. This means that we sleep together on my small bed settee, his hot body pressed against mine. Sometimes he takes so much space that I fall onto the floor, and he wakes up, looks at me with interest, and asks curiously what I’m up to. Yeah, ok, probably if I did have a bedroom, he’d still be running into my room at some time in the night.

But the point I am trying to make is this: The problems of single mothers have nothing to do with loneliness. Our lives are difficult, but they’re not lonely or sad. We often have colourful, full, warm lives. But often also lives which are bloody hard. They’re not hard because we’re lonely, or because we’re missing a man, a husband to complete us. Single mothers’ lives are hard because society has made conscious decisions to make them hard.

People spend a lot of time and energy on pitying poor single mothers. During Corona, in the election year, or whenever it suits politicians, basically, many, many crocodile tears will flow because of us poor single mothers! So much pity. Because of single mothers, lockdown had to be ended immediately – because of single mothers the speed limit on the motorway could not be removed. Seems like single mothers are the perfect victims sometimes. Well, it’s nice to be thought of every now and then – but forgive me for thinking that this pity for single mothers only comes into play when it’s useful. If something needs to be changed which would ONLY benefit single mothers – well, then the tears don’t flow quite so hard.

The biggest losers of all time

It’s a weird paradox really: on the one hand, single mothers serve as a symbol for the biggest losers of all time – portrayed as people for whom things couldn’t be worse. Yet at the same time, the most paranoid fantasies circulate about how easy things are for us! Apparently, if you’re a single mother you IMMEDIATELY get a nursery place, a married mother told me in the playground. Or if you’re a single mother you’ll be given your WBS certificate IMMEDIATELY, according to my good friend Lina. And when you’re a single mother, the youth welfare office pays your nursery costs, doesn’t it?, asked my good friend Stefan. Right? Right? Right? Or the other day on the internet, a white young childless guy assured me that if you’re a single mother, you just have to show a WBS voucher to a housing company like Degewo, and you IMMEDIATELY receive a flat – assigned to you!

These paranoid fantasies remind me of the fantasies Pegida supporters have about refugees who are driven in taxis paid for by the welfare office to cosmetic surgery clinics paid for by the state health insurance. It’s interesting, though, that these crazy fantasies about single mom privileges are more or less believed by everyone – even by people who are not misogynist or sexist or classist in the slightest. This is because so little is actually known about the lived reality of single motherhood. It really makes you wonder: if our society really gave so many privileges to single mothers, why would people have to pity us?

The function of pity for single mothers

And it’s important to recognise that this pity has a function: it demonstrates contempt. We are meant to understand that we are shit, basically lonely, sad, marginal figures. Why did Nils tell my ex-colleague that I get “my rent” paid for me by my ex? He didn’t want her to see that it is possible for a woman to live independently from a man – he wanted to show her that I’m to be pitied. I think that the reason for this pity is to scare off married women. Oh, the poor single mothers – their life is so cold, so gruesome, so terrible – compared to the happy married women. I honestly think: if the single mother wasn’t such a tragic figure – if society showed more solidarity and fair treatment for single mothers – there would be far fewer women who stay with their male partners.

And we mustn’t forget that the term “single mother” can be used to describe many different people in many different life situations. There are single mothers who are white German women in secure, well paid jobs, who live around the corner from their mama and share everything 50/50 with their ex. Such women really don’t need so much pity! There are single mums too, who are, white foreign women, who don’t even know the father of their child – and earn so much that they can pay a nanny. Princess Diana was also a single mother, as her boys lived in boarding schools (yeah, okay, she is a single mother who deserved our pity!) But single mothers’ struggles can be quite different. We are not all in the same boat – far from it. However, even the truly “poor” single mothers – the ones who live from Hartz IV or precarious work: they don’t need your pity either. What single mothers need is empathy, support and a fairer society. And a WBS voucher for a flat with a bedroom!

This article first appeared in German on the Edition F website. Translation: Phil Butland. Reproduced with permission.

