text
stringlengths 2.57k
160k
| hyperpartisan
bool 2
classes | bias
int64 0
4
| cleaned_text
stringlengths 1.79k
91.8k
| word_count
int64 512
12.5k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
<p>Photo by FDR Presidential Library &amp; Museum | <a href="" type="internal">CC BY 2.0</a></p>
<p>There is so much to love about this series. The uncompromising scenes of combat, the voices of both Americans and Vietnamese, the historical context, the exposure of the utter incompetence of our military leaders, the terrific music that is frequently exactly where it should be, the slowly revealed powerful still images and Peter Coyotes’ wonderful narrative voice. Its tragic failure is its inability to hold anyone responsible for their actions.</p>
<p>Ken Burns and Lynn Novick tell us that the war was begun “in good faith by decent people out of fateful misunderstandings, American overconfidence and&#160;…” whatever the current threat. That’s probably true of most wars. However, as we used to teach our children, you have to be accountable for your actions. If you kill someone speeding the wrong way down a one way street you’ll get charged with manslaughter even if you’re rushing someone to the hospital.</p>
<p>It’s the lack of accountability, the failure to prosecute those who lied to get us into the war, who encouraged battlefield tactics that resulted in the massacre of women and children, who authorized the indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets, who drenched Vietnam in chemical poisons that will cause birth defects and death for generation.</p>
<p>In order to maintain this central lie, Burns and Novick must establish a false balance between good and evil on both sides. Every time the United States is shown doing something bad, Burns and Novick show us how the Vietnamese also did bad things. In one absurd example, Coyote intones something like, “we called them ‘Dinks,’ ‘Gooks,’ ‘Mamasans;’ they called us ‘invaders’ and ‘imperialists.’” The GI terms are dehumanizing, but the Vietnamese terms are accurate. People who cross 3,000 miles of ocean to attack a country that has done them no harm, are accurately called ‘invaders.’ I suppose you could argue about the ‘imperialist’ charge.</p>
<p>Vietnamese soldiers killed some 58,000 Americans and wounded a couple of hundred thousand more. Buns and Novick put the number of Vietnamese we killed at 3 million, but most experts say it was more like 4 million and Vietnam says it’s 6 million, with more people continuing to die from unexploded ordinance and Agent Orange. We destroyed 60% of their villages, sprayed 21 million gallons of lethal poisons, imposed free fire zones (a euphemism for genocide) on 75% of South Vietnam. They attacked US military bases in their country and never killed an American on American soil. There are no equivalences here.</p>
<p>Burns and Novick do a good job of explaining that the United States worked with Ho Chi Minh during World War II and that Ho hoped to get our support after the war. They do not mention that having friendly relations with Communist countries was a successful strategy we used with Yugoslavia, because although it was Communist, Yugoslavia was also independent and a thorn in the Soviet Union’s side. Any minimal understanding of Vietnam’s history would have identified Vietnam’s fiercely independent streak. Intelligent leaders (anyone with half a brain) would have adopted the Yugoslav strategy in Vietnam.</p>
<p>This brings us to another central problem of the Burns and Novick series, Leslie Gelb’s smiling recollection (he looks so smug) that nobody knew anything about Vietnam and didn’t for several years. In fact, throughout the series, many people say “we should have known better.” Is ignorance really a good excuse for launching a brutal war and the war crimes that followed? Unmentioned is how easy it was to gather information on Vietnam. French historians and journalists had studied every aspect of the country and its culture during and after their defeat in the French Indo China war. Much of this material had been translated into English. That’s how I figured out in 1965 that we were going to lose the war in Vietnam.</p>
<p>Burns and Novick fail to mention my trip to North Vietnam in 1965 nor any of the other trips to North Vietnam by members of the American peace movement such as Tom Hayden, Staughton Lynd and Herbert Aptheker who went in January 1966 and members of Women’s Strike for Peace who went later. They only show us Jane Fonda’s trip in 1972, when she broadcast to US troops asking them to stop the bombing and was photographed sitting in an anti-aircraft gun. No one else who went to North Vietnam did either of these things.</p>
<p>Our earlier trips to North Vietnam were important, because we were the only Americans to witness the destruction being rained down on North Vietnam. Burns’ documentary shows lots of aerial shots of bombs and napalm going off (Mussolini’s son called them rosebuds blooming in the desert when he attacked Ethiopia) but very few shots of the bomb’s effects on the ground in North Vietnam. We hear talk of precision bombing, but those of us who traveled to North Vietnam observed hospitals, schools, churches, markets, and working class neighborhoods utterly destroyed. And this was ten years before the war ended!</p>
<p>The Burns’ documentary doesn’t show us the makeshift hospitals with children and old people without arms and legs or suffering from horrendous burns, all victims of American bombing attacks. The documentary focuses our compassion on the American pilots who dropped the bombs.</p>
<p>In fact, the only heroes in Ken Burns’ Vietnam are American GI’s. Almost everyone else is their enemy: the Vietnamese they fought, the officers whose absurd strategy sent them to their deaths, and the American peace movement that struggled to end the war and bring them home. Burns and Novick portray the peace movement in the worst possible terms. In at least three places, they have moving sound bites about how returning soldiers were spit on or in other ways disrespected. It’s a false memory, at least in any general sense. They couldn’t find any visual support, no signs about baby killers, because it didn’t happen, or happened extremely rarely.</p>
<p>To me, this is the central flaw of Burns and Novick’s film, their failure to deal truthfully and equally with the peace movement. Six million Americans took part in the anti-war effort (only 2.7 million Americans served&#160;as&#160;soldiers). Everyone I knew in the peace movement honored the veterans and wanted justice for them. They studied books, took part in teach-ins, and watched newsreels. But Burns and Novick, with a couple of notable exceptions, characterize the peace movement as uninformed, chaotic, disrespectful, self absorbed and violent. At one point, they intercut 1969 pictures of kids at Woodstock wallowing in great music with soldiers fighting in Vietnam. What was that supposed to mean?</p>
<p>The kids who refused to go (many out of righteous opposition), who fled into exile in Canada or Sweden, or who, like boxer Muhammad Ali lost his right to fight for three years, or the Fort Hood 3 who went to prison, or the professors and journalists who lost their jobs, the protestors beaten by riled up construction workers, Martin Luther King who went public with his opposition in 1967, the priests who raided draft offices and burned their records, Alice Hertz and two other Americans&#160;who burned themselves to death in honor of the Buddhist monks who did the same in South Vietnam protesting our puppet regime — these are not worth profiling, all tinged by the same brush, they are the bad guys who disrespected our troops and went violent. What a wonderful authoritarian message that gives to viewers. Don’t protest an evil war or your country’s&#160;war crimes.</p>
<p>The only heroes in Burns and Novick’s Vietnam are American servicemen and I am thrilled to see them finally recognized for what they went through. We have moving back stories of their homes, their motives for joining, their families waiting for them.</p>
<p>None of the six million participants in the American peace movement gets similar treatment. The same is true, incidentally, of the Vietnamese. While the sound bites are great, there are no Vietnamese back stories either.</p>
<p>Without the peace movement, there is no moral center to this series. The lack of accountability is fatal. That an American general can watch from a helicopter the massacre at Mai Lai (as the films tells us) and suffer no consequences is sickening. If military courts had aggressively prosecuted violators of human rights, or even if we only had held detailed and accurate reconciliations where the truth came out, there would have been a chance that our reckless invasions of Iraq with its policy of torture and the invasion of Afghanistan would not have followed so easily. When people are held accountable for their actions, perpetrators of questionable violent acts think twice.</p>
<p>Last week on NPR an American general in Afghanistan announced that we are not trying to occupy territory in Afghanistan, we are simply trying to kill terrorists. Here, again, is the same rationale of the body count that led to disaster in Vietnam. We are reliving the Vietnam War because no one was ever really held&#160;responsible&#160;for its horrors.</p>
<p>The moral center of the Vietnam War was held by those who opposed it. Several people I’ve talked to say the series is depressing. I had the same feeling of despair at the end. Burns and Novick suggest Vietnam’s a tragedy. It’s not. In tragedy a powerful human makes a terrible mistake and suffers the consequences. No one suffered any consequences for Vietnam. Burns and Novick assure us that even if people did wrong, they didn’t mean to. America is still the shining city on the hill and we can do no wrong.</p>
<p>This article originally ran on Koch’s Medium page.</p> | true | 4 | photo fdr presidential library amp museum cc 20 much love series uncompromising scenes combat voices americans vietnamese historical context exposure utter incompetence military leaders terrific music frequently exactly slowly revealed powerful still images peter coyotes wonderful narrative voice tragic failure inability hold anyone responsible actions ken burns lynn novick tell us war begun good faith decent people fateful misunderstandings american overconfidence and160 whatever current threat thats probably true wars however used teach children accountable actions kill someone speeding wrong way one way street youll get charged manslaughter even youre rushing someone hospital lack accountability failure prosecute lied get us war encouraged battlefield tactics resulted massacre women children authorized indiscriminate bombing civilian targets drenched vietnam chemical poisons cause birth defects death generation order maintain central lie burns novick must establish false balance good evil sides every time united states shown something bad burns novick show us vietnamese also bad things one absurd example coyote intones something like called dinks gooks mamasans called us invaders imperialists gi terms dehumanizing vietnamese terms accurate people cross 3000 miles ocean attack country done harm accurately called invaders suppose could argue imperialist charge vietnamese soldiers killed 58000 americans wounded couple hundred thousand buns novick put number vietnamese killed 3 million experts say like 4 million vietnam says 6 million people continuing die unexploded ordinance agent orange destroyed 60 villages sprayed 21 million gallons lethal poisons imposed free fire zones euphemism genocide 75 south vietnam attacked us military bases country never killed american american soil equivalences burns novick good job explaining united states worked ho chi minh world war ii ho hoped get support war mention friendly relations communist countries successful strategy used yugoslavia although communist yugoslavia also independent thorn soviet unions side minimal understanding vietnams history would identified vietnams fiercely independent streak intelligent leaders anyone half brain would adopted yugoslav strategy vietnam brings us another central problem burns novick series leslie gelbs smiling recollection looks smug nobody knew anything vietnam didnt several years fact throughout series many people say known better ignorance really good excuse launching brutal war war crimes followed unmentioned easy gather information vietnam french historians journalists studied every aspect country culture defeat french indo china war much material translated english thats figured 1965 going lose war vietnam burns novick fail mention trip north vietnam 1965 trips north vietnam members american peace movement tom hayden staughton lynd herbert aptheker went january 1966 members womens strike peace went later show us jane fondas trip 1972 broadcast us troops asking stop bombing photographed sitting antiaircraft gun one else went north vietnam either things earlier trips north vietnam important americans witness destruction rained north vietnam burns documentary shows lots aerial shots bombs napalm going mussolinis son called rosebuds blooming desert attacked ethiopia shots bombs effects ground north vietnam hear talk precision bombing us traveled north vietnam observed hospitals schools churches markets working class neighborhoods utterly destroyed ten years war ended burns documentary doesnt show us makeshift hospitals children old people without arms legs suffering horrendous burns victims american bombing attacks documentary focuses compassion american pilots dropped bombs fact heroes ken burns vietnam american gis almost everyone else enemy vietnamese fought officers whose absurd strategy sent deaths american peace movement struggled end war bring home burns novick portray peace movement worst possible terms least three places moving sound bites returning soldiers spit ways disrespected false memory least general sense couldnt find visual support signs baby killers didnt happen happened extremely rarely central flaw burns novicks film failure deal truthfully equally peace movement six million americans took part antiwar effort 27 million americans served160as160soldiers everyone knew peace movement honored veterans wanted justice studied books took part teachins watched newsreels burns novick couple notable exceptions characterize peace movement uninformed chaotic disrespectful self absorbed violent one point intercut 1969 pictures kids woodstock wallowing great music soldiers fighting vietnam supposed mean kids refused go many righteous opposition fled exile canada sweden like boxer muhammad ali lost right fight three years fort hood 3 went prison professors journalists lost jobs protestors beaten riled construction workers martin luther king went public opposition 1967 priests raided draft offices burned records alice hertz two americans160who burned death honor buddhist monks south vietnam protesting puppet regime worth profiling tinged brush bad guys disrespected troops went violent wonderful authoritarian message gives viewers dont protest evil war countrys160war crimes heroes burns novicks vietnam american servicemen thrilled see finally recognized went moving back stories homes motives joining families waiting none six million participants american peace movement gets similar treatment true incidentally vietnamese sound bites great vietnamese back stories either without peace movement moral center series lack accountability fatal american general watch helicopter massacre mai lai films tells us suffer consequences sickening military courts aggressively prosecuted violators human rights even held detailed accurate reconciliations truth came would chance reckless invasions iraq policy torture invasion afghanistan would followed easily people held accountable actions perpetrators questionable violent acts think twice last week npr american general afghanistan announced trying occupy territory afghanistan simply trying kill terrorists rationale body count led disaster vietnam reliving vietnam war one ever really held160responsible160for horrors moral center vietnam war held opposed several people ive talked say series depressing feeling despair end burns novick suggest vietnams tragedy tragedy powerful human makes terrible mistake suffers consequences one suffered consequences vietnam burns novick assure us even people wrong didnt mean america still shining city hill wrong article originally ran kochs medium page | 900 |
<p>WikiLeaks, the whistle-blower website, has again published a massive trove of documents, this time from a private intelligence firm known as Stratfor. The source of the leak was the hacker group “Anonymous,” which took credit for obtaining more than 5 million emails from Stratfor’s servers. Anonymous obtained the material on Dec. 24, 2011, and provided it to WikiLeaks, which in turn partnered with 25 media organizations globally to analyze the emails and publish them.</p>
<p>Among the emails was a short one-liner that suggested the U.S. government has produced, through a secret grand jury, a sealed indictment against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. In addition to painting a picture of Stratfor as a runaway, rogue private intelligence firm with close ties to government-intelligence agencies serving both corporate and U.S. military clients, the emails support the growing awareness that the Obama administration, far from diverging from the secrecy of the Bush/Cheney era, is obsessed with secrecy, and is aggressively opposed to transparency.</p>
<p>I traveled to London last Independence Day weekend to interview Assange. When I asked him about the grand-jury investigation, he responded: “There is no judge, there is no defense counsel, and there are four prosecutors. So, that is why people that are familiar with grand-jury inquiries in the United States say that a grand jury would not only indict a ham sandwich, it would indict the ham and the sandwich.”</p>
<p>As I left London, The Guardian newspaper exposed more of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. phone-hacking scandal, which prompted the closing of his tabloid newspaper, the largest circulation Sunday newspaper in the U.K., News of the World. The coincidence is relevant, as News of the World reported anything but what its title claimed, focusing instead on salacious details of the private lives of celebrities, sensational crimes, and photos of scantily clad women. For this and his other endeavors, Murdoch amassed a reported personal fortune of $7.6 billion.</p>
<p />
<p>Meanwhile, Assange — who, like Murdoch, was born in Australia (Murdoch abandoned his nationality for U.S. citizenship in order to purchase more U.S. broadcast licenses) — had engaged in one of largest and most courageous acts of publishing in history by founding wikileaks.org, which allows people to safely and securely deliver documents using the Internet in ways that make it almost impossible to trace. He and his colleagues at WikiLeaks had published millions of leaked documents, most notably about the U.S. wars and occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and thousands of U.S. diplomatic cables, true “news of the world.” The Sydney Peace Foundation awarded Assange a gold medal for “exceptional courage and initiative in pursuit of human rights.” In contrast, the U.S. government targeted him, possibly under the Espionage Act. Murdoch is hailed as a pioneering newsman, while pundits on Murdoch-owned cable-television outlets openly call for Assange’s murder.</p>
<p>The Stratfor emails will be released over time, along with context provided by WikiLeaks’ media partners. Already revealed by the documents are the close, and potentially illegal, connections between Stratfor employees and government-intelligence and law-enforcement officials. Rolling Stone magazine reports that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security was monitoring Occupy Wall Street protests nationally, and the Texas Department of Public Safety has an undercover agent at Occupy Austin who was disclosing information to contacts at Stratfor. Stratfor also is hired by multinational corporations to glean “intelligence” about critics. Among companies using Stratfor were Dow Chemical, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and Coca-Cola.</p>
<p>Fred Burton, Stratfor’s vice president of intelligence, and a former head of counterintelligence at the U.S. State Department’s diplomatic corps, wrote in an email, “Not for Pub — We have a sealed indictment on Assange. Pls protect.” Burton and others at Stratfor showed intense interest in WikiLeaks starting in 2010, showing intense dislike for Assange personally. Burton wrote: “Assange is going to make a nice bride in prison. Screw the terrorist. He’ll be eating cat food forever.” Another Stratfor employee wanted Assange waterboarded.</p>
<p>Michael Ratner, legal adviser to Assange and WikiLeaks, told me, “The Obama administration has gone after six people under the Espionage Act. That’s more cases than happened since the Espionage Act was actually begun in 1917. … What this is about is the United States wanting to suppress the truth.”</p>
<p>1917 is also the year when U.S. Sen. Hiram Johnson famously said, “The first casualty when war comes is truth.” The White House is holding a gala dinner this week, honoring Iraq War veterans. Bradley Manning is an Iraq War vet who won’t be there. He is being court-martialed, facing life in prison or possibly death, for allegedly releasing thousands of military and diplomatic documents to WikiLeaks revealing the casualties of war. President Barack Obama would better serve the country by also honoring Assange and Manning.</p>
<p>We should pursue the truth, not its messengers.</p>
<p>Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.</p>
<p>Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 1,000 stations in North America. She is the author of “Breaking the Sound Barrier,” recently released in paperback and now a New York Times best-seller.</p>
<p>© 2012 Amy Goodman</p>
<p>Distributed by King Features Syndicate</p> | true | 4 | wikileaks whistleblower website published massive trove documents time private intelligence firm known stratfor source leak hacker group anonymous took credit obtaining 5 million emails stratfors servers anonymous obtained material dec 24 2011 provided wikileaks turn partnered 25 media organizations globally analyze emails publish among emails short oneliner suggested us government produced secret grand jury sealed indictment wikileaks founder julian assange addition painting picture stratfor runaway rogue private intelligence firm close ties governmentintelligence agencies serving corporate us military clients emails support growing awareness obama administration far diverging secrecy bushcheney era obsessed secrecy aggressively opposed transparency traveled london last independence day weekend interview assange asked grandjury investigation responded judge defense counsel four prosecutors people familiar grandjury inquiries united states say grand jury would indict ham sandwich would indict ham sandwich left london guardian newspaper exposed rupert murdochs news corp phonehacking scandal prompted closing tabloid newspaper largest circulation sunday newspaper uk news world coincidence relevant news world reported anything title claimed focusing instead salacious details private lives celebrities sensational crimes photos scantily clad women endeavors murdoch amassed reported personal fortune 76 billion meanwhile assange like murdoch born australia murdoch abandoned nationality us citizenship order purchase us broadcast licenses engaged one largest courageous acts publishing history founding wikileaksorg allows people safely securely deliver documents using internet ways make almost impossible trace colleagues wikileaks published millions leaked documents notably us wars occupations iraq afghanistan thousands us diplomatic cables true news world sydney peace foundation awarded assange gold medal exceptional courage initiative pursuit human rights contrast us government targeted possibly espionage act murdoch hailed pioneering newsman pundits murdochowned cabletelevision outlets openly call assanges murder stratfor emails released time along context provided wikileaks media partners already revealed documents close potentially illegal connections stratfor employees governmentintelligence lawenforcement officials rolling stone magazine reports us department homeland security monitoring occupy wall street protests nationally texas department public safety undercover agent occupy austin disclosing information contacts stratfor stratfor also hired multinational corporations glean intelligence critics among companies using stratfor dow chemical lockheed martin northrop grumman raytheon cocacola fred burton stratfors vice president intelligence former head counterintelligence us state departments diplomatic corps wrote email pub sealed indictment assange pls protect burton others stratfor showed intense interest wikileaks starting 2010 showing intense dislike assange personally burton wrote assange going make nice bride prison screw terrorist hell eating cat food forever another stratfor employee wanted assange waterboarded michael ratner legal adviser assange wikileaks told obama administration gone six people espionage act thats cases happened since espionage act actually begun 1917 united states wanting suppress truth 1917 also year us sen hiram johnson famously said first casualty war comes truth white house holding gala dinner week honoring iraq war veterans bradley manning iraq war vet wont courtmartialed facing life prison possibly death allegedly releasing thousands military diplomatic documents wikileaks revealing casualties war president barack obama would better serve country also honoring assange manning pursue truth messengers denis moynihan contributed research column amy goodman host democracy daily international tvradio news hour airing 1000 stations north america author breaking sound barrier recently released paperback new york times bestseller 2012 amy goodman distributed king features syndicate | 518 |
<p>The ability of the corporate state to pacify the country by extending credit and providing cheap manufactured goods to the masses is gone. The pernicious idea that democracy lies in the choice between competing brands and the freedom to accumulate vast sums of personal wealth at the expense of others has collapsed. The conflation of freedom with the free market has been exposed as a sham. The travails of the poor are rapidly becoming the travails of the middle class, especially as unemployment insurance runs out and people get a taste of Bill Clinton’s draconian welfare reform. And class warfare, once buried under the happy illusion that we were all going to enter an age of prosperity with unfettered capitalism, is returning with a vengeance.</p>
<p>Our economic crisis — despite the corporate media circus around the death of Michael Jackson or Gov. Mark Sanford’s marital infidelity or the outfits of Sacha Baron Cohen’s latest incarnation, Brüno — barrels forward. And this crisis will lead to a period of profound political turmoil and change. Those who care about the plight of the working class and the poor must begin to mobilize quickly or we will lose our last opportunity to save our embattled democracy. The most important struggle will be to wrest the organs of communication from corporations that use mass media to demonize movements of social change and empower proto-fascist movements such as the Christian right.</p>
<p>American culture — or cultures, for we once had distinct regional cultures — was systematically destroyed in the 20th century by corporations. These corporations used mass communication, as well as an understanding of the human subconscious, to turn consumption into an inner compulsion. Old values of thrift, regional identity that had its own iconography, aesthetic expression and history, diverse immigrant traditions, self-sufficiency, a press that was decentralized to provide citizens with a voice in their communities were all destroyed to create mass, corporate culture. New desires and habits were implanted by corporate advertisers to replace the old. Individual frustrations and discontents could be solved, corporate culture assured us, through the wonders of consumerism and cultural homogenization. American culture, or cultures, was replaced with junk culture and junk politics. And now, standing on the ash heap, we survey the ruins. The very slogans of advertising and mass culture have become the idiom of common expression, robbing us of the language to make sense of the destruction. We confuse the manufactured commodity culture with American culture.</p>
<p>How do we recover what was lost? How do we reclaim the culture that was destroyed by corporations? How do we fight back now that the consumer culture has fallen into a state of decay? What can we do to reverse the cannibalization of government and the national economy by the corporations?</p>
<p />
<p>All periods of profound change occur in a crisis. It was a crisis that brought us the New Deal, now largely dismantled by the corporate state. It was also a crisis that gave the world Adolf Hitler and <a href="http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0771127.html%20" type="external">Slobodan Milosevic</a>. We can go in either direction. Events move at the speed of light when societies and cultural assumptions break down. There are powerful forces, which have no commitment to the open society, ready to seize the moment to snuff out the last vestiges of democratic egalitarianism. Our bankrupt liberalism, which naively believes that Barack Obama is the antidote to our permanent war economy and Wall Street fraud, will either rise from its coma or be rolled over by an organized corporate elite and their right-wing lap dogs. The corporate domination of the airwaves, of most print publications and an increasing number of Internet sites means we will have to search, and search quickly, for alternative forms of communication to thwart the rise of totalitarian capitalism.</p>
<p><a href="http://subsol.c3.hu/subsol_2/contributors3/ewenbio.html%20" type="external">Stuart Ewen</a>, whose <a href="http://www.stayfreemagazine.org/archives/14/ewen1.html%20" type="external">books</a> “Captains of Consciousness: Advertising and the Social Roots of the Consumer Culture” and “PR: A Social History of Spin” chronicle how corporate propaganda deformed American culture and pushed populism to the margins of American society, argues that we have a fleeting chance to save the country. I fervently hope he is right. He attacks the ideology of “objectivity and balance” that has corrupted news, saying that it falsely evokes the scales of justice. He describes the curriculum at most journalism schools as “poison.”</p>
<p>“&#160;‘Balance and objectivity’ creates an idea where both sides are balanced,” he said when I spoke to him by phone. “In certain ways it mirrors the two-party system, the notion that if you are going to have a Democrat speak you need to have a Republican speak. It offers the phantom of objectivity. It creates the notion that the universe of discourse is limited to two positions. Issues become black or white. They are not seen as complex with a multitude of factors.”</p>
<p>Ewen argues that the forces for social change — look at any lengthy and turgid human rights report — have forgotten that rhetoric is as important as fact. Corporate and government propaganda, aimed to sway emotions, rarely uses facts to sell its positions. And because progressives have lost the gift of rhetoric, which was once a staple of a university education, because they naively believe in the Enlightenment ideal that facts alone can move people toward justice, they are largely helpless.</p>
<p>“Effective communication requires not simply an understanding of the facts, but how those facts will take place in the public mind,” Ewen said. “When <a href="http://etext.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/BonCrow.html%20" type="external">Gustave Le Bon</a> says it is not the facts in and of themselves which make a point but the way in which the facts take place, the way in which they come to attention, he is right.” The emergence of corporate and government public relations, which drew on the studies of mass psychology by Sigmund Freud and others after World War I, found its bible in <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=YhXLOVc6BsoC&amp;dq=Walter+Lippmann%E2%80%99s+book+" type="external">Walter Lippmann’s book “Public Opinion,”</a> a manual for the power elite’s shaping of popular sentiments. Lippmann argued that the key to leadership in the modern age would depend on the ability to manipulate “symbols which assemble emotions after they have been detached from their ideas.” The public mind could be mastered, he wrote, through an “intensification of feeling and a degradation of significance.”</p>
<p>These corporate forces, schooled by Woodrow Wilson’s vast <a href="http://www.propagandacritic.com/articles/ww1.cpi.html%20" type="external">Committee for Public Information</a>, which sold World War I to the public, learned how to skillfully mobilize and manipulate the emotional responses of the public. The control of the airwaves and domination through corporate advertising of most publications restricted news to reporting facts, to “objectivity and balance,” while the real power to persuade and dominate a public remained under corporate and governmental control.</p>
<p>Ewen argues that pamphleteering, which played a major role in the 17th and 18th centuries in shaping the public mind, recognized that “the human mind is not left brain or right brain, that it is not divided by reason which is good and emotion which is bad.”</p>
<p>He argues that the forces of social reform, those organs that support a search for truth and self-criticism, have mistakenly shunned emotion and rhetoric because they have been used so powerfully within modern society to disseminate lies and manipulate public opinion. But this refusal to appeal to emotion means “we gave up the ghost and accepted the idea that human beings are these divided selves, binary systems between emotion and reason, and that emotion gets you into trouble and reason is what leads you forward. This is not true.”</p>
<p>The public is bombarded with carefully crafted images meant to confuse propaganda with ideology and knowledge with how we feel. Human rights and labor groups, investigative journalists, consumer watchdog organizations and advocacy agencies have, in the face of this manipulation, inundated the public sphere with reports and facts. But facts alone, Ewen says, make little difference. And as we search for alternative ways to communicate in a time of crisis we must also communicate in new forms. We must appeal to emotion as well as to reason. The power of this appeal to emotion is evidenced in the photographs of <a href="http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&amp;um=1&amp;sa=1&amp;q=Jacob+Riis&amp;btnG=Search+images&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=%20" type="external">Jacob Riis</a>, a New York journalist, who with a team of assistants at the end of the 19th century initiated urban-reform photography. His stark portraits of the filth and squalor of urban slums awakened the conscience of a nation. The photographer <a href="http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&amp;q=Lewis%20Hine&amp;um=1&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=wi%20" type="external">Lewis Hine</a>, at the turn of the 20th century, and <a href="http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&amp;um=1&amp;sa=1&amp;q=walker+evens&amp;btnG=Search+images&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=" type="external">Walker Evans</a> during the Great Depression did the same thing for the working class, along with writers such as Upton Sinclair and James Agee. It is a recovery of this style, one that turns the abstraction of fact into a human flesh and one that is not afraid of emotion and passion, which will permit us to counter the force of corporate propaganda.</p>
<p>We may know that fossil fuels are destroying our ecosystem. We may be able to cite the statistics. But the oil and natural gas industry continues its flagrant rape of the planet. It is able to do this because of the money it uses to control legislation and a massive advertising campaign that paints the oil and natural gas industry as part of the solution. A group called EnergyTomorrow.org, for example, has been running a <a href="http://www.energytomorrow.org/advertisements.aspx" type="external">series of television ads</a>. One ad features an attractive, middle-aged woman in a black pantsuit — an actor named Brooke Alexander who once worked as the host of “WorldBeat” on CNN and for Fox News. Alexander walks around a blue screen studio that becomes digital renditions of American life. She argues, before each image, that oil and natural gas are critical to providing not only energy needs but health care and jobs.</p>
<p>“It is almost like they are taking the most optimistic visions of what the stimulus package could do and saying this is what the development of oil and natural gas will bring about,” Ewen said. “If you go to the Web site there is a lot of sophisticated stuff you can play around with. As each ad closes you see in the lower right-hand corner in very small letters API, the American Petroleum Institute, the lobbying group for ExxonMobil and all the other big oil companies. For the average viewer there is nothing in the ad to indicate this is being produced by the oil industry.”</p>
<p>The modern world, as Kafka predicted, has become a world where the irrational has become rational, where lies become true. And facts alone will be powerless to thwart the mendacity spun out through billions of dollars in corporate advertising, lobbying and control of traditional sources of information. We will have to descend into the world of the forgotten, to write, photograph, paint, sing, act, blog, video and film with anger and honesty that have been blunted by the parameters of traditional journalism. The lines between artists, social activists and journalists have to be erased. These lines diminish the power of reform, justice and an understanding of the truth. And it is for this purpose that these lines are there.“As a writer part of what you are aiming for is to present things in ways that will resonate with people, which will give voice to feelings and concerns, feelings that may not be fully verbalized,” Ewen said. “You can’t do that simply by providing them with data. One of the major problems of the present is that those structures designed to promote a progressive agenda are antediluvian.”</p>
<p>Corporate ideology, embodied in neoconservatism, has seeped into the attitudes of most self-described liberals. It champions unfettered capitalism and globalization as eternal. This is the classic tactic that power elites use to maintain themselves. The loss of historical memory, which “balanced and objective” journalism promotes, has only contributed to this fantasy. But the fantasy, despite the desperate raiding of taxpayer funds to keep the corporate system alive, is now coming undone. The lie is being exposed. And the corporate state is running scared.</p>
<p>“It is very important for people like us to think about ways to present the issues, whether we are talking about the banking crisis, health care or housing and homelessness,” Ewen said. “We have to think about presenting these issues in ways that are two steps ahead of the media rather than two steps behind. That is not something we should view as an impossible task. It is a very possible task. There is evidence of how possible that task is, especially if you look at the development of the underground press in the 1960s. The underground press, which started cropping up all over the country, was not a marginal phenomenon. It leeched into the society. It developed an approach to news and communication that was 10 steps ahead of the mainstream media. The proof is that even as it declined, so many structures that were innovated by the underground press, things like The Whole Earth Catalogue, began to affect and inform the stylistic presentation of mainstream media.”</p>
<p>“I am not a prophet,” Ewen said. “All I can do is look at historical precedence and figure out the extent we can learn from it. This is not about looking backwards. If you can’t see the past you can’t see the future. If you can’t see the relationship between the present and the past you can’t understand where the present might go. Who controls the past controls the present, who controls the present controls the future, as George Orwell said. This is a succinct explanation of the ways in which power functions.”</p>
<p>“Read ‘The Gettysburg Address,’&#160;” Ewen said. “Read Frederick Douglass’ autobiography or his newspaper. Read ‘The Communist Manifesto.’ Read Darwin’s ‘Descent of Man.’ All of these things are filled with an understanding that communicating ideas and producing forms of public communication that empower people, rather than disempowering people, relies on an integrated understanding of who the public is and what it might be. We have a lot to learn from the history of rhetoric. We need to think about where we are going. We need to think about what 21st century pamphleteering might be. We need to think about the ways in which the rediscovery of rhetoric — not lying, but rhetoric in its more conventional sense — can affect what we do. We need to look at those historical antecedents where interventions happened that stepped ahead of the news. And to some extent this is happening. We have the freest and most open public sphere since the village square.”</p>
<p>The battle ahead will be fought outside the journalistic mainstream, he said. The old forms of journalism are dying or have sold their soul to corporate manipulation and celebrity culture. We must now wed fact to rhetoric. We must appeal to reason and emotion. We must not be afraid to openly take sides, to speak, photograph or write on behalf of the disempowered. And, Ewen believes, we have a chance in the coming crisis to succeed.</p>
<p>“Pessimism is never useful,” he said. “Realism is useful, understanding the forces that are at play. To quote <a href="http://www.marxists.org/archive/gramsci/intro.htm%20" type="external">Antonio Gramsci</a>, ‘pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will.’&#160;”</p> | true | 4 | ability corporate state pacify country extending credit providing cheap manufactured goods masses gone pernicious idea democracy lies choice competing brands freedom accumulate vast sums personal wealth expense others collapsed conflation freedom free market exposed sham travails poor rapidly becoming travails middle class especially unemployment insurance runs people get taste bill clintons draconian welfare reform class warfare buried happy illusion going enter age prosperity unfettered capitalism returning vengeance economic crisis despite corporate media circus around death michael jackson gov mark sanfords marital infidelity outfits sacha baron cohens latest incarnation brüno barrels forward crisis lead period profound political turmoil change care plight working class poor must begin mobilize quickly lose last opportunity save embattled democracy important struggle wrest organs communication corporations use mass media demonize movements social change empower protofascist movements christian right american culture cultures distinct regional cultures systematically destroyed 20th century corporations corporations used mass communication well understanding human subconscious turn consumption inner compulsion old values thrift regional identity iconography aesthetic expression history diverse immigrant traditions selfsufficiency press decentralized provide citizens voice communities destroyed create mass corporate culture new desires habits implanted corporate advertisers replace old individual frustrations discontents could solved corporate culture assured us wonders consumerism cultural homogenization american culture cultures replaced junk culture junk politics standing ash heap survey ruins slogans advertising mass culture become idiom common expression robbing us language make sense destruction confuse manufactured commodity culture american culture recover lost reclaim culture destroyed corporations fight back consumer culture fallen state decay reverse cannibalization government national economy corporations periods profound change occur crisis crisis brought us new deal largely dismantled corporate state also crisis gave world adolf hitler slobodan milosevic go either direction events move speed light societies cultural assumptions break powerful forces commitment open society ready seize moment snuff last vestiges democratic egalitarianism bankrupt liberalism naively believes barack obama antidote permanent war economy wall street fraud either rise coma rolled organized corporate elite rightwing lap dogs corporate domination airwaves print publications increasing number internet sites means search search quickly alternative forms communication thwart rise totalitarian capitalism stuart ewen whose books captains consciousness advertising social roots consumer culture pr social history spin chronicle corporate propaganda deformed american culture pushed populism margins american society argues fleeting chance save country fervently hope right attacks ideology objectivity balance corrupted news saying falsely evokes scales justice describes curriculum journalism schools poison 160balance objectivity creates idea sides balanced said spoke phone certain ways mirrors twoparty system notion going democrat speak need republican speak offers phantom objectivity creates notion universe discourse limited two positions issues become black white seen complex multitude factors ewen argues forces social change look lengthy turgid human rights report forgotten rhetoric important fact corporate government propaganda aimed sway emotions rarely uses facts sell positions progressives lost gift rhetoric staple university education naively believe enlightenment ideal facts alone move people toward justice largely helpless effective communication requires simply understanding facts facts take place public mind ewen said gustave le bon says facts make point way facts take place way come attention right emergence corporate government public relations drew studies mass psychology sigmund freud others world war found bible walter lippmanns book public opinion manual power elites shaping popular sentiments lippmann argued key leadership modern age would depend ability manipulate symbols assemble emotions detached ideas public mind could mastered wrote intensification feeling degradation significance corporate forces schooled woodrow wilsons vast committee public information sold world war public learned skillfully mobilize manipulate emotional responses public control airwaves domination corporate advertising publications restricted news reporting facts objectivity balance real power persuade dominate public remained corporate governmental control ewen argues pamphleteering played major role 17th 18th centuries shaping public mind recognized human mind left brain right brain divided reason good emotion bad argues forces social reform organs support search truth selfcriticism mistakenly shunned emotion rhetoric used powerfully within modern society disseminate lies manipulate public opinion refusal appeal emotion means gave ghost accepted idea human beings divided selves binary systems emotion reason emotion gets trouble reason leads forward true public bombarded carefully crafted images meant confuse propaganda ideology knowledge feel human rights labor groups investigative journalists consumer watchdog organizations advocacy agencies face manipulation inundated public sphere reports facts facts alone ewen says make little difference search alternative ways communicate time crisis must also communicate new forms must appeal emotion well reason power appeal emotion evidenced photographs jacob riis new york journalist team assistants end 19th century initiated urbanreform photography stark portraits filth squalor urban slums awakened conscience nation photographer lewis hine turn 20th century walker evans great depression thing working class along writers upton sinclair james agee recovery style one turns abstraction fact human flesh one afraid emotion passion permit us counter force corporate propaganda may know fossil fuels destroying ecosystem may able cite statistics oil natural gas industry continues flagrant rape planet able money uses control legislation massive advertising campaign paints oil natural gas industry part solution group called energytomorroworg example running series television ads one ad features attractive middleaged woman black pantsuit actor named brooke alexander worked host worldbeat cnn fox news alexander walks around blue screen studio becomes digital renditions american life argues image oil natural gas critical providing energy needs health care jobs almost like taking optimistic visions stimulus package could saying development oil natural gas bring ewen said go web site lot sophisticated stuff play around ad closes see lower righthand corner small letters api american petroleum institute lobbying group exxonmobil big oil companies average viewer nothing ad indicate produced oil industry modern world kafka predicted become world irrational become rational lies become true facts alone powerless thwart mendacity spun billions dollars corporate advertising lobbying control traditional sources information descend world forgotten write photograph paint sing act blog video film anger honesty blunted parameters traditional journalism lines artists social activists journalists erased lines diminish power reform justice understanding truth purpose lines thereas writer part aiming present things ways resonate people give voice feelings concerns feelings may fully verbalized ewen said cant simply providing data one major problems present structures designed promote progressive agenda antediluvian corporate ideology embodied neoconservatism seeped attitudes selfdescribed liberals champions unfettered capitalism globalization eternal classic tactic power elites use maintain loss historical memory balanced objective journalism promotes contributed fantasy fantasy despite desperate raiding taxpayer funds keep corporate system alive coming undone lie exposed corporate state running scared important people like us think ways present issues whether talking banking crisis health care housing homelessness ewen said think presenting issues ways two steps ahead media rather two steps behind something view impossible task possible task evidence possible task especially look development underground press 1960s underground press started cropping country marginal phenomenon leeched society developed approach news communication 10 steps ahead mainstream media proof even declined many structures innovated underground press things like whole earth catalogue began affect inform stylistic presentation mainstream media prophet ewen said look historical precedence figure extent learn looking backwards cant see past cant see future cant see relationship present past cant understand present might go controls past controls present controls present controls future george orwell said succinct explanation ways power functions read gettysburg address160 ewen said read frederick douglass autobiography newspaper read communist manifesto read darwins descent man things filled understanding communicating ideas producing forms public communication empower people rather disempowering people relies integrated understanding public might lot learn history rhetoric need think going need think 21st century pamphleteering might need think ways rediscovery rhetoric lying rhetoric conventional sense affect need look historical antecedents interventions happened stepped ahead news extent happening freest open public sphere since village square battle ahead fought outside journalistic mainstream said old forms journalism dying sold soul corporate manipulation celebrity culture must wed fact rhetoric must appeal reason emotion must afraid openly take sides speak photograph write behalf disempowered ewen believes chance coming crisis succeed pessimism never useful said realism useful understanding forces play quote antonio gramsci pessimism intellect optimism will160 | 1,310 |
<p />
<p>Barack Obama, the likely Democratic nominee, has two options in his hunt for a partner on the Democratic ticket. He can double down on strengths or he can compensate for weaknesses. If he mimics the last Democratic president and chooses the former (Bill Clinton selected another young Southerner, Al Gore, in 1992), the decision-making process is relatively easy: Find someone youthful and energetic with a devotion to reform, a foreign policy approach that rejects conventional wisdom, and a short or nonexistent Washington resume. If Obama chooses the latter, however, things are decidedly more complex. Does he choose a VP who bolsters the ticket on foreign policy or on executive experience? Is there anyone with foreign policy expertise who isn’t a creature of Washington? Does he find someone with appeal to working-class voters in Appalachia or white women nationwide? What about Jews in Florida and Latinos in the Southwest? And hanging over all of this is the geographic question—does Obama pick someone who hails from a swing state that he or she can deliver?</p>
