Free speech and I

December 10th is celebrated as International Human Rights Day. That's because on this day in 1948 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – UDHR, was adopted by the United Nations.

Happy Birthday UDHR!

The UDHR is a landmark document which proclaims that fundamental human rights are to be universally guaranteed to all people. In Article 19, it also provides for the protection of freedom of speech and free media. I recently contributed to the #Article19ForAll social action, organized by Deutsche Welle, Germany's public broadcaster.

I did this because I have always been a fervent believer in the right to free speech.

And why is it so important? It's obvious isn't it?

This right allows us to express ourselves. To express our opinions and views by whatever means – through writing, print, photos, music, dancing, poetry, cartoons, films, shouting or even...conspicuous silence.... To express opinions that are popular but also those that buck the trend. The non-conformist, provocative or even shocking ones.

All of this is protected.

It is a right to find and demand information from the state and other powerful institutions. The right to demand justice. The right to protest. The right to create, to innovate or to collaborate. The right to speak truth to power!

The great threats to free speech in this time and age really do worry me, and from so many sides. There are so many governments that resort to restriction and censorship, especially online. There are so many governments in cahoots with tech companies which use elaborate surveillance systems to spy on our communications and what we do online. This state and / or corporate surveillance is just wrong and I never understand why more of us are not up in arms about it. Sadly, journalists and activists, especially those working on environmental issues, get killed, prosecuted or are imprisoned for simply speaking out. They are threatened and harassed.

Julian Assange, founder and publisher of WikiLeaks, is my Number One hero of free speech. WikiLeaks has published information about so many wrongdoings, so much corruption, countless war crimes and have brought transparency to so many illegal practices. Guilty governments hate being exposed and in turn twist the truth and pretend that what has come to light is against their national security or state interest... Of course we know it's against their true state interests. They conveniently omit that all the information WikiLeaks has published actually belongs to the people and that in fact the state merely holds the information on behalf of and for the people.

There is simply no justification for secrecy.

These publications have had immense impact. They have changed many peoples' views of governments. They have changed many peoples' lives. They have even changed the way media publish and the way journalism works [for the better] and what it means for and how to protect sources in digital the age.

And so because of this work, several governments are after Julian and WikiLeaks, especially the USA. Julian has faced many smear campaigns and even death threats. He has been arbitrarily detained according to the United Nations since December 2010. This year, his freedom and ability to communicate with the outside world was restricted even more when he was cut off from the world for six months. And to top it off the Democratic National Committee started a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against WikiLeaks simply for publishing their emails and exposing their problematic practices during the presidential primaries.

However especially worrisome are the recent revelations in the US. This November, US prosecutors confirmed something that WikiLeaks and others have been saying for almost a decade; that Julian has been secretly charged in the US by violating the US Espionage Act, which bizarrely criminalizes releasing information about US war crimes.

What Julian and WikiLeaks have had to endure is the biggest attack on free speech and constitutional rights in years and that's just the beginning. Just wait: after WikiLeaks they will aim for other publishers like the NY Times, the Post....the list is endless.

Many international organizations have supported Julian and WikiLeaks and have called for their rights to be protected, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Reporters Without Borders and more than 50 other freedom of expression organizations in the IFEX (International Freedom of Expression) network.

But this is not enough. Simply more must be done to free Julian and to protect free speech...and this will protect freedom for us all.

On this 70th anniversary of the UDHR, on this day of Human Rights, on this day so close to Christmas when we should be thinking of others, I ask you all to spare a thought to the importance of free speech and appreciate those who fight for it...those who fight for us... those like Julian Assange and WikiLeaks!

Love

Pamela

www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

Brexit and I (also starring Shakespeare and Churchill)

photo by Luca Pizzaroni

I am visiting London today.

The top topic du jour is the "Brexit deal", the terms of the UK leaving the European Union, following the 2016 referendum.

The main problem is that although people in the UK voted to leave the EU, nobody knew at the time what this would actually look like. It has never been done. So it is a new thing for everyone involved.

The current deal, pushed forward by Theresa May, Prime Minister of the UK, is hated by both the Leave and the Remain camps.

