Digital & Print Membership
Yearly + Receive 8 free printed back issues
$420 Annually
Monthly + Receive 3 free printed back issues
$40 Monthly
Fashion (still) has a Fascism Problem
From Mussolini to Musk, the fashion industry’s troubling alliance with power persists.
Magazine’s latest cover featuring Kim Kardashian alongside various Tesla wares. Kim on a Cybertruck, Kim in the embrace of a Tesla Optimus robot, hyper-polished, eerily soulless images of two massive brands… seemingly devoid of deeper meaning… except it wasn’t. It felt like a perfect distillation of a troubling ideology: the fusion of fashion, technology, and authoritarian aesthetics, all in service of power.

So, I criticized the shoot; it went viral. Some people got it. Others didn’t, insisting it was “just a magazine,” that fashion “isn’t political.”
But fashion has always been political, and more importantly, it has always had a little bit of a Nazi problem. This isn’t just about the Perfect Magazine cover, Elon Musk, or Kim Kardashian; it’s about how fashion has historically aligned itself with authoritarianism, and how we’re watching it unfold again today.
Fashion’s entanglement with fascism isn’t just a one off chapter in history, it’s foundational to how the industry operates. Nazi Germany understood that power isn’t just about military force but about aesthetics and uniformity. Hitler’s regime meticulously crafted an image of strength and modernity, hiring designers to create some of the most ( unfortunately ) visually striking propaganda of the 20th century. The clean lines, brutal efficiency, and cold futurism of Nazi visual culture became a blueprint for authoritarian aesthetics in the modern age when the war ended.
The industry itself was complicit. Hugo Boss manufactured SS uniforms using forced labor from concentration camps. Coco Chanel, now lauded as a feminist icon, was a Nazi informant and anti-Semitic opportunist who used the war to try and steal her company back from its Jewish co-owners. Christian Dior’s postwar success was built in the ruins of Jewish couturiers who were either exiled or erased.

Hugo Boss Designed Nazi Uniforms
Coco Chanel was a Nazi informant
But it wasn’t just Germany. In 1930s Italy, Benito Mussolini’s government exerted control over the fashion industry, establishing the Ente Nazionale della Moda (ENM) in 1935 to coordinate fashion production and promote a distinct Italian style. A tool of nationalist propaganda, the ENM ensured that Italian fashion aligned with fascist ideals. The organization also aimed to eliminate foreign influence (especially French fashion), elevate Italian designers, and reinforce a vision of Italy as a self-sufficient, culturally superior state.

Benito Mussolini
Mussolini understood fashion’s role in shaping national identity. The Italian government dictated styles that embodied the fascist ideal, structured, powerful, yet unmistakably Italian. Women were expected to dress modestly, reflecting their domestic role in Mussolini’s rigid societal order, while men’s fashion leaned into militaristic tailoring, reinforcing ideals of strength and discipline. Fashion magazines under fascist control encouraged women to embrace an elegant but restrained femininity, one that placed the state above personal expression.
Even luxury brands played along. Salvatore Ferragamo, for example, outfitted the feet of everyone from Hitler’s wife, Eva Braun, who came to his shop flanked by Nazi guards, and Benito Mussolini.

Eva Braun
These are not just footnotes, they are foundational to how fashion rebuilt itself in the 20th century.
Back to modern day and fashion’s flirtation with authoritarianism hasn’t vanished, it’s just evolved. Elon Musk has turned X (formerly Twitter) into a breeding ground for far-right extremism and amplifies white nationalist rhetoric under the guise of “free speech.” He treats governance like a personal game, systematically dismantling institutions, gutting regulatory oversight, and positioning himself as the ultimate arbiter of truth.
Tesla’s branding borrows from fascist futurism: sleek, cold, obsessed with efficiency at all costs. The Perfect cover is an extension of this, fashion as a sterile, dehumanized dystopia where power is the only currency. The visual language of Musk’s empire, militaristic minimalism and brutalism repackaged as luxury, is absolutely not new. It’s a direct descendant of the aesthetics that defined fascist regimes.