<p>There is not a lot of evidence that suggests vice presidential candidates make a serious difference (good or bad) for the ticket. Two words: Dan Quayle. One study showed that a veep pick can increase a ticket’s performance by less than one half of one percent in the VP’s home state. Presidential candidates do not assume the assets (or race, or gender) of their running mates, and voters generally focus on the top of the ticket. The most important questions for Obama may be the simplest. Which potential VP can be president should the unthinkable happen, and whom can Obama spend four (or eight) harmonious years with in the White House?</p>
<p>With these caveats in mind, let’s look at the contenders. Hillary Clinton isn’t on this list—not because she is an unlikely pick, but because the merits of adding her to the ticket have been debated ad nauseam.</p>
<p>Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D-Kan.), 60 Sebelius is frequently mentioned because she is a living embodiment of Obama’s message. She won the governorship of deep red Kansas in 2002 and 2006. In both campaigns, she convinced a Republican to switch to the Democratic Party in order to become her lieutenant governor. In 2006, Sebelius also recruited the then-Republican district attorney in Johnson County to run as a Democrat for attorney general against a Republican incumbent. He did, and he won.</p>
<p>Sebelius is also on the list because it is assumed she will strengthen Obama’s support among female voters. But is that really true? Will women who are devoted to Hillary Clinton warm to Sebelius simply because she is a woman? That would be a fairly patronizing assumption for Obama and his strategists to make. And hardcore Clinton supporters may by angered if Obama selects a female running mate who isn’t Hillary Clinton. A final consideration on the topic of gender is whether putting an African American and a woman on the same ticket is too much of a political risk in a country that has elected neither to the top office.</p>
<p>Sebelius has other advantages. Because she has worked with a Republican legislature, she has been forced to issue bold vetoes of abortion restrictions, a harsh voter identification measure, and the creation of new coal plants. She is also anti-death penalty. In sum, Sebelius is a strong and successful progressive in a state where one doesn’t expect to find them.</p>
<p>Her lack of foreign policy credentials and Kansas’ paltry six electoral votes are liabilities. And no discussion of Sebelius is complete without a mention of her <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-kMS0S_C_0" type="external">soporific response</a> to Bush’s 2008 State of the Union address. Given the opportunity to showcase her talents, Sebelius came off as wooden and uninspiring. For one speech at least, she was the anti-Obama.</p>
<p>Gov. Ted Strickland (D-Ohio), 66 Governors and senators from Ohio are always going to be considered (Strickland isn’t the only Buckeye State lawmaker on this list), but Strickland brings more than just pull with the swingiest of states. The son of a steelworker, and a former Methodist minister who promised to follow “biblical principles” when he ran for governor in 2006, Strickland can probably appeal to those fabled working-class whites, if anyone can.</p>
<p>Though Strickland has only been governor since 2007 (he won 20 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of independents in his fight against then-Secretary of State Ken Blackwell), he did represent Ohio for six terms in the House before moving to the mansion. During that time, Strickland was instrumental in creating SCHIP, the federal government’s leading program providing health care for underprivileged children. In fact, it was during the genesis of SCHIP that Strickland came to know then-first lady Hillary Clinton, whose presidential candidacy he endorsed. That fact alone wouldn’t make Strickland a thorny pick, but he did parrot some of the Clinton campaign’s harshest criticisms of Obama.</p>
<p>Age is a factor with Strickland. Of concern to the Democratic Party, though perhaps not to Obama, is whether the VP pick will be able to carry its flag eight years down the line. Initiating an era of long-term progressive governance requires someone who is young, energetic, and inoffensive to most or all of the factions within the party. In that case, Strickland, who will be 74 in 2016, most certainly isn’t their guy.</p>
<p>Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), 62 Webb recently took on John McCain on the GI Bill and showed that he wasn’t intimidated. In characteristically gruff fashion, he said that McCain, who opposed the bill because he feared it would decrease retention rates, was <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/30/webb-mccain-is-so-full-of-it/" type="external">“full of it.”</a> It was reminiscent of when Webb, in a reception at the White House soon after his election in 2006, refused to take a photo with President Bush and told him off when Bush asked about Webb’s son, who was then serving in Iraq.</p>
<p>Incidents like that one have helped to forge Webb’s reputation as the Democratic Party’s ballsiest member. A former Marine, Webb has earned a Navy Cross, the Silver Star, two Bronze Stars, and two Purple Hearts. He was secretary of the navy in the 1980s (though he is now actively opposed to the Iraq War), and two of his recent books are called Born Fighting and A Time to Fight. Sense a theme?</p>
<p>But if Webb doesn’t sound too much like a Democrat, that’s because he wasn’t one until recently. He held that secretary of the navy post during the Reagan administration. He was once quoted calling liberals “cultural Marxists.” In 2000 he assailed affirmative action as “state-sponsored racism,” and in 2004 he wrote that John Kerry should have been condemned for his opposition to the Vietnam War.</p>
<p>But Webb says that the GOP lost him. As a former Republican, he serves Obama’s unity theme. As VP, Webb could hit the trail saying to Reagan Democrats and moderate Republicans, “I used to find answers in the Republican Party, too. But it got too extreme, too corrupt, and too hawkish.” And Webb’s conversion looks thorough: He now has a 100 percent NARAL rating, supports same-sex civil unions, opposes the death penalty, and is an advocate for prison reform.</p>
<p>But for the foreign policy credentials, the ability to put Virginia in play, and the outsized personality (Terence Samuel noted in the American Prospect, “some Democrats see in [Webb] attributes they long for in their party — conviction, strength, and a willingness to fight”), Webb has one thing that may keep him off the ticket: a horrible record on women’s rights. He wrote a 1979 article titled “Women Can’t Fight,” making the argument that women are biologically unsuited for combat. He called the Naval Academy “a horny woman’s dream.” At a 1991 gathering of naval aviators known as Tailhook, widespread sexual assault/harassment of female attendees took place; Webb publicly denounced the military’s subsequent attempt to clean up shop. He called the investigation a “witch hunt.”</p>
<p>Capping the defeat of the first nearly successful female presidential candidate by putting a one-time spouter of chauvinism on the ticket might be a seriously dumb idea for the Democrats. “It would be seen as a big ‘screw you’ to Hillary’s supporters and to feminists in general,” writes <a href="http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/ixnay_on_the_ebbway.php" type="external">blogger Kathy G</a>.</p>
<p>Gov. Ed Rendell (D-Pa.), 64 Obama needs Pennsylvania the way fish need water. One reason Clinton won the Pennsylvania primary so decisively was Rendell’s support. He served two terms as Philadelphia’s district attorney, followed by two terms as the city’s mayor. (The New York Times called his tenure “the most stunning turnaround in recent urban history.”) Then Rendell took a year to chair the Democratic National Committee before running for governor. He won twice statewide. He brings a roadmap for success in the Keystone State and valuable executive experience.</p>
<p>That long resume in public service, however untainted by Washington as it may be, could be a deficiency if it is perceived as clashing with Obama’s agent-of-change theme. A bigger disadvantage, however, is Rendell’s seemingly genetic inability to stay on message. He has a long history of problematic truth telling, including his claim that Obama would struggle in Pennsylvania because “You’ve got conservative whites here…who are not ready to vote for an African American candidate.” Rendell would be an irrepressible personality in a position that sometimes calls for self-suppression. No presidential candidate wants to be upstaged by his or her running mate.</p>
<p>Rendell also brings no foreign policy background, and his age is no asset. The fact that he is Jewish, however, could help Obama in Florida and with Jews nationwide who question Obama’s commitment to Israel. But there’s always the other hand: Is America ready for a ticket that includes a fellow whom a significant number of Americans still believes is a secret Muslim, and a Jew?</p>
<p>Gov. Bill Richardson (D-N.M.), 60 His impressive resume—former Secretary of Energy, former UN Ambassador, 15 years in Congress, two-term governor—provided the justification for his presidential run, but Richardson couldn’t translate it into support with voters. He was often <a href="/mojoblog/archives/2008/01/7020_fascinating_ane.html" type="external">something of a sideshow</a> and failed to convince voters that he was worthy of serious consideration.</p>
<p>Richardson’s history of negotiating with tough characters around the globe would lend credence to Obama on his biggest split from foreign policy orthodoxy. And Richardson could help Obama with Latino voters in swing states like Nevada and Colorado (and deliver New Mexico’s five electoral votes). Minor concern: Does the Democratic Party want Richardson to be its best-positioned member for a 2016 run for the presidency?</p>
<p>Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), 61 An unlikely choice, no doubt. But selecting Hagel, an outspoken anti-war Republican, would be a powerful signal that Obama will walk the walk, and not just talk the talk, when it comes to reaching out to like-minded Republicans. The two-term senator has foreign policy credentials and unlike most other moderate Republicans who have gone queasy on the war on Iraq, Hagel actually votes with the Democrats nowadays.</p>
<p>But although Hagel has become something of a progressive darling because of his <a href="http://men.style.com/gq/features/full?id=content_5326" type="external">tough talk</a> on the Bush administration, he is a <a href="/mojoblog/archives/2007/01/3402_the_changing_dy.html" type="external">bedrock conservative</a> on most domestic issues. His Planned Parenthood rating was 0 percent in 2006. His League of Conservation Voters rating was 20 percent in 2007. These are likely deal breakers.</p>
<p>Gen. Wesley Clark (US Army, retired), 63 Clark, a retired four-star general, commanded the NATO forces in the Kosovo War during his term as the supreme allied commander (1997 to 2000). Obviously that background brings national security cred to the ticket.</p>
<p>But by Clark’s own admission, his political consciousness was born after his military duties ended in 2000. A history of suspiciously conservative statements and the fact that Clark did not seem to have clearly defined positions on major issues when he ran for president as a Democrat in 2004 led many to believe that his choice of political party was a matter of convenience instead of principle. But Clark has always been pro-choice, and is now firmly against the Iraq War. And since 2004, he has become a fully integrated part of the progressive movement, even giving the keynote address at YearlyKos, the annual convention for liberal bloggers and their fans, in 2007.</p>
<p>Clark endorsed Clinton last September and is identified as one of her most prominent (and combative) surrogates. As a result, many in the media argue that his selection would help unify the party. But will heartbroken Clinton supporters really be mollified if one of Clinton’s good friends is on the ticket? Picking Clark would only be a bridge-building gesture if Clinton herself feels as though Clark’s presence on the ticket ensures that her agenda will have a place in the next administration.</p>
<p>Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), 69 Nunn is almost as old as McCain, the man Democrats are hoping voters will consider too geriatric for the presidency. If something were to happen to Obama, the face of the presidency and the face of the Democratic Party would change drastically. He is essentially a Cheney pick.</p>
<p>That said, Nunn has his strengths. A favorite of the folks who consider themselves national security experts, Nunn served for 24 years as a senator (1972 to 1997). He was chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and cosponsored the bill that formed the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, which helps foreign countries secure and destroy their nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.</p>
<p>And after leaving the Senate, Nunn didn’t stop working on the issue of nukes, a focus he shares with Obama, whom he endorsed. He is currently the cochairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a nonprofit that seeks to reduce the global threat from weapons of mass destruction. He is routinely considered a top choice for secretary of defense or secretary of state in Democratic administrations, and offers something to everyone on foreign policy: He was often considered a hawk, but opposed both Gulf wars.</p>
<p>Throughout his Senate career, Nunn was a moderate to conservative Democrat on domestic policy. He fiercely opposed President Clinton’s attempt to integrate openly homosexual Americans into the military and was a committed deficit hawk. He left politics, citing a lack of “zest and enthusiasm,” meaning he would probably shy from the attack-dog role traditionally played by the VP candidate. And his long career in Washington makes the “change” slogan a hard sell.</p>
<p>Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), 52 Though young and telegenic, Bayh resembles a generic politician. He has a long career in politics—he was elected governor of Indiana in 1988 (at the age of 33) and again in 1992, and was elected to the Senate in 1998 and again in 2004. Like many lifetime politicians, Bayh is a legacy. He is the son of Birch Bayh, who was a senator from 1963 to 1981 and ran for president in 1976, losing to Jimmy Carter in the Democratic primary.</p>
<p>Bayh is a moderate. As governor, he cut taxes and earned the favor of the Wall Street Journal, which called him a “genuinely fiscally conservative Democrat.” After moving to Washington, Bayh served as chair of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, a group that has been criticized for its corporate funding and willingness to embrace Republicanism Lite. He is a member of the Senate Centrist Coalition.</p>
<p>While Bayh is competent, his name is typically met with a yawn in VP discussions. He isn’t known for any bold positions or legislative achievements. He is close to the Clintons—top-tier DLCers—and has been an active surrogate during the campaign. He is frequently cited, like Wes Clark, as one of the Clintonites Obama could choose as a sop to the defeated camp.</p>
<p>More purely political concerns: Indiana is deep red, and though Obama fared well against Clinton there, his only hope of winning the state in November may be by selecting Bayh, who has won by historic margins in the state. (Even with Bayh, it will be very tough to take a state that Bush won by 21 percent in 2004.) If the Democrats, with Bayh on the ticket, were to win the White House, Indiana’s Republican governor would likely replace Bayh with a member of the GOP, costing the Dems a seat in the Senate and potentially undermining their chance of achieving a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority.</p>
<p>Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.), 65 As the current don of the Democrats’ foreign policy community, Biden shores up Obama on a key front. Currently serving his sixth term in the Senate, Biden is the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and a former chairman of the Judiciary Committee. The senator from tiny Delaware would be a perfect liaison to Capitol Hill. That comes with the obvious flip side, however. When you’ve been in Washington more than 30 years, it’s hard to argue you can suddenly play an agent of change. You are as complicit in Washington’s problems as anyone.</p>
<p>Biden has a famously big mouth. He talks too much and too often says things that he immediately regrets. Early in the campaign season, for example, Biden said that Obama represented a break from black presidential candidates of the past because he is “clean and articulate.” But as Steve Kornacki wrote in the New York Observer, “By embracing [Biden], Obama would be sending a signal to well-meaning white voters of a certain generation that he understands if they—like Biden—haven’t fully figured out how to talk about race.” And that big mouth can be an effective weapon. Biden could be an attack-dog with infinite credibility. When Bush likened Obama to Nazi appeasers several weeks ago, Biden roared, “This is bullshit. This is malarkey. This is outrageous.”</p>
<p>There are problems to overcome. Biden supported the war in Iraq and is relatively hawkish by Democratic standards. When he campaigned in Iowa as a presidential candidate, Biden frequently said that he would oppose any move to make war funding dependent on withdrawal timetables because of a “sacred obligation” to the troops.</p>
<p>Gov. Janet Napolitano (D-Ariz.), 50 Here’s someone for whom age is definitely not a factor. Of all the people on this list, Napolitano is the closest to Obama in years. Napolitano first entered the national stage when she represented Anita Hill in her sexual harassment case against Clarence Thomas. In 1993, Napolitano was named the US attorney for Arizona. In 1998, she was elected attorney general. By 2002, she had won the governorship. In 2005, Time named her one of the five best governors in the US. As a two-term governor, like Sebelius, Napolitano has a longer record of executive achievement than Strickland, Virginia governor Tim Kaine, and Montana governor Brian Schweitzer.</p>
<p>Napolitano has tons of experience with the immigration issue. When disgruntled Arizona voters passed Proposition 200, which prohibited undocumented immigrants from receiving benefits from the state, Napolitano stood up against it. She has done so with other bills targeting undocumented immigrants. But Napolitano understands something must be done: In 2005 she declared a state of emergency in Arizona because of the border situation. Like Obama, Napolitano supports comprehensive immigration reform.</p>
<p>The negatives are there, however. She is perhaps the least well known nationally of all the candidates on this list, and she brings no foreign policy expertise to the ticket. Though Arizona generally could be a swing state, it will be essentially impossible for the Dems to win McCain’s home state. Napolitano is unmarried, which might prompt distracting gossip about her sexuality. If Napolitano is not Obama’s VP pick, she will be term-limited out of office in 2010. She could run for John McCain’s seat, whether he’s sitting in it or not.</p>
<p>Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.), 54 If Edwards desires the vice presidential nod—and that’s no sure thing considering his experience in 2004—it would have served him well to endorse Obama early and campaign with him in those late primary states where he might have helped Obama the most: Pennsylvania, Indiana, West Virginia, and Kentucky. By endorsing late and declining to play an active role for Obama, Edwards missed an opportunity not only to test-run an Obama-Edwards act, but also to prove that he could help Obama attract the votes of working-class whites.</p>
<p>Some might argue that Edwards’ pitch to those folks—he was the strongest economic populist in the Democratic presidential field—was manufactured, and not really part of Edwards’ personal history (like Strickland or Webb) nor part of his long-term public record (like Sherrod Brown, below). His critics assailed him as a hypocrite, citing his expensive haircuts, his big house, and his work for a hedge fund. He also brings little to the table on national security, and in 2004 he didn’t deliver his home state.</p>
<p>All of that said, he reinforces Obama’s strengths. He is young, lively, a good speaker, and has been around Washington just long enough to know where it’s broken. He spent a very significant portion of his time in the race slamming the power of lobbyists and the sway of special interests. His “Two Americas” message was fundamentally a call to create one America, which fits Obama’s rhetoric like a glove. We noted on more than <a href="/washington_dispatch/2007/11/John-Edwards-Iowa-caucuses.html" type="external">one occasion</a> that there was <a href="/washington_dispatch/2007/11/obama-edwards-reform.html" type="external">serious overlap</a> between the Edwards and Obama messages. In fact, Edwards hinted that they made <a href="/mojoblog/archives/2007/12/6383_edwards_to_obam.html" type="external">natural partners</a>.</p>
<p>Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), 55 Brown represents, like Edwards, an opportunity for Obama to double down. He is an energetic campaigner and an early and consistent opponent of the war in Iraq. He is fresh to the Senate (though he did spend 14 years in the House). He is one of the upper body’s leading advocates for the populist economic policies that have become standard rhetoric for both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton this campaign season. (Back when Brown was in the House in 2005, he was a leader in the fight against CAFTA.) Brown has built a serious reputation: Political observers consider him a top-flight economic mind. Though Brown adds nothing to the ticket in terms of national security bona fides, he speaks the language of those working-class whites on the nation’s No. 1 issue. And he’s an unabashed progressive.</p>
<p>Did I mention he’s from Ohio? If Brown leaves the Senate, Gov. Ted Strickland can replace him with another Democrat, thus preserving the Dems’ count in the Senate. Ultimately a 60-seat majority in the Senate may mean more to an Obama administration than any vice presidential choice.</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | barack obama likely democratic nominee two options hunt partner democratic ticket double strengths compensate weaknesses mimics last democratic president chooses former bill clinton selected another young southerner al gore 1992 decisionmaking process relatively easy find someone youthful energetic devotion reform foreign policy approach rejects conventional wisdom short nonexistent washington resume obama chooses latter however things decidedly complex choose vp bolsters ticket foreign policy executive experience anyone foreign policy expertise isnt creature washington find someone appeal workingclass voters appalachia white women nationwide jews florida latinos southwest hanging geographic questiondoes obama pick someone hails swing state deliver lot evidence suggests vice presidential candidates make serious difference good bad ticket two words dan quayle one study showed veep pick increase tickets performance less one half one percent vps home state presidential candidates assume assets race gender running mates voters generally focus top ticket important questions obama may simplest potential vp president unthinkable happen obama spend four eight harmonious years white house caveats mind lets look contenders hillary clinton isnt listnot unlikely pick merits adding ticket debated ad nauseam gov kathleen sebelius dkan 60 sebelius frequently mentioned living embodiment obamas message governorship deep red kansas 2002 2006 campaigns convinced republican switch democratic party order become lieutenant governor 2006 sebelius also recruited thenrepublican district attorney johnson county run democrat attorney general republican incumbent sebelius also list assumed strengthen obamas support among female voters really true women devoted hillary clinton warm sebelius simply woman would fairly patronizing assumption obama strategists make hardcore clinton supporters may angered obama selects female running mate isnt hillary clinton final consideration topic gender whether putting african american woman ticket much political risk country elected neither top office sebelius advantages worked republican legislature forced issue bold vetoes abortion restrictions harsh voter identification measure creation new coal plants also antideath penalty sum sebelius strong successful progressive state one doesnt expect find lack foreign policy credentials kansas paltry six electoral votes liabilities discussion sebelius complete without mention soporific response bushs 2008 state union address given opportunity showcase talents sebelius came wooden uninspiring one speech least antiobama gov ted strickland dohio 66 governors senators ohio always going considered strickland isnt buckeye state lawmaker list strickland brings pull swingiest states son steelworker former methodist minister promised follow biblical principles ran governor 2006 strickland probably appeal fabled workingclass whites anyone though strickland governor since 2007 20 percent republicans 69 percent independents fight thensecretary state ken blackwell represent ohio six terms house moving mansion time strickland instrumental creating schip federal governments leading program providing health care underprivileged children fact genesis schip strickland came know thenfirst lady hillary clinton whose presidential candidacy endorsed fact alone wouldnt make strickland thorny pick parrot clinton campaigns harshest criticisms obama age factor strickland concern democratic party though perhaps obama whether vp pick able carry flag eight years line initiating era longterm progressive governance requires someone young energetic inoffensive factions within party case strickland 74 2016 certainly isnt guy sen jim webb dva 62 webb recently took john mccain gi bill showed wasnt intimidated characteristically gruff fashion said mccain opposed bill feared would decrease retention rates full reminiscent webb reception white house soon election 2006 refused take photo president bush told bush asked webbs son serving iraq incidents like one helped forge webbs reputation democratic partys ballsiest member former marine webb earned navy cross silver star two bronze stars two purple hearts secretary navy 1980s though actively opposed iraq war two recent books called born fighting time fight sense theme webb doesnt sound much like democrat thats wasnt one recently held secretary navy post reagan administration quoted calling liberals cultural marxists 2000 assailed affirmative action statesponsored racism 2004 wrote john kerry condemned opposition vietnam war webb says gop lost former republican serves obamas unity theme vp webb could hit trail saying reagan democrats moderate republicans used find answers republican party got extreme corrupt hawkish webbs conversion looks thorough 100 percent naral rating supports samesex civil unions opposes death penalty advocate prison reform foreign policy credentials ability put virginia play outsized personality terence samuel noted american prospect democrats see webb attributes long party conviction strength willingness fight webb one thing may keep ticket horrible record womens rights wrote 1979 article titled women cant fight making argument women biologically unsuited combat called naval academy horny womans dream 1991 gathering naval aviators known tailhook widespread sexual assaultharassment female attendees took place webb publicly denounced militarys subsequent attempt clean shop called investigation witch hunt capping defeat first nearly successful female presidential candidate putting onetime spouter chauvinism ticket might seriously dumb idea democrats would seen big screw hillarys supporters feminists general writes blogger kathy g gov ed rendell dpa 64 obama needs pennsylvania way fish need water one reason clinton pennsylvania primary decisively rendells support served two terms philadelphias district attorney followed two terms citys mayor new york times called tenure stunning turnaround recent urban history rendell took year chair democratic national committee running governor twice statewide brings roadmap success keystone state valuable executive experience long resume public service however untainted washington may could deficiency perceived clashing obamas agentofchange theme bigger disadvantage however rendells seemingly genetic inability stay message long history problematic truth telling including claim obama would struggle pennsylvania youve got conservative whites herewho ready vote african american candidate rendell would irrepressible personality position sometimes calls selfsuppression presidential candidate wants upstaged running mate rendell also brings foreign policy background age asset fact jewish however could help obama florida jews nationwide question obamas commitment israel theres always hand america ready ticket includes fellow significant number americans still believes secret muslim jew gov bill richardson dnm 60 impressive resumeformer secretary energy former un ambassador 15 years congress twoterm governorprovided justification presidential run richardson couldnt translate support voters often something sideshow failed convince voters worthy serious consideration richardsons history negotiating tough characters around globe would lend credence obama biggest split foreign policy orthodoxy richardson could help obama latino voters swing states like nevada colorado deliver new mexicos five electoral votes minor concern democratic party want richardson bestpositioned member 2016 run presidency sen chuck hagel rneb 61 unlikely choice doubt selecting hagel outspoken antiwar republican would powerful signal obama walk walk talk talk comes reaching likeminded republicans twoterm senator foreign policy credentials unlike moderate republicans gone queasy war iraq hagel actually votes democrats nowadays although hagel become something progressive darling tough talk bush administration bedrock conservative domestic issues planned parenthood rating 0 percent 2006 league conservation voters rating 20 percent 2007 likely deal breakers gen wesley clark us army retired 63 clark retired fourstar general commanded nato forces kosovo war term supreme allied commander 1997 2000 obviously background brings national security cred ticket clarks admission political consciousness born military duties ended 2000 history suspiciously conservative statements fact clark seem clearly defined positions major issues ran president democrat 2004 led many believe choice political party matter convenience instead principle clark always prochoice firmly iraq war since 2004 become fully integrated part progressive movement even giving keynote address yearlykos annual convention liberal bloggers fans 2007 clark endorsed clinton last september identified one prominent combative surrogates result many media argue selection would help unify party heartbroken clinton supporters really mollified one clintons good friends ticket picking clark would bridgebuilding gesture clinton feels though clarks presence ticket ensures agenda place next administration sen sam nunn dga 69 nunn almost old mccain man democrats hoping voters consider geriatric presidency something happen obama face presidency face democratic party would change drastically essentially cheney pick said nunn strengths favorite folks consider national security experts nunn served 24 years senator 1972 1997 chairman armed services committee cosponsored bill formed nunnlugar cooperative threat reduction program helps foreign countries secure destroy nuclear biological chemical weapons leaving senate nunn didnt stop working issue nukes focus shares obama endorsed currently cochairman nuclear threat initiative nonprofit seeks reduce global threat weapons mass destruction routinely considered top choice secretary defense secretary state democratic administrations offers something everyone foreign policy often considered hawk opposed gulf wars throughout senate career nunn moderate conservative democrat domestic policy fiercely opposed president clintons attempt integrate openly homosexual americans military committed deficit hawk left politics citing lack zest enthusiasm meaning would probably shy attackdog role traditionally played vp candidate long career washington makes change slogan hard sell sen evan bayh dind 52 though young telegenic bayh resembles generic politician long career politicshe elected governor indiana 1988 age 33 1992 elected senate 1998 2004 like many lifetime politicians bayh legacy son birch bayh senator 1963 1981 ran president 1976 losing jimmy carter democratic primary bayh moderate governor cut taxes earned favor wall street journal called genuinely fiscally conservative democrat moving washington bayh served chair centrist democratic leadership council group criticized corporate funding willingness embrace republicanism lite member senate centrist coalition bayh competent name typically met yawn vp discussions isnt known bold positions legislative achievements close clintonstoptier dlcersand active surrogate campaign frequently cited like wes clark one clintonites obama could choose sop defeated camp purely political concerns indiana deep red though obama fared well clinton hope winning state november may selecting bayh historic margins state even bayh tough take state bush 21 percent 2004 democrats bayh ticket win white house indianas republican governor would likely replace bayh member gop costing dems seat senate potentially undermining chance achieving 60seat filibusterproof majority sen joe biden ddel 65 current democrats foreign policy community biden shores obama key front currently serving sixth term senate biden chairman foreign relations committee former chairman judiciary committee senator tiny delaware would perfect liaison capitol hill comes obvious flip side however youve washington 30 years hard argue suddenly play agent change complicit washingtons problems anyone biden famously big mouth talks much often says things immediately regrets early campaign season example biden said obama represented break black presidential candidates past clean articulate steve kornacki wrote new york observer embracing biden obama would sending signal wellmeaning white voters certain generation understands theylike bidenhavent fully figured talk race big mouth effective weapon biden could attackdog infinite credibility bush likened obama nazi appeasers several weeks ago biden roared bullshit malarkey outrageous problems overcome biden supported war iraq relatively hawkish democratic standards campaigned iowa presidential candidate biden frequently said would oppose move make war funding dependent withdrawal timetables sacred obligation troops gov janet napolitano dariz 50 heres someone age definitely factor people list napolitano closest obama years napolitano first entered national stage represented anita hill sexual harassment case clarence thomas 1993 napolitano named us attorney arizona 1998 elected attorney general 2002 governorship 2005 time named one five best governors us twoterm governor like sebelius napolitano longer record executive achievement strickland virginia governor tim kaine montana governor brian schweitzer napolitano tons experience immigration issue disgruntled arizona voters passed proposition 200 prohibited undocumented immigrants receiving benefits state napolitano stood done bills targeting undocumented immigrants napolitano understands something must done 2005 declared state emergency arizona border situation like obama napolitano supports comprehensive immigration reform negatives however perhaps least well known nationally candidates list brings foreign policy expertise ticket though arizona generally could swing state essentially impossible dems win mccains home state napolitano unmarried might prompt distracting gossip sexuality napolitano obamas vp pick termlimited office 2010 could run john mccains seat whether hes sitting sen john edwards dnc 54 edwards desires vice presidential nodand thats sure thing considering experience 2004it would served well endorse obama early campaign late primary states might helped obama pennsylvania indiana west virginia kentucky endorsing late declining play active role obama edwards missed opportunity testrun obamaedwards act also prove could help obama attract votes workingclass whites might argue edwards pitch folkshe strongest economic populist democratic presidential fieldwas manufactured really part edwards personal history like strickland webb part longterm public record like sherrod brown critics assailed hypocrite citing expensive haircuts big house work hedge fund also brings little table national security 2004 didnt deliver home state said reinforces obamas strengths young lively good speaker around washington long enough know broken spent significant portion time race slamming power lobbyists sway special interests two americas message fundamentally call create one america fits obamas rhetoric like glove noted one occasion serious overlap edwards obama messages fact edwards hinted made natural partners sen sherrod brown dohio 55 brown represents like edwards opportunity obama double energetic campaigner early consistent opponent war iraq fresh senate though spend 14 years house one upper bodys leading advocates populist economic policies become standard rhetoric barack obama hillary clinton campaign season back brown house 2005 leader fight cafta brown built serious reputation political observers consider topflight economic mind though brown adds nothing ticket terms national security bona fides speaks language workingclass whites nations 1 issue hes unabashed progressive mention hes ohio brown leaves senate gov ted strickland replace another democrat thus preserving dems count senate ultimately 60seat majority senate may mean obama administration vice presidential choice | 2,117 |
<p>WASHINGTON (AP) — Segregation is making a comeback in U.S. schools.</p>
<p>Progress toward integrated classrooms has largely been rolled back since the Supreme Court issued its landmark Brown v. Topeka Board of Education decision 60 years ago, according to a report released Thursday by the Civil Rights Project at UCLA. Blacks are now seeing more school segregation than they have in decades, and more than half of Latino students are now attending schools that are majority Latino.</p>
<p>In New York, California and Texas, more than half of Latino students are enrolled in schools that are 90 percent minority or more, the report found. In New York, Illinois, Maryland and Michigan, more than half of Black students attend schools where 90 percent or more are minority.</p>
<p>Project co-director Gary Orfield, author of the “Brown at 60” report, said the changes are troubling because they show some minority students receive poorer educations than White students and Asian students, who tend to be in middle-class schools. The report urged, among other things, deeper research into housing segregation, which is a “fundamental cause of separate-and-unequal schooling.”</p>
<p>Although segregation is more prevalent in central cities of the largest metropolitan areas, it’s also in the suburbs. “Neighborhood schools, when we go back to them, as we have, produce middle-class schools for Whites and Asians and segregated high-poverty schools for Blacks and Latinos,” Orfield said.</p>
<p>Housing discrimination — stopping or discouraging minorities from moving to majority-White areas — also plays a role in school segregation and “that’s been a harder nut to crack,” said Sherrilyn Ifill, president of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, which argued the Brown case in front of the Supreme Court.</p>
<p>School performance can be entwined with poverty, too.</p>
<p>“These are the schools that tend to have fewer resources, tend to have teachers with less experience, tend to have people who are teaching outside their area of specialty, and it also denies the opportunities, the contacts and the networking that occur when you’re with people from different socio-economic backgrounds,” said Dennis Parker, director of the American Civil Liberties Union Racial Justice Program.</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal" />For students like Diamond McCullough, 17, a senior at Walter H. Dyett High School on Chicago’s South Side, the disparities are real. Her school is made up almost entirely of African-American students. She said her school doesn’t offer physical education classes or art, and Advanced Placement classes are only available online.</p>
<p>McCullough noted the school is named after a famous musician, Walter H. Dyett, and the school no longer has a band class. “We don’t have a music chorus class,” she said. “We barely have the basic classes we need.”</p>
<p>Aquila Griffin, 18, said she transferred from Dyett to another high school 20 blocks away because she needed biology and world studies to graduate. The two traveled to Washington this week for a labor-sponsored rally outside the U.S. Supreme Court in support of public education.</p>
<p>“Many blame the schools for failing, or teachers, but they never blame the bad policies put in place in schools,” Griffin said. “A teacher can only teach to a certain extent with the resources. It’s the policies put in place that’s failing the students.”</p>
<p>On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court ruled: “In the field of public education, the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” In the aftermath of that ruling, scores of cities and towns implemented desegregation plans that often included mandatory busing, in some cases triggering an exodus of whites to private schools or less diverse communities.</p>
<p>John Rury, an education professor at the University of Kansas, said the work at UCLA has revealed how many of the advances in desegregating schools made after the Brown ruling have stopped — or been reversed.</p>
<p>While racial discrimination has been a factor, other forces are in play, Rury said. Educated parents with the means to move have flocked to districts and schools with the best reputations for decades, said Rury, who has studied the phenomenon in the Kansas City region.</p>
<p>In the South, many school districts encompass both a city and the surrounding area, he said. That has led to better-integrated schools.</p>
<p>Still, around the country, only 23 percent of Black students attended white-majority schools in 2011. That’s the lowest number since 1968.</p>
<p>Advocates point to rulings by federal courts that have freed many of the schools from Brown-related desegregation orders since the 1990s. That, they say, is leading the country back toward more segregated schools.</p>
<p>At the same time, there’s been a demographic change in public schools. Between 1968 and 2011, the number of Hispanic students in the public school system rose 495 percent, while the number of Black students increased by 19 percent and the number of white students dropped 28 percent, according to the Education Department.</p>
<p>Today, many Hispanic students are attending segregated schools, particularly in the West.</p>
<p>Chuck Brothers, a retired social studies and psychology teacher who taught in a low-income school in St. Lucie County, Florida, said the nation trips over how to solve these issues.</p>
<p>“I think we haven’t taken the time, and it’s across the board, politically and socially, to really understand what we really do want out of education and how are we really going to make it available for everyone,” Brothers said.</p>
<p>___</p>
<p>Associated Press writer Kimberly Hefling co-wrote this article.</p>
<p>Copyright 2014 The Associated Press</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Contact author</a></p>
<p>&#160;&#160; <a href="" type="internal">Brown at 60</a>, <a href="" type="internal">Brown v. Board of Education</a>, <a href="" type="internal">Brown v. Topeka Board of Education</a>, <a href="" type="internal">education news</a>, <a href="" type="internal">segregation</a>, <a href="" type="internal">student news</a></p> | true | 4 | washington ap segregation making comeback us schools progress toward integrated classrooms largely rolled back since supreme court issued landmark brown v topeka board education decision 60 years ago according report released thursday civil rights project ucla blacks seeing school segregation decades half latino students attending schools majority latino new york california texas half latino students enrolled schools 90 percent minority report found new york illinois maryland michigan half black students attend schools 90 percent minority project codirector gary orfield author brown 60 report said changes troubling show minority students receive poorer educations white students asian students tend middleclass schools report urged among things deeper research housing segregation fundamental cause separateandunequal schooling although segregation prevalent central cities largest metropolitan areas also suburbs neighborhood schools go back produce middleclass schools whites asians segregated highpoverty schools blacks latinos orfield said housing discrimination stopping discouraging minorities moving majoritywhite areas also plays role school segregation thats harder nut crack said sherrilyn ifill president naacp legal defense fund argued brown case front supreme court school performance entwined poverty schools tend fewer resources tend teachers less experience tend people teaching outside area specialty also denies opportunities contacts networking occur youre people different socioeconomic backgrounds said dennis parker director american civil liberties union racial justice program students like diamond mccullough 17 senior walter h dyett high school chicagos south side disparities real school made almost entirely africanamerican students said school doesnt offer physical education classes art advanced placement classes available online mccullough noted school named famous musician walter h dyett school longer band class dont music chorus class said barely basic classes need aquila griffin 18 said transferred dyett another high school 20 blocks away needed biology world studies graduate two traveled washington week laborsponsored rally outside us supreme court support public education many blame schools failing teachers never blame bad policies put place schools griffin said teacher teach certain extent resources policies put place thats failing students may 17 1954 supreme court ruled field public education doctrine separate equal place separate educational facilities inherently unequal aftermath ruling scores cities towns implemented desegregation plans often included mandatory busing cases triggering exodus whites private schools less diverse communities john rury education professor university kansas said work ucla revealed many advances desegregating schools made brown ruling stopped reversed racial discrimination factor forces play rury said educated parents means move flocked districts schools best reputations decades said rury studied phenomenon kansas city region south many school districts encompass city surrounding area said led betterintegrated schools still around country 23 percent black students attended whitemajority schools 2011 thats lowest number since 1968 advocates point rulings federal courts freed many schools brownrelated desegregation orders since 1990s say leading country back toward segregated schools time theres demographic change public schools 1968 2011 number hispanic students public school system rose 495 percent number black students increased 19 percent number white students dropped 28 percent according education department today many hispanic students attending segregated schools particularly west chuck brothers retired social studies psychology teacher taught lowincome school st lucie county florida said nation trips solve issues think havent taken time across board politically socially really understand really want education really going make available everyone brothers said ___ associated press writer kimberly hefling cowrote article copyright 2014 associated press 160 contact author 160160 brown 60 brown v board education brown v topeka board education education news segregation student news | 562 |
<p>Jack Newfield was a Village Voice reporter, a Brooklyn Dodger fan, and a friend of mine. When I was in Columbia, South Carolina in the winter of 1967/68, I received in the mail from Jack and his friend Paul Gorman, the first album by the singer-songwriter Leonard Cohen, with a note that said “Isn’t this amazing?” When I saw Jack I asked him what was so amazing? He said the record reminded him of the songs I used to sing for friends in his living room. Jack meant the Leonard Cohen comparison as a compliment but I, in my arrogance, did not take it as one.</p>
<p>One of Jack’s signature moves as a journalist was to make analogies between people in disparate fields, like “Robert Kennedy is the Senate’s Albert Camus.” Sometimes you could see the likeness, sometimes you couldn’t. So I wrote Jack this song, which once was topical but now requires annotation.</p>
<p>Norman Mailer is Ho Chi Minh Janice Ian is Staughton Lynd Richie Goldstein is really Richard Goodwin and I’m Jack Newfield, I’m Jack Newfield I’m Jack Newfield, who are you?</p>
<p>Norman Mailer was a US American writer who hit the scene after World War II with a novel called The Naked and the Dead. In ’67 or ’68 he ran for mayor of New York City and Jack was involved with the campaign. Ho Chi Minh was the president of North Vietnam. Janice Ian is a folk-rocker who had some big hits, starting with “Seventeen.” Staughton Lynd is a political organizer, the son of brilliant sociologists. In the spring of ’63, Lynd was teaching at Spelman College in Atlanta. The Lynds lived upstairs from the Zinns, Howard and Roz, and they were all involved with the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee. The night I arrived to stay with the Zinns, the Lynds’ baby fell out of a second story window (but was okay). Lynd became a lawyer late in life, has always fought on the side of the underdog.</p>
<p>Richard Goldstein wrote cultural criticism for the Voice. Later he edited a very good, short-lived magazine called US that was the size of a mass-market paperback. In recent years Goldstein has been writing obituaries for the New York Times. He was very small-boned and sweet-looking, in total contrast to Richard Goodwin, a big-boned, brutish-looking politico employed by the Kennedy Administration. I was present once when Goodwin visited Lillian Hellman in Martha’s Vineyard in the summer of 1964. He had just represented the U.S. at a meeting of the Organization of American States in Punta Del Este, Uruguay. At this time Che Guevara had dropped out of sight and everyone was wondering what he was doing and where? Goodwin told Hellman that Che and Fidel had had “a homosexual falling-out.” After he left I asked Hellman if she believed Goodwin’s bizarre info. Ol’ Lil (who was then younger than I am now) said she didn’t rule it out. “He has that fag face,” she said of Che.</p>
<p>Joey Archer is Baby Blue RFK of course, Camus Tom Hayden’s Carol Baker’s new guru And I’m Jack Newfield…</p>
<p>Joey Archer was a welterweight boxer whose fights were covered and whose psyche was analyzed in the Village Voice… Baby Blue was seemingly a chick kissed off by Bob Dylan —unless she was the personification of the Fake Left, which Jack heard from someone in Dylan’s entourage… RFK was Robert F. Kennedy, who Jack admired and befriended… Albert Camus was a French novelist… Tom Hayden, a leader of the peace moveent, had not yet gotten involved with a famous actress, but my guess was in the right direction. Tom and I are on okay terms as old men after a long split. In the ’70s I called him the leader of the Fake Left and his wife said it was a shame that &#160;I had lost my mind. Tom was in Jack’s pantheon with Dylan, Pynchon, Bobby Kennedy, Mario Cuomo, Jimmy Breslin, and Robert Moses.</p>
<p>Robert Moses is Robert Parris Ed Sanders is Roger Maris Mr. Jones is really Mrs. Harris and I’m Jack Newfield…</p>
<p>Robert Moses, a leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, got fed up with the personal publicity and said he’d rather be known as Robert Parris (which I think was his middle name). He married a woman I’d gone to high school with and will always love. The last time I heard her voice (1988) it was on a phone answering machine, asking, “What have you done for Black people today?” &#160;Ed Sanders is a real prime mover —maybe the prime mover— in the marijuana legalization movement. With Allen Ginsberg he started a group called Lemar.</p>
