Texas Weekly Online

Texas-trans-white
Menu
Menu

Author: shailender

Epstein and the politics of distraction

Epstein and the politics of distraction

After the beginning of Trump’s second term, the connections between capitalism, white supremacy and imperial domination became increasingly clear. These have been highlighted through ICE raids as modern-day slave patrols, global criminal operations such as the kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, and United States assistance to Israel’s genocide in Gaza as a bipartisan US and transnational corporate experiment. The growing understanding that people in the Global South, along with Black, Indigenous and other People of Colour (BIPOC) within the imperial core, face a common enemy has galvanised an anti-colonial, revolutionary movement committed to radical transformation. And then the release of the Epstein files flooded public discourse. Jeffrey Epstein was a financier convicted of sex crimes involving minors. After renewed federal charges in 2019, he died in jail (officially ruled a suicide). The case triggered public outrage about ruling class impunity, media focus on unsavoury associations between the political and corporate class and a plethora of conspiratorial narratives about cover-ups. The Epstein case became far more than a criminal proceeding; it reflects a symbolic exposure of ruling class impunity and concentrated power and a spectacle of corruption within an empire in deep crisis and decline. The Epstein case exposed ruling class criminality while simultaneously displacing structural accountability. Importantly, “spectacle” does not mean “fake”; it means the organisation of politics through symbolic drama that displaces structural political analysis. With spectacle, social contradictions (inequality, social crises and instability) are dramatised rather than structurally challenged. Advertisement The enduring media and public fixation on the Epstein files, particularly as their release proceeds with little accountability and continued narratives that discredit and isolate survivors, serves less as accountability and more as a political diversion from systemic injustices: Racism, capitalism, the growth of the police state and ongoing international impunity. More troubling still, it marks another step in the erosion of democracy and the consolidation of expansionist, war-driven fascism. Fascist spectacle In work by Walter Benjamin, Hannah Arendt, Guy Debord, Umberto Eco and others, fascist spectacle involves anti-intellectual and emotionally driven mass mobilisation around simple moral binaries (pure people v the corrupt ruling class), where action is revered while thought is reviled; the replacement of institutional process with symbolic imagery and drama; and mythic narratives of national decay and rebirth. Political theorist Roger Griffin calls this rebirth “palingenic ultranationalism”, that is, destruction as a precondition for rebirth. The function of spectacle is to subvert principled analysis and resistance to oppression with emotion – outrage, disgust, despair and helplessness. Conspiracy theories are the narrative engine of spectacle. They transform systemic crisis and social instability into simple, emotionally gripping stories of social taboo-breaking, centred on hidden and untouchable enemies, laying the groundwork through which authoritarian solutions are marketed as necessary and even redemptive. When structural violence becomes visible, but accountability remains absent, public anger often seeks explanation through personalised and conspiratorial narratives rather than systemic analysis. Amid growing distrust and corruption in mainstream media and the rise of citizen-driven and alternative social media ecosystems, conspiracy theories surrounding the Epstein case have blossomed: Claims of secret global cabals engaged in immoral sexual criminality, ritualistic fantasies involving human sacrifice, cannibalism and ancient symbolic structures and explicitly racist and anti-Semitic tropes about hidden rulers, among others. Theories like these, whether wholly true, partially true or false, are not new; fascist movements have historically mobilised around the idea that the nation is being secretly corrupted by a degenerate ruling class, with a radical cleansing necessary to return to a righteous path. These narratives do not expose a corrupt system; they obscure and mystify it. By sensationalising corruption into myth and providing explicit, though untouchable, targets for public outrage, they displace rigorous anti-colonial and material analyses of structural exploitation, greed and state violence with collective authoritarian longing for a strongman and the suppression of dissent to restore order. Advertisement The criminality of Epstein and the powerful figures who orbited him and participated in his abuses have come to symbolise a degenerate ruling class with identifiable names and faces, targets who could be exposed and jailed, thereby clearing the narrative space for a heroic white knight to ride in with promises of salvation. As Hannah Arendt warned, conspiracy thinking thrives when trust in institutions collapses. The Epstein scandal intensified the sense of a ruling class operating above the law and of a justice system which protects its own, conditions ideal for authoritarian movements to exploit by insisting the system is irredeemably rigged and that only a strong leader can tear it down. As such, the spectacle of the Epstein scandal can absorb and manipulate public outrage, redirecting it away from necessary structural accountability in the form of decolonisation and redistribution of wealth, ultimately reinforcing the very systems it appears to challenge. In doing so, it promotes the aesthetics of politics – the spectacle – rather than grounded critiques of capitalism and imperial power. Further, it serves to distract from failures ultimately promoting oppression and war. According to Federico Caprotti, various forms of fascist spectacle produce a “collage” which both expresses and obscures the syncretic ideology of the regime. The grand spectacle: War When politics becomes theatre rather than collective progress dependent on accountability, transformation or reform, crisis becomes emotional drama, drama demands release (internal resolution) or escalation and escalation inevitably finds its expression in externalised war, in which the nation performs a grand spectacle of unity and sacrifice on the largest possible stage. War acts as a stabilising force when internal contradictions cannot be resolved through collective mobilisation. With its uniforms and marches, war channels discontent by uniting a fragmented, outraged population against an externalised enemy, transforming righteous anger at the violence, oppression and greed of a ruling class into manufactured unity, heroism and meaning through violence against “the other”. These dynamics, outlined by Benjamin decades ago, feel alarmingly familiar in the present moment, including in the spectacle surrounding the Epstein scandal. In this context, external conflict functions not only as policy but as emotional consolidation, redirecting internal

