Digital & Print Membership
Yearly + Receive 8 free printed back issues
$420 Annually
Monthly + Receive 3 free printed back issues
$40 Monthly
Francesca Albanese & Abby Martin in Tunis
Conversations on Empire, Resistance, and Media
UNFLINCHING may be the best word to describe human rights lawyer Francesca Albanese, since her appointment as UN Special Rapporteur on Palestine in May 2022 and and more intensely since October 2023. She has staunchly defended the rights of the people of Palestine from the perspective of international law, no matter how hostile or misinformed her audience or interviewer may be. This conversation with journalist Abby Martin, which took place in Tunis in March 2025, highlight some of the fundamental issues of the Occupation of Palestine right now in the context of the ongoing genocide, including the U.S. administration’s erratic and grotesque policies serve as deliberate distractions from Israel’s ongoing ethnic cleansing, and the fact that that the suffering in Gaza is compounded by the inaction of global powers.

ABBY MARTIN: Give us your reaction not just to Trump’s stated desire to “ethnically cleanse” Gaza and force Palestinian refugees into neighboring countries, but also to the psychological warfare aspect—this hyper-normalization where, every day, there’s a new spectacle to focus on. Meanwhile, the policies are ramping up and being greenlit.
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: I believe there is a deliberate strategy behind the way the current U.S. president and his acolytes communicate. It’s intentional, and it’s psychologically overwhelming. Every day, most of the world—whether in Europe, Africa, or elsewhere—wakes up to some new, erratic, grotesque policy. Grotesque in the sense that it is so insulting to fundamental freedoms, basic human rights, and dignity that we are left stunned. The reaction is often, ‘Oh my God, what is he doing?’ or ‘Why aren’t people reacting?’
We end up in a state of alarm and panic, distracted by the spectacle. This mode of communication is part of the problem, and I truly believe it’s intentional. While I don’t downplay the very real danger these people pose to fundamental freedoms—both for Americans and others—when looking at it from the perspective of Palestine, it serves as a massive distraction, and of course, an insult.
The point is—and this is what I really need people to understand—while we speculate about why Trump is saying these things about Gaza, debating whether it’s legal or illegal (which, of course, it is illegal), we need to move beyond just debating. We need to take measures not only to prevent this from happening but to actively address this misconduct.
Because the reality on the ground is that, regardless of what Trump says, Israel is already advancing the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. It’s incredible that statements regarding the so-called ‘Gaza Riviera’ came out so soon after a meeting with the Israeli prime minister—who is wanted by the ICC for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
I see these two forces not just colliding but colluding in pursuit of an even greater evil: the forced displacement of Palestinians from the occupied Palestinian territories. And this is happening in both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
ABBY MARTIN: Well, it’s shocking.
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: The other shocking thing is how numb we have become to the suffering of the Palestinian people. Every day, Israeli jails vomit out what remains of Palestinians who have been arbitrarily arrested, detained, and tortured.
I heard a former Palestinian detainee recount how he begged his torturer to treat him like an animal—saying, Can you just treat me like an animal? Because you would have more respect for animals.
The level of sadism unleashed against Palestinians is truly unfathomable. It is redefining what genocide looks like, and yet, no one reacts.

ABBY MARTIN: It seems like only a matter of time before the war continues there. Israel has already killed over 100 people and is refusing to comply with even this current phase. At every step, they’re trying to stall and prevent these phases from being fulfilled as they were negotiated.
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: First of all, I want to say that it’s important to understand the ceasefire has never truly meant a cessation of violence for Palestinians—especially in Gaza. Hundreds of people have been killed, most of them shot as they tried to move from south to north.
But there have been other violations of the ceasefire agreement—no mobile units or homes have been allowed in. Only two-thirds of the aid trucks that were agreed upon have entered, along with some of the tents. This is why people, especially young children, are freezing at night. The temperatures are extremely cold, and they die—not just from lack, but from terminal conditions caused by deprivation.

The situation in Gaza is brutal. And yet, Qatar, Egypt, the U.S.—the supposed guardians of the ceasefire—what are they doing? There is a profound sense of abandonment. Palestinians have been left to their fate, and it’s incredibly unjust.
This is why I understand why they look to me and my mandate as a beacon of light—because no one else is speaking up for their rights at this level. Yes, the people in the streets stand with Gaza, but what about those with real platforms, with even an inch of power? No one speaks out.
ABBY MARTIN: I think that’s what feels so strange about this temporary cessation—or the ceasefire, as you said—because it doesn’t really mean a cessation of hostilities or violence. We’ve clearly seen what Israel has continued to do.
But that’s what felt so strange about a ceasefire being put in place after 15 months of unending slaughter—especially of children. The bare minimum demand that activists and Palestinians have been calling for, for so long, has finally been met, but only after Gaza has already been decimated. After Israel has seized even more territory beyond its so-called borders.
And now, amid the spectacle of Trump’s rhetoric, we see the war ramping up in the West Bank. Tanks entering for the first time in 20 years, killing dozens, kidnapping hundreds, expelling tens of thousands. Villages being cleared out, attacked by both settlers and armed soldiers. The genocide you’ve outlined in your reports, Francesca—it’s not just confined to Gaza. So talk about that.
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Yeah, I think that we we are seeing what a settler colonial genocide is when people are sacrificed, are destroyed in the pursuit of control of land and resources attached to the land. This is what the genocide of the Native Americans in the United States, or in other places of the Americas, or in Canada, has been: it’s a fight that the settler, the settler society, undertakes against the natives in order to control land and resources. And you know, I hear at times people feel challenged and uncomfortable with the settler colonial paradigm applied to Israel. Excuse me, but I don’t challenge the facts that the Jewish people in the aftermath of the Holocaust had nowhere to go. But there are two things. First of all, the project of colonizing Palestine. It’s something that is written about — the founding fathers of Israel wrote about it since the end of the 19th century. So from the mid 1800’s onward, they’ve been talking about colonizing Palestine because they were looking for a homeland. And so they’ve been exploring different opportunities, from Argentina to Utah to Uganda and Palestine.
So long before modern Israel there was an idea to move to this land of Palestine, that the Hebrew people of the Bible had an attachment to, no question. But what they did, they never went as refugees. And this is the second element: after the Holocaust, it’s not that they went as refugees or migrants seeking asylum. No, they went as part of a project that took the land, took the homes, took everything that had been left behind as people were pushed out. There has been a forced displacement and dispossession of the Palestinians that dates back 100 years, and it started with the Brits, and it has been a low intensity dispossession and forced displacement, with a few peaks, like in 1947-1949, in 1967 and now so it people need to understand that for the Palestinians, this is yet another, surely the most violent face of of annihilation. But this is what settler colonialism does.

ABBY MARTIN: Indeed, Francesca, your compassion and your work has changed the way that people perceive the situation in Palestine. I mean, like you said, people with a modicum of power have just not lifted a finger or uttered one word about the situation. And it does seem it’s just very telling about our political climate and about the repression and chilling effect that this has had over the world’s intellectuals, politicians, media players, celebrities. I mean, the list goes on and on, but you’re out there, front and center, putting yourself out there to be a conduit, a very important one, and it has changed the minds and hearts of countless people. What initially drove you to advocate for Palestine?