<p>Roger Maris broke Babe Ruth’s home run record in an extended season. Mr. Jones, Jack claimed, referring to the square in the Dylan song who doesn’t know what’s happening, was Joan Baez, who had married a draft resister, David Harris, who went to prison. Jack knew people who knew Dylan and he was always getting info-tidbits, not all of them accurate. This one seemed especially far-fetched.</p>
<p>Warren Hinckle is Max Lerner Eldridge Cleaver is Otto Kerner Tina Aptheker’s really Nat Turner and I’m Jack Newfield…</p>
<p>Warren Hinckle was the flamboyant publisher of Ramparts magazine. When Hayden asked in June ’68 if I could &#160;come to Chicago and put out a daily leaflet with a map to coordinate actions on the streets, Hinckle said, “We’ll do it as a wallposter! One side news from the streets, one side news from the convention!” And we did! &#160;Max Lerner was a liberal columnist for the New York Post. Eldridge Cleaver, author of “Soul on Ice,” became a prominent Black Panther. Otto Kerner had been the governor of Illinois during the protests at the 1968 Democratic National Convention. A commission headed by Kerner would conclude that the turmoil amounted to a “police riot.” Bethina Aptheker, a feminist professor at UC Santa Cruz, was the daughter of a Communist Party historian who, she would eventually claim, had molested her as a little girl. Nat Turner led a slave revolt that William Styron based a novel on.</p>
<p>Norman Fruchter is Johnny Carson Dick Aurelio is Don Larsen Antonioni is also Barbara Garson And I’m Jack Newfield…</p>
<p>Norman Fruchter —a serious dude— organized a group of lefty filmmakers called Newsreel. Johnny Carson was host of the Tonight show, holding the country together with his sane commentaries after insane days. Richard Aurelio was press secretary to the mayor of New York City, John Lindsay. In the mid-70s Aurelio was handling public relations for Erhard Seminar Training. (I wonder if Bill and Hillary took the est “training?”) Michelangelo Antonioni was an Italian filmmaker whose movie set in the U.S., Zabriskie Point, did not ring true in any way. The dialogue that I and four other writers contributed got vetoed by the miscast actor and actress. Barbara Garson was the author of a brilliant little play about Lyndon Johnson called MacBird. Her ex-husband Marvin was a natural humorist who moved to Israel and sends occasional letters to the AVA. Barbara and I wrote a comedy with songs called “Going Co-op” that got produced off-off-Broadway but I never got to see because I moved back to California to work on the paper with the women who were as angry as I was.</p>
<p>Hale Boggs’ daughter married LeRoi Jones Andy Kopkind is I.F. Stone Fred Gardner, I know him: none other than Leonard Cohen and I’m Jack Newfield, I’m Jack Newfield I’m Jack Newfield, so are you.</p>
<p>Hale Boggs was a Congressman from Louisiana, the Speaker of the House for many years, and the author of federal mandatory-minimum legislation passed in 1951 that has resulted in countless years of misery for countless millions of Americans. His daughter, Cokie Roberts, became an influential reporter/pundit, married a New York Times reporter named Steve Roberts, and wrote a book giving advice for marital success. (Hale Boggs’s son Tommy ran the most influential lobbying firm in DC for many years, his top client being Big PhRMA.) Andrew Kopkind was a journalist whose New York Review of Books piece about the court martial of Capt. Howard Levy (for refusing to train the Green Berets in the healing arts because their ulterior motive was not benign) inspired me and my friends to start a coffeehouse near Fort Jackson that provided a respite from the Army for off-duty GIs. &#160;IF Stone was a lefty journalist from an earlier generation. &#160;The Rolling Stones need no introduction.</p>
<p>LeRoi Jones was a poet and writer who took the name Amiri Baraka, moved back to New Jersey, and became ever sharper in his criticism of capitalism. He testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee that Tom Hayden (author of a book called Rebellion in Newark) was not a spokesman for the Black community of that city. Leonard Cohen is a Canadian poet/novelist whose nasal drone reminded Jack Newfield of your correspondent. Cohen is still touring, drawing adoring throngs. I’m recording the songs I can remember on GarageBand. &#160;It’s too bad Jack isn’t around. Bill DiBlasio could use his input.</p>
<p>PS November 2016 Goodbye, Tom, RIP Leonard Cohen. For all my ambivalence about them, I feel diminished.</p> | true | 4 | jack newfield village voice reporter brooklyn dodger fan friend mine columbia south carolina winter 196768 received mail jack friend paul gorman first album singersongwriter leonard cohen note said isnt amazing saw jack asked amazing said record reminded songs used sing friends living room jack meant leonard cohen comparison compliment arrogance take one one jacks signature moves journalist make analogies people disparate fields like robert kennedy senates albert camus sometimes could see likeness sometimes couldnt wrote jack song topical requires annotation norman mailer ho chi minh janice ian staughton lynd richie goldstein really richard goodwin im jack newfield im jack newfield im jack newfield norman mailer us american writer hit scene world war ii novel called naked dead 67 68 ran mayor new york city jack involved campaign ho chi minh president north vietnam janice ian folkrocker big hits starting seventeen staughton lynd political organizer son brilliant sociologists spring 63 lynd teaching spelman college atlanta lynds lived upstairs zinns howard roz involved student nonviolent coordinating committee night arrived stay zinns lynds baby fell second story window okay lynd became lawyer late life always fought side underdog richard goldstein wrote cultural criticism voice later edited good shortlived magazine called us size massmarket paperback recent years goldstein writing obituaries new york times smallboned sweetlooking total contrast richard goodwin bigboned brutishlooking politico employed kennedy administration present goodwin visited lillian hellman marthas vineyard summer 1964 represented us meeting organization american states punta del este uruguay time che guevara dropped sight everyone wondering goodwin told hellman che fidel homosexual fallingout left asked hellman believed goodwins bizarre info ol lil younger said didnt rule fag face said che joey archer baby blue rfk course camus tom haydens carol bakers new guru im jack newfield joey archer welterweight boxer whose fights covered whose psyche analyzed village voice baby blue seemingly chick kissed bob dylan unless personification fake left jack heard someone dylans entourage rfk robert f kennedy jack admired befriended albert camus french novelist tom hayden leader peace moveent yet gotten involved famous actress guess right direction tom okay terms old men long split 70s called leader fake left wife said shame 160i lost mind tom jacks pantheon dylan pynchon bobby kennedy mario cuomo jimmy breslin robert moses robert moses robert parris ed sanders roger maris mr jones really mrs harris im jack newfield robert moses leader student nonviolent coordinating committee got fed personal publicity said hed rather known robert parris think middle name married woman id gone high school always love last time heard voice 1988 phone answering machine asking done black people today 160ed sanders real prime mover maybe prime mover marijuana legalization movement allen ginsberg started group called lemar roger maris broke babe ruths home run record extended season mr jones jack claimed referring square dylan song doesnt know whats happening joan baez married draft resister david harris went prison jack knew people knew dylan always getting infotidbits accurate one seemed especially farfetched warren hinckle max lerner eldridge cleaver otto kerner tina apthekers really nat turner im jack newfield warren hinckle flamboyant publisher ramparts magazine hayden asked june 68 could 160come chicago put daily leaflet map coordinate actions streets hinckle said well wallposter one side news streets one side news convention 160max lerner liberal columnist new york post eldridge cleaver author soul ice became prominent black panther otto kerner governor illinois protests 1968 democratic national convention commission headed kerner would conclude turmoil amounted police riot bethina aptheker feminist professor uc santa cruz daughter communist party historian would eventually claim molested little girl nat turner led slave revolt william styron based novel norman fruchter johnny carson dick aurelio larsen antonioni also barbara garson im jack newfield norman fruchter serious dude organized group lefty filmmakers called newsreel johnny carson host tonight show holding country together sane commentaries insane days richard aurelio press secretary mayor new york city john lindsay mid70s aurelio handling public relations erhard seminar training wonder bill hillary took est training michelangelo antonioni italian filmmaker whose movie set us zabriskie point ring true way dialogue four writers contributed got vetoed miscast actor actress barbara garson author brilliant little play lyndon johnson called macbird exhusband marvin natural humorist moved israel sends occasional letters ava barbara wrote comedy songs called going coop got produced offoffbroadway never got see moved back california work paper women angry hale boggs daughter married leroi jones andy kopkind stone fred gardner know none leonard cohen im jack newfield im jack newfield im jack newfield hale boggs congressman louisiana speaker house many years author federal mandatoryminimum legislation passed 1951 resulted countless years misery countless millions americans daughter cokie roberts became influential reporterpundit married new york times reporter named steve roberts wrote book giving advice marital success hale boggss son tommy ran influential lobbying firm dc many years top client big phrma andrew kopkind journalist whose new york review books piece court martial capt howard levy refusing train green berets healing arts ulterior motive benign inspired friends start coffeehouse near fort jackson provided respite army offduty gis 160if stone lefty journalist earlier generation 160the rolling stones need introduction leroi jones poet writer took name amiri baraka moved back new jersey became ever sharper criticism capitalism testified house unamerican activities committee tom hayden author book called rebellion newark spokesman black community city leonard cohen canadian poetnovelist whose nasal drone reminded jack newfield correspondent cohen still touring drawing adoring throngs im recording songs remember garageband 160its bad jack isnt around bill diblasio could use input ps november 2016 goodbye tom rip leonard cohen ambivalence feel diminished | 920 |
<p>On December 10, 2003, two Strykers, the Army’s newest armored personnel carrier, were patrolling near Balad, Iraq, when the embankment beneath them collapsed and the vehicles plunged into a rain-swollen river. Three soldiers died and another was severely injured. Three days later, another Stryker rolled over a roadside bomb south of Baghdad. The explosion left one soldier injured and the vehicle in flames.</p>
<p>It was an inglorious combat debut for the Army’s first new personnel carrier in thirty years. But it confirmed the worst fears of some of the Stryker’s critics that the vehicle is unsafe and its crews untrained for using it in combat conditions. One former Pentagon analyst described the 8-wheeled vehicle as “riding in a dune buggy armored in tinfoil.”</p>
<p>The Stryker Interim Armored Vehicle is billed as the Pentagon’s latest weapon in its new high-tech Army, a fast moving carrier designed for the urban battlefield and unconventional wars. This fall the Army deployed 300 Stryker vehicles and 3,500 soldiers to Iraq’s notorious Sunni Triangle, the Iowa-sized area in central Iraq where the most intense guerrilla fighting is taking place.</p>
<p>But new documents reveal that Pentagon weapons testers had expressed serious reservations about whether the Strykers were ready for battle. The Pentagon’s chief weapons tester, Tom Christie, warned in a classified letter to the Secretary of the Defense that the Stryker is especially vulnerable to rocket-propelled grenades and improvised explosive devices. These are, of course, precisely the kinds of threats faced by the Stryker brigades now in Iraq.</p>
<p>Advertised as rapid deployment vehicles, the Stryker brigades could in theory be rushed anywhere in the world within 96 hours by C-130 transport planes. But numerous internal studies have questioned whether the Stryker can be deployed by C-130s at all. Moreover, a newly released Government Accounting Office report scolded the Pentagon for a host of other problems with the carrier, which was meant to replace the much-maligned Bradley Fighting Vehicle. The GAO report points to serious problems with the Stryker’s design and maintenance and discloses deficiencies in training for its use.</p>
<p>Even Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld wanted to delay funding of additional Stryker brigades until more testing and training could be completed. But congress, ever an anxious to spread the pork around to as many districts as possible, didn’t heed the warning and approved the additional purchases.</p>
<p>The Stryker is a joint venture of two of the mightiest industrial corporations in America: General Dynamics and General Motors. These companies waged a fierce two-year long lobbying battle, stretching from Capitol Hill to the halls of the Pentagon, to win the $4 billion contract to build 2,131 Strykers, which was awarded in November 2000.</p>
<p>The first Strykers, which cost $3 million a piece, more than 50% above projections, rolled off the assembly line in April 2002. Presiding over the ceremony at the Stryker rollout in Alabama was former Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki. The Stryker was a key component in Shinseki’s plan to upgrade the Army, a scheme he outlined in a 1999 paper titled “Army Vision.” In that report, Shinseki called for the development of an interim armored brigade featuring “all-wheel formation”. This was a thinly veiled hint that the contract would be awarded to General Dynamics. The Stryker is a wheeled carrier, as opposed to the tank-like vehicles built by United Defense which run on tracks.</p>
<p>During Shinseki’s speech in Alabama, he pointedly singled out for special thanks David K. Heebner. Heebner, a former Army Lt. General, had been one of Shinseki’s top aides, serving as Assistant Vice Chief of Staff for the Army. As such, he played a key role in pushing for funding for Shinseki’s projects, including the Stryker. In November 1999, General Dynamics issued a press release announcing that they had hired Heebner as an executive at the company. The announcement came a full month before Heebner’s official retirement date of December 31, 1999. The timing of the announcement is curious for several reasons. Most glaringly, it’s clear that the Army was leaning toward handing a multi-billion dollar contract to General Dynamics at the very time Heebner may have been in negotiations with the company for a high-paying executive position.</p>
<p>Federal conflict of interest laws prohibit government employees from being engaged “personally or substantially in a particular matter in which an organization they are negotiating with, or have an agreement with for future employment, has a financial interest.” It’s not clear if Heebner recused himself from the negotiations with General Dynamics over the Stryker contract.</p>
<p>However, it’s very clear that the Stryker deal, despite the reservations raised by Pentagon weapons testers and the GAO, proved to be very lucrative for both Heebner and General Dynamics. Off the strength of the Stryker deal, Heebner quickly rose to the rank of Senior Vice-President for Planning and Development for General Dynamics, the conduit between the nation’s number two defense contractor and the Pentagon. By the end of last year, Heebner amassed more than 13,600 shares of General Dynamics stock valued at more than $1.2 million. “Based on the circumstances surrounding General Heebner’s hiring and compensation, and internal Pentagon warnings about the Stryker’s vulnerability, further investigation of the Stryker program is required,” says Eric Miller, a senior defense investigator at the Project on Government Oversight.</p>
<p>This article is excerpted from JEFFREY ST. CLAIR’s new book, <a href="" type="internal">Grand Theft Pentagon</a>.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | december 10 2003 two strykers armys newest armored personnel carrier patrolling near balad iraq embankment beneath collapsed vehicles plunged rainswollen river three soldiers died another severely injured three days later another stryker rolled roadside bomb south baghdad explosion left one soldier injured vehicle flames inglorious combat debut armys first new personnel carrier thirty years confirmed worst fears strykers critics vehicle unsafe crews untrained using combat conditions one former pentagon analyst described 8wheeled vehicle riding dune buggy armored tinfoil stryker interim armored vehicle billed pentagons latest weapon new hightech army fast moving carrier designed urban battlefield unconventional wars fall army deployed 300 stryker vehicles 3500 soldiers iraqs notorious sunni triangle iowasized area central iraq intense guerrilla fighting taking place new documents reveal pentagon weapons testers expressed serious reservations whether strykers ready battle pentagons chief weapons tester tom christie warned classified letter secretary defense stryker especially vulnerable rocketpropelled grenades improvised explosive devices course precisely kinds threats faced stryker brigades iraq advertised rapid deployment vehicles stryker brigades could theory rushed anywhere world within 96 hours c130 transport planes numerous internal studies questioned whether stryker deployed c130s moreover newly released government accounting office report scolded pentagon host problems carrier meant replace muchmaligned bradley fighting vehicle gao report points serious problems strykers design maintenance discloses deficiencies training use even defense secretary donald rumsfeld wanted delay funding additional stryker brigades testing training could completed congress ever anxious spread pork around many districts possible didnt heed warning approved additional purchases stryker joint venture two mightiest industrial corporations america general dynamics general motors companies waged fierce twoyear long lobbying battle stretching capitol hill halls pentagon win 4 billion contract build 2131 strykers awarded november 2000 first strykers cost 3 million piece 50 projections rolled assembly line april 2002 presiding ceremony stryker rollout alabama former army chief staff eric shinseki stryker key component shinsekis plan upgrade army scheme outlined 1999 paper titled army vision report shinseki called development interim armored brigade featuring allwheel formation thinly veiled hint contract would awarded general dynamics stryker wheeled carrier opposed tanklike vehicles built united defense run tracks shinsekis speech alabama pointedly singled special thanks david k heebner heebner former army lt general one shinsekis top aides serving assistant vice chief staff army played key role pushing funding shinsekis projects including stryker november 1999 general dynamics issued press release announcing hired heebner executive company announcement came full month heebners official retirement date december 31 1999 timing announcement curious several reasons glaringly clear army leaning toward handing multibillion dollar contract general dynamics time heebner may negotiations company highpaying executive position federal conflict interest laws prohibit government employees engaged personally substantially particular matter organization negotiating agreement future employment financial interest clear heebner recused negotiations general dynamics stryker contract however clear stryker deal despite reservations raised pentagon weapons testers gao proved lucrative heebner general dynamics strength stryker deal heebner quickly rose rank senior vicepresident planning development general dynamics conduit nations number two defense contractor pentagon end last year heebner amassed 13600 shares general dynamics stock valued 12 million based circumstances surrounding general heebners hiring compensation internal pentagon warnings strykers vulnerability investigation stryker program required says eric miller senior defense investigator project government oversight article excerpted jeffrey st clairs new book grand theft pentagon 160 160 | 538 |
<p>Photo by Allie_Caulfield | <a href="" type="internal">CC BY 2.0</a></p>
<p>Planning documents describe how our world will be shaped and how it will be destroyed.</p>
<p>The Spanish arrived in California in 1769 with such a plan: it was to protect the lands along the west coast north of their colonial holdings in Mexico and the Southwest from the threatened incursions of the Russians, by establishing a series of Missions, each a day’s ride from the other, and along this royal road would journey the holy fathers and their accompanying military support. Their endeavors were planned to be economically supported by the establishment of agricultural estates surrounding the Missions which would be worked by the indigenous peoples of the area acting as serfs in an essentially medieval agricultural system. The surplus wealth of these estates would flow back first to Mexico City and thence to the Spanish crown. In the event, there was no surplus and the lands became killing fields as the Indians succumbed to European diseases, mistreatment, hunger and the overwhelming grief of lands and cultures lost.</p>
<p>Between 1834 and 1836, some years after the Mexican War of Independence, the Missions were secularized and their lands distributed by the Mexican government to political favorites and victorious military commanders as spoils of war (after initially agreeing to redistribute the lands to the local Indians) who created vast ranchos where remnant populations of the indigenous peoples became peons or vaqueros. The Mexican-American War, the discovery of gold in 1848, and the coming of the railroads led to the Wild West – where privately held land became foundational to fortunes made in farming, minerals, oil, real estate and commerce. Not much has changed since, although beginning in the late nineteenth century, municipal planning codes now delineate how these stolen lands may be developed.</p>
<p>The County of Ventura in Southern California, covering territory that was ground zero in the Anglo-Spanish destruction of the most populous and technologically advanced indigenous communities in North America, is now working on a comprehensive update to its General Plan for the first time since 1988. In a recent meeting of the Municipal Area Council (MAC) that serves the unincorporated area in which I live, local residents gathered to review the opportunities for helping shape the plan. The meeting was held in Oak View, some dozen miles from the coast and on the way, if not to nowhere, to nowhere very significant – it is one of a gaggle of small communities that dot the road through the Ojai Valley, between the foothills of the transverse Santa Ynez mountain range and the Sulphur Mountain ridge, towards the valley’s eponymous city.</p>
<p>My reasons for spending time in Oak View are limited to attending MAC meetings and getting my car’s tires rotated at Fred’s Tireman. Enough time, however, to wonder at the works of entrepreneurial humankind; to wonder at the survival of an odd selection of stores that eke out a living for their owners in the harsh economic climate of this beleaguered township. Right in the middle of the commercial strip, exactly in a row, as in some sort of ecological climax community of the tawdry are Donuts and More; Nails Forever; Herbs of Hope; 805 Vapes Vapor Lounge; His ‘n’ Hairs; Gold ‘n’ Essence Tanning Salon; and anchoring the eastern end of this block, the newly opened Coffee Connection (which is attempting an injection of hipsterism into what is an avowedly working-class enterprise zone). Across the street is the newly opened Jack’s Dollar Plus. Then – in the next block – it’s Ojai Valley Muffler; Rte. 33 Laundry; and Ojai Valley MAMA (Modern American Martial Arts) before the stand-alone, red-trimmed Ojai Valley Glass which sits next to Fred’s.</p>
<p>On this stretch of State Highway 33, which runs east from the 101 Coast Highway, and winds through Casitas Springs (Bait and Liquor), Oak View and Mira Monte, the commercial presence must be considered woeful to those of bourgeois tastes and twenty-first century proclivities (pilgrimaging, perhaps, towards their Mecca) but the very persistence of its stores and services and the unfailing optimism of the owners of the new ones that replace the failed – gambling against the economic odds – possesses a kind of grandeur. Their openings and closings represent the ongoing process of transformation, in which all things arise and pass away, a concept that is at the very heart of the Taoist understanding of the cosmos which lightly graces the consciousness of the Venice and Silverlake (Los Angeles) diasporas that will crowd the markets, yoga gyms, vegan restaurants and coffee shops that await them a few miles on.</p>
<p>All of which is to say that Ventura County serves a very heterogenous population. From the Oaxacan Indian, non-Spanish speaking Mixtec farm laborers and fruit pickers on the fertile plains of Oxnard, the upper-middle class bohemians of Ojai, Latinos everywhere, Asians, African Americans, wealthy white conservatives and the red-necked, blue-collared legions between, the County runs the ethnic and socio-economic gamut. Those attending the MAC meeting were mostly aging, liberal whites – a societal spectrum much involved in officially sanctioned politics. One outlier was the young, local representative of S.U.R.J. (Showing Up for Racial Justice, a multi-racial movement dedicated to undermining white support for white supremacy) who semi-officially tagged the number of non-whites in the crowd of fifty plus, at two, an Asian and a Latina. The muti-racialist was a ginger-haired Anglo. So it is that input into the County’s visioning process is chromatically challenged, at least based on this showing. But there are even more serious limitations to its attempts to incorporate the will of the people.</p>
<p>Despite a member of the County’s planning department avowal that they had conducted an exhaustive sweep of public opinion in order to shape their General Plan they had, after a dozen community workshops across the county, a booth at the County Fair and an on-line questionnaire, garnered a mere thirty-two participants from the Ojai Valley, which has a population approaching 30,000. Results were similarly sparse elsewhere in the County. Out of this statistically irrelevant sample the County and its consultant had fashioned a crude matrix that featured the top five responses to ‘What I love most about Ventura County’; ‘Our biggest challenges’ and ‘What could make our community better’. Stock responses such as ‘Agriculture and Farms’, ‘Beaches’, ‘Water’, ‘Roads and Transportation’ and ‘Open Spaces and Greenbelts’ were distributed meaninglessly across the matrix. Residents of the Ojai Valley were given a scant one-week notice of the MAC meeting addressing these results.</p>
<p>Since I believe I have been defrauded of my rights to legitimately provide input to the process by a patently specious outreach program conducted as window dressing to the machinations (and low-grade word-smithing) conducted in the vape-filled rooms of the County Planning Commission on a document initially drafted by a planning consultant, I feel empowered to propose a draft of my own five-point Guiding Principles for The People’s Paradise (F.K.A. County) of Ventura.</p>
<p>1) Residents’ inalienable human-rights (at a minimum nourishment, shelter, security, and access to health care, education and wild spaces) shall be privileged over property rights.</p>
<p>2) Native flora and fauna, as the visible expressions of underlying native ecosystems, are to be privileged over all exogenous plantings (except for food production) and exogenous fauna (except for food production and licensed recreational and therapeutic purposes). Native fauna shall have priority access in wild-land corridors between their remaining and future habitats.</p>
<p>3) All the developed lands of Ventura County are to be regarded as a safe space – a sanctuary for all, regardless of Federal immigration status.</p>
<p>4) The County’s beaches and coastal waters are to be freely accessible but otherwise sacrosanct (for they are wild places) – there shall be no commercial fishing or oil drilling in its waters nor new development within the traditional areas of wetland and sand-dune succession. Restoration of this liminal zone shall be a priority.</p>
<p>5) Reduction of energy use (along with the on-going replacement of fossil fuels with renewables) will be the first principle in assessing the viability of future development and applied with equal primacy, in the re-shaping of existing infrastructures.</p>
<p>That’s right! I am so up for a re-visioning that adumbrates the Proudhonian concept that privately owned property is essentially theft from the common wealth and Thoreau’s epiphany that in wilderness is the preservation of the world – fiercely focused on a local level, on the grass roots, on (or in) the trenches, even on the entirely powerless but menacingly named Municipal Area Council; and actively targets the hide-bound, reactionary County bureaucracy. The alternative is to quietly accede to the milquetoast, verdant radicalism of our local Green Council and the estimable C.F.R.O.G. (Citizens for Responsible Oil and Gas) who have taken for their alternative model the vision statement and planning guidelines of the uber-liberal Marin County, north of San Francisco. Neither injections of realism into the continuing, but ultimately entirely unsustainable status quo so fiercely protected by the County and its political supporters is likely to pierce, at the present time, the heavily armored skin of this institutional dinosaur.</p>
<p>The day awaits when County leadership acknowledges the illegitimacy of private land ownership in Ventura County entwined as it is with the Native American holocaust unleashed (not altogether deliberately) by the Spanish, the sham of Mexican land grants and the subsequent depredations of the majority Anglo hordes who invaded the State in the second half of the nineteenth century. Left, are picturesque Spanish colonial Mission buildings, built by native labor – essentially the architecture of the holocaust – that are again centers of the Roman Catholic faith, now significant tourist attractions and icons in the mythology of California, surrounded by the massive infrastructures of a militarized global capitalism – forever impinging on the remaining wild-lands of California.</p> | true | 4 | photo allie_caulfield cc 20 planning documents describe world shaped destroyed spanish arrived california 1769 plan protect lands along west coast north colonial holdings mexico southwest threatened incursions russians establishing series missions days ride along royal road would journey holy fathers accompanying military support endeavors planned economically supported establishment agricultural estates surrounding missions would worked indigenous peoples area acting serfs essentially medieval agricultural system surplus wealth estates would flow back first mexico city thence spanish crown event surplus lands became killing fields indians succumbed european diseases mistreatment hunger overwhelming grief lands cultures lost 1834 1836 years mexican war independence missions secularized lands distributed mexican government political favorites victorious military commanders spoils war initially agreeing redistribute lands local indians created vast ranchos remnant populations indigenous peoples became peons vaqueros mexicanamerican war discovery gold 1848 coming railroads led wild west privately held land became foundational fortunes made farming minerals oil real estate commerce much changed since although beginning late nineteenth century municipal planning codes delineate stolen lands may developed county ventura southern california covering territory ground zero anglospanish destruction populous technologically advanced indigenous communities north america working comprehensive update general plan first time since 1988 recent meeting municipal area council mac serves unincorporated area live local residents gathered review opportunities helping shape plan meeting held oak view dozen miles coast way nowhere nowhere significant one gaggle small communities dot road ojai valley foothills transverse santa ynez mountain range sulphur mountain ridge towards valleys eponymous city reasons spending time oak view limited attending mac meetings getting cars tires rotated freds tireman enough time however wonder works entrepreneurial humankind wonder survival odd selection stores eke living owners harsh economic climate beleaguered township right middle commercial strip exactly row sort ecological climax community tawdry donuts nails forever herbs hope 805 vapes vapor lounge n hairs gold n essence tanning salon anchoring eastern end block newly opened coffee connection attempting injection hipsterism avowedly workingclass enterprise zone across street newly opened jacks dollar plus next block ojai valley muffler rte 33 laundry ojai valley mama modern american martial arts standalone redtrimmed ojai valley glass sits next freds stretch state highway 33 runs east 101 coast highway winds casitas springs bait liquor oak view mira monte commercial presence must considered woeful bourgeois tastes twentyfirst century proclivities pilgrimaging perhaps towards mecca persistence stores services unfailing optimism owners new ones replace failed gambling economic odds possesses kind grandeur openings closings represent ongoing process transformation things arise pass away concept heart taoist understanding cosmos lightly graces consciousness venice silverlake los angeles diasporas crowd markets yoga gyms vegan restaurants coffee shops await miles say ventura county serves heterogenous population oaxacan indian nonspanish speaking mixtec farm laborers fruit pickers fertile plains oxnard uppermiddle class bohemians ojai latinos everywhere asians african americans wealthy white conservatives rednecked bluecollared legions county runs ethnic socioeconomic gamut attending mac meeting mostly aging liberal whites societal spectrum much involved officially sanctioned politics one outlier young local representative surj showing racial justice multiracial movement dedicated undermining white support white supremacy semiofficially tagged number nonwhites crowd fifty plus two asian latina mutiracialist gingerhaired anglo input countys visioning process chromatically challenged least based showing even serious limitations attempts incorporate people despite member countys planning department avowal conducted exhaustive sweep public opinion order shape general plan dozen community workshops across county booth county fair online questionnaire garnered mere thirtytwo participants ojai valley population approaching 30000 results similarly sparse elsewhere county statistically irrelevant sample county consultant fashioned crude matrix featured top five responses love ventura county biggest challenges could make community better stock responses agriculture farms beaches water roads transportation open spaces greenbelts distributed meaninglessly across matrix residents ojai valley given scant oneweek notice mac meeting addressing results since believe defrauded rights legitimately provide input process patently specious outreach program conducted window dressing machinations lowgrade wordsmithing conducted vapefilled rooms county planning commission document initially drafted planning consultant feel empowered propose draft fivepoint guiding principles peoples paradise fka county ventura 1 residents inalienable humanrights minimum nourishment shelter security access health care education wild spaces shall privileged property rights 2 native flora fauna visible expressions underlying native ecosystems privileged exogenous plantings except food production exogenous fauna except food production licensed recreational therapeutic purposes native fauna shall priority access wildland corridors remaining future habitats 3 developed lands ventura county regarded safe space sanctuary regardless federal immigration status 4 countys beaches coastal waters freely accessible otherwise sacrosanct wild places shall commercial fishing oil drilling waters new development within traditional areas wetland sanddune succession restoration liminal zone shall priority 5 reduction energy use along ongoing replacement fossil fuels renewables first principle assessing viability future development applied equal primacy reshaping existing infrastructures thats right revisioning adumbrates proudhonian concept privately owned property essentially theft common wealth thoreaus epiphany wilderness preservation world fiercely focused local level grass roots trenches even entirely powerless menacingly named municipal area council actively targets hidebound reactionary county bureaucracy alternative quietly accede milquetoast verdant radicalism local green council estimable cfrog citizens responsible oil gas taken alternative model vision statement planning guidelines uberliberal marin county north san francisco neither injections realism continuing ultimately entirely unsustainable status quo fiercely protected county political supporters likely pierce present time heavily armored skin institutional dinosaur day awaits county leadership acknowledges illegitimacy private land ownership ventura county entwined native american holocaust unleashed altogether deliberately spanish sham mexican land grants subsequent depredations majority anglo hordes invaded state second half nineteenth century left picturesque spanish colonial mission buildings built native labor essentially architecture holocaust centers roman catholic faith significant tourist attractions icons mythology california surrounded massive infrastructures militarized global capitalism forever impinging remaining wildlands california | 928 |
<p>The same Balch Springs, Texas police department that shot and killed an unarmed, black 15-year-old has been filmed using a taser on a handcuffed black man.</p>
<p>On April 29, Balch Springs Police officer Roy Oliver allegedly shot and killed Jordan Edwards, a high school freshman, as the boy and his friends drove away from a party. The police department initially issued a public statement claiming Oliver fired in self-defense after the teenagers reversed toward him "in an aggressive manner."</p>
<p>After reviewing body camera footage from the killing, police admitted that the teenagers had been <a href="" type="internal">driving away from police</a> when Oliver fired the fatal shot. Oliver was dismissed from the force and <a href="" type="internal">charged with murder</a>.</p>
<p>But now, two weeks after Edwards' death, another body camera video evidently depicting excessive force by a white Balch Springs officer against a black man has been released to <a href="http://www.fox4news.com/news/255045710-story" type="external">Dallas's Fox 4 News</a>. And unlike in Oliver's case, an internal investigation found no fault with the officer's actions.</p>
<p>On April 28, 2016, Balch Springs police responded to a call of a man waving a gun, Fox 4 reported. When officers arrived on the scene, they found Marco Stephenson, now 39, holding a BB gun.</p>
<p>The body camera footage begins as a Balch Springs officer exits his squad car, his gun pointed at Stephenson, who is already kneeling with his hands on his head. An unnamed sergeant is already on the scene, pointing a gun at Stephenson. The sergeant kicks Stephenson's BB gun, which was lying on the sidewalk.</p>
<p>Stephenson appears to comply as three officers arrest him, and does not resist as the officers place handcuffs on him. Stephenson tells officers he plans on spitting out a toothpick. While his face is not visible in the footage, he appears be standing calmly, with his hands cuffed behind his back. But the sergeant who kicked his BB gun immediately pulls out a taser and fires it into Stephenson's abdomen.</p>
<p>Stephenson is seen shouting and collapsing. While Stephenson is still lying on the ground with his hands cuffed behind his back and an officer pinning him down, the officer with the taser shocks him a second time. "Don't pull away. Do you understand? Do you understand?" an officer asks Stephenson. "Don't pull away. Do you get it? Do you get it?"</p>
<p>Stephenson still does not appear to resist officers. "Yes sir," he says.</p>
<p>"Are you going to straighten up?" the officer asks. "Cause I ain't playing with you today. Do you understand"</p>
<p>"Yes sir," Stephenson repeats.</p>
<p>In a statement, the Balch Springs Police Department said the sergeant, whom Fox 4 reported was a supervising officer, had been cleared of wrongdoing.</p>
<p>Start and finish your day with the top stories from The Daily Beast.</p>
<p>A speedy, smart summary of all the news you need to know (and nothing you don't).</p>
<p>"Balch Springs PD is aware of the incident that occurred in 2016. The video was reviewed by the Texas Ranger Division which is the highest and most prestigious law enforcement agency in Texas," the department wrote in a statement. "It was determined charges would not be filed against the Balch Springs police officer after the video was reviewed by an independent agency and an internal review was conducted."</p>
<p>The police department did not respond to The Daily Beast's request for further information.</p>
<p>The investigation may have been the only reason a leaker was able to obtain a copy of the 2016 body camera footage, which an anonymous person sent Fox 4 in the mail. When the Balch Springs Police Department began using body cameras in <a href="https://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/2015/01/08/balch-springs-police-officers-now-have-body-cameras" type="external">January 2015</a>, the department announced that it would be storing footage for 90 days, unless the footage was under investigation.</p>
<p>Balch Springs Police Chief Jonathan Haber told Fox 4 that officers brought the incident to his attention in its immediate aftermath, but that Stephenson never filed a complaint with the department.</p>
<p>But at the time of his arrest, Stephenson was already taking action against a nearby police department for a startlingly similar case of alleged excessive force.</p>
<p>In a March 2015 lawsuit reviewed by The Daily Beast, Stephenson accused the nearby Dallas Police Department of aggressively arresting him for driving while intoxicated. Police lacked probable cause for the arrest, and Stephenson's toxicology test revealed him to have been sober, he claimed in the lawsuit.</p>
<p>A Dallas Police officer "ordered him to get face down on the ground" with his taser pointed at Plaintiff's chest, - Stephenson's lawyers alleged in his suit. "Plaintiff complied calmly, without sudden movements, and without protest. As soon as Mr. Stephenson complied, [an officer], with great force and without justification, pushed his face down and into the pavement. [Another officer] immediately pushed Mr. Stephenson's back down while grabbing his right arm back and up behind his back."</p>
<p>The lawsuit, filed over two years ago, is still ongoing, and would have been active for over a year when Balch Springs police arrested Stephenson, possibly explaining his decision not to file a new complaint.</p>
<p>In its statement, the Balch Springs Police Department said it was aware that the footage of Stephenson's arrest was particularly inflammatory in the wake of Jordan Edwards' death.</p>
<p>"With recent events we understand we are under the microscope of the public eye, and that is why we will continue to serve our community as we have done in the past," the department wrote. "We understand people are upset and angry from the video that occurred in 2016, and we have made changes and corrections to better serve our community."</p> | true | 4 | balch springs texas police department shot killed unarmed black 15yearold filmed using taser handcuffed black man april 29 balch springs police officer roy oliver allegedly shot killed jordan edwards high school freshman boy friends drove away party police department initially issued public statement claiming oliver fired selfdefense teenagers reversed toward aggressive manner reviewing body camera footage killing police admitted teenagers driving away police oliver fired fatal shot oliver dismissed force charged murder two weeks edwards death another body camera video evidently depicting excessive force white balch springs officer black man released dallass fox 4 news unlike olivers case internal investigation found fault officers actions april 28 2016 balch springs police responded call man waving gun fox 4 reported officers arrived scene found marco stephenson 39 holding bb gun body camera footage begins balch springs officer exits squad car gun pointed stephenson already kneeling hands head unnamed sergeant already scene pointing gun stephenson sergeant kicks stephensons bb gun lying sidewalk stephenson appears comply three officers arrest resist officers place handcuffs stephenson tells officers plans spitting toothpick face visible footage appears standing calmly hands cuffed behind back sergeant kicked bb gun immediately pulls taser fires stephensons abdomen stephenson seen shouting collapsing stephenson still lying ground hands cuffed behind back officer pinning officer taser shocks second time dont pull away understand understand officer asks stephenson dont pull away get get stephenson still appear resist officers yes sir says going straighten officer asks cause aint playing today understand yes sir stephenson repeats statement balch springs police department said sergeant fox 4 reported supervising officer cleared wrongdoing start finish day top stories daily beast speedy smart summary news need know nothing dont balch springs pd aware incident occurred 2016 video reviewed texas ranger division highest prestigious law enforcement agency texas department wrote statement determined charges would filed balch springs police officer video reviewed independent agency internal review conducted police department respond daily beasts request information investigation may reason leaker able obtain copy 2016 body camera footage anonymous person sent fox 4 mail balch springs police department began using body cameras january 2015 department announced would storing footage 90 days unless footage investigation balch springs police chief jonathan haber told fox 4 officers brought incident attention immediate aftermath stephenson never filed complaint department time arrest stephenson already taking action nearby police department startlingly similar case alleged excessive force march 2015 lawsuit reviewed daily beast stephenson accused nearby dallas police department aggressively arresting driving intoxicated police lacked probable cause arrest stephensons toxicology test revealed sober claimed lawsuit dallas police officer ordered get face ground taser pointed plaintiffs chest stephensons lawyers alleged suit plaintiff complied calmly without sudden movements without protest soon mr stephenson complied officer great force without justification pushed face pavement another officer immediately pushed mr stephensons back grabbing right arm back behind back lawsuit filed two years ago still ongoing would active year balch springs police arrested stephenson possibly explaining decision file new complaint statement balch springs police department said aware footage stephensons arrest particularly inflammatory wake jordan edwards death recent events understand microscope public eye continue serve community done past department wrote understand people upset angry video occurred 2016 made changes corrections better serve community | 531 |
<p>The resurgent debate over gun control has put a spotlight on the hardline leaders of the National Rifle Association. In the wake of the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, executive vice president Wayne LaPierre delivered a full-throated rejection of gun control and called for more firearms in schools, while David Keene, the group’s president, predicted the failure of any new assault weapons ban introduced in Congress. The two NRA figureheads purported to speak for more than 4 million American gun owners, though the group’s membership <a href="" type="internal">may in fact be smaller</a>.</p>
<p>But whatever its true size, today’s NRA, widely considered to be disproportionately influential in politics, operates more like a corporation or politburo than a typical nonprofit or lobbying organization. Its 76 board directors and 10 executive officers keep a grip on power through elections in which ordinary grassroots members appear to have little say.</p>
<p>The NRA leadership is known as much for its organizational secrecy as its absolutist interpretation of the Second Amendment. That may be why, until now, little has been known about some of its most powerful insiders. They sit on the NRA board of directors’ nine-member Nominating Committee, which, despite ballots distributed annually to legions of NRA members, closely controls who can be elected to the NRA board. Mother Jones has uncovered key details about the current Nominating Committee <a href="#committee" type="external">*</a>:</p>
<p>Long before Newtown, and even before the bloodbath at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, a survey conducted in May 2012 by Republican pollster Frank Luntz <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/25/us-usa-shooting-denver-guns-idUSBRE86O02O20120725" type="external">found</a> that most gun owners, including current and former members of the NRA, favor tighter gun regulations such as universal criminal background checks. And according to an ABC/Washington Post <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2013/01/14/National-Politics/Polling/question_9679.xml?uuid=1Brk4F6VEeKKy6tct36VyA" type="external">poll</a> published on Tuesday, 86 percent of gun-owning households support a law requiring background checks at gun shows to close the so-called “loophole.” So what motivates NRA leaders to remain so out of step with their constituency, flatly rejecting any discussion of legal reform?</p>
<p>One answer may be their ties to the $11.7 billion gun industry. Freedom Group’s Kollitides ran for the NRA board in 2009 but lost, despite an endorsement from gun manufacturer Remington. “His campaign didn’t sit well with some gun bloggers, who viewed him as an industry interloper,” according to a 2011 <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/business/how-freedom-group-became-the-gun-industrys-giant.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=1&amp;" type="external">report</a> in the New York Times.</p>
<p />
<p>It remains unclear who among the NRA leadership tapped Kollitides, Bain, and Smith, to be on the current Nominating Committee.</p>
<p>“I was appointed,” Bain confirmed in a brief phone call. “I am not a board member,” he said, declining to say who appointed him. “This conversation is over.”</p>
<p>Calls to Kollitides and Smith seeking comment were not returned. The NRA declined to respond to multiple requests for comment regarding its board members and other organizational details. However, one NRA official, who declined to be named, said that Kollitides “has never been on the board, although he has run several times.”</p>
<p>But that need not stand in the way. “You’ve got a good friend you want to get more involved, and you nominate him,” a current long-serving NRA board member told Mother Jones.</p>
<p />
<p>Back in August 2011, the NRA Nominating Committee elected Clark, a board member since 1999, as its chair. Clark, a competitive sport shooter and an instructor in the Eddie Eagle GunSafe program <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDgvHJ8ZkTc" type="external">heralded by LaPierre</a> in his recent media blitz, is a longtime resident of Newtown. Her home is about a 10-minute drive by car from Sandy Hook Elementary School and about a 15-minute drive from the former home of Nancy Lanza, who was also murdered by her son on December 14 after he got possession of her semi-automatic assault rifle and other legally registered weapons.</p>
<p>Reached by phone on December 29 in nearby Bridgeport, Connecticut, where she works in the health care industry, Clark confirmed her NRA leadership role. When asked if she knew any of the victims or their families in Newtown, she replied, “This is a hard time for me. I am not really interested in giving an interview at this time.”</p>
<p>Unlike the NRA’s paid executive officers, who earn big money for their work, Clark’s directorship is unpaid. (LaPierre took home $960,000 from the NRA and related organizations in 2010; Kayne B. Robinson, the executive director of general operations, earned more than $1 million.)</p>