Why Demonstrate in Berlin for Western Sahara?

Speech at the rally for Western Sahara, Brandenburger Tor, 6th November 2021. Plus Photo Gallery


07/11/2021

Why should we demonstrate in Berlin for Western Sahara? Apart from International Solidarity and the fact that Europe is the home of colonialism.

Firstly, because Germany is a leading country in the EU. It is the EU which is responsible for the sufferings of the Sahrawi people. Spain was the original coloniser of Western Sahara, and even though it formally handed over the country to Morocco – and not to the Sahrawi people. It is still the administering power. The EU must be clear about its role in supporting and perpetuating occupation. We demand that the German government oppose the occupation of Western Sahara.

Secondly, because EU companies are profiting from the country’s natural resources. These include German companies like Heidelberg Cement. It is not a coincidence that Heidelberg Cement is also responsible for similar exploitation of the Palestinians and cooperation with the occupying Israeli government. We demand that German and European businesses stop profiting from exploitation and occupation,

Thirdly, because Germany is a member of the UN. The UN promised a referendum on independence over 30 years ago, but has still failed to act. We demand that the German government uses its influence in the UN to push for a referendum. This is the very least that the Sahrawi people deserve.

Germany, the EU, and the UN are failing to act because they are profiting from exploitation and oppression. They will only act if we force them to act. This is why we must unite our struggles in one fight.

Last week, many of us were demonstrating in Berlin against the coup in Sudan. In previous weeks, we have demonstrated for Palestine, for Kurdistan, for Egypt. These are all parts of the same struggle against the same people.

The Berlin LINKE Internationals are doing our best to link up the different international organisations in our city. Now one quarter of Berliners do not have a German passport. We have many separate struggles, but we must bring these struggles together.

This is why we call on the EU and Germany to recognise the Frente Polisario as the legitimate representatives of the Saharwi people.

This is why we say

Free, Free Palestine!

Free, Free Sudan!

Free, Free Western Sahara!

One Struggle, One Fight!

Photos: Phil Butland, Norma Lorenzo and Jaime Martinez Porro

The Paradox of Solidarity for Labor That Should End

Drug Dealers in Recent German TV and Film – Why the Left should support Dealers


06/11/2021

Dealer Work Online

A perverse factory ballet introduces Germany’s most famous drug dealer, the Kinder-Zimmer dealer Maximilian Schmidt in the Netflix documentary Shiny_Flakes: The Teenage Drug Baron, which was released in August.

Punching pills from bright powders, steel shafts strike and pirouette to the nostalgic rattle and clang of industrial-age metal on metal, hydraulics hissing and popping, building to a menacing crescendo, as vividly colored tablets shudder and fall from a conveyor belt. Cut. Schmidt sits at a table in what looks like a prison. He rotates a smartphone to read online customer comments that make him burst out laughing:

“‘I always order my crystal [methamphetamine] here, then I shoot it up. And when the flash comes I cook the cocaine to make a bit of crack, and then I smoke a nice pipe.
Top-notch, A++++ stuff.
Guys! I lost two teeth right afterwards.
This stuff really fucks you up. I definitely recommend it – you idiots!’

Schmidt pockets the phone, smiles and says, “Looks like he was satisfied.”

Smoking crack and shooting speed are two of the most stigmatized forms of illegal drug use. Unless a viewer knows that you can use methamphetamine without losing your teeth, and that this comment is meant as a joke, Schmidt’s laughter is monstrous.

When not answering questions seated at a staged interrogation table, Schmidt reenacts the labors of his crime in an exact replica of his childhood bedroom up to and including his violent arrest. He smashes fist-sized crystals of ersatz-MDMA with a hammer, counts pills, weighs powders, cuts sheets of LSD, heat-seals small plastic bags, packs it all in envelopes to post, and taps out responses to customers. He also expresses his gratitude and surprise for help he received from anonymous online comrades who “would answer any stupid question,” about processing bulk orders of drugs.