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Oh, interestingly, I’m not sure it’s me who changed the way Palestine is discussed. I think I’m part of a transition, I’m part of a wave that has been it has been forming, and it has grown, propelled by the Palestinians, and then Israeli human rights organizations, and then international organizations, and then, little by little, the UN have been also involved in in correcting the narrative that has been dominant. So now, compared to three years ago, it’s much more common to talk about colonialism or apartheid. Yes, I have put a lot of effort into explaining the context to people. And I’ve never intended to be an advocate for the Palestinians. For me, it’s about so much more than the Palestinians. It’s about human rights. I’m a fierce human rights advocate because I do believe that this is what protects us. Human rights are the results of struggles for emancipation of so many people, those who fought for the abolition of slavery, for the end of racial segregation, for the end of apartheid, for the recognition of Indigenous people. It’s through revolutions and through revolts, and struggles that translate into improvement of living conditions. And this is the moment we live in.
Because the Palestinians have been so fiercely repressed, and because this has happened in flagrant violation of international law, this is why I feel so committed. Because I’ve been asked by the United Nations to report on the reality on the ground. And the reality on the ground is obscene. The policies out there affecting the Palestinians are so deranged, that we are already in a dystopian reality, that I have to go back to my center and try to remember: why you are doing what you are doing, finding your purpose and connecting to the purpose of the others. This is what’s happening right now in my life, and my life in connection with the Palestinian struggle for freedom.
ABBY MARTIN:
To paraphrase Mohammed El-Kurd: It does feel like, especially for Palestinians, being trapped collectively in someone else’s hallucination. It’s like a fever dream that’s imposed on you, where black is white, up is down. Where drone bombings are not terrorism, but words are.
It’s the intent versus the actions, and it’s this bizarre kind of framework that’s imposed on us by the people who are the colonizers. And to your point, these institutions are in place to try to protect some sort of semblance of international law and human rights that we have agreed on after World War Two. And it does seem like there are certain Western powers that are just making a mockery of them, especially European powers, who have been hell bent on criminalizing pro-Palestine speech and journalism, as opposed to actually stopping a genocide, which is the crime of all crimes.
You were just feeling the brunt of this on your European tour in Germany. It was absolutely mind bending to see what happened to you in Germany, where they sent police to intimidate you. Already venues were shut down because of a “security risk”. Talk about what happened to you and why you think it is that not just Europe, but the West at large seems more concerned with clamping down on speech, as opposed to actual genocide.

FRANCESCA ALBANESE: This is the reality, unfortunately, and I had an idea that the situation in Germany was critical before going. I went to Germany at the tail end of a long trip across Europe. I had been to Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands. The pro Israel lobby is pretty strong in the West, and it has grown stronger and stronger with increased focus on “security” and militarization and anti-Arabism, which is very, very wide-spread, very common. There has been a rise of racism in the past 20 years in Europe, and I think it’s totally unreported, and under-reported. So I went to Germany after having faced pressure from the pro Israel groups in other countries, especially in the Netherlands. They managed to have a hearing that I had an invitation from the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Parliament, which eventually disinvited me. But it didn’t matter, because eventually I met with a former prime minister, with a former foreign minister, and with parliamentarians, and I also had a press conference at the parliament, but you know, meanwhile, they had the headlines. You know, “she was disinvited because she’s an anti-Semite.”
I went to Germany because I had been invited to the Munich Peace Conference, which took place right next door to this security conference. And I was invited to Munich University and Berlin Friar University. I went to Munich, and I gave my first speech where, of course, I spoke about what happens to the human rights and fundamental freedoms in the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Problem number one, and you cannot say “from the river to the sea” in Germany. And the second thing is that I said, “Well, Germany should know, because Germany has committed two genocides in the span of 30 years.” And the genocide of the Jews was not only not the first genocide of human history, it was a genocide that was perpetrated in Europe because the Jews were the Other, like the Other who were the colonized in Asia, Africa, or in the Americas; and this was the second point you cannot say. So I was accused to have called for the erasure of Israel by saying from the river to the sea, and then to have relativized and trivialized the Holocaust. Now, this is why I say this. I mean, I’m debating whether they are stupid, or perform stupidity. And I was leaning toward a latter when I went to Germany. Now I think they’re really stupid. I mean, a lot of people in Germany are obtuse. They are so dogmatic that they don’t think, they just act like a pack, like a herd. It’s incredible that educated people can behave like a herd.
Then I went to Berlin, where I was due to speak at the so-called Free University of Berlin (at one point I told them to drop the “free” from the name). However, it didn’t happen, they cancelled the event because of pressure from the Berlin mayor, the Israeli ambassador, some MPs, the Minister of Science. It’s very serious that the university gave into this pressure. Eventually we had another event where they threatened to shut down the venue who had accepted to host us forever, and we had the event in the newspaper’s office. So instead of 600 there were only 150 people allowed in. There were queues of people waiting, looking, listening to the conference from their phone and looking at it from outside the window and it was an amazing event, so strong. And the police were there in full gear.
Myself and others spoke about the fact that Germany has an identity issue, because, after the Second World War, embracing Israel’s protection was the way to redeem themselves. But they have not really elaborated upon what they had done to the Jewish people, you know, so they stick to Israel without even realizing what they have done to the Jewish people. Because today they continue to persecute the Jewish people. There are Jewish people, including Israelis, who have been arrested and detained for standing in solidarity with the Palestinians.
Meanwhile, you should know that when I went to that event, I knew that the Federal Police had called the UN saying they were going to arrest me. So I didn’t sleep the night before, because I don’t want to be arrested! I was freaking out. You know, people think that I’m brave— I’m not brave, I’m just very sure. I’m very sure of what I’m doing. So I’m so solid and I’m so firm because I know that what I’m saying is true. But then here I am: I find myself in a place where I’m told you’re going to be arrested for what you said? Oh, hold on, hold on a second. So now the law enforcement is after me as if I were the criminal. So it took me the whole night thinking, trying to meditate, to really find peace. And then in the morning, I talked to my husband. I said, Max, these people want to arrest me, and he said they’re crazy. Go ahead and do what you always do. Talk to the people, because they need you to tell them there’s still some oxygen for them to breathe. And you today, you are their oxygen. And this thing really strengthened me Abby, and pushed me through the day. But it was very, very heavy. This has been the heaviest thing other than looking into the eyes of the genocide there and the victims of the genocide, this is, this is one of the most surreal and absurd things I’ve ever gone through.

ABBY MARTIN: Oh my God. That must have been so intense. It was intense just watching it unfold from the safety of Portland, Oregon, thinking you could actually get arrested. I mean, Francesca Albenese, the special rapporteur could be arrested??
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: A UN expert? And for what?
ABBY MARTIN: Exactly. When you zoom out and you look at the ICC, the threats and the sanctions against the ICC and South Africa from the Trump administration and the kind of this new political climate—even though both parties really mirror each other when it comes to this kind of Imperial conquest abroad and the support for Israel—there is something a little bit more “mask off” about the belligerence and the approach from the Trump administration of just no qualms at all about open threats and declaration of war against these institutions that are even trying to impose some sort of penalties for what Israel is doing, or to curb back the impunity. I guess there was this huge sense of relief when the ICC issued the arrest warrants, right? Yes, but now you see what Trump is doing, sanctioning the entire court, their families, imposing all these penalties. What is your response to this new political climate, and what could happen and manifest from the attempt from these global bodies to try to rein in the impunity,
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: I do see the normalization and the spreading of mafia style techniques at the international level. It’s becoming more and more common and more normalized to cover up for crimes committed by a country in the name of “friendship”, or Alliance. And this is what the mafia is about. Eventually, you know, you have white collar crimes committed in the interest of protection, having each other’s back. But the point is that in the sanctions against the ICC, the attack on the functions and the persons involved in the ICC investigation; this is a new law, and it represents a fatal blow for the multilateral order. So there should be a strong, the strongest pushback ever from the rest of the world, and it’s not happening. What the US is doing, together with Israel, is dismantling, piece by piece, the multilateral order that has been established over the past eighty years.