<p>Elections for the NRA board, which oversees the organization’s nearly 800 employees and more than $200 million in annual revenues, occur annually for 25 directors, who serve three-year terms. The vote typically involves less than 7 percent of NRA members, according to past NRA <a href="http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/research/nra-board-aug-2008.pdf" type="external">ballot results</a> and <a href="http://www.firearmscoalition.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=599:nra-directors-election&amp;catid=19:the-knox-update&amp;Itemid=144" type="external">pro-NRA bloggers</a>. A low election turnout among members is not uncommon among nonprofit groups, but how a candidate gets his or her name on the ballot is key. According to an NRA supporter and self-proclaimed <a href="http://www.pagunblog.com/2009/02/11/nra-board-nominations/" type="external">Second Amendment activist in Pennsylvania</a> who blogs under the handle “Sebastian,” this occurs one of two ways: It requires a grassroots petition by members, which rarely gets a candidate on the ballot, or a candidate must be included on the official slate endorsed by the Nominating Committee.</p>
<p>“Read the bios in your ballot and you’ll see that almost all were nominated by the nominating committee,” complained “Pecos Bill” from Illinois last January in one pro-gun-rights <a href="http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=18899.0" type="external">forum</a>. “Seems the NRA, fine organization that it is, is being run like a modern corporation and the ‘good ol’ boys’ are keeping themselves in power.”</p>
<p>*This refers to the Nominating Committee appointed by the NRA board in 2011 for the most recent board elections in 2012. This year’s Nominating Committee, whose members remain unclear, presumably will soon release its handpicked slate of candidates for NRA board elections in 2013.</p>
<p>In fact, 10 women currently serve on the board, but few people had access to that information until very recently, when the NRA posted <a href="http://www.nra.org/board/" type="external">a complete list on its website</a>. (In the past, the NRA cloaked its board in secrecy; incomplete and outdated lists were published by outside groups using press clips and legally required NRA financial disclosures.) According to a search using Archive.org, the current board page was published sometime after December 6.</p>
<p />
<p>The Nominating Committee now led by Clark handpicked nearly all of the candidates on the 2012 ballot. As John Richardson, an NRA “ <a href="http://www.nra.org/benefits.aspx" type="external">Life Member</a>” in North Carolina explained on his blog, <a href="http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2012/01/roundup-of-endorsements-for-nra-board.html" type="external">No Lawyers – Only Guns and Money</a>, in January 2012, “This year there are 31 candidates running for 25 positions. Of these 31, 29 were nominated by the Nominating Committee. The remaining two candidates were nominated by a petition of the membership which requires at least 250 signatures.” (One of those two nominated by petition was elected to the board last year.)</p>
<p>Other notable figures currently serving on the board include actor and firearms enthusiast Tom Selleck; anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist; Lt. Colonel Oliver North of Iran-Contra fame; right-wing rocker Ted Nugent, whose thinly veiled threats about Barack Obama’s reelection campaign prompted <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/reliable-source/post/ted-nugents-meeting-with-secret-service-unfolds-without-incident/2012/04/19/gIQALXFnTT_blog.html" type="external">a Secret Service inquiry</a>; and Marion Hammer, the former NRA president who <a href="" type="internal">helped mastermind the spread of Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law</a>.</p>
<p>At a poignant news conference held in Newtown on Monday, parents of some of the slain first-graders announced <a href="http://www.sandyhookpromise.org/" type="external">Sandy Hook Promise</a>, a new group and campaign to promote “common sense solutions” to America’s gun violence problem. It is unclear whether Patricia A. Clark attended that gathering in her local community. But she has shown a certain kind of interest in kids for decades. According to her <a href="http://www.nra.org/board/#CLARK" type="external">board bio</a>, she has “worked with Juniors for more than 30 years” as a firearms coach and instructor. As a line in her bio puts it, she is an “NRA Benefactor and Heritage Society member who believes that youngsters are the key to NRA’s future.”</p> | true | 4 | resurgent debate gun control put spotlight hardline leaders national rifle association wake massacre newtown connecticut executive vice president wayne lapierre delivered fullthroated rejection gun control called firearms schools david keene groups president predicted failure new assault weapons ban introduced congress two nra figureheads purported speak 4 million american gun owners though groups membership may fact smaller whatever true size todays nra widely considered disproportionately influential politics operates like corporation politburo typical nonprofit lobbying organization 76 board directors 10 executive officers keep grip power elections ordinary grassroots members appear little say nra leadership known much organizational secrecy absolutist interpretation second amendment may little known powerful insiders sit nra board directors ninemember nominating committee despite ballots distributed annually legions nra members closely controls elected nra board mother jones uncovered key details current nominating committee long newtown even bloodbath movie theater aurora colorado survey conducted may 2012 republican pollster frank luntz found gun owners including current former members nra favor tighter gun regulations universal criminal background checks according abcwashington post poll published tuesday 86 percent gunowning households support law requiring background checks gun shows close socalled loophole motivates nra leaders remain step constituency flatly rejecting discussion legal reform one answer may ties 117 billion gun industry freedom groups kollitides ran nra board 2009 lost despite endorsement gun manufacturer remington campaign didnt sit well gun bloggers viewed industry interloper according 2011 report new york times remains unclear among nra leadership tapped kollitides bain smith current nominating committee appointed bain confirmed brief phone call board member said declining say appointed conversation calls kollitides smith seeking comment returned nra declined respond multiple requests comment regarding board members organizational details however one nra official declined named said kollitides never board although run several times need stand way youve got good friend want get involved nominate current longserving nra board member told mother jones back august 2011 nra nominating committee elected clark board member since 1999 chair clark competitive sport shooter instructor eddie eagle gunsafe program heralded lapierre recent media blitz longtime resident newtown home 10minute drive car sandy hook elementary school 15minute drive former home nancy lanza also murdered son december 14 got possession semiautomatic assault rifle legally registered weapons reached phone december 29 nearby bridgeport connecticut works health care industry clark confirmed nra leadership role asked knew victims families newtown replied hard time really interested giving interview time unlike nras paid executive officers earn big money work clarks directorship unpaid lapierre took home 960000 nra related organizations 2010 kayne b robinson executive director general operations earned 1 million elections nra board oversees organizations nearly 800 employees 200 million annual revenues occur annually 25 directors serve threeyear terms vote typically involves less 7 percent nra members according past nra ballot results pronra bloggers low election turnout among members uncommon among nonprofit groups candidate gets name ballot key according nra supporter selfproclaimed second amendment activist pennsylvania blogs handle sebastian occurs one two ways requires grassroots petition members rarely gets candidate ballot candidate must included official slate endorsed nominating committee read bios ballot youll see almost nominated nominating committee complained pecos bill illinois last january one progunrights forum seems nra fine organization run like modern corporation good ol boys keeping power refers nominating committee appointed nra board 2011 recent board elections 2012 years nominating committee whose members remain unclear presumably soon release handpicked slate candidates nra board elections 2013 fact 10 women currently serve board people access information recently nra posted complete list website past nra cloaked board secrecy incomplete outdated lists published outside groups using press clips legally required nra financial disclosures according search using archiveorg current board page published sometime december 6 nominating committee led clark handpicked nearly candidates 2012 ballot john richardson nra life member north carolina explained blog lawyers guns money january 2012 year 31 candidates running 25 positions 31 29 nominated nominating committee remaining two candidates nominated petition membership requires least 250 signatures one two nominated petition elected board last year notable figures currently serving board include actor firearms enthusiast tom selleck antitax crusader grover norquist lt colonel oliver north irancontra fame rightwing rocker ted nugent whose thinly veiled threats barack obamas reelection campaign prompted secret service inquiry marion hammer former nra president helped mastermind spread floridas stand ground law poignant news conference held newtown monday parents slain firstgraders announced sandy hook promise new group campaign promote common sense solutions americas gun violence problem unclear whether patricia clark attended gathering local community shown certain kind interest kids decades according board bio worked juniors 30 years firearms coach instructor line bio puts nra benefactor heritage society member believes youngsters key nras future | 767 |
<p>On Monday March 30, in a committee room in the House of Commons, Diane Abbott MP chaired a meeting entitled, “Britain’s Guantánamo? The use of secret evidence and evidence based on torture in the UK courts,” to discuss the stories of some of the men held as “terror suspects” on the basis of secret evidence, and to work out how to persuade the government to change its policies. A detailed report of the meeting is available <a href="" type="internal">here</a>, and the profiles of five prisoners are available by following <a href="" type="internal">this link</a>), but I thought it was also worth addressing a question posed by the meeting’s title, and to ask if it is fair to compare the bitter fruits of Britain’s anti-terror legislation with the iconic symbol of the Bush administration’s “War on Terror.”</p>
<p>In some ways, of course, it is not. The British government, while clearly complicit, to some extent, in the <a href="" type="internal">rendition and torture</a> of prisoners by or on behalf of the Bush administration, and in interrogating them while they were held in illegal and unjustifiable conditions, has not been directly involved in their industrial-scale rendition, in the establishment of a vast offshore prison devoted to coercive intelligence-gathering, or in <a href="" type="internal">the direct implementation of torture</a>, under the cover of <a href="" type="internal">flawed legal advice</a> which included blatant attempts to redefine its very meaning.</p>
<p>That said, there are, in fact, many unnerving similarities between the Bush administration’s policies, which prompted universal condemnation on an unprecedented scale, and those implemented in the UK, which have caused barely a ripple of protest.</p>
<p>The similarities between Guantánamo and the UK terror laws</p>
<p>At Guantánamo, since January 2002, the US government has, at various times, held 779 men, mostly without charge or trial, who were picked up in 20 different countries but detained neither as prisoners of war, protected by the Geneva Conventions, nor as criminal suspects, to be tried in a recognized court. When, after three and a half years, the Supreme Court ruled that they had habeas corpus rights, the government responded not by allowing them access to the US courts, but by holding military tribunals, designed to justify their detention through the use of secret evidence that the prisoners — known as “detainees” — were not allowed to see.</p>
<p>In the UK, since December 2001, the British government has, at various times, held around 70 men without charge or trial, refusing to try them as criminal suspects in recognized courts. The policy began with the imprisonment of 17 men in Belmarsh high-security prison, but when, after three years, the Law Lords ruled that their imprisonment was in contravention of the <a href="" type="internal">Human Rights Act</a>, the government responded by introducing control orders and deportation bail, both of which involve draconian restrictions that amount to house arrest. Throughout this whole period, the government has justified the men’s detention through the use of secret evidence that the prisoners — known as “detainees” — are not allowed to see.</p>
<p>Another similarity concerns attempts by both the British and American governments to bypass their obligations under the <a href="http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/h_cat39.htm" type="external">UN Convention Against Torture</a> — which prevents the return of foreign nationals to countries where they face the risk of torture — by reaching diplomatic agreements with various dictatorships in North Africa and the Middle East. These purport to guarantee that repatriated prisoners will be treated humanely, but in reality they have proved worthless.</p>
<p>Deportation to Tunisia</p>
<p>In June 2007, for example, after the US government signed a “diplomatic assurance” with the Tunisian dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, so that prisoners cleared for release from Guantánamo could be repatriated, two prisoners who were returned — <a href="" type="internal">Lotfi Lagha</a> and <a href="" type="internal">Abdullah bin Omar</a> — reported that they were <a href="" type="internal">threatened and mistreated</a> in Tunisian custody. They were then subjected to show trials, apparently based on evidence obtained through the torture of other prisoners, and received prison sentences of <a href="" type="internal">three</a> and <a href="" type="internal">seven</a> years.</p>
<p>In the UK, the British government has been involved in a similar policy, signing “memoranda of understanding” (MoUs) in 2005 with Jordan, Libya and Lebanon, and attempting, without success, to do the same with Algeria, in order to deport “detainees” held on the basis of secret evidence, instead of putting them forward for trial in the UK. This is apparently because of the British government’s refusal to join the rest of the world in finding ways to use information obtained by the intelligence services in court, while preserving the confidentiality of sources and methods ( <a href="" type="internal">PDF</a>), but it is difficult not to conclude that, in fact, the government has been swept up in its own rhetoric, and has actually lost sight of the correct balance between liberty and security.</p>
<p>There are further disturbing parallels. After the demonstrable failure of the Americans’ “diplomatic assurance” with Tunisia, a District Court judge intervened to prevent the return of a third Tunisian — <a href="" type="internal">Lotfi bin Ali</a> — in November 2007, arguing that he could suffer “irreparable harm” that the US courts would be powerless to reverse. Since then, no other Tunisians have been repatriated from Guantánamo, and, although the British government subsequently persisted in attempts to deport Tunisians from Europe, intervening in an Italian case, <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/refworld/rwmain?docid=47c6882e2" type="external">Saadi v. Italy</a>, which was being considered by the European Court of Human Rights at the same time, the British attempts were struck down by the Court, which ruled, in March 2008, that attempts to return Nassim Saadi to Tunisia would be a clear breach of Article 3 of the <a href="http://www.hrcr.org/docs/Eur_Convention/euroconv3.html" type="external">European Convention on Human Rights</a> (which states that “No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”).</p>
<p>Deportation to Libya</p>
<p>Both the US and the UK have faced struggles with repatriating foreign nationals to Libya, not because of any difficulties either government has with its enemy-turned-ally, the dictator Moammar Gaddafi, but because courts on both sides of the Atlantic have intervened to prevent Libyans from being repatriated: a Libyan in Guantánamo, <a href="" type="internal">Abdul Rauf al-Qassim</a>, has been resisting his enforced return since June 2007, and in the UK, attempts to return 12 Libyans accused of having connections with terrorism were scuppered when, in April 2008, as the <a href="" type="internal">Independent</a> described it, the Court of Appeal “gave a damning verdict on promises” that two men — identified only as AS and DD — “would not be tortured in their home country.” The judges ruled that the government “failed to give enough weight to the risk of torture.”</p>
<p>What is particularly galling in the Libyans’ case is that nowhere along the line has a single voice in authority been heard pointing out that those who once opposed Colonel Gaddafi’s regime — and are now wanted in his dungeons — would, not so long ago, have been regarded as our friends, but that observation, of course, succinctly demonstrates an uncomfortable truth: that yesterday’s freedom fighters can all too easily become today’s terrorists when the winds of politics change.</p>
<p>Deportation to Algeria</p>
<p>Where both the British and American governments seem to be in accord — and seem also to be meeting with some success in their mission to discard the UN Convention Against Torture and the European Convention on Human Rights — is with Algeria. Although some Algerians in Guantánamo — most notably <a href="" type="internal">Ahmed Belbacha</a>, who had lived peacefully in the UK for two years before he took an ill-timed holiday in Pakistan — are still <a href="" type="internal">striving to prevent</a> their enforced repatriation from Guantánamo, others are on record as having returned willingly, even though the fate that awaited them — whether freedom, or a bent trial followed by further imprisonment — seems to be akin to a round of Russian Roulette.</p>
<p>Given the choice of two evils, eight Algerians (see <a href="" type="internal">here</a>, <a href="" type="internal">here</a>, <a href="" type="internal">here</a>, <a href="" type="internal">here</a> and <a href="" type="internal">here</a>) settled for Algeria over Guantánamo between July 2008 and January 2009, and the same thing has happened with a number of “terror suspects” in the UK, who, exhausted by the imprisonment and house arrest foisted on them by the British government, on the basis of unknowable and unchallengeable secret evidence, opted to return “voluntarily “ to Algeria, with mixed results, as amnesty International has reported ( <a href="" type="internal">PDF</a>). Some were released without charge, while others received prison sentences after dubious trials, and in all cases it has been next to impossible for human rights observers to monitor what has been happening with the kind of diligence that is necessary.</p>
<p>The British government — or the Law Lords, at least — know how shaky is the assumption that Algerians returned from the UK will be treated humanely and given fair trials, for two particular reasons: firstly, because the Algerian government has refused even to sign a worthless “memorandum of understanding” and has also refused to allow any British representatives to monitor what happens to those who are returned, and secondly, because, when the Lords approved the deportation in February of two prisoners — BB and U — they resorted, as I explained in <a href="" type="internal">an article at the time</a>, to claiming that President Bouteflika has improved Algeria’s human rights record, and has “acknowledged and approved a letter from the Prime Minster which included the statement that ‘this exchange of letters underscores the absolute commitment of our two governments to human rights and fundamental freedoms.’”</p>
<p>In quiet desperation, the Lords also quoted the judges of SIAC (Britain’s secret terror court), who had noted that “Very considerable efforts have been made at the highest political levels on both sides to strengthen these ties,” and concluded that, as a result, “it is barely conceivable, let alone likely, that the Algerian government would put them at risk by reneging on solemn assurances.” As I noted at the time, it was hardly reassuring that, if returned prisoners did find themselves abused, they could be comforted by the fact that the government, SIAC and the Law Lords had thought that such abuse was “barely conceivable.”</p>
<p>Deportation to Jordan</p>
<p>And finally, while the US managed to return all the Jordanians it was holding in Guantánamo <a href="" type="internal">without apparent incident</a>, the British government faced an even more uphill struggle to conclude that it most-celebrated would-be deportee, Abu Qatada, would be treated humanely on his return. In the same ruling in which the Law Lords declared that it was safe for BB and U to be returned to Algeria, they concluded that Abu Qatada would not be tortured, and would receive a fair trial — or at least, would not receive “a flagrant denial of a fair trial” — for two reasons; firstly, because, in October 2005, a human rights organization in Jordan “signed an agreement with the United Kingdom government under which it would monitor the due performance of the obligations undertaken by Jordan under the MoU,” and, secondly, because “the fact that he would have a very high profile, coupled with the MoU, and the diplomatic capital invested in it, meant that the Jordanian authorities were likely to make sure that he was not ill-treated in custody or when he emerged from it.”</p>
<p>The judges made their decision in spite of the fact that Abu Qatada had been previously tortured in Jordan, and had been convicted in absentia in a terror trial at which witnesses claimed they had been tortured to make false confessions. In addition, their ruling was disappointing because a “likelihood” that he would not be tortured is far from reassuring, and seems, instead, to be another form of Russian Roulette that plays games with a man’s life and with the universal torture ban.</p>
<p>An unnerving conclusion</p>
<p>For now, the deportations of Abu Qatada, BB and U are on hold, pending a review by the European Court of Human Rights, which may mean — if both torture and judicial secrecy are regarded with the horror and scorn that they deserve — that the British government will eventually be obliged to abandon its blanket use of secret evidence and its labyrinthine attempts to circumvent the universal torture ban, by allowing the use of intercept evidence and reintroducing fair trials.</p>
<p>Ministers might also want to reflect that, although Barack Obama has not magically dismantled the legacy of the Bush administration’s “War on Terror,” he is at least committed to <a href="" type="internal">closing Guantánamo within a year</a>, has established a review of the prisoners’ cases that has <a href="" type="internal">started to approve</a> the release of prisoners, and is continuing to allow judges — empowered by a <a href="" type="internal">Supreme Court ruling</a> last June — to challenge the Bush administration’s secret evidence, with the result that, in 24 of the 28 cases so far reviewed, the judges involved have ordered the prisoners’ release because the government failed to provide sufficient evidence that they should ever have been held in the first place (a summary is <a href="" type="internal">here</a>, and see <a href="" type="internal">here</a> for the latest decision).</p>
<p>In Britain, in contrast, the government would still have us believe that all of its supposed “terror” evidence is infallible, and cannot be challenged, even though much of what is known appears to be misguided intelligence, or intelligence obtained through torture, and even though glaring errors on the part of the Home Office and the security services have been repeatedly noted over the last seven years. This not only makes a mockery of due process; it also leaves the government — and Home Secretary Jacqui Smith in particular — looking like the last bastion of the kind of unprincipled and unfettered executive power embraced by former US Vice President Dick Cheney and his chief of staff David Addington, the architects of the “War on Terror.”</p>
<p>As Jane Mayer explained in her book <a href="" type="internal">The Dark Side</a>, in the summer of 2002, when John Bellinger, the National Security Council’s top lawyer, tried to approach the White House counsel, Alberto Gonzales, to seek a review of the prisoners’ cases — expressing some of the same doubts about the US intelligence services that lawyers have sought to expose in relation to the intelligence services in the UK, and that judges in the US have finally been allowed to prove in some of the Guantánamo cases — he was met with the sternest of rebukes, when a scheduled meeting was hijacked by David Addington, who declared, imperiously, “No, there will be no review. The President has determined that they are ALL enemy combatants. We are not going to revisit it.”</p>
<p>Without fair trials for “terror suspects” in the UK, Jacqui Smith, like Jack Straw, David Blunkett, Charles Clarke and John Reid before her, appears to be nothing less than David Addington’s Anglicized twin, and in Addington’s statement above, all that needs changing are the words “President” to “Tony Blair,” and “enemy combatants” to “terrorists,” and the picture is complete. In democracies founded on the rule of law, it is not sufficient for an elected minister to maintain, as President Bush declared for over seven years, that it was true because he said so.</p>
<p>ANDY WORTHINGTON is a British historian, and the author of ‘ <a href="" type="internal">The Guantánamo Files: The Stories of the 774 Detainees in America’s Illegal Prison’</a> (published by Pluto Press). Visit his website at: <a href="http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/" type="external">www.andyworthington.co.uk</a> He can be reached at: <a href="mailto:andy@andyworthington.co.uk" type="external">andy@andyworthington.co.uk</a></p> | true | 4 | monday march 30 committee room house commons diane abbott mp chaired meeting entitled britains guantánamo use secret evidence evidence based torture uk courts discuss stories men held terror suspects basis secret evidence work persuade government change policies detailed report meeting available profiles five prisoners available following link thought also worth addressing question posed meetings title ask fair compare bitter fruits britains antiterror legislation iconic symbol bush administrations war terror ways course british government clearly complicit extent rendition torture prisoners behalf bush administration interrogating held illegal unjustifiable conditions directly involved industrialscale rendition establishment vast offshore prison devoted coercive intelligencegathering direct implementation torture cover flawed legal advice included blatant attempts redefine meaning said fact many unnerving similarities bush administrations policies prompted universal condemnation unprecedented scale implemented uk caused barely ripple protest similarities guantánamo uk terror laws guantánamo since january 2002 us government various times held 779 men mostly without charge trial picked 20 different countries detained neither prisoners war protected geneva conventions criminal suspects tried recognized court three half years supreme court ruled habeas corpus rights government responded allowing access us courts holding military tribunals designed justify detention use secret evidence prisoners known detainees allowed see uk since december 2001 british government various times held around 70 men without charge trial refusing try criminal suspects recognized courts policy began imprisonment 17 men belmarsh highsecurity prison three years law lords ruled imprisonment contravention human rights act government responded introducing control orders deportation bail involve draconian restrictions amount house arrest throughout whole period government justified mens detention use secret evidence prisoners known detainees allowed see another similarity concerns attempts british american governments bypass obligations un convention torture prevents return foreign nationals countries face risk torture reaching diplomatic agreements various dictatorships north africa middle east purport guarantee repatriated prisoners treated humanely reality proved worthless deportation tunisia june 2007 example us government signed diplomatic assurance tunisian dictator zine el abidine ben ali prisoners cleared release guantánamo could repatriated two prisoners returned lotfi lagha abdullah bin omar reported threatened mistreated tunisian custody subjected show trials apparently based evidence obtained torture prisoners received prison sentences three seven years uk british government involved similar policy signing memoranda understanding mous 2005 jordan libya lebanon attempting without success algeria order deport detainees held basis secret evidence instead putting forward trial uk apparently british governments refusal join rest world finding ways use information obtained intelligence services court preserving confidentiality sources methods pdf difficult conclude fact government swept rhetoric actually lost sight correct balance liberty security disturbing parallels demonstrable failure americans diplomatic assurance tunisia district court judge intervened prevent return third tunisian lotfi bin ali november 2007 arguing could suffer irreparable harm us courts would powerless reverse since tunisians repatriated guantánamo although british government subsequently persisted attempts deport tunisians europe intervening italian case saadi v italy considered european court human rights time british attempts struck court ruled march 2008 attempts return nassim saadi tunisia would clear breach article 3 european convention human rights states one shall subjected torture inhuman degrading treatment punishment deportation libya us uk faced struggles repatriating foreign nationals libya difficulties either government enemyturnedally dictator moammar gaddafi courts sides atlantic intervened prevent libyans repatriated libyan guantánamo abdul rauf alqassim resisting enforced return since june 2007 uk attempts return 12 libyans accused connections terrorism scuppered april 2008 independent described court appeal gave damning verdict promises two men identified dd would tortured home country judges ruled government failed give enough weight risk torture particularly galling libyans case nowhere along line single voice authority heard pointing opposed colonel gaddafis regime wanted dungeons would long ago regarded friends observation course succinctly demonstrates uncomfortable truth yesterdays freedom fighters easily become todays terrorists winds politics change deportation algeria british american governments seem accord seem also meeting success mission discard un convention torture european convention human rights algeria although algerians guantánamo notably ahmed belbacha lived peacefully uk two years took illtimed holiday pakistan still striving prevent enforced repatriation guantánamo others record returned willingly even though fate awaited whether freedom bent trial followed imprisonment seems akin round russian roulette given choice two evils eight algerians see settled algeria guantánamo july 2008 january 2009 thing happened number terror suspects uk exhausted imprisonment house arrest foisted british government basis unknowable unchallengeable secret evidence opted return voluntarily algeria mixed results amnesty international reported pdf released without charge others received prison sentences dubious trials cases next impossible human rights observers monitor happening kind diligence necessary british government law lords least know shaky assumption algerians returned uk treated humanely given fair trials two particular reasons firstly algerian government refused even sign worthless memorandum understanding also refused allow british representatives monitor happens returned secondly lords approved deportation february two prisoners bb u resorted explained article time claiming president bouteflika improved algerias human rights record acknowledged approved letter prime minster included statement exchange letters underscores absolute commitment two governments human rights fundamental freedoms quiet desperation lords also quoted judges siac britains secret terror court noted considerable efforts made highest political levels sides strengthen ties concluded result barely conceivable let alone likely algerian government would put risk reneging solemn assurances noted time hardly reassuring returned prisoners find abused could comforted fact government siac law lords thought abuse barely conceivable deportation jordan finally us managed return jordanians holding guantánamo without apparent incident british government faced even uphill struggle conclude mostcelebrated wouldbe deportee abu qatada would treated humanely return ruling law lords declared safe bb u returned algeria concluded abu qatada would tortured would receive fair trial least would receive flagrant denial fair trial two reasons firstly october 2005 human rights organization jordan signed agreement united kingdom government would monitor due performance obligations undertaken jordan mou secondly fact would high profile coupled mou diplomatic capital invested meant jordanian authorities likely make sure illtreated custody emerged judges made decision spite fact abu qatada previously tortured jordan convicted absentia terror trial witnesses claimed tortured make false confessions addition ruling disappointing likelihood would tortured far reassuring seems instead another form russian roulette plays games mans life universal torture ban unnerving conclusion deportations abu qatada bb u hold pending review european court human rights may mean torture judicial secrecy regarded horror scorn deserve british government eventually obliged abandon blanket use secret evidence labyrinthine attempts circumvent universal torture ban allowing use intercept evidence reintroducing fair trials ministers might also want reflect although barack obama magically dismantled legacy bush administrations war terror least committed closing guantánamo within year established review prisoners cases started approve release prisoners continuing allow judges empowered supreme court ruling last june challenge bush administrations secret evidence result 24 28 cases far reviewed judges involved ordered prisoners release government failed provide sufficient evidence ever held first place summary see latest decision britain contrast government would still us believe supposed terror evidence infallible challenged even though much known appears misguided intelligence intelligence obtained torture even though glaring errors part home office security services repeatedly noted last seven years makes mockery due process also leaves government home secretary jacqui smith particular looking like last bastion kind unprincipled unfettered executive power embraced former us vice president dick cheney chief staff david addington architects war terror jane mayer explained book dark side summer 2002 john bellinger national security councils top lawyer tried approach white house counsel alberto gonzales seek review prisoners cases expressing doubts us intelligence services lawyers sought expose relation intelligence services uk judges us finally allowed prove guantánamo cases met sternest rebukes scheduled meeting hijacked david addington declared imperiously review president determined enemy combatants going revisit without fair trials terror suspects uk jacqui smith like jack straw david blunkett charles clarke john reid appears nothing less david addingtons anglicized twin addingtons statement needs changing words president tony blair enemy combatants terrorists picture complete democracies founded rule law sufficient elected minister maintain president bush declared seven years true said andy worthington british historian author guantánamo files stories 774 detainees americas illegal prison published pluto press visit website wwwandyworthingtoncouk reached andyandyworthingtoncouk | 1,315 |
<p>The political maneuvering between President Barack Obama and his top field commanders over withdrawal from Iraq has taken a sudden new turn with the leak by CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus – and a firm denial by a White House official – of an account of the Jan. 21 White House meeting suggesting that Obama had requested three different combat troop withdrawal plans with their respective associated risks, including one of 23 months.</p>
<p>The Petraeus account, reported by McClatchy newspapers Feb. 5 and then by the Associated Press the following day, appears to indicate that Obama is moving away from the 16-month plan he had vowed during the campaign to implement if elected. But on closer examination, it doesn’t necessarily refer to any action by Obama or to anything that happened at the Jan. 21 meeting.</p>
<p>The real story of the leak by Petraeus is that the most powerful figure in the U.S. military has tried to shape the media coverage of Obama and combat troop withdrawal from Iraq to advance his policy agenda – and, very likely, his personal political interests as well.</p>
<p>This writer became aware of Petraeus’s effort to influence the coverage of Obama’s unfolding policy on troop withdrawal when a military source close to the general, who insisted on anonymity, offered the Petraeus account on Feb. 4. The military officer was responding to the IPS story ‘Generals Seek to Reverse Obama Withdrawal Decision’ published two days earlier.</p>
<p>The story reported that Obama had rejected Petraeus’s argument against a 16-month withdrawal option at the meeting and asked for a withdrawal plan within that time frame, and that Petraeus had been unhappy with the outcome of the meeting.</p>
<p>It also reported that Gen. Ray Odierno, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and retired Army general Jack Keane, a close ally of Petraeus, had both made public statements indicating a determination to get Obama to abandon the 16-month plan.</p>
<p>The officer told IPS that, contrary to the story, Petraeus had been “very pleased” with the direction of the discussions. He said that there had been no decision by Obama at the meeting and no indication that Obama had a preference for one option over another.</p>
<p>The military source provided the following carefully worded statement: “We were specifically asked to provide projections, assumptions and risks for the accomplishment of objectives associated with 16-, 19- and 23-month drawdown options.” That was exactly the sentence published by McClatchy the following day, except that “specifically” was left out.</p>
<p>The source also said Petraeus, Odierno and Ambassador Ryan Crocker had already reached a “unified assessment” on the three drawdown options and had forwarded them to the chain of command.</p>
<p>But a White House official told IPS Monday that the Petraeus account was untrue. “The assessments of the three drawdown dates were not requested by the president,” said the official, who insisted on not being identified because he had not been authorised to comment on the matter. “He never said, ‘Give me three drawdown plans’.”</p>
<p>McClatchy’s Nancy Youssef reported a similar account from aides to Obama. “Obama told his advisors shortly after taking office that he remained committed to the 16-month timeframe,” Youssef wrote, “but asked them to present him with the pros and cons of that and other options, without specifying dates.”</p>
<p>That suggests that the only specific plan for which Obama requested an assessment of risks was the 16-month plan, but that he agreed to look at other plans as well.</p>
<p>The sentence given to this writer as well as to McClatchy bore one obvious clue that the request for the assessments of three drawdown plans did not come from Obama: the sentence used the passive voice. It also failed to explicitly state that the request in question was made during the meeting with Obama.</p>
<p>Petraeus did not respond to a request through the intermediary to say who requested the studies and whether they had been proposed by the military commanders themselves. McClatchy’s Youssef also noted that it is “unclear who came up with the idea…” of the 19- and 23-month withdrawal plans.</p>
<p>By implying that Obama had requested the three plans without saying so explicitly, the sentence leaked by Petraeus seems to have been calculated to create a misleading story.</p>
<p>One of Petraeus’s objectives appears to have been to counter any perception that he is seeking to undermine Obama on Iraq policy. Petraeus wishes to remain out of the spotlight in regard to any conflict regarding withdrawal over the Iraq issue. “He has been very careful to keep a very low profile,” said the military officer close to Petraeus, “because this is a new administration.”</p>
<p>But the Petraeus leak also serves to promote the idea that Obama is moving away from his campaign pledge on a 16-month combat troop withdrawal, which has already been the dominant theme in news media coverage of the issue. That idea would also justify continued sniping by military officers at the Obama 16-month plan as too risky.</p>
<p>In a new book, ‘The Gamble’, to be published Tuesday, Washington Post reporter Tom Ricks confirms an earlier report that in his initial encounter with Petraeus in Baghdad last July, Obama had made no effort to hide his sharp disagreement with the general’s views. Obama interrupted a lecture by Petraeus, according to Ricks, and made it clear that, as president, he would need to take a broader strategic view of the issue than that of the commander in Iraq.</p>
<p>Ricks, who interviewed Petraeus about the meeting, writes that Obama’s remarks “likely insulted Petraeus, who justly prides himself on his ability to do just that…” That strongly implies that Petraeus expressed some irritation at Obama over the incident to Ricks.</p>
<p>On top of the interest of Petraeus and other senior officers in keeping U.S. troops in Iraq for as long as possible, Petraeus has personal political interests at stake in the struggle over Iraq policy. He has been widely regarded as a possible Republican Presidential candidate in 2012.</p>
<p>Petraeus evidently believed the White House was promoting a story that made him look like the loser at the Jan. 21 meeting. “I imagine the White House is not too happy that this information is out there,” said the military source, referring to the Petraeus account he had provided to IPS.</p>
<p>Obama is obviously treading warily in handling Petraeus. His concern about Petraeus’s political ambitions may have been a factor in the decision to bring four-star Marine Corps Gen. James Jones in as his national security adviser.</p>
<p>“I’ve been told by a couple of people that one of the reasons for Jones being chosen was to have him there as a four-star to counter Petraeus,” says one Congressional source.</p>
<p>GARETH PORTER is an investigative historian and journalist with Inter-Press Service specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, “ <a href="" type="internal">Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam</a>“, was published in 2006.</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | political maneuvering president barack obama top field commanders withdrawal iraq taken sudden new turn leak centcom commander gen david petraeus firm denial white house official account jan 21 white house meeting suggesting obama requested three different combat troop withdrawal plans respective associated risks including one 23 months petraeus account reported mcclatchy newspapers feb 5 associated press following day appears indicate obama moving away 16month plan vowed campaign implement elected closer examination doesnt necessarily refer action obama anything happened jan 21 meeting real story leak petraeus powerful figure us military tried shape media coverage obama combat troop withdrawal iraq advance policy agenda likely personal political interests well writer became aware petraeuss effort influence coverage obamas unfolding policy troop withdrawal military source close general insisted anonymity offered petraeus account feb 4 military officer responding ips story generals seek reverse obama withdrawal decision published two days earlier story reported obama rejected petraeuss argument 16month withdrawal option meeting asked withdrawal plan within time frame petraeus unhappy outcome meeting also reported gen ray odierno top us commander iraq retired army general jack keane close ally petraeus made public statements indicating determination get obama abandon 16month plan officer told ips contrary story petraeus pleased direction discussions said decision obama meeting indication obama preference one option another military source provided following carefully worded statement specifically asked provide projections assumptions risks accomplishment objectives associated 16 19 23month drawdown options exactly sentence published mcclatchy following day except specifically left source also said petraeus odierno ambassador ryan crocker already reached unified assessment three drawdown options forwarded chain command white house official told ips monday petraeus account untrue assessments three drawdown dates requested president said official insisted identified authorised comment matter never said give three drawdown plans mcclatchys nancy youssef reported similar account aides obama obama told advisors shortly taking office remained committed 16month timeframe youssef wrote asked present pros cons options without specifying dates suggests specific plan obama requested assessment risks 16month plan agreed look plans well sentence given writer well mcclatchy bore one obvious clue request assessments three drawdown plans come obama sentence used passive voice also failed explicitly state request question made meeting obama petraeus respond request intermediary say requested studies whether proposed military commanders mcclatchys youssef also noted unclear came idea 19 23month withdrawal plans implying obama requested three plans without saying explicitly sentence leaked petraeus seems calculated create misleading story one petraeuss objectives appears counter perception seeking undermine obama iraq policy petraeus wishes remain spotlight regard conflict regarding withdrawal iraq issue careful keep low profile said military officer close petraeus new administration petraeus leak also serves promote idea obama moving away campaign pledge 16month combat troop withdrawal already dominant theme news media coverage issue idea would also justify continued sniping military officers obama 16month plan risky new book gamble published tuesday washington post reporter tom ricks confirms earlier report initial encounter petraeus baghdad last july obama made effort hide sharp disagreement generals views obama interrupted lecture petraeus according ricks made clear president would need take broader strategic view issue commander iraq ricks interviewed petraeus meeting writes obamas remarks likely insulted petraeus justly prides ability strongly implies petraeus expressed irritation obama incident ricks top interest petraeus senior officers keeping us troops iraq long possible petraeus personal political interests stake struggle iraq policy widely regarded possible republican presidential candidate 2012 petraeus evidently believed white house promoting story made look like loser jan 21 meeting imagine white house happy information said military source referring petraeus account provided ips obama obviously treading warily handling petraeus concern petraeuss political ambitions may factor decision bring fourstar marine corps gen james jones national security adviser ive told couple people one reasons jones chosen fourstar counter petraeus says one congressional source gareth porter investigative historian journalist interpress service specialising us national security policy paperback edition latest book perils dominance imbalance power road war vietnam published 2006 160 | 643 |
<p>By David Gibbs / AlterNetThe following is a transcript of a recent public interview at the University of Arizona with linguist and political commentator Noam Chomsky by Dr. David N. Gibbs.David Gibbs:</p>
<p>The main issue on everyone’s minds is the inauguration of Donald Trump as president. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has emphasized the extreme danger that Trump poses, due to the augmented risk of nuclear war and uncontrolled climate change. After inauguration, the Bulletin’s metaphoric clock has been repositioned at two and a half minutes to midnight, with “midnight” signifying catastrophe. Do you agree with the Bulletin regarding the alleged dangers posed by the Trump presidency?</p>
<p>Noam Chomsky: One of the dangers is unquestionable. Of the two existential threats – the threats to the termination of the species basically and most other species – one of them, climate change, on that I think there’s no basis for discussion. Trump has been very inconsistent on many things; on Twitter he’s been all over the place, but some of it is very consistent. That is: Do nothing about climate change except make it worse. And he’s not just speaking for himself, but for the whole Republican Party, the whole leadership. It’s already had impact, it will have worse impact. We’ll talk about this next week, but if there are ways out of this, it’s going to be not easy.</p>
<p>With regard to nuclear weapons, it’s kind of hard to say. He’s said lots of things. As you mentioned, the national security experts are terrified. But they’re more terrified by his personality than by his statements. So if you read people like, say Bruce Blair[1], one of the leading, most sober, knowledgeable specialists, he says, look, his statements are all over the map, but his personality is frightening, he’s a complete megalomaniac. You never know how he’s going to react. When he learned for example that he’d lost the election by about three million votes, his instant reaction was insanity; you know, three to five million illegal immigrants somehow were organized in some incredible fashion to vote. On any little issue – Miss Universe, or whatever it may be – he’s completely unpredictable, he’ll go off into outer space. His guru Steve Bannon is worse, he’s much scarier. He probably knows what he’s doing.</p>
<p />
<p>Over the years, there’s been case after case when there were very narrow decisions that had to be made about whether to launch nuclear weapons in serious cases. What is this guy going to do if his vaunted negotiating skills fail, if somebody doesn’t do what he says? Is he going to say, “Okay we’ll nuke them? We’re done?” Remember that in any major nuclear war, the first strike destroys the country that attacks; it’s been known for years. The first strike of a major power is very likely to cause what’s called nuclear winter, leads to global famine for years and everything’s basically gone. Some survivors straggling around. Could he do it? Who knows.</p>
<p>Some of his comments can be interpreted as potentially reducing the threat of nuclear war. The major threat right now is right on the Russian border. Notice, not the Mexican border, the Russian border. And it’s serious. He has made various statements moving toward reducing the tensions, accommodating Russian concerns and so on. On the other hand, you have to balance that against expanding our nuclear forces, add to our so-called depleted military, which is already more powerful than the rest of the world combined; attack in Syria, send forces to Syria, start bombing. Who knows what could be next? Michael Flynn, [former] national security adviser,[2] [his reaction] to the Iranian missile test the other day was very frightening. Now the missile test is ill-advised, they shouldn’t have done it. But it’s not in violation of international law or international agreements. They shouldn’t have done it. His reaction suggested maybe we’re going to go to war in retaliation. Would they do it? If they did, you don’t know what’s going to happen next. Everything could blow up.</p>