Never have the words of Shakespeare - "now is the winter of our discontent" – rang more true than now.

I have been following the situation very closely and I fully support the position of Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour party leader (leader of the opposition). Ok, I admit it, I have a little political crush on Jeremy Corbyn. He is a politician whose integrity I absolutely and unconditionally admire. But that is another matter for another time...[watch this space]

If you read coverage of Brexit in The Guardian, for example, you might think that the end of the world or Armageddon is due at 1pm local time on 29th March 2019, the Brexit time. The Guardian, the metropolitan elites and the likes describe the EU as some sort of humanitarian charity that is a force of unquestionable good and that nothing is more important than being a member of it, no matter what.

The Leave camp and its leaders lied through their teeth during the referendum campaign and resorted to disgusting scapegoating of migrants in the process. They have been absolutely appalling.

This cold war style propaganda on both sides is shocking and sickening.

But let's be honest. For the bureaucrats and shareholders of the biggest global corporations the EU is nothing more than their own pet project. The main pillar of the EU is free trade without any national limitations, including national tariffs and laws protecting workers, consumers or nature. I am fully aware that the EU helped achieve a lot of good and introduced many measures that have been beneficial to the people and to life on this planet. But this is just a disguise used to ensure its true purpose.

There are neoliberal policies enshrined in EU treaties which EU countries are forced to implement even if against their will. Inequality between the EU countries has been increasing. Weaker states have been pushed deeper into crisis. Just look at Greece - and the barbaric treatment it had to endure - to see the true ruthlessness of the EU.

EU rules make it impossible for the states to introduce policies such as re-nationalisation of railways or other social justice reforms.

The supporters of the EU claim that its main benefit is the free movement of people. They are totally blind to the phenomenon called social dumping (aka a business practice whereby employers use cheaper labour than is usually available at their business sites of production or sale and migrant workers within the EU). This means lowering the wages. Sadly, the right wing parties misuse this to create anti-migrant sentiments. Failing neoliberalism is unable to address the staggering inequalities between the rich and the poor and the resulting frustration and so it resorts to right-wing party tactics and their scapegoats.

The EU is not a democratic institution. Again, the Greece example - where the EU forced the Syriza government to go against the decision of its own population - shows how impossible it is for a country to extricate itself from the EU.

So all in all, I find the UK referendum on leaving the EU to be a brave move. It is vitally important that the EU is thoroughly and fundamentally reformed. Europe deserves a much better form of organised cooperation. And I would really support the UK attempting to create an alternative for Europe.

But retreating to nationalistic tendencies is not an alternative. The only road to freedom is via a joint fight of the unprivileged. This means foreign workers included.

The current deal proposed by Theresa May does NOT offer such an alternative. It is a disaster. I am sure that I could have negotiated better conditions than this dumb deal. I have been negotiating with Hollywood for decades. I could handle Mr Michel Bernier (the EU Chief negotiator)!!

But what is the solution? How to find a good way out of this impasse?

I would love to see Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister, he would certainly negotiate a better deal.

I was thinking that perhaps the UK needs something like the National Government, similar to one that was created during World War II. It would have the leaders of all the major political parties in the UK working jointly towards the best solution for the people in the country.

The EU must definitely learn their lesson and reform. People from other EU countries must also stand against the true nature of the EU. And we must all keep in mind that reforming the EU is just part and parcel of the fight against global supranational institutions. Institutions that create and enforce rules that benefit global businesses, the rich and the privileged!

Don't think that this sounds like a hopeless project set to fail. Remember, as Winston Churchill once said: "success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm."

So it is absolutely worth it to try.

Love

Pamela

NICKY LARSON

Nicky Larson est le meilleur des gardes du corps, un détective privé hors-pair. Il est appelé pour une mission à hauts risques : récupérer le parfum de Cupidon, un parfum qui rendrait irrésistible celui qui l’utilise… NICKY LARSON (Comédie 2019) Pamela Anderson, Philippe Lacheau, Didier Bourdon Date de sortie : 6 Février 2019

Yellow Vests and I

I am glad that the media noticed my brief Twitter take on the situation in France, my adopted country, which has been experiencing a series of mass protests in the last few weeks.