From Gaza to defence: Five key takeaways from Indian PM Modi’s Israel visit

From Gaza to defence: Five key takeaways from Indian PM Modi’s Israel visit

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has wrapped up a two-day visit to Israel, which was marked by a welcoming embrace from his counterpart, Benjamin Netanyahu, and a conspicuous silence about Israel’s genocidal war in occupied Palestinian territory. During the visit, which began on Wednesday, the two leaders lauded their strong friendship, which they said has deepened bilateral ties, and signed agreements on a range of issues, including innovation and agriculture. “You are a great friend of Israel, … Narendra. You are more than a friend. You are a brother,” Netanyahu told Modi when both leaders addressed the Israeli parliament in Jerusalem on Wednesday. Netanyahu showed Modi around Yad Vashem, a memorial in Jerusalem to the victims of the Holocaust, and hosted a dinner after they had spoken to the Knesset, where Modi was conferred with the parliament’s highest honour. This was the second ever visit by an Indian prime minister to Israel after Modi’s first visit in 2017. That time, he also did not visit Palestine despite India’s long history of supporting the Palestinian cause. While India opposed the creation of Israel in 1948 and formalised diplomatic relations only in 1992, relations between the two countries have improved since then, flourishing particularly since Modi became India’s prime minister in 2014. Since then, their ties have blossomed, anchored in defence and the shared nationalistic leanings of their leaders. Here are five key takeaways from Modi’s trip to Israel: Netanyahu greets Modi during a special session of the Knesset on February 25, 2026 [Ronen Zvulun/Reuters] Full support for Israel, silence on Gaza genocide Wednesday was the first time an Indian leader had addressed the Knesset. Modi received a standing ovation after declaring: “India stands with Israel firmly, with full conviction, in this moment and beyond.” Advertisement Modi told the Israeli parliament that he carries “the deepest condolences of the people of India for every life lost and for every family whose world was shattered in the barbaric terrorist attack by Hamas on October 7” in 2023. “We feel your pain. We share your grief. India stands with Israel firmly, with full conviction, in this moment and beyond,” he said. “No cause can justify the murder of civilians. Nothing can justify terrorism.” The Indian prime minister referred to the Mumbai attacks in 2008, which New Delhi has blamed on neighbouring Pakistan, saying: “Like you, we have a consistent and uncompromising policy of zero tolerance for terrorism with no double standards.” Modi also threw his weight behind United States President Donald Trump’s 20-point Gaza peace plan, stating that India “supports all efforts that contribute to durable peace and regional stability”. While Modi said he backed “dialogue, peace and stability in the region”, he skipped any mention of the continuing genocide in Gaza, where the Israeli army has killed more than 72,000 Palestinians since October 2023. Anwar Alam, a senior fellow at the Policy Perspective Foundation, a think tank in New Delhi, said the timing of Modi’s visit is “too poor and has grossly compromised India’s historical pro-Palestine stand”. Alam