Welcome to
GlobalEyes

Your Weekly Window
in the Mirror of the World
Spartacus R.
The editor of Global Africa Pocket News and author of "Violation" and "The Maãt Mystery" takes another look at the world.

It is interesting to see how some of us are satisfied to cuss each other out for voting or for not voting. At the end of the day those Africans who vote will swear that they have done something to change the status quo for our benefit and those who do not vote and see no value in voting for one crooked politician after another will swear that if everyone abstained from voting this oppressive system we call democracy will come crashing down on itself. With the obvious risk of offending and alienating everyone, I would say that they are both wrong. Choosing to take one type of poison instead of another doesn't improve your health nor does ignoring someone who is hell bent on killing you cause them to commit suicide.

A few years ago I wrote: "With the mass export of "democracy", (the latest Global Europe export commodity in the exploitation war), many Global Africans (Black people) are now feeling proud and elated that we have finally had the opportunity in South Africa (Azania) for example, to officially give up control of our lives by voting. .... Giving someone else the right to make decisions on our behalf may free us from the burden of possibly making the wrong decisions but it also removes any possibility of us making the right decisions for ourselves. It does not make us freer. If we retain the right to make and execute all decisions about our lives we also retain the right to correct our own mistakes."  (From Leadership & Self Determination) I'm not saying there is something wrong with people who vote. For me their reasons for voting and who they vote for, given our situation, is more important. Many people don't vote because they are asleep or they just don't care.

Before we go any further with the argument for and against voting as Africans we have to ask ourselves the simple question: "Is there or is there not a war going on?" If your answer is "No" then it really doesn't matter who you vote for. It is clear that many among us feel that voting is an absolutely necessary way of staking your claim to be a responsible member of a free democratic society. And many of those who feel that way will only vote for someone approved by the Jews or some other kind of European (White) person. They are usually the ones who can't see any war...

If your answer is "Yes, there is a war going on" the part you play in that war will be determined by among other things whether you vote or not, why and who you vote for if you do.

If you recognise that there is a war going on and your enemy tells you that the problems you and your people experience can be resolved by voting for someone he has carefully chosen to represent his interests, you would say "No thanks". Right?

I would say no thanks too, not just because he or she is representing my enemy's interests but more because voting for representational government is relinquishing my right to participate more fully in the decisions which are made about my life and my environment.  This is the case whether the office is local or national. The only difference is in scale.

In a society at war where representational electoral politics is the way in which people are governed, abstention is neither the answer. Even if three out of a thousand people voted the controllers will just continue with business as usual. If we are to win this war it has to be fought on every level in every arena including the electoral arena. But we must always be clear that we are fighting a war because even when we are independent of the enemy they can still be present through their agents.

A few years ago I initiated a process which resulted in the selection by the African community in London of the first independent African candidate to run for office in the British parliamentary elections. The campaign to get Reverend Hewie Andrew elected proved to be so effective that two individuals (David Muir working for the Labour party and Lee Jasper working for a less visible agency) were employed by our enemy to sabotage and undermine our campaign. That is the only time I have ever voted. Where the candidate was chosen from among us by us to run on our behalf.

So to those of you who don't vote because you can't see any one who you believe can represent your interests, I say put up your own candidates. Starting first with the local elections and then, having set up the machinery, go national. But again you have to be very careful you are not being abused by disgruntled wanabees like this same Lee Jasper who is now threatening to run as an independent candidate in the London Assembly if he is not chosen as the token Nigger to stand on behalf of the Labour party.

Essentially there is no difference between the US and UK situation where the person you end up voting for is chosen by a small group of people who have little or nothing in common with you and whose vested interests are diametrically opposed to yours.

It is amazing how easy it is to mislead even the most steadfast of people by tugging at their emotional strings. See how easy it is for example, to get unanimous agreement on censorship by screaming "Child porn".

I hear the argument that too many of our people have died fighting for our right to vote for us not to value it. I agree with Sister Ifama's statement on the issue when she said: "First of all people did not die for my right to vote, they died trying to exercise "their" right to vote.  This is not in dishonor of my people who have died exercising their right thus ensuring my not being harassed as I exercise my "right". Secondly, my "right" to vote is embedded in the constitution of the united snakes. So if it is my "right" I have a right to exercise that right.  I choose not to until there is someone that "I" feel is worthy of it." (from email sent to the Harambee, Black Power List by Ifama Jackson). But, with all due respect to their memory and in celebration of their courage, I would go a little further and say that those who died fighting for the right to vote were essentially people who had lost sight of the fact that they were and still are AT WAR. They fought for the right to help choose which individual or group of individuals should be in charge of the enemy's war campaigns against us.

Suppose the teams at the bottom of the basketball, baseball or football leagues and their supporters demanded that they have a say in who manages the teams at the top of the leagues. Would that make much sense to you? OK. Suppose, after a lot of fighting and dying, the owners of the top teams presented their 2 or 3 favoured managers and asked everyone to vote for the best manager. Would you be satisfied with that, that things had changed? Would that mean the teams at the bottom of the league and their supporters would get a better deal or would stop getting thrashed?

Those who argue for voting, citing the sacrifices of our Ancestors, are saying that because our enemy now allow us to participate in rubber stamping their choice of managers or commanders, we should be grateful and happy. I disagree. I believe that the war is not over until we have won the final battle and taken back all that has been stolen from us - with interest. Until that time everything we do must be viewed from the perspective that we are still at war and our enemies will not give us anything which will work against their interests. Some of our people believe that we lost the war a long time ago when we were enslaved but the war is not over yet and we will win. We have the power to win. We are the power.

May the Ancestors guide and protect you all on our way.
Love and life
SR