The Perfect cover wasn’t just a poorly thought out fashion moment, it was very much a signal of where the industry’s elite allegiances are shifting. The same industry that once dressed SS officers is now platforming tech billionaires who want to dismantle democracy and replace it with corporate autocracies.
And let’s talk about who’s making these decisions. Perfect Magazine is run by Katie Grand, a white woman who has spent decades curating fashion’s biggest moments and styling some of the most influential shoots that shaped public perception. And now, she’s using that power to platform a billionaire who is gutting democracy, stripping labor rights, and amplifying the far right. There’s something eerily familiar about a white woman aligning herself with fascist-adjacent forces.
We like to tell ourselves that fascism is a hyper-masculine ideology, that it’s all angry men in uniforms shouting into microphones. But history tells a different story. Women have always played a crucial role in legitimizing and normalizing authoritarian regimes and fashion has been one of their sharpest tools.
During the Nazi era, women’s magazines helped push fascist beauty ideals, encouraging women to embody “Aryan femininity” while also supporting the regime in domestic and social roles. The wives of high ranking Nazi officials threw extravagant parties in couture while their husbands orchestrated genocide. Even in fascist Italy, designers like Elsa Schiaparelli played with military aesthetics, blending them elegantly into high fashion.

And now, we have Katie Grand curating a new kind of fascist aesthetic with a cover that frames an authoritarian billionaire like Elon Musk as the future. Just like women in the past championed beauty under fascism, Grand is dressing up modern authoritarianism and making it look desirable.
Musk isn’t the only one using fashion as a tool for authoritarian branding. His buddy Donald Trump understands the powers of aesthetics. MAGA culture thrives on uniformity and branding, from the red hats to the oversized suits that became a blueprint for power dressing in certain right-wing circles. Trump’s aesthetics, big, loud, excessive, and room dominating are the visual antithesis of Musk’s sterile futurism, but they serve the same purpose: reinforcing hierarchy, separating the elite from the undesirable.

The mainstream fashion industry, of course, pretends to stay neutral. But as we’ve seen recently brands are clamoring to dress him and his family. Brioni still tailors his suits. Dior dresses his wife and daughter. The industry loves to perform progressivism, but when it comes to actual power, it’s never been interested in taking a long term stand.
Every time fashion’s political ties are pointed out, the response is the same: “Fashion isn’t political.” But it always has been. As the world slides back toward authoritarianism, fashion is once again complicit. We condemn its past alliances with oppressive regimes, yet the present echoes the same patterns.
By aligning with figures like Musk and Trump, fashion isn’t just overlooking the issue, it’s making an active decision to side with power built on exploitation and division for their bottom line and if we don’t call it out now, we’ll end up wearing the chains it’s silently designing.
{
"article":
{
"title" : "Fashion (still) has a Fascism Problem: From Mussolini to Musk, the fashion industry’s troubling alliance with power persists.",
"author" : "Louis Pisano",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/fashion-still-has-a-fascism-problem",
"date" : "2025-05-06 09:57:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Kim-Kardashians-Perfect-Magazine-shoot.jpg",
"excerpt" : "Magazine’s latest cover featuring Kim Kardashian alongside various Tesla wares. Kim on a Cybertruck, Kim in the embrace of a Tesla Optimus robot, hyper-polished, eerily soulless images of two massive brands… seemingly devoid of deeper meaning… except it wasn’t. It felt like a perfect distillation of a troubling ideology: the fusion of fashion, technology, and authoritarian aesthetics, all in service of power.",
"content" : "Magazine’s latest cover featuring Kim Kardashian alongside various Tesla wares. Kim on a Cybertruck, Kim in the embrace of a Tesla Optimus robot, hyper-polished, eerily soulless images of two massive brands… seemingly devoid of deeper meaning… except it wasn’t. It felt like a perfect distillation of a troubling ideology: the fusion of fashion, technology, and authoritarian aesthetics, all in service of power.So, I criticized the shoot; it went viral. Some people got it. Others didn’t, insisting it was “just a magazine,” that fashion “isn’t political.” But fashion has always been political, and more importantly, it has always had a little bit of a Nazi problem. This isn’t just about the Perfect Magazine cover, Elon Musk, or Kim Kardashian; it’s about how fashion has historically