Comic Books, Jews, and Superheroes

By Henry Srebrnik, [Summerside, PEI] Journal Pioneer

The death of Stan Lee at the age of 95 on Nov. 12 reminds us of the outsized role of American Jews in the development of low to middlebrow cultural industries such as comic books and Hollywood films in the 20^th century.

Born Stanley Martin Lieber in 1922 in New York, the son of Jewish immigrants, Lee would go on to create such superheroes as Spider-Man, the Incredible Hulk and the X-Men.   

This was an emerging mass market, but one that required little in the way of capital or academic degrees  to get started. Considered somewhat crass, it was looked down upon by more established ethnic groups and hence was one Jewish artists and writers could enter without having to worry about discrimination.

In 1939 Lee was brought in by a relative, Martin Goodman, to a small comic books publisher. It would eventually become Marvel, and Lee and artist Jack Kirby (born Jacob Kurtzberg) would go on to build a mega-million-dollar empire.

By the mid-1930s, others had already created the modern comic book. An unemployed Jewish novelty salesman named Maxwell Charles Gaines (née Max Ginzberg) decided to put the comic strips published in newspapers between covers and sell them as separate items, thus creating the American comic book.

It was in the midst of the Great Depression, and young Jewish writers and illustrators found themselves without jobs. The advertising industry was rife with anti-Semitism, so, like the Jews who “invented” Hollywood, they created their own industry.

The most enduring of all superheroes, Superman, was also the creation of two young Jews, writer Jerry Siegel from Cleveland and artist Joe Shuster, born in Toronto. 

In 1938, Detective Comics (later DC), a Jewish enterprise owned by Harry Donenfeld and Jack Liebowitz, both born in eastern Europe, published Superman’s first entry in the pages of Action Comics #1. Superman was an instant hit. The so-called “Golden Age” of comics had begun.

Siegel and Shuster had been developing Superman since 1933. After years of fruitless soliciting to the syndicates, in 1938, they sold all rights to Superman to DC for $130.

Between 1939 and 1941 Detective Comics introduced popular superheroes such as Batman, Wonder Woman, the Flash, and Green Lantern. Marvel Comics had best-selling titles featuring the Human Torch and Captain America.

Was this a genre that somehow drew on the experiences of Jews living as marginalized figures in a larger society where they often faced anti-Semitism and locked doors when seeking work?

Most of the superheroes had secret double identities, with mild-mannered alter egos. This, too, might have been reflected in the Jewishness of their creators. 

They lived in a non-Jewish, somewhat hostile, world. They felt that they could succeed in America only if they disguised their identities as Jews. So they tried to assimilate, as best they could, while clandestinely remaining part of their Jewish milieu.

This is a theme taken up by Danny Fingeroth, a former editor at Marvel Comics, in his book Disguised as Clark Kent: Jews, Comics and the Creation of the Superhero.

“One might speak Yiddish at home, but that was the language of your embarrassing immigrant parents and grandparents. You speak English in public so you can fit in with your friends at school.”

Fingeroth also sees the superhero- as-savior stemming from Jewish history. “I think the idea of a being who wields great power wisely and justly would be very appealing to people whose history involves frequently being the victim of power wielded brutally and unjustly.”

Arie Kaplan, who wrote From Krakow to Krypton: Jews and Comic Books, concurs. “Superman actualized the adolescent power fantasies of its creators -- two Jewish Depression kids craving a muscle-bound redeemer to liberate them from the social and economic impoverishment of their lives.”

Lee himself wondered whether “there was something in our background, in our culture, that brought us together in the comic book field?

“When we created stories about idealized superheroes, were we subconsciously trying to identify with characters who were the opposite of the Jewish stereotypes that hate propaganda had tried to instill in people’s minds?” Lee’s superheroes were all “outsiders” in one way or another.

After the Second World War, the publication of Fredric Wertham’s Seduction of the Innocent in 1954 claimed that comics sparked illegal behavior among minors. A moral panic followed, and the industry removed many of its crime and horror lists. The superheroes, though, remained standing.

Democracy in an African Archipelago

By Henry Srebrnik, [Charlottetown, PEI] Guardian

Cape Verde, the small archipelagic country 500 kilometres off the west coast of Senegal, may be the best country in Africa for civil liberties and political rights.

Comprising 10 islands and five islets, with a population of 505,000, the unique geography and history of this former Portuguese colony have played a key role in facilitating good governance, and an open and non-violent society.

Civil and political rights are enshrined in the constitution and widely respected in practice. The country has a free press and decent levels of health care, with a life expectancy of 72 years for men and 80 for women. The literacy rate stands at close to 90 per cent.

