The following is from Agnieszka Szpila’s Hexes of the Deadwood Forest. Szpila is one of Poland’s most critically acclaimed, bestselling, and transgressive writers. The Polish edition of Hexes of the Deadwood Forest
was longlisted for the Nike Award, the country’s premiere literary
award, and will be published in at least nine countries around the
world.
Concerning the Flaming-Fucking-Fury, a Foreshadowing of Something Yet to Come
In a market square with church towers rising high above the roofs of
magnificent houses and a huge, ornately decorated town hall, people were
strolling about, dressed in old-fashioned clothing-women in wide
ankle-length skirts and white embroidered blouses with ruffs at the neck
and puffed sleeves stitched with silk thread, and men in long trousers
tucked into boots topped with silver buckles or in short breeches
revealing stockings that clung tightly to their calves and festive
shirts, waistcoats, and long colorful coats, with elegant hats on their
heads. Along the winding streets paved with cobblestones, shaded by the
wealthy burghers’ three-story townhouses that had Dutch-style granaries
on the upper floors and beautiful red-tiled roofs on which pigeons and
sparrows contentedly perched for hours on end, cats were sauntering
lazily, heading toward the market to try to snatch some scraps from the
butchers’ stalls.
The hustle and bustle in the market square and the constantly flowing
waves of people transporting wares of all kinds in wooden carts –
squawking fowl, patterned fabrics, dried cuts of meat, and jugs so full
of milk that they sloshed around, splashing some of the passersby – gave
no indication that, apart from all the activity at the market, there
was anything extraordinary happening in the town.
But there was an increased number of guards in the square compared to
a typical market day, and this sent a shiver of uneasiness through the
crowds.
Suddenly, bells began to ring in all the churches. They tolled
unevenly, which caused even more anxiety throughout the town, cutting as
it did like a wedge through the safe everyday life of the place.
As the US-Israeli war on Iran reshapes regional alignments, uneasy allies like Abu Dhabi and Islamabad are sliding into open confrontation over loyalty, leverage, and survival.
The war on Iran has
not only ignited a direct confrontation between Tehran and the
Washington-backed Israeli campaign, but it has also torn open quieter
rivalries across West Asia. One of the clearest fault lines now runs
between the UAE and Pakistan, where a year of simmering tensions has
given way to open strategic divergence.
Over the past year,
relations between Abu Dhabi and Islamabad have steadily frayed. But the
rupture accelerated once the US–Israeli assault on Iran began, followed
by a sudden Emirati demand that Pakistan repay a $3.5-billion loan dating back to 2018.
Abu Dhabi has publicly acknowledged Pakistan’s recent role in attempting to mediate
between Tehran and Washington and bring about an already violated
ceasefire. Yet behind closed doors, it has refused to identify the
aggressors driving the conflict and the resulting global economic shock.
This selective silence reflects a broader alignment with US priorities,
even as it risks destabilizing its own regional partnerships.
The divergence came to a head
during a strategic consultation in Riyadh on 19 March. The meeting
nearly collapsed after the UAE, alongside Kuwait, Jordan, and Bahrain,
blocked Pakistan’s push to include a condemnation of Israeli aggression.
Instead, Abu Dhabi advanced a far more extreme position – advocating
the defeat of Iran “by any means necessary,” while avoiding any
criticism of Washington or Tel Aviv.
According to Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir, writing in the Urdu-language newspaper Jhang,
Emirati officials went as far as suggesting the potential use of
nuclear weapons against Iran. Lebanon, Turkiye, and Pakistan pushed back
forcefully, warning that any such escalation would not stop at Iran’s
borders but would inevitably engulf the Persian Gulf monarchies
themselves.
Only after last-minute Saudi intervention was the final communiqué amended to include language condemning Israeli aggression.
Mediation or managed pressure?
Pakistan,
alongside Turkiye and Egypt, has stepped forward as part of a loose
mediation track aimed at halting the war. All three states maintain ties
to Washington, yet attempt to position themselves as intermediaries
capable of delivering a ceasefire acceptable to Tehran.
Islamabad’s proposal outlined a two-phase plan.
The first calls for an immediate ceasefire and the reopening of the
Strait of Hormuz. The second envisions a broader settlement – dubbed the
“Islamabad Accord” – spanning 15 to 20 days of negotiations, during
which Iran would limit its nuclear program to civilian use in exchange
for sanctions relief, the release of frozen assets, and a new regional
security framework for Hormuz.