aligned itself with authoritarianism, and how we’re watching it unfold again today.Fashion’s entanglement with fascism isn’t just a one off chapter in history, it’s foundational to how the industry operates. Nazi Germany understood that power isn’t just about military force but about aesthetics and uniformity. Hitler’s regime meticulously crafted an image of strength and modernity, hiring designers to create some of the most ( unfortunately ) visually striking propaganda of the 20th century. The clean lines, brutal efficiency, and cold futurism of Nazi visual culture became a blueprint for authoritarian aesthetics in the modern age when the war ended.The industry itself was complicit. Hugo Boss manufactured SS uniforms using forced labor from concentration camps. Coco Chanel, now lauded as a feminist icon, was a Nazi informant and anti-Semitic opportunist who used the war to try and steal her company back from its Jewish co-owners. Christian Dior’s postwar success was built in the ruins of Jewish couturiers who were either exiled or erased.Hugo Boss Designed Nazi UniformsCoco Chanel was a Nazi informantBut it wasn’t just Germany. In 1930s Italy, Benito Mussolini’s government exerted control over the fashion industry, establishing the Ente Nazionale della Moda (ENM) in 1935 to coordinate fashion production and promote a distinct Italian style. A tool of nationalist propaganda, the ENM ensured that Italian fashion aligned with fascist ideals. The organization also aimed to eliminate foreign influence (especially French fashion), elevate Italian designers, and reinforce a vision of Italy as a self-sufficient, culturally superior state.Benito MussoliniMussolini understood fashion’s role in shaping national identity. The Italian government dictated styles that embodied the fascist ideal, structured, powerful, yet unmistakably Italian. Women were expected to dress modestly, reflecting their domestic role in Mussolini’s rigid societal order, while men’s fashion leaned into militaristic tailoring, reinforcing ideals of strength and discipline. Fashion magazines under fascist control encouraged women to embrace an elegant but restrained femininity, one that placed the state above personal expression.Even luxury brands played along. Salvatore Ferragamo, for example, outfitted the feet of everyone from Hitler’s wife, Eva Braun, who came to his shop flanked by Nazi guards, and Benito Mussolini.Eva BraunThese are not just footnotes, they are foundational to how fashion rebuilt itself in the 20th century.Back to modern day and fashion’s flirtation with authoritarianism hasn’t vanished, it’s just evolved. Elon Musk has turned X (formerly Twitter) into a breeding ground for far-right extremism and amplifies white nationalist rhetoric under the guise of “free speech.” He treats governance like a personal game, systematically dismantling institutions, gutting regulatory oversight, and positioning himself as the ultimate arbiter of truth.Tesla’s branding borrows from fascist futurism: sleek, cold, obsessed with efficiency at all costs. The Perfect cover is an extension of this, fashion as a sterile, dehumanized dystopia where power is the only currency. The visual language of Musk’s empire, militaristic minimalism and brutalism repackaged as luxury, is absolutely not new. It’s a direct descendant of the aesthetics that defined fascist regimes.The Perfect cover wasn’t just a poorly thought out fashion moment, it was very much a signal of where the industry’s elite allegiances are shifting. The same industry that once dressed SS officers is now platforming tech billionaires who want to dismantle democracy and replace it with corporate autocracies.And let’s talk about who’s making these decisions. Perfect Magazine is run by Katie Grand, a white woman who has spent decades curating fashion’s biggest moments and styling some of the most influential shoots that shaped public perception. And now, she’s using that power to platform a billionaire who is gutting democracy, stripping labor rights, and amplifying the far right. There’s something eerily familiar about a white woman aligning herself with fascist-adjacent forces. We like to tell ourselves that fascism is a hyper-masculine ideology, that it’s all angry men in uniforms shouting into microphones. But history tells a different story. Women have always played a crucial role in legitimizing and normalizing authoritarian regimes and fashion has been one of their sharpest tools.During the Nazi era, women’s magazines helped push fascist beauty ideals, encouraging women to embody “Aryan femininity” while also supporting the regime in domestic and social roles. The wives of high ranking Nazi officials threw extravagant parties in couture while their husbands orchestrated genocide. Even in fascist Italy, designers like Elsa Schiaparelli played with military aesthetics, blending them elegantly into high