Arizona boycotted for racist law

The new racist law of Arizona (SB1070), as you may know, allows citizens to denounce policemen if they do not stop and identify potential illegal immigrants, that is in practical terms: anyone who looks Hispanic, but holds no provision to guarantee the human rights of these people nor to allow them to denounce police or the state for abuses. It basically makes sure that police will be pressed hard to treat all Hispanic people as potential criminals or otherwise be reported to their bosses by the local nazis.

It has been globally condemned as a racist law and has been denounced that way in pan-American forums such as the OAS and within the USA itself.

In fact, what is happening is that Arizona is becoming the focus of a widespread boycott, what seems to bother the governor of the state, Jan Bewer, and is harming the hostery business, which has reported significant falls in customers since the law was pushed ahead. But really if not being blond with bright blue eyes and speaking broken English with a nasal accent while spitting "chew" on the floor makes your suspicious to the state police, who may even arrest you for no reason... it's clear that it's better not to go to Arizona, just in case.

Hostery industrials have detached themselves from the racist law. Debbie Johnson gremial speaker for the industry in Arizona, said: "I would like to tell to all the people who is angry for the law that we did not support it. Many of our workers are Hispanic and we respect them".

Even the City of Los Angeles is pondering the possibility of boycotting Arizona. Public servants of San Francisco, another major Californian city, already decided to suspend all cooperation with Arizona except in health and police. Both city governments have asked citizens not to consume any product with Arizonan origin.

Signatures are already being gathered in order to get a referendum on the law. Paradoxically, Arizona has some unusual democratic provisions in its constitution allowing the citizens to call for referendums easily.

Source: La Haine[es].

Petition to Obama to speak against the institutional murder of Mumia Abu-Jamal

Mumia Abu-Jamal is probably the most famous political prisoner of the USA, along with Leonard Peltier. He is a journalist and a political activist of leftist ideas. Today, Spanish bi-weekly Diagonal interviews his attorney, Robert Bryan, who claims he was declared guilty, 28 years ago, in a clear case of institutional racism, with the judge openly telling to a colleague: "I'm going to get the nigger fried" and banning eight black people from taking part in the jury.

The case is now at an appeal court with a very technical twist on whether the case is similar or different from another case. Bryan blames the situation to poor defense in past trials and would like them to be repeated ex novo. He argues that this is very typical: poor people cannot afford a good defense attorney, what favors the more experienced public accusation. Mumia's former attorney did not even present the racial composition of the original jury in a past revision in 1995, what could have changed the case completely.

This is an example of why death penalty is an error, not just in the case of Mumia but in thousands of other cases in the USA and across the world. People are executed not for comitting a crime but for not being properly represented, for not being able to pay for a good attorney. Death penalty is a privilege reserved for the poor.

He also says that Mumia is being persecuted essentially for being an active voice, for not shutting up, for denouncing all kind of injustice and abuses. So the authorities only see one way to achieve this goal: killing him. However so far they have only achieved to make him globally famous. Bryan says he's not going to stop writing.

He wants to live, he does not want to die. He does not wish to be executed. But he will not shup up, he will not go silent just to save his own life.

He also makes an appeal to sign the petition asking US President Barack Obama to speak, as moral authority, in favor of a moratorium of death penalty for Mumia and the 20,000 people that are sentenced to death in the USA. You can read and sign the petition (in many languages) HERE.

Here there is the trailer of the movie on Mumia's life, In prison my whole life:



Further information: Mumia Abu-Jamal Legal Defense.

Report on intolerance in Europe

I could only find the press release of this paper (should be somewhere in this site but I can't find it) but it's informative enough anyhow:

Andreas Zick et al. European Conditions. Findings of a study on Group-focused Enmity in Europe. Amadeu Antonio Stiftung, 2009. (PDF).

The report includes data for 8 EU states (the four largest ones plus Poland, Netherlands, Portugal and Hungary).

Immigration:

• 50.4% think that "there are too many immigrants" in their countries. Oddly enough Portugal and Hungary are among the ones showing highest apportions of this xenophobic marker, only after Britain and Italy.
• 33.5% think that "because of the number of immigrants, I sometimes feel like a stranger". Again Hungary is strangely high considering that immigrants are few there.
• 48% think that "when jobs are scarce, [locals] should have more rights to a job than an immigrant". Again Eastern European countries are oddly high in this value.
  
