Josna Rege

Archive for 2026|Yearly archive page

644. Independence & Interdependence

In blogs and blogging, Britain, culture, culture, history, India, Inter/Transnational, Politics, postcolonial, singing, Stories on April 13, 2026 at 2:46 am

For the month of April, as part of the annual A to Z Challenge, I will be endeavoring to write a short personal post every day on the subject of war and peace—short because of time, War and Peace because of the times. To make things more bearable, I will endeavor to include music in every post.

In 1960s India, the 15th of August meant a great deal to us. It was Independence Day, and it celebrated that day in 1947 when India gained its hard-won independence from British colonial rule. Our hearts thrilled as we stood tall to sing our national anthem, by Rabindranath Tagore (or Thakur), which drew us all together and simultaneously celebrated our beautiful diversity. We remembered and sought to follow in the footsteps of our national heroes, men and women who had given themselves fully to the freedom struggle, many spending years in prison yet continuing to organize. I remember the celebrations as joyful and forward-looking. We felt that there was a role for us all to play in building the newly independent nation. 

Self-sufficiency was one of our national watchwords. The swadeshi (lit. of one’s own country) movement in the first decade of the 20th century, which boycotted British goods and strove to buy and sell only things that were Indian-made, became an important element in the larger movement for swaraj—self-government or self-rule. After independence, India continued to uphold the principle of swadeshi by developing its own industrial base and heavily regulating overseas imports, so as to encourage the development of the domestic market. We were aware of the trap of neo-colonialism, whereby the country would be only nominally independent, with the former colonizer or other “Western” powers remaining in control of the economy, and Indian puppets placed in top-ranking positions, as long as they played ball. 

As I grew older and explored these ideas more deeply, I continued to believe in them, but my feelings became more nuanced. I came to understand that there were always different strands in the Indian independence movement, representing contending political perspectives and ideas of India. I learned that the independent nations of India and Pakistan, separated at birth by Britain’s bloody Partition, celebrated their Independence just a day apart from each other; that in this modern world no nation could be wholly self-sufficient, neither should it be; that it was not only India who could claim a song by Rabindranath Tagore as its national anthem, but also neighboring Bangladesh (see TMA #453). And I came to believe that while there was nothing wrong with loving your country, it was wrong to trumpet your own as the best country in the world.

I will never stop believing that colonialism and imperialism are bad things, that it is wrong for one nation to exploit another, whether economically or politically, and to enrich itself at another’s expense. I believe that even the smallest, least powerful nations of the world should have a place at the table and a right to control their own internal affairs. National independence remains critically important. But so does independence of thought, word, and action

Unity in Diversity, one of India’s most quoted tenets, can in practice mean the suppression of dissenting or even different views in the face of a dominant one, with independent ideas seen as “anti-national.” And of course, no one country has the monopoly on this: countries around the world are cracking down on dissent, including the U.S. and the U.K.

I likewise believe that dependency is a dangerous condition in a rapacious world. By definition, a nation—or a region within a nation—that becomes too dependent on another nation—politically, economically, or culturally—loses its sovereignty and its self-respect. The same goes for relationships between individuals.

Instead I say, let independence continue to hold its head high, but permit interdependence to stand by its side. Unlike the state of dependency, in which a dominant party subordinates and dictates to a weaker one, interdependence is based on mutuality, and on the recognition that in this globalized world with its limited natural resources, we need each other, but as respected equals. It is no life to be a vassal, held in thrall to a Great Power. In a world still dominated by Might is Right. the spirit of interdependence stands for mutual support. As Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., said, in his 1965 commencement address at Oberlin College:

All I’m saying is simply this: that all mankind is tied together; all life is interrelated, and we are all caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. For some strange reason I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. And you can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be – this is the interrelated structure of reality. 

Two songs for today:
 
I Ain’t Marching Anymore, written and sung by Phil Ochs

Song of Peace/Finlandia, words by Lloyd Stone, music by Sibelius, sung by Joan Baez. 


Tell Me Another (Contents to Date)

Chronological Table of Contents

643. Humanitarian Aid

In health, Inter/Transnational, Music, Stories on April 11, 2026 at 3:59 am

For the month of April, as part of the annual A to Z Challenge, I will be endeavoring to write a short personal post every day on the subject of war and peace—short because of time, War and Peace because of the times. To make things more bearable, I will endeavor to include music in every post.

This ought to be simple. 

Humanitarian aid is a form of assistance designed to save lives and alleviate suffering during and after crises, such as floods, famine or conflicts. Aid is essential for addressing the immediate needs of affected populations and laying the groundwork for long-term recovery and development. 

More than 362 million people around the world are in critical need of humanitarian aid. When people are at their most vulnerable, humanitarian aid is often the difference between survival and suffering, or even life and death. (International Rescue Committee (IRC). “What s Humanitarian Aid and Why Is it Important?”)

International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
This is an international standard that governs humanitarian assistance in conflict or war:

IHL recognizes that the civilian population of a State affected by an armed conflict is entitled to receive humanitarian assistance. It regulates, in particular, the conditions for providing humanitarian assistance in the form of food, medicines, medical equipment, or other vital supplies to civilians in need. (Source: International Committee of the Red Cross. “Humanitarian Assistance”, in How Does Law Protect in War?)

Here’s an informative article by Clive Baldwin of Human Rights Watch: 
How Does International Humanitarian Law Apply in Israel and Gaza? It allows us to apply IHL to the tragic events that have been unfolding on our screens. 

Rule 55. Access for Humanitarian Relief to Civilians in Need
The parties to the conflict must allow and facilitate rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian relief for civilians in need, which is impartial in character and conducted without any adverse distinction, subject to their right of control. (Source: International Humanitarian Law Databases)

For the seven fundamental rules governing humanitarian aid in wars or other conflicts, see International Humanitarian Law: Handbook for Parliamentarians2016, pp. 8-9 (Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) and International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

So, this ought to be simple. In a nutshell, civilians should not be targeted in war. Those who are affected have the right to receive lifesaving aid in the form of food, medicines and medical supplies. Combatants who have been injured or taken prisoner must also be treated humanely. No parties in a conflict, even third parties, may block the delivery of aid to the affected populations. Right?