<p>This crazy ban on the seven states, where we can’t accept immigrants, almost every analyst points out the obvious: It just increases the threat of terror. It lays the basis for terror. It’s just like the atrocities in Abu Ghraib and Bagram and Guantanamo. They’re the most fabulous recruiting techniques for Al Qaeda and ISIS. Everyone knows it. Now, you ban not the whole Muslim world. You ban seven states, seven states that have not been responsible for a single terrorist act. Those are the seven he banned. But, you leave the ones that really are responsible, like Saudi Arabia, which is the center for propaganda and funding and so on for radical Islamic Jihadism, well you can’t touch them because of business interests, also they have oil and so on and so forth. There’s actually an article in The Washington Post, I don’t know whether it’s tongue in cheek or not, which said the criterion for being on the list of banned states is that Trump doesn’t have business interests there. Maybe. But it’s this kind of wild unpredictability, megalomania, thin-skinned craziness that really has me worried, more than his statements. Now, on the climate change there’s just nothing to say, he’s perfectly straightforward.</p>
<p>Gibbs: Let us turn to the role of the media in reporting alleged Russian interference in the U.S. electoral process. Mainstream journalists have called Trump a puppet of Russia, a modern version of the Manchurian Candidate. Others have criticized the media for accepting unsubstantiated claims about Russian influence, and reporting such claims as facts. Norman Solomon and Serge Halimi, for example, stated that press reporting on this issue amounts to a mass hysteria reminiscent of the McCarthy era, while Seymour Hersh called the media reporting on Russia “outrageous.”[3] What is your view of this situation?</p>
<p>Chomsky: My guess is that most of the world is just collapsing in laughter. Suppose all the charges are true, I mean every single one, it is so amateurish by U.S. standards that you can hardly even laugh. What the U.S. does is the kind of thing I described in Italy in 1948. Case after case like that, not hacking or spreading rumors in the media, but saying, look, we’re going to starve you to death or kill you or destroy you unless you vote the way we want. I mean that’s what we do.</p>
<p>Take the famous 9/11. Let’s think about it for a minute. It was a pretty awful terrorist act. It could have been a lot worse. Now let’s suppose that instead of the plane being downed in Pennsylvania by passengers, suppose it had hit its target, which was probably the White House. Now suppose it had killed the president. Suppose that plans had been set for a military coup to take over the government. And right away, immediately 50,000 people were killed, 700,000 tortured. A bunch of economists were brought in from Afghanistan, let’s call them the “Kandahar Boys,” who very quickly destroyed the economy, and established a dictatorship which devastated the country. That would have been a lot worse than 9/11. It happened: the first 9/11, it happened on September 11, 1973, in Chile. We did it. Was that interfering or hacking a party? This record is all over the world, constantly overthrowing governments, invading, forcing people to follow what we call democracy, as in the cases I mentioned. As I say, if every charge is accurate, it’s a joke, and I’m sure half the world is collapsing in laughter about this, because people outside the United States know it. You don’t have to tell people in Chile about the first 9/11.</p>
<p>Gibbs: One of the surprises of the post-Cold War era is the persistence of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and other U.S.-led alliances. These alliances were created during the Cold War mainly or exclusively for containing the claimed Soviet threat. In 1991, the USSR disappeared from the map, but the anti-Soviet alliance systems persisted and, in fact, expanded. How do we account for the persistence and expansion of NATO? What in your view is the purpose of NATO after the Cold War?</p>
<p>Chomsky: We have official answers to that. It’s a very interesting question, which I was planning to talk about but didn’t have time. So thanks. It’s a very interesting question. For 50 years, we heard NATO is necessary to save Western Europe from the Russian hordes, you know the slave state, stuff I was talking about. In 1990-91, no Russian hordes. Okay, what happens? Well, there are actually visions of the future system that were presented. One was Gorbachev. He called for a Eurasian security system, with no military blocs. He called it a Common European Home. No military blocs, no Warsaw Pact, no NATO, with centers of power in Brussels, Moscow, Ankara, maybe Vladivostok, other places. Just an integrated security system with no conflicts.</p>
<p>That was one. Now the other vision was presented by George Bush, this is the “statesman,” Bush I, and James Baker, his secretary of state. There’s very good scholarship on this incidentally. We really know a lot about what happened, now that all the documents are out. Gorbachev said that he would agree to the unification of Germany, and even adherence of Germany to NATO, which was quite a concession, if NATO didn’t move to East Germany. And Bush and Baker promised verbally, that’s critical, verbally that NATO would not expand “one inch to the east,” which meant East Germany. Nobody was talking about anything farther at the time. They would not expand one inch to the east. Now that was a verbal promise. It was never written. NATO immediately expanded to East Germany. Gorbachev complained. He was told, look, there’s nothing on paper. People didn’t actually say it, but the implication was, look, if you are dumb enough to take faith in a gentleman’s agreement with us, that’s your problem. NATO expanded to East Germany.</p>
<p>There’s very interesting work, if you want to look into it by a young scholar in Texas named Joshua Shifrinson. It appeared in International Security, which is one of the prestige journals, published by MIT.[4] He goes through the documentary record very carefully, and he makes a pretty convincing case that Bush and Baker were purposely deceiving Gorbachev. The scholarship has been divided on that. Maybe they just weren’t clear or something. But if you read it, I think it’s quite a convincing case, that they were purposely setting it up to deceive Gorbachev.OK, NATO expanded to East Berlin and East Germany. Under Clinton, NATO expanded further, to the former Russian satellites. In 2008, NATO formally made an offer to Ukraine to join NATO. That’s unbelievable. I mean, Ukraine is the geopolitical heartland of Russian concern, quite aside from historical connections, population and so on. Right at the beginning of all of this, serious senior statesmen, people like Kennan for example and others warned that the expansion of NATO to the east is going to cause a disaster.[5] I mean, it’s like having the Warsaw Pact on the Mexican border. It’s inconceivable. And others, senior people warned about this, but policymakers didn’t care. Just go ahead.</p>
<p>Right now, where do we stand? Well, right at the Russian border, both sides have been taking provocative actions, both sides are building up military forces. NATO forces are carrying out maneuvers hundreds of yards from the Russian border, the Russian jets are buzzing American jets. Anything could blow up in a minute. In a minute, you know. Any incident could instantly blow up. Both sides are modernizing and increasing their military systems, including nuclear systems.</p>
<p>So what’s the purpose of NATO? Well, actually, we have an official answer. It isn’t publicized much, but a couple of years ago, the secretary-general of NATO made a formal statement explaining the purpose of NATO in the post-Cold War world is to control global energy systems, pipelines and sea lanes. That means it’s a global system, and of course he didn’t say it, it’s an intervention force under U.S. command, as we’ve seen in case after case. So that’s NATO. So what happened to the years of defending Europe from the Russian hordes? Well, you can go back to NSC-68,[6] and see how serious that was. So that’s what we’re living with.</p>
<p>Right now, the threat to our existence is Muslim terrorists from seven states, who have never had a single terrorist act. About half the population believes that. I mean you look back at American history and American culture, it’s pretty striking. I mean this has been the safest country in the world forever, and the most frightened country in the world. That’s a large part of the source of the gun culture. You have to have a gun when you go into Starbucks, because who knows what’s going to happen. It just doesn’t happen in other countries.</p>
<p>There’s something deeply rooted in American culture. You can pretty much identify what it was. You take a look at the history. Remember, the U.S. is not a global power until pretty recently. It was internal conquest. You had to defend yourself against what the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, an enlightened figure, called the attacks of the “merciless Indian savages,” whose known way of warfare was torture and destruction. Jefferson wasn’t a fool. He knew that it was the merciless English savages who were carrying out these acts. That is in the Declaration of Independence, recited piously every July Fourth, the merciless Indian savages with no reason at all were suddenly attacking us. I mean, you can imagine the reasons. That’s one. Also, you had a slave population. You had to protect yourself against them. You needed guns. One consequence of that was in Southern culture, possession of a gun became kind of a sign of manhood, not just because of slaves but other white men. If you had a gun, you’re not going to push me around. You know, I’m not one of those guys you can kick in the face.</p>
<p>There was another element, which was kind of interesting. In the mid to late nineteenth century, the gun manufacturers recognized that they had a limited market. Remember that this is a capitalist society. You’ve got to expand your market. They were selling guns to the military. That’s a pretty limited market. What about all the rest of the people? So what started was all kinds of fantastic stories about Wyatt Earp and the gunmen and the Wild West, how exciting it was to have these guys with guns defending themselves against all sorts of things.</p>
<p>I grew up in that, when I was a kid. My friends and I used to play cowboys and Indians. We were cowboys killing the Indians, following the Wild West stories. All of this combined into a very strange culture, which is frightened. You look at the polls today, I think half the population supports this ban on these dangerous immigrants who are going to come in and do something, who knows what. And, meanwhile, the countries that really have been involved in terrorism, they’re out. It’s kind of like I think it was Oklahoma banning Sharia law. Now there’s probably 50 Muslims in Oklahoma, and they have to ban Sharia law, you know. This terror which is all over the country is constantly incited. The Russians were part of NSC-68, is a dramatic case. And that case, like most propaganda, wasn’t totally fabricated. The Russians were doing a lot of rotten things, you can point to them. But the idea that if you consider what Hans Morgenthau called “abuse of reality,” the picture of the world was almost the opposite of what they presented. But somehow this sells and is continually repeated, at least in this kind of situation.</p>
<p>Gibbs: During the Cold War, the political left generally opposed military intervention. After 1991, however, the anti-interventionist movement collapsed and in its place has emerged the idea of humanitarian interventionism, which celebrates intervention as a defense of human rights. Military actions in the Balkans, Iraq, Libya have all been presented as acts of humanitarianism, which aimed to liberate oppressed peoples, and these interventions were at least initially popular among political liberals. Proposals for augmented U.S. intervention in Syria often invoke the humanitarian principle. What is your view of humanitarian intervention?</p>
<p>Chomsky: Well, I don’t quite see it like that. Now, if you look back to the anti-intervention movements, what were they? Let’s take the Vietnam War – the biggest crime since the Second World War. Those of you who are old enough will remember what happened. You couldn’t be opposed to the war for years. The mainstream liberal intellectuals were enthusiastically in support of the war. In Boston, a liberal city where I was, we literally couldn’t have a public demonstration without it being violently broken up, with the liberal press applauding, until late 1966. By that time, there were hundreds of thousands of American troops rampaging in South Vietnam. South Vietnam had been practically destroyed. The leading, the most respected Vietnam historian, military historian Bernard Fall[7] – he was a hawk incidentally, but he cared for the Vietnamese – he said it wasn’t clear to him whether Vietnam could survive as a historical and cultural entity under the most massive attack that any region that size had ever suffered. He was talking about South Vietnam, incidentally. By that time, we did begin to get some protests. But not from liberal intellectuals. They never opposed the war.</p>
<p>In fact, it’s pretty dramatic when you get to 1975, very revealing, the war ends. Everybody had to write something about the war, what it meant. And you also had polls of public opinion, and they’re dramatically different. So if you look at the writings of intellectuals, there are two kinds. One said, “Look, if we fought harder, we could have won.” You know, the stab in the back. But the others, who were way at the left, people like Anthony Lewis of The New York Times, way out in left stream, his view in 1975 was the Vietnam War began with blundering efforts to do good. But by 1969, it was clear that it was a disaster, that was too costly to us. We could not bring democracy to South Vietnam at a cost that we were willing to accept. So it was a disaster. That is the left extreme.</p>
<p>Take a look at public opinion. About 70 percent of the population, in the polls, said the war was fundamentally wrong and immoral, not a mistake. And that attitude lasted as long as polls were taken in the early ‘80s. The pollsters don’t ask reasons. They just give numbers. So why did the people think it was fundamentally wrong and immoral? The guys who ran the polls, John E. Rielly, a professor at the University of Chicago, a liberal professor, he said what that means is that people thought too many Americans had been, were being killed. Maybe. Another possibility is they didn’t like the fact that we were carrying out the worst crime since the Second World War. But that’s so inconceivable that wasn’t even offered as a possible reason.Now what happened in the following years? Well, I think that, among the educated classes, it stayed the same. You talk about humanitarian intervention. It’s like Vietnam was a humanitarian intervention. Among the public, it’s quite different. Take the Iraq War. It’s the second worst crime after the Second World War. It’s the first time in history, in the history of imperialism, there were huge demonstrations, before the war was officially launched. Actually, it was already under way. But before it was officially launched, there were huge demonstrations everywhere. I think it had an effect. The public still was split.</p>
<p>And [after Vietnam], the type of interventions that are carried out are designed so as not to elicit public reactions. In fact, it was stated early in the first Bush [presidency], Bush I, in one of their documents they pointed out in the future, U.S. wars are going to be against much weaker enemies. And they have to be won quickly and decisively before a popular reaction develops. And if you take a look, that’s what’s done. Look at Panama, for instance, over a couple of days. And Kosovo, no American troops. You wrote a great book about it.[8] But I’m not convinced that it’s different from what it was.</p>
<p>Gibbs: With the end of the Cold War, there has been a decline of activism in the U.S. and elsewhere around the issue of nuclear disarmament. Once again, this state of affairs differs from the period of the Cold War, when there was a mass movement that opposed nuclear weapons – recall the Freeze movement from the 1980s — but this movement largely disappeared after 1991. The danger of nuclear war remains as high as ever, but there is little public engagement on this issue, it would seem. How would you explain the disappearance of the anti-nuclear movement?</p>
<p>Chomsky: Well, that’s absolutely right. The peak of anti-nuclear popular activism was in the early ‘80s, when there was a huge movement. And the Reagan administration decided to defuse it and partially succeeded, by presenting the illusion of Star Wars, SDI, that somehow we’re going to eliminate nuclear weapons. The Reagan administration picked up the rhetoric of the anti-nuclear movement. They said “Yeah, you’re right.” We have to eliminate nuclear weapons. And the way we’re going to do it is by having SDI, Star Wars, the Strategic Defense Initiative, which prevent nuclear weapons from impacting. Well, that did defuse the movement.</p>
<p>And when the Russians collapsed, and it looked like as if maybe we can reduce the nuclear tensions. And for a while they actually were reduced. There was a reduction of nuclear weapons. They really were reduced on both sides. Various steps were taken. Nowhere near enough, but some of them were taken.</p>
<p>On the other hand, it’s very important to understand the official position of the United States. You should read it. So in 1995, this is Clinton, a very important document came out, still classified, but large parts of it were declassified. It’s called “Essentials of Post-Cold War Deterrence.”[9] What does post-Cold War deterrence mean? Deterrence means use of nuclear weapons. This was released by the Strategic Command, which was in charge of nuclear weapons planning and running nuclear weapons. I wrote about it when it came out and have been writing about it since. Since then, I’ve never seen a reference to it. But it is an amazing document. Here’s what it says basically: It says we have to maintain the right of first strike, the right of the first use of nuclear weapons, even against non-nuclear powers. Nuclear weapons, they point out, are really constantly used, because they cast a shadow over other military actions. In other words, when people know we are ready to use nuclear weapons, they’re going to back off if we do something aggressive. So basically, nuclear weapons are always being used.</p>
<p>Now that’s a point that Dan Ellsberg has made for years. He said it’s kind of like if you and I go into a grocery store to rob it, and I have a gun. The guy may give you the money in the cash register. I’m using the gun even if I don’t shoot. Well that’s nuclear weapons — essential to post-war deterrence — they cast a shadow over everything. Then, it goes on to say that we must present a national persona of being irrational and vindictive, because that’s going to terrify people. And then, they’ll back off. And this is not Trump, this is Clinton. It’s not Nixon, you know. We have to be irrational and vindictive, because that’s going to frighten people. And we have to maintain this for years. And then we’ll be able to carry out the actions that we want to carry out.</p>
<p>That’s our nuclear weapons strategy, as of the early post-Cold War years. And I think this is a real failure of the intellectual community, including scholarship and the media. It’s not like you had headlines all over the place. And it’s not secret, the documents are there. And I think that’s probably the right picture. You know, people talk about Nixon’s “madman theory.” We don’t really know much about that. It was in memoirs, by somebody else.[10] But this is real. This is the real mad man theory. We have to be irrational and vindictive, so people don’t know what we’re up to. This is not Trump and Bannon. It’s from the Clinton era.</p>
<p>Gibbs: I think we have time for one more question. In popular discussion, the phrase “national security” has come to mean security against military threats almost exclusively. This narrative downgrades the significance of non-military threats, such as climate change, antibiotic resistant bacteria, or viral epidemics. It would seem that there is an imbalance between perceived military threats, which receive overwhelming governmental funding and press attention on the one hand, and non-military threats, which receive relatively little on the other hand. How do we account for the apparent overemphasis on military threats?</p>
<p>Chomsky: Well, [with] military threats, you can see them actually. You can imagine it. People don’t think about it enough. But if you think about it for a minute, you can see that a nuclear attack could be the end of everything. These other threats are kind of slow. Maybe we won’t see them next year. Maybe the science is uncertain, maybe we don’t have to worry about it. Climate change is the worst, but there’s others.</p>
<p>Take pandemics. There could easily be a severe pandemic. A lot of that comes from something we don’t pay much attention to: Eating meat. The meat production industry, the industrial production of meat, uses an immense amount of antibiotics. I don’t remember the exact figure, it’s probably like half the antibiotics. Well, antibiotics have an effect: They lead to mutations that make them ineffective. We’re now running out of antibiotics that deal with the threat of rapidly mutating bacteria. A lot of that just comes from the meat production industry. Well, do we worry about it? Well, we ought to be. You go into a hospital now, it’s dangerous. We can get diseases that can’t be dealt with, that are moving around the hospital. A lot of that traces back to industrial meat production. These are really serious threats, all over the place.</p>
<p>Take something you really don’t think about: plastics in the ocean. I mean plastics in the ocean have an enormous ecological effect. When geologists announced the beginning of a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene, humans destroying the environment, one of the main things they pointed to is the use of plastics in the earth. We don’t think about it, but it has a tremendous effect. But these are things you don’t see right in front of your eyes. You need to think about them a little, to see what the consequences are. It’s easy to put them aside, and the media don’t talk about them. Other things are more important. How am I going to put food on the table tomorrow? That’s what I’ve got to worry about, and so on. It’s very serious, but it’s hard to bring out the enormity of these issues, when they do not have the dramatic character of something you can show in the movies, with a nuclear weapons falling and everything disappears.</p>
<p>Professor Chomsky approved this transcript for publication. The interview is presented in full, with only very slight editing for style.</p>
<p>[1] For the recent opinions of Princeton University nuclear weapons specialist Bruce G. Blair, see Blair, “ <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/opinion/trump-and-the-nuclear-keys.html" type="external">Trump and the Nuclear Keys</a>,” New York Times, Oct. 12, 2016.</p>
<p>[2] Note that Michael T. Flynn resigned as national security adviser on Feb. 13, 2017, several days after this interview took place.</p>
<p>[3] See Solomon, “ <a href="http://original.antiwar.com/solomon/2016/12/20/urgent-progressives-stop-fueling-anti-russia-frenzy/" type="external">Urgent to Progressives: Stop Fueling Anti-Russia Frenzy</a>,” Antiwar.com, Dec. 21, 2016; Scahill, “ <a href="https://theintercept.com/2017/01/25/seymour-hersh-blasts-media-for-uncritically-promoting-russian-hacking-story/" type="external">Seymour Hersh Blasts Media for Uncritically Reporting Russian Hacking Story</a>,” The Intercept, Jan. 25, 2017.</p>
<p>[4] The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion,” International Security 40, no. 4, 2016.</p>
<p>[5] On George F. Kennan’s warning about the dangers of NATO expansion, see Thomas L. Friedman, “F <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/opinion/foreign-affairs-now-a-word-from-x.html" type="external">oreign Affairs: Now a Word from X</a>,” New York Times, May 2, 1998.</p>
<p>[6] Here, Chomsky references the National Security Council memorandum NSC-68, one of the key documents of the Cold War. This document was the topic of Chomsky’s lecture, which preceded the interview. The document text is now fully declassified and available online. See “ <a href="https://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/coldwar/documents/pdf/10-1.pdf" type="external">A Report to the National Security Council – NSC 68</a>,” April 14, 1950, made available through the Harry S. Truman Presidential Library.</p>
<p>[7] Regarding Bernard Fall’s writings on Vietnam, see Fall, Last Reflections on a War. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1967.</p>
<p>[8] The book Chomsky references with regard to the Kosovo intervention is David N. Gibbs, “First Do No Harm: Humanitarian Intervention and the Destruction of Yugoslavia.” Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press, 2009.</p>
<p>[9] The full text of this declassified document is now available online. See U.S. Department of Defense, Strategic Command, “ <a href="http://www.nukestrat.com/us/stratcom/SAGessentials.PDF" type="external">Essentials of Post-Cold War Deterrence</a>,” 1995 [no exact date indicated], made available through provided by the Federation of American Scientists, Nuclear Information Project.</p>
<p>[10] The idea that President Richard Nixon subscribed to a “madman” theory of international relations first appeared in the memoir by former Nixon aide H. R. Haldeman, in “Haldeman and Joseph DiMona, The Ends of Power.” New York: Times Books, 1978, p. 98.</p> | true | 4 | david gibbs alternetthe following transcript recent public interview university arizona linguist political commentator noam chomsky dr david n gibbsdavid gibbs main issue everyones minds inauguration donald trump president bulletin atomic scientists emphasized extreme danger trump poses due augmented risk nuclear war uncontrolled climate change inauguration bulletins metaphoric clock repositioned two half minutes midnight midnight signifying catastrophe agree bulletin regarding alleged dangers posed trump presidency noam chomsky one dangers unquestionable two existential threats threats termination species basically species one climate change think theres basis discussion trump inconsistent many things twitter hes place consistent nothing climate change except make worse hes speaking whole republican party whole leadership already impact worse impact well talk next week ways going easy regard nuclear weapons kind hard say hes said lots things mentioned national security experts terrified theyre terrified personality statements read people like say bruce blair1 one leading sober knowledgeable specialists says look statements map personality frightening hes complete megalomaniac never know hes going react learned example hed lost election three million votes instant reaction insanity know three five million illegal immigrants somehow organized incredible fashion vote little issue miss universe whatever may hes completely unpredictable hell go outer space guru steve bannon worse hes much scarier probably knows hes years theres case case narrow decisions made whether launch nuclear weapons serious cases guy going vaunted negotiating skills fail somebody doesnt says going say okay well nuke done remember major nuclear war first strike destroys country attacks known years first strike major power likely cause whats called nuclear winter leads global famine years everythings basically gone survivors straggling around could knows comments interpreted potentially reducing threat nuclear war major threat right right russian border notice mexican border russian border serious made various statements moving toward reducing tensions accommodating russian concerns hand balance expanding nuclear forces add socalled depleted military already powerful rest world combined attack syria send forces syria start bombing knows could next michael flynn former national security adviser2 reaction iranian missile test day frightening missile test illadvised shouldnt done violation international law international agreements shouldnt done reaction suggested maybe going go war retaliation would dont know whats going happen next everything could blow crazy ban seven states cant accept immigrants almost every analyst points obvious increases threat terror lays basis terror like atrocities abu ghraib bagram guantanamo theyre fabulous recruiting techniques al qaeda isis everyone knows ban whole muslim world ban seven states seven states responsible single terrorist act seven banned leave ones really responsible like saudi arabia center propaganda funding radical islamic jihadism well cant touch business interests also oil forth theres actually article washington post dont know whether tongue cheek said criterion list banned states trump doesnt business interests maybe kind wild unpredictability megalomania thinskinned craziness really worried statements climate change theres nothing say hes perfectly straightforward gibbs let us turn role media reporting alleged russian interference us electoral process mainstream journalists called trump puppet russia modern version manchurian candidate others criticized media accepting unsubstantiated claims russian influence reporting claims facts norman solomon serge halimi example stated press reporting issue amounts mass hysteria reminiscent mccarthy era seymour hersh called media reporting russia outrageous3 view situation chomsky guess world collapsing laughter suppose charges true mean every single one amateurish us standards hardly even laugh us kind thing described italy 1948 case case like hacking spreading rumors media saying look going starve death kill destroy unless vote way want mean thats take famous 911 lets think minute pretty awful terrorist act could lot worse lets suppose instead plane downed pennsylvania passengers suppose hit target probably white house suppose killed president suppose plans set military coup take government right away immediately 50000 people killed 700000 tortured bunch economists brought afghanistan lets call kandahar boys quickly destroyed economy established dictatorship devastated country would lot worse 911 happened first 911 happened september 11 1973 chile interfering hacking party record world constantly overthrowing governments invading forcing people follow call democracy cases mentioned say every charge accurate joke im sure half world collapsing laughter people outside united states know dont tell people chile first 911 gibbs one surprises postcold war era persistence north atlantic treaty organization usled alliances alliances created cold war mainly exclusively containing claimed soviet threat 1991 ussr disappeared map antisoviet alliance systems persisted fact expanded account persistence expansion nato view purpose nato cold war chomsky official answers interesting question planning talk didnt time thanks interesting question 50 years heard nato necessary save western europe russian hordes know slave state stuff talking 199091 russian hordes okay happens well actually visions future system presented one gorbachev called eurasian security system military blocs called common european home military blocs warsaw pact nato centers power brussels moscow ankara maybe vladivostok places integrated security system conflicts one vision presented george bush statesman bush james baker secretary state theres good scholarship incidentally really know lot happened documents gorbachev said would agree unification germany even adherence germany nato quite concession nato didnt move east germany bush baker promised verbally thats critical verbally nato would expand one inch east meant east germany nobody talking anything farther time would expand one inch east verbal promise never written nato immediately expanded east germany gorbachev complained told look theres nothing paper people didnt actually say implication look dumb enough take faith gentlemans agreement us thats problem nato expanded east germany theres interesting work want look young scholar texas named joshua shifrinson appeared international security one prestige journals published mit4 goes documentary record carefully makes pretty convincing case bush baker purposely deceiving gorbachev scholarship divided maybe werent clear something read think quite convincing case purposely setting deceive gorbachevok nato expanded east berlin east germany clinton nato expanded former russian satellites 2008 nato formally made offer ukraine join nato thats unbelievable mean ukraine geopolitical heartland russian concern quite aside historical connections population right beginning serious senior statesmen people like kennan example others warned expansion nato east going cause disaster5 mean like warsaw pact mexican border inconceivable others senior people warned policymakers didnt care go ahead right stand well right russian border sides taking provocative actions sides building military forces nato forces carrying maneuvers hundreds yards russian border russian jets buzzing american jets anything could blow minute minute know incident could instantly blow sides modernizing increasing military systems including nuclear systems whats purpose nato well actually official answer isnt publicized much couple years ago secretarygeneral nato made formal statement explaining purpose nato postcold war world control global energy systems pipelines sea lanes means global system course didnt say intervention force us command weve seen case case thats nato happened years defending europe russian hordes well go back nsc686 see serious thats living right threat existence muslim terrorists seven states never single terrorist act half population believes mean look back american history american culture pretty striking mean safest country world forever frightened country world thats large part source gun culture gun go starbucks knows whats going happen doesnt happen countries theres something deeply rooted american culture pretty much identify take look history remember us global power pretty recently internal conquest defend declaration independence thomas jefferson enlightened figure called attacks merciless indian savages whose known way warfare torture destruction jefferson wasnt fool knew merciless english savages carrying acts declaration independence recited piously every july fourth merciless indian savages reason suddenly attacking us mean imagine reasons thats one also slave population protect needed guns one consequence southern culture possession gun became kind sign manhood slaves white men gun youre going push around know im one guys kick face another element kind interesting mid late nineteenth century gun manufacturers recognized limited market remember capitalist society youve got expand market selling guns military thats pretty limited market rest people started kinds fantastic stories wyatt earp gunmen wild west exciting guys guns defending sorts things grew kid friends used play cowboys indians cowboys killing indians following wild west stories combined strange culture frightened look polls today think half population supports ban dangerous immigrants going come something knows meanwhile countries really involved terrorism theyre kind like think oklahoma banning sharia law theres probably 50 muslims oklahoma ban sharia law know terror country constantly incited russians part nsc68 dramatic case case like propaganda wasnt totally fabricated russians lot rotten things point idea consider hans morgenthau called abuse reality picture world almost opposite presented somehow sells continually repeated least kind situation gibbs cold war political left generally opposed military intervention 1991 however antiinterventionist movement collapsed place emerged idea humanitarian interventionism celebrates intervention defense human rights military actions balkans iraq libya presented acts humanitarianism aimed liberate oppressed peoples interventions least initially popular among political liberals proposals augmented us intervention syria often invoke humanitarian principle view humanitarian intervention chomsky well dont quite see like look back antiintervention movements lets take vietnam war biggest crime since second world war old enough remember happened couldnt opposed war years mainstream liberal intellectuals enthusiastically support war boston liberal city literally couldnt public demonstration without violently broken liberal press applauding late 1966 time hundreds thousands american troops rampaging south vietnam south vietnam practically destroyed leading respected vietnam historian military historian bernard fall7 hawk incidentally cared vietnamese said wasnt clear whether vietnam could survive historical cultural entity massive attack region size ever suffered talking south vietnam incidentally time begin get protests liberal intellectuals never opposed war fact pretty dramatic get 1975 revealing war ends everybody write something war meant also polls public opinion theyre dramatically different look writings intellectuals two kinds one said look fought harder could know stab back others way left people like anthony lewis new york times way left stream view 1975 vietnam war began blundering efforts good 1969 clear disaster costly us could bring democracy south vietnam cost willing accept disaster left extreme take look public opinion 70 percent population polls said war fundamentally wrong immoral mistake attitude lasted long polls taken early 80s pollsters dont ask reasons give numbers people think fundamentally wrong immoral guys ran polls john e rielly professor university chicago liberal professor said means people thought many americans killed maybe another possibility didnt like fact carrying worst crime since second world war thats inconceivable wasnt even offered possible reasonnow happened following years well think among educated classes stayed talk humanitarian intervention like vietnam humanitarian intervention among public quite different take iraq war second worst crime second world war first time history history imperialism huge demonstrations war officially launched actually already way officially launched huge demonstrations everywhere think effect public still split vietnam type interventions carried designed elicit public reactions fact stated early first bush presidency bush one documents pointed future us wars going much weaker enemies quickly decisively popular reaction develops take look thats whats done look panama instance couple days kosovo american troops wrote great book it8 im convinced different gibbs end cold war decline activism us elsewhere around issue nuclear disarmament state affairs differs period cold war mass movement opposed nuclear weapons recall freeze movement 1980s movement largely disappeared 1991 danger nuclear war remains high ever little public engagement issue would seem would explain disappearance antinuclear movement chomsky well thats absolutely right peak antinuclear popular activism early 80s huge movement reagan administration decided defuse partially succeeded presenting illusion star wars sdi somehow going eliminate nuclear weapons reagan administration picked rhetoric antinuclear movement said yeah youre right eliminate nuclear weapons way going sdi star wars strategic defense initiative prevent nuclear weapons impacting well defuse movement russians collapsed looked like maybe reduce nuclear tensions actually reduced reduction nuclear weapons really reduced sides various steps taken nowhere near enough taken hand important understand official position united states read 1995 clinton important document came still classified large parts declassified called essentials postcold war deterrence9 postcold war deterrence mean deterrence means use nuclear weapons released strategic command charge nuclear weapons planning running nuclear weapons wrote came writing since since ive never seen reference amazing document heres says basically says maintain right first strike right first use nuclear weapons even nonnuclear powers nuclear weapons point really constantly used cast shadow military actions words people know ready use nuclear weapons theyre going back something aggressive basically nuclear weapons always used thats point dan ellsberg made years said kind like go grocery store rob gun guy may give money cash register im using gun even dont shoot well thats nuclear weapons essential postwar deterrence cast shadow everything goes say must present national persona irrational vindictive thats going terrify people theyll back trump clinton nixon know irrational vindictive thats going frighten people maintain years well able carry actions want carry thats nuclear weapons strategy early postcold war years think real failure intellectual community including scholarship media like headlines place secret documents think thats probably right picture know people talk nixons madman theory dont really know much memoirs somebody else10 real real mad man theory irrational vindictive people dont know trump bannon clinton era gibbs think time one question popular discussion phrase national security come mean security military threats almost exclusively narrative downgrades significance nonmilitary threats climate change antibiotic resistant bacteria viral epidemics would seem imbalance perceived military threats receive overwhelming governmental funding press attention one hand nonmilitary threats receive relatively little hand account apparent overemphasis military threats chomsky well military threats see actually imagine people dont think enough think minute see nuclear attack could end everything threats kind slow maybe wont see next year maybe science uncertain maybe dont worry climate change worst theres others take pandemics could easily severe pandemic lot comes something dont pay much attention eating meat meat production industry industrial production meat uses immense amount antibiotics dont remember exact figure probably like half antibiotics well antibiotics effect lead mutations make ineffective running antibiotics deal threat rapidly mutating bacteria lot comes meat production industry well worry well ought go hospital dangerous get diseases cant dealt moving around hospital lot traces back industrial meat production really serious threats place take something really dont think plastics ocean mean plastics ocean enormous ecological effect geologists announced beginning new geological epoch anthropocene humans destroying environment one main things pointed use plastics earth dont think tremendous effect things dont see right front eyes need think little see consequences easy put aside media dont talk things important going put food table tomorrow thats ive got worry serious hard bring enormity issues dramatic character something show movies nuclear weapons falling everything disappears professor chomsky approved transcript publication interview presented full slight editing style 1 recent opinions princeton university nuclear weapons specialist bruce g blair see blair trump nuclear keys new york times oct 12 2016 2 note michael flynn resigned national security adviser feb 13 2017 several days interview took place 3 see solomon urgent progressives stop fueling antirussia frenzy antiwarcom dec 21 2016 scahill seymour hersh blasts media uncritically reporting russian hacking story intercept jan 25 2017 4 end cold war us offer limit nato expansion international security 40 4 2016 5 george f kennans warning dangers nato expansion see thomas l friedman f oreign affairs word x new york times may 2 1998 6 chomsky references national security council memorandum nsc68 one key documents cold war document topic chomskys lecture preceded interview document text fully declassified available online see report national security council nsc 68 april 14 1950 made available harry truman presidential library 7 regarding bernard falls writings vietnam see fall last reflections war garden city ny doubleday 1967 8 book chomsky references regard kosovo intervention david n gibbs first harm humanitarian intervention destruction yugoslavia nashville tn vanderbilt university press 2009 9 full text declassified document available online see us department defense strategic command essentials postcold war deterrence 1995 exact date indicated made available provided federation american scientists nuclear information project 10 idea president richard nixon subscribed madman theory international relations first appeared memoir former nixon aide h r haldeman haldeman joseph dimona ends power new york times books 1978 p 98 | 2,626 |
<p>Vijay Prashad is the Executive Director of the Tricontinental Institute for Social Research and is also chief editor of LeftWord Books. Vija He is the author of over 18 books among them The Death of a Nation and the Future of the Arab Revolution (University of California Press, 2016).</p>
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p /> LYNN FRIES, TRNN PRODUCER: Welcome to The Real News. I'm Lynn Fries in Geneva.
<p />
<p />In this report, we take a look into the battle for a new policy framework of trade and investment rules, rules with an agenda, including the needs of the world's people and the planet's ability to sustain those needs. Specifically, we explore all this in relation to North-South trade negotiations and the operations of multinational corporations.
<p />
<p />The Real News invited historian and author Vijay Prashad to talk to us about all this. Professor Prashad is Edward Said Chair at the American University of Beirut, Lebanon. Among the many books he's authored are The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South and Arab Spring, Libyan Winter. He writes regularly for The Hindu, Frontline, and CounterPunch.
<p />
<p />Vijay Prashad was recently keynote speaker at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development Public Symposium. We met Vijay here in Geneva at the UNCTAD event.
<p />
<p />Vijay Prashad, thank you for joining us.
<p />
<p />VIJAY PRASHAD, PROF. INTERNATIONAL STUDIES, TRINITY COLLEGE: My pleasure. Thank you so much.
<p />
<p />FRIES: In his keynote address on trade and investment rules, our guest made the point that growth is not a neutral process. And so we open our conversation with what this tells us about trade rules.
<p />
<p />PRASHAD: Look, the question is people talk about the global economy. They talk about the need for, say, trade treaties. They talk about the importance of having some kind of global compact. But what's not recognized is what these things mean.
<p />
<p />So the first issue is when people talk about the global economy. What they mean is how everybody else's economic activity intersects with the activity of, say, the major countries of the world, how it intersects essentially with multinational corporations, and essentially how that economic activity is legible in the logic of capitalism.
<p />
<p />So when they start talking about creating treaties or rules that govern trade and development and economic activity in general, what people have to recognize is that the economy itself, firstly, is not neutral, and secondly, the rules are not framed in a neutral manner.
<p />
<p />FRIES: Post World War&#160;II, in 1947, as part of an international effort towards economic recovery and development, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, GATT, was established as the first multilateral instrument governing trade, commercial relations. Its stated purpose was to ensure "that economic warfare and beggar-my-neighbor policies that had deepened the Great Depression and stoked the tensions of war would never recur."
<p />
<p />From 1948, GATT was the only multilateral instrument governing international trade. And as trade liberalized under GATT, in the 1950s and 1960s transnational corporations of the advanced economies of the North expanded and became huge conglomerates. Also from the 1960s onwards, newly independent developing nations sought to find their place in the world as self-sufficient productive economies after colonial rule, and so joined GATT with its postwar legacy of international cooperation.
<p />
<p />GATT, however, began to loose ground as an institutional framework for nations of the South to find mutual benefit in an agenda including its need to develop it own structures of production and its own scientific and technological capacity to compete.
<p />
<p />PRASHAD: Somebody has framed the rules. In the 1970s, from the 1970s into the '80s there was a series of specific interventions made by the North. You know, when the Group of Seven countries were created in 1973-74, they had a specific agenda. They include countries like the United States, Britain, Italy, Japan, Germany, etc. They had a very specific agenda: to move the so called economy--this arrangement of how people, you know, exchange goods, how they produce goods, etc.--in their interest.
<p />
<p />So, for instance, because they had understood that capitalism was moving in the direction of so-called offshoring--a whole series of technological developments had presented themselves--you know, container ships, satellites for communication, easy ways to cut up factories and have bits of factories be in different countries, you know, what today is called, as if it's a new thing, the global commodity chain--in other words, they disarticulated or broke up production. You know, firms were already doing that in the 1970s. So the Group of Seven countries, seeing that this is what was occurring, felt they needed to harness rules that gave the Group of Seven states and their populations advantages over the rest of the world. And indeed that's what they did.
<p />
<p />I mean, when they launched the big round of GATT, the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, the round that was launched in Punta del Este, Uruguay, that round brought up new issues, one of which, a very important issue, was intellectual property rights. You know, you may ask: what does intellectual property rights have to do with rules for the economy that was emerging? Actually, it was central for the North, because the way the North understood things is if production lines are going to be outsourced from the North, if they're going to be set up in Mexico, Indonesia, East Asia, etc., how does the North protect, you know, its ability to thrive and grow if they were going to lose production to other places? Well, what they did was they created an architecture, a regime of intellectual property where the North was able to collect rent of goods that were produced elsewhere.
<p />
<p />So for instance, if I'm Nike, which actually owns no factories anywhere itself, Nike will remain in the United States in Oregon, Nike will design shoes, but it will be produced outside the United States, subcontracted along the so-called value chain, in Indonesia, in Malaysia, etc. The shoes are sold, and Nike gets a rent of every shoe sold because they have the intellectual property right, they have a monopoly right over that kind of shoe. So Nike essentially collects rent of intellectual properties secured through international trade treaties.
<p />
<p />So an international trade treaty isn't just some neutral process.
<p />
<p />FRIES: The postwar GATT dealt with issues of market access. As the WTO replaced GATT, new rules for trade and investment were put in place. These rules granted foreign capital international protections over their investment, intellectual property, and services, etc., along with liberalized market access. Framed by negotiators of the North, the needs of transnational corporations were well served in a new growth model and its underlying assumption that foreign direct investment is the motor of growth to create jobs and lift millions out of poverty.
<p />
<p />PRASHAD: So today when there's a discussion about treaties, about economic growth, etc., these discussion should not be absent the context. I mean, the context is a real one. The context is the context of the rules that had been created which worked against the interests of the South and protected the North's ability for their economies to grow. And by the way, that's what we call jobless growth, because in the North you will have growth from the collecting of rents, you know, on the intellectual property upon which you have a monopoly, but you don't create jobs in your own country. So in the United States or in Northern Europe you can have high growth rates, the GDP will grow, but you don't have jobs for the population. And that was called in the 1990s jobless growth.
<p />
<p />Jobless growth wasn't an accidental product. It was indeed how the rules were framed, to enable firms to take advantage of low wages elsewhere and yet, you know, insist that those firms are able to repatriate profits back to the North. And that was the essence of jobless growth.
<p />
<p />FRIES: In this segment, we provided some historic context to trade rules. In our next segment, we take this forward into some current dynamics. Please join us for part two of our series with Vijay Prashad.
<p />
<p />Our thanks to Vijay Prashad. And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.