• 30.7% think that "immigrants enrich our culture". In this case East Europeans are the ones who seem to welcome more the cultural input by immigrants, what somehow seems to contradict other variables.

Anti-Jewish sentiment:

• 24.6 % believe that "Jews have too much influence" in their country. Again East Europe is particularly high in this feeling (in spite of very few Jews living there).
• 41.2% believe that "Jews try to take advantage of having been victims in the Nazi era".
  
• 31% believe that "Jews in general do not care about anything but their own kind".
• 38.1% disagree with the idea that "Jews enrich our culture"

Anti-Muslim sentiment:

• 44.2% believe that "there are too many Muslims" in their country. Again Hungary is oddly high, while Portugal is low for this marker.
  
• 55.4% think that "Muslims are too demanding".
  
• 54.4% think that "Islam is a religion of intolerance".

Even if these figures seem high, there has been a clear drop in Islamophobia and an increase in Judeophobia in the last year, as Gilad Atzmon reports, probably triggered by the increased awareness of the macabre injustice that Israel is committed to.

Racism:

• 13.1% think that "preferably Blacks and Whites should not get married"
• 31.3% believe that "there is a natural hierarchy between Black and White people". Italy seems the country pushing down this racist belief, otherwise quite marked.

Sexism:

• 17.6% consider that "when jobs are scarce, men should have more rights to a job than a woman"
• 60.2% think that "women should take their roles as wives and mothers more seriously". This sentence is so ambiguous that can only indicate a relative trend in sexism, which is clearly stronger in the poorer countries of East and South Europe for both questions.

Homophobia:

• 42.6% disagree with the statement "there is nothing immoral about homosexuality".
• 52.9% disagree with the statement "it is agood thing to allow marriage between two men or two women".

The Netherlands is by far the most tolerant country in this aspect, while Poland is at the opposite extreme, followed by Hungary.

Overall there is a noticeable pattern of greater intolerance, sexism and xenophobia in Eastern European countries for nearly all values.

Israel admits organ theft from Palestinian corpses

After the clownish actuation of the pathetic neonazi Zionist minister of foreign affairs, Russian-born Avigador Liebermann, Israel had finally to admit that the Swedish newspapers who denounced organ theft to victims of political murders by the Israeli Army is for real.

Read more at Al Jazeera (again NATO propaganda media, aka "free press", like BBC seem to silence the matter).

Israel is guilty of the crime of apartheid

That is the conclusion of an independent South African committee, enlisted by the Human Sciences Research Council to verify the claims of apartheid in Palestine.

The committee concludes, following international jurisprudence that race is a social construct relative to local perceptions and that, in this sense, Jewish and Palestinian are racial categories in the Near East.

It then goes on to examine Israeli practices on light of the article 2 of the Apartheid Convention.

Finding that:

Section a) Denial to a member or members of a racial group or groups of the right to life and liberty of person.- YES: Israel’s policies and practices include murder, in the form of extrajudicial killings; torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of detainees (...) All of these practices are discriminatory in that Palestinians are subject to legal systems and courts which apply standards of evidence and procedure that are different from those applied to Jewish settlers living the OPT and that result in harsher penalties for Palestinians.

Section b) Deliberate imposition on a racial group or groups of living conditions calculated to cause its or their physical destruction in whole or in part.- NO: Not satisfied, as the Israel’s policies and practices in the OPT are not found to have the intent of causing the physical destruction of the Palestinian people.

Section c) Measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups.- YES:

i) (...) Restrictions on the Palestinian right to freedom of movement are endemic in the West BankPalestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip are not allowed to visit the other territory and are not allowed to enter East Jerusalem with a pass.

ii) The right of Palestinians to choose their own place of residence within their territory is severely curtailed by systematic administrative restrictions on Palestinian residency and building in East Jerusalem, by discriminatory legislation that operates to prevent Palestinian spouses from living together on the basis of which part of the OPT they originate from, and by the strictures of the permit and ID systems.

iii) Palestinians are denied their right to leave and return to their country. Palestinian refugees displaced in 1948 from the territory now inside Israel who are living in the OPT (approximately 1.8 million people including descendents) are not allowed to return to their former places of residence. Similarly, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians displaced to surrounding states from the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967 have been prevented from returning to the OPT. (...) Political activists and human rights defenders are often subject to arbitrary and undefined ’travel bans’, while many Palestinians who travelled and lived abroad for business or personal reasons have had their residence IDs revoked and been prohibited from returning.