ABBY MARTIN: Is there any way to circumvent that power that the US has the dominance over these institutions? We’re seeing efforts like the Hague group and things like that, but it does seem like, because of the power and domination of the US, it’s going to be hard to actually work around that. Because obviously you still have faith in international law, and you feel like the law is the solution. It’s just a matter of implementation. But there is that huge paradox: how do we implement something that the US is obstructing?
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: I have already said that there are 192 one member states out of 193 in the UN that have nothing to gain from supporting the policies of the US in the long term. This is imperialism in its crudest form, and there is a need to disengage from that. The world should take this as an opportunity and as a blessing in disguise.
ABBY MARTIN: Indeed. I want to talk quickly about your next report about the institutional complicity in the genocide. What are you hoping to accomplish with the findings? And why is that the next focus for you?
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: The next report is about the private sector: the maze of business, corporations, financial institutions, research institutions, everyone that is partaking in the legality of the occupation at the international level. And there is a network, a system made of ganglions, that nourishes and profits from the legality of the occupation, from research centers, universities, charities, banks, pension funds, businesses, startups connected to the surveillance and military sector, the military sector itself. It’s sickening, if you look at it from within, because there are so many, there are so many ties that link to the to the contribution of individuals that are not even aware of their part of an unlawful endeavor. And this is what prompted my interest in exposing this, because I need one of the things that I promised myself I would do through my mandate, is that I would pull back the various layers covering the reality, covering the truth. I will expose it. This is what the truth teller, in the words and in spirit of Professor Edward Said, would do, and this is what I think is the role of anyone who has an inch of an intellect to contribute to the debate, so I need to expose that and seek and give civil society tools to seek accountability.
ABBY MARTIN: What do you think is next for Gaza in terms of how we can keep this issue on people’s minds? Because it seems like there’s a fatigue and exhaustion, especially with this resurgence of fascism in you know, my country, Francesca, that’s overseen and subsidizing the vast majority of what’s happening, there’s a lot of fatigue, because for the last 15 months, a lot of Americans have been protesting Biden for overseeing this, and now it’s like, oh my god, now we’re supposed to protest fascism and this kind of new era, and I think people just don’t know where to take it. And I think the worry is that Palestine is going to be absent from the conversation, considering the gravity of everything else that’s going on and compounding it with the ongoing genocide.
FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Look, I know that there is a lot of fatigue, but we cannot stop because we are tired. And I think that people do not realize you think that it’s been me contributing to the shift of debate, of the debate, but hell no, it’s been us — us, me, and other special rapporteurs and Amnesty International and people on the ground and scholars who have fought to stand by their principles and last but not least, the protesters and the Palestinians, those who have been really on the front line, the Palestinians who have been genocided. And while they were being genocided, they were sending messages to the outside world. And so the protesters were the ones carrying that word into their world. They need to be told that they need to be acknowledged. If I could, I would hug everyone and say thank you, because we are part of a revolution. We are still small and we need to grow, but we are many, so rather than grow, we need to unite. And this is what I keep on telling people, keep on moving, keep on talking. Don’t get gaslighted. Don’t get distracted. Keep on going. Even if we lose, we will lose fighting for something that’s just, and we will fall while fighting against something that is terribly untenably unjust. We need to try at least, and I’m very positive that if we do that, if we continue, if we are not defeated by our own fear or self doubt, we will make it. We will succeed. We will bring Israel to accountability. Many things seem impossible till they become possible. Nelson Mandela used to say, we need to feel it inside, really in our guts.

In Conversation:
Photography by:
{
"article":
{
"title" : "Francesca Albanese & Abby Martin in Tunis: Conversations on Empire, Resistance, and Media",
"author" : "Francesca Albanese, Abby Martin",
"category" : "interviews",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/francesca-albanese-and-abby-martin-in-tunis-conversations-on-empire-resistance-and-media",
"date" : "2025-03-21 18:15:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/zrq12-Edit-2.jpg",
"excerpt" : "UNFLINCHING may be the best word to describe human rights lawyer Francesca Albanese, since her appointment as UN Special Rapporteur on Palestine in May 2022 and and more intensely since October 2023. She has staunchly defended the rights of the people of Palestine from the perspective of international law, no matter how hostile or misinformed her audience or interviewer may be. This conversation with journalist Abby Martin, which took place in Tunis in March 2025, highlight some of the fundamental issues of the Occupation of Palestine right now in the context of the ongoing genocide, including the U.S. administration’s erratic and grotesque policies serve as deliberate distractions from Israel’s ongoing ethnic cleansing, and the fact that that the suffering in Gaza is compounded by the inaction of global powers.",
"content" : "UNFLINCHING may be the best word to describe human rights lawyer Francesca Albanese, since her appointment as UN Special Rapporteur on Palestine in May 2022 and and more intensely since October 2023. She has staunchly defended the rights of the people of Palestine from the perspective of international law, no matter how hostile or misinformed her audience or interviewer may be. This conversation with journalist Abby Martin, which took place in Tunis in March 2025, highlight some of the fundamental issues of the Occupation of Palestine right now in the context of the ongoing genocide, including the U.S. administration’s erratic and grotesque policies serve as deliberate distractions from Israel’s ongoing ethnic cleansing, and the fact that that the suffering in Gaza is compounded by the inaction of global powers.ABBY MARTIN: Give us your reaction not just to Trump’s stated desire to “ethnically cleanse” Gaza and force Palestinian refugees into neighboring countries, but also to the psychological warfare aspect—this hyper-normalization where, every day, there’s a new spectacle to focus on. Meanwhile, the policies are ramping up and being greenlit.FRANCESCA ALBANESE: I believe there is a deliberate strategy behind the way the current U.S. president and his acolytes communicate. It’s intentional, and it’s psychologically overwhelming. Every day, most of the world—whether in Europe, Africa, or elsewhere—wakes up to some new, erratic, grotesque policy. Grotesque in the sense that it is so insulting to fundamental freedoms, basic human rights, and dignity that we are left stunned. The reaction is often, ‘Oh my God, what is he doing?’ or ‘Why aren’t people reacting?’We end up in a state of alarm and panic, distracted by the spectacle. This mode of communication is part of the problem, and I truly believe it’s intentional. While I don’t downplay the very real danger these people pose to fundamental freedoms—both for Americans and others—when looking at it from the perspective of Palestine, it serves as a massive distraction, and of course, an insult.The point is—and this is what I really need people to understand—while we speculate about why Trump is saying these things about Gaza, debating whether it’s legal or illegal (which, of course, it is illegal), we need to move beyond just debating. We need to take measures not only to prevent this from happening but to actively address this misconduct.Because the reality on the ground is that, regardless of what Trump says, Israel is already advancing the ethnic cleansing of Palestine. It’s incredible that statements regarding the so-called ‘Gaza Riviera’ came out so soon after a meeting with the Israeli prime minister—who is wanted by the ICC for war crimes and crimes against humanity.I see these two forces not just colliding but colluding in pursuit of an even greater evil: the forced displacement of Palestinians from the occupied Palestinian territories. And this is happening in both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.ABBY MARTIN: Well, it’s shocking.FRANCESCA ALBANESE: The other shocking thing is how numb we have become to the suffering of the Palestinian people. Every day, Israeli jails vomit out what remains of Palestinians who have been arbitrarily arrested, detained, and tortured. I heard a former Palestinian detainee recount how he begged his torturer to treat him like an animal—saying, Can you just treat me like an animal? Because you would have more respect for animals.The level of sadism unleashed against Palestinians is truly unfathomable. It is redefining what genocide looks like, and yet, no one reacts.ABBY MARTIN: It seems like only a matter of time before the war continues there. Israel has already killed over 100 people and is refusing to comply with even this current phase. At every step, they’re trying to stall and prevent these phases from being fulfilled as they were negotiated.FRANCESCA ALBANESE: First of all, I want to say that it’s important to understand the ceasefire has never truly meant a cessation of violence for Palestinians—especially in Gaza. Hundreds of people have been killed, most of them shot as they tried to move from south to north.But there have been other violations of the ceasefire agreement—no mobile units or homes have been allowed in. Only two-thirds of the aid trucks that were agreed upon have entered, along with some of the tents. This is why people, especially young children, are freezing at night. The temperatures are extremely cold, and they die—not just from lack, but from terminal conditions caused by deprivation.The situation in Gaza is brutal. And yet, Qatar, Egypt, the U.S.