For those of you who haven’t noticed, it’s 2009. Many of us consider ourselves to live in societies of relative freedom, tolerance and acceptance — where people of all colors and creeds can live and work side by side in harmony.

On June 8^th this year, the far-right political group, the British National Party (BNP) won two seats in the European Parliament. No big whoop, yeah? What are two seats in an organization of that size? When the Party’s immigration policies include offering financial incentives and political pressure to persuade legal immigrants to leave Britain and return to their countries of origin — no matter how long they have been settled in Britain — and their membership excludes people that are not of direct white, British descent, then I think there is some serious cause for concern.

Nick Griffin, the leader of the BNP, is an incredibly outspoken individual with some seriously scary points of view. In a recent television interview about immigration from South Saharan Africa, Griffin said a way of tackling the problem would be to sink the ships bringing the immigrants. Another comment that jumped out was Griffin’s musings about Third World Aid, when he stated he did not believe Britain should be “obliged to subsidise the incompetence and corruption of Third World states by supplying them with financial aid.” This kind of open hatred is seriously troublesome in the early 21^st century.

Most controversially, members of the BNP have publicly expressed incredibly controversial views regarding the Holocaust. While most members may not openly engage in Holocaust denial, they have made insane claims regarding the numbers of Jews killed in the atrocities. Griffin has previously made comments such as;

“I am well aware that orthodox opinion is that six million Jews were gassed and cremated or turned into soup and lampshades. I have reached the conclusion that the ‘extermination’ tale is a mixture of Allied wartime propaganda, extremely profitable lie, and latter witch-hysteria.”

“There is no doubt that hundreds, probably thousands of Jews were shot to death in Eastern Europe, because they were rightly or wrongly seen as communists or potential partisan supporters. That was awful. But this nonsense about gas chambers is exposed as a total lie”

However, the population of the UK are not just sitting back and doing nothing to protest against the unacceptable views of this far-right party. The Hope Not Hate campaign, fronted by Nick Lowles is at the forefront of the crusade against the BNP, and social networking sites such as Facebook have provided the campaign with a platform to encourage the public to show their support. The Hope Not Hate group has over 18,500 members, and the 1,000,000 United Against the BNP group has just under 600,000 members on Facebook alone.

Watch the now infamous “sink the ships” interview. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8141069.stm

acceptance, British National Party, Eastern Europe, European Parliament, extermination, facebook, financial aid, freedom, gas chambers, holocaust, Hope Not Hate campaign, immigration policies, Jews, legal immigrants, members, Nick Griffin, Nick Lowles, orthodox, politics, population, propaganda, sink the ships, social networking, society, South Saharan Africa, Swine Flu, television, Third World Aid, tolerance, uk Hide

Zaiba Habib Durrani heard the threats at least once a week. But as she told the McClatchy Newspapers, vows to kill her or disfigure her face with acid did little to deter her from running for one of 124 provincial council seats in her country’s latest elections.

Afghanistan’s 2009 campaigns have left an already volatile nation even more distressed in the aftermath. Lost among reports of possible election fraud and senseless violence, however is a critical message of steadfast bravery and tireless hope. Out of 41 presidential candidates, two were women. And 333 out of more than 3,000 contenders for provincial council belonged to the fairer sex. For a state where over 80 percent of women are illiterate and maternal mortality is the second highest in the world, the existence of these female politicians is nothing short of miraculous.

The role of women in Afghan society hasn’t always been one of invisibility and subjugation. By the 1950s, a growing movement began to churn as women entered the workforce becoming teachers, nurses and even politicians. An open culture was developing, marked by the lifting of the veil in 1959 and female enfranchisement in 1964. Until the 1990s, Afghanistan was on its way to modernity. Civil war and the rise of the Taliban soon quashed any social advances taking shape.

With the Taliban government now retreating, Afghan women have emerged from what has arguably been their bleakest moment in history. But if new legislation is any indication of civil support for social change — Afghan men were recently given the right to starve their wives if sexual demands were not met — women’s rights has a slow and torturous uphill battle.

The mere presence of women in politics signals a definite crack in the Afghan status quo. Although female voter turnout fell from the previous election, the fact that any woman even cast her vote, especially being favorite targets of the Taliban for election-day violence, hints at a persistent female voice rumbling beneath the fundamentalist regime. As women continue to step forth to offer their services in government roles, they demonstrate that women will participate in Afghanistan’s political, economic and civil arenas.

A New York Times article addressing the fight against global poverty declared that “the greatest unexploited resource isn’t oil fields or veins of gold; it is the women and girls who aren’t educated and never become a major presence in the formal economy.”

Empowering women isn’t simply the right thing to do; it’s also a crucial step to ensuring the success of the world’s future. These Afghan women don’t have to win office to become agents of change. By showing the next generation they have a chance in the political process, these brave few are leading the vanguard in Afghan women’s rights. If these women are able to survive and come into the light in one of the world’s poorest and most misogynistic nations, then other women around the globe may also have a chance to flourish.

Afghan women, afghanistan, Afghanistan’s 2009 campaigns, Civil war, economy, election-day violence, elections, Empowering women, female enfranchisement, female politicians, fundamentalist regime, global poverty, government, McClatchy Newspapers, new york times, politics, presidential candidates, taliban, women, women’s rights, Zaiba Habib Durrani Hide

She resigned two weeks ago, just after the nude pictures of her had surfaced. Tears were streaming down her face when she said, “I wish to state that I am not ashamed of my sexuality as a woman and a single person.”