fashion.And now, we have Katie Grand curating a new kind of fascist aesthetic with a cover that frames an authoritarian billionaire like Elon Musk as the future. Just like women in the past championed beauty under fascism, Grand is dressing up modern authoritarianism and making it look desirable.Musk isn’t the only one using fashion as a tool for authoritarian branding. His buddy Donald Trump understands the powers of aesthetics. MAGA culture thrives on uniformity and branding, from the red hats to the oversized suits that became a blueprint for power dressing in certain right-wing circles. Trump’s aesthetics, big, loud, excessive, and room dominating are the visual antithesis of Musk’s sterile futurism, but they serve the same purpose: reinforcing hierarchy, separating the elite from the undesirable.The mainstream fashion industry, of course, pretends to stay neutral. But as we’ve seen recently brands are clamoring to dress him and his family. Brioni still tailors his suits. Dior dresses his wife and daughter. The industry loves to perform progressivism, but when it comes to actual power, it’s never been interested in taking a long term stand.Every time fashion’s political ties are pointed out, the response is the same: “Fashion isn’t political.” But it always has been. As the world slides back toward authoritarianism, fashion is once again complicit. We condemn its past alliances with oppressive regimes, yet the present echoes the same patterns.By aligning with figures like Musk and Trump, fashion isn’t just overlooking the issue, it’s making an active decision to side with power built on exploitation and division for their bottom line and if we don’t call it out now, we’ll end up wearing the chains it’s silently designing."
}
,
"relatedposts": [
{
"title" : "Trump’s attack on Venezuela: An Exemplary Punishment",
"author" : "Simón Rodriguez",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/trumps-attack-on-venezuela-an-exemplary-punishment",
"date" : "2026-01-14 10:13:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Uncle_Sam_Straddles_the_Americas_Cartoon.jpg",
"excerpt" : "After four months of maritime siege in which the US military killed more than 100 people in alleged anti-drug trafficking operations and seized oil tankers, as well as the bombing of a small dock in northwestern Venezuela, Trump launched a large-scale attack and kidnapped de facto ruler Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, who were in Fuerte Tiuna, the country’s main military complex in Caracas.",
"content" : "After four months of maritime siege in which the US military killed more than 100 people in alleged anti-drug trafficking operations and seized oil tankers, as well as the bombing of a small dock in northwestern Venezuela, Trump launched a large-scale attack and kidnapped de facto ruler Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, who were in Fuerte Tiuna, the country’s main military complex in Caracas.The invaders attacked civilian targets such as the port of La Guaira, the Venezuelan Institute for Scientific Research, the Charallave airport, and electrical transmission infrastructure, as well as military installations in Caracas, Maracay, and Higuerote. The preliminary toll is around 80 dead and more than a hundred wounded. The US government claims that it suffered no casualties and that it had the support of infiltrators working for the CIA. This internal collaboration was crucial to the success of the attack.The Venezuelan military defeat has political causes, beyond US technical superiority. Chavismo has prioritized coup-proofing over military effectiveness, going so far as to have one of the highest rates of generals per capita in the world, who have been given control of various economic sectors for cronyism. Furthermore, the government lacks a military strategy for asymmetric resistance to imperialist aggression.During Chávez’s administration, in 2007, there was debate over which military model to adopt. Retired General Müller Rojas criticized the large investments in sophisticated military equipment, proposed by then-Defense Minister Raúl Isaías Baduel, proposing instead a doctrine of popular resistance and asymmetric warfare. Chávez settled the debate in Baduel’s favor, and in the following years, the Venezuelan government spent billions of dollars on arms purchases from Russia and China. This equipment proved useless in the face of the US attack, as the late Müller Rojas predicted, but it was part of the patronage system that enriched the Chavista military. Ironically, Baduel died as a political prisoner in 2021.A corrupt military may be useful for repressing workers, students, or indigenous peoples, but it can easily be bribed. Maduro himself does not seem to have had much confidence in the military, having entrusted his security largely to Cuban personnel, 32 of whom died in the US attack.Vice President Delcy