iv) Israel denies Palestinians in the OPT their right to a nationality by denying Palestinian refugees from inside the Green Line their right of return, residence, and citizenship in the State (Israel) governing the land of their birth. Israel’s policies in the OPT also effectively deny Palestinians their right to a nationality by obstructing the exercise of the Palestinian right to self-determination through the formation of a Palestinian State in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza Strip.

v) Palestinians are restricted in their right to work (...)

vi) Palestinian trade unions exist but are not recognised by the Israeli government or by the Histadrut (the main Israeli trade union) and cannot effectively represent Palestinians working for Israeli employers and businesses. Although these workers are required to pay dues to the Histadrut, it does not represent their interests and concerns, and Palestinians have no voice in formulating Histadrut policies. (...)

vii) The right of Palestinians to education is not impacted directly by Israeli policy, as Israel does not operate the school system in the OPT, but education is severely impeded by military rule. (...)

viii) The right of Palestinians to freedom of opinion and expression is greatly restricted through censorship laws (...).

ix) Palestinians’ right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association is impeded through military orders. (...) Most Palestinian political parties have been declared illegal and institutions associated with those parties, such as charities and cultural organisations, are regularly subjected to closure and attack.

x) The prevention of full development in the OPT and participation of Palestinians in political, economic, social and cultural life is most starkly demonstrated by the effects of Israel’s ongoing siege and regular large-scale military attacks on the Gaza Strip. Although denied by Israel, the population of the Gaza Strip is experiencing an on-going severe humanitarian crisis.

Section d) Measures designed to divide the population along racial lines by the creation of separate reserves and ghettos for the members of a racial group or groups, the prohibition of mixed marriages among members of various racial groups, the expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial group or groups or to members thereof.- YES:

i) Israel has divided the West Bank into reserves or cantons in which residence and entry is determined by each individual’s group identity. Entry by one group into the zone of the other group is prohibited without a permit. The Wall and its infrastructure of gates and permanent checkpoints suggest a policy permanently to divide the West Bank into racial cantons. Israeli government ministries, the World Zionist Organisation and other Jewish national institutions operating as authorised agencies of the State plan, fund and implement construction of the West Bank settlements and their infrastructure for exclusively Jewish use.

ii) Article 2(d) is not satisfied regarding a prohibition on mixed marriages between Jews and Palestinians.

iii) Israel has extensively appropriated Palestinian land in the OPT for exclusively Jewish use. Private Palestinian land comprises about 30 percent of the land unlawfully appropriated for Jewish settlement in the West Bank. Presently, 38 percent of the West Bank is completely closed to Palestinian use, with significant restrictions on access to much of the rest of it.

Section e) Exploitation of the labour of the members of a racial group or groups, in particular by submitting them to forced labour.- NO: Not significantly satisfied, as Israel has raised barriers to Palestinian employment inside Israel since the 1990s and Palestinian labour is now used extensively only in the construction and services sectors of Jewish-Israeli settlements in the OPT. (...)

Section f) Persecution of organizations and persons, by depriving them of fundamental rights and freedoms, because they oppose apartheid.- YES: Arrest, imprisonment, travel bans and the targeting of Palestinian parliamentarians, national political leaders and human rights defenders, as well as the closing down of related organisations by Israel, represent persecution for opposition to the system of Israeli domination in the OPT, within the meaning of Article 2(f).

Additionally the committee finds the following similitudes of Israeli policies with the three pillars of South African apartheid:

1. Demarcation of South Africans into formal racial groups, with different legal systems applying to each of them (Population Registration Act of 1950).
2. Segregation of these racial groups in separate geographic areas, culminating in the formation of the bantustans (Group Areas Act of 1950 and Pass Laws of 1952-69).
3. Draconian security laws and policies to enforce the system, including extra-judicial killings, torture and degrading treatment.