Portuguese functions as a state language but Cape Verdean Kriolo is spoken by virtually everyone.

The population is, as one writer put it, neither African nor Portuguese but an admixture of both. The country retains close ties with Portugal and its currency is linked to the euro. Some have even suggested joining the European Union.

Cape Verde was claimed by Portuguese sailors in the 15^th century. Uninhabited until then, it became a plantation economy and a centre for the slave trade. Enslaved Africans and Portuguese convicts were brought to the islands to work as agricultural field hands.

  

Cape Verde became an important commercial hub between the Americas, Africa and Europe. Other groups, including Arabs, Dutch, French, and Jews, settled and were absorbed into the mixed population. 

In 1956, the African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde (PAIGC), was founded by the nationalist leader Amilcar Cabral. Following a protracted national war of liberation, the two Portuguese colonies attained independence as one state in 1975.

But the marriage of Portugal’s educated Cape Verde population with the underdeveloped mainland of what became Guinea-Bissau was never going to last, and they went their separate ways after a bloody coup in the latter in 1980. Guinea-Bissau is virtually a failed state today.

On Cape Verde, the ruling party, which was renamed the PAICV, remained the sole legal political party from 1980 until 1990, when the constitution was amended to legalise opposition parties.

Though a one-party state committed to ideological socialism until then, the ruling party had set up an effective and largely non-corrupt and pragmatic administrative structure.

With the coming of multi-party politics, the Movement for Democracy (MpD) was formed. It won the 1991 presidential elections, with Antonio Mascarenhas Monteiro defeating Aristides Pereira, who had been in power since independence. It also defeated the PAICV in that year’s parliamentary balloting.

This was followed by victories in the National Assembly elections of I995 and the presidential election of 1996, with Monteiro re-elected.

In 2001, however, weakened by internal struggles, the MpD lost to a rejuvenated PAICV, with Pedro Pires defeating Carlos Veiga for the presidency. The 2006 election repeated that result between the same two men.

The MpD regained control of the executive branch in 2011, with Jorge Carlos Fonseca beating Manuel Inocencio Sousa. Fonseca was re-elected in 2016, with 74.08 per cent of the vote, when the PAICV failed to present a candidate. He easily beat two independents, Joaquim Monteiro and Albertino Graca.

Though the PAICV had remained the largest party in parliament in 2011, it lost control of the legislative branch to the MpD as well in 2016.

Given the creolized nature of the population, disagreements between the parties revolve around pragmatic economic and political issues, since there are no distinct ethnicities on the islands.

In terms of institutional support, anecdotal evidence suggests that the Roman Catholic

Church in Cape Verde, to which most people belong, prefers the MpD, while unions back the PAICV.

The essentially untroubled transfer of power in elections over the last 27 years indicates that the nation has, by and large, confidence in its electoral institutions.

Israel Sells Arms to Make Friends

By Henry Srebrnik [Saint John, NB] Telegraph Journal
 

What’s the best way to make friends and influence people, especially if they’re leaders of countries? 

If you’re Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, the answer is simply: sell them weapons.

On Nov. 25, the president of Chad, Idriss Déby, visited Israel. A poor, corrupt country in the Sahel region of Africa, it is plagued by political violence and ranks very high on the failed-state index. 

Déby has dealt with rebellions and coups d’état attempts since he first became president in 1990. So Chad has little to contribute to Israel -- except on the diplomatic front. 

Some 13.5 million people live in Chad, 55 per cent of whom are Muslim. In 1972 it severed ties with Israel under pressure from Saudi Arabia, Libya and other Arab countries in order to isolate Israel. 

Déby was highly influenced by former Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi, who had treated Chad like his country’s personal backyard and a center from which to expand Libya’s influence throughout Africa. But that has all ended, of course.

Netanyahu is trying to move into the breach: in exchange for Israeli military technology, he can get excellent media exposure. Exporting arms and cyber weaponry to rulers like Déby, plus waging public relations campaigns on their behalf, equals highly publicized visits to Israel.

The prime minister described the visit in the context of his attempt to re-establish an Israeli presence in Africa. Noting that in the past two years he had paid three visits to states on the continent, Netanyahu told Déby that “I hope to come to the center of Africa. 

“And I wish to bring with me Israeli entrepreneurs, Israeli experts, Israeli companies, everything that can improve the life of the peoples of Africa, which is something we believe in. Israel is coming back to Africa, Africa is coming back to Israel.”

But the real reason for the visit dealt with arms sales and the fight against Islamists. A secret meeting in New York at the end of September, between Foreign Minister Mahamat Zene Cherif of Chad and Israel’s national security adviser Meir Ben Shabbat, set the stage for Déby’s formal visit. 