Wrong. One only has to look at the armed conflicts of the past 3-4 years, but why that long?—the past 3-4 days—to see glaring violations of International Humanitarian Law with regard to the delivery of life-saving humanitarian aid. Civilians, including children, are being targeted, and are dying in large numbers. Civilian infrastructure such as water and power supplies, homes and schools, medics, ambulances and hospitals are being targeted as well. The delivery of humanitarian aid is being blocked, so that civilian populations are facing hypothermia, starvation, and disease and hospitals have shut down, unable to function. Prisoners and detainees are being starved and tortured. Just to name a few.

Sadly, when nations keep violating international humanitarian law with impunity, as if the opprobrium of the rest of the world means nothing to them, they undermine the moral power of the system, making it easier for other nations to do the same, resulting in a downward spiral. 

Humanitarian aid is supposed to be delivered from and by a number of sources, governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and private corporations and individuals. Governments have recently been dramatically reducing their support for international humanitarian aid. The violations of IHL protecting non-combatants, including medical personnel, make it too dangerous for aid workers to function in the war zones. The selective barring of entry to numerous aid organizations denial of entry to aid trucks full of desperately needed humanitarian aid, means, again, that even if the aid is there, it cannot be delivered to the vulnerable populations who need it desperately. Nevertheless, I can recommend the three reputable NGOs below, who are continuing to deliver humanitarian aid, despite extremely challenging conditions: 

Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)

Lebanon: Testimony from a Night of Mass Casualties in Beirut (MSF)

International Rescue Committee (IRC)

Innovation vs cuts: Humanitarian aid in 2026 (IRC) 

IRC’s emergency watchlist, listing the countries currently most in need of humanitarian aid. 

Gaza Recovery: Help Deliver Urgent Aid (IRC)

Palestine Children’s Relief Fund (PCRF)

And now, a song for the letter H:

A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall, Bob Dylan, on the 1963 album, The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan
Patti Smith performing it (in Dylan’s absence) at the 2016 Nobel Prize Award Ceremony.

Tell Me Another (Contents to Date)

Chronological Table of Contents

642. Guns: Bringing War Home

In blogs and blogging, Inter/Transnational, Media, Music, Politics, United States on April 9, 2026 at 7:45 pm

For the month of April, as part of the annual A to Z Challenge, I will be endeavoring to write a short personal post every day on the subject of war and peace—short because of time, War and Peace because of the times. To make things more bearable, I will endeavor to include music in every post.

According to Fortune Business Insights, in 2025, at $4.2 billion, the United States small arms industry commanded a 43.5% share of the entire global market. The demand was “driven by high civilian firearm ownership, substantial defense spending, and strong procurement by law enforcement and homeland security.” Now let’s try to unpack that. 

The U.S. gun industry is doing well, and is projected to keep growing steadily year by year. The civilian share of the market is the largest (with U.S. civilians owning an estimated 500 million guns and a spike in sales during the uncertainty of the COVID pandemic) but contracts from the Department of Defense  (DoD) provide reliable income that the gun manufacturers can plan on. Purchases by the Department of Homeland Security are also a growing source of industry income. 

Let us go a little further in understanding the link between guns purchased by the DoD for use in wars around the world and guns purchased for use in the U.S., both by the  federal government and by civilians. 

Armed ICE agents, Saint Paul, Minnesota, January 2026 (photo: Octavio Jones/AFP/Getty)

According to Armed for Violencea report released by U.S. Senator Adam Schiff’s office in February 2026, in 2025 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) “committed to spending more than $144 million on weapons, ammunition, and related accessories,” a dramatic increase from the previous year. 

ICE’s spending commitments on weapons, ammunition, and accessories surged fourfold – an increase of over 360 percent – when compared to ICE’s contracts in 2024. In 2025, CBP’s contracts for weapons, ammunition, and accessories doubled when compared to CBP’s 2024 contract totals. 

These purchases are directly contributing to the aggressive attitudes and actions of heavily armed (and inadequately trained) ICE and CBP agents in cities and towns across the nation, including killing and injuring civilians. Increasingly, these forces are seeing civilians as “the enemy” and targeting them with military-grade weapons.

With regard to civilian purchases of small arms, we know that semi-automatic assault rifles, initially developed for the military, are increasingly being the purchase of choice by U.S. civilians. We know that these weapons, equipped with high-capacity magazines, are capable of doing the most damage in the least time without the need for a pause to reload, and have been the most common weapons of choice in mass shooting around the country. Take the shooter at Sandy Hook Elementary School, for instance: “In four minutes, he shot 154 bullets, killing 20 children and six adults.” 

We also know that an increasing number of mass shootings across the U.S., are perpetrated by right-wing extremists, and that even when they do not fire these weapons, their ability to carry and brandish them in public creates a chilling effect in society.

But even more chilling—and pertinent to my point here—is the fact that the small arms industry uses funds from DoD contracts in its marketing to civilians, glamorizing military-style guns and seducing civilians in their marketing. Turning Our Streets into War Zones, an October, 2025 report by the Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, reveals “how gunmakers use tax-payer funded military contracts to produce and market weapons of war to civilians.” The marketing that directly linked masculinity to military-style weapons resulted in a $73 million legal settlement after the Sandy Hook shooting, but it didn’t compensate for the precious lives of the children. 

The report illustrates its point with graphic examples of the ad campaigns of leading gun manufacturers who have obtained lucrative DoD contracts, charging that they have:

taken the same firearms they designed for combat and repackaged them into civilian products that they marketed as being “battle-tested” and “battle-proven,” among other military descriptors, to garner more sales. Smith & Wesson executives referred to this marketing technique—associating products with the U.S. military and police to build their legitimacy for civilians—as the “halo effect.”