We see him work to exhaustion, round the clock, then collapse.

Schmidt was 19 years old when he was busted in 2015. He grew up in Leipzig a child of post-reunification Germany’s go-go spirit of self-interested enterprise. He saw drug use in movies and on TV portrayed as fun. Though he himself never used drugs, for society at large, he said, drugs were about, “Hey, let’s party”.

In the new Germany, his entrepreneurialism is an expression of fashionable start-up audacity, a radicalism suited to his times. A theme Shiny_Flakes’ producers caricature in their hit Netflix series based on Schmidt’s story, “How To Sell Drugs Fast (Online)”, among the best, most socially useful, and anti-capitalist drug-crime fictions I have seen. It mocks the main character’s Steve Jobs hero-worship, and ridicules police stupidity and racist dealer clichés and hyper-violence. It sends up smarmy business gurus and includes an organic hipster juice company fronting for an MDMA factory run by two stylish young Dutch women who are, like all true TV drug dealers, as murderous as they are cruel, offering fresh juice and business offers that cannot be refused.

The German drug-entrepreneur comedy is not new. The 2001 box-office hit Lammbock – Alles in Handarbeit (Lammbock – All Handcrafted) that starred Moritz Bleibtreu and Lucas Gregorowicz was about stoners who solve post-high school troubles by adding weed delivery to their pizza business. It includes a dreadlocked hippie character flashing peace signs in a stock comic reference to drugs’ other radical history. The one rooted in pro-drug politics defended and celebrated by activists as means of revolutionary consciousness raising.

A generation later, dudes delivering weed with handcrafted pizzas are out, internet start-ups with PowerPoint business plans in. All traces of drugs’ radical history have vanished.

Debate over drugs’ political use split leftists in Germany’s Sixties youth movements, leading to the expulsion of pro-drug leftists from political cooperative apartments and communes. Out of the tumult, in 1969 a group of stoner-friendly militants for the “right to get high” („Recht auf den eigenen Rausch“) and direct action, including violence, announced the formation of the notorious Zentralrat der umherschwelfenden Haschrebellen (Central Council of Wandering Hash Rebels).

If German socialists today have come around to support legalizing drugs, and German high school children, notably girls, may be depicted in a popular TV comedy enjoying and managing their use of cannabis, MDMA, and ketamine, as they are in “How to Sell Drugs Online (Fast)”, it is thanks to a half-century of activism for drug decriminalization, which included a vestige of the Haschrebellen who called the national demonstration in 1997 establishing the annual Hanf Parade, one of Berlin’s largest annual political protests.

The parallel normalization of “soft” drug use in popular culture has long established drug illegality as an apolitical means of transgressive self-realization that only the most unhip reactionaries, and some police, find objectionable.

What has not changed is the status of labor required for the provision of illegal drugs, work performed by people who are nearly always called “drug dealers”, whether they grow cannabis, smuggle tons of cocaine, or stand in the park selling small bags of whatever’s available.

For the Left, the unnamed paradox is that this is labor, that is illegal work, that even if ethical, remains labor that should disappear. (An exception is the Haschrebellen, as they exist today on a website. See their Dealer Special page.)

Unlike sex work, the activities of drug smuggling, clandestine production and distribution, may only be politically defensible under prohibition, and only to the extent that prohibition is deemed unjust and harmful to society, as it appears to be in German public opinion and the platforms of political parties from the pro-capitalist FDP to the socialist LINKE.

Acid Communism

Berlin’s HKW (Haus der Kultur der Welt) cultural center hosted an “Acid Communism” conference in June this year, which opened with a talk by cultural critic Diedrich Diederichsen titled “Access to Tools (on Acid)”.

The idea of “acid communism” revived for Diederichsen the question, “What would have happened if hippie drug culture and the New Left had not diverged, the first descending into esotericism, the others ending up Maoists?” Yet he never mentions their brief fusion in the 1969 Haschrebellen, or their subsequent apparitions.