Rodríguez assumed the interim presidency. She declared a state of emergency to avoid the constitutional requirement to call elections in the event of the head of state’s absence. The US government has stated that, through the continuation of the naval blockade and the threat of a second attack, it hopes to ensure that the Venezuelan government serves US interests. When asked on January 4 whether they would use this pressure to demand the release of political prisoners, Trump responded emphatically that he is interested in oil, and everything else can wait. In spite of this, the Venezuelan government announced on January 8 the unilateral release of an unspecified number of political prisoners. Human rights NGOs estimate there are around 800 political prisoners.The rights of Venezuelans have never interested Trump, as demonstrated not only by his lack of interest in democratic rights in Venezuela, but also by the racist persecution of Venezuelan immigrants in the US, stigmatized by Trump as criminals and mentally ill people allegedly sent by Maduro to “invade” the country, a fascistic discourse endorsed by the Venezuelan right-wing leader María Corina Machado. Thousands of Venezuelans have been deported to Venezuela, while hundreds have been sent to the CECOT, Latin America’s largest torture center, run by the dictatorship of El Salvador, under false accusations of belonging to the Tren de Aragua, a gang classified as a terrorist organization by Trump.Delcy Rodríguez has reportedly already reached an agreement with Trump to deliver between 30 and 50 million barrels of oil. The US government would sell the oil, establishing offshore accounts for this purpose outside the control of its own Treasury Department; part of the petrodollars generated would be used to pay debtors, and payments in kind would be made to the Venezuelan state, including equipment and supplies for oil production itself, as well as food and medicine.This policy bears similarities to the “Oil for food” program applied as part of the sanctions regime of the 1990s against Iraq. That program became a huge source of corruption in the UN. We can expect something similar or worse from Trump’s corrupt government. Chevron, which already is the main oil extractor in Venezuela, is lobbying for a privileged role in Trump’s plans for oil theft, enforced through a naval blockade and threats of new attacks, as the stock capacity on land or in ships off the Venezuelan coast reached their limit and the alternative was to stop production. On January 9, Trump met executives from Chevron, Conoco-Phillips, Exxon-Mobil, among other oil companies, to lay out the profits opportunities in Venezuela enhanced by military intervention.We are facing a new version of imperialist “gunboat diplomacy” and the methods of the “Roosevelt Corollary,” on which the US based its invasion of Latin American and Caribbean countries in the first half of the 20th century, taking control of their customs, as in the cases of the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Nicaragua.Rodríguez’s capitulation has been interpreted by some as evidence that her rise to power was agreed with Trump, as startlingly quickly negotiations for the restoration of diplomatic relations, which were severed since 2019, have begun. For this purpose, a US delegation visited Caracas on January 9. Certainly, Chavismo’s anti-imperialism was always rather performative, it did not even nationalize the oil industry, and the US maintained an important presence through Chevron. The US remained Venezuela’s main trading partner until at least 2024.The regime is cooperating with the extortionist Trump, not resisting. The traditional right-wing opposition, which celebrated the January 3 attack (describing it as the beginning of Venezuela’s liberation), welcomes Trump’s measures. Not even Trump’s humiliation of Machado, when he declared she lacked “support” and “respect” within Venezuela, has led Venezuelan Trumpists to regain a modicum of sobriety. Their entire political strategy, after Maduro’s 2024 electoral fraud, has been solely to wait for Trump to hand them power.Trump’s priorities are different, although they could converge in the future with Machado: to distract attention from recently published documents reflecting his friendship with the criminal Jeffrey Epstein; to enhance his foreign policy based on extortion, refuting the Democratic slogan “Trump Always Chickens Out”, and to manage billions of petrodollars at the service of his business circle. And finally, in a more strategic sense, it represents the application of the new National Security doctrine, which gives priority to absolute US control of the hemisphere, expelling its imperialist competitors, China and Russia. Venezuela represented the most vulnerable point in the hemisphere for spectacular and exemplary military action. After the attack on Venezuela, threats