“The Halo Effect” has been described as “the marketer’s secret weapon.” It refers to “a cognitive bias that causes us to form a positive impression of something—be it a person, a product, or a brand—because it’s associated with something else we feel positively about.” These advertisements will give you an idea of how arms manufacturers target civilians.

print ads from Daniel Defense (from the Smoking Gun report, Turning Our Streets into War Zones)

There is a bright spot: the small arms industry’s market outlook  projections, which are mostly very upbeat, identify two areas that present challenges to their profits, “stringent gun control regulations” and “public safety concerns and anti-gun movements.” This indicates that public concern and action actually can make a difference. 

This year at the Academy Awards, the film that won the Oscar for best documentary short was All the Empty Rooms (dir. Joshua Seftel, 2025). See the film’s trailer here. In it, journalist and photographer Steve Hartman visits the homes of families who have lost a child to gun violence, talkng to the parents and photographing the child’s now-empty bedroom. One of the children had been killed in the Uvalde, Texas, school shooting in May, 2022, in which the 18-year-old shooter had used a Daniel Defense assault rifle that he had bought legally just a few days before. The families of two of the Uvalde victims have brought a lawsuit against the gunmaker Daniel Defense, the gun store, and law enforcement.

The taxpayer-funded weapons of war that the United States sells and deploys abroad turn our own neighborhoods into war zones.

War Resisters League logo

Two songs for today:

Happiness is a Warm Gun (Lennon-McCartney), written and sung by John Lennon, on the Beatles’ 1968 White Album. This insightful song speaks to the very mindset that the gun manufacturers target in their marketing to civilians.  

Give Peace a Chance, Plastic Ono Band, released in July, 1969 as a 45 RPM record. All I can say is, it bears repetition. 

Tell Me Another (Contents to Date)

Chronological Table of Contents

Ten Years in the April A to Z Blogging Challenge

In blogs and blogging, Notes, Stories on April 8, 2026 at 4:45 pm

I have just realized that this my 10th (arguably my 11th) year participating in the annual April A to Z Blogging Challenge, in which bloggers sign up to for an abecedarian April, posting a blog a day, preferably on a self-chosen theme. Here is a list of my chosen themes for every year in which I took up the Challenge between 2013 and 2025, with each one linking to a hyperlinked list of all my April A-to-Z posts that year.

2013: Blogging from A to Z (no theme)

2014: Traveling Light

2015: A Printer’s Alphabet

2016: Bringing Me Joy

2019: Migrants, Refugees, and Exiles

2020: 50 Years in the United States

2021: My theme this year was Anachronidioms, but April is the cruelest month for people in academia, and that year must have been particularly so, because I only managed to get to the letter F before I had to throw in the towel. Here are those six posts: AnimalidiomsBritishismsClothes and ClothingDancing in the StreetEuphemisms, and Fin.

2023: My India Trip

2024: The World is Always With Us

2025: Books I Have Loved

2026: War and Peace (underway)

Tell Me Another (Contents to Date)

Chronological Table of Contents

641. Freedom

In blogs and blogging, Politics, singing, Stories, United States, women & gender, Words & phrases on April 8, 2026 at 5:26 am

For the month of April, as part of the annual A to Z Challenge, I will be endeavoring to write a short personal post every day on the subject of war and peace—short because of time, War and Peace because of the times. To make things more bearable, I will endeavor to include music in every post.

Freedom is a big word, and in its shaking off of all constraints it opens up the world. Everybody yearns for it, but it means very different things to different people. Large groups of people come together to struggle for freedom, but to an individual, after the initial excitement, freedom can quickly get very lonely. Freedom gives you choices, but too many choices can make you lose your bearings. Unfreedom weighs you down and holds you back, but freedom can give you heavy responsibilities. Freedom conjures up a sense of ease, but it doesn’t come easy, and without constant vigilance you may wake up one morning and find that it has gone.  

The etymology of the free in freedom in Old English means exempt from, not in bondage, noble, joyful, and in Proto-Germanic, beloved. Way back, it is connected in Old English and Old Norse with affection, friendship, peace, personal security. By the 13th century, freedom also means clear of obstruction, unrestrained in movement, loose, at liberty, wild. By the late 14th century, we see freedom, in relation to nations, meaning “not subject to foreign rule or to despotism.”  

From modern times down to the present day, freedom still retains its sense of deliverance from domination. Hence enslaved and colonized people continue to yearn and struggle for freedom. 

Freedom from coercion or constraint is also very much present in a longing for personal freedom: the freedom to come and go, to be with family, to love the person one wishes to love, and to achieve personal fulfillment, spiritually, psychologically, through love and work. This sense of individual freedom as distinct from collective liberation on the one hand and spiritual liberation on the other is a more modern one, the freedom to break away and be alone. 

I once asked my students to listen to Kris Kristofferson’s Me and Bobby McGee, sung by Janis Joplin and to think about the meaning of the line, “Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose.” They were stumped. What a lonely freedom, empty without love and commitment.

I want to hold up the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom, founded in April, 1915, during the First World War, “’to bring together women of different political views and philosophical and religious backgrounds determined to study and make known the causes of war and work for a permanent peace’ and to unite women worldwide who oppose oppression and exploitation.” WILPF’s U.S. website introduces itself in this way:  

Feminist peace analysis is our superpower. We understand how war, economic exploitation, climate destruction, and oppression are linked through the same systems. That’s why we’ve been fighting for total peace, not just the absence of war, but justice in every form. 