—the supposed guardians of the ceasefire—what are they doing? There is a profound sense of abandonment. Palestinians have been left to their fate, and it’s incredibly unjust.This is why I understand why they look to me and my mandate as a beacon of light—because no one else is speaking up for their rights at this level. Yes, the people in the streets stand with Gaza, but what about those with real platforms, with even an inch of power? No one speaks out.ABBY MARTIN: I think that’s what feels so strange about this temporary cessation—or the ceasefire, as you said—because it doesn’t really mean a cessation of hostilities or violence. We’ve clearly seen what Israel has continued to do.But that’s what felt so strange about a ceasefire being put in place after 15 months of unending slaughter—especially of children. The bare minimum demand that activists and Palestinians have been calling for, for so long, has finally been met, but only after Gaza has already been decimated. After Israel has seized even more territory beyond its so-called borders.And now, amid the spectacle of Trump’s rhetoric, we see the war ramping up in the West Bank. Tanks entering for the first time in 20 years, killing dozens, kidnapping hundreds, expelling tens of thousands. Villages being cleared out, attacked by both settlers and armed soldiers. The genocide you’ve outlined in your reports, Francesca—it’s not just confined to Gaza. So talk about that.FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Yeah, I think that we we are seeing what a settler colonial genocide is when people are sacrificed, are destroyed in the pursuit of control of land and resources attached to the land. This is what the genocide of the Native Americans in the United States, or in other places of the Americas, or in Canada, has been: it’s a fight that the settler, the settler society, undertakes against the natives in order to control land and resources. And you know, I hear at times people feel challenged and uncomfortable with the settler colonial paradigm applied to Israel. Excuse me, but I don’t challenge the facts that the Jewish people in the aftermath of the Holocaust had nowhere to go. But there are two things. First of all, the project of colonizing Palestine. It’s something that is written about — the founding fathers of Israel wrote about it since the end of the 19th century. So from the mid 1800’s onward, they’ve been talking about colonizing Palestine because they were looking for a homeland. And so they’ve been exploring different opportunities, from Argentina to Utah to Uganda and Palestine.So long before modern Israel there was an idea to move to this land of Palestine, that the Hebrew people of the Bible had an attachment to, no question. But what they did, they never went as refugees. And this is the second element: after the Holocaust, it’s not that they went as refugees or migrants seeking asylum. No, they went as part of a project that took the land, took the homes, took everything that had been left behind as people were pushed out. There has been a forced displacement and dispossession of the Palestinians that dates back 100 years, and it started with the Brits, and it has been a low intensity dispossession and forced displacement, with a few peaks, like in 1947-1949, in 1967 and now so it people need to understand that for the Palestinians, this is yet another, surely the most violent face of of annihilation. But this is what settler colonialism does.ABBY MARTIN: Indeed, Francesca, your compassion and your work has changed the way that people perceive the situation in Palestine. I mean, like you said, people with a modicum of power have just not lifted a finger or uttered one word about the situation. And it does seem it’s just very telling about our political climate and about the repression and chilling effect that this has had over the world’s intellectuals, politicians, media players, celebrities. I mean, the list goes on and on, but you’re out there, front and center, putting yourself out there to be a conduit, a very important one, and it has changed the minds and hearts of countless people. What initially drove you to advocate for Palestine?FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Oh, interestingly, I’m not sure it’s me who changed the way Palestine is discussed. I think I’m part of a transition, I’m part of a wave that has been it has been forming, and it has grown, propelled by the Palestinians, and then Israeli human rights organizations, and then international organizations, and then, little by little, the UN have been also involved in in correcting the narrative that has been dominant. So now, compared to three years ago, it’s much more common to talk about colonialism or apartheid. Yes, I have put a lot of effort into explaining the context to people. And I’ve never intended to be an advocate for the Palestinians. For me, it’s about so much more than the Palestinians. It’s about human rights. I’m a fierce human rights advocate because I do believe that this is what protects us. Human rights are the results of struggles for emancipation of so many people, those who fought for the abolition of slavery, for the end of racial segregation, for the end of apartheid, for the recognition of Indigenous people. It’s through revolutions and through revolts, and struggles that translate into improvement of living conditions. And this is the moment we live in.Because the Palestinians have been so fiercely repressed, and because this has happened in flagrant violation of international law, this is why I feel so committed. Because I’ve been asked by the United Nations to report on the reality on the ground. And the reality on the ground is obscene. The policies out there affecting the Palestinians are so deranged, that we are already in a dystopian reality, that I have to go back to my center and try to remember: why you are doing what you are doing, finding your purpose and connecting to the purpose of the others. This is what’s happening right now in my life, and my life in connection with the Palestinian struggle for freedom.ABBY MARTIN: To paraphrase Mohammed El-Kurd: It does feel like, especially for Palestinians, being trapped collectively in someone else’s hallucination. It’s like a fever dream that’s imposed on you, where black is white, up is down. Where drone bombings are not terrorism, but words are.It’s the intent versus the actions, and it’s this bizarre kind of framework that’s imposed on us by the people who are the colonizers. And to your point, these institutions are in place to try to protect some sort of semblance of international law and human rights that we have agreed on after World War Two. And it does seem like there are certain Western powers that are just making a mockery of them, especially European powers, who have been hell bent on criminalizing pro-Palestine speech and journalism, as opposed to actually stopping a genocide, which is the crime of all crimes.You were just feeling the brunt of this on your European tour in Germany. It was absolutely mind bending to see what happened to you in Germany, where they sent police to intimidate you. Already venues were shut down because of a “security risk”. Talk about what happened to you and why you think it is that not just Europe, but the West at large seems more concerned with clamping down on speech, as opposed to actual genocide.FRANCESCA ALBANESE: This is the reality, unfortunately, and I had an idea that the situation in Germany was critical before going. I went to Germany at the tail end of a long trip across Europe. I had been to Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands. The pro Israel lobby is pretty strong in the West, and it has grown stronger and stronger with increased focus on “security” and militarization and anti-Arabism, which is very, very wide-spread, very common. There has been a rise of racism in the past 20 years in Europe, and I think it’s totally unreported, and under-reported. So I went to Germany after having faced pressure from the pro Israel groups in other countries, especially in the Netherlands. They managed to have a hearing that I had an invitation from the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Parliament, which eventually disinvited me. But it didn’t matter, because eventually I met with a former prime minister, with a former foreign minister, and with parliamentarians, and I also had a press conference at the parliament, but you know, meanwhile, they had the headlines. You know, “she was disinvited because she’s an anti-Semite.”I went to Germany because I had been invited to the Munich Peace Conference, which took place right next door to this security conference. And I was invited to Munich University and Berlin Friar University. I went to Munich, and I gave my first speech where, of course, I spoke about what happens to the human rights and fundamental freedoms in the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Problem number one, and you cannot say “from the river to the sea” in Germany. And the second thing is that I said, “Well, Germany should know, because Germany has committed two genocides in the span of 30 years.” And the genocide of the Jews was not only not the first genocide of human history, it was a genocide that was perpetrated in Europe because the Jews were the Other, like the Other who were the colonized in Asia, Africa, or in the Americas; and this