A ceasefire in Lebanon was announced on Thursday by US President Donald Trump, but its reality tells a very different story. IMAGE Design/ Palestine Chronicle
The balance is finally shifting. For the first time in decades, the trajectory of history is no longer bending in Israel’s favor.
A ceasefire in Lebanon was announced
on Thursday by US President Donald Trump, but its reality tells a very
different story. The ceasefire was not the product of American
diplomacy, nor Israeli strategic calculation. It was imposed—largely as a
result of sustained Iranian pressure.
Washington, Tel Aviv, and their
allies—including some within Lebanon itself—will continue to deny this
reality. Acknowledging Iran’s role would mean admitting that a historic
precedent has been set: for the first time, forces opposing the United
States and Israel have succeeded in imposing conditions on both.
This is not a minor development. It
is a strategic rupture. But it is not the only fundamental shift now
underway: Israel’s very approach to war and diplomacy is itself
changing.
After failing to secure victory
through overwhelming violence, Israel is increasingly relying on
coercive diplomacy to impose political outcomes.
Over the past two to three decades,
this Israeli strategy has become unmistakably clear: achieving through
diplomacy what it has failed to impose on the battlefield.
‘Diplomacy’ as War
Israeli ‘diplomacy’ does not conform
to the conventional meaning of the term. It is not negotiation between
equals, nor a genuine pursuit of peace. Rather, it is diplomacy fused
with violence: assassinations, sieges, blockades, political coercion,
and the systematic manipulation of internal divisions within opposing
societies. It is diplomacy as an extension of war by other means.
Likewise, Israel’s conception of the
‘battlefield’ is fundamentally different. The deliberate targeting of
civilians and civilian infrastructure is not incidental, nor merely
‘collateral damage’; it is central to the strategy itself.
Nowhere is this clearer than in Gaza.
Following the ongoing genocide, vast swathes of Gaza have been reduced
to rubble, with estimates indicating that around 90 percent of the whole
of Gaza has been destroyed. According to the Gaza Ministry of Health, women and children consistently account for roughly 70 percent of all of Gaza’s casualties.
This is not collateral damage. It is
the deliberate destruction of a civilian population, an act of genocide
that is designed to force mass displacement and remake the political and
demographic reality in Israel’s favor.
The same logic extends beyond Gaza.
It shapes Israel’s wars in Lebanon against Hezbollah and its broader
confrontation with Iran.
The United States, Israel’s principal
ally, has historically operated within a similar paradigm. From Vietnam
to Iraq, civilian populations, infrastructure, and even the environment itself have borne the brunt of American warfare.
Diplomatic momentum builds in Islamabad despite sensationalism and skepticism from Indian media
As the Pakistan-mediated ‘Islamabad Talks’
between the United States and Iran began on Saturday, the world watched
closely except for some “evil eyes” across the border still clinging to
propaganda over nuance.
Consistent with a long-standing pattern of criticising Pakistan,
Indian broadcast media and its hyperventilating anchors attempted to
undermine Islamabad’s efforts, and even appeared to cast doubt on the
viability of the Islamabad talks. In doing so, they risked further
eroding whatever little credibility they had and invited criticism for
sensationalism.
This approach aligns with the broader policy stance articulated by
Narendra Modi, who, after his first election as India’s prime minister
in 2014, stated his intention to make Pakistan a “pariah” globally over
its alleged support for terrorism.
Former US diplomat Jeffery Gunter did not hold back when an Indian
anchor pressed him on whether US Vice President JD Vance would be safe
in Pakistan.
Giving them what can only be described as a televised reality check,
Gunter said, “I feel like the schoolteacher about to discipline each and
every one of you.”
He did not stop there.
“This is about lives. This is about livelihood. This is about
expensive gasoline for everyday Indians, everyday Americans,” he said
during a live broadcast on India’s Times Now TV, before calling out the
drama unfolding in front of him.
Turning a serious geopolitical moment into a Pakistan versus India
shouting match, he added, was “actually quite embarrassing” and
“shameful”.
You could almost hear the collective detention bell ring.
Because right now, all eyes are on Pakistan. Some are watching with
curiosity, others with cautious hope that maybe, just maybe, peace might
actually stand a chance. And yet, there are some “evil eyes” in the
room too, two of them very visibly, Israel and India.