The Haschrebellen story is complicated, and Diederichsen’s twenty-minute talk was not about the history of pro and anti-drug radical politics. It was about how the psychedelic deconstruction of commodities may have better reflected Marxist analysis than the puritanical anti-drug Left understood. Still the absence of any example of political action stemming from a politicized German drug culture was unfortunate since the origin’s of “acid communism”, as Mark Fisher imagined in the 2017 essay inspiring the conference, advocated deploying the experiences of “psychedelic consciousness” as a means of advancing socialist political action as much as theory.

Fisher argued this new form of mass consciousness encompassed not just drug users, but masses of working class people, and that it, and related socialist Sixties projects, were the main targets of neoliberalism summed up in the Thatcherite dictums: There is no alternative (to capitalism), and Society does not exist (only families and individuals). That neoliberal ideological onslaught helped to neutralize psychedelic consciousness and establish illegal drugs as symbolic commodities of individual transgression and self-realization – or destruction.

A World of Bosses

In recent German drug dealer film and TV fictions, forms of this transgressive self-realization occur when the deserving hero achieves dominion over others and assumes his natural destiny to become a “boss”. The body of the dealer at work is mystified into the imagined transcendence of work, or worker, to boss. Unlike the sex worker, who since the 1970s has enjoyed growing Left solidarity, the drug worker’s body can disappear, and usually does in fiction.

No German fiction better illustrates this than Burhan Qurbani’s 2020 Berlin Alexanderplatz, made, in Qurbani’s words, to tell the story of Berlin’s Black refugee park dealers and promote a utopian multicultural new German.

Early in the film, the park dealer underboss, Reinhold, tells film’s hero Francis, “He’s nothing compared to you,” referring to Ottu, a fellow refugee with whom Francis works illegally as a construction laborer. “He’s the one who should be working for you.” Throughout the movie, all the other main characters are bosses who tell Francis that he too should be a boss.

In Berlin Alexanderplatz’s three hours we never get to know an actual park dealer or his community. We never learn anything about anyone who does the work preparing and stashing drugs, or watching out for police, or greeting people and exchanging drugs for money. When the film’s hero Francis finally enters the park drug business by demonstrating his capacity for brutal violence, the only “dealing” we see him do is managing the collection of money. His advancement is nearly complete.

In the movie’s final scene Francis sits alone on the edge of a 19th century fountain in a gray three-piece suit, pale pink tie and matching pochette. Framed in fountain mist and glistening statuary, after having appeared first at the same fountain in mud-caked work clothes, he is finally dressed for his true station. The 21st century new German, properly bourgeois.

For this ending, Qurbani has said, he sacrificed art for propaganda, choosing politics over film elegance. He felt obliged as a taxpayer-funded filmmaker to offer a utopian vision for a new Germany, and to “flip-off” the far-right AfD with a mixed race baby that miraculously appears in the film’s last minutes, and the self-described “freaks”, trans, gay, and people of color immigrants, declaring themselves the new Germany.

Dealers are never mentioned at the film’s three Berlin launch events, one hosted by an entrepreneur whose business is dedicated to professional advancement of disadvantaged German youth, another by a spokesman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and the third, at Hasenheide Park, where the working dealers who inspired the film could hear the movie and its presenter, a scholar of racial diversity training, chatting with director and cast.

It is easy to understand how refugee and anti-racist professionals would seek to avoid explicit association with drug dealing by ignoring it, even when presenting a movie purportedly made about them. Similar political concerns likely explain the drug dealers’ absence in the TheLeftBerlin.com declaration against racial profiling in the Berlin Wrangel neighborhood that appeared earlier this year.

But for the Left, the wholesale failure to articulate an unambiguous solidarity with illegal drug work contradicts the logical grounds for solidarity now extended to defend the individual right to choose one’s gender and sex partners, to sell one’s body for sex, as well as the right to acquire and use drugs, like beer, cannabis and MDMA.

