bill fletcher: today on the global african,we'll look at black lives matter movement in depth. we'll also look at the diamond controversysurrounding oprah winfrey. that's today on the global african. i'm your host, bill fletcher.thanks for joining us again. and don't go anywhere. in the wake of the acquittal of george zimmermanback in 2013, alicia garza took to her facebook page, writing a love letter to black folksin an attempt to create solidarity. that love letter contained three words that would goon to become the rallying cry of a social movement: "black lives matter".
over the summer, activists received considerableattention when they stormed the stage at the annual progressive conference known as netroots,as well as when they stormed the stage at an event where senator bernie sanders wasspeaking. these confrontations raised longstanding issues of class and race and the prioritiesof progressives. on august 28, the democratic national committee passed a resolution supportingblack lives matter and its goals. in response to this resolution, the blacklives matter network disavowed the committee's report, stating, quote, "the democratic party,like the republican and all political parties, have historically attempted to control orcontain black people's efforts to liberate ourselves", unquote. "true change requiresreal struggle, and that struggle will be in
the streets and led by people, not by a politicalparty", the statement went on to add. cooptation has always been a fear of activists,and rejection of the democratic party's show of support can be seen as a refusal to becoopted. the movement for black lives has undoubtedly played a large role in bringingto attention the tragic deaths of michael brown, sandra bland, tamir rice, natasha mckenna,freddie gray, and many others. with that success comes backlash, as right-wingcommentators have stepped up their attacks on the movement. fox news host bill o'reillywent so far as to vow that he would put black lives matter out of business. how will the movement counter this reactionaryassault? more broadly speaking, what is next
for the movement for black lives and an organizationknown as black lives matter? we're joined by alicia garza, who's one ofthe founders of black lives matter, an organization within the larger galaxy of something knownas the movement for black lives. alicia is also a community organizer, has been the recipientof numerous awards for her organizing work, including the local hero award and the jeannegauna communicate justice award (if i pronounced that correctly). she is an outstanding spokespersonfor this movement as it has been unfolding over the last couple of years. thank you very much for joining us. alicia garza: thanks for having me.
fletcher: our pleasure. so, alicia, this movementhas exploded. and as one could predict, there have been various forms of pushback. and onehas been sort of internal to the movement, internal tensions, which i'd like to get toin one second. but the first is that the right wing doesn't particularly like you. garza: you don't say. fletcher: i noticed this. so what do you makeof these right-wing attacks? garza: well, i think that what we're seeingis that black lives matter, both as a movement, right, the broader movement for black lives,and then the activities, of course, of the black lives matter organization, have reallypenetrated the fabric of this country. and
we know that, because we are seeing a backlashfrom the right wing and from conservative forces who are now attempting to discreditblack lives matter as a terrorist group and a hate group. it's not surprising that theseattacks came just a few days before the anniversary of september 11, when many people were killedin an attack on the world trade center and the pentagon. we shouldn't be surprised that the languagethat's being used, as incendiary as it is, is really meant to generate images and memoriesof fear, and also of being at war. and from our perspective, we have often said that thereis a war on black people, not just in this country, but around the world. and it's notsurprising to us that the right wing and conservative
forces are now adopting that language andinstead seeing that white people, right, are under attack. fletcher: there's been debates regarding theappropriateness of tactics like the netroots action or the action at the social securityrally where senator bernie sanders spoke in seattle. but there's also been issues thathave been raised about whether black lives matter specifically has a program that's broaderthan identity. what do you make of this? garza: well, the first thing i'll say is thattensions and differences are healthy, and this demonstrates that the movement itselfis broadening out and that it's growing, and that it's grappling to articulate its purpose,its vision, and its identity. and so in some
ways we should see this as a good problemto have. at the same time, i think we've also beenmade aware of the fact that there are some critiques of the organization in particular.and we think that some of those critiques come from a grounded place and some of themdon't. so, to be fair, black lives matter is an organization that's two years old, andcertainly it was generated and derived from the passions of black people intergenerationallyacross the globe to have space for black folks to be able to dream together, to vision together,and to be connected in a way that we have not been for quite some time. to that end,there are always going to be differences in terms of approach and strategy. and for uswhat's the most important is not just that