Both appear unsettled by the direction things are taking. Israel
launched strikes in Lebanon almost immediately after Prime Minister
Shehbaz Sharif spoke of a ceasefire, while across the border, Indian
media slipped into overdrive, spinning narratives before facts had time
to land.
Prime-time debates on leading Indian news channels, including Aaj
Tak, Republic TV, and Times Now, have expressed surprise and concern
over Pakistan’s emerging role as a diplomatic bridge between the Middle
East and the West, noting that it challenges the long-held perception of
Pakistan’s international isolation.
But this ceasefire is beyond this. If the conflict spirals, the
fallout will not politely stay confined to one region. It will travel to
South Asia, to Europe, and well beyond, bringing energy shocks, rising
inflation, disrupted trade, and humanitarian crises, the kind of domino
effect no one really signs up for. In moments like this, urgency is
expected, not theatre.
Yet instead of restraint, what we saw was performance, where urgency
was the need of the hour, but parts of the Indian media chose spectacle
instead.
AI models derive their assumptions from English-language sources based in the United States. IMAGE/ Weiquan Lin/Moment via Getty Images
A friend in Indonesia recently told me about a conversation he had
with ChatGPT. He had typed a question in Indonesian – Bahasa Indonesia –
about how to handle a difficult family dispute. The chatbot responded
fluently, in perfect Indonesian, with advice about communication
strategies and conflict resolution. The grammar was flawless. The tone
was appropriate. And yet something felt off.
What the AI offered was advice rooted in American cultural assumptions:
prioritize your own preferences, communicate directly, and if family
members don’t respect your boundaries, consider cutting them off.
The response was in Indonesian but shaped by values that centered individual autonomy over the consensus-building, social harmony and collective family dynamics that tend to matter more in Indonesian social life.
My friend was skeptical enough to notice the mismatch and mention it
to me. Many users might not. That is what prompted my research,
published in the International Review of Modern Sociology,
into a pattern I found across major AI systems: Even when they were
fluent in several languages, the language models retained their Western
worldview. I call this “epistemological persistence.”
Fluency is not the same as understanding
I have studied Indonesian society,
media and culture for more than 30 years. That gives me a particular
vantage point on a problem that reaches well beyond Indonesia: large
language models – LLMs – like ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini can now speak
dozens of languages with remarkable fluency. That fluency creates the
impression that AI understands local cultures.
Producing grammatically correct Indonesian, Arabic, Swahili or Hindi,
however, does not change the underlying worldview through which these
systems reason. It does not alter how they think about people,
relationships, responsibility or what counts as a good outcome.
Censorship is a vicious cycle. While Israel may never have concerned itself with film certification in India, Indian authorities showing their willing to censor films in the interest of a foreign nation may change the expectation.
New Delhi: More than 90 filmmakers, journalists,
academics and activists from India, Israel and elsewhere have issued a
statement condemning the Central Board of Film Certification’s ban on the Oscar-winning documentary The Voice of Hind Rajab in
India. This ban, they argue, “continues a worrying pattern of Indian
censorship of Palestinian and progressive Israeli voice”.
Signatories include actors Naseeruddin Shah and Ratna Pathak Shah, filmmakers Michal Aviad, Payal Kapadia, Ilan Ziv and Anant Patwardhan, and academics Akeel Bilgrami, Lynne Segal and J.P. Loo.
The full statement is reproduced below.
Banning The Voice of Hind Rajab threatens freedom of expression in India and Israel.
We are, variously, Israelis, Indians, filmmakers, journalists, academics and activists. We write in support of pluralism, democracy and freedom of expression in India and in Israel—for both Jews and Palestinians. And we condemn the Central Board of Film Certification’s invocation of Indo-Israeli relations to justify its banning of The Voice of Hind Rajab.
The ban continues a worrying pattern of Indian censorship of
Palestinian and progressive Israeli voices. In January, Einat Weizman
and an Israeli theatre troupe were denied visas for the International Theatre Festival of Kerala. And in December last year, the Union government censored pro-Palestinian films at the International Film Festival of Kerala, including All that’s left of you and Once upon a time in Gaza.
We wish to make three points about the implications of the ban for
freedom of expression, not only in India but also in Israel.
Dermatologists lack the cultural knowledge to treat alopecia, or hair loss, in Black and African patients.