Israel does all this:

1. It divides the population into Jews, "Israeli Arabs" and Palestinians, privileging naturally the Jewish settlers (and all Jews worldwide are entitled to Israeli citizenship, while the native Palestinians are not). Palestinians are even banned from family reunification if the spouses live in distinct areas under this system.
2. It creates separate areas for Palestinians and Jews, the first with a clear tendency to shrink and the latter to grow. The first fragmented and marginalized and the latter well connected and serviced. It has also segregated East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank.
3. It does have, upholds and enforces a series of special laws that allow and encourage brutal and degrading treatment of Palestinians. Torture and extra-judicial killings are the norm, not any exception.

The committee concludes that Israel is guilty of the crime of apartheid.

Source and further details at Voltairenet: Occupation, Colonialism, Apartheid?, by Human Sciences Research Council of South Africa. Also available as PDF.
.

Israel more akin to Nazi Germany than to Apartheid South Africa

There is an interesting meditation by Salim Nazzal at Sabbah Blog on the unique type of racism that the Zionist regime is founded upon.

He argues that White South Africans arrived there without a pre-defined racist project or any project whatsoever in fact: the racist ideology and regime only evolved trough time ad contextually. Meanwhile Zionists arrived to Palestine with a clear genocidal goal: supress all natives, either by murder or forced exile, and take their land.

He mentions as illustrative example the Israeli officer in the massacre of Kufr Qasim which took place in 1956 was not only proud of what he committed of murder but summarized the Zionist worldview: "In killing of any Arab here (in Palestine) we save the life of an Israeli, and by killing Arabs outside we save Israel!". Sentence that resembles way too much that one of Hitler about what mattered the death of one hundred Polish women digging a trench if those deaths could save a single German soldier.

A rather unique element of Zionist genocidal policies is what Nazzal describes as "kill and cry": that particularly annoying attitude of blaming their victims for the Zionist criminal acts. Maybe Torquemada acted the same way, blaming Jews and presumt witches of forcing him to torture and murder them.

Another very much unique and also disturbing element is trying to bring back history back to 2000 years ago, like if nothing have happened in between, both in Palestine and also among the international Jewry that feeds Israel with flesh and gold.

There are other differential elements but certainly it is very much worrying that it resembles so much, like so many abused people, to the ones who abused them. We may feel pity for their dramatic historical traumas (but they are not the only ones who have suffered nor certainly the main ones suffering in colonized Palestine) but that cannot ever serve as excuse to do the same unto others.

Never again! Destroy Nazi Israel!
.

Our rulers' hypocrisy on racism

Found at Desert Peace. Drawing by Carlos Latuff (copyleft).

I can only imagine that the guard in the background is Canada, a country that has the most boot-licking attitude towards Israel and Zionazism.

As you probably know, Canada (first of all), the USA (second) and some European states are boycotting the Durban conference on racism because they do not seem to accept that the main case of outraging racism and apartheid in the world today is Israel.

They fill their mouths with the word "antisemitism" until the term has been dried up of any meaning. And, anyhow, aren't Arabs Semitic too?
.

Some 85% of US Jewish are Zionazis

I did not made up this, nor took from any "angry Arab" site... I found it (via Body on the line) at a Zionist entity: the Anti Defamation League, self-described as "to stop the defamation of the Jewish people... to secure justice and fair treatment to all".

Well, according to their own data, only 14-17% of US Jewish are critical of Israel in relation with the Gaza genocide. The rest, either by ignorance, complacency, ethnocentrism, hypocrisy or a little bit of all, support Israel unconditionally.

There seems there is no need to defamate anyone: they are bluntly admitting to be Jewish Nazis. Only a small minority seems to have feelings beyond their own ethnocentrism and honor their people with some dignity and free thought.
.

Israeli active genocide in East Jerusalem

Source: Rebelión: 'Israel: compulsiva estrategia para judaizar Jerusalén Oriental'. The genocide that Zionism is causing in all palestine since 1948 with the complicity of "the West" has many faces. And East Jerusalem, ilegally annexed to Israel in 1967, is no exception but one of the main fronts of the racism of this late colonial state.

Facts of the genocide:

• In August 2008 Israel authorized the building of new 1760 homes (for Jews only).
• There are already 192,000 Jewish colonists settled ilegally in East Jerusalem.
• 25% of the Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem have been cut from the city by the construction of the Wall of Shame.
• 'Abandoned' lands belonging to refugees forced to flee after the war were expropiated. These lands comprise about 1/3 of all East Jerusalem and were largely used to build new illegal settelements.
  