was the second point you cannot say. So I was accused to have called for the erasure of Israel by saying from the river to the sea, and then to have relativized and trivialized the Holocaust. Now, this is why I say this. I mean, I’m debating whether they are stupid, or perform stupidity. And I was leaning toward a latter when I went to Germany. Now I think they’re really stupid. I mean, a lot of people in Germany are obtuse. They are so dogmatic that they don’t think, they just act like a pack, like a herd. It’s incredible that educated people can behave like a herd.Then I went to Berlin, where I was due to speak at the so-called Free University of Berlin (at one point I told them to drop the “free” from the name). However, it didn’t happen, they cancelled the event because of pressure from the Berlin mayor, the Israeli ambassador, some MPs, the Minister of Science. It’s very serious that the university gave into this pressure. Eventually we had another event where they threatened to shut down the venue who had accepted to host us forever, and we had the event in the newspaper’s office. So instead of 600 there were only 150 people allowed in. There were queues of people waiting, looking, listening to the conference from their phone and looking at it from outside the window and it was an amazing event, so strong. And the police were there in full gear.Myself and others spoke about the fact that Germany has an identity issue, because, after the Second World War, embracing Israel’s protection was the way to redeem themselves. But they have not really elaborated upon what they had done to the Jewish people, you know, so they stick to Israel without even realizing what they have done to the Jewish people. Because today they continue to persecute the Jewish people. There are Jewish people, including Israelis, who have been arrested and detained for standing in solidarity with the Palestinians.Meanwhile, you should know that when I went to that event, I knew that the Federal Police had called the UN saying they were going to arrest me. So I didn’t sleep the night before, because I don’t want to be arrested! I was freaking out. You know, people think that I’m brave— I’m not brave, I’m just very sure. I’m very sure of what I’m doing. So I’m so solid and I’m so firm because I know that what I’m saying is true. But then here I am: I find myself in a place where I’m told you’re going to be arrested for what you said? Oh, hold on, hold on a second. So now the law enforcement is after me as if I were the criminal. So it took me the whole night thinking, trying to meditate, to really find peace. And then in the morning, I talked to my husband. I said, Max, these people want to arrest me, and he said they’re crazy. Go ahead and do what you always do. Talk to the people, because they need you to tell them there’s still some oxygen for them to breathe. And you today, you are their oxygen. And this thing really strengthened me Abby, and pushed me through the day. But it was very, very heavy. This has been the heaviest thing other than looking into the eyes of the genocide there and the victims of the genocide, this is, this is one of the most surreal and absurd things I’ve ever gone through.ABBY MARTIN: Oh my God. That must have been so intense. It was intense just watching it unfold from the safety of Portland, Oregon, thinking you could actually get arrested. I mean, Francesca Albenese, the special rapporteur could be arrested??FRANCESCA ALBANESE: A UN expert? And for what?ABBY MARTIN: Exactly. When you zoom out and you look at the ICC, the threats and the sanctions against the ICC and South Africa from the Trump administration and the kind of this new political climate—even though both parties really mirror each other when it comes to this kind of Imperial conquest abroad and the support for Israel—there is something a little bit more “mask off” about the belligerence and the approach from the Trump administration of just no qualms at all about open threats and declaration of war against these institutions that are even trying to impose some sort of penalties for what Israel is doing, or to curb back the impunity. I guess there was this huge sense of relief when the ICC issued the arrest warrants, right? Yes, but now you see what Trump is doing, sanctioning the entire court, their families, imposing all these penalties. What is your response to this new political climate, and what could happen and manifest from the attempt from these global bodies to try to rein in the impunity,FRANCESCA ALBANESE: I do see the normalization and the spreading of mafia style techniques at the international level. It’s becoming more and more common and more normalized to cover up for crimes committed by a country in the name of “friendship”, or Alliance. And this is what the mafia is about. Eventually, you know, you have white collar crimes committed in the interest of protection, having each other’s back. But the point is that in the sanctions against the ICC, the attack on the functions and the persons involved in the ICC investigation; this is a new law, and it represents a fatal blow for the multilateral order. So there should be a strong, the strongest pushback ever from the rest of the world, and it’s not happening. What the US is doing, together with Israel, is dismantling, piece by piece, the multilateral order that has been established over the past eighty years.ABBY MARTIN: Is there any way to circumvent that power that the US has the dominance over these institutions? We’re seeing efforts like the Hague group and things like that, but it does seem like, because of the power and domination of the US, it’s going to be hard to actually work around that. Because obviously you still have faith in international law, and you feel like the law is the solution. It’s just a matter of implementation. But there is that huge paradox: how do we implement something that the US is obstructing?FRANCESCA ALBANESE: I have already said that there are 192 one member states out of 193 in the UN that have nothing to gain from supporting the policies of the US in the long term. This is imperialism in its crudest form, and there is a need to disengage from that. The world should take this as an opportunity and as a blessing in disguise.ABBY MARTIN: Indeed. I want to talk quickly about your next report about the institutional complicity in the genocide. What are you hoping to accomplish with the findings? And why is that the next focus for you?FRANCESCA ALBANESE: The next report is about the private sector: the maze of business, corporations, financial institutions, research institutions, everyone that is partaking in the legality of the occupation at the international level. And there is a network, a system made of ganglions, that nourishes and profits from the legality of the occupation, from research centers, universities, charities, banks, pension funds, businesses, startups connected to the surveillance and military sector, the military sector itself. It’s sickening, if you look at it from within, because there are so many, there are so many ties that link to the to the contribution of individuals that are not even aware of their part of an unlawful endeavor. And this is what prompted my interest in exposing this, because I need one of the things that I promised myself I would do through my mandate, is that I would pull back the various layers covering the reality, covering the truth. I will expose it. This is what the truth teller, in the words and in spirit of Professor Edward Said, would do, and this is what I think is the role of anyone who has an inch of an intellect to contribute to the debate, so I need to expose that and seek and give civil society tools to seek accountability.ABBY MARTIN: What do you think is next for Gaza in terms of how we can keep this issue on people’s minds? Because it seems like there’s a fatigue and exhaustion, especially with this resurgence of fascism in you know, my country, Francesca, that’s overseen and subsidizing the vast majority of what’s happening, there’s a lot of fatigue, because for the last 15 months, a lot of Americans have been protesting Biden for overseeing this, and now it’s like, oh my god, now we’re supposed to protest fascism and this kind of new era, and I think people just don’t know where to take it. And I think the worry is that Palestine is going to be absent from the conversation, considering the gravity of everything else that’s going on and compounding it with the ongoing genocide.FRANCESCA ALBANESE: Look, I know that there is a lot of fatigue, but we cannot stop because we are tired. And I think that people do not realize you think that it’s been me contributing to the shift of debate, of the debate, but hell no, it’s been us — us, me, and other special rapporteurs and Amnesty International and people on the ground and scholars who have fought to stand by their principles and last but not least, the protesters and the Palestinians, those who have been really on the front line, the Palestinians who have been genocided. And while they were being genocided, they were sending messages to the outside world. And so the protesters were the ones carrying that word into their world. They need to be told that they need to be acknowledged. If I could, I would hug everyone and say thank you, because we are part of a revolution. We are still small and we need to grow, but we are many, so rather than grow, we need to unite. And this is what I keep on telling people, keep on moving, keep on talking. Don’t get gaslighted. Don’t get distracted. Keep on going. Even if we lose, we will lose fighting for something that’s just, and we will fall while fighting against something that is terribly untenably unjust. We need to try at least, and I’m very positive that if we do that, if we continue, if we are not defeated by our own fear or self doubt, we will make it. We will succeed. We will bring Israel to accountability. Many things seem impossible till they become possible. Nelson Mandela used to say, we need to feel it inside, really in our guts."