So the visit was really focused on security and skirted around Chad’s less than stellar record in the realm of human rights. Chadian authorities have banned peaceful assemblies and arrested and prosecuted activists and journalists.

In April Chad’s parliament approved a new constitution that expanded Déby’s powers and could allow him to serve until 2033.

Israel has supported the Chadian army in the domain of satellite eavesdropping on rebel groups operating in the north of the country. Part of its armored equipment was bought from Israel. 

Netanyahu wants Israel to be a significant partner in the African regional coalition against extremist Islamist terrorism. Déby agreed. “We have a shared struggle,” he said. It’s not nice, but it’s realpolitik.

China's Economic Inroads in Africa

By Henry Srebrnik, [Summerside, PEI] Journal Pioneer

China is now the single largest bilateral financier of infrastructure in Africa, surpassing the African Development Bank, the European Commission, the European Investment Bank, the World Bank and the Group of Eight (G8) countries combined.

In 2017 alone, the newly signed value of Chinese contracted projects in Africa registered $76.5 billion, according to Standard Bank’s China Economist Jeremy Stevens.

Across trade, investment, infrastructure financing, and aid, no other country has such depth and breadth of engagement in Africa. Chinese firms of all sizes and sectors are bringing capital investment, management know-how, and entrepreneurial energy to every corner of the continent.

China's investments in the infrastructure of African nations are particularly strong, encompassing utilities, telecommunications, port construction and transportation.

The impact is conspicuous all over Africa, from new airports and roads as well as ports and high-rise buildings. They are also creating much-needed jobs.

The seventh Forum on China Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), held in Beijing in September, highlighted China’s expansive economic diplomacy, including a $60 billion pledge in “no-strings” attached development assistance.

The absence of political conditions makes this aid more attractive to countries that struggle with fulfilling requirements such as reducing corruption and increasing accountability.

But only five African countries have a trade surplus with Beijing and many are in danger of defaulting on their debts.

In recent years, Nigeria has received relatively large funds from China for railways. China is backing two major standard-gauge rail projects: One is a line from Lagos to Kano, the other a coastal railway from Lagos to Calabar. 

The Nigerian government hopes that the latter will support peacekeeping in the Niger Delta region, thus improving oil investments there, oil being another key interest of China in Africa.

One-third of China’s oil supplies comes from the African continent, mainly from Angola. In recent years, China has made $19 billion in loans to Angola. 

The Luanda government has supplied oil to China in exchange for Chinese financing and construction of major infrastructure projects.

Djibouti in August launched the first phase of a Chinese-built free trade zone billed as Africa’s largest. The government, which is heavily indebted to Beijing, seized control of Doraleh Container Terminal from Dubai-based DP World. 

Djibouti President Ismail Omar Guelleh invoked emergency measures to gain control of the port, in order to hand over operations to Chinese state-connected firms.

Djibouti stands to be a key node in China’s strategy of linking ports worldwide to their greater “One Belt, One Road” initiative.

Another of the new Belt and Road countries is Senegal, which was part of President Xi Jinping’s four-country visit to the continent last summer.

Chinese loans are paying for a new wrestling stadium, a highway to the city of Touba, and part of an industrial park.

Kenya has now borrowed far more from China than from any other country. But it has also come to depend on a flood of Chinese manufacturing imports. Kenya’s trade with China has grown eightfold in the past decade, according to President Uhuru Kenyatta, who has complained about this trade imbalance.

The 51-kilometre four-lane Entebbe-Kampala Expressway that connects Uganda’s capital to the Entebbe International Airport was built by a Chinese company using a $476 million loan from the Export-Import Bank of China.

Uganda has taken $3 billion worth of Chinese loans. “This debt acquired from China comes with huge business for Chinese companies, particularly construction companies that have turned the whole of Africa into a construction site,” economist Ramathan Ggoobi of Makerere University has remarked.

Still, President Yoweri Museveni views the Chinese as “more business-like” than western investors.

China’s strategy on the continent is a comprehensive one, including economic, political and security elements.

For instance, China wants African diplomatic support in the UN and elsewhere in its quest to regain Taiwan and prevent secession in Tibet and Xinjiang.

Over the past five years, China’s official arms sales to Africa have increased by 55 per cent and its share of the African arms market has doubled to 17 per cent, surpassing the United States.

The need to protect China’s increased investments in Africa have driven a shift away from China’s traditional non-interference in the internal matters of other countries to new diplomatic and military initiatives on the continent. For many, this smacks of a new form of colonialism.

After all, the European powers that carved up the continent in the 19^th century also began the process by at first claiming they needed to protect their economic interests.