Alopecia, or
hair loss, has many underlying causes and affects millions of people in
the U.S. and around the world. Dermatologists have the right medical
training to treat the myriad types of hair loss, but the field, and the
medical community at large, have failed to address the specific needs of
Black and African people. For Black people, hair loss is more than just
a medical condition — it’s a deeply personal and cultural issue.
Black and African people are underrepresented in dermatological research, especially in alopecia studies.
This research gap creates a lack of understanding of the condition
among doctors and the lack of cultural connection or knowledge needed to
diagnose and treat Black and African patients.
To better understand the experience of Black people with alopecia, I
conducted surveys asking people their opinions around hair and
interviewed 10 people about their experiences with hair loss. The study,
part of an undergraduate research project, was small but informative.
The surveys showed — to no surprise — the value of hair to Black
identities. The interviews revealed that common reasons for hair loss
were hair straightening, the use of tight hairstyles, and damaging hair
products.
Among the interviewees, only one person had visited a dermatologist,
and one other had gone to their primary care doctor for hair loss. The
rest of the interviewees said they had sought advice from social media,
barbers, family, friends, hairstylists, and braiders. I asked the
participants why they did not seek medical or dermatological advice, and
some they said that they believed that dermatologists did not
understand the unique needs of Black or Afro-textured hair.
Half of the study participants specifically stated that they
preferred to seek out advice from a person who looks like them and who
also understands the cultural nuances surrounding hair. For medical
providers to better serve Black and African patients, dermatologists and
health care providers need better representation and to establish a
cultural connection with the community.
To shift the blame
away from Black hair practices and traditions, it is paramount to
include more people of African and Black descent into research studies.
They can do so by learning about the historical and cultural significance of pre-colonial African societies,
where hair signified more than aesthetics. In pre-colonial Zulu, Xhosa,
Akan, Masai, and Yoruba societies, hair could signify religious
spirituality, social status, or community belonging. During colonialism
and enslavement, the imposition of White Eurocentric beauty standards
encouraged Black and African women not to express their natural hair. As
a result, in the 1900s, more Black and African women relaxed and straightened their hair — a practice that comes with a price. Besides causing chemical damage to hair and potentially harming personal health,
straightening leads to loss of connection to Black and African culture.
Hair signifies a heritage that has thrived in the face of subjugation
and racial violence for centuries.
Barkat Ali Ghulam Hussain Virani (1923 – 1994) was born near Bhawnagar, Gujarat. He was a poet, playwright, and novelist who wrote in the Gujarati language. He wrote his first ghazal on September 1, 1941.
Barkat Virani was inspired by Qismat Qureshi who suggested two pen names: “Bezar” and “Befam”, Virani opted for the second and became “Befam”.
On poet/novelist Shayda‘s advise, he moved to Bombay. Befam met All India Radio’s (AIR) Z. A. Bukhari <1> at a mushaira, (gathering of poets where they recite their poems in front of an audience), Bukhari helped him to join AIR.
In 1952, he married Shayda’s daughter Ruqaiyya.
Befam was also associated with Gujarati cinema. He passed away in 1994. One of the couplets from his poem Nahoti:
raDyA “Befam” sauv mArA maraN per ej kAraN thi hato mAro.j ae avsar ne mAri hAjri nahoti
on my death, all cried “Befam” just for this reason <2> it was an event about me and I was not present
“Befam” toy keTluN thAki javuN paDyuN nahiN to jivanno mArg chhe ghar thi qabar sudhi
how much “Befam”, I had to get tired tho life’s road is only from home to grave
Then Udhas recited “Befam”‘s famous poem Nayan ne bandh raakhine mein jiyare tamne joya chhe with a muktak. Many poets use Muktak which is a four line introduction to the poem.
Udhas doesn’t recite all the couplets but has added two new couplets in his rendition. The ghazal on Rekhta Gujarati website has more couplets but not the two heard in Udhas’ recitation. It also doesn’t have the muktak.
A video to some of the couplets of this ghazal set to a combined Bharatnatyam and Kathak dance is given at the end.
So here is the four-line Muktak followed by the poem. Musi is by Appu.
Manhar Udhas rendered it well in a very sweet voice.