In her 2020 book Die Elenden, the journalist Anna Mayr explains the contempt and ignorance for the poor and chronically unemployed, prevalent among her peers and the German middle class generally, as a product of the narrowness of journalists’ life experiences, all attending the same schools and all, with rare exceptions, from the middle classes themselves. This may also explain Burhan Qurbani’s inability to portray a dealer and the German journalists failure to notice that his film’s “dealer” is never really a dealer.

Is the absence of drug-work specific (non-anarchist) Left solidarity similarly due to the limited life experience of its intellectuals? Is it due to the Left tendency to equate commerce with capitalism and see dealers, at best, as entrepreneurs, who unlike sex worker/entrepreneurs can be alienated from their labor and only interested in money, indifferent to their trade’s possible harms?

German film and TV depictions of dealers as money obsessed entrepreneurs, violent criminals or helpless victims of circumstance with no other choice, confine illegal drug work to criminality, a criminality challenged by the Left but without following their arguments against prohibition to their logical conclusion. By and large, the Left today rejects the criminalization of queer sexuality and sex work and seeks modes of solidarity with those harmed by their criminalization.

Drug dealers, and other illegal drug workers, including large-scale and highly profitable traffickers, could be reimagined as engaging in forms self-funded civil disobedience that have over the decades weakened, to the point of breaking, regimes of prohibition that criminalize and harm mostly the poor, immigrants and people of color. Work that should merit at least tacit Left support if not active solidarity.

___

Scott Holmquist’s recent work on drug dealers includes Shiny Fakes of Dealer Violence, in der Freitag, and the protest art-intervention LAST HERO: 24-hour Park Drug Dealer Solidarity Sit-In (2019). The 2018 Rosa Luxemburg Salon panel discussion, originally titled, “Drug Dealing as Labor,” was part of his exhibition Other Homelands: Origins and Migration Routs of Berlin Parks Drug Sellers.

The peaceful resistance will continue

Interview with Shadia Abdel-Moneim, political secretary of Sudanese Communist Party in Berlin


04/11/2021

Hello, thanks for talking to us. Could you start by introducing yourself? Who are you and how are you active?

Thank you for this chance to elaborate on the situation in Sudan. I am Shadia Abdel-Moneim, the political secretary of the communist party branch in Germany, a human rights defender, especially vulnerable groups. I am one of the founders of a number of associations and initiatives [established] as resistance bodies to the Bashir regime throughout the 30 years of the bloody dictatorial Islamic regime in Sudan. I worked closely with a number of women’s and youth groups in conflict areas for peace and justice.

Today, after the revolution, I am struggling with groups of Sudanese activists inside Sudan and in diaspora in order to achieve the slogans of the revolution and establish a better reality for Sudanese people.

Briefly, what is happening in Sudan at the moment?

The security committee of the Bashir régime, which shares the transitional government with civilians, led by its chairman Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, carried out a military coup on October 25, 2021. This was part of a series of military coups which began with the palace coup of April 11, 2019. The goal is the same – to prevent the mass movement from achieving the goals and slogans of the glorious December Revolution.

Who is Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and should we fear him?

Burhan studied in a Sudanese army college, then later in Jordan and at the Egyptian military academy in Cairo, where fellow alumni included Egyptian president Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Burhan and Sisi are longstanding friends, though the Sudanese general has lifelong affiliations with the kinds of Islamist movements that Sisi has outlawed.

He was absolutely instrumental to the devastation caused in Darfur, he fought in the region and was a military intelligence colonel coordinating army and militia attacks against civilians in West Darfur state from 2003 to 2005.

Burhan’s time in Darfur is significant also because it brought him into contact with the warlord Mohamed Hamdan Dagolo, widely known as Hemeti. Hemeti became leader of the Janjaweed, the Arab militias that brought death and despair to Darfur, and which have since morphed into the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), with Hemeti still at the helm.