against Colombia, Mexico, and even Greenland follow.Chavismo itself largely created its own vulnerability after years of anti-popular and anti-worker policies, such as imposing a minimum wage of less than USD$5 per month, eliminating workers’ freedom of association, persecuting indigenous peoples, defunding public health and education, and forcing the migration of 8 million Venezuelan workers, all while favoring the emergence of a new Bolivarian bourgeoisie through rampant corruption, creating new chasms of social inequality.Until 2015, Chavismo ruled with the support of electoral majorities. After its defeat in that year’s parliamentary elections, it took a dictatorial turn, relying on repression and electoral fraud, while bleeding the economy dry to pay off foreign debt, creating hellish hyperinflation. The economy contracted by around 80% between 2013 and 2021, most of this before US sanctions. The destruction was such that the export of scrap metal, obtained from the dismantling of abandoned industries, became one of Venezuela’s largest exports.It is illustrative to recall the cables from the US embassy in Caracas to the State Department, published by Wikileaks, which asked the Obama administration not to publicly confront Chávez, as this would strengthen him in the context of widespread popular rejection of the US. The current situation is different, with many Venezuelans cynically accepting US domination. Opposing imperialist intervention, on the other hand, does not save dissidents from persecution either. The presidential candidate backed by the Communist Party of Venezuela in 2024, Enrique Márquez, has been in prison for 10 months without formal charges.The humiliation to which the Venezuelan people are subjected today, under the double yoke of a dictatorship and a US siege, is brutal. The policy of aggression against Latin America and the Caribbean, the perceived sphere of US dominance, gains momentum with this attack. In the face of this we need a continental response, to defend the possibility of a free and dignified future for Venezuela and for all of Latin America and the Caribbean."
}
,
{
"title" : "A Lone Protester, Rain or Shine: One Man’s Daily Act of Dissent in Japan",
"author" : "Yumiko Sakuma",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/a-lone-protester-rain-or-shine",
"date" : "2026-01-13 10:00:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Lone_Gaza_Japan.jpg",
"excerpt" : "Photographs by Chisato Hikita",
"content" : "Photographs by Chisato HikitaThe way Japan’s grassroots activism has shown up for the people of Palestine has been nothing short of extraordinary. In a country known for its low political engagement, I’ve met countless newly woken activists who not only joined the international movement but have also incorporated direct action into their daily lives through street protests, fundraising events and content creation, writing campaigns, etc. Many of them express frustration that demonstrations in Japan aren’t as large as those abroad, or that their efforts seem to yield little visible change, but their persistence and quiet stubbornness are unlike anything I’ve ever seen.One of the figures who has emerged from this movement is Yusuke Furusawa, who has taken to the streets every single day, seven days a week, for more than two years, usually for an hour or so each time. I came across him on social media and reached out while I was in Tokyo.The day we met was an excruciatingly hot Saturday in July. On my way to meet him near Shinjuku Station, a sprawling terminal of train lines, subways, and shopping complexes, he messaged to say he’d had to relocate because of a nearby Uyoku (right-wing nationalist) presence. As I exited one wing of the station, I passed a large crowd gathered around Uryu Hirano, a young hardline activist who had just lost her bid for a national council seat.Then I found Furusawa, delivering a monologue about what the Palestinian people have been enduring, about the complicity of the Japanese government, and about the tangled relationship between the U.S. military-industrial complex and the Israeli state. He stood in the middle of two opposing streams of foot traffic, turning every few seconds to address people coming from both directions, waving a large flag and holding a sign that read “Stop GAZA Genocide.”In October 2023, he had been home-bound for Covid. “I was frustrated because I wanted to go to the protests but couldn’t. Finally, feeling restless, I eventually stumbled out holding a placard, that’s how it all began. When I thought about how I’ve never really taken any actions on this issue while seeing these terrible situations unfolding every day, I just couldn’t sort out my feelings.”Furusawa makes his living as a prop maker for a broadcasting company while occasionally getting gigs as a theater actor. He wasn’t particularly political until a few years ago