we hear those critiques, but that we alsoground them in current conditions, and not only where people are at, but where peoplewant to go. it's also important to us that we make itclear that while we have a high level of disappointment and distrust in the status quo and in thesystem as it functions now, we also understand that in order to break down the system, wecan't just build outside of it, that we have to also look for openings and opportunitiesto leverage power and influence, to break apart the system that we're fighting fromthe inside. and that's a very tricky line to walk, and we're going to make a lot ofmistakes. but it is important to us to continue to engage, to continue to find allies wherewe feel like they're available, to build tactical
alliances where necessary, and to look foropportunities to build strategic alliances. the black lives matter movement and the organizationof black lives matter has had a program of demands. that program is changing, becauseof course we want to make sure that the issues that we're tackling are not just about policebrutality, but are about the totality of black life. and so really we're looking at questionsof jobs and unemployment, we're looking at questions of education, we're looking at questionsof gender justice, we're looking at questions of safety and community safety, communityinvestment, economic development, and also the state of our democracy. so the way that we're doing that is by engagingfolks at the grassroots level. we have not
released a policy platform yet for 2016, althoughthere are elements within the movement that already have. for our purposes, we feel thatit's really important to source the demands from the [state (?)], from our communities.and so we're going through an intentional process to do that. fletcher: both you and i have been very involvedin working-class organizing for years. besides the obvious, what is the relevance of themovement for black lives, and specifically black lives matter, to the black working class,which is grappling, in addition to police lynchings and racial terror, to the terrorof unemployment, the terror of disparate health care and education? what's the relevance ofthe movement?
garza: well, let me start by saying that blacklives matter is attempting to make an intervention in the phenomenon of anti-black racism andstate-sanctioned violence in all of its forms against black people around the world. andso, when we understand black lives matter in that context, then we can more easily answerthe question of what is the relevance of black lives matter to the black working class. so first and foremost we think it's importantto acknowledge and understand that black folks are at the losing end of almost every disparitysocially, economically, and politically. black lives matter has talked a lot and actuallyorganizes around issues that are important to the black working class, including issuesof school closures and school privatizations,
issues that name that black people are morelikely to be suspended or expelled from schools than they are to graduate from schools. welook at questions of the economy and black people, one, understanding that black unemploymentrates are higher than almost any other ethnic group, and then also understanding that forblack folks who are in the economy, we are highly concentrated in the service sector,which is engaged in a race to the bottom, whether that be around wages, whether thatbe around conditions, or whether that be around regulations. so, again, when we think about the relationshipbetween the black working class and black lives matter, really what we're asking is:what's the relationship of anti-blackness
and state sanctioned violence to the economy? fletcher: let me ask you one other question,alicia. you mentioned international earlier, and i wondered if you could give us some senseas to what exactly do you mean in terms of black lives matter internationally. what sortof internationalism do you see practicing? garza: sure. so, for the past year, blacklives matter and black lives matter organizers in the organization black lives matter havebeen doing a series of exchanges with black folks internationally. we participated ina delegation to palestine late last year, where some of our members and one of our cofoundersdid an exchange with black palestinians and tried to understand the connections and relationships,both in conditions, social status, political
power, and economic power. we've done toursthrough the u.k. where we've built relationships with families who have lost loved ones topolice brutality and who also are fighting in the anti-austerity movement, folks whoare also suffering under regressive immigration policies that are not unlike the ones thatwe have here in the united states, the difference being that a large majority of immigrantsto some of these countries are immigrants from africa. we also have been in a relationshipand in contact with activists in places like colombia who are fighting not just policeabuse and police violence, but they're fighting the wholescale takeover of the land that they'vesubsisted on for generations and the natural resources that exist within those lands. wehave been in conversations with folks in south
africa who are fighting neoliberalism andfighting anti-black racism years and years after the revolutions that have existed insouth africa. we have also been in contact with activists in israel who are fightinganti-blackness as it relates to both immigration policy, right, and police abuse and policeviolence. and the list goes on it on, right? i just returned from scotland, where a newleft party is being formed. and part of what they want to ground themselves in is thisconversation around black lives matter. fletcher: well, alicia garza, one of the foundersof black lives matter and an outstanding spokesperson for racial justice on a global scale, i wantto thank you very much for joining us on the global african.
garza: thank you so much for having me. fletcher: and thank you for joining us forthis segment of the global african. i'm your host, bill fletcher. and we'll be back ina moment, so don't go anywhere. in may of this year, oprah winfrey appearedon a cover of her magazine, o magazine, to celebrate its 15th anniversary. on it, shewore a pair of diamond earrings that were stunning but extremely controversial. thepieces of jewelry were created by lev leviev, a man commonly referred to as the king ofdiamonds. however, while leviev is known for his abilityto acquire some of the world's most impressive diamonds, he has also become known as a veryquestionable businessman to many human rights
activists. it is said that lev leviev is profitingoff of human rights violations in angola. security companies employed by lev levievin angolan diamond mining communities have been accused of committing brutal human rightsabuses towards diamond diggers. and in addition to these allegations, footage of the terribleconditions have surfaced onto the internet. furthermore, leviev is also under fire forbuilding thousands of israeli settlement homes on palestinian land, which stands in violationof international law. activists have been urging oprah winfrey topublicly sever ties with leviev. and adalah-ny, a new york group, campaigning for palestinianhuman rights, sent her a letter to educate her on just who she was doing business with.
patrick connors of adalah-ny joins us todayto give us more insight on this subject and to explain just what happened with this letterhis organization sent to oprah and to her team. we're joined now by patrick connors, who iswith the new york-based group adalah-ny | the new york campaign for the boycott of israel. so welcome to the global african. we reallyappreciate your taking the time to join us today. let me just start with this--you know, cutto the chase. what is the actual story behind the oprah winfrey diamond scandal?
patrick connors: well, oprah winfrey was photographedon the cover of o magazine wearing leviev diamonds. and this was a 15th anniversaryissue of the oprah magazine. the fact that she was wearing diamonds was highlighted ithink three times in the magazine. it was picked up online by e! online, by huffingtonpost. but leviev's companies, including his diamondcompanies, have been involved in terrible human rights abuses in angola in the diamondindustry and in the occupied palestinian territories, where they built illegal israeli settlementson palestinian land. and as far as i can tell from researching,oprah appears to be the first major celebrity to have worn leviev diamonds and to be effectivelyendorsing his diamonds and his companies since
2008. so it's a bit of a surprise that somebodywho has a reputation for supporting social justice in the u.s. and in south africa andother places and being a role model would be promoting a company of a human rights abuser. fletcher: who is lev leviev? what is his involvementin this entire diamonds issue? connors: so lev leviev is an uzbek-born israelibillionaire, and he's one of the wealthiest businessmen in israel. a lot of his wealthhas come from his work in the diamond industry, where he was--originally worked for the debeers company in south africa and then became--in apartheid south africa, i should say, andthen became known as the man who broke the de beers cartel and became a major player,perhaps the major player in angola's diamond
industry. so diamonds have been a major part of hiswealth, but he has expanded to a lot of different kinds of businesses and is the major shareholderof a company called africa israel, which is an israeli company involved in constructionand other businesses. and in the construction area, they're involved in the construction--buildingisraeli settlements over the last 12 years or so. he's also involved in a number of otherindustries, but those are two of his major ones. and he seems like he's a bit of a right-winger,given his support for israeli settlements. he also has donated to settlement causes.and, actually, practically all of his businesses,
you can cite some kinds of unethical businesspractices, and in specific cases really terrible human rights abuses, both in palestine andangola. so his record for business ethics is really bad. fletcher: leviev--what are his--this lev leviev,what are his ties with angola and the diamonds issue in angola? connors: he became involved in the angolandiamond industry i believe around 1999, 2000, coming in with another israeli oligarch whohad ties to angola and to the dos santos regime. together they got involved in the diamondindustry. and leviev has remained since then, and actually got into a business conflictwith the other israeli businessman over that.