Some followers accused me of "throwing support" behind the riots and violence and not understanding the problem. This is so biased. Why? Let's see! Why these protests now?

Instead of being hypnotized by the burning images, I wanted to ask "where did the protests come from?" 

"Yellow Vests" ("Gilets Jaune" named after roadside-safety vests) are a mass popular movement against the current establishment. It is a revolt that has been simmering in France for years. A revolt by ordinary people against the current political system which -  as in many other western countries – colludes with the elite and despises its own citizens.

The protest started when President Macron announced an increase in carbon and air pollution taxes. The next increase will happen in January. This is supposed to collect more money for the state budget and also motivate people to use alternatives to diesel-fuelled cars. Macron would like to ban diesel cars by 2040.

But the French state encouraged people to buy diesel fuelled cars for many years. For example, in 2016, 62% of cars in France were diesel cars, as well as 95% of all vans and small lorries. So it is no wonder that many people view the new policy as a total betrayal.

Getting a new car is probably not a big deal for President Macron and his ministers. But it is way too difficult for many people who are already financially stretched to the max . Many poor people will not be able to get to work, especially if there is no reliable public transport in place throughout. Many old people will not be able to get to the shops or to the doctor.

Lots of media see Yellow Vests protesters as criminals causing destruction.

I see forces of destruction on the other side.

What about the violence?

I am a committed pacifist. I despise violence. But I also know that when protests end in violence it is too often the failure and the fault of the state. The failure of the state to enable people to be heard. This is the position of many international human rights organisations including Amnesty International.

Also, the critics of "violent riots" pretend that the current capitalist society is non-violent. Violence is a part of modern society and comes in many forms.

For example, Philippe Bourgois recognises four types of violence.

Political violence is conducted in the name of some state power or ideology.

Structural violence concerns the political and economic order of  society in which the conditions of inequality and exploitation are institutionalised, including the exploitation of "cheap labour" and natural resources in the developing world.

Symbolic violence is involved when the oppressed and powerless internalize their humiliation and inequality.

And finally, everyday violence is the violence of "ordinary" life, such as criminality or domestic violence. This violence is often closely linked to structural violence (for example criminality can be associated with poverty) or a symbolic one (domestic violence can be linked to gender inequality).

So what is the violence of all these people and burned luxurious cars compared to the structural violence of the French and global elites?

When some protesters destroy cars and burn shops, they symbolically attack private property that is the basis of capitalism. When they attack police officers, they symbolically reject and challenge repressive state forces - forces that primarily protect the capital.

Moralising about burned cars and banks’ broken windows is misplaced. This must be seen in the context of the current status quo. A status quo in which the power of the powerful and the powerlessness of the powerless is maintained. A status quo of societies where only a few profit and the many loose.

What about the climate change?

Some people might think that Yellow Vests are fighting against good policies that aim to reduce carbon emissions.

But let's not forget that it is the world's richest 10% who are responsible for nearly 50% of total lifestyle consumption emissions.

Also, the stated fight against climate change is often a very lucrative business and used merely as a screen for preferential projects that would not be viable otherwise due to their costs. These projects are often chosen in a way that is not very transparent.

I do not believe that the Yellow Vests support harmful policies that cause climate change. They are against the political system and the politics that did far more for the rich than for the poor.

What is next?

The true question is whether the current protests can turn into something constructive. What comes the day after and if the progressives in France, and all over the world, can find solutions to constructing equal and egalitarian societies.

Yellow Vests are calling for a new social justice order, for the right to live in dignity based on fair wages and a fair tax system. The only solution is to create such a system. A system that will stand for respect of community life: for redistribution of the wealth to the benefit of the people and the nation. Because the people have been excluded from the distribution of  wealth thus far and have been left destitute.

More to come. Watch this space!

Love

Pamela

Danse Avec Les Stars - Pamela Anderson et Maxime Dereymez - To build a Home - Foxtrot

Letter to President Emmanuel Macron, France

Monsieur le président,

J’ai l’honneur de vous solliciter pour un rendez-vous afin de vous remettre la pétition de mes amis de PETA France demandant une interdiction nationale de la détention d’animaux sauvages dans les cirques.