• Palestinians who do not live in Jerusalem for 7 years are deprived from their residence status. This norm is not applied to 'master race' Jews, of course.
• In 2006 ID card was revoked to at least 1360 Palestinians, according to UN. This figure was five times larger than in 2005 or any year before.
  
• Since the 2003 law on citizenship and residence, those Palestinians from the occupied territories (the bantustans) that get married with residents or citizens of Israel cannot acquire residence and therefore are forbidden from living with their partners.
• Since 1982 the Zionist government does not allow residence for Palestinian children who have one parent that is not resident in Jerusalem.
  
• While Jewish colonization is widely encouraged, Palestinian construction is nearly forbidden.
• Both Israelis and Palestinians build ilegally at similar levels but the response from the authorities is radically different: some 150 homes are demolished each year, 75% of them of Palestinian property.
  
• Racist discriminaton also exists in aspects like budget allocations, taxation and all kind of services (water, draining, roads, parks, illumination, post offices, schools, etc.)

It is time to massively boycott such a racist state as Israel. In fact it's alread some 60 years late.

Israel to demolish Palestinian village in West Bank.

The West Bank is divided by the Oslo agreements in three areas: A, B and C. A+B zones make up the Bantustan: a fragmented territory of cities and villages under Palestinian civil administration; zone C is totally under Israeli control, and it includes most of the West Bank (and, of course, all Zionist colonies) .

Reference maps from PASSIA:
- West Bank per the Oslo agreement, 1995 (first outline of the Palestinian bantustan)
- West Bank and Gaza status at 2000 (slightly expanded bantustan)
- Rejected "final status" Zionist proposal at Camp David 2000 (still most of the West Bank would remain Israeli, the Bantustan would remain discontinuous)

Right now, among many other quoitidiain abuses of the Zionist Apartheid regime, the colonialist forces are going to demolish an entire Palestinian village in zone C, Al 'Aqabah, dating from the British mandate period, pretxting lack of planning documents. Meanwhile Zionist colonies grow impunely and the attacks to Palestinians by settlers' dead squads have increased scaringly.

'Race' and genetics: strong warning!

A group of geneticists, mostly from Stanford University, including some famous names like Cavalli-Sforza and Underhill, have published an open letter giving a strong warning on the use and abuse of racial labelling in medical genetics.

The letter consists of ten statements, whose first sentences (headlines) are reproduced here:

Statement 1: We believe that there is no scientific basis for any claim that the pattern of human genetic variation supports hierarchically organized categories of race and ethnicity

Statement 2: We recognize that individuals of two different geographically defined human populations are more likely to differ at any given site in the genome than are two individuals of the same geographically defined population

Statement 3: We urge those who use genetic information to reconstruct an individual's geographic ancestry to present results within the broader context of an individual's overall ancestry

Statement 4: We recognize that racial and ethnic categories are created and maintained within sociopolitical contexts and have shifted in meaning over time

Statement 5: We caution against making the naive leap to a genetic explanation for group differences in complex traits, especially for human behavioral traits such as IQ scores, tendency towards violence, and degree of athleticism

Statement 6: We encourage all researchers who use racial or ethnic categories to describe how individual samples are assigned category labels, to explain why samples with such labels were included in the study, and to state whether the racial or ethnic categories are research variables

Statement 7: We discourage the use of race as a proxy for biological similarity and support efforts to minimize the use of the categories of race and ethnicity in clinical medicine, maintaining focus on the individual rather than the group

Statement 8: We encourage the funding of interdisciplinary study of human genetic variation that includes a broad range of experts in the social sciences, humanities and natural sciences

Statement 9: We urge researchers, those working in media, and others engaged in the translation of research results to collaborate on efforts to avoid overstatement of the contribution of genetic variation to phenotypic variation

Statement 10: We recommend that the teaching of genetics include historical and social scientific information on past uses of science to promote racism as well as the potential impact of future policies; we encourage increased funding for the development of such teaching materials and programs for secondary and undergraduate education

Please read the whole text anyhow, as this is just an excerpt.

As I see it, statement 5 is particularly important, specially upon the hype that racists around the world are placing on the ultra-biased psudoscientific "findings" of people like Richard Lynn, who claims that some ethnic groups of Africa have such a low IQ that the whole ethnicities should be considered retarded - against what any impartial observer can infer. Such "research" is, of course, founded by Nazi groups, akin to the Klu Klux Klan - but some intelligent people is giving credibility to it, what is outraging.