and as i said, he's been a central playerin the angolan diamond industry, with close ties to the dos santos regime, even to isabeldos santos in one of his partnerships. they were copartners. so he's very much linkedwith a very repressive and corrupt government in angola. and so that's continued from, ibelieve, about the early 2000s to present, where he still has a major role in angola'sdiamond industry. fletcher: now, my understanding is that there'sa direct tie-in between leviev and his company and the settlements or supporting settlementsin the occupied palestinian territories. can you tell us a little bit about that? connors: so leviev, all of his businessesfall under what they call the leviev group
of companies, both the diamond businessesand the companies that are involved in building israeli settlements. so his wealth is kindof integrated and you can't separate the money that he's earning, the large amounts of moneythat he's learning from diamonds from the other businesses and the settlement enterprise. so as early as around the early 1990s, hebecame involved with another smaller company. he's a co-owner of something called leadermanagement and development that is building settlements on the land of the palestinianvillage of jayyous in the west bank and taking away its vital farmland and really basicallyimpoverishing that agricultural town of jayyous. after that, he became, as i mentioned, theowner of africa israel, and that company began
building settlements as well in a number ofdifferent communities, palestinian communities in the west bank. and all of those israeli settlements are builton palestinian land, take away palestinian farmland. they isolate palestinian communitiesinto isolated enclaves that are a little bit analogous to bantustans. people can't movearound freely. they lose income from the land that's taken over from the settlements. sothe settlements are destroying the west bank, really. and leviev, his companies, two ofthem, africa israel and leader management and development, are two that have playeda role in building thousands of settlement homes since about the early 2000s until now.
i should just add that africa israel has beenunder a lot of pressure, partly because of the campaign that we're involved in and thatmany other people around the world are involved in, and different governments have brokenrelations with leviev and his companies over this. charities, nonprofits have done so aswell. and so late last fall, an israeli media outletreported that africa israel had stated that it will no longer build in occupied palestinianterritories, no longer build settlements. but there's been no confirmation of that.africa israel itself has not affirmed that that's the case. there's no clear record thatthey've--that they're currently building settlements, but there's also no clear commitment thatthey've agreed to stop building settlements.
leader management and development also, whichis the company that develops the settlement of zufim on the land of the village of jayyous,has been in existence since the early 1990s. and in the last year, a court case by israelisettlers revealed that leviev's attorney is claiming that he's actually sold that companyto some unnamed other people. but there's no way to confirm, again, if this is true,if it's a lie. the records are unclear. in fact, the israeli government records showthat he still actually is the co-owner of leader management and development, which isinvolved in settlements in zufim. so there are some, again, murky media reports thatperhaps he's sold the company, but no proof that.
fletcher: and one final question. what isyour organization, adalah-ny, what are they planning on doing as a follow-up on this controversialsituation with oprah winfrey? connors: well, we've been actually involvedin campaigning against the human rights abuses committed by leviev's companies since 2007and calling on governments and organizations and people to boycott his companies, to breakrelationships with him. so that's an ongoing campaign. it will continue. with respect to oprah winfrey and the factthat she wore leviev diamonds, we right now have an online letter to her. we originallysent--we sent an initial letter with 34 signatories, individual signatories, and i think nine organizationalsignatories to her. when she didn't respond
after about a month, we put it online andcalled for more people to sign. right now we have about 5,500 signatories. and eachtime people sign online, a letter is sent to executives at the oprah winfrey networkand at o magazine. so we're continuing to send messages to her, calling on her to renounceher relationship, her endorsement, essentially, of leviev's companies, and we're looking atother ways to try to be in touch with her. she's not accepted our--sorry. her representativeshave not accepted our phone calls and emails over the last month. so we're looking at options of ways to continueto encourage her to do the right thing. fletcher: patrick connors, thank you verymuch for joining us for the global african.
we appreciate you taking this time. thankyou. connors: thank you. fletcher: and thank you for joining us forthis episode of the global african. i'm your host, bill fletcher. and we'll see you nexttime. hope you enjoyed the show.
No comments:
Post a Comment