}
,
"relatedposts": [
{
"title" : "Narrative Sovereignty in the American Wing of The Met: Don't Miss ENCODED at the MET",
"author" : "",
"category" : "",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/narrative-sovereignty-in-the-american-wing-of-the-met",
"date" : "2025-12-22 12:58:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Hidden_Exhibition.jpg",
"excerpt" : "As artists and multicultural activists, we did not come to the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s American Wing seeking permission, instead we showed up to the work with intention, responsibility, and a commitment to truth. ENCODED: Change the Story, Change the Future exists because silence is not neutral, presence without agency is insufficient and solidarity across values-based creativity is essential for liberation.",
"content" : "As artists and multicultural activists, we did not come to the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s American Wing seeking permission, instead we showed up to the work with intention, responsibility, and a commitment to truth. ENCODED: Change the Story, Change the Future exists because silence is not neutral, presence without agency is insufficient and solidarity across values-based creativity is essential for liberation.The American Wing is often described as a celebration of American art, yet it also functions as a carefully curated archive of colonial mythology and westward expansion propaganda. Its paintings and sculptures rehearse familiar narratives: conquest framed as destiny, extraction framed as progress, whiteness framed as purity, Indigenous absence framed as inevitability. These works are not merely historical artifacts; they are instruments of narrative power. They encode ideas about belonging, legitimacy, and nationhood, ideas that continue to shape cultural consciousness and public policy today. ENCODED intervenes in this institutional space not to negate history, but to complicate it. Using augmented reality, the exhibition overlays Indigenous artistic expression and counter-narratives directly onto famous works in the American Wing, reframing them through Indigenous epistemologies, lived experience, and historical truth. This is not an act of erasure. It is an act of expansion and an overt insistence that American art history is incomplete without Indigenous voice, presence, and critique.At its core, ENCODED is grounded in the principle of narrative sovereignty. Narrative sovereignty asserts that communities most impacted by historical and ongoing harm such as Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant people, Palestinians, Pacific Islanders, Trans folks and the working class all must have the authority to tell their own stories, in their own words, and within the institutions that have historically excluded or misrepresented them. This is not a symbolic gesture. It is a democratic imperative.Democracy depends on access to truth. When museums present a singular, sanitized vision of history, they do not merely reflect power, they reinforce it. The American Wing has long upheld myths of “taming the West” and the so-called exhaustion of empire, narratives that obscure the violence of settler colonialism, normalize Indigenous dispossession and chattel slavery. ENCODED challenges these myths by making visible what has been omitted: resistance, survival, continuity, solidarity and accountability. For me, I also hope this intervention reflects back to museum goers and viewers the perils of authoritarianism, fascism and ongoing colonial projects such as legacy media consolidation, rapid creation of datacenters to produce AI, cutting access to healthcare, education, rights, or the current US regime’s attempt to erase history by any means necessary.The artists participating in ENCODED are not responding nostalgically to the past. They are engaging the present. Their work examines how colonial narratives persist in contemporary systems including environmental destruction justified by extraction, racial hierarchies reinforced through cultural storytelling, and institutions that benefit from the aesthetics of inclusion while resisting structural change. These are not abstract critiques; they are lived realities and for me deep lessons that have been shaped by having formerly worked at a neocolonial conservation nonprofit ran by wealthy cis wyt men and their enablers for nearly five years.Artistic integrity, in this context, cannot be separated from ethical responsibility. For too long, the art world has upheld a false binary between aesthetics and politics, suggesting that rigor diminishes when artists engage power directly. ENCODED rejects this premise. Integrity is not neutrality. Integrity is the willingness to tell the truth, even when it destabilizes comfort or prestige. Walking with integrity can be painful and takes courage.Importantly, ENCODED is not positioned as a protest staged outside the institution, nor as a request for institutional validation. It is an act of presence with agency. The project uses accessible technology to meet audiences where they are, inviting participation rather than reverence. Viewers scan QR codes and encounter layered narratives that ask them to look again, listen differently, and question inherited assumptions. Except for a few organized tours, the experience is self-guided, decentralized, and deliberately democratic. It’s also fun, and it is so special to hear the familiar sounds from the ENCODED pieces ring throughout the galleries signalling that kin is close by.This kinship network and accessibility is central to the work. Cultural literacy should not be gated by academic language, curatorial authority, white exceptionalism or economic privilege. By operating through personal devices, ENCODED rejects the museum’s traditional hierarchy of knowledge and affirms that interpretation is a shared civic space. The exhibition does not dictate conclusions; it creates conditions for reckoning and deep dialogue.Solidarity is another foundational principle of the project. ENCODED brings together Indigenous artists across nations and disciplines, in relationship with Black, Brown, and allied communities who recognize that colonialism is not a single-issue structure. The logics that dispossessed Indigenous peoples are the same logics that underwrote slavery, environmental exploitation, the seizing of Palestine, forced child mining labor of cobalt in Congo and in general global empire. Working in solidarity does not collapse difference; it honors specificity while resisting division and acknowledging historic patterns of systemic oppression.In a cultural landscape shaped by scarcity and competition, ENCODED models an alternative, one rooted in collective presence, shared resources, and mutual accountability. The project refuses the extractive norms of both empire and the contemporary art economy, offering instead a relational approach grounded in care, collaboration, and long-term impact on community.The decision to situate ENCODED within the American Wing was deliberate. Indigenous art has too often been confined to anthropological contexts or framed as premodern, separate from the narrative of American art. ENCODED asserts what has always been true: Indigenous peoples are not peripheral to American history; we are foundational to it. Our stories do not belong on the margins, nor do they belong solely to the past or through a white gaze.Yet presence without counter-narrative risks assimilation. ENCODED insists that visibility must be accompanied by authorship. By intervening directly within the American Wing, the project challenges the authority of colonial framing and invites institutions to reckon with their role in shaping public memory. Our hope is that eventually the Met will see this as an opportunity to engage in discussion and support its presence well into 2026.There is risk in this work. Naming colonial propaganda within revered institutions invites discomfort, defensiveness, and critique. But risk is inseparable from integrity. Artists and cultural workers are accountable not only to institutions and audiences, but to future generations. The question is not whether institutions will change, but whether artists will continue to lead with courage when they do not.ENCODED is an offering and a provocation. It asks what it means to inherit a cultural legacy and whether we are willing to transform it. Empire is not exhausted; it is contested. And art remains one of the most powerful sites of that contestation. When we change the story, we do change the future. Not through erasure, but through expansion. Not through dominance, but through relationship.Ultimately, ENCODED affirms that art is not merely a reflection of society, but a tool for shaping it and that when artists from the margins claim space at the center, together and with integrity, we open pathways toward a more honest, inclusive, and democratic cultural future. Join us.To access ENCODED review the exhibit website for instructions. While at the Met scan the QR code and click through the prompts for the self guided tour.https://www.encodedatthemet.com"