Statements 3 and 7 look particularly related. When I read studies that come up with conclusions that supposedly apply to all "Caucasoids" based on a limited sample of "Utah whites" (of very restricted NW European ancestry and with likely founder efefctes of their own - Mormon colonization and all that) I feel that my intelligence is being insulted. The least they could do is to create a really comprehensive and representative sample of "Caucasoids" around the world or at least in their original homeland of West Eurasia and neighbouring areas, if they really want to reach to any meaningful conclussion.

Overall, it's clear that the hype of a hypersimplified understanding of genetics and the dismissal of other factors underlying genetic expression (epigenetics...) as well as of economic, social and cultural factors is a dangerous reality in some corners. The very fact that most Anglosaxon countries still use (against all Western humanistic values) racial categories in official papers is a clear symptom that racism is far from deceased and that special caution should be displayed when dealing with the geographic/ethnic patterns that may exist.

This letter is probably (and sadly) necesary and I hope it raises a good number of adherents.

---

Note: Manjunat also posts on it. There are other related posts in my blogroll but they are mostly based on a totally distorted version of the letter published in New Scientist.

Boycott to Israel

Basque internationalist organization Askapena (Basque for Freedom) has joined the Palestianian and calls for a boycott to Israel focused in cultural areas, together with other internationalist groups. Some of the organizations asked to be actively boycotted by the platform IsraeliBoikot are:

- The Israeli sport teams, notably Maccabi Tel Aviv, whose presence is normally accompanied by massive police deployements, including Israeli agents, are in the focus of this campaign. Israel is not, in any case, any European country and should not play in European competitions. In fact it should be boycotted from all international sport competitions due to its racist policies.
- Dance groups such as Mayumana, which are accused of being propaganda tools of the Zioist occupation regime to give a false image of normality around the World.

In this they join a wider campaign promoted by Palestinian themselves who have asked for cultural and academic boycott to Israel. The reasons are obvious: it is a colonial occupation regime, that is excuting a long term planned genocide against the Palestinian natives. Israel is a racist state only for Jews, the vast majority of which have arrived from foreign lands as colonists in the last 60 years, taking the lands and country of the natives. These policies have not changed a bit in the recent past and Israel is still the most racist state all around the world, a colonial aberration that cannot be accepted as "normal", the same that Apartheid South Africa wasn't.

References:
- israeliboikot.org (in Basque and Spanish)
- Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott to Israel (in English and Arabic)

Supersaharan Africa

I am tired of reading Subsaharan Africa. It is racist.

Sub (Wikitionary):

Etymology

From the Latin sub, meaning under

Prefix

sub-

1. under, beneath (examples: subterranean, submarine)
2. subsidiary, secondary (example: subplot)
3. almost, nearly (example: subhuman)

(...)

Derived terms

* Sub-Saharan
* subtropical

Antonyms

* super-

So?

Under the Sahara: water, oil, gas, rocks? But not Black Africa.

Subsidiary or secondary Sahara? Almost, nearly Saharan? Make no sense... unless you are using it like subhuman.

It is all based on a caprice, the Eurocentric convention that places the north on top in most maps. But defining a huge region of the world based on that is stupid and never has happened before. A much more correct term (always from the Eurocentric position) would be Ultrasaharan (beyond the Sahara), Transaharan (beyond or across the Sahara, like in transaharan caravan or transatlantic cruise but also like Transalpine Gaul) or (less Eurocentrically) Sudsaharan (with d): south of the Sahara. Tropical Africa is also somewhat valid but excludes parts of Southern Africa.

I normally use Sudsaharan Africa, that is easily understood, or simply Black Africa, that is much more historical and has not the dismissive connotation of sub.

But while the world becomes aware, I may well use the term Supersaharan Africa, just to make a point.
Super:

Etymology

From the Latin super

Prefix

super-

1. above, over, or upon
2. superior in size, quality, number, degree, status, title, or position
3. inclusive

(...)

Antonyms

* sub-

After all placing the North on top of the maps is nothing but a cartographic convention:

Supersaharan Africa
Peters (equal area) projection

What about you?

If not you, who? If not now, when?