<p />
<p />End
<p />
<p />DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy. | true | 4 | vijay prashad executive director tricontinental institute social research also chief editor leftword books vija author 18 books among death nation future arab revolution university california press 2016 lynn fries trnn producer welcome real news im lynn fries geneva report take look battle new policy framework trade investment rules rules agenda including needs worlds people planets ability sustain needs specifically explore relation northsouth trade negotiations operations multinational corporations real news invited historian author vijay prashad talk us professor prashad edward said chair american university beirut lebanon among many books hes authored poorer nations possible history global south arab spring libyan winter writes regularly hindu frontline counterpunch vijay prashad recently keynote speaker united nations conference trade development public symposium met vijay geneva unctad event vijay prashad thank joining us vijay prashad prof international studies trinity college pleasure thank much fries keynote address trade investment rules guest made point growth neutral process open conversation tells us trade rules prashad look question people talk global economy talk need say trade treaties talk importance kind global compact whats recognized things mean first issue people talk global economy mean everybody elses economic activity intersects activity say major countries world intersects essentially multinational corporations essentially economic activity legible logic capitalism start talking creating treaties rules govern trade development economic activity general people recognize economy firstly neutral secondly rules framed neutral manner fries post world war160ii 1947 part international effort towards economic recovery development general agreement tariffs trade gatt established first multilateral instrument governing trade commercial relations stated purpose ensure economic warfare beggarmyneighbor policies deepened great depression stoked tensions war would never recur 1948 gatt multilateral instrument governing international trade trade liberalized gatt 1950s 1960s transnational corporations advanced economies north expanded became huge conglomerates also 1960s onwards newly independent developing nations sought find place world selfsufficient productive economies colonial rule joined gatt postwar legacy international cooperation gatt however began loose ground institutional framework nations south find mutual benefit agenda including need develop structures production scientific technological capacity compete prashad somebody framed rules 1970s 1970s 80s series specific interventions made north know group seven countries created 197374 specific agenda include countries like united states britain italy japan germany etc specific agenda move called economythis arrangement people know exchange goods produce goods etcin interest instance understood capitalism moving direction socalled offshoringa whole series technological developments presented themselvesyou know container ships satellites communication easy ways cut factories bits factories different countries know today called new thing global commodity chainin words disarticulated broke production know firms already 1970s group seven countries seeing occurring felt needed harness rules gave group seven states populations advantages rest world indeed thats mean launched big round gatt general agreement trade tariffs round launched punta del este uruguay round brought new issues one important issue intellectual property rights know may ask intellectual property rights rules economy emerging actually central north way north understood things production lines going outsourced north theyre going set mexico indonesia east asia etc north protect know ability thrive grow going lose production places well created architecture regime intellectual property north able collect rent goods produced elsewhere instance im nike actually owns factories anywhere nike remain united states oregon nike design shoes produced outside united states subcontracted along socalled value chain indonesia malaysia etc shoes sold nike gets rent every shoe sold intellectual property right monopoly right kind shoe nike essentially collects rent intellectual properties secured international trade treaties international trade treaty isnt neutral process fries postwar gatt dealt issues market access wto replaced gatt new rules trade investment put place rules granted foreign capital international protections investment intellectual property services etc along liberalized market access framed negotiators north needs transnational corporations well served new growth model underlying assumption foreign direct investment motor growth create jobs lift millions poverty prashad today theres discussion treaties economic growth etc discussion absent context mean context real one context context rules created worked interests south protected norths ability economies grow way thats call jobless growth north growth collecting rents know intellectual property upon monopoly dont create jobs country united states northern europe high growth rates gdp grow dont jobs population called 1990s jobless growth jobless growth wasnt accidental product indeed rules framed enable firms take advantage low wages elsewhere yet know insist firms able repatriate profits back north essence jobless growth fries segment provided historic context trade rules next segment take forward current dynamics please join us part two series vijay prashad thanks vijay prashad thank joining us real news network end disclaimer please note transcripts real news network typed recording program trnn guarantee complete accuracy | 757 |
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Part Four: Jesus Told Him Where to Bomb</p>
<p>Get George Bush in front of a bunch of preachers and his tongue tends to loosen up a bit and occasionally some luminous black pearls spill out. Shortly after the Supremes invested him with the presidency, Bush confided to the Reverend Jim Wallis, head of the Call of Renewal coven of churches, the following: “I don’t understand how poor people think.”</p>
<p>This presidential gem, worthy of Antoinette herself, neatly mirrors a statement made during the darkest trench of the recession by Bush’s director of Housing and Urban Development, Alphonso Jackson, who deflected criticism of the Bush economic disaster by pronouncing that “being poor is a state of mind, not a condition.”</p>
<p>Jackson’s coarse declaration reflects a kind of economic phenomenology that might even give Milton Friedman the willies. Naturally, Bush doesn’t know the difference between phenomenology and proctology, but he keenly intuits its essential meaning: The suffering of the poor is entirely self-inflicted. They simply lack faith. And the circle of blow-dried Cotton Mathers the president surrounds himself with sanction his cold sense of compassion. Blaming the victim is not only a political device; it’s infused with ecclesiastical authority. The downtrodden must be blamed for their own good.</p>
<p>Bush presided over the loss of more than 2 million jobs, the cruelest blow to working people since the Great Depression. Not his fault. Homeless and poverty rates have soared as a result and thanks to Clinton when this recession hit the social safety net of welfare and food stamps had already been sheared away. Not Bush’s responsibility. The mounting piles of corpses in Afghanistan and Iraq. Others are to blame.</p>
<p>Here you have the prime virtue of being a born-again politician: automatic absolution from responsibility for inflicting even more deprivations on the weakest in society. (For more on Bush and the fundamentalists I highly recommend David Domke’s excellent new book, <a href="" type="internal">God Willing: Political Fundamentalism in the White House, the ‘War on Terror’ and the Echoing Press</a>.)</p>
<p>All of this feeds Bush’s stunted capacity for human empathy. His joking about executions. His refusal to comfort the families of the slain in Iraq and Afghanistan. His imperviousness to the plight of the poor. How else can you explain his bizarre remarks at a White House Christmas party in 2001 made in front of Billy Graham and other guardians of the faith. “All in all, 2001 has been a fabulous year for Laura and me,” Bush gushed, even though the ruins of the Twin Towers were still warm to the touch and cruise missiles were cratering hovels in Kandahar.</p>
<p>In the spring of 2001, Bush invited a flock of religious leaders to the White House for tea and a prayer session. The president soon strayed from his prepared script. “I had a drinking problem,” he confessed during the gathering. “Right now, I should be in a bar. Not the Oval Office.” There’s no record of any objection being lodged.</p>
<p>Of course, perhaps the pastors of doom and damnation sensed that the cure had not entirely taken hold. There’s plenty of anecdotal evidence that Bush continues to nip at the bottle every once in a while-and it’s almost certainly good for the country and the world that he does imbibe. An Austin musician told us of a night in the mid-1990s, a decade after Bush went on the wagon, when he hustled into the bathroom of a bar between sets only to find the Governor face down on the less than spic-and-span floor, mumbling inanities. It was an episode of foreshadowing worthy of O. Henry, for years later Bush would be similarly felled on the floor of the Oval Office by a renegade pretzel.</p>
<p>Some presidents need a blowjob to unwind; others just crave some blow. Save an Iraqi child; get George high.</p>
<p>* * *</p>
<p>Some leaders of state have a hotline to other bigwigs. Like an Old Testament king, George Bush gets operational faxes straight from the Supreme Deity. “God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East,” he told Abu Abbas, the former Palestinian Prime Minister. “If you can help me, I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.”</p>
<p>He is surrounded by Christian soldiers, the real coalition of the willing. One of them, Gen. Jerry Boykin, proclaimed that God put Bush in office –apparently Jim Baker was merely an unwitting instrument of the Supreme Deity. Boykin also fumed that God had told him that followers of Islam where heathens and it was his duty to smite them. This is the same brand of bracing biblical exegesis that marked the Fifth Monarchists of puritan England, who believed they could hasten the Apocalypse by firing off their blunderbusses in unison inside the Houses of Parliament. Praise the lord and program the cruise missiles.</p>
<p>Bush’s wash-and-wear fundamentalism has revved up liberals into a frenzied panic. But aside from Boykin and Ashcroft, Bush hasn’t surrounded himself with that many more religious fanatics than Reagan or even Carter embedded into their ranks. After all, who is Bush’s guide to God? None other than, good old Billy Graham, the sky pilot for nearly every president since LBJ, who has absolved official villainy for more than 40 years. Is there a more stable fixture of the federal government than Graham? Alan Greenspan is a mere piker compared to Billy G.</p>
<p>When Bush talks religion, it’s a surefire sign that’s he’s in trouble. His public utterances of piety serve as a distress call to the stalwarts, the base that never wavers. Hence the fervid imprecations against gay marriage issued in Bush’s darkest hour.</p>
<p>Bush’s stop-and-go pursuit of a religious agenda has been perfunctory at best, backfiring deliriously more often than not. Indeed, John DiIulio, the arch zealot in the Bush inner circle, quit in a huff and denounced the administration as sellouts and frauds, more interested in Moab bombs and tax cuts than state-coerced conversions to Christ.</p>
<p>“There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus,” DiIulio told Ron Suskind, writing for Esquire. “What you’ve got is everything-and I mean everything-being run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis.”</p>
<p>One of those Mayberry Machiavellians is John Ashcroft, the Savonarola of the Potomac. Ashcroft, the singing senator who lost his reelection to a dead man, is an unapologetic bigot, who launches weekly sorties against the Bill of Rights. (Apparently, no one informed Ashcroft that his raids on the Constitution are the equivilent of a saturation bombing strike on a Potemkin village– Madison’s carta of liberty having been hollowed out by more fiendish minds, long, long ago.) But the censorious Missourian, who sought and received three draft deferrments during the Vietnam war, rumbles on, rummaging through the private corners of our lives, like one of Moliere’s pious buffoons, draping the breasts of Lady Justice one day and condemning homosexuality as “a sin” the next. In <a href="" type="internal">The Bush Betrayal</a>, the libertarian writer James Bovard’s pitiless dismantling of the Bush era, Bovard quips that the Persecutor General wants to “repeal 1776.”</p>
<p>Whether or not anyone has briefed the president to this fact remains unclear, but Ashcroft has become an oozing liability to the Bush crowd, ridiculed even by Republican ultras such as Bob Barr and Dick Armey and repudiated by federal judges in nearly every circuit. Ashcroft has overreached so far that he begins to make Ed Meese seem like Ramsey Clark.</p>
<p>There’s nothing spiritual about Ashcroft’s jihad and that’s why, ultimately, his vindictive crusade will flounder on its own rectitude and rigidity; he offers only persecution and purges, no transcendence. Frail Billy Graham could teach the Reverend Prosecutor a thing or two about how to con a congregation into compliance.</p>
<p>That’s not to say that the Patriot Act (and its odious offspring) doesn’t qualify as one of the spookiest legislative incursions on civil liberties since the McCarran Act. But Ashcroft can’t be saddled with all the blame for that inquisitorial bill. After all, he didn’t write it. He merely plucked it fully-formed from one of Janet Reno’s shelves, dusted it off and dumped it on a complicit Congress, which passed it nearly unanimously. Only Russ Feingold, the Wisconsin progressive, and Ron Paul, the Texas libertarian, spoke out as prophetic voices of dissent, warning that we were slipping into a culture of official suspicion and interrogation. And so it came to pass: warrantless searches and wiretaps, governments snoops in libraries, infiltration of dissident groups, immigrants rounded up and sent to detention camps without legal redress, prosecution of lawyers who work too sedulously in the defense their clients, and on and on. Paranoia as federal policy.</p>
<p>The maintenance of this creepy state of affairs depends on the mainlining of anxiety, inculcating an ever-tender sense of trauma in the psyche of the populace. Thus, the color-coded terror alerts, issued with the precision of a metronome. But here Bush faces his most puzzling problem: keeping the whole thing knotted up tight. Unless he, by some miraculous heresy, legalizes pot, there’s no way this condition of perpetual paranoia can be sustained. The republic is too diverse, too innately averse to prosecutorial probings (memo to K. Starr), too unwieldy and restless to be kept sedate under the looking glass for long before minor rebellions begin to erupt, sending out little fuck-yous to the system.</p>
<p>Bush began to lose ground in the winter of 2004: from Janet Jackson flashing her right tit at a scandalized Michael Powell to US soldiers refusing to serve in Iraq to John Dean calling for the impeachment of the president to the exposure of the Sadean circus at Abu Ghraib to the punch-drunk economy, seemingly face-down for the count. It had begun to unravel. By early summer, the once unsinkable Bush was listing, desperate for any life-ring in the sucking maelstrom.</p>
<p>Of course, that’s where the Democrats come in.</p>
<p>Part Five: The House Rules</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Part One: The Ties That Blind</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Part Two: Mark His Words</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Part Three: More Pricks Than Kicks</a></p>
<p>JEFFREY ST. CLAIR is the author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1567512585/counterpunchmaga" type="external">Been Brown So Long It Looked Like Green to Me: the Politics of Nature</a> and, with Alexander Cockburn, <a href="http://www.easycarts.net/ecarts/CounterPunch/CP_Books.html" type="external">Dime’s Worth of Difference: Beyond the Lesser of Two Evils</a>.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | 160 part four jesus told bomb get george bush front bunch preachers tongue tends loosen bit occasionally luminous black pearls spill shortly supremes invested presidency bush confided reverend jim wallis head call renewal coven churches following dont understand poor people think presidential gem worthy antoinette neatly mirrors statement made darkest trench recession bushs director housing urban development alphonso jackson deflected criticism bush economic disaster pronouncing poor state mind condition jacksons coarse declaration reflects kind economic phenomenology might even give milton friedman willies naturally bush doesnt know difference phenomenology proctology keenly intuits essential meaning suffering poor entirely selfinflicted simply lack faith circle blowdried cotton mathers president surrounds sanction cold sense compassion blaming victim political device infused ecclesiastical authority downtrodden must blamed good bush presided loss 2 million jobs cruelest blow working people since great depression fault homeless poverty rates soared result thanks clinton recession hit social safety net welfare food stamps already sheared away bushs responsibility mounting piles corpses afghanistan iraq others blame prime virtue bornagain politician automatic absolution responsibility inflicting even deprivations weakest society bush fundamentalists highly recommend david domkes excellent new book god willing political fundamentalism white house war terror echoing press feeds bushs stunted capacity human empathy joking executions refusal comfort families slain iraq afghanistan imperviousness plight poor else explain bizarre remarks white house christmas party 2001 made front billy graham guardians faith 2001 fabulous year laura bush gushed even though ruins twin towers still warm touch cruise missiles cratering hovels kandahar spring 2001 bush invited flock religious leaders white house tea prayer session president soon strayed prepared script drinking problem confessed gathering right bar oval office theres record objection lodged course perhaps pastors doom damnation sensed cure entirely taken hold theres plenty anecdotal evidence bush continues nip bottle every whileand almost certainly good country world imbibe austin musician told us night mid1990s decade bush went wagon hustled bathroom bar sets find governor face less spicandspan floor mumbling inanities episode foreshadowing worthy henry years later bush would similarly felled floor oval office renegade pretzel presidents need blowjob unwind others crave blow save iraqi child get george high leaders state hotline bigwigs like old testament king george bush gets operational faxes straight supreme deity god told strike al qaeda struck instructed strike saddam determined solve problem middle east told abu abbas former palestinian prime minister help act elections come focus surrounded christian soldiers real coalition willing one gen jerry boykin proclaimed god put bush office apparently jim baker merely unwitting instrument supreme deity boykin also fumed god told followers islam heathens duty smite brand bracing biblical exegesis marked fifth monarchists puritan england believed could hasten apocalypse firing blunderbusses unison inside houses parliament praise lord program cruise missiles bushs washandwear fundamentalism revved liberals frenzied panic aside boykin ashcroft bush hasnt surrounded many religious fanatics reagan even carter embedded ranks bushs guide god none good old billy graham sky pilot nearly every president since lbj absolved official villainy 40 years stable fixture federal government graham alan greenspan mere piker compared billy g bush talks religion surefire sign thats hes trouble public utterances piety serve distress call stalwarts base never wavers hence fervid imprecations gay marriage issued bushs darkest hour bushs stopandgo pursuit religious agenda perfunctory best backfiring deliriously often indeed john diiulio arch zealot bush inner circle quit huff denounced administration sellouts frauds interested moab bombs tax cuts statecoerced conversions christ precedent modern white house going one complete lack policy apparatus diiulio told ron suskind writing esquire youve got everythingand mean everythingbeing run political arm reign mayberry machiavellis one mayberry machiavellians john ashcroft savonarola potomac ashcroft singing senator lost reelection dead man unapologetic bigot launches weekly sorties bill rights apparently one informed ashcroft raids constitution equivilent saturation bombing strike potemkin village madisons carta liberty hollowed fiendish minds long long ago censorious missourian sought received three draft deferrments vietnam war rumbles rummaging private corners lives like one molieres pious buffoons draping breasts lady justice one day condemning homosexuality sin next bush betrayal libertarian writer james bovards pitiless dismantling bush era bovard quips persecutor general wants repeal 1776 whether anyone briefed president fact remains unclear ashcroft become oozing liability bush crowd ridiculed even republican ultras bob barr dick armey repudiated federal judges nearly every circuit ashcroft overreached far begins make ed meese seem like ramsey clark theres nothing spiritual ashcrofts jihad thats ultimately vindictive crusade flounder rectitude rigidity offers persecution purges transcendence frail billy graham could teach reverend prosecutor thing two con congregation compliance thats say patriot act odious offspring doesnt qualify one spookiest legislative incursions civil liberties since mccarran act ashcroft cant saddled blame inquisitorial bill didnt write merely plucked fullyformed one janet renos shelves dusted dumped complicit congress passed nearly unanimously russ feingold wisconsin progressive ron paul texas libertarian spoke prophetic voices dissent warning slipping culture official suspicion interrogation came pass warrantless searches wiretaps governments snoops libraries infiltration dissident groups immigrants rounded sent detention camps without legal redress prosecution lawyers work sedulously defense clients paranoia federal policy maintenance creepy state affairs depends mainlining anxiety inculcating evertender sense trauma psyche populace thus colorcoded terror alerts issued precision metronome bush faces puzzling problem keeping whole thing knotted tight unless miraculous heresy legalizes pot theres way condition perpetual paranoia sustained republic diverse innately averse prosecutorial probings memo k starr unwieldy restless kept sedate looking glass long minor rebellions begin erupt sending little fuckyous system bush began lose ground winter 2004 janet jackson flashing right tit scandalized michael powell us soldiers refusing serve iraq john dean calling impeachment president exposure sadean circus abu ghraib punchdrunk economy seemingly facedown count begun unravel early summer unsinkable bush listing desperate lifering sucking maelstrom course thats democrats come part five house rules part one ties blind part two mark words part three pricks kicks jeffrey st clair author brown long looked like green politics nature alexander cockburn dimes worth difference beyond lesser two evils 160 160 | 977 |
<p>In which the author, exclusively for CounterPunch, goes by train but also by ferry, bicycle, plane, and rental car from Nairobi, Kenya, to Pretoria and Johannesburg, South Africa. This is Part VIII. <a href="" type="internal">To read part I, click here</a>.</p>
<p>Staats Model School in Pretoria, once a prison, from which Winston Churchill escaped during the Boer War.</p>
<p>Don’t Run, Whatever You Do</p>
<p>I enjoyed the mile-long walk between the two border posts, from Botswana to South Africa. It was a lovely morning, the birds were out in force, I was alone for once, and I could glimpse, if only from a roadside, why so many tourists pay $5000 a week to sleep in one of those Out of Africa safari camps in a Botswana national park.</p>
<p>The closest I had come to such a safari was, on one of my many bus rides across Africa, when I read Peter Allison’s <a href="" type="internal">Don’t Run Whatever You Do</a>, a tell-all book written by a seasoned guide about the high-end safari trade. The title is a play on the concept that, to animals in the wild, anything on the run is a TV dinner.</p>
<p>Allison’s book is an extended campfire story of his close encounters with lions, elephants, and crocodiles, not to mention the big game that is paying over five grand to ride around in a Land Rover with long lenses on their cameras. (He writes: “Lions, hyenas, leopards, and safari guides all follow plunging vultures, knowing that if they land during the day it is only for meat.”)</p>
<p>Allison never tires of the Big Five, although the clients are more domesticated. He humorously describes bored teenagers from New York, cheapskates from England (after a week together one tipped him a pound), arrogant Germans, and clueless Japanese.</p>
<p>The great character in the book is a tourist from Japan nicknamed Spielberg, for all the cameras around his neck, which in Japanese is rendered as Spiirubaagu. Allison describes one of their drives this way:</p>
<p>The incensed Spiirubaagu was shouting at the giraffe (another thing I had repeatedly asked the group not to do was call out to the animals, but this was too amusing for me to stop him), “Stop pissing! Stupid animal! Can’t you see I am trying to take your photo!”</p>
<p>Allison is out on a drive with Spielberg when the guide makes a near fatal mistake—that of getting out of the Land Rover and finding himself between two lionesses and their cubs. They charge him.</p>
<p>Allison waves his arms and shouts, but figures he’s dinner until, for reasons that are inexplicable, the big cats veer away from him at the last minute, brushing his arms as they run by.</p>
<p>It’s the closest call he has in more than ten years of guiding in Africa, and Spiirubaagu watches it all from the nearby Land Rover. Afterward, he says to the shaken guide: “I’m sorry, but I wasn’t able to get that the first time. Would you mind doing it again?”</p>
<p>Botswana: A Small Corner of Africa That Works</p>
<p>Between his animal stories, Allison retells the history of the Botswana king, Sir Seretse Khama, around the time independence. As heir to the throne in the 1950s, he was sent off to London for some study and polishing. While there, at a missionary society dinner dance, he met and fell in love with a white woman named Ruth Williams.</p>
<p>Both the elders of his tribe in Bechuanaland and the British government thought the romance should not end in marriage. But Seretse was insistent that Ruth was the one for him, even though his uncle, the Anglican church, and the Foreign Office all thought it was a terrible match.</p>
<p>Neither Seretse nor Ruth listened to this counsel, and an English justice of the peace married them. Theirs would be a loving marriage for the rest of their lives and result in four children, and the couple would do wonders for Botswana, even if he was banned from serving as king.</p>
<p>Even when it was the British protectorate of Bechuanaland, Botswana was a buffer state. The British first claimed the vast, empty land to keep the Germans (then in German Southwest Africa, now Namibia) from cutting their rail line from Cape Town to Rhodesia.</p>
<p>During the time of apartheid, Botswana offered the British a way to trade in southern African minerals, but not necessarily with South Africa. And when England decided in 1966 that they needed “their man” in Gaborone, they went with Seretse as president of the independent nation. Yet again it was a marriage made in heaven, and soon even the cranky tribal elders came around to the man who could have been king.</p>
<p>Although Seretse died in 1980, and is largely forgotten outside of southern Africa, he should be remembered as one of the most enlightened leaders in the era of African independence.</p>
<p>He was lucky that the country, just after independence in 1967, found diamonds and other exportable minerals. But unlike Mugabe in Zimbabwe, who has used his thugs to take control of the diamond production, Seretse dedicated the foreign earnings to building up the country’s infrastructure, which may explain why the night train from Francistown to Lobatse has the most modern rolling stock in Africa, with pressed clean sheets and comfortable berths, while the sleeper from Harare to Bulawayo dates to the 1950s and has the feel of a death train.</p>
<p>Botswana was the first country not to charge me $50 for a visa (they just stamped my passport and handed it back). And despite all the police roadblocks on the road into Francistown, I sensed very little corruption in my dealings as I crossed the country from north to south, although later I read that big game hunting (for about $10,000 a week) is tolerated on some of the private ranches around the country (for the amusement, I am sure, of the Trump boys, among others).</p>
<p>The South African border guards at Ramatlamabama, on a quiet Monday morning, were in a cheerful mood, and they quickly stamped my passport and pointed me toward a combi waiting near the frontier fencing.</p>
<p>Again, as we took off at high speed for Mafikeng, I thought I might arrive in short order, but no sooner were my hopes up than the van began searching for fares in many of the black townships that, after the so-called “removals” of the Afrikaner government in the 1970s, were built outside the city.</p>
<p>The driver went up and down an endless number of dirt roads in townships such as Six Hundred and Makgokgwane He would wait at crossroads, honk in front of houses, and stop for anyone with their hand in the air. For many in these townships, such combis are their only lifeline into the city.</p>
<p>The communities reminded me of Soweto, one of the townships outside Johannesburg, that saw so much violence in the years before white-rule ended in South Africa in 1991.</p>
<p>Soweto has houses at all price points—from hovels to MacMansions—and out here in the townships around Mafikeng, I was surprised to see some lovely modern brick houses. They had cut lawns and air conditioning, although most of the poverty-stricken houses that I saw from the van windows reminded me of the iconic phrase: “Cry, the beloved country, these things are not yet at an end.”</p>
<p>A Visit to Soweto</p>
<p>Driving into Mafikeng, I was reminded of Soweto and the writer Alan Paton, who wrote <a href="" type="internal">Cry, the Beloved Country</a>. The first time I went to South Africa I saw both.</p>
<p>In September 1984, during the period of apartheid and the white rule of the National party, my wife (of one week) and I flew to Johannesburg by way of Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires.</p>
<p>As a honeymoon, it was the grand tour of political repression. To pay for it, I agreed to write several articles about the Dirty War in Argentina and the politics in South Africa, which was no hardship, as both subjects interested me. I also wangled an assignment from an airline magazine to write about South African trains, including the celebrated Blue Train (which then ran between Johannesburg and Cape Town—now it starts in Pretoria).</p>
<p>Our flight from Buenos Aires to Johannesburg made stops in Sao Paulo and Cape Town, so it took hours to make the crossing. At the time South Africa was under sanctions and only a few airlines flew the route. The passengers on board were returning South Africans, who, when the captain announced we were in local airspace, took off their sweatshirts and waved them above their seats.</p>
<p>The only hotel where we could stay in Johannesburg and receive African guests was the American-owned Holiday Inn. When we went to our room, I assumed the television was broken, as there was no way to change the channel. That’s when we learned that South African television had only one channel, which was state-owned, and that much of its energy went into censoring U.S. cop shows, which in that era had many tough-guy detectives who were black.</p>
<p>We rented a car to get to Soweto, which is about five miles southwest of center city Johannesburg, and drove it to a police checkpoint, where I was told we needed to apply for a visitors’ permit before entering the township.</p>
<p>The army officers on duty, however, were dismissive of the idea that any Americans might have a valid reason to visit Soweto and scoffed at giving us a permit. As I was leaving the fortified outpost—in those days Soweto was the scene of much violence—someone in the parking lot said to me that gates did not enclose Soweto and that if we wished, although it was technically illegal, we could drive around the township, which is what we did.</p>
<p>I had thought Soweto might be an African slum drawn along Kibera lines, with hovels and dirt paths between them. Instead, we discovered a suburb very similar to the townships that I saw around Mafikeng.</p>
<p>Row houses of every description—a few were lavish—lined the paved and unpaved streets. From newspaper accounts at the time, I thought we might come across burning tires, of the Palestinian variety, at any time. But Soweto, on that day, was peaceful, and neither demonstrators nor police impeded our progress.</p>
<p>At the time I had thought the political activist Steven Biko had come from Soweto, as he was instrumental in the protests there in the 1970s. But he grew up in the Eastern Cape closer to Durban, and he died in 1977 in a police cell in Pretoria, having been beaten in Port Elizabeth, a city on the coast.</p>
<p>He spoke inspiring words, “The wealth of the country must eventually be enjoyed by people of the country…” but under apartheid, he was banned (prohibited from social and political contact) and later killed.</p>
<p>Remembering the South Africa writer Alan Paton</p>
<p>To meet the writer Alan Paton, we drove south on the highway toward Durban, pleased to discover that the route took us through the front lines of the Second Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902) and such celebrated battlefields as Ladysmith, Colenso, and Spion Kop. (As a war correspondent, Winston Churchill was taken prisoner on his way to Ladysmith, locked up in Pretoria, and some months later escaped and managed to get to Laurenço Marques, which is now Maputo, in Mozambique.)</p>
<p>We spent the night in Ladysmith, very much a regional colonial town, with markers from the battles, and drove the next day to Hillcrest, above Durban, where Alan Paton lived with his wife, Anne.</p>
<p>I had no connection to the celebrated author, other than a letter I had written to him, addressed from information I gleaned from the back jacket of a paperback edition of Cry, the Beloved Country, which read: “Alan Paton now lives in Hillcrest, Natal.” I figured the postman would find him, and he did.</p>
<p>Paton’s wife responded by saying that his time was precious, but that we could spend a half hour with him in conversation, which is what happened. He received us in his writing studio, behind the house, and set us straight (his manner was that of a Scottish preacher with fierce eyes and a shock of white hair) on why the Afrikaners would never willingly give up power.</p>
<p>He spoke also about his sympathies for the Liberal Party and the work of his friend, Helen Suzman, a South African parliamentarian and human rights advocate. (For a long time she was the only elected official in opposition to apartheid.) But no one in 1984 could imagine the white-dominated regime freeing Nelson Mandela from prison or calling for a coalition government.</p>
<p>The Patons could not figure out what we were doing in South Africa, driving around in a rental car, and we did not advertise that we were on our honeymoon until just before saying good-bye when Anne insisted that we return to the living room, where she served us tea and celebratory cakes.</p>
<p>While Alan died in 1988, I am pleased to add that Anne is still alive and well. She moved from South Africa (because of the violence) and ended up first in Britain and now in Connecticut, where we saw her last year—fit and engaged, but still missing the country that, in the first words of his famous novel, Alan described this way:</p>
<p>There is a lovely road that runs from Ixopo into the hills. These hills are grass-covered and rolling, and they are lovely beyond any singing of it.</p>
<p>The Boer War Siege of Mafeking</p>
<p>I told the driver and conductor of the combi that I was headed to the Mafikeng Museum, and they kindly routed the bus to drop me at the front door. The fare was $1.</p>
<p>I poked my head into the museum, satisfying myself that it was open, and then drifted around the corner in search of breakfast or an early lunch, if not dinner and lunch from the previous day’s fiasco on the trafficking bus.</p>
<p>Mafikeng (formerly Mafeking and now often written as Mahikeng) is more an overgrown town than a small city but still has a bustling downtown section (with shaded sidewalks and merchants who spread the wares almost into the street). But an elegant café or restaurant never came in view.</p>
<p>My only choice was among fast-food joints with picnic tables out front. (On the road in Africa, you eat when you can, what you can, and there’s always Fanta nearby.) Mostly I drank several bottles of cold water, and had my hair cut in a “salon” attached to the restaurant. I wanted a trim, but the barber decided I would look better with a gangsta buzz cut until I squirmed in protest.</p>
<p>Back in the museum, a dusty affair in what feels like an elementary school auditorium, I walked around in the company of one of two soldiers, who took turns guarding me, lest I take a picture of the Mafeking siege lines in 1899-1900 or jot down notes about the forced removals of blacks in the 1970s.</p>
<p>Finally, I tired of the escorts and complained to the museum director that I had written ahead to arrange a meeting with an expert on the siege, but had never heard back. At least this protest allowed me to take pictures in the museum (I was its only visitor), and she called off her dogs of war.</p>
<p>Until I walked around the museum, I had not understood the importance of Mafeking in nineteenth-century Cape Colony geography. After 1897, it was the rail junction on the line between the Cape and Bulawayo—the same stretch of track that I had followed on my buses and when walking across the border from Botswana into South Africa.</p>
<p>Before the line was finished, Mafeking was also just beyond the border between the Boer republic—the Transvaal, as it was called—and English settlers in the Cape Colony.</p>
<p>Twice in 1881 and 1884, international treaties had adjusted the borders between the rival powers, but on neither occasion did it keep the Boers from hoping to extend their sphere of influence into Mafeking, something they tried to do when hostilities began against Great Britain in 1899.</p>
<p>Mafeking was also the key town in the great power politics of the region that included the endless struggle in southern African between English colonists (Cecil Rhodes is the best known) and the instruments of German power, which controlled land on both African coasts in southern Africa. German South West Africa was to the west of Mafeking, and German East Africa, later Tanzania, was to the east.</p>
<p>In between was the buffer state of Bechuanaland, which had its administrative center in Mafeking. North of my border crossing at Ramatlabama, the land now Botswana was the Protectorate of Bechuanaland, which Rhodes and other colonial officials sought to control as a corridor up to Rhodesia.</p>
<p>South of the Molopo River, it was known as British Bechuanaland, and it was part of the Cape Colony. No wonder Mafeking became, after Ladysmith, the most contested town in the Anglo-Boer War. (This one was actually the second that was fought.)</p>
<p>In October 1899, shortly after war was declared, the Boers laid siege to the town and its rail junction. Inside a perimeter that enclosed the town center, a fort, and the railway station, there was a small English garrison, the white population, and a many African natives—a people known as the Batalong, who, reluctantly, sided with the British as the Boers believed in racial segregation, if not slavery.</p>
<p>That said, the British commander of the town during the siege, Colonel Robert Baden-Powell, treated his nominal allies, the Batalong, as if workhorses or indentured servants, often denying them food except for thin gruel.</p>
<p>Skirmishes and small battles were fought all around the town during the siege which lasted 217 days. It was lifted in May 1900, a month before British troops—Churchill among them—took Pretoria, ending the phase of conventional warfare in the conflict, which continued for almost two more years as a guerrilla struggle.</p>
<p>The Boers fought in loose formations, called commandos, and the British retaliated by burning some 30,000 Boer farms in the Transvaal and Orange Free State, and by rounding up thousands of Boer families (mostly women and children, as their men were away in battle) and herding them into concentration camps (they were not a Nazi invention).</p>
<p>In that archipelago of camps, in which conditions were inhumane, some twenty-six thousand Boers (mostly children) died in British captivity.</p>
<p>In many ways, the Boer War was Great Britain’s Vietnam or Algeria, a colonial war that could only be fought, unsuccessfully at that, with violence against the citizenry, and from which British colonialism never recovered.</p>
<p>After Mafeking was liberated (for years there was an annual dinner in London to celebrate it), I would argue that it was all downhill for the British Empire, even though it prevailed in two world wars.</p>
<p>Winston Churchill in the Boer War</p>
<p>If there was a winner in the Boer War, it was Winston Churchill, who emerged, in the words of author Candice Millard, as a “hero of the empire.” In a war that lacked identifiable British heroes—General Louis Botha, later a South African prime minister, was one for the Boers—Churchill’s daring exploits during his capture and subsequent escape cast him as one.</p>
<p>The full title of Millard’s book is <a href="" type="internal">Hero of the Empire: The Making of Winston Churchill</a>, and I read it on the road (okay, for a change, I was in the air) between Mafikeng and Johannesburg.</p>
<p>It wasn’t so much that I had gone soft on African buses—although my resistance to seven-hour rides was weakening. But in searching for a connection between the two cities, I had struggled to find even the name of an operating bus company and feared another stranding.</p>
<p>Nor did travel chat rooms indicate that combis cover the route with frequent departures from near the old station. (They do.) As best I could determine, there was only one morning bus. When I found a $30 air ticket, I pounced, as it would spare me a night within the siege lines or another death ride in a minivan.</p>
<p>Millard’s book is conventional history well told. She doesn’t unearth new information about Churchill, his weird parents, his many ambitions, or the route of his escape to Mozambique. She often quotes from Churchill’s own letters and books on the subject. But the story is neatly told, so is both a riveting account of Churchill’s capture and escape, and a clear summary of the Second Anglo-Boer War.</p>
<p>Millard’s take on Churchill’s interest in South Africa and the coming Boer war is that it could offer him the chance for glory, which he believed was the missing ingredient on his resumé for election to Parliament.</p>
<p>Several months before hostilities broke out between the British and the Boers, Churchill had stood in Oldham during a by-election (the filling of a vacant seat in between normal parliamentary elections). He lost. Oldham was coal country in the Midlands, and a Liberal defeated him. (Candidates for parliamentary seats need not live in their districts or even know much about them. Carpet-bagging is the rule in Britain.)</p>
<p>Denied the chance to sit in parliament and no longer a serving military officer (he had graduated from Sandhurst), Churchill heard the news of a crisis in South Africa with glee. Finally, he would have his chance to show his mettle under fire, although his ticket to the front lines was as a war correspondent for London’s Morning Post newspaper.</p>
<p>Churchill had often, in his early career, blurred the lines between combatant and correspondent, even before he resigned his military commission. If he could not get to the front as an infantry or cavalry officer, he would switch hats and go as a newspaper man.</p>
<p>He had seen action in the Northwest Frontier Territory and in Cuba, but most notably in a cavalry charge during the battle of Omdurman in Sudan (it’s outside Khartoum), resulting in his best-selling book, <a href="" type="internal">The River War: An Historical Account of the Reconquest of the Soudan</a> (1899). But warrior fame had so far eluded him.</p>
<p>Heading to South Africa—Winston traveled with a servant and a full wine cellar—Churchill’s great fear was that the war would be over before he got his chance for a dance with lady fame. No sooner had his troopship docked in Cape Town than he was on his way to Durban, where he connected with a troop train heading north toward Ladysmith and the front lines.</p>
<p>The Boers carried small knapsacks and long rifles, and little else. They slept in the wild and lived off the land, which they considered their own. By contrast, a British cavalry officer, according to Millard, might ride to the front weighing 400 pounds, when you added in all of his kit.</p>
<p>Tactically, the British army had advanced little from those skirmish lines deployed at Waterloo. Troops marched and shot their rifles in tight formations, which, for the Boers hidden behind boulders, made them sitting ducks. In the early months of the fighting around Ladysmith, the British experienced only losses, and eventually the town was surrounded and besieged, as happened in Mafeking.</p>
<p>With their technological superiority—not unlike the Americans in Vietnam fighting the Vietcong—the British hoped to relieve the Ladysmith siege by sending an armored-plated train, full of troops, up the line toward the city.</p>
<p>Think of it as an early tank, but one on rails, which made it easy for the Boers to spot (there was steam flowing from the engine) and track its slow progress up the line.</p>
<p>Most British troops in that theater of operation thought of duty on the armored train as little more than orders for suicide, such were the casualties inflicted on the men huddled inside the plated-hopper cars. (They had gun holes punched through the sides, and thus resembled a medieval serpent steaming toward destruction.)</p>
<p>In a letter, Churchill wrote: “An armoured train! The very name sounds strange. A locomotive disguised as a knight-errant; the agent of civilisation in the habiliments of chivalry.”</p>
<p>So impatient was Churchill to get to the front lines in Ladysmith, both to scoop his newspaper rivals and perhaps to engage in some glory hunting, that he agreed to join one operation on the armored train.</p>
<p>Part way up the line, in the hamlet of Frere, the Boers cut off Churchill’s train, killed a number of men, and knocked several rail cars off the rails.</p>
<p>Under the terms of warfare in 1899, strictly speaking a war correspondent should never carry a firearm. Nor should he, in any way, participate in the fighting. The punishment for breaking this code of conduct, if the correspondent was captured by the other side, was often summary execution.</p>
<p>With his train under attack and some of the officers wounded, Churchill responded bravely to challenge. He helped to clear the line, he directed fire against the Boers, and he loaded wounded men onto the engine and sent it off in the direction of the British lines, thus saving the lives of many wounded in the attack.</p>
<p>Churchill Escapes from Prison in Pretoria</p>
<p>Churchill himself was surrounded and captured, and for many early days in captivity he feared that the Boers might execute him. Back in England, accounts of the fighting had won him the reputation for gallantry that he was desperately seeking.</p>
<p>The prisoners, both officers and their men along with the correspondent, were marched off to prison in Pretoria, at the Staats Model School. Later, when I was in the South African capital, I tracked down its location, at the corner of Lilian Ngoyi and Nana Sita (my GPS made a hash of the pronunciation). The building is one of a handful of Dutch designs from the Boer era that is still standing and it feels like a school you might come across in The Hague.</p>
<p>From the moment Churchill entered the prison, he devoted most of his waking hours to escape planning. As you might expect from someone who loved strategic brainstorming, his schemes grew grander and grander, until, in one plan, he would not simply break out of jail and flee to the border, but would kidnap President Paul Kruger and hold him hostage until the Boers surrendered and the war was over.</p>
<p>In the end, the rash Churchill bolted over a back fence of the prison but without two of his fellow prisoners, who were to have gone with him (one spoke both Afrikaans and the Zulu language, which would have helped out on the road). Hence Winston was on his own.</p>
<p>After striding through the town as if a burgher going for a walk, he hopped a freight train that took him forty miles from the capital, where he ran out of schemes and ideas.</p>
<p>He had no food, little water, and the countryside was crawling with Boer police on the lookout for the celebrated prisoner (everyone knew he was the son of Randolph Churchill, who had once been Chancellor of the Exchequer and who had also written a number of articles belittling the Boers).</p>
<p>Churchill had no chance of walking several hundred miles to the border through such terrain, so he knocked on a random door, hoping to bribe his way to freedom (he was a prisoner but flush with cash).</p>
<p>By remarkable good fortune, he knocked on the door of an Englishman who managed a prosperous coal mine in the Transvaal and who undertook to orchestrate Winston’s escape.</p>
<p>Churchill was given food, whiskey, and cigars, and stashed down a mine shaft until he could be hidden on a goods train taking wool to the docks of Lourenço Marques. One of the English sympathizers went with him to bribe away nosy custom inspectors and the like, and Churchill made it to freedom.</p>
<p>Millard writes: “He didn’t have a weapon, a map, a compass, or, aside from a few bars of chocolate in his pocket, any food. He didn’t speak the language, either that of the Boers or that of the Africans. Beyond the vaguest of outlines, he didn’t even have a plan—just the unshakable conviction that he was destined for greatness.”</p>
<p>Back in Durban on a coastal steamer by the end of December, 1899, Churchill was given a hero’s welcome, and for the rest of his life he would remain a household name in Britain.</p>
<p>Millard writes: “He had reminded the world what it meant to be a Briton—resilient, resourceful and, even in the face of extreme danger, utterly unruffled.”</p>
<p>One of the men who saved Churchill turned out to be from Oldham, which at the next election sent him to parliament, where he would serve various constituencies until 1964 (he died the next year).</p>