Nayan ne bandh raakhine mein jiyare tamne joya chhe
ashru viraha ni rAt nA khADi shakyo nahiN <3> pAchhA nayan nA noorne vAdi shakyo nahiN huN jene kAj andh thayo roy royee ne AvyA tiyAre aene nihAdi shakyo nahiN
nayan ne bandh rAkhine meiN jiyAre tamne joyA chhe tame chho aenA kartA pan vadhAre tamne joyA chhe
bijA jemaj tame pan aene pAgaltA gani lesho nathi hAre chhatAN meiN mari hAre tamne joyA chhe
paraNtu arth eno ae nathi ke rAt viti ga.ee nahiN to meiN ghaNi vera savAre tamne joya chhe
nathi ae pan have kaiN jaN kiyAre tamne jovAno nathi ae pan have kaiN yAd kiyare tamne joyA chhe
nahiNtar Avi rite to tare nahiN lAsh daryA maN mane lAge chhe ke aene kinAre tamne joyA chhe
mane nahi pan hati tamne.j ae becheni darshanni paDyA chho eklA jiyAre meiN tamne joya chhe
rutu ekaj hati pan rang nahoto Apno ekaj mane sehra.ae joyA chhe bahAre tamne joyA chhe
tame ho ke na ho, paDto nathi ka.eeN fer dushTi mAN ujAse joya chhe emaj andhkAre tamne joya chhe
ha.ve mAra jivanmAN ae kadi chamki nahiN shakshe ke Aa mArA muqaddarnA sitAre tamne joya chhe
gani tamnej manzil etlA mAte to bhatkuN chhuN huN thAkyo chhuN to ek ek utAre tamney joYa chhe
nivaran chho ke karan, nA paDi aeni khabar kaN.ye khabar chhe ej ke man.nA munjhAre tamne joyA chhe
surA pidhA pachhini chhe Aa mArA bhAnni kakshA meiN mArA kaifmAN mArA khumAre tamne joyA chhe
haqiqat mAN ju.oto aeyee ek sapnu hatu mAruN khuli ANkhe meiN mArA gharnA dware tamne joyA chhe
Keeping my eyes shut, when I have seen you
I could not stop tears of separation at night I could not tolerate any more light the one for whom I wept so much and went blind when she came, I could not look at her
with closed eyes , I still felt you you are much more than when I have seen you <4>
like others, you too would call this madness being not with me, yet with me I have seen you
it doesn’t mean the night has passed away as often in the morning I have seen you
now not even I know when I’ll be seeing you now I don’t even remember when I have seen you
otherwise the corpse wouldn’t float like this in a river I think on the river bank it must have seen you
not me, it was you who was restless for a sight when you were alone then I have seen you
the season was same but our color was not the same the desert saw me, where as the spring saw you
whether you’re there or not, it’s irrelevant to my vision in the light saw you and in the darkness too
in my life, she’ll never be able to shine again because the star of my fortune, has seen you
I considered you my destination, that’s why I am wandering I’m exhausted, at every place I stayed, I have seen you
whether you’re the cure or the cause, I couldn’t figure out the only thing I know is that mental unease has seen you
this is the state of my senses, that post alcohol consumption in my intoxication, my inebriated state has seen you
realistically looking, that one was my dream with open eyes, at my doorstep I have seen you
<1> Z.A. (Zulfiqar Ali) Bukhari started with All India Radio Delhi during British rule and was later made Station Director at AIR Akashvani. In 1939, he was transferred to Bombay. After 1947, he moved to the newly created Pakistan and became the first director-general of Radio Pakistan. But in 1959, Pakistan’s first military dictator General Ayub Khan forced him into retirement>
Burhanuddin Hassan, in his book Pas-i-Pardah (Behind the Scene) (p. 38) writes:
“When Ayub Khan arrived at the broadcasting house for his first address to the nation, he immediately showed his disapproval for Z.A. Bukhari. Perhaps, he had found Bukhari overconfident or perhaps the latter had unwittingly offended him. Soon afterwards, Bukhari was sent into forced early retirement. His old friend, Syed Rashid Ahmed, who had succeeded him, could not survive either. Radio Pakistan was soon controlled by a bunch of civil servants who could live up to government’s expectation in running its affairs.
“Thus, Radio Pakistan, hitherto a centre for excellence of art and culture, was reduced to a subsidiary division of the information ministry. The news bulletins carried speeches and statements by government officials, and press notes from the PID (Press Information Department).”
