Preparation for future wars

I’ve talked about the failure of the antiwar movement before, in that it failed to stop the War on Iraq from happening, despite the protests held by tens of millions of people all over the world in the months before the start of the war. One common complaint heard at the time was that the protests came too late, that the troops were already in place, the preperations made and that therefore war was inevitable. I’m not sure this was entirely true; the protests did keep the Netherlands out of the war proper, though sadly not out of the occupation and I can see that if the Stop the War campaign had made different tactical and strategical choices in 2003 it might’ve kept the JUK out as well. There is however a kernel of truth in the idea that anti-war protests usually come too late, when the war is already started or preparations are so advanced stopping is impossible. It doesn’t help that for the most part anti-war movements are created largely adhoc, in response to a threatening war, that they die down in times of “peace”.

When you stop to think about it, it’s absurd that we live in a time when it’s assumed normal that even a country like the Netherlands, with no real enemies nearby is spending millions if not billions of euros each year on defence. Moreover we’re spending it not to defend our own country, but to enable our army to invade and occupy other countries. During the nineties, while our attention was elsewhere, the Dutch army transformed itself from a tank heavy Cold War style “defend the Fulda Gap” army into a lean, mean humanitarian intervention fighting machine, laying the foundations for getting involved first in Yugoslavia, then Kosovo and finally Iraq and Afghanistan. That’s the status quo, in which criticism of defence spending is seldom on a fundamental level, but mainly on issues of cost or choice of spending.

What brought this to mind is the news that the UK ministry of Defence is going ahead with a thirteen billion pound tanker investment, in which it gets over a dozen new tanker/transport planes. These planes are not needed for the defense of the United Kingdom, certainly not in that number. Instead they’ll be invaluable for the next Iraq or Afghanistan… That’s why we need an anti-war movement that doesn’t just mobilise when war is imminent, but that opposes defence spending from the start. If we have an army that’s capable of “humanitarian interventions”, interventions is what we get. We need to take away these tools that enable our armies to start wars. We need to stop the preperations for future wars, not just the current war.

The Communist Manifesto

Originally written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the revolution year of 1848, The Communist Manifesto is not so much a theoretical treatise on communism as a call to arm. Dated in parts, but still very relevant in general principles. You can read the 1888 English edition on this very website, but perhaps you’ll like it better in cartoon form? Proof positive that you can do more than just “Jive Bunny” with stock cartoon footage, here’s the Disneyised version of the Manifesto:

Deadhouse Gates – Steven Erikson

Cover of Deadhouse Gates


Deadhouse Gates
Steven Erikson
941 pages
published in 2000

Deadhouse Gates is the second book in Erikson’s Malazan Book of the Fallen epic fantasy series of ten projected volumes. Whereas the previous volume, Gardens of the Moon had a severe case of everything but the kitchen sink plotting, this is much more focussed. Of course, it’s still a 900+ pages epic fantasy brick with several interlocking storylines, not all of which are wrapped up in this installment. You have to expect a certain amount of complexity.

This second book of the Malazan cycle takes place on a completely different continent from the first, with a largely new cast of characters, some of which are however related to the people we got to know in Gardens of the Moon. The central story revolves around a religious revolts on the subcontinent of the Seven Cities, one of the oldest conquests of the Malazan empire. For decades there has been a prophecy doing the rounds about the return of the Whirlwind, which would cleanse the Seven Cities and drive the Malazan out of the continent. Now it has started and most of the Seven Cities, apart from the capital of Aren have fallen.

Read more

Victory for Superman’s creators

Via Howling Curmudgeons comes the news that the heirs of Jerry Siegel have been given back part of the copyright on Superman:

The ruling specifically upheld the Seigels’ copyright in the Superman material published in Detective Comics’ Action Comics Vol. 1. The extent to which later iterations of the character are derived from that original was not determined by the judge.

In an unusually detailed narrative, the judge’s 72-page order described how Mr. Siegel and Mr. Shuster, as teenagers at Glenville High School in Cleveland, became friends and collaborators on their school newspaper in 1932. They worked together on a short story, “The Reign of the Superman,” in which their famous character first appeared not as hero, but villain.

By 1937, the pair were offering publishers comic strips in which the classic Superman elements — cape, logo and Clark Kent alter-ego — were already set. When Detective Comics bought 13 pages of work for its new Action Comics series the next year, the company sent Mr. Siegel a check for $130, and received in return a release from both creators granting the company rights to Superman “to have and hold forever,” the order noted.

In the late 1940s, a referee in a New York court upheld Detective Comics’ copyright, prompting Mr. Siegel and Mr. Shuster to drop their claim in exchange for $94,000. More than 30 years later, DC Comics (the successor to Detective Comics) gave the creators each a $20,000-per-year annuity that was later increased to $30,000. In 1997, however, Mrs. Siegel and her daughter served copyright termination notices under provisions of a 1976 law that permits heirs, under certain circumstances, to recover rights to creations.

What tends to be airbrushed out of the careful corporate histories of DC and Marvel, the socalled Big Two, is how much of their succes was built on outright stealing. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster losing control of Superman is only the best known example, but there’s also the way Kirby was treated by Marvel, were he lost control not just of his creations, but of his artwork as well! All those well known and well loved creations DC and Marvel pride themselves on were created by people who largely had to sign away their rights to them on the back of the checks they got for their work. Onetime payments only; toyalties were unknown in the comics industry until the early eighties…

It’s unfortunate that Siegel himself did not live to see this victory, but at least his heirs can now share some of the profits DC has made out of their father’s and husband’s creation.

Wilders in trouble –for copyright infringement?

wilders picking his nose

So Fitna debuted yesterday to an universal reception of yawns, though of course there was much navel gazing in the Dutch newspapers today. One thing everybody noticed is how little original material there was in the movie, much of it being news footage from various events like the September 11 attacks, the Madrid bombings etc. There was some speculation online on whether or not all those images were properly licensed. Well, we got our answer: The Danish cartoonist whose Mohammed cartoon was used in the opening and ending parts of Fitna is preparing to sue for copyright infringement:

The Danish Union of Journalists said Friday it will sue Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders for copyright infringement for using a Danish cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad in his anti-Quran film.

The union said it will file a lawsuit on behalf of Kurt Westergaard, the cartoonist who made a controversial drawing in 2005 depicting Islam’s prophet wearing a turban shaped like a bomb.

“Wilders has the right to make his movie but he has no permission to use my drawing,” Westergaard said in a phone interview with Denmark’s TV2. Westergaard has been living under police protection since an alleged plot to murder him was uncovered last month.

“This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. It is all about copyright,” Westergaard said. “I won’t accept my cartoon being taken out of its original context and used in a completely different one.”

So if that wasn’t licensed, how much of the other images were? Was this perhaps why Wilders was asking his supporters to send money, earlier this week?