when he joined a local grass-roots movement to elect Satoko Kishimoto, an environmental activist and water rights activist who had lived in Belgium, to be Suginami Ward mayor against the pro-business, pro-development incumbent. Especially, he was inspired by the Hitori Gaisen, solo street demonstration, movement which was triggered by one person who decided to campaign by standing quietly on the street with a sign, which spread like a wild fire and resulted in a win by Kishimoto, a move viewed as a victory of the People, who were determined to stop the over development and gentrification.'I’m not really good at group activities, so rallies and marches aren’t really my thing. I get too tired trying too hard to chant or keep up with everyone else.” Previously, he had been suffering from depression. “This has been helpful like as a daily rehabilitation activity.”Thus, he stands alone, daily and consistently. As I watched him speak under the glaring sun, I was struck by how most people don’t even look up, or notice him, seemingly so self-absorbed or focused on where they are going. Occasionally, non-Japanese people stop and take pictures of/with him. While I was there, a mother and a kid from Turkey stopped him to thank him through a translation app on her phone. She had tears in her eyes. Furusawa said he does get yelled at a few times a day and was once even choked by a person who identified as an IDF personnel.This was a few days after July 20th, when Japan had a national council election where more than 8 million people voted for candidates from the Sansei Party, which ran on “Japanese First” platform and a far-right, nationalist political messaging. Furusawa says, a few Japanese people who walk up to him with encouraging signs tend to be ultra nationalists and conservatives. “A lot of times, these guys who say to me ‘you are great for standing against the United States,’ are far right people, which makes me feel defeated.” And there are younger ones who mock him or laugh at him.Do you have an idea as to how long you’d be doing this? I asked him. Furusawa told me about the time an Aljazeela crew came to his apartment to shoot a segment on him. When he told them, “I will stop if Israel stopped bombing Gaza,” the reporter said, “That is how Japanese people forget about the Middle East.” Furusawa thinks about this episode daily. “I realized I hadn’t understood anything at all, and I felt this helplessness like all my actions over the past four months were being erased in an instant. That’s when I made the decision to do it every day. Those words swirled around me daily.”After I came back to New York, I procrastinated writing this story. I tried writing it many times in my head, but between being disappointed in the surge of xenophobia and racism in Japan, dealing with medical issues and being scared as an immigrant, my head was not in the right place to give a proper ending to this story. Then, so called “ceasefire” was announced. I thought of him and reached out.I apologized to him for not writing a story sooner. “I didn’t know how to write the story without glorifying the protest movements.”He told me attacks by people from Israel were happening increasingly, probably like three times more, especially after the UK recognized the state of Palestine. “They come at me with anger. I’ve also met a few people from Palestine thanking me with tears for what I do. I feel l need to keep a distance from these emotions because what I am really protesting against is the illegal occupation and apartheid of Palestine and how we are not really facing it.”He hadn’t stopped his protests, still standing out there every day with a flag and a sign, delivering his monologue. He does so because, for one, he did not trust the “ceasefire,” but also because what he stands against is not just the current wave of assaults, bombing, starvation, etc.“I want to keep going until we seriously tackle the issue, not just go through the superficial motions of Palestine’s state recognition. It isn’t about just stopping the war. It is about getting people to care so that nations collectively help them. I am not talking about months, more like years because it is going to take time.”Lately, after spending an hour on anti-genocide protest, he stands with another sign for 30 minutes or so before he goes home. The sign says “Delusion of Hate.” That is because he thinks Japan’s xenophobia and hatred come from delusions. “A mix of victim mentality and inferiority complex, plus delusions inflated by conspiracy theories that don’t even exist.”That is when I realized what he is really fighting is indifference. He went on, “Some might find my style of protests noisy, annoying, or unpleasant. I want them to reject it. I want to get on their nerves, or talk to their hearts. Maybe that is how we can break through the indifference. That is going to take time, like years of time.”"