For WILPF, Freedom means peace gained through working together to end injustice and exploitation, and to give all people room to move: freedom in all its senses. On March 2nd, 2026, almost immediately after the launch of the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran, WILPF issued a Call for Immediate Ceasefire and Compliance with International Law,

denounc[ing] these acts as violations of international law and part of a broader pattern of militarism and impunity. Rejecting both aggression and militarised retaliation, this statement calls for an immediate ceasefire, urgent diplomacy, accountability, and a renewed commitment to disarmament—affirming that true security is rooted in peace, justice, and the rule of law, not war.

In contrast, the term Free World, as in, “The President of the United States is the leader of the Free World,” came into use as propaganda in the Second World War and the Cold War, referring to the Allies, the Western Bloc, and the aligned countries as opposed to the authoritarian states such as Germany, Italy, and Japan. Later, it came to refer to capitalist liberal democracies collectively—and their authoritarian allies—as opposed to communist states. The term fell into disuse after the end of the Cold War, but it seems to be having a revival of late. To me, it has always been  distasteful in its carving up of the world into perpetually warring power blocs, leaving the formerly colonized and the non-aligned nations out of the picture altogether; and in its equating of capitalism (the “free” market) with freedom. In any case, the “free” in Free World no longer has explanatory meaning in the world’s current geopolitical configurations—perhaps it never did.

President Roosevelt’s Four Freedoms, though, in his 1941 State of the Union address, still hold resonance for me:

The first is freedom of speech, and expression—everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way—everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want—which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants—everywhere in the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear—which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor—anywhere in the world.

He continued: 

That is no vision of a distant millennium.
It is a definite basis for a kind of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind of world is the very antithesis of the so-called new order of tyranny which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb.

Let me leave you with some freedom songs for the letter F

Freedomby Richie Havens, sung here at Woodstock in 1969.
Havens’ repeated cries of “Freedom,” followed by the heart-wrenching, “Sometimes I feel like a motherless child/A long way from my home,” evokes all the meanings of Freedom at once.  

Oh Freedom! sung by Odetta in 1956, a spiritual taken up and adapted as a freedom song after the Civil War.

and 

Freedom is a Constant Struggle, a Civil Rights song covered by Leyla McCalla in 2023 as a tribute to singer and activist Barbara Dane, who recorded it with the Chambers Brothers in 1966. 

Tell Me Another (Contents to Date)

Chronological Table of Contents

640. Equal Rights

In Aging, blogs and blogging, culture, history, Inter/Transnational, Music, Politics, singing, Stories on April 7, 2026 at 5:10 am

For the month of April, as part of the annual A to Z Challenge, I will be endeavoring to write a short personal post every day on the subject of war and peace—short because of time, War and Peace because of the times. To make things more bearable, I will endeavor to include music in every post.

Everyone is crying out for peace/None is crying out for justice. (Peter Tosh)

When you get to my age, you start to feels that everything has been said before. And of course, it has, if never in exactly the same way. You know that the people around you realize that, like the Ancient Mariner, you are telling them the same things over and over again, and you can feel them rolling their eyes. But for your part, although your words seem to keep being blown away in the wind, you keep repeating them, again and again, each time a little differently, in the hope that one day they may be heard by someone, take root somewhere. 

First I thought that E would comment on military euphemisms used for propaganda purposes. But I realized that I had already written a post on E for Euphemisms in April, 2021. So I decided to switch over from the War to the Peace side of my War and Peace theme and settle on E for Empathy. Alas, that too had been my E word in April, 2024. If you’d like to visit them, here they are: Euphemisms and Empathy.

Even my song for E is a repeat offering: 
Equal Rights, by Peter Tosh, the 1977 title track of his second solo album.  

Everyone is crying out for peace
None is crying out for justice.

I don’t want no peace
I need equal rights and justice
I need equal rights and justice
I need equal rights and justice
Got to get it! Equal rights and justice.

I think I’ve found my focus. 

For as long as people feel the sting of unfair treatment; as long as people have known that they have rights; as long as people who have barely enough to live on are dominated by others who have more than they can ever use and still want more; as long as these persist, so will conflicts, uprisings, and wars. It is not enough to demand peace without also working for equal rights and justice. Only then can we hope to achieve true and lasting peace. Until then, war will continue on repeat.

Everyone is fighting for
equal rights and justice
Palestine is fighting for
equal rights and justice
Down in Angola. Equal rights and justice 
Down in Botswana. Equal rights and justice 
Down in Zimbabwe. Equal rights and justice 
Down in Rhodesia. Equal rights and justice 
Right here in Jamaica.
Equal rights and justice. 

Forty years ago—seventy-five years ago—Palestine was fighting for equal rights and justice. It is still crying out for them today. Right here in the United States of America, people are fighting for equal rights and justice, and have been for hundreds of years. But while their voices seem to go unheard, change has slowly been taking place; though not enough, and not always in the right direction. 

On this early morning of April 7th, 2026, the commander-in-chief of the United States, the nation with by far the biggest military in the world, is raining down death and destruction on Iran from the skies, and threatening to unleash its full fury by a certain deadline this evening, while the world waits with bated breath. How to end this seemingly endless cycle of violence and greed? 

War (first four verses)

Until the philosophy which hold one race
Superior and another inferior
is finally and permanently discredited and abandoned
Everywhere is war, me say war.

That until there are no longer first class
and second class citizens of any nation
Until the color of a man’s skin
is of no more significance than the color of his eyes
Me say war.

That until the basic human rights are equally
guaranteed to all, without regard to race
A dis a war.

That until that day
the dream of lasting peace, world citizenship
rule of international morality
will remain in but a fleeting illusion
to be pursued, but never attained
Now everywhere is war,
War.

Bob Marley and the Wailers, on their 1976 album, Rastaman Vibration. For notes on the song and the complete lyrics, see here and here.

Tell Me Another (Contents to Date)

Chronological Table of Contents

639. (De)humanization

In blogs and blogging, Music, Stories, Words & phrases on April 6, 2026 at 4:38 am

For the month of April, as part of the annual A to Z Challenge, I will be endeavoring to write a short personal post every day on the subject of war and peace—short because of time, War and Peace because of the times. To make things more bearable, I will endeavor to include music in every post.

Because dehumanization is rampant and I can’t bear to give it primacy, let me start by centering the positive, humanization.   

Humanization is the act or process of humanizing. To humanize is
—to address or portray (someone) in a way that emphasizes that person’s humanity or individuality
—to represent (something) as human to attribute human qualities to (something)
—to make (something) humane to softencivilize

Humanization is the task of a lifetime, something that we seek to develop in ourselves and that we recognize and nurture in our interactions with others. It is the process of becoming more fully human, of growing into our best selves, of flowering through and through.

Dehumanization is the process of dehumanizing. To dehumanize is: 
—to deprive (someone or something) of human qualities, personality, or dignity
—to subject (someone, such as a prisoner) to inhuman or degrading conditions or treatment
Here Merriam-Webster illuminates the definition in a quote:
“… you treat people with respect, you get respect back. You treat them like animals, you strip search them, you dehumanize them, you lock them up, you don’t feed them … you are going to get that back …”— Adelina Iftene
—to address or portray (someone) in a way that obscures or demeans that person’s humanity or individuality.
Two illustrative examples:
“I’m always struck by the way language is used to dehumanize others.”— Anna Lind-Guzik
“But that approach ignores the fundamental dynamics of racism, which dehumanizes people along crude lines, ignoring any internal distinctions among those with broadly similar looks, treating them all as uniformly suspicious”.”— Sangay K. Mishra

During wartime, propaganda on both sides regularly dehumanizes the opposing side, the perceived enemy. How, otherwise, could decent people bring themselves to kill fellow-human beings? How War Dehumanizes Everyone it Touches, by Paul Tritchler, examines this process with particular reference to the devastating bombing of Dresden, Germany in the Second World War.

Dehumanization is also universally recognized as one of the precursors to genocide, a dangerous red flag. Genocide Watch, an organization that “exists to predict, prevent, stop, and punish genocide and other forms of mass murder,” has identified ten stages of genocide. The fourth stage is dehumanization, in which:

One group denies the humanity of the other group. Members of it are equated with animals, vermin, insects or diseases. Dehumanization overcomes the normal human revulsion against murder. At this stage, hate propaganda in print, on hate radios, and in social media is used to vilify the victim group. It may even be incorporated into school textbooks. Indoctrination prepares the way for incitement. The majority group is taught to regard the other group as less than human, and even alien to their society. They are indoctrinated to believe that “ We are better off without them.”  The powerless group can become so depersonalized that they are actually given numbers rather than names, as Jews were in the death camps.  They are equated with filth, impurity, and immorality.  Hate speech fills the propaganda of official radio, newspapers, and speeches. The Ten Stages of Genocide.

The Perpetrator Studies Network “includes the work of scholars and educators whose research and teaching centers on perpetrators and perpetration of genocide, mass killings, and political violence.” Its website, which has an extensive bibliography of scholarship on the subject, includes Hagar Abdalbar’s summary of a book chapter by Nick Haslam, entitled, “The Many Roles of Dehumanization in Genocide” (in Confronting Humanity at its Worst: Social Psychological Perspectives on Genocide, 2020). In it Haslam argues that dehumanization is not only a precursor of genocide, but that it “is woven through the fabric of genocide and is not just a step on the path toward it.” Haslam also argues that dehumanization does not only mean “animalization” (such as referring to people as vermin, cockroaches, garbage), it can also involve lumping people together so as to erase their individuality, seeing them as disgusting, contemptible, or useless objects, or demonizing them even when they are the victims, not the perpetrators.

Whether we are considering humanization or its opposite, the process is twofold. It involves both speech and action—talking to and about groups of people in certain ways, and treating them in certain ways. It is also reciprocal. In each case, those who talk about and treat other people in these ways are themselves changed in the process, for better or worse. People—and societies—who routinely dehumanize others are themselves dehumanized. Those who are at the receiving end of dehumanization may also internalize the abuse. And those who seek to develop greater humanity and humaneness in themselves are likely to treat others in the same way. 

In 3 Ways to Deal with Dehumanizing Language, the St. Louis Holocaust Museum helps us to understand why dehumanizing language is dangerous and offers some simple ways to respond to it: recognize it, question why it is being used, and call it out. Genocide Watch goes further: 

Local and international leaders should condemn the use of hate speech and make it culturally unacceptable. Leaders who incite genocide should be prosecuted in national courts.  They should be banned from international travel and have their foreign finances frozen. Hate radio stations should be jammed or shut down, and hate propaganda and its sources banned from social media and the internet. Hate crimes and atrocities should be promptly punished.

On that note, let us turn away from this dispiriting talk of demonization and dehumanization. 

Here are two songs for the letter D:

Deportee (Plane Wreck at Los Gatos). Its lyrics were written by Woody Guthrie to commemorate the deaths of migrants who were recruited as farmworkers in the U.S. but subsequently sent back to Mexico. On the way home they were killed in a plane crash, and rather than dignifying them with their individual names, the newspaper coverage just described  them as “deportees.” Woody Guthrie sought to re-humanize them in this song by giving them a story and a name. The song has been covered by many artists. 
Woody Guthrie himself
Joan Baez, Mary Chapin Carpenter and the Indigo Girls
Arlo Guthrie, Woody’s son

Don’t Numb to Thiscomposed by Abigail Bengson, sung here with Shaun Bengson. The title and the words speak for themselves.

Tell Me Another (Contents to Date)

Chronological Table of Contents

638. The Cold War

In blogs and blogging, Books, Immigration, India, Inter/Transnational, Music, Politics, postcolonial, Stories, United States, Words & phrases on April 4, 2026 at 5:05 am

For the month of April, as part of the annual A to Z Challenge, I will be endeavoring to write a short personal post every day on the subject of war and peace—short because of time, War and Peace because of the times. To make things more bearable, I will endeavor to include music in every post.

The term Cold War refers to the intense political and military rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, or U.S.S.R., that shaped international relations over some four decades, beginning after the Second World War, in 1947, with the Truman Doctrine, and ending in 1989-1991, with the fall of the Soviet Union. It was referred to as “cold” because even though there was intense competition and a prodigious arms build-up on both sides as each tried to outdo the other in military might, these two nuclear-armed superpowers held back from the brink of outright war. Because the fear of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), an inevitable result of the use of nuclear weapons on either or both sides, may have prevented a all-out war between U.S. and the U.S.S.R. 

Despite the mad premise of MAD, the cold was frequently very hot. Wars did break out all over the world during that time, but most of them were proxy wars, in which opposing forces in other, smaller countries were supported by one or both of the two superpowers. 

Proxy wars were not only military engagements but also ideological, political, and cultural struggles. These conflicts shaped the development of many nations and regions, leaving legacies that continue to affect global politics today. Understanding these wars provides insight into how superpower competition influenced the world, often at a devastating cost to the nations where these wars unfolded. (excerpt from Proxy Wars: The Battlegrounds of the Cold War)

Between 1989 and 1991, when the Berlin was knocked down and U.S.S.R. was dismantled, many people around the world breathed sighs of relief, hoping that there would no longer be the same need for massive military build-ups on both sides, and funds formerly used to feed the war machine could now be used for the public good. But they reckoned without the massive military industrial complex that, once created, demanded more and more. The United States, now the sole global superpower, needed to find a new enemy and a new justification for continuing to build up its massive military indefinitely. 

Here we are, 35 years later, having seen the rise and fall of a succession of doctrines and enemies. Old chestnuts are brought back out and dusted off. The Cold War gave way to Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizationsrebutted here by the late Edward Said, then the New American Century, the New Cold War, the Hot Peace, and the Trumpian resurrection of the 1823 Monroe Doctrine. But through it all, the one constant has been the steady growth of the U.S. military budget. 

But I’m not a political scientist and, believe it or not, I didn’t want to talk about war today. Instead I wanted to note that, in my experience, throughout the Cold War and despite the Cold War mentality that, as I have read, dominated the U.S. media and public attitudes toward “the Communist enemy,” not everyone fell prey to the government propaganda. Growing up in India in the 1950s and 1960s, I was fortunate enough to live in a country led by one of the founders of the Non-Aligned Movement. This was a group of developing countries, most of which had been formerly colonized by Europe and did not want to succumb to the seemingly mandatory polarization of the whole word, with the superpowers forcing smaller countries to choose one side or the other. On the campus of the Indian Institute of Technology where my father taught, there were visiting professors from Russia and the United States as well as from Europe and the U.K., and we had the opportunity to meet them all and to get to know them as people, not as ambassadors of an ideology. 

I have written before about the lavishly illustrated and heavily subsidized Russian children’s books that came to us in translation, into English and several of the Indian languages, with my all-time favorite being Lazar Lagin’s The Old Genie Hottabych. This initiative  was probably a Soviet exercise of soft power, akin to the Voice of America or US AID Projects, but we didn’t see them as such, especially at a time when books from the U.S. or the U.K. were so expensive that they were out of reach for most people in India. 

During our 16-month sojourn in England while waiting for our U.S. immigration visas, I took History with a wonderful teacher called Mr. Laurence Davies. Quite rightly, he never spoke of his own political leanings in class, but it became clear to me that he was a Labour party supporter. One day, he asked me to wait after class so that he could have a word with me. He said he knew that my family would soon be emigrating to the United States, and he wanted to warn me that in class there I should never mention communism, let alone express any sympathies toward it, because Americans were bitterly opposed to it and I was likely to get into trouble. How sad, that the country that staunchly proclaimed the right to freedom of speech should be so intolerant. But when I finally arrived in the U.S. in 1970, I found that anything was up for discussion—in Massachusetts, at least. 

After immigrating to the United States, I was lucky enough to attend a high school that had a robust Russian program. Though I personally didn’t take Russian, having that active program alongside other languages more commonly offered in the States normalized the language and the culture. After moving to Western Massachusetts just as the Soviet Union was being dismantled, we found that our town’s middle and high school had a respected and long-standing Russian program with a Russian club that held cultural programs open to the community, and a reciprocal  exchange program with a Russian sister city. My husband and in-laws were Ukrainian American, at a time when “Russian” and “Ukrainian” were used interchangeably. We all loved attending the Russian Club dinners and Cossack-dancing contests. Through our son we became friends with the founder-director of the program. Sadly, after some years, although our friendship flourished the program was cancelled, as if, with the end of the Cold war, learning the language was no longer necessary. How sad and how short-sighted. Barely ten years later, Russia-hating had come back into fashion. 

Now for some songs: 

First, the Beatles broke through the Iron Curtain with:  

Back in the U.S.S.R. by The Beatles, on their 1968 White Album. Here’s Paul McCartney in Red Square 2003, performing the song live (see 54:54 on).

and, thanks to a recommendation from fellow-blogger Lisa of Tao-Talk:

Russians
, by Sting, from his 1985 solo album, The Dream of the Blue Turtles. The song is a commentary and plea that criticizes the then-dominant Cold War foreign policy and doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) by the United States and the then-existing Soviet Union.

And now, two songs brought to you by the letter C. They are not about the Cold War, but remind us that incarceration and government suppression are not limited to any one nation or political ideology. 

Christmas in Prison by John Prine, from his 1973 album Sweet Revenge.

(Working for the) Clampdown by The Clash, from their 1979 album London Calling (and a live version here).

Tell Me Another (Contents to Date)

Chronological Table of Contents

637. Bombs Away!

In blogs and blogging, Britain, Family, Inter/Transnational, Media, Music, Politics, Stories, United States, Words & phrases on April 3, 2026 at 4:36 am

For the month of April, as part of the annual A to Z Challenge, I will be endeavoring to write a short personal post every day on the subject of war and peace—short because of time, War and Peace because of the times. To make things more bearable, I will endeavor to include music in every post.

At twelve years old, my mother was evacuated from London during the Second World War along with her whole school, Parliament Hill School for Girls, when Germany was bombing the city. She was one of 6,000 evacuees from London who were relocated to St. Albans in early September, 1939 and billeted out to foster parents. Mum had to live with two or three different foster families during that time, and was miserable being separated from her family. Her younger brother stayed at home with their parents and suffered through nerve-shattering bombings, one of which struck quite close by while he was out on an errand, its blast sweeping him up and dropping him some distance down the street. After Mum returned to London the bombs continued to drop, and the family used to go to air-raid shelters for the night. When she told me these stories, she must have softened them for me, because I never felt the terror that she must have done, and she never wanted me to have to do so. But that war changed her life in so many ways that I can only guess at. And for many years after it was over, Britain continued to feel its after-effects. 

Now, eight years after Mum’s death, I am finally reading and re-reading all the essays she wrote in the United States while taking night courses in pursuit of a B.A. She was in her fifties by then. Reading a personal narrative that I had read quickly years ago and just as quickly forgotten, I was appalled at my earlier insensitivity. It was called “A Direct Hit.”

Now, as I think of the thousands upon thousands of civilians across the world being subjected to aerial bombings day after day, most of them without access to air-raid shelters or  adequate medical facilities, I tremble to think of what my mother went through in her impressionable teenage years. She used to tell me that the worst part of the V-1s, or “buzz bombs”, that the Germans deployed in the last year of the war was when, after buzzing around overhead, they suddenly went quiet. That meant that, you had about 12 seconds to take cover, before the missile hit the ground and exploded; but the silence was terrifying, because you didn’t know where it would strike. The V-1s were“Vengeance bombs,” reprisals for Churchill’s relentless bombing of German cities, and intended to strike the maximum terror into the hearts of Londoners.

When you think about it, aerial bombing has to be one of the most diabolical inventions of the modern age. A pilot can destroy many human habitations and human lives in one sortie without having to face them directly, and without having to get his or her hands dirty. The victims, in turn, never even get to see the face of the person who rained death upon them. It is easy for the perpetrator of the bombing to see the whole enterprise as a game. All the more so today, with the advent of remote-activated bombs and drone warfare. 

The Chinese invented gunpowder back in the 9th century and developed the rocket as a weapon in the thirteenth century, but it fell out of use—“until the English rediscovered it at the beginning of the nineteenth century” writes Sven Lindqvist, in his mind-blowing A History of Bombing (p. 1). The first bombs dropped in an aerial attack were by an Italian military officer near Turkish-controlled Tripoli, North Africa, in November, 1911.  Each of the four “bombs” was in fact a hand grenade, weighing only 2 kilos, or 4.4 pounds (p. 1-2). Contrast this with the 500-, 1,000-, and 2000-pound bombs that have been routinely dropped on the Gaza Strip over the past two and a half years. In fact, as early as April, 2024, it was estimated that the bombs dropped on Gaza since October 2023 had totaled more than 70,000 tonnes, more than the combined bomb tonnage dropped on Dresden, Hamburg, and London in the whole of the Second World War.

While in these early days, most militaries were reluctant to use this new form of warfare on civilian populations, the British had no such compunctions in their colonies. In a 2003 interview Lindqvist said, “Britain had been bombing civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Egypt, and Africa since 1919 instead of using infantry and artillery.” As his interviewer, Mats Bigert, noted, Lindqvist’s book argues that” the period between the two world wars provided, more or less, an aerial bombardment training camp for the colonial powers.”

According to Lindqvist, two things helped to lay the groundwork for the wholesale adoption of aerial bombing in the 20th century. One was the ability to imagine doing so, and this imagination was fired by a number of works of fiction in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. A second essential prerequisite for bombing fellow human beings to blazes was the ability to designate these unfortunates as savages or barbarians. The argument was circular, it seems, because “savages” could be bombed without moral scruples; but then again, “civilized” peoples could be bombed into savagery (Lindqvist, p. 2). Furthermore, bombing brutalizes the bombers themselves, turning them into savages.

As I remember, it was in the late 20th century, in the first Gulf War of 1990-1991—also known as the first space war—that remote-operated, precision-guided weapons began to be heavily employed by the United States. As a result, there was a tremendous disparity between the number of  Iraqi and U.S. casualties: some 50,000 Iraqis were killed, in contrast with only 298 American service members, and of those deaths, half were a result of “non-hostile causes.”

In the 21st century, the disparity has only grown. A month into the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran, according to the U.S.-based rights group HRANA,  3,527 people have been killed in Iran since the war began, 1,606 of whom were civilians, including at least 244 children. In contrast, 13 U.S. service members have been killed during the same period, six of whom were killed in the crash of a U.S. military aircraft. And in Israel, missiles launched from Iran and Lebanon—where Israel is waging another war—have killed 19 people. Every human death in war is a tragedy, but the disproportionality of the carnage is striking. 

It never ceases to shock me that war-makers can be so cavalier about dropping bombs on fellow human beings. Bombing an enemy seems especially easy when the enemy is made up of people of color—people seen as different from oneself in some essential way.

The term “bombs away!”, the title of this piece, was first used by bomber pilots in the 1940s when releasing their payload. It means “Here we go!, or Here goes nothing!” idiomatically,  as the speaker is doing something daring and exhilarating. Who remembers then-Presidential candidate John McCain in 2007, getting laughs from the crowd as he advocates the bombing of Iran to the tune of the Beach Boys song Barbara Ann: “Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran“? 