}
,
{
"title" : "The Aesthetics of Atrocity:: Lockheed Martin’s Streetwear Pivot",
"author" : "Louis Pisano",
"category" : "",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/the-aesthetics-of-atrocity",
"date" : "2025-12-20 10:30:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Lockheed_StreetWar.jpg",
"excerpt" : "On December 12, The Business of Fashion published an article titled “The Unlikely Rise and Uncertain Future of Lockheed Martin Streetwear,” detailing the world’s largest arms manufacturer’s entrance into casual apparel.",
"content" : "On December 12, The Business of Fashion published an article titled “The Unlikely Rise and Uncertain Future of Lockheed Martin Streetwear,” detailing the world’s largest arms manufacturer’s entrance into casual apparel.Through a licensing deal with South Korea’s Doojin Yanghang Corp., Lockheed turns fighter jet graphics, corporate slogans, and its star logo into gorpcore staples. Oversized outerwear, tactical pants, and advanced synthetic fabrics sell out at Seoul pop-ups like the Hyundai department store with young Korean consumers chasing the edgy, functional vibe. Andy Koh, a Seoul-based content creator, tells BoF that while arms manufacturing is, in theory, political, he has never encountered widespread discomfort among Korean consumers. “As long as it looks cool and the product functions as expected,” he says, “they seem okay with it.”This trend aligns with a broader South Korean fashion phenomenon: licensing logos from global non-fashion brands to create popular streetwear lines. Examples include National Geographic puffers, Yale crewnecks, Kodak retro tees, CNN hoodies, Discovery jackets, Jeep outdoor wear, and university apparel from institutions like Harvard and UCLA. These licensed collections, often featuring media, academia, sports leagues, or adventure themes, have become staples on online retailers like Musinsa and in brick-and-mortar stores, propelled by K-pop influence and a tech-savvy youth market that make these odd crossovers multimillion-dollar successes.Lockheed, however, is categorically different. Its core business is not exploration, education, or journalism. It is industrialized death, and its arrival in fashion forces a reckoning with how far commodification can stretch.Having spent years in the military, maybe I’m the wrong person to critique this. Or maybe I’m exactly the right one. I know what weapons are for, how they’re used, and the human cost they carry. Lockheed manufactures F-16 and F-35 fighter jets, Hellfire missiles, and precision-guided systems that human rights organizations have repeatedly linked to civilian casualties across multiple conflicts. In Yemen, U.S.-supplied weapons incorporating Lockheed technology contributed to thousands of civilian deaths since 2015, most notoriously the 2018 airstrike on a school bus in Saada that killed dozens of children. In Gaza, since October 2023, Lockheed-supplied F-35s and munitions have formed the backbone of air operations that Amnesty International and other watchdogs have flagged for potential violations of international humanitarian law, cases now under examination by the International Court of Justice.In 2024, the company reported $71 billion in revenue, almost entirely from military contracts, with more than 1,100 F-35s already delivered worldwide and production lines running hotter than ever. That staggering scale is the reality lurking beneath a logo now casually printed on everyday apparel.So why does the planet’s largest arms manufacturer license its brand to streetwear? The answer seems to be twofold: easy money and sophisticated image laundering. Licensing delivers low-risk royalties from Korea’s reported $35-40 billion apparel market with virtually no operational headache. Lockheed simply collects checks while a third-party manufacturer handles design, production, distribution, and deals with all the mess of retail.The far more ambitious goal, however, is reputational refurbishment. Doojin deliberately markets the line around “future-oriented technical aesthetics” and “aerospace innovation,” leaning on cutting-edge fabrics to conjure high-tech futurism instead of battlefield carnage. By late 2025, as U.S. favorability in South Korea continued to slide amid trade tensions and regional geopolitical shifts, the brand quietly de-emphasized its American roots, according to Lockheed representatives. The strategy clearly tries to sever the logo from political controversy and plant it firmly in youth culture, where aesthetic appeal routinely outmuscles ethical concern.Lockheed has honed this kind of rebranding for decades. Their corporate brochures overflow with talk of “driving innovation” and “advancing scientific discovery,” spotlighting STEM scholarships, veteran hiring initiatives, and rapid-response disaster aid. The clothing itself carries the same sanitized messaging. One prominent slogan reads “Ensuring those we serve always stay ahead of ready”, euphemistic corporate-speak that sounds heroic until you remember that “those we serve” includes forces deploying Hellfire missiles against civilian targets. Other pieces feature F-35 graphics paired with copy declaring the jet “strengthens national security, enhances global partnerships, and powers economic growth”. It’s textbook PR varnish. Instruments designed for lethal efficiency, now rebranded as symbols of progress and prosperity.We’ve also seen this trick before: Fast fashion brands that slap “sustainable” labels on sweatshop products. Tech giants that fund glamorous art installations while they harvest user data. Oil companies that rebrand themselves as forward-thinking “energy” players as the Earth’s climate burns. Lockheed, though, traffics in something uniquely irreversible: export-grade death. By licensing its identity to apparel, multibillion-dollar arms contracts are reduced to mere intellectual property; civilian casualties dissolved into, simply, background static.In other words, vibes overpower victims. And when those vibes are stamped with the logo of the planet’s preeminent death merchant, resistance feels futile.Gorpcore has always drawn from military surplus for its rugged utility: endless cargo pockets, indestructible nylons, tactical silhouettes born in combat and repurposed for city streets. Brands like Arc’teryx, The North Face, and Supreme mine that heritage for authenticity and performance. After World War II, army fatigues became symbols of genuine rebellion, worn by anti-war protesters as an act of defiance against the establishment. Today, the dynamic threatens to invert entirely. The establishment itself, the world’s preeminent arms dealer, now supplies the “authentic” merchandise, turning subversion into subtle endorsement.Streetwear grew out of skate culture, hip-hop, and grassroots rebellion against mainstream norms. Importing the aesthetics of atrocity risks converting that legacy into compliance, rendering militarism the newest version of mainstream cool. For a generation immersed in filtered feeds and rapid trend cycles, Lockheed’s logo can sit comfortably beside NASA patches or National Geographic emblems, conveniently severed from the charred wreckage in Saada or the devastation in Gaza. Research on “ethical fading” demonstrates how strong visual design can mute moral alarms, a phenomenon intensified in Korea’s hyper-trendy ecosystem, where mandatory military service may further desensitize young consumers to defense branding while K-pop’s global engine drives relentless consumption.If the line proves durable, escalation feels inevitable. Palantir, another cornerstone of the defense-tech world, has already gone there, hyping limited merch drops that sell out in hours: $99 athletic shorts stamped “PLTR—TECH,” $119 nylon totes, hoodies emblazoned with CEO Alex Karp’s likeness or slogans about “dominating” threats. What’s to stop Northrop Grumman from launching its own techwear line? Or BAE Systems from dropping high-end collaborations?Lockheed already licenses merchandise worldwide through various agencies; broader international rollouts beyond Korea seem only a matter of time. Backlash is possible, boycotts from ethically minded buyers, perhaps even regulatory scrutiny as anti-militarism sentiment swells. Gorpcore’s longstanding flirtation with military aesthetics could calcify into outright fetish, obliterating whatever daylight remained between practical function and state-sanctioned propaganda.Yet, history suggests that in oversaturated markets, “cool” almost always trumps conscience. Lockheed’s streetwear pivot is a stark illustration of how fashion and culture launder raw power, enabling the machinery of war to conceal itself among hype, hoodies, and sold-out drops."