}
,
{
"title" : "Sanctions are a Tool of Empire",
"author" : "Collis Browne",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/sanctions-are-a-tool-of-empire",
"date" : "2026-01-13 08:35:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Sanctions.jpg",
"excerpt" : "Sanctions & Embargoes only Hurt the People",
"content" : "Sanctions & Embargoes only Hurt the PeopleIn light of the economic collapse and ongoing social and political unrest in Venezuela and Iran, we must examine U.S. economic sanctions and how they contribute to and exacerbate these dynamics.Although framed as something much more innocuous or even righteous, sanctions are a form of economic warfare used to enforce U.S. & Western empire.What Sanctions AreSanctions block a country’s sovereign ability to act freely in a global world. They restrict trade, banking, investment, and access to global markets.Despite the myth of “free markets,” sanctions show how capitalism really works: Markets are only free when they serve power.They are usually installed against nations that show signs of independence from US and Western (capitalist) interests, such as any meaningful socialist policies, nationalizing resources or limiting foreign ownership or resources or property.Although the claim is usually around “punishing” a government for human rights abuses, There are plenty of governments that commit egregious human rights abuses that are never sanctioned because of favorable business policies towards US interests (global western capital), The US is itself guilty of grave human rights abuses both at home and abroad, so cannot claim to have any moral authority, and Many of the abuses are either exaggerated, outright fabricated, or are simply scapegoats to cover the real motives. To be clear: this does not excuse human rights abuses by any government, but sanctions are never the answer: they are never driven by a moral imperative, and are never successful in improving the materials conditions of the people of the countries affected.How Sanctions are UsedUS foreign policy uses sanctions as a key part of a familiar playbook: Claim that a government is a “dictatorship” or “threat” to democracy or security Cut the country off from trade and money Cause shortages, inflation, and unemployment People suffer — food, medicine, fuel become scarce Blame the suffering on the government, not the sanctions Further stir up unrest by covert actions on the ground agitating dissent and violence Often, provide material support for right-wing political opposition that favors US intervention and resource privatizationThe goal is pressure, chaos, and instability.The End GoalSanctions are a foundational step in a long-term campaign to destabilize a country or region by creating enough pain to force one of the following outcomes: Install a pro-U.S. government Enable or justify a coup Pave the way for military interventionAll of these are about resource extraction and unfettered access for multinational and Western corporations.Fact 1: Sanctions Don’t WorkSanctions Don’t Achieve Their Stated Political GoalsSince 1970, nearly 90% of sanctions have failed — meaning they did not force the target government to change its behavior or leadership. Report after report show that sanctions don’t produce freedom, democracy or peace, they produce suffering.Fact 2: Sanctions Punish PeopleSanctions Hurt the People, Not LeadersAcross 32 empirical studies*, sanctions were shown to: Increase poverty Increase inequality Increase mortality Worsen human rights outcomesRegional oligarchs and elites adapt, while ordinary people pay the price.Example: IraqIraq (1990s) Sanctions destroyed water, food, and healthcare systems Hundreds of thousands of civilians — many of them children — died as a direct result Saddam Hussein retained power, up until the eventual US invasionSanctions weakened the population, not the ruler.Example: VenezuelaVenezuela (2010s–present) Oil and banking sanctions collapsed imports and currency Medicine and food shortages surged Tens of thousands of excess deaths Massive emigration as millions fled the countryThe government survived. The people suffered. If anything, the sanctions contributed to the rise of the right-wing opposition against the strong socialist base of support.Example: SyriaSyria (2011–present) Sanctions began early in the conflict and intensified economic collapse They worsened shortages, unemployment, and infrastructure failure Economic destabilization deepened social fragmentation and displacementSanctions did not overthrow the government, but they amplified collapse, suffering, and long-term instability, making recovery and reconstruction nearly impossible.Example: IranIran (since 1979, and especially 2018–present) Sanctions targeted oil exports and global banking access Iran was cut off from foreign currency earnings The rial collapsed; inflation surged sharplySanctions directly restrict access to dollars and euros — forcing rapid currency devaluation, import inflation, and rising prices for basics even when goods are technically “allowed.”Inflation hits civilians first.Sanctions are a Tool of EmpireSanctions are a tool of global capitalist imperialism, and movements against US intervention must include a call against sanctions. They do not bring freedom or democracy. They enrich global financial elites, preserve imperial control, and devastate everyday people — again and again."
}
]
}