More recently, on March 23, 2026, the current President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces said that if the U.S couldn’t make the desired deal with Iran, “we’ll just keep bombing our little hearts out.” 

On that note, let me offer the following songs to accompany the letter B:

Bombs Away by Johnny Clegg and Savuka, a song from their December, 1989 album, Cruel, Crazy, Beautiful World, released in late-apartheid South Africa, just before Nelson Mandela was released from 27 years in prison.

Bombs Away by the English rock band, the Police, a song on their album Zenyatta Mondatta, released in 1980, at the time of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.  

And finally, as an antidote to all the bombs:

Bangladesh, by George Harrison on the double-album The Concert for Bangladesh (1971), live recordings of two August, 1971 concerts he organized in aid of the Bengali refugees of the Bangladesh liberation war (see my blog post of the same name). 

Put those bombs away!

Tell Me Another (Contents to Date)

Chronological Table of Contents

636. Anti-Vietnam War Movement

In blogs and blogging, culture, history, Immigration, Inter/Transnational, memories, Music, Politics, Stories, United States on April 2, 2026 at 3:32 am

For the month of April, participating for the 10th time in the annual A to Z Blogging Challenge, I will be endeavoring to write a short personal post every day on the subject of War and Peace—short because of time, War and Peace because of the times. To make things more bearable, I will endeavor to include music in every post.

I started school in Brookline, Massachusetts in February, 1970, immediately after we arrived in the United States. I was fifteen years old and had to take in a lot very quickly. But it was not only my life and my family’s life that was turbulent at that time. The whole country was in turmoil and I was plunged into the midst of it. The cover-up of the 1968 My Lai massacre was revealed that spring, and President Nixon expanded the massive bombing campaign in Cambodia. Vietnam continued to be bombed relentlessly. April was the worst month of the year for U.S. casualties, as 730 troops were killed, and of course thousands more lost their lives when one counts the Vietnamese civilian and military deaths on both sides. U.S. campuses erupted in protest at the May 4th and May 15th killings of student anti-war protesters at Kent State and Jackson State Universities. Students in my new high school took a vote to go on strike, and teach-ins and protests gave me a rapid introduction to this violent new country which was to be my home.

I use the term “anti-war movement,” but in fact the U.S. Congress never declared war on Vietnam. President Johnson (LBJ) used the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin Resolution to get congressional troop authorization for this “conflict.” But make no mistake: it was a war, a devastating war, which left some 3.5 million people dead, most of them Vietnamese civilians, leaving its mark on the survivors and indeed, on everyone who lived through the era. It lasted from 1954-1975, with the U.S. involved for most of that time, but engaged in increasingly heavy bombing campaigns (beginning with Operation Rolling Thunder) and ground combat from 1964-1973. April, 2025 marked 50 years since the fall of Saigon, and here you can listen to a conversation on the subject with the Vietnamese American writer Viet Thanh Nguyen, author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel, The Sympathizer. 

Although the United States public were largely indifferent to the war in its early years, they became much more engaged after 1965, when large numbers of men began to be deployed to Vietnam, growing from 23,000 to 183,000 in a single year. Even then, a majority of Americans supported the war. They were fiercely anti-Communist in the 1950s and 1960s and had been sold on the Domino Theory, used by U.S. governments throughout the Cold War to justify American military interventions into the affairs of other nations. It wasn’t until large number of young men started coming home in body bags, cover-ups came to light revealing that the U.S. had massacred innocent civilians and invaded Cambodia, and the police at home shot and killed students protesting the war, that the tide began to turn. Vietnam Veterans against the War had an important impact on high school and college campuses–including Brookline High, where they showed a powerful documentary filmed in Vietnam at one of our teach-ins, and later testified on Capitol Hill. It also came to light that a disproportionate percentage of the 40,000 young men who were being drafted every month were African American and economically disadvantaged. The student movement began to link the issues of racism and poverty at home to imperialism and economical exploitation abroad, thereby diversifying and strengthening the movement. 

Coming from outside the U.S., and specifically from India which had taken a position of non-alignment in the Cold War and had quite recently won independence from colonial rule, I was predisposed to join the opposition to the Vietnam War. I also suspect that arriving in the U.S. as the anti-war movement was reaching its peak had something to do with it. That Spring of 1970, students from nearly 900 high schools, colleges and universities across the country walked out of classes, with some 100 shutting down altogether. My high school was in the thick of all this turmoil, which came to a head just weeks after I first set foot in it. 

Music was another force that shaped my sensibilities about the war, before I knew anything about the anti-war movement. The year before I came to the U.S. the Beatles song, The Ballad of John and Yoko, featuring the couple’s very public honeymoon bed-in for peace, had been number one in the British pop charts for three weeks. (It was also banned by the BBC.) John’s solo single, “Give Peace a Chance,” was also issued in 1969 and became an anthem of the anti-war movement. For Christmas that year my mother had given me my very first record album, Donovan’s Greatest Hits, which included a cover of Buffy Sainte-Marie’s 1963 song, “Universal Soldier.” Woodstock, the biggest ever open-air music festival, had been held in 1969, and I had missed it. However, the concert movie was released in March, 1969, and the triple album in May. Needless to say, we teenagers went to see the movie and listened to the album again and again. In it, Country Joe McDonald led the crowd in his I Feel Like I’m Fixin’ to Die Rag. Rest In Peace, Joe McDonald.

For the rest of this month of posts on war and peace I will close each one with abecedarian links to one or two songs.
For the letter A, I choose:
Bob Dylan’s All Along the Watchtower as sung by Jimi Hendrix (released in 1967 and 1968 respectively); and
The Beatles’ Across the Universe (first recorded in 1968 and released in December 1969 and May 1970). Neither explicitly mentions the war, but both are imbued with the spirit of that time. 

Tell Me Another (Contents to Date)

Chronological Table of Contents

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started