But this is not quite the story of an American celebrity apologizing for an embarrassing picture taken on the red carpet. I am instead talking about Elizabeth Wong, a politician of the opposition People’s Justice Party in Malaysia. And for us, the pictures aren’t so shocking: she was simply photographed sleeping in a sarong, half-naked. But the issue here is not the content of the photographs, but instead, their implications.

In America, sensationalism is mostly inconsequential. One scandal seems to be replaced with another and rather quickly at that. Sure, Britney caught our attention when she didn’t wear panties, we know Rush Limbaugh has a prescription drug addiction and Governor Rod Blagojevich tried to sell Obama’s congressional seat, but what does it all really matter? In the end, these stories become commodities, used to sell more magazines and garner more website hits. In our country, we often play the moral card, but it’s not such a serious game.

Conversely, Malaysia is a much more conservative country. Wong has been criticized in the past for being too independent because she is a woman. Marriage is rigorously upheld as a fundamental institution, especially for women. The media is mostly controlled by the government and heavily censored. BBC calls the censorship laws in Malaysia “some of the toughest in the world.” It is of course the majority party—the National Front coalition who imparts control and opposes the People’s Justice Party. Wong charged at her resignation, “Although the smear campaign directed towards me has caused me a lot of anguish, I am aware that the real objective is to discredit [the party].”

On her blog, she describes this situation as “the darkest period of her life” but also tells her readers she remains committed to the ideals of her party. Opposition party leader Anwar Ibrahim has urged her to reconsider her resignation. He was a past target of the National Front coalition as well, serving time in jail for supposed corruption charges by former Prime Minister, Mahathir bin Mohamad. Technically, despite her public resignation, Wong is currently on leave until the police investigation concerning the pictures is completed. A new election may take place, depending on Wong’s final decision and the outcome of the investigation.

But here is where cultural differences make this situation more complex. We are champions of the individual here, constantly telling people to stand up for their rights. However, Malaysia has a different cultural context. Wong knew this was an attack on her party and as stated in her resignation speech, “[She] decided to make a stand in the interests of the party and its struggle for the people.” But Wong did not only stand up for her party, but defended the pictures of herself and the right to privacy for the citizens of Malaysia. Wong stepped away from her political position but, in doing so, stood up for the women of Malaysia and putting an end to as she puts it, “gutter politics.”

anwar ibrahim, censorship, culture, elizabeth wong, mahathir bin mohomad, malaysia, people's justice party, politics, sexuality Hide

Artist Aaron Johnson offers a scintillating and titillating peephole into the filthy love affair of church and state with his latest show, Star Crossed, at the Stefan Stux Gallery in New York City. Frustrated by the challenge of making a direct statement through the subtleties of his previous artwork, he set out to boldly proclaim his dissatisfaction with the current political climate.

Johnson’s aim is true as he spears the heart of the traditional American myth, revealing gritty undertones of secret political lust. Startling and disturbing in content, yet strangely appealing with bright colors and plastic-y sheen, his work effects like a moth to a flame. It’s nearly impossible to tear your eyes away from the shocking images of a bloody and vindictive Christ brutally defiling an eager Lady Liberty, a clownish Uncle Sam parading on his hog-tied camel, or a demonic yet haloed George W. seasoning his ghoulish dinner with the Crucifix and the Statue of Liberty.

It takes a moment for the viewer’s eyes to manage to focus on the most controversial element of all: each of these images is clinging to an actual American Flag stretched as its canvas. This brings us to the heart of this provocative exhibit, the very fabric of which it is made. To some, defiling a flag is an inexcusable act, but as an icon in the greater world around us it has come to represent a shameful savagery wreaked clumsily by President Bush, a man who claims to be led by God. Johnson merely turns on the floodlights, exposing the stains, the flaws weaving in and out of the conscious and unconscious American identity.

A surprisingly poignant undertow pulls beneath the glaring accusations, a longing for the mythical promise of “truth, justice, and the American way” meaning something honest and pure. Appropriately timed before the most highly anticipated presidential election, I wonder if patriotism is anything more than a buzzword on a soapbox. Is it merely a waking dream, ethereal and intangible, a trick of smoke and mirrors? Or is everyone who is born on American soil, under so many stars and stripes, a patriot by default? And each American a canvas whose opinions, beliefs, triumphs and failures all splatter across our collective union, swirling and bleeding together until the original is obliterated? Perhaps the real melting pot is not a melting pot at all, but rather more like Johnson’s abstract pieces: a dynamic explosion of life’s fluids resulting in a metaphoric Big Bang that leaves us like so much flotsam waiting to reform into something new and wonderful.

As I ponder this, it becomes clear that though the title of the show Star Crossed, is less about an affair between church and state and more about the meaning of the physical stars and stripes. Referencing Romeo and Juliet, the star-crossed lovers could very well be the American people and their motherland; doomed to be separated by the greed of corporate lobbyists and overreaching politicians. With our current status and history it would certainly be easier to drink the poison and put America out of her misery, laying her out with a lover’s kiss.  However, the sins of our fathers will not be so easily eradicated. We must boldly look into the eye of our gluttony and obscenity and choose to change. Our nation is lucky to have artists like Aaron Johnson, who illuminate such notions and challenge popular believe.

Check out Aaron Johnson and his revolutionary technique “reverse-painted acrylic polymer peel painting” at www.aaronjohnsonart.com

aaron johnson, american identity, american myth, art, gallery, politics, romeo and juliet, star crossed Hide