<2> In Gujarati, befam means un-reigned, uncontrollable. By putting Befam next to radyA (cried), the poet is playing with the words — implying that people cried uncontrollably.
<3> Viraha means separation from lover.
<4> Here the poet is referring to the inner beauty.
B. R. Gowani can be reached at brgowani@hotmail.com
Image from the cover of Nathi Ngubane’s Malcolm X in Gaza: A Coloring Book.
“The ever-scheming European imperialists wisely placed
Israel where she could geographically divide the Arab world…and also
divide the Africans against the Asians.”
In September 1964, during an extensive tour of Africa and
West Asia, Malcolm X visited the Gaza Strip. Malcolm’s time in Gaza was
brief. He arrived there from Egypt on September 5th and left the
following day at noon, returning to Cairo. Yet the brevity of Malcolm’s
visit to Gaza was countered by the fullness and intensity of his
experience there. He visited the Khan Younis refugee camp, created in
1949 to hold Palestinian’s dispossessed from their land following the Nakba.
He prayed at the mosque and broke bread with religious leaders, and
visited Gaza’s parliamentary building and a local hospital. Malcolm also
met with the Palestinian poet and librarian Harun Hashem Rashid, born
in the Gaza Strip, whose firsthand accounts of the violence of zionism,
and whose poem, “We Must Return,”
on Palestinians returning to their lands deeply moved him. Malcolm
transcribed Rashid’s poem in his diary and, less than days after his
visit, Malcolm’s impressions of Gaza took shape in a remarkable essay
indicting zionism and defending the Palestinian cause.
Titled “Zionist Logic,” Malcolm’s essay was one of a
handful of essays (including “Racism: the cancer that is destroying
America” and “The Negro’s Fight,”) that he published in the Cairo-based
English-language newspaper, the Egyptian Gazette. This essay has been reprinted and cited extensively since it first appeared, including in the Militant and Socialist Viewpoint.
For good reason. Malcolm describes the geopolitical and geo-economic
rationales for zionism in scathingly precise fashion. He describes
“Israeli Zionists” as those who “religiously believe their Jewish God
has chosen them to replace the outdated European colonialism with a new
form of colonialism.” He also makes the case for a Third World
anti-imperialist alliance to defeat zionism.
“Zionist Logic” also demonstrates both Malcolm’s
extraordinary intellectual gifts, and the degree to which he was
developing an internationalist position near the end of his life. The
question can now only be asked: where would that internationalism have
led us if Malcolm hadn’t been assassinated on February 28, 1965, just
months after his return from Africa and West Asia – and Gaza.
We reprint Malcolm X’s “Zionist Logic” below.
Zionist Logic
by MALCOLM X (1964)
The Zionist armies that now occupy Palestine claim their
ancient Jewish prophets predicted that in the “last days of this world”
their own God would raise them up a “messiah” who would lead them to
their promised land, and they would set up their own “divine” government
in this newly-gained land, this “divine” government would enable them
to “rule all other nations with a rod of iron.”
If the Israeli Zionists believe their present occupation of
Arab Palestine is the fulfillment of predictions made by their Jewish
prophets, then they also religiously believe that Israel must fulfill
its “divine” mission to rule all other nations with a rod of irons,
which only means a different form of iron-like rule, more firmly
entrenched even, than that of the former European Colonial Powers.
These Israeli Zionists religiously believe their Jewish God
has chosen them to replace the outdated European colonialism with a new
form of colonialism, so well disguised that it will enable them to
deceive the African masses into submitting willingly to their “divine”
authority and guidance, without the African masses being aware that they
are still colonized.
Camouflage
The Israeli Zionists are convinced they have successfully
camouflaged their new kind of colonialism. Their colonialism appears to
be more “benevolent,” more “philanthropic,” a system with which they
rule simply by getting their potential victims to accept their friendly
offers of economic “aid,” and other tempting gifts, that they dangle in
front of the newly-independent African nations, whose economies are
experiencing great difficulties. During the 19th century, when the
masses here in Africa were largely illiterate, it was easy for European
imperialists to rule them with “force and fear,” but in this present era
of enlightenment, the African masses are awakening, and it is
impossible to hold them in check now with the antiquated methods of the
19th century.
The imperialists, therefore, have been compelled to devise
new methods. Since they can no longer force or frighten the masses into
submission, they must devise modern methods that will enable them to
maneuver the African masses into willing submission.