These various sources of power and wealth have come under threat from Sudan’s civilian-led government and it is thought that this is partly why Burhan and Hemeti have moved when they have. Both he and Hemeti are said to be mindful of being held accountable for past actions in Darfur, and Burhan had been lobbying to dissolve the civilian-led council of ministers.

This is Burhan and Hemeti’s coup, but the relationship between the two men is difficult because, among other things, Hemeti projects himself as a leader abroad, and is closer to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed. Burhan is considered to be Egypt’s man. Hemeti is a more charismatic, more cartoonish figure than the quietly spoken, methodical Burhan, and the RSF leader is more closely associated with the atrocities surrounding the transition to democracy – most notably, the massacre of more than 128 people in Khartoum in June 2019 – than the armed forces general.

Two years ago, mass demonstrations removed former President Bashir. Are those forces still active, and how are they reacting to the coup?

Protests and resistance against the Bashir regime began in Sudan from the first day of his rule, and the regime met it with brutal repression. Trade unions and professional and factional unions were dismantled. The regime also worked to weaken and divide political parties.

In 2008, journalists began to form the Journalists’ Network. After that, the Doctors Committee and the Democratic Lawyers Alliance were formed, and the features of this alternative gathering of the unions seized by Al-Bashir’s authority began to become clear. At the initiative of the Journalists’ Network, a grouping of these three bodies was formed, and the Teachers’ Committee joined it until the assembly became composed of 17 unofficial union bodies.

These bodies demanded rejecting partnership with the military, rejecting the flawed constitutional document, rejecting the incomplete Juba peace and adhering to a transitional period led by civilians. Thus, we can say that the masses that overthrew Bashir are able to thwart the coup and adhere to the goals of the revolution, and are now more organized to do so.

What is the role of women in your revolution?

It is well known that Al-Bashir’s was a hardline Islamic regime, that worked in coordination with international Islamist groups, which pursued an approach hostile to women’s liberation.

Since its early days in Sudan, Al-Bashir’s regime began to restrict women and imposed on them the so-called Islamic dress, which is a headscarf and a black abaya. Women resisted in all their factions, except for those belonging to the ruling organization. The regime retreated under the weight of women’s resistance and was satisfied with the veil, and women’s resistance continued.

In the early nineties, the regime enacted what is known as the Public Order Law, which blatantly targeted women. It also enacted articles in the criminal law that criminalize women. Through its arsenal of laws and restrictions imposed on women, the regime has been confiscating the gains that women gained through hard struggle since the fifties of the last century.

In response to all these attacks on women’s gains, women organized to create resistance bodies from pressure groups and associations under different names, but all of them came together to resist the regime and its degrading laws against women.

I can say that women determined their position early on from the regime, and the unity of purpose helped them in this, and the resistance of women continued until the revolution, and they were among the most important factions that led the revolution, and this was because they were organized and ready to topple the regime more than others

What is the state of the organised Left? What parties are there and how are they relating to the movement?

The largest left-wing parties in terms of organization, number and political position is the Sudanese Communist Party. Other leftist trends include Baathist and Nasserist parties influenced by the Arab National socialism.

With the exception of the Communist Party and the Sudanese Socialist Democratic Party, all of these parties supported the neoliberal Hamdok government and now stand against the will of the people to break up the partnership with the military and proceed with building a civil and democratic state.

What have you learned from uprising in neighbouring countries like Egypt?

Despite the geographical location of Sudan, the nature of Sudanese political and personal life itself is different, and therefore the experience of the revolution in Sudan is different. Since political independence, the Sudanese have struggled for freedom and democracy and carried out two revolutions, October 1969 and April 1985. The two revolutions were aborted with regional and international interventions.

In both revolutions, there was a political leadership that, despite its weakness, was present and in one way or another related to the masses. This was not the case in the Egyptian revolution, where the leadership of the revolution was activists. In Sudan in recent years, voices have risen asking the masses to isolate and bypass parties, and these voices are trying to implement the Egyptian model in Sudan.