argued that while New Delhi, a leader of the anticolonial nonalignment movement, can continue to maintain ties with Tel Aviv, “India cannot allow itself to display such insensitivity to Palestinian sufferings and stand with the coloniser.” Modi signs the guestbook at Yad Vashem as Netanyahu and Dani Dayan, chairman of the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial Museum, watch on February 26, 2026 [Ilia Yefimovich/AFP] Modi emphasises ‘civilisational ties’ with Israel One reason Modi, unlike previous Indian leaders, has displayed such warmth towards the Israeli prime minister is the Indian Hindu right’s enthusiasm for the ideology of Zionism, analysts said. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has roots in a philosophy, Hindutva, which ultimately seeks to transform India into a Hindu nation and a natural homeland for Hindus anywhere in the world – similar to Israel’s view of itself as a Jewish homeland. During his speech to the Knesset, therefore, Modi doubled down on what he called the “civilisational ties” between the two nations. He started his address to the Knesset by announcing himself as “a representative of one ancient civilisation addressing another”. “We are both ancient civilisations, and it is perhaps no surprise that our civilisational traditions also reveal philosophical parallels,” he said, quoting the Israeli “principle of ‘tikkun olam’ about healing the world”. Advertisement “In India, there is great admiration for Israel’s resolve, courage and achievements,” Modi said. “Long before we related to each other as modern states, we were linked by ties that go back more than 2,000 years.” Modi mused about “returning to a land to which I have always felt drawn”. “After all, I was born on the same day that India formally recognised Israel – September 17, 1950.” While India formally recognised Israel in 1950, two years after its formation, it only established diplomatic relations with it in 1992. Modi disembarks as he arrives at Ben Gurion International Airport near Tel Aviv, Israel, on February 25, 2026 [Shir Torem/Reuters] Deepening defence ties These days, India is Israel’s largest weapons buyer, pumping billions of dollars into Israel’s defence industry each year. In 2024 as Israel waged its war on Gaza, Indian weapons firms sold Israel rockets and explosives, according to an Al Jazeera investigation. On Thursday, Modi held talks with Netanyahu focused on further boosting ties in the areas of defence and security along with trade, technology and agriculture. “We have decided to establish the Critical and Emerging Technologies Partnership. This will give new momentum to cooperation in areas such as AI, quantum, and critical minerals,” Modi said. The two countries are also currently negotiating a free trade agreement. Elevating strategic ties India and Israel are reportedly inching closer to an alliance, along with other global powers, to boost security cooperation. Before Modi’s visit, Netanyahu pitched a “hexagon of alliances” that he said would include India, Greece, Cyprus and other unnamed Arab, African and Asian states to collectively stand against what he called “radical” Shia and Sunni Muslim “axes” of adversaries in

Trump U-turn: Is Venezuelan oil really available to Cuba again?

Trump U-turn: Is Venezuelan oil really available to Cuba again?