Comme l’indique la Fédération des vétérinaires d’Europe : « Les besoins des mammifères sauvages ne peuvent être satisfaits dans un cirque itinérant, en particulier quant aux conditions de vie et à la possibilité d’exprimer des comportements normaux ». Or, la loi française (l’article L214-1 du Code rural) énonce que « tout animal étant un être sensible doit être placé par son propriétaire dans des conditions compatibles avec les impératifs biologiques de son espèce ». Quant aux dispositions du décret du 18 mars 2011 censées garantir le bien-être animal dans les cirques, elles ne sont souvent accompagnées d’aucun contrôle dans la pratique, et sont parfois inapplicables.

Une vingtaine d’États de l’UE, comme la Belgique, la Croatie, le Danemark, la Finlande, la Grèce, l’Italie, les Pays-Bas et le Royaume-Uni ont déjà pris en compte le bien-être des animaux en légiférant pour interdire les cirques qui détiennent des animaux sauvages. En France, une centaine de communes dont Paris, Strasbourg, Rennes, Grenoble ou encore Ajaccio ont officiellement pris position pour des cirques sans animaux sauvages et appellent à un changement législatif ou règlementaire. Surtout, la grande majorité de nos concitoyens souhaitent ce changement : 67 % des Françaises et des Français sont favorables à l’interdiction des cirques avec animaux sauvages selon un sondage IFOP/30 Millions d’Amis de février 2018. Enfin, ci-joint, vous trouverez la lettre ouverte qu’ont signé plus de 100 vétérinaires français qui appellent le gouvernement à agir.

C’est pourquoi j’aimerais vous rencontrer pour discuter d’une mesure qui ferait cesser cette souffrance archaïque et placerait la France dans le groupe de pays qui ont montré l’exemple au reste du monde en prenant la décision de tourner la page des cirques animaliers.

Je vous remercie de votre attention et dans l’attente de pouvoir vous rencontrer, je vous prie d’agréer, Monsieur le président, l’expression de ma considération la plus distinguée.

Pamela Anderson

Sunday Project

Video available in Australia only

Speaking for the first time since her public spat with Scott Morrison, Pamela Anderson admits she wasn't surprised by the PM's lewd comments.

"It's typical of politicians," Anderson said on the Sunday Project.

"It's very Trumpian actually to use a sexist remark to kind of divert from the actual issue, the actual question, so it wasn't shocking."

"I assumed he was doing it on purpose so he could shift the attack to the lewd comments instead of focusing on the issue of Julian, which is most important."

Anderson appeared on the show solo after Morrison declined an invitation to also speak.

Earlier this month, our PM made insensitive remarks about Anderson while on a commercial radio station. "I've had plenty of mates ask me if they can be my special envoy to sort the issue out... um, with Pamela Anderson," he said. The comment came after Anderson called on the prime minister to help Wikileaks founder Julian Assange come back to Australia after more than six years holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

"Defend your friend, get Julian his passport back and take him back to Australia and be proud of him, and throw him a parade when he gets home," she said during an appearance on 60 Minutes earlier in the month. When asked what her thoughts were on the possibility Morrison's comment was actually a compliment, Anderson simply laughed.

"What age are we in?" she asked. "I don't know how to respond to that."

"My career was what it was and it also got me into a lot of doors where I wouldn't have been able to get into so I guess in some regard I've used my image to have a voice and so I can't really complain too much."

In recent years, the former Baywatch star has turned her attention to activism on several fronts, including women's rights and animal welfare. After striking up a friendship with Assange -- or "romantic struggle", as Anderson referred to it-- over their shared interest in activism, and has since campaigned for Australian intervention in his case.

She told The Project she isn't currently able to see or speak with the Wikileaks founder, and called once again on the PM for action.

"It was good to see so many Australians in support of Julian and wanting to bring him home and I think it's just one of the last ways to save him" she said.

"And he's a hero. He's an Australian and people should be very proud and the prime minster has a lot of power and can make it happen."

via www.tendaily.com.au/shows/theproject

From Playboy to Politics - inside the extraordinary life of Pamela Anderson - 60 Minutes Australia