In my estimation, the most important lesson that we have to learn from the revolutions of the Arab Spring, and specifically the Egyptian revolution, is to keep the army away from practicing politics, prevent the army from sharing power and prevent their control of any economic investments. We should be strengthening the political leadership represented in political parties, trade unions, and resistance committees.

Do you think that the US and German governments can play a positive role in your liberation?

Of course, it is clear that international and regional foreign interventions in Sudanese affairs have had a very negative impact on political stability in Sudan since political independence in the fifties. In my personal assessment, Germany is trying to understand the nature of Sudanese society, political and social, and this is a correct start. Germany and the United States of America can help the Sudanese to build a state of freedom, peace and justice, the civil and democratic state for which they gave thousands of martyrs.

This can be done first: by hearing the voice of the masses represented by its living forces from resistance committees, political parties, factional and demanding forces.

Second: Stop supporting the militias, as the European Union, led by Germany, used to do, when they supported the Janjaweed militias led by Hemeti in what is known as the Khartoum process to stop illegal immigration and extend the borders. In return, they have to help the Sudanese in disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of these various militias in accordance with international principles, and help in building a single national army that performs its globally recognized mission of protecting the homeland and guarding the constitution.

Third: restricting the hand of the regional axes from interfering in the internal affairs of the Sudanese state and respecting the right of the Sudanese to formulate the future of their state and national sovereignty by applying pressure on them instead of pressure on the Sudanese to accept fragile and harmful settlements for the future of the revolution and the state

Fourth: Not to pressure the Sudanese, represented by the political parties and the civilian component, to accept partnership with the military, to return to the constitutional document rejected by the masses, or to abide by the Juba Peace Agreement. It did not address the roots of the peace crisis and did not accommodate all conflicted parties, such as those displaced by the war and the factions of Abdul Wahed Muhammad Nour and Al Helou.

They can assist the Sudanese in dismantling the institutions of the former regime by freezing the assets of its symbols abroad, pressure to hand over wanted persons to the criminal court, and technical assistance in handing over companies and funds in the possession of the military to be under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Finance.

Technical assistance in building the institutions of democratic transition, such as the establishment of the Constitutional Court, the reform of the judiciary, the establishment of the constitutional conference, the establishment of the Electoral Commission, the enactment of the election law, and the restructuring of the Ministry of Statistics in preparation for the population census.

In my estimation, this is the role that helps in the stability of Sudan. Other than that, if settlements are imposed, protests and political turmoil in Sudan will continue.

What happens next?

The coup is isolated internally and externally. Also knows that the international community, the African Union and the axes do not dare to support the coup in light of the unequivocal popular rejection.

There are compromises and mediation efforts taking place now, but it is also very clear that no one is negotiating with the masses and no one is negotiating in the name of the masses. Which means that any solution will not work if it does not take into account the demands of the masses that raised them in their slogans.

The December 2019 revolution was the result of the accumulation of a continuous struggle over the years. The peaceful resistance will continue using the same tools from peaceful protests to civil disobedience and political strikes, until the Sudanese reach the slogans of the revolution: “freedom, peace and justice, civility, the people’s choice”.

No matter how many obstacles are placed in front of them and no matter how long it takes, I know exactly how strong the Sudanese are and the strength of their patience whenever they have a clear, agreed goal.

How can people in Berlin support your movement?

I am absolutely certain that international solidarity and belief in the right of peoples to freedom, peace, justice and a decent life will help a lot in changing the balance of power and help public opinion to put pressure on their governments in choosing to align themselves with the will of the people.

People in Berlin can:

  1. Organise solidarity activities with the Sudanese people.
  2. Lead a global campaign to put pressure on Abdel Fattah al-Burhan to restore the internet and communications.
  3. Organize a large campaign to stop the killing and arrest of protesters.
  4. Put pressure to hand over wanted persons to the International Court
  5. Call on the international community to declare the Janjaweed a terrorist organization.