<p>Up next: Johannesburg to Pretoria. The Boer Republic. <a href="" type="internal">To read earlier chapters, please click here</a>.</p> | true | 4 | author exclusively counterpunch goes train also ferry bicycle plane rental car nairobi kenya pretoria johannesburg south africa part viii read part click staats model school pretoria prison winston churchill escaped boer war dont run whatever enjoyed milelong walk two border posts botswana south africa lovely morning birds force alone could glimpse roadside many tourists pay 5000 week sleep one africa safari camps botswana national park closest come safari one many bus rides across africa read peter allisons dont run whatever tellall book written seasoned guide highend safari trade title play concept animals wild anything run tv dinner allisons book extended campfire story close encounters lions elephants crocodiles mention big game paying five grand ride around land rover long lenses cameras writes lions hyenas leopards safari guides follow plunging vultures knowing land day meat allison never tires big five although clients domesticated humorously describes bored teenagers new york cheapskates england week together one tipped pound arrogant germans clueless japanese great character book tourist japan nicknamed spielberg cameras around neck japanese rendered spiirubaagu allison describes one drives way incensed spiirubaagu shouting giraffe another thing repeatedly asked group call animals amusing stop stop pissing stupid animal cant see trying take photo allison drive spielberg guide makes near fatal mistakethat getting land rover finding two lionesses cubs charge allison waves arms shouts figures hes dinner reasons inexplicable big cats veer away last minute brushing arms run closest call ten years guiding africa spiirubaagu watches nearby land rover afterward says shaken guide im sorry wasnt able get first time would mind botswana small corner africa works animal stories allison retells history botswana king sir seretse khama around time independence heir throne 1950s sent london study polishing missionary society dinner dance met fell love white woman named ruth williams elders tribe bechuanaland british government thought romance end marriage seretse insistent ruth one even though uncle anglican church foreign office thought terrible match neither seretse ruth listened counsel english justice peace married would loving marriage rest lives result four children couple would wonders botswana even banned serving king even british protectorate bechuanaland botswana buffer state british first claimed vast empty land keep germans german southwest africa namibia cutting rail line cape town rhodesia time apartheid botswana offered british way trade southern african minerals necessarily south africa england decided 1966 needed man gaborone went seretse president independent nation yet marriage made heaven soon even cranky tribal elders came around man could king although seretse died 1980 largely forgotten outside southern africa remembered one enlightened leaders era african independence lucky country independence 1967 found diamonds exportable minerals unlike mugabe zimbabwe used thugs take control diamond production seretse dedicated foreign earnings building countrys infrastructure may explain night train francistown lobatse modern rolling stock africa pressed clean sheets comfortable berths sleeper harare bulawayo dates 1950s feel death train botswana first country charge 50 visa stamped passport handed back despite police roadblocks road francistown sensed little corruption dealings crossed country north south although later read big game hunting 10000 week tolerated private ranches around country amusement sure trump boys among others south african border guards ramatlamabama quiet monday morning cheerful mood quickly stamped passport pointed toward combi waiting near frontier fencing took high speed mafikeng thought might arrive short order sooner hopes van began searching fares many black townships socalled removals afrikaner government 1970s built outside city driver went endless number dirt roads townships six hundred makgokgwane would wait crossroads honk front houses stop anyone hand air many townships combis lifeline city communities reminded soweto one townships outside johannesburg saw much violence years whiterule ended south africa 1991 soweto houses price pointsfrom hovels macmansionsand townships around mafikeng surprised see lovely modern brick houses cut lawns air conditioning although povertystricken houses saw van windows reminded iconic phrase cry beloved country things yet end visit soweto driving mafikeng reminded soweto writer alan paton wrote cry beloved country first time went south africa saw september 1984 period apartheid white rule national party wife one week flew johannesburg way rio de janeiro buenos aires honeymoon grand tour political repression pay agreed write several articles dirty war argentina politics south africa hardship subjects interested also wangled assignment airline magazine write south african trains including celebrated blue train ran johannesburg cape townnow starts pretoria flight buenos aires johannesburg made stops sao paulo cape town took hours make crossing time south africa sanctions airlines flew route passengers board returning south africans captain announced local airspace took sweatshirts waved seats hotel could stay johannesburg receive african guests americanowned holiday inn went room assumed television broken way change channel thats learned south african television one channel stateowned much energy went censoring us cop shows era many toughguy detectives black rented car get soweto five miles southwest center city johannesburg drove police checkpoint told needed apply visitors permit entering township army officers duty however dismissive idea americans might valid reason visit soweto scoffed giving us permit leaving fortified outpostin days soweto scene much violencesomeone parking lot said gates enclose soweto wished although technically illegal could drive around township thought soweto might african slum drawn along kibera lines hovels dirt paths instead discovered suburb similar townships saw around mafikeng row houses every descriptiona lavishlined paved unpaved streets newspaper accounts time thought might come across burning tires palestinian variety time soweto day peaceful neither demonstrators police impeded progress time thought political activist steven biko come soweto instrumental protests 1970s grew eastern cape closer durban died 1977 police cell pretoria beaten port elizabeth city coast spoke inspiring words wealth country must eventually enjoyed people country apartheid banned prohibited social political contact later killed remembering south africa writer alan paton meet writer alan paton drove south highway toward durban pleased discover route took us front lines second angloboer war 18991902 celebrated battlefields ladysmith colenso spion kop war correspondent winston churchill taken prisoner way ladysmith locked pretoria months later escaped managed get laurenço marques maputo mozambique spent night ladysmith much regional colonial town markers battles drove next day hillcrest durban alan paton lived wife anne connection celebrated author letter written addressed information gleaned back jacket paperback edition cry beloved country read alan paton lives hillcrest natal figured postman would find patons wife responded saying time precious could spend half hour conversation happened received us writing studio behind house set us straight manner scottish preacher fierce eyes shock white hair afrikaners would never willingly give power spoke also sympathies liberal party work friend helen suzman south african parliamentarian human rights advocate long time elected official opposition apartheid one 1984 could imagine whitedominated regime freeing nelson mandela prison calling coalition government patons could figure south africa driving around rental car advertise honeymoon saying goodbye anne insisted return living room served us tea celebratory cakes alan died 1988 pleased add anne still alive well moved south africa violence ended first britain connecticut saw last yearfit engaged still missing country first words famous novel alan described way lovely road runs ixopo hills hills grasscovered rolling lovely beyond singing boer war siege mafeking told driver conductor combi headed mafikeng museum kindly routed bus drop front door fare 1 poked head museum satisfying open drifted around corner search breakfast early lunch dinner lunch previous days fiasco trafficking bus mafikeng formerly mafeking often written mahikeng overgrown town small city still bustling downtown section shaded sidewalks merchants spread wares almost street elegant café restaurant never came view choice among fastfood joints picnic tables front road africa eat theres always fanta nearby mostly drank several bottles cold water hair cut salon attached restaurant wanted trim barber decided would look better gangsta buzz cut squirmed protest back museum dusty affair feels like elementary school auditorium walked around company one two soldiers took turns guarding lest take picture mafeking siege lines 18991900 jot notes forced removals blacks 1970s finally tired escorts complained museum director written ahead arrange meeting expert siege never heard back least protest allowed take pictures museum visitor called dogs war walked around museum understood importance mafeking nineteenthcentury cape colony geography 1897 rail junction line cape bulawayothe stretch track followed buses walking across border botswana south africa line finished mafeking also beyond border boer republicthe transvaal calledand english settlers cape colony twice 1881 1884 international treaties adjusted borders rival powers neither occasion keep boers hoping extend sphere influence mafeking something tried hostilities began great britain 1899 mafeking also key town great power politics region included endless struggle southern african english colonists cecil rhodes best known instruments german power controlled land african coasts southern africa german south west africa west mafeking german east africa later tanzania east buffer state bechuanaland administrative center mafeking north border crossing ramatlabama land botswana protectorate bechuanaland rhodes colonial officials sought control corridor rhodesia south molopo river known british bechuanaland part cape colony wonder mafeking became ladysmith contested town angloboer war one actually second fought october 1899 shortly war declared boers laid siege town rail junction inside perimeter enclosed town center fort railway station small english garrison white population many african nativesa people known batalong reluctantly sided british boers believed racial segregation slavery said british commander town siege colonel robert badenpowell treated nominal allies batalong workhorses indentured servants often denying food except thin gruel skirmishes small battles fought around town siege lasted 217 days lifted may 1900 month british troopschurchill among themtook pretoria ending phase conventional warfare conflict continued almost two years guerrilla struggle boers fought loose formations called commandos british retaliated burning 30000 boer farms transvaal orange free state rounding thousands boer families mostly women children men away battle herding concentration camps nazi invention archipelago camps conditions inhumane twentysix thousand boers mostly children died british captivity many ways boer war great britains vietnam algeria colonial war could fought unsuccessfully violence citizenry british colonialism never recovered mafeking liberated years annual dinner london celebrate would argue downhill british empire even though prevailed two world wars winston churchill boer war winner boer war winston churchill emerged words author candice millard hero empire war lacked identifiable british heroesgeneral louis botha later south african prime minister one boerschurchills daring exploits capture subsequent escape cast one full title millards book hero empire making winston churchill read road okay change air mafikeng johannesburg wasnt much gone soft african busesalthough resistance sevenhour rides weakening searching connection two cities struggled find even name operating bus company feared another stranding travel chat rooms indicate combis cover route frequent departures near old station best could determine one morning bus found 30 air ticket pounced would spare night within siege lines another death ride minivan millards book conventional history well told doesnt unearth new information churchill weird parents many ambitions route escape mozambique often quotes churchills letters books subject story neatly told riveting account churchills capture escape clear summary second angloboer war millards take churchills interest south africa coming boer war could offer chance glory believed missing ingredient resumé election parliament several months hostilities broke british boers churchill stood oldham byelection filling vacant seat normal parliamentary elections lost oldham coal country midlands liberal defeated candidates parliamentary seats need live districts even know much carpetbagging rule britain denied chance sit parliament longer serving military officer graduated sandhurst churchill heard news crisis south africa glee finally would chance show mettle fire although ticket front lines war correspondent londons morning post newspaper churchill often early career blurred lines combatant correspondent even resigned military commission could get front infantry cavalry officer would switch hats go newspaper man seen action northwest frontier territory cuba notably cavalry charge battle omdurman sudan outside khartoum resulting bestselling book river war historical account reconquest soudan 1899 warrior fame far eluded heading south africawinston traveled servant full wine cellarchurchills great fear war would got chance dance lady fame sooner troopship docked cape town way durban connected troop train heading north toward ladysmith front lines boers carried small knapsacks long rifles little else slept wild lived land considered contrast british cavalry officer according millard might ride front weighing 400 pounds added kit tactically british army advanced little skirmish lines deployed waterloo troops marched shot rifles tight formations boers hidden behind boulders made sitting ducks early months fighting around ladysmith british experienced losses eventually town surrounded besieged happened mafeking technological superioritynot unlike americans vietnam fighting vietcongthe british hoped relieve ladysmith siege sending armoredplated train full troops line toward city think early tank one rails made easy boers spot steam flowing engine track slow progress line british troops theater operation thought duty armored train little orders suicide casualties inflicted men huddled inside platedhopper cars gun holes punched sides thus resembled medieval serpent steaming toward destruction letter churchill wrote armoured train name sounds strange locomotive disguised knighterrant agent civilisation habiliments chivalry impatient churchill get front lines ladysmith scoop newspaper rivals perhaps engage glory hunting agreed join one operation armored train part way line hamlet frere boers cut churchills train killed number men knocked several rail cars rails terms warfare 1899 strictly speaking war correspondent never carry firearm way participate fighting punishment breaking code conduct correspondent captured side often summary execution train attack officers wounded churchill responded bravely challenge helped clear line directed fire boers loaded wounded men onto engine sent direction british lines thus saving lives many wounded attack churchill escapes prison pretoria churchill surrounded captured many early days captivity feared boers might execute back england accounts fighting reputation gallantry desperately seeking prisoners officers men along correspondent marched prison pretoria staats model school later south african capital tracked location corner lilian ngoyi nana sita gps made hash pronunciation building one handful dutch designs boer era still standing feels like school might come across hague moment churchill entered prison devoted waking hours escape planning might expect someone loved strategic brainstorming schemes grew grander grander one plan would simply break jail flee border would kidnap president paul kruger hold hostage boers surrendered war end rash churchill bolted back fence prison without two fellow prisoners gone one spoke afrikaans zulu language would helped road hence winston striding town burgher going walk hopped freight train took forty miles capital ran schemes ideas food little water countryside crawling boer police lookout celebrated prisoner everyone knew son randolph churchill chancellor exchequer also written number articles belittling boers churchill chance walking several hundred miles border terrain knocked random door hoping bribe way freedom prisoner flush cash remarkable good fortune knocked door englishman managed prosperous coal mine transvaal undertook orchestrate winstons escape churchill given food whiskey cigars stashed mine shaft could hidden goods train taking wool docks lourenço marques one english sympathizers went bribe away nosy custom inspectors like churchill made freedom millard writes didnt weapon map compass aside bars chocolate pocket food didnt speak language either boers africans beyond vaguest outlines didnt even planjust unshakable conviction destined greatness back durban coastal steamer end december 1899 churchill given heros welcome rest life would remain household name britain millard writes reminded world meant britonresilient resourceful even face extreme danger utterly unruffled one men saved churchill turned oldham next election sent parliament would serve various constituencies 1964 died next year next johannesburg pretoria boer republic read earlier chapters please click | 2,492 |
<p>Exclusively for CounterPunch, Matthew Stevenson travels from Haiphong and Hanoi, in what was North Vietnam, to the Central Highlands and Ho Chi Minh City, formerly Saigon and the capital, in search of the remnants of the American war in Vietnam. This is Part III of an eight-part series.</p>
<p>The battle of Ap Bac, in the Mekong Delta, prominent in the education of Lt. Col. John Paul Vann, if not in the American descent into Vietnam.</p>
<p>On this trip to Vietnam, a lot of my time was spent in search of the elusive character of John Paul Vann, the subject of Neil Sheehan’s prize-winning history, <a href="" type="internal">A Bright Shining Lie</a>. The book, some 800 pages, was published in 1988, and it tells the story of Vann’s service in Vietnam, where as a lieutenant colonel in 1962 he began serving as an adviser to a Vietnamese division in the Mekong Delta.</p>
<p>Although Vann retired from the army in summer 1963, he could not leave the country or the war alone, and he returned there, serving as a civilian pacification expert and in other responsibilities, until June 1972.</p>
<p>Just after the battle of Kontum, in which, as a foreign service officer with the highest grade, he had command over American forces, he was killed in a helicopter accident.</p>
<p>In between, as described in Sheehan’s magisterial biography, Vann becomes a metaphor for all the promise and disappointment of the American intervention in Vietnam.</p>
<p>Vann never gives up believing that the war can be won, but he disagrees strongly with the likes of Robert McNamara and General William Westmorland that a war of attrition can be successful against either Viet Cong or North Vietnamese regulars.</p>
<p>The “bright, shining lie,” depending on the chapter in the book, is either the American illusion in Vietnam or John Paul Vann himself, who despite his Boy Scout appearance and starched khaki uniform, allows the sorrows of war to cover up a debauched personal life (under-age mistresses, illegitimate children, bigamy, abandonment of his U.S. family, etc.).</p>
<p>Vann died several days after winning a masterful 1972 victory over the North Vietnamese Army in the battle of Kontum—one of the great victories of the American war, although within a matter of months Kontum was given away for a soundbite at the Paris peace talks, so that Nixon and Kissinger could run for re-election on having “ended” the Vietnam war.</p>
<p>A Visit to Ap Bac in the Mekong Delta</p>
<p>I first read Sheehan’s history and biography in winter 1993, when I went to Hanoi for the first time, but it was only in my more recent travels that I went to Ap Bac, the site of the 1963 battle in the Mekong Delta, that sets the stage for much of Vann’s bitterness about the war.</p>
<p>In that battle, the Vietnamese forces to which Vann is attached as an adviser have the chance to surround and annihilate a battalion of Viet Cong forces, who have decided to make a stand near a hamlet (on the edge of a rice paddy) outside the provincial town of My Tho in the Delta.</p>
<p>[If you are trying to get there, which I recommend, Ap Bac is about fifty miles southwest of Ho Chi Minh City or 15 miles northwest of My Tho, on country lanes and dirt roads to the north of Highway QL1A, on which the bus to Vinh Long can drop you. A small museum is on the spot, although the staff is clueless about the battle.]</p>
<p>For the battle and his Vietnamese soldiers, Vann orchestrated the backup presence of American helicopter gunships and amphibious half-tracks, to support the attack of the infantry across a broad rice paddy (see the above photograph). But Vann cannot fight the battle all on his own, and his South Vietnamese soldiers turn a potential victory into a humiliating defeat.</p>
<p>In the fighting for Ap Bac, American helicopters are shot down, attacks against the Viet Cong are avoided, and the enemy is allowed to skip out the back. Vann is furious and leaks his frustration to the American press in Saigon, including Sheehan, who was an early eye witness to the after-action of the fighting. But neither Vann’s nor Sheehan’s take on the battle—that of a South Vietnamese failure of nerve—is what gets played up in the briefing rooms.</p>
<p>The local U.S. commander General Paul Harkins, the rest of the American military brass in Vietnam, and the Kennedy administration all decide to close ranks and to proclaim Ap Bac a great victory for the South Vietnamese army. As they tell the war stories, it confirms the nobility of American assistance in Vietnam and the courage of our allies, even though few had engaged the enemy at Ap Bac.</p>
<p>When, however, American reporters, including Sheehan, visit the battlefield in the aftermath and question the lack of enemy dead or the doomed American helicopters lying on their sides, they are denounced for aiding and abetting the enemy, and for not keeping up with the tunes of the patriotic marches.</p>
<p>Actually Ap Bac meant more in the Vietnam War than simply an opportunity lost to encircle a vulnerable enemy battalion.</p>
<p>When the U.S. army and political establishment (away from the upbeat headlines) took stock of the performance of the South Vietnamese army, they came to the conclusion that the only way to win the war would be with direct involvement of U.S. combat forces.</p>
<p>Ap Bac—almost more than the false flagged naval encounters in the Gulf of Tonkin—cast the die for the Kennedy and Johnson administrations to wage war directly against North Vietnam and the Viet Cong. It was decided that only with direct American arms could the fighting be won.</p>
<p>In the delusional words of aspiring politician Ronald Reagan, who said in 1965: “We should declare war on North Vietnam. . . . We could pave the whole country and put parking strips on it, and still be home by Christmas.”</p>
<p>John Paul Vann Goes After Hearts and Minds</p>
<p>Unfortunately for American history, the battle template that U.S. commanders brought to Vietnam was lifted from the playbook that defeated the Germans on the plains of northern Europe.</p>
<p>It called for a mechanized army to advance on a broad front, backed up by artillery, air power, and armor. But unlike in Europe, where the goal was to liberate cities and countries, success here would be measured by the number of enemy killed, as if in one of the Indian wars.</p>
<p>While Vann was all for a holy war against Communism in Southeast Asia, he wasn’t eager to sign up for Westmoreland’s way of war. Vann subscribed more to what is now called counter-insurgency, the idea that small-unit tactics, as opposed to carpet bombings of cities and the countryside, could win against the invaders. Sheehan writes:</p>
<p>One of Vann’s most famous maxims, often quoted down the years, came from those first lessons: “This is a political war and it calls for discrimination in killing. The best weapon for killing would be a knife, but I’m afraid we can’t do it that way. The worst is an airplane. The next worst is artillery. Barring a knife, the best is a rifle—you know who you’re killing.”</p>
<p>Vann’s outspokenness, however, not to mention some of the scandals in his personal life, forced him to retire from the army in summer 1963 as a lieutenant colonel, after twenty years of service.</p>
<p>A week before he retired, he had been scheduled to brief some of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on alternative strategies with which to wage the Vietnam war, but at the last minute the briefing was cancelled.</p>
<p>Only years later, when he had risen through the civilian ranks of the in-country pacification programs, could Vann apply his tactical theories, although by then the war was a lost cause.</p>
<p>Sheehan describes Vann’s reaction in 1965 to the coming of U.S. combat forces into Vietnam:</p>
<p>“The American soldier was merely buying time,” Vann warned. “The major challenge now facing the U.S. in Vietnam” was to use that time to break the Communist monopoly on social revolution.</p>
<p>Vann wants to win over the same hearts and mind as does Westmoreland, only he wants to do it by driving his jeep around contested provinces and by building new schools.</p>
<p>Few Americans ever spent so much time “in country” as did John Paul Vann, who was there for many stretches between 1962 and 1972.</p>
<p>Down the Ho Chi Minh Trail Through the Central Highlands</p>
<p>In search of Vann’s greatest accomplishment in Vietnam, as the “civilian general” who orchestrated and won the 1972 battle of Kontum, on this trip I decided to travel through the Central Highlands.</p>
<p>My original plan was to bus-and-bike from Dieu Tri, near the coast, to Pleiku, along Highway 19, which passes through An Khe and the Man Yang Pass, the scene of a French military defeat in 1954 that spelled the end of the French occupation of Indochina, much as did Dien Bien Phu earlier in the same year.</p>
<p>Instead of following the French to the scene of their ambush, to get to Kontum I was obliged to change my plans and to take a mini-van from Danang that for six hours climbed the escarpments of the Central Highlands. Who knew that Vietnam had an alpine landscape?</p>
<p>Here and there, the bus stopped for meal breaks and coffee, but mostly it played chicken with oncoming traffic, all of which jostled for a place on the twisting two-lane road.</p>
<p>Close to Kontum, one of the cities in the highlands, the bus made <a href="" type="internal" />stops in Dak To II and Dak To, mountainside towns that during the war years had straddled the Ho Chi Minh Trail and had seen some of the heaviest fighting in Vietnam—first in 1967 and again in the 1972 Easter Offensive.</p>
<p>Although the sun was beginning to set by the time my bus arrived in Dak To, I still had clear views of the rolling, mountainous landscape that stretched west from Dak To toward the nearby borders with both Cambodia and Laos.</p>
<p>Here the Ho Chi Minh Trail might well have been a back road through the Cumberland Mountains.</p>
<p>Along Rocket Ridge in the Central Highlands to Kontum</p>
<p>If the Americans had won the war in Vietnam, this landscape would be recalled in history in the same context as Antietam Creek. But because the U.S. was driven out of Vietnam, Kontum is as forgotten as the War of Jenkins’ Ear.</p>
<p>In these now barren hills (a number have never recovered from being hit by defoliants), the American army constructed a number of fire-support bases, both to block the Ho Chi Minh Trail as it worked its way south toward Saigon, and to assist infantry operations that were launched in the direction of enemy formations that also poured across the nearby borders with Laos and Cambodia.</p>
<p>The most distinctive hillside on the drive, just north of Kontum, had the nickname “Rocket Ridge” The Americans turned it into a medieval fortress that—in the numerous attacks against Dak To and Kontum—the North Vietnamese often tried to storm, as if scaling the walls of a medieval castle.</p>
<p>John Vann’s last battle, that for Kontum in 1972, was a classic set-piece engagement fought between North Vietnamese regulars (NVA) and the South Vietnamese Army (often called ARVN) on this thirty-mile stretch of highway between Dak To and Kontum.</p>
<p>Wanting to end the war in 1972, the NVA attacked with tanks and in human waves against the entrenched positions of Vann’s ARVN forces (who were backed up by American military advisers).</p>
<p>By this point in the war, Nixon had withdrawn most American combat forces, which explains why a civilian had senior military rank in Military Region II and why American involvement was largely limited to air power and artillery.</p>
<p>In the early days of the 1972 Easter Offensive, the NVA overran Dak To and besieged Kontum, much as General Vo Nguyen Giap had surrounded the French at Dien Bien Phu.</p>
<p>On this occasion, however, thanks to Vann’s presence and his thirst for battle, the ARVN could call on the combined arms of the American air forces, which threw everything from B-52 bombers to army Cobra helicopters into the fight to save the surrounded city of Kontum.</p>
<p>With Vann’s reputation on the line, American advisers guided the South Vietnamese army to hold their lines around Kontum, while from the air thousands of bombs broke the North Vietnamese advance and later the siege lines. It was a near-run thing, but eventually in early June the NVA withdrew.</p>
<p>Had such a victory come in 1965, when the first U.S. ground troops were sent to Vietnam, it would have been hailed as one of the great victories of the war.</p>
<p>Coming, however, in summer 1972, by which time the American public had given up on the Vietnam War, Kontum was a footnote in a disintegrating situation at the end of a lost war. Who today even remembers its name?</p>
<p>The Battle of Kontum Saves South Vietnam—for a while</p>
<p>My room that night was in a hotel training center, staffed with students and interns, all of whom meant well and tried hard, even if the cost of good intentions was inedible food in the restaurant.</p>
<p>The next morning, before breakfast and the coming mid-day sun, I went out on my bicycle, in search of what had once been the 1972 siege lines. But long ago they had vanished under the construction of a modern, if pleasant, Vietnamese city.</p>
<p>Another book I was reading on my Kindle was Thomas P. McKenna’s <a href="" type="internal">Kontum: The Battle to Save South Vietnam</a>. It’s partly a campaign history (with detailed descriptions of Air Force units and artillery brigades) and partly a Vietnam War memoir, although McKenna is one of the few writers from that time who believed that the war could still be won and who fought with the devotion of a Confederate calvary officer—in this case, to save Kontum. His courage is commendable, and he writes with a distinctive, positive voice.</p>
<p>In his book, McKenna writes of John Paul Vann, his commanding officer:</p>
<p>Brigadier General Hill considered John Paul Vann abrasive and self-centered and saw him run roughshod over people. However, during the six weeks he spent with Vann he realized what a good fighting man he was. Vann never asked his subordinates to do anything he would not do himself, and Hill never knew any officer who got so much loyalty from his troops. Hill had more military experience than Vann but could not equal Vann’s influence with the Vietnamese. Vann was the one American who came, stayed for a decade, and showed the Vietnamese he cared. This feeling and his good rapport with the Vietnamese enabled him to look them in the eye and say things like, “You really screwed that one up!”</p>
<p>On the bicycle I made several loops through the shops in the downtown section, which even early in the morning were spilling into the streets.</p>
<p>But to see more of the vast battle area, I decided to hire a car and driver and to explore the contours of the battlefields from Dak To south to Pleiku, a front that was sixty miles long and twenty miles from east to west.</p>
<p>Aside from a few North Vietnamese memorials, the battlefields have been lost in time. Even the NVA monuments have a forlorn quality. Many were locked behind rusting fences and covered with fallen leaves.</p>
<p>Needless to say, there are no American markers, and the only South Vietnamese memorial, by the side of a busy road, implies that its war dead were scattered to the wind—a sacrilege in the local culture.</p>
<p>John Vann and the American Presence in Vietnam Go Down in Flames</p>
<p>On the drive I did manage to locate the location near the Kontum Pass where John Vann died on the night of June 9, 1972, flying back from a meeting in Pleiku.</p>
<p>During the battle of Kontum, Vann made it a point to visit the besieged city every day. Although the battle was over by June 8, the next day he kept to his routine of touching down in Kontum, even if on this occasion it meant a night flight, over contested ground, through deteriorating weather conditions.</p>
<p>That night he was also flying with a replacement pilot; his regular pilot was suffering from battle fatigue, from so many previous flights with Vann into harm’s way.</p>
<p>Approaching Kontum, but not yet through the Chu Pao Pass, Vann (or perhaps his relief pilot—we don’t know who was at the controls) flew the helicopter into the ground, into what Sheehan describes as the only grove of trees on the line from Pleiku to Kontum.</p>
<p>I cannot be sure I found the exact place where Vann died. I had copies of pages from Sheehan’s book, plus a map in his biography marking the tree grove with an “X”. And I had highlighted on my Kindle passages from McKenna’s history of the battle.</p>
<p>But the driver I had engaged that morning was allergic to factual information, my maps, or even Google coordinates. After I spotted trees and high ground on the flight path into Kontum, he parked the car off the road haphazardly and encouraged me to search for the spot.</p>
<p>From a parking lot of a nearby gas station, I took pictures of the area, frustrated that the Vietnam War comes without any of the markers that punctuate the battlefields of the American Civil War.</p>
<p>(Later my friend Craig Whitney, who worked closely with Sheehan at the New York Times and reported from Vietnam, wrote to me: “Are the Montagnard death figures still standing in the grove Vann crashed into?” If they are, I could not find them.)</p>
<p>In his biography of Vann, Sheehan describes at great length Vann’s military burial in Arlington National Cemetery, about a week after the accident.</p>
<p>One of the ironies of Vann’s life is that his death brought together the oddest collection of mourners. Army generals, with whom he had argued for years about the course of the Vietnam war, were there. So were journalists and opponents of the war.</p>
<p>Not far away, and ready to greet the Vann family at the White House, was President Richard Nixon, who appreciated that Vann was one of the few who believed in Vietnamization.</p>
<p>Another who mourned the loss of his good friend John Paul Vann was former RAND Corporation official Daniel Ellsberg, who in that summer of 1972 was in the fight of his life (with many of those gathered around Vann’s grave) to stay out of jail for having leaked the Pentagon Papers (to Neil Sheehan at the New York Times).</p>
<p>The only person who brought all these men together, at least in death, was Vann—although it is still isn’t clear whether he was the last believer or the first cynic.</p>
<p>The Deep State Premieres in Vietnam</p>
<p>Another presence in the lives of Neil Sheehan, Daniel Ellsberg, and John Paul Vann was the former Times reporter David Halberstam, who in 1972 would publish <a href="" type="internal">The Best and the Brightest</a>.</p>
<p>Halberstam had been with Sheehan and Vann during the time of Ap Bac, and he was among those reporters who had questioned the official story of the battle as a South Vietnamese victory.</p>
<p>About the time of Vann’s burial—perhaps with the mourners gathered around the Vann grave in mind—in his book Halberstam quotes Sheehan at length in describing what sounds like an early edition of the Deep State. He writes:</p>
<p>These men, largely private, were functioning on a level different from the public policy of the United States, and years later when New York Times reporter Neil Sheehan read through the entire documentary history of the war, that history known as the Pentagon Papers, he would come away with one impression above all, which was that the government of the United States was not what he had thought it was; it was as if there were an inner U.S. government, what he called “a centralized state, far more powerful than anything else, for whom the enemy is not simply the Communists but everything else, its own press, its own judiciary, its own Congress, foreign and friendly governments—all these are potentially antagonistic. It had survived and perpetuated itself,” Sheehan continued, “often using the issue of anti-Communism as a weapon against the other branches of government and the press, and finally, it does not function necessarily for the benefit of the Republic but rather for its own ends, its own perpetuation; it has its own codes which are quite different from public codes. Secrecy was a way of protecting itself, not so much from threats by foreign governments, but from detection from its own population on charges of its own competence and wisdom.”</p>
<p>Sheehan devoted some sixteen years of his adult life, not to mention all his years as reporter in Vietnam, to figuring out and writing down the life of John Paul Vann. A Bright Shining Lie is worth such an effort.</p>
<p>Although I have read the book twice now, I still struggle to figure out if Sheehan admires Vann, despite all his flaws, or whether he believes he embodies everything that is misguided about the American experience in Vietnam.</p>
<p>My feeling is that Sheehan likes and admires Vann as both a professional soldier and a friend. Later on, however, neither Vann nor the war effort turn out to look as they did in those early, upbeat press briefings from 1962-63.</p>
<p>To chase away these demons, Sheehan spends all those years writing A Bright Shining Lie—to figure out how he misunderstood Vann and how the government of the United States got the war in Vietnam so wrong.</p>
<p>Sheehan’s book is one of the few good things to come out of a bad war, and I took pleasure on my bike in following his chapters and prose around Vietnam, which feels a little less gloomy when you have a good book in your hands. (It felt as if I was reading Ulysses—“… a nightmare from which I am trying to awake”—while biking around Dublin.)</p>
<p>Otherwise in many places, Vietnam might well be Reagan’s paved paradise, where the war is largely forgotten and all that remains—besides the painful memories for those who served here (Don’t it always seem to go / That you don’t know what you’ve got / ’Till it’s gone)—is an empty parking lot of the American soul.</p>
<p>Up Next: To the Street Without Joy, north of Hue, where French-American scholar Bernard Fall wrote part of his famous history, and where ten years later he was killed. <a href="https://www.counterpunch.org/author/be2uyeta/" type="external">To read earlier installments in the series, please click here</a>.</p> | true | 4 | exclusively counterpunch matthew stevenson travels haiphong hanoi north vietnam central highlands ho chi minh city formerly saigon capital search remnants american war vietnam part iii eightpart series battle ap bac mekong delta prominent education lt col john paul vann american descent vietnam trip vietnam lot time spent search elusive character john paul vann subject neil sheehans prizewinning history bright shining lie book 800 pages published 1988 tells story vanns service vietnam lieutenant colonel 1962 began serving adviser vietnamese division mekong delta although vann retired army summer 1963 could leave country war alone returned serving civilian pacification expert responsibilities june 1972 battle kontum foreign service officer highest grade command american forces killed helicopter accident described sheehans magisterial biography vann becomes metaphor promise disappointment american intervention vietnam vann never gives believing war disagrees strongly likes robert mcnamara general william westmorland war attrition successful either viet cong north vietnamese regulars bright shining lie depending chapter book either american illusion vietnam john paul vann despite boy scout appearance starched khaki uniform allows sorrows war cover debauched personal life underage mistresses illegitimate children bigamy abandonment us family etc vann died several days winning masterful 1972 victory north vietnamese army battle kontumone great victories american war although within matter months kontum given away soundbite paris peace talks nixon kissinger could run reelection ended vietnam war visit ap bac mekong delta first read sheehans history biography winter 1993 went hanoi first time recent travels went ap bac site 1963 battle mekong delta sets stage much vanns bitterness war battle vietnamese forces vann attached adviser chance surround annihilate battalion viet cong forces decided make stand near hamlet edge rice paddy outside provincial town tho delta trying get recommend ap bac fifty miles southwest ho chi minh city 15 miles northwest tho country lanes dirt roads north highway ql1a bus vinh long drop small museum spot although staff clueless battle battle vietnamese soldiers vann orchestrated backup presence american helicopter gunships amphibious halftracks support attack infantry across broad rice paddy see photograph vann fight battle south vietnamese soldiers turn potential victory humiliating defeat fighting ap bac american helicopters shot attacks viet cong avoided enemy allowed skip back vann furious leaks frustration american press saigon including sheehan early eye witness afteraction fighting neither vanns sheehans take battlethat south vietnamese failure nerveis gets played briefing rooms local us commander general paul harkins rest american military brass vietnam kennedy administration decide close ranks proclaim ap bac great victory south vietnamese army tell war stories confirms nobility american assistance vietnam courage allies even though engaged enemy ap bac however american reporters including sheehan visit battlefield aftermath question lack enemy dead doomed american helicopters lying sides denounced aiding abetting enemy keeping tunes patriotic marches actually ap bac meant vietnam war simply opportunity lost encircle vulnerable enemy battalion us army political establishment away upbeat headlines took stock performance south vietnamese army came conclusion way win war would direct involvement us combat forces ap bacalmost false flagged naval encounters gulf tonkincast die kennedy johnson administrations wage war directly north vietnam viet cong decided direct american arms could fighting delusional words aspiring politician ronald reagan said 1965 declare war north vietnam could pave whole country put parking strips still home christmas john paul vann goes hearts minds unfortunately american history battle template us commanders brought vietnam lifted playbook defeated germans plains northern europe called mechanized army advance broad front backed artillery air power armor unlike europe goal liberate cities countries success would measured number enemy killed one indian wars vann holy war communism southeast asia wasnt eager sign westmorelands way war vann subscribed called counterinsurgency idea smallunit tactics opposed carpet bombings cities countryside could win invaders sheehan writes one vanns famous maxims often quoted years came first lessons political war calls discrimination killing best weapon killing would knife im afraid cant way worst airplane next worst artillery barring knife best rifleyou know youre killing vanns outspokenness however mention scandals personal life forced retire army summer 1963 lieutenant colonel twenty years service week retired scheduled brief joint chiefs staff alternative strategies wage vietnam war last minute briefing cancelled years later risen civilian ranks incountry pacification programs could vann apply tactical theories although war lost cause sheehan describes vanns reaction 1965 coming us combat forces vietnam american soldier merely buying time vann warned major challenge facing us vietnam use time break communist monopoly social revolution vann wants win hearts mind westmoreland wants driving jeep around contested provinces building new schools americans ever spent much time country john paul vann many stretches 1962 1972 ho chi minh trail central highlands search vanns greatest accomplishment vietnam civilian general orchestrated 1972 battle kontum trip decided travel central highlands original plan busandbike dieu tri near coast pleiku along highway 19 passes khe man yang pass scene french military defeat 1954 spelled end french occupation indochina much dien bien phu earlier year instead following french scene ambush get kontum obliged change plans take minivan danang six hours climbed escarpments central highlands knew vietnam alpine landscape bus stopped meal breaks coffee mostly played chicken oncoming traffic jostled place twisting twolane road close kontum one cities highlands bus made stops dak ii dak mountainside towns war years straddled ho chi minh trail seen heaviest fighting vietnamfirst 1967 1972 easter offensive although sun beginning set time bus arrived dak still clear views rolling mountainous landscape stretched west dak toward nearby borders cambodia laos ho chi minh trail might well back road cumberland mountains along rocket ridge central highlands kontum americans war vietnam landscape would recalled history context antietam creek us driven vietnam kontum forgotten war jenkins ear barren hills number never recovered hit defoliants american army constructed number firesupport bases block ho chi minh trail worked way south toward saigon assist infantry operations launched direction enemy formations also poured across nearby borders laos cambodia distinctive hillside drive north kontum nickname rocket ridge americans turned medieval fortress thatin numerous attacks dak kontumthe north vietnamese often tried storm scaling walls medieval castle john vanns last battle kontum 1972 classic setpiece engagement fought north vietnamese regulars nva south vietnamese army often called arvn thirtymile stretch highway dak kontum wanting end war 1972 nva attacked tanks human waves entrenched positions vanns arvn forces backed american military advisers point war nixon withdrawn american combat forces explains civilian senior military rank military region ii american involvement largely limited air power artillery early days 1972 easter offensive nva overran dak besieged kontum much general vo nguyen giap surrounded french dien bien phu occasion however thanks vanns presence thirst battle arvn could call combined arms american air forces threw everything b52 bombers army cobra helicopters fight save surrounded city kontum vanns reputation line american advisers guided south vietnamese army hold lines around kontum air thousands bombs broke north vietnamese advance later siege lines nearrun thing eventually early june nva withdrew victory come 1965 first us ground troops sent vietnam would hailed one great victories war coming however summer 1972 time american public given vietnam war kontum footnote disintegrating situation end lost war today even remembers name battle kontum saves south vietnamfor room night hotel training center staffed students interns meant well tried hard even cost good intentions inedible food restaurant next morning breakfast coming midday sun went bicycle search 1972 siege lines long ago vanished construction modern pleasant vietnamese city another book reading kindle thomas p mckennas kontum battle save south vietnam partly campaign history detailed descriptions air force units artillery brigades partly vietnam war memoir although mckenna one writers time believed war could still fought devotion confederate calvary officerin case save kontum courage commendable writes distinctive positive voice book mckenna writes john paul vann commanding officer brigadier general hill considered john paul vann abrasive selfcentered saw run roughshod people however six weeks spent vann realized good fighting man vann never asked subordinates anything would hill never knew officer got much loyalty troops hill military experience vann could equal vanns influence vietnamese vann one american came stayed decade showed vietnamese cared feeling good rapport vietnamese enabled look eye say things like really screwed one bicycle made several loops shops downtown section even early morning spilling streets see vast battle area decided hire car driver explore contours battlefields dak south pleiku front sixty miles long twenty miles east west aside north vietnamese memorials battlefields lost time even nva monuments forlorn quality many locked behind rusting fences covered fallen leaves needless say american markers south vietnamese memorial side busy road implies war dead scattered winda sacrilege local culture john vann american presence vietnam go flames drive manage locate location near kontum pass john vann died night june 9 1972 flying back meeting pleiku battle kontum vann made point visit besieged city every day although battle june 8 next day kept routine touching kontum even occasion meant night flight contested ground deteriorating weather conditions night also flying replacement pilot regular pilot suffering battle fatigue many previous flights vann harms way approaching kontum yet chu pao pass vann perhaps relief pilotwe dont know controls flew helicopter ground sheehan describes grove trees line pleiku kontum sure found exact place vann died copies pages sheehans book plus map biography marking tree grove x highlighted kindle passages mckennas history battle driver engaged morning allergic factual information maps even google coordinates spotted trees high ground flight path kontum parked car road haphazardly encouraged search spot parking lot nearby gas station took pictures area frustrated vietnam war comes without markers punctuate battlefields american civil war later friend craig whitney worked closely sheehan new york times reported vietnam wrote montagnard death figures still standing grove vann crashed could find biography vann sheehan describes great length vanns military burial arlington national cemetery week accident one ironies vanns life death brought together oddest collection mourners army generals argued years course vietnam war journalists opponents war far away ready greet vann family white house president richard nixon appreciated vann one believed vietnamization another mourned loss good friend john paul vann former rand corporation official daniel ellsberg summer 1972 fight life many gathered around vanns grave stay jail leaked pentagon papers neil sheehan new york times person brought men together least death vannalthough still isnt clear whether last believer first cynic deep state premieres vietnam another presence lives neil sheehan daniel ellsberg john paul vann former times reporter david halberstam 1972 would publish best brightest halberstam sheehan vann time ap bac among reporters questioned official story battle south vietnamese victory time vanns burialperhaps mourners gathered around vann grave mindin book halberstam quotes sheehan length describing sounds like early edition deep state writes men largely private functioning level different public policy united states years later new york times reporter neil sheehan read entire documentary history war history known pentagon papers would come away one impression government united states thought inner us government called centralized state far powerful anything else enemy simply communists everything else press judiciary congress foreign friendly governmentsall potentially antagonistic survived perpetuated sheehan continued often using issue anticommunism weapon branches government press finally function necessarily benefit republic rather ends perpetuation codes quite different public codes secrecy way protecting much threats foreign governments detection population charges competence wisdom sheehan devoted sixteen years adult life mention years reporter vietnam figuring writing life john paul vann bright shining lie worth effort although read book twice still struggle figure sheehan admires vann despite flaws whether believes embodies everything misguided american experience vietnam feeling sheehan likes admires vann professional soldier friend later however neither vann war effort turn look early upbeat press briefings 196263 chase away demons sheehan spends years writing bright shining lieto figure misunderstood vann government united states got war vietnam wrong sheehans book one good things come bad war took pleasure bike following chapters prose around vietnam feels little less gloomy good book hands felt reading ulysses nightmare trying awakewhile biking around dublin otherwise many places vietnam might well reagans paved paradise war largely forgotten remainsbesides painful memories served dont always seem go dont know youve got till goneis empty parking lot american soul next street without joy north hue frenchamerican scholar bernard fall wrote part famous history ten years later killed read earlier installments series please click | 2,017 |
<p>“Homo sapiens is poised to become the greatest catastrophic agent since a giant asteroid collided with the Earth 65,000,000 years ago, wiping out half the world’s species in a geological instant.” So wrote anthropologist Richard Leakey in his 1995 book, “ <a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Sixth-Extinction-Patterns-Humankind/dp/0385468091" type="external">The Sixth Extinction</a>: Patterns of Life and the Future of Humankind.”</p>
<p>Because of the vital dependence we have on the “ecosystem services” provided by the rest of nature, Leakey warned, “unrestrained, Homo sapiens might not only be the agent of the sixth extinction, but also risks being one of its victims.”</p>
<p>Twenty years later, the great climate journalist Elizabeth Kolbert has won a very deserved Pulitzer prize for her nonfiction book “ <a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Sixth-Extinction-Unnatural-History/dp/0805092994" type="external">The Sixth Extinction</a>: An Unnatural History.”</p>
<p>In her book, Kolbert quotes Leakey and explains that there’s no way of knowing if humanity will be wiped out in this self-inflicted disaster. For her, “what’s most worth attending to” right now, is the fact that “we are deciding, without quite meaning to, which evolutionary pathway remain open and which will forever be closed.” As she notes, “no other creature has ever managed this.”</p>
<p>I personally doubt homo sapiens will go fully extinct. The more important question for me is whether the planet can support upwards of 10 billion people post-2050 given that we have already <a href="" type="internal">overshot the Earth’s biocapacity</a> — and the overshoot gets worse every year.</p>
<p>Most significantly, we are in the process of destroying a livable climate upon which so many species, including our own, rely. We are currently on a trajectory to warm the planet 4°C (7°F) or more this century and then continue warming in the next. In 2011, the UK Royal Society devoted a <a href="http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/369/1934/4" type="external">special issue</a> of one of its journals to “Four degrees and beyond: the potential for a global temperature increase of four degrees and its implications.” The concluding piece warned:</p>
<p>“In such a 4°C world, the limits for human adaptation are likely to be exceeded in many parts of the world, while the limits for adaptation for natural systems would largely be exceeded throughout the world.”</p>
<p>In particular, “drought and desertification would be widespread” and we’d see “large areas of cropland becoming unsuitable for cultivation, and declining agricultural yields.” At the same time, we’d “also rapidly be losing [the world’s] ecosystem services, owing to large losses in biodiversity, forests, coastal wetlands, mangroves and saltmarshes, and terrestrial carbon stores, supported by an acidified and potentially dysfunctional marine ecosystem.”</p>
<p>Can such a world support 10 billion people?</p>
<p>As for biodiversity, a 2015 study in Science said we may lose one-sixth of all species to extinction if we warm 4°C. “Other experts said the real toll may turn out to be even worse,” <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/05/science/new-estimates-for-extinctions-global-warming-could-cause.html" type="external">reported</a> the New York Times. The paper quoted evolutionary biologist John Wiens warning the number of extinctions “may well be two to three times higher.”</p>
<p>As I <a href="" type="internal">reported</a> a few weeks ago, another 2015 <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/348/6231/229.abstract" type="external">study in Science</a> concluded that the Permo-Triassic extinction 252 million years ago (“the greatest extinction of all time”) happened when massive amounts carbon dioxide were injected into the atmosphere, first slowly and then quickly (driven by volcanic eruptions). The researchers found “During the second extinction pulse, however, a rapid and large injection of carbon caused an abrupt acidification event that drove the preferential loss of heavily calcified marine biota.” This extinction <a href="http://www.ed.ac.uk/news/2015/acidoceans-090415" type="external">killed over 90 percent of marine life</a> and wiped out some 70 percent of land-based animal and plant life.</p>