After months of a crippling oil blockade on Cuba imposed by the United States, the fuel-starved country may now see some relief after the US government said it would begin authorising companies to resell Venezuelan oil, even as tensions between the two reach a head. On Wednesday, the US Department of the Treasury said it would allow the resale of Venezuelan oil for “commercial and humanitarian use” in Cuba as the small island nation faces one of its worst fuel crises in decades. Recommended Stories list of 4 itemsend of list Venezuela is the largest provider of oil to Cuba. However, since US forces abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January and imprisoned him to face drugs and weapons charges in a New York court, the Donald Trump administration has taken control of Caracas’s oil and halted exports to Havana. Washington has long had frosty relations with Cuba, but Trump’s administration is specifically seeking regime change there by the end of 2026, US media has reported. The US’s policy shift this week, however, comes after Caribbean leaders sounded the alarm about the dire situation in Cuba, an island nation of 10.9 million people. At a regional meeting of Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries on Wednesday, attended by US Secretary of State and Cuban-American Marco Rubio, Jamaica’s Prime Minister Andrew Holness called on Washington to ease the pressure. “Today, many Cubans are facing serious economic hardship, energy shortages, and growing humanitarian challenges,” Holness said. Cuba is not a CARICOM member but shares close ties. Advertisement “We are sensitive to their struggles. But we must also recognise that a prolonged crisis in Cuba will not remain there. It can impact migration, security and economic stability across the Caribbean, including Jamaica,” he added. A man carries pork rinds to sell as Cubans brace for fuel scarcity measures after the US tightened its oil supply blockade, in Havana, Cuba, February 6, 2026 [Norlys Perez/Reuters] What’s the situation in Cuba now? Cuba’s state-dominated economy was already struggling under a US embargo which has been in place since 1962, dating back to Havana’s alliance with the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Since then, sanctions on Cuba have eased and tightened under various US administrations. The long-running sanctions have severely weakened Cuba, causing the country to become highly dependent on imports, and high inflation routinely leads to food and energy shortages. Mass emigration of Cuba’s skilled labour force, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, has added to the country’s difficulties. With Trump’s latest oil embargo, the US has added a severe energy crisis to the mix. Widespread power blackouts of up to 20 hours at a time are now being reported across Cuba, impacting hospitals, businesses and households alike. Surgeries have been suspended, schools have cancelled classes, and waste trucks are parked as rubbish piles up in the streets. Four United Nations special rapporteurs warned in early February that the situation is contributing to a severe public health problem in the country and said it could lead to a “severe humanitarian” crisis. Cuba has lost 90 percent of its fuel supply, and despite shutting beach resorts and restricting aviation fuel sales, the country could experience a total blackout as early as late February, according to Ignacio Seni, a risk analyst writing for the US-based intelligence firm Crisis 24. The Mexican government dispatched humanitarian aid to the people of Cuba on board two ships of the Mexican Navy, Veracruz, Mexico, February 9, 2026 [Mexico Ministry of Foreign Affairs via Anadolu Agency] Why has the US  blocked oil deliveries to Cuba? Cuba produces crude oil but does not have the capacity to refine enough to meet domestic demand. Venezuela was providing as much as 50 percent of Cuba’s oil before the US government took control of its oil industry at the start of this year, about 35,000 barrels per day. Under a special barter agreement in place since 2000, Cuba provides support for education, healthcare, and security services in return for discounted Venezuelan fuel. Indeed, about 30 members of Maduro’s security detail who were killed in the operation to abduct him in January were from Cuba. Advertisement Then, days after Maduro was abducted, Trump turned his aim at Cuba itself, warning Havana to “make a deal before it is too late”. He did not, however, give details about what type of deal he wanted. On January 29, Trump issued an executive order imposing new trade tariffs on any countries selling oil to Cuba because of what he called the “policies, practices and actions” of the Cuban government, which, he said, pose an “extraordinary threat” to the US. Trump also claimed, without evidence, that Havana funds “terrorism”. Besides Venezuela, Cuba was also sourcing oil from Mexico, Russia and Algeria, but all oil imports into the country ceased. Trump’s order, therefore, effectively amounted to a blockade. The US has also reportedly seized fuel tankers in open waters transferring oil to Cuba, according to a New York Times investigation into ship movements in the Caribbean Sea published last week. The US began building up its naval presence in the area in September last year as it prepared to attack Maduro, and its troops continue to patrol the waters. In mid-February, one tanker loaded with Colombian oil was intercepted by the US Coast Guard as it came within 70 miles of Cuba, the Times reported. The vehicle, called the Ocean Mariner, was previously used to covertly transport oil between Venezuela and Iran. Before Maduro’s capture, US forces also struck multiple Venezuelan boats in the eastern Pacific and Caribbean that the US claimed – without evidence – were trafficking drugs. How have Cuba and others reacted to the US blockade? Cuban authorities under President Miguel Diaz-Canel have accused the US of imposing collective punishment on the country. On Wednesday, it also accused the US of links to armed men who entered the country’s waters on a Florida-tagged speedboat. Four Americans of Cuban origin were killed in the altercation, and two were injured. In the past,