}
,
{
"title" : "Our Era of Insecurity: How Unaffordability and Uncertainty Became Our Monoculture",
"author" : "Alissa Quart",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/our-era-of-insecurity",
"date" : "2025-12-16 11:56:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Unaffordability.jpg",
"excerpt" : "In 2025, I’ve interviewed a number of people who saw themselves as living in “survival mode.” At first, their professions might surprise you. They are government contractors, public broadcasters, and tech workers, formerly safe professions. And some of their jobs disappeared this year due to DOGE “efficiency” cuts, the dismantling of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and AI acceleration. They are among the millions now living through an experience that I call terra infirma, a new level of economic and social uncertainty.",
"content" : "In 2025, I’ve interviewed a number of people who saw themselves as living in “survival mode.” At first, their professions might surprise you. They are government contractors, public broadcasters, and tech workers, formerly safe professions. And some of their jobs disappeared this year due to DOGE “efficiency” cuts, the dismantling of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and AI acceleration. They are among the millions now living through an experience that I call terra infirma, a new level of economic and social uncertainty.It’s the mood that encapsulates so much of Trump 2.0. A November 2025 Pew study found that almost half of U.S. adults are uncertain about having enough retirement income. When it comes to health insurance, they may be waiting for their ACA health subsidies to sunset or for their partner’s premiums to skyrocket. Addressing unaffordability and uncertainty is even the newest theme song in politics, most recently in the Maine campaign of gubernatorial candidate, oyster farmer and military veteran Graham Platner.Seventy years ago, the critic Raymond Williams used the term “structure of feeling” to describe a collective emotion that is tied to a time and place, as well as social and economic conditions. Today, our “structure of feeling” is uncertainty. You could even take it further, and call “precarity” the last monoculture as it’s a condition shared by so many Americans. As Astra Taylor, author of The Age of Insecurity: Coming Together as Things Fall Apart, says, insecurity is a “defining feature of our time.”As far as mass moods go, “insecurity” is certainly a disconcerting one. The economist Pranab Bardhan writes in A World of Insecurity, that “insecurity, more than inequality, agitates people.” What makes 2025 different from other years, however, is the degree to which we all experienced this precarity. The usual uncertainty level has been turned up from a whine to a 135-decibel air raid scream.What’s happened? Tariffs have raised our costs. Medicaid will be scaled back over the next decade by a trillion dollars. Meanwhile, dozens of Venezuelan fishermen have been exploded by our armed forces. And while two-thirds of Americans are already living with economic insecurity, their feelings about it don’t necessarily involve the discrepancy between their lot and those of the very rich. As Steven Semler, the co-founder of Security Policy Reform Institute (SPRI), explains it to me, these Americans have a mindset that “is more fearful of poverty than aspirations of being a millionaire.”The people of terra infirma do describe such fears. In the words of one, they’ve experienced a “mental health decline and a loss of purpose” and in another, “a serious financial pinch”, because they are their family’s main breadwinner. Uncertainty is the common refrain of the growing number of laid-off software workers, according to Human-Centered Design scholar Samuel So. In addition to feeling destabilized about their professional security for the first time, software workers have experienced disillusionment and alienation from the technology industry’s “military and police partnerships.” Jobs themselves are part of this insecurity, with never-ending hiring processes, the race of automation, and ghost jobs, the twisted contemporary version of the perished Russian serfs of Nikolai Gogol’s Dead Souls, except now professional opportunities are offered that don’t actually exist. People are also nervous about their future, because insecurity is a temporal emotion, as much about the future as the present. Many of us wonder how our security will further erode, as our health plan premiums soar, or as our subways catch on fire, or as ICE comes to our cities. This causes not only stress in the moment, but discomfort about what lies ahead.Of course, it’s not just Trump 2.0 alone that has caused this. The forces behind Trump’s win in 2024—and the anger at the traditional Democratic party—have something to do with this disposition, as well. In the weeks leading up to Trump’s election, people surveyed by the Federal Reserve Board ranked one of their top concerns as pricing and their top concern as inflation. Disparate phenomena—AI slop, job cuts, relentless and confusing cutbacks in crucial academic research—are entwined. It’s as if they were all figures in a paranoiac Thomas Pynchon novel. In a “world of insecurity,” as economist Bardhan writes, instabilities interlink. In other words, what I think of as “informational insecurity”—bots, false ads, fake news—often joins up with economic instability.These different instances of confusion and instability blend into a gnarly color wheel of distress. Economic distress, sure—that is also accentuated by societal, cultural, environmental, and physical examples of insecurity we see all around us, every day.How do we pick apart these knotted-together insecurities? For starters, we can embrace candidates who address economic uncertainty head-on, including New York’s new mayor, Zohran Mamdani, Seattle’s new mayor, Katie Wilson, and Virginia’s governor-elect Abigail Spanberger. These politicians, as Nicholas Jacobs has written of Maine candidate Platner, are “speaking to grievances that are real, measurable, and decades in the making.”Another line of defense is being brave and grasping for community in any way we can. I think of the ordinary people blowing whistles near Chicago to alert their neighbors when ICE showed up in their suburban towns: they were accidental upstanders, refusing to be part of manufactured uncertainty and instability.One traditional definition of security is “freedom from fear.” And while we are unlikely to experience that freedom from fear as long as the populist American Right continues its goosestep, it’s also important to remember that uncertainty, like any “structure of feeling,” is an unfinished emotion.Yes, insecurity shapes us now. But we, as a collective, are so much more than it. Because even if we are living in a time of such negative uncertainty, it won’t necessarily stay that way. We can still redefine ourselves and, most importantly, recognize we are not alone."
}
]
}