<p>A 2014 <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/344/6187/1246752.abstract" type="external">review article</a> in the journal Science led by Duke conservation ecologist Stuart Pimm, “The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection,” concluded, “Current rates of extinction are about 1,000 times the background rate of extinction. These are higher than previously estimated and likely still underestimated.”</p>
<p>The current mass extinction is due to a combination of factors, many driven by humans, including habitat destruction and over-fishing and over-hunting. A number of aspects of climate change have begun contributing to species extinction, but what is of most concern to biologists today is that as the rate of global warming speeds up in the coming decades, the climate may well change too quickly for many if not most species to adapt.</p>
<p>Significantly, there is more to biodiversity than just the number of species, as shown in a <a href="http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v1/n6/full/nclimate1191.html" type="external">2011 study&#160;</a>, “Cryptic biodiversity loss linked to global climate change.” It was the first global study “to quantify the loss of biological diversity on the basis of genetic diversity.” Cryptic biodiversity “encompasses the diversity of genetic variations and deviations within described species.” It could only be studied in detail since molecular-genetic methods were developed.</p>
<p>Researchers noted that “If global warming continues as expected, it is estimated that almost a third of all flora and fauna species worldwide could become extinct.” But their research “discovered that the proportion of actual biodiversity loss should quite clearly be revised upwards: by 2080, more than 80% of genetic diversity within species may disappear in certain groups of organisms.” Species may survive, but ”the majority of the genetic variations, which in each case exist only in certain places, will not survive,” as study co-author Carsten Nowak <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110824091146.htm" type="external">explained</a>. A species’ genetic variation increases its adaptability to a changing climate and changing habitats. Losing genetic diversity decreases the species’ long-term chances for survival.</p>
<p>A similar point was made in a January 2015 Science article, “ <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/347/6223/1259855.abstract" type="external">Planetary boundaries</a>,” by 18 international experts led by Will Steffen of the <a href="http://www.stockholmresilience.org/21/research/research-news/1-15-2015-planetary-boundaries-2.0---new-and-improved.html" type="external">Stockholm Resilience Centre</a>.</p>
<p>Here is the key chart of their findings (an update of their original <a href="http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/" type="external">2009 findings</a>).</p>
<p>We are already well beyond the zone of uncertainty and into the high risk area for the “genetic diversity” component of biosphere integrity. Researchers label climate change and biosphere integrity as “core boundaries.” They could “drive the Earth System into a new state” if substantially changed. Steffen notes, “Transgressing a boundary increases the risk that human activities could inadvertently drive the Earth System into a much less hospitable state, damaging efforts to reduce poverty and leading to a deterioration of human wellbeing in many parts of the world, including wealthy countries.”</p>
<p>The bottom line, as the Science authors explain, is that “The relatively stable, 11,700-year-long Holocene epoch is the only state of the ES [Earth System] that we know for certain can support contemporary human societies.” As we move beyond that stable state, the risks for all species — including ours — grow and grow.</p> | true | 4 | homo sapiens poised become greatest catastrophic agent since giant asteroid collided earth 65000000 years ago wiping half worlds species geological instant wrote anthropologist richard leakey 1995 book sixth extinction patterns life future humankind vital dependence ecosystem services provided rest nature leakey warned unrestrained homo sapiens might agent sixth extinction also risks one victims twenty years later great climate journalist elizabeth kolbert deserved pulitzer prize nonfiction book sixth extinction unnatural history book kolbert quotes leakey explains theres way knowing humanity wiped selfinflicted disaster whats worth attending right fact deciding without quite meaning evolutionary pathway remain open forever closed notes creature ever managed personally doubt homo sapiens go fully extinct important question whether planet support upwards 10 billion people post2050 given already overshot earths biocapacity overshoot gets worse every year significantly process destroying livable climate upon many species including rely currently trajectory warm planet 4c 7f century continue warming next 2011 uk royal society devoted special issue one journals four degrees beyond potential global temperature increase four degrees implications concluding piece warned 4c world limits human adaptation likely exceeded many parts world limits adaptation natural systems would largely exceeded throughout world particular drought desertification would widespread wed see large areas cropland becoming unsuitable cultivation declining agricultural yields time wed also rapidly losing worlds ecosystem services owing large losses biodiversity forests coastal wetlands mangroves saltmarshes terrestrial carbon stores supported acidified potentially dysfunctional marine ecosystem world support 10 billion people biodiversity 2015 study science said may lose onesixth species extinction warm 4c experts said real toll may turn even worse reported new york times paper quoted evolutionary biologist john wiens warning number extinctions may well two three times higher reported weeks ago another 2015 study science concluded permotriassic extinction 252 million years ago greatest extinction time happened massive amounts carbon dioxide injected atmosphere first slowly quickly driven volcanic eruptions researchers found second extinction pulse however rapid large injection carbon caused abrupt acidification event drove preferential loss heavily calcified marine biota extinction killed 90 percent marine life wiped 70 percent landbased animal plant life 2014 review article journal science led duke conservation ecologist stuart pimm biodiversity species rates extinction distribution protection concluded current rates extinction 1000 times background rate extinction higher previously estimated likely still underestimated current mass extinction due combination factors many driven humans including habitat destruction overfishing overhunting number aspects climate change begun contributing species extinction concern biologists today rate global warming speeds coming decades climate may well change quickly many species adapt significantly biodiversity number species shown 2011 study160 cryptic biodiversity loss linked global climate change first global study quantify loss biological diversity basis genetic diversity cryptic biodiversity encompasses diversity genetic variations deviations within described species could studied detail since moleculargenetic methods developed researchers noted global warming continues expected estimated almost third flora fauna species worldwide could become extinct research discovered proportion actual biodiversity loss quite clearly revised upwards 2080 80 genetic diversity within species may disappear certain groups organisms species may survive majority genetic variations case exist certain places survive study coauthor carsten nowak explained species genetic variation increases adaptability changing climate changing habitats losing genetic diversity decreases species longterm chances survival similar point made january 2015 science article planetary boundaries 18 international experts led steffen stockholm resilience centre key chart findings update original 2009 findings already well beyond zone uncertainty high risk area genetic diversity component biosphere integrity researchers label climate change biosphere integrity core boundaries could drive earth system new state substantially changed steffen notes transgressing boundary increases risk human activities could inadvertently drive earth system much less hospitable state damaging efforts reduce poverty leading deterioration human wellbeing many parts world including wealthy countries bottom line science authors explain relatively stable 11700yearlong holocene epoch state es earth system know certain support contemporary human societies move beyond stable state risks species including grow grow | 634 |
<p>On December 7th 2017 the US Fish &amp; Wildlife Service (i.e., “the Service”) requested comments from the public “…on a recent D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling…that may impact our June 30, 2017, final rule delisting the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) grizzly bear Distinct Population Segment (DPS).” In its Federal Register notice, the Service exclusively featured the portion of this ruling that pertained to the Service’s illegal decision in the case of gray wolves to parse out and then delist a DPS from a much larger entity that was originally listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).</p>
<p>This request for public comment was bizarre on several counts. On the face of it, the Service was apparently expecting “the public” to render an opinion on a highly technical ruling by a Federal Court of Appeals, and the relevance of that ruling to highly technical litigation currently contesting the Service’s recent rule removing ESA protections for Yellowstone’s grizzly bear population. Barring the very few well-informed lawyers inclined to comment, “the public” was not qualified to judge legal aspects of this specific issue.</p>
<p>Moreover, in its request for comments, the Service failed to both adequately describe the appellate court ruling or note other key issues highlighted by the Court. To quote the ruling (Humane Society of the United States, et al. v. Zinke et al., 865 F.3d 585 [D.C. Cir. 2017]): “In this case, the agency’s analysis (i) wholly failed to address the effect on the remnant population of carving out the Western Great Lakes segment, and in doing so (ii) misapplied the Service’s own discreteness and significance tests, and also (iii) turned its back on the implications of historical range loss. Those are major shortcomings that go to the heart of the Service’s delisting rule.”</p>
<p>Nowhere in the request for comments did the Service offer the public a useful description of how it addressed the effects of delisting the Greater Yellowstone DPS on recovery of grizzly bears in other ecosystems; how it applied the discreteness and significance tests to differentiate the Yellowstone DPS; or how it addressed the implications of historical range loss. In fact, the Service made no reference to factor (iii) of the appellate court’s judgement. It is not clear exactly what the Service was hoping to obtain from “the public,” and to what effect.</p>
<p>This lack of clarity and comprehensiveness by the Service begs the question of motives and intended outcomes. The obvious answer is that this request for comments by the Service was a cynical attempt to retrospectively develop a paper trail to remedy a patently deficient and overly hasty decision process, and flush out key elements of arguments that might be made by plaintiffs in litigation focused on removal of ESA protections for the Yellowstone DPS. Moreover, this attempt by the Service to elicit opposition arguments without concurrently rescinding its final rule delisting Yellowstone’s grizzly bear population was unprecedented and illegal.</p>
<p>Even so, this unseemly scramble by the Service to paper over the consequences of arbitrarily divvying up grizzly bear populations for the politically motivated removal of ESA protections does highlight some issues critical to the long-term survival and recovery of grizzly bears in the contiguous U.S. And these issues are substantial, including inadequacy of the Service’s current population recovery targets, importance of connectivity among existing populations, and potential contribution of areas farther afield in the western U.S. to a more robust vision of recovery and restoration for grizzly bears. What are the effects of delisting Yellowstone’s grizzly bear population on recovery in other ecosystems, and what are the implications of historical range loss to the Service’s current approach to grizzly bear recovery? What follows is a litany of critical failings in the Service’s current recovery program, an explanation of why, and the perhaps obvious remedy for each.</p>
<p>….</p>
<p>The Service adopts a standard for recovery of grizzly bears in the contiguous United States that enshrines the loss of roughly 97% of historic grizzly bear distributions and numbers. This standard does not ensure adequate representation of ecosystems or adequate connectivity among populations, and is unnecessary given ample potential habitat.</p>
<p>The Service does not adequately address the magnitude of historical grizzly bear losses in the contiguous United States, the paucity of current “recovery” relative to those historical losses, the lack of representation of historical ecosystems in current Recovery Areas, or the considerable potential prospects for recovering this species both near and far from current grizzly bear populations in the northern US Rocky Mountains.</p>
<p>The figure immediately below (panels B-E), based largely on research reported by Mattson and Merrill (2002), shows the pace and magnitude of grizzly bear extirpations in the western United States between roughly 1800 and 1960. Additional information includes state by state population estimates circa 1800 as well as total grizzly bear population estimates for each time step. I based these estimates on a detailed reconstruction of historical grizzly bear habitat (in panel A) to which I applied a range of grizzly bear densities derived from contemporary research differentiating core from peripheral habitat. Panel F shows the extent of grizzly bear distributions around 2010, which correspond with what the Service contends is full recovery for the GYE and NCDE populations. The figure next below recasts this spatial depiction in graphical form.</p>
<p />
<p>Losses of grizzly bear numbers and distributions in the western contiguous United States between 1800 and 1960 (B-E) along with the extent of gains since roughly 1970, largely under ESA protection. The extent of grizzly bear distributions at each time step are shown in green and the extent of losses in yellow. Estimated total populations are shown in the upper right corner of each figure and estimated cumulative losses of populations and distributions in red in the lower right-hand corner. Panel A shows estimated core and peripheral historical range relative to the extent of extreme desert and hot climates that would have imposed thermoregulatory limits on the distributions of grizzly bears.</p>
<p />
<p>Historical declines and more recent growth of total grizzly bear populations in the western contiguous United States along with estimated annual rates of change (in red) during intervals between population estimates. The range of estimated population sizes throughout are shown in gray.</p>
<p>The take-away points from this history are, first, that we lost roughly 98% of former grizzly bear numbers and 97% of historical distributions in a short 150-year period and, second, that “recovery” in our two largest Recovery Areas recoups virtually none of former historical populations and only 2% of former distributions. This is truly an impoverished vision of recovery, especially given the extent of habitat near current ecosystems as well as in other regions potentially suitable for restoration and recovery of grizzly bears.</p>
<p>The figure immediately below shows the extent of suitable but largely as-yet unoccupied habitat for grizzly bears in the western contiguous United States. Each color or cross-hatching scheme denotes results reported by different researchers. All results include not only the effects of current habitat productivity, but also the effects of habitat security vis-à-vis humans. All but two of the assessments are published (Merrill et al. 1999; Carroll et al. 2001a, 2001b, 2003; Boyce and Waller 2003; Merrill and Mattson 2003; Singleton et al. 2004; Mattson &amp; Merrill 2004; Merrill 2005; Schwartz et al. 2010, Mowat 2013; Lyons et al. 2016). The assessment of habitat suitability in the southwestern US by Mattson and Merrill is in preparation. The west-wide assessment by Carroll is unpublished but for this map.</p>
<p>Map of potential grizzly bear habitat in the western contiguous United States based on a compilation of research dating back to 1999. Different colors or cross-hatching schemes denote results produced by different researchers. Black cross-hatched polygons denote current recovery areas.</p>
<p>The take-away point here is that the best available science suggests there is ample potential but currently unoccupied habitat for grizzly bears in the western US, including extensive areas adjacent to but outside of current Primary Conservation Areas and Demographic Monitoring Areas. Whether the Service takes these results at face value is irrelevant. At a minimum they show that the Service incurs a burden to undertake its own thorough analysis of potential grizzly bear habitat in the western United States as part of a revised comprehensive recovery strategy.</p>
<p>The Service needs to abandon its de facto adoption of 2-3% as sufficient for recovery of grizzly bear distributions and populations, and reconcile any new standards with a thorough analysis of potential habitat within historical distributions.</p>
<p>….</p>
<p>The Service adopts a standard for recovery of grizzly bear populations within ecosystems that is inadequate for insuring long-term genetic health, evolutionary potential, and resilience to catastrophic environmental change, and is at odds with the best available scientific information.</p>
<p>Research dating back to the 1980s amply demonstrates the need for populations numbering in the thousands, not hundreds, to ensure long-term genetic health and demographic resilience of vertebrate mammalian populations. Lande (1995), Brook et al. (2006), and Triall et al. (2007, 2010) have all emphasized this consensus based on genetic as well as long-term demographic evidence. More specifically for Ursus arctos, Reed et al. (2003) estimated that Minimum Viable Populations need to be around 5000 animals to ensure 99% probability of persistence for 40 generations which, in the case of grizzly bears, roughly equates to 400 years. Of particular relevance to grizzly bears in the northern US Rocky Mountains, Reed et al. (2003) estimated that this number needs to be even higher, around 8900, if bear managers are managing for little or no population increase. Such numbers far exceed recovery targets set by the Service and States for any Rocky Mountain grizzly bear population.</p>
<p>The Service recognizes the inadequacy of the current population recovery target for ensuring long-term genetic health of Yellowstone’s grizzly bears in its final recovery rule, consistent with previous statements by the now-retired Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator, Dr. Chris Servheen. For example, Servheen et al. (2001) state that “If carnivores such as grizzly bears…are to survive and recover to healthy population levels in the Rocky Mountains, the issue of fragmentation needs to be addressed in a proactive and effective manner.” Likewise, Proctor et al. (2012), of whom Dr. Servheen was a co-author, state that “Without female connectivity, small populations are not viable over the long term.” More authoritatively yet, the Service states in numerous places of its 2011 review of grizzly bear recovery that a connected metapopulation comprised of current northern Rocky Mountains grizzly bear populations will be critical to ensuring long-term recovery and persistence of this species in the contiguous United States (US Fish &amp; Wildlife Service 2011). Proctor et al. (2005) make much the same point relative to small trans-boundary populations in the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak Recovery Areas.</p>
<p>Amplifying these concerns, numerous researchers have observed the heightened vulnerability of large-bodied wide-ranging carnivores such as grizzly bears to endangerment, extirpation, and extinction. For example, Cardillo et al. (2005, 2006) note not only that extinction risk increases dramatically for mammals averaging larger than 10 kg, but also that latent risk of extinction at a community level is highest in North America at not only high latitudes, but also mid latitudes coincident with all of the extant grizzly bear populations of the contiguous United States. Similarly, Mattson (2004) emphasizes that “Carnivore size is perhaps the single most important biological factor governing the nature of interactions with humans and related levels of endangerment.” Consistent with Cardillo et al. (2005), Mattson (2004) also showed that carnivores &gt;8 kg in size have substantially higher odds of being endangered globally.</p>
<p>The Service needs to design and implement a recovery program that provides for contiguous populations of grizzly bears of a size that comports with the best available science, sustains evolutionary potential, and ensures resilience to potential catastrophic environmental changes.</p>
<p>….</p>
<p>The Service fails to consider the importance of potential emigration from the Greater Yellowstone and Northern Continental Divide ecosystems to natural recovery of grizzly bears in the Selway-Bitterroot, Cabinet-Yaak, and Selkirk ecosystems.</p>
<p>Connectivity among current grizzly bear populations in the northern Rocky Mountains will almost certainly increase odds of persistence for the original demographic/geographic entity listed under the Endangered Species Act in 1975, and contribute to reaching population sizes needed to ensure long-term genetic health and demographic resilience (as per my point immediately above). As I also noted immediately above, Servheen et al. (2001), Proctor et al. (2005), US Fish &amp; Wildlife Service (2011) and others such as Craighead and Vyse (1996) have unequivocally stated that, not only will connectivity increase odds of persistence, but more emphatically be necessary to ensure that end. Likewise, authors such as Carroll et al. (2004) have shown that a doubling of connectivity among bear populations occupying protected areas increases probability of persistence by 100-300% for populations in semi-developed and developed landscapes typical of the northern US Rocky Mountains. Of particular relevance to the Selway-Bitterroot Recovery Area, absent active reintroduction efforts, natural recovery in this area will be wholly contingent on immigration of grizzly bears from other ecosystems, most likely from the Yellowstone and Northern Continental Divide Recovery Areas.</p>
<p>Given this imperative to connect ecosystems, there is ample research showing ample potential for achieving this end. In fact, substantial potential connective habitat exists among all existing Recovery Areas. Most notably, Walker and Craighead (1997), Merrill et al. (1999), Carroll et al. (2001, 2003, 2004), Servheen et al. (2001), Merrill and Mattson (2003), Mattson and Merrill (2004), Merrill (2005), Cushman et al. (2009), Proctor et al. (2012, 2015), and Peck et al. (2017) have replicated each other’s results using different data and methods showing the same potential corridors and connective habitat, amounting to one of the most robust bodies of evidence for such potential independent of actual occupancy by bears. The figure immediately below shows this connective habitat for grizzly bears in the U.S.-Canadian Rockies, including potential connectivity to central Idaho.</p>
<p>Map showing the current distribution of grizzly bears in the US-Canadian Rocky Mountains(dark pink or red shows core; light pink peripheral), current US Recovery Areas (red delineations), potential habitat in central Idaho (tan) and major potential connective habitat/corridors among ecosystems with an emphasis on the GYE and central Idaho (red arrows).</p>
<p>However, even with such potential, it can be an agonizingly slow process for especially female grizzly bears to colonize far-distant areas. Averaged across relevant studies (Blanchard and Knight 1991, McLellan and Hovey 2001, Proctor et al. 2004, Støen et al. 2006, Zedrosser et al. 2007, Norman and Spong 2015), female brown/grizzly bears disperse only around 7 miles from their natal ranges, in contrast to 26 miles for male bears. Assuming that annual survival rates equal to those documented for grizzly bears occupying northern Rocky Mountain Recovery Areas apply to bears colonizing connective habitat, it would take female grizzlies roughly 80 years to colonize areas 100 miles distant. For male grizzly bear it would take roughly 50 years. The pace of colonization is slower than might be expected for males given that their advance is pegged to the advance of reproductive females, barring the next to last generational step.</p>
<p>But this prognosis for progress only holds if survival rates for grizzly bears in connective habitat are comparable to those for bears in current Recovery Areas, which would only be likely if protections in connective habitat were comparable to those in source areas and if land uses in this connective habitat remain hospitable to grizzly bears. Given these concerns, the on-going rapid growth of human populations in the interstitia among northern Rocky Mountain grizzly bear populations is a major threat which the Service did not adequately address in its final rule delisting Yellowstone’s grizzly bear population, but nonetheless recognized and highlighted in its 2011 status review of grizzly bear recovery (US Fish &amp; Wildlife Service 2011). This, then, raises the question of whether security for grizzlies in potential connective habitat can be achieved and maintained under state management in the absence of ESA-related protections and resources, which brings me to my last point.</p>
<p>The Service needs to design and implement a recovery program that ensures successful natural colonization of the Selway-Bitterroot and natural augmentation of the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystems through immigration of grizzly bears from the GYE and NCDE.</p>
<p>….</p>
<p>The Service errs in its reliance upon vague and non-binding indications by the State of Montana, and none by the States of Idaho and Wyoming, to, at best, “maintain the option” to promote connectivity among existing grizzly bear populations in the northern U.S. Rocky Mountains. The Service has furthermore signed off on a management regime designed to prevent growth of the Yellowstone grizzly bear population.</p>
<p>In stark contradiction to implications of the research that I’ve summarized here, the Service dismisses the need for, even benefits of, connectivity among ecosystems throughout the final rule delisting Yellowstone’s grizzly bear population. Much of this language is the apparent result of changes demanded by the states of Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho. The best that the rule can offer is non-binding vague language suggesting that the state of Montana may or may not manage to promote connectivity between the NCDE and GYE ecosystems. More specifically the final rule states that “the State of Montana has indicated they [sic] will manage discretionary mortality in this area [between the GYE and NCDE ecosystems] in order to retain the opportunity for natural movements of bears between ecosystems.”</p>
<p>As problematic for achieving connectivity and reaching population goals needed to ensure long-term viability, the rule specifies a post-delisting management regime designed to prevent appreciable, if any, growth of the Yellowstone population. The key protocols are codified in a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) developed and adopted by the three involved states, emphasizing management of grizzly bear mortality. This MOA and the rule itself specify that any growth of the population will be met with an increase in allowable mortality designed to bring numbers down again. For example, the rule states that the adjustable mortality rates adopted in the MOA “…were calculated as those necessary to manage the population to the modeled average Chao2 population estimate of 674 bears, which occurred during the time period that this population had a relatively flat population trajectory.” This is unambiguously a recipe for preventing any long-term growth in the Yellowstone grizzly bear population.</p>
<p>As an upshot, the current rule is designed to prevent the kind of population growth needed to attain connectivity, colonize the Selway-Bitterroot ecosystem, and reach numbers needed to ensure population viability, and furthermore offers no enforceable assurance that management in areas between currently-occupied ecosystems will proactively promote connectivity and colonization.</p>
<p>The Service needs to ensure connectivity of grizzly bear populations in accord with a revised Recovery Plan prior to removing ESA protections, and then include authoritative binding provisions in any delisting rule that require the relevant States to maintain connectivity for the indefinite future.</p>
<p>….</p>
<p>The Service’s current approach to recovering and restoring grizzly bears in the western U.S. is a travesty. Or, more generously, the Service’s recovery program ignores and contravenes the best available science, despite frequent protestations to the contrary.</p>
<p>I’m not sure what it will take to elicit generosity, honesty, and integrity on the part of our public servants overseeing recovery of grizzly bears in the contiguous US. Given the extent to which these folks have been coopted, brain-washed, or otherwise subjugated, I’m not sure there is any remedy internal to the Service itself, which is why, for good or bad, the fate of grizzly bears rests on the cogency of legal arguments made by lawyers contesting the removal of ESA protections for Yellowstone’s grizzly bears. Good luck and best wishes to them all.</p>
<p>Referenced Literature</p>
<p>Blanchard, B. M., &amp; Knight, R. R. (1991). Movements of Yellowstone grizzly bears. Biological Conservation, 58(1), 41-67.</p>
<p>Boyce, M. S., &amp; Waller, J. S. (2003). Grizzly bears for the Bitterroot: predicting potential abundance and distribution. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 31(3), 670-683.</p>
<p>Brook, B. W., Traill, L. W., &amp; Bradshaw, C. J. (2006). Minimum viable population sizes and global extinction risk are unrelated. Ecology letters, 9(4), 375-382.</p>
<p>Cardillo, M., Mace, G. M., Jones, K. E., Bielby, J., Bininda-Emonds, O. R., Sechrest, W., … &amp; Purvis, A. (2005). Multiple causes of high extinction risk in large mammal species. Science, 309(5738), 1239-1241.</p>
<p>Cardillo, M., Mace, G. M., Gittleman, J. L., &amp; Purvis, A. (2006). Latent extinction risk and the future battlegrounds of mammal conservation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(11), 4157-4161.</p>
<p>Carroll, C., Noss, R. F., &amp; Paquet, P. C. (2001a). Carnivores as focal species for conservation planning in the Rocky Mountain region. Ecological applications, 11(4), 961-980.</p>
<p>Carroll, C., Noss, R. F., Schumaker, N. H., &amp; Paquet, P. C. (2001b). Is the return of the wolf, wolverine, and grizzly bear to Oregon and California biologically feasible? Pages 25-46 in Large Mammal Restoration: Ecological and Sociological Challenges in the 21st Century. Island Press, Washington, D.C.</p>
<p>Carroll, C., Noss, R. F., Paquet, P. C., &amp; Schumaker, N. H. (2003). Use of population viability analysis and reserve selection algorithms in regional conservation plans. Ecological applications, 13(6), 1773-1789.</p>
<p>Carroll, C., Noss, R. F., Paquet, P. C., &amp; Schumaker, N. H. (2004). Extinction debt of protected areas in developing landscapes. Conservation Biology, 18(4), 1110-1120.</p>
<p>Craighead, F. L., &amp; Vyse, E. R. (1996). Brown/grizzly bear metapopulations. Pages 325-351 in Metapopulations and Wildlife Conservation Management. Island Press, Washington DC.</p>
<p>Cushman, S. A., &amp; Lewis, J. S. (2010). Movement behavior explains genetic differentiation in American black bears. Landscape ecology, 25(10), 1613-1625.</p>
<p>Lande, R. (1995). Mutation and conservation. Conservation biology, 9(4), 782-791.</p>
<p>Lyons, A. L., Gaines, W. L., Begley, J., &amp; Singleton, P. (2016). Grizzly bear carrying capacity in the North Cascades Ecosystem. Contract Report #US 15-05, Skagit Environmental Endowment Commission.</p>
<p>Mattson, D. J. (2004). Living with fierce carnivores? An overview and models of mammalian carnivore conservation. Pages 151-176 in People and Predators: From Conflict to Coexistence. Island Press, Washington, DC.</p>
<p>Mattson, D. J., &amp; Merrill, T. (2002). Extirpations of grizzly bears in the contiguous United States, 1850–2000. Conservation Biology, 16(4), 1123-1136.</p>
<p>Mattson, D. J., &amp; Merrill, T. (2004). A model-based appraisal of habitat conditions for grizzly bears in the Cabinet–Yaak region of Montana and Idaho. Ursus, 15(1), 76-89.</p>
<p>McLellan, B. N., &amp; Hovey, F. W. (2001). Natal dispersal of grizzly bears. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 79(5), 838-844.</p>
<p>Merrill, T., Mattson, D. J., Wright, R. G., &amp; Quigley, H. B. (1999). Defining landscapes suitable for restoration of grizzly bears Ursus arctos in Idaho. Biological Conservation, 87(2), 231-248.</p>
<p>Merrill, T., &amp; Mattson, D. (2003). The extent and location of habitat biophysically suitable for grizzly bears in the Yellowstone region. Ursus, 171-187.</p>
<p>Merrill, T. (2005). Grizzly bear conservation in the Yellowstone to Yukon region. Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative, Technical Report 6.</p>
<p>Mowat, G., Heard, D. C., &amp; Schwarz, C. J. (2013). Predicting grizzly bear density in western North America. PloS one, 8(12), e82757.</p>
<p>Norman, A. J., &amp; Spong, G. (2015). Single nucleotide polymorphism‐based dispersal estimates using noninvasive sampling. Ecology and evolution, 5(15), 3056-3065.</p>
<p>Peck, C. P., Manen, F. T., Costello, C. M., Haroldson, M. A., Landenburger, L. A., Roberts, L. L., … &amp; Mace, R. D. (2017). Potential paths for male‐mediated gene flow to and from an isolated grizzly bear population. Ecosphere, 8(10).</p>
<p>Proctor, M. F., McLellan, B. N., Strobeck, C., &amp; Barclay, R. M. (2004). Gender-specific dispersal distances of grizzly bears estimated by genetic analysis. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 82(7), 1108-1118.</p>
<p>Proctor, M. F., McLellan, B. N., Strobeck, C., &amp; Barclay, R. M. (2005). Genetic analysis reveals demographic fragmentation of grizzly bears yielding vulnerably small populations. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 272(1579), 2409-2416.</p>
<p>Proctor, M. F., Paetkau, D., McLellan, B. N., Stenhouse, G. B., Kendall, K. C., Mace, R. D., … &amp; Wakkinen, W. L. (2012). Population fragmentation and inter‐ecosystem movements of grizzly bears in western Canada and the northern United States. Wildlife Monographs, 180(1), 1-46.</p>
<p>Proctor, M. F., Nielsen, S. E., Kasworm, W. F., Servheen, C., Radandt, T. G., Machutchon, A. G., &amp; Boyce, M. S. (2015). Grizzly bear connectivity mapping in the Canada–United States trans‐border region. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 79(4), 544-558.</p>
<p>Reed, D. H., O’Grady, J. J., Brook, B. W., Ballou, J. D., &amp; Frankham, R. (2003). Estimates of minimum viable population sizes for vertebrates and factors influencing those estimates. Biological Conservation, 113(1), 23-34.</p>
<p>Schwartz, C. C., Haroldson, M. A., &amp; White, G. C. (2010). Hazards affecting grizzly bear survival in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Journal of Wildlife Management, 74(4), 654-667.</p>
<p>Servheen, C., Waller, J. S., &amp; Sandstrom, P. (2001). Identification and management of linkage zones for grizzly bears between the large blocks of public land in the Northern Rocky Mountains. University of California, Davis, Road Ecology Center. Retrieved from: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/9kr1w8fp</p>
<p>Støen, O. G., Zedrosser, A., Sæbø, S., &amp; Swenson, J. E. (2006). Inversely density-dependent natal dispersal in brown bears Ursus arctos. Oecologia, 148(2), 356.</p>
<p>Traill, L. W., Bradshaw, C. J., &amp; Brook, B. W. (2007). Minimum viable population size: a meta-analysis of 30 years of published estimates. Biological conservation, 139(1), 159-166.</p>
<p>Traill, L. W., Brook, B. W., Frankham, R. R., &amp; Bradshaw, C. J. (2010). Pragmatic population viability targets in a rapidly changing world. Biological Conservation, 143(1), 28-34.</p>
<p>US Fish &amp; Wildlife Service (2011). Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) 5-year review: summary and evaluation. Grizzly Bear Recovery Office, Missoula, Montana.</p>
<p>Walker, R., &amp; Craighead, L. (2001). Analyzing wildlife movement corridors in Montana using GIS. Retrieved from: &#160;file://C:\mwp\school\Geog 4405\Analyzing Wildlife Movement Corridors in Montana Using GIS.htm 1/30/2001</p>
<p>Zedrosser, A., Støen, O. G., Sæbø, S., &amp; Swenson, J. E. (2007). Should I stay or should I go? Natal dispersal in the brown bear. Animal Behaviour, 74(3), 369-376.</p> | true | 4 | december 7th 2017 us fish amp wildlife service ie service requested comments public recent dc circuit court appeals rulingthat may impact june 30 2017 final rule delisting greater yellowstone ecosystem gye grizzly bear distinct population segment dps federal register notice service exclusively featured portion ruling pertained services illegal decision case gray wolves parse delist dps much larger entity originally listed endangered species act esa request public comment bizarre several counts face service apparently expecting public render opinion highly technical ruling federal court appeals relevance ruling highly technical litigation currently contesting services recent rule removing esa protections yellowstones grizzly bear population barring wellinformed lawyers inclined comment public qualified judge legal aspects specific issue moreover request comments service failed adequately describe appellate court ruling note key issues highlighted court quote ruling humane society united states et al v zinke et al 865 f3d 585 dc cir 2017 case agencys analysis wholly failed address effect remnant population carving western great lakes segment ii misapplied services discreteness significance tests also iii turned back implications historical range loss major shortcomings go heart services delisting rule nowhere request comments service offer public useful description addressed effects delisting greater yellowstone dps recovery grizzly bears ecosystems applied discreteness significance tests differentiate yellowstone dps addressed implications historical range loss fact service made reference factor iii appellate courts judgement clear exactly service hoping obtain public effect lack clarity comprehensiveness service begs question motives intended outcomes obvious answer request comments service cynical attempt retrospectively develop paper trail remedy patently deficient overly hasty decision process flush key elements arguments might made plaintiffs litigation focused removal esa protections yellowstone dps moreover attempt service elicit opposition arguments without concurrently rescinding final rule delisting yellowstones grizzly bear population unprecedented illegal even unseemly scramble service paper consequences arbitrarily divvying grizzly bear populations politically motivated removal esa protections highlight issues critical longterm survival recovery grizzly bears contiguous us issues substantial including inadequacy services current population recovery targets importance connectivity among existing populations potential contribution areas farther afield western us robust vision recovery restoration grizzly bears effects delisting yellowstones grizzly bear population recovery ecosystems implications historical range loss services current approach grizzly bear recovery follows litany critical failings services current recovery program explanation perhaps obvious remedy service adopts standard recovery grizzly bears contiguous united states enshrines loss roughly 97 historic grizzly bear distributions numbers standard ensure adequate representation ecosystems adequate connectivity among populations unnecessary given ample potential habitat service adequately address magnitude historical grizzly bear losses contiguous united states paucity current recovery relative historical losses lack representation historical ecosystems current recovery areas considerable potential prospects recovering species near far current grizzly bear populations northern us rocky mountains figure immediately panels based largely research reported mattson merrill 2002 shows pace magnitude grizzly bear extirpations western united states roughly 1800 1960 additional information includes state state population estimates circa 1800 well total grizzly bear population estimates time step based estimates detailed reconstruction historical grizzly bear habitat panel applied range grizzly bear densities derived contemporary research differentiating core peripheral habitat panel f shows extent grizzly bear distributions around 2010 correspond service contends full recovery gye ncde populations figure next recasts spatial depiction graphical form losses grizzly bear numbers distributions western contiguous united states 1800 1960 along extent gains since roughly 1970 largely esa protection extent grizzly bear distributions time step shown green extent losses yellow estimated total populations shown upper right corner figure estimated cumulative losses populations distributions red lower righthand corner panel shows estimated core peripheral historical range relative extent extreme desert hot climates would imposed thermoregulatory limits distributions grizzly bears historical declines recent growth total grizzly bear populations western contiguous united states along estimated annual rates change red intervals population estimates range estimated population sizes throughout shown gray takeaway points history first lost roughly 98 former grizzly bear numbers 97 historical distributions short 150year period second recovery two largest recovery areas recoups virtually none former historical populations 2 former distributions truly impoverished vision recovery especially given extent habitat near current ecosystems well regions potentially suitable restoration recovery grizzly bears figure immediately shows extent suitable largely asyet unoccupied habitat grizzly bears western contiguous united states color crosshatching scheme denotes results reported different researchers results include effects current habitat productivity also effects habitat security visàvis humans two assessments published merrill et al 1999 carroll et al 2001a 2001b 2003 boyce waller 2003 merrill mattson 2003 singleton et al 2004 mattson amp merrill 2004 merrill 2005 schwartz et al 2010 mowat 2013 lyons et al 2016 assessment habitat suitability southwestern us mattson merrill preparation westwide assessment carroll unpublished map map potential grizzly bear habitat western contiguous united states based compilation research dating back 1999 different colors crosshatching schemes denote results produced different researchers black crosshatched polygons denote current recovery areas takeaway point best available science suggests ample potential currently unoccupied habitat grizzly bears western us including extensive areas adjacent outside current primary conservation areas demographic monitoring areas whether service takes results face value irrelevant minimum show service incurs burden undertake thorough analysis potential grizzly bear habitat western united states part revised comprehensive recovery strategy service needs abandon de facto adoption 23 sufficient recovery grizzly bear distributions populations reconcile new standards thorough analysis potential habitat within historical distributions service adopts standard recovery grizzly bear populations within ecosystems inadequate insuring longterm genetic health evolutionary potential resilience catastrophic environmental change odds best available scientific information research dating back 1980s amply demonstrates need populations numbering thousands hundreds ensure longterm genetic health demographic resilience vertebrate mammalian populations lande 1995 brook et al 2006 triall et al 2007 2010 emphasized consensus based genetic well longterm demographic evidence specifically ursus arctos reed et al 2003 estimated minimum viable populations need around 5000 animals ensure 99 probability persistence 40 generations case grizzly bears roughly equates 400 years particular relevance grizzly bears northern us rocky mountains reed et al 2003 estimated number needs even higher around 8900 bear managers managing little population increase numbers far exceed recovery targets set service states rocky mountain grizzly bear population service recognizes inadequacy current population recovery target ensuring longterm genetic health yellowstones grizzly bears final recovery rule consistent previous statements nowretired grizzly bear recovery coordinator dr chris servheen example servheen et al 2001 state carnivores grizzly bearsare survive recover healthy population levels rocky mountains issue fragmentation needs addressed proactive effective manner likewise proctor et al 2012 dr servheen coauthor state without female connectivity small populations viable long term authoritatively yet service states numerous places 2011 review grizzly bear recovery connected metapopulation comprised current northern rocky mountains grizzly bear populations critical ensuring longterm recovery persistence species contiguous united states us fish amp wildlife service 2011 proctor et al 2005 make much point relative small transboundary populations selkirk cabinetyaak recovery areas amplifying concerns numerous researchers observed heightened vulnerability largebodied wideranging carnivores grizzly bears endangerment extirpation extinction example cardillo et al 2005 2006 note extinction risk increases dramatically mammals averaging larger 10 kg also latent risk extinction community level highest north america high latitudes also mid latitudes coincident extant grizzly bear populations contiguous united states similarly mattson 2004 emphasizes carnivore size perhaps single important biological factor governing nature interactions humans related levels endangerment consistent cardillo et al 2005 mattson 2004 also showed carnivores gt8 kg size substantially higher odds endangered globally service needs design implement recovery program provides contiguous populations grizzly bears size comports best available science sustains evolutionary potential ensures resilience potential catastrophic environmental changes service fails consider importance potential emigration greater yellowstone northern continental divide ecosystems natural recovery grizzly bears selwaybitterroot cabinetyaak selkirk ecosystems connectivity among current grizzly bear populations northern rocky mountains almost certainly increase odds persistence original demographicgeographic entity listed endangered species act 1975 contribute reaching population sizes needed ensure longterm genetic health demographic resilience per point immediately also noted immediately servheen et al 2001 proctor et al 2005 us fish amp wildlife service 2011 others craighead vyse 1996 unequivocally stated connectivity increase odds persistence emphatically necessary ensure end likewise authors carroll et al 2004 shown doubling connectivity among bear populations occupying protected areas increases probability persistence 100300 populations semideveloped developed landscapes typical northern us rocky mountains particular relevance selwaybitterroot recovery area absent active reintroduction efforts natural recovery area wholly contingent immigration grizzly bears ecosystems likely yellowstone northern continental divide recovery areas given imperative connect ecosystems ample research showing ample potential achieving end fact substantial potential connective habitat exists among existing recovery areas notably walker craighead 1997 merrill et al 1999 carroll et al 2001 2003 2004 servheen et al 2001 merrill mattson 2003 mattson merrill 2004 merrill 2005 cushman et al 2009 proctor et al 2012 2015 peck et al 2017 replicated others results using different data methods showing potential corridors connective habitat amounting one robust bodies evidence potential independent actual occupancy bears figure immediately shows connective habitat grizzly bears uscanadian rockies including potential connectivity central idaho map showing current distribution grizzly bears uscanadian rocky mountainsdark pink red shows core light pink peripheral current us recovery areas red delineations potential habitat central idaho tan major potential connective habitatcorridors among ecosystems emphasis gye central idaho red arrows however even potential agonizingly slow process especially female grizzly bears colonize fardistant areas averaged across relevant studies blanchard knight 1991 mclellan hovey 2001 proctor et al 2004 støen et al 2006 zedrosser et al 2007 norman spong 2015 female browngrizzly bears disperse around 7 miles natal ranges contrast 26 miles male bears assuming annual survival rates equal documented grizzly bears occupying northern rocky mountain recovery areas apply bears colonizing connective habitat would take female grizzlies roughly 80 years colonize areas 100 miles distant male grizzly bear would take roughly 50 years pace colonization slower might expected males given advance pegged advance reproductive females barring next last generational step prognosis progress holds survival rates grizzly bears connective habitat comparable bears current recovery areas would likely protections connective habitat comparable source areas land uses connective habitat remain hospitable grizzly bears given concerns ongoing rapid growth human populations interstitia among northern rocky mountain grizzly bear populations major threat service adequately address final rule delisting yellowstones grizzly bear population nonetheless recognized highlighted 2011 status review grizzly bear recovery us fish amp wildlife service 2011 raises question whether security grizzlies potential connective habitat achieved maintained state management absence esarelated protections resources brings last point service needs design implement recovery program ensures successful natural colonization selwaybitterroot natural augmentation cabinetyaak ecosystems immigration grizzly bears gye ncde service errs reliance upon vague nonbinding indications state montana none states idaho wyoming best maintain option promote connectivity among existing grizzly bear populations northern us rocky mountains service furthermore signed management regime designed prevent growth yellowstone grizzly bear population stark contradiction implications research ive summarized service dismisses need even benefits connectivity among ecosystems throughout final rule delisting yellowstones grizzly bear population much language apparent result changes demanded states wyoming montana idaho best rule offer nonbinding vague language suggesting state montana may may manage promote connectivity ncde gye ecosystems specifically final rule states state montana indicated sic manage discretionary mortality area gye ncde ecosystems order retain opportunity natural movements bears ecosystems problematic achieving connectivity reaching population goals needed ensure longterm viability rule specifies postdelisting management regime designed prevent appreciable growth yellowstone population key protocols codified memorandum agreement moa developed adopted three involved states emphasizing management grizzly bear mortality moa rule specify growth population met increase allowable mortality designed bring numbers example rule states adjustable mortality rates adopted moa calculated necessary manage population modeled average chao2 population estimate 674 bears occurred time period population relatively flat population trajectory unambiguously recipe preventing longterm growth yellowstone grizzly bear population upshot current rule designed prevent kind population growth needed attain connectivity colonize selwaybitterroot ecosystem reach numbers needed ensure population viability furthermore offers enforceable assurance management areas currentlyoccupied ecosystems proactively promote connectivity colonization service needs ensure connectivity grizzly bear populations accord revised recovery plan prior removing esa protections include authoritative binding provisions delisting rule require relevant states maintain connectivity indefinite future services current approach recovering restoring grizzly bears western us travesty generously services recovery program ignores contravenes best available science despite frequent protestations contrary im sure take elicit generosity honesty integrity part public servants overseeing recovery grizzly bears contiguous us given extent folks coopted brainwashed otherwise subjugated im sure remedy internal service good bad fate grizzly bears rests cogency legal arguments made lawyers contesting removal esa protections yellowstones grizzly bears good luck best wishes referenced literature blanchard b amp knight r r 1991 movements yellowstone grizzly bears biological conservation 581 4167 boyce amp waller j 2003 grizzly bears bitterroot predicting potential abundance distribution wildlife society bulletin 313 670683 brook b w traill l w amp bradshaw c j 2006 minimum viable population sizes global extinction risk unrelated ecology letters 94 375382 cardillo mace g jones k e bielby j binindaemonds r sechrest w amp purvis 2005 multiple causes high extinction risk large mammal species science 3095738 12391241 cardillo mace g gittleman j l amp purvis 2006 latent extinction risk future battlegrounds mammal conservation proceedings national academy sciences united states america 10311 41574161 carroll c noss r f amp paquet p c 2001a carnivores focal species conservation planning rocky mountain region ecological applications 114 961980 carroll c noss r f schumaker n h amp paquet p c 2001b return wolf wolverine grizzly bear oregon california biologically feasible pages 2546 large mammal restoration ecological sociological challenges 21st century island press washington dc carroll c noss r f paquet p c amp schumaker n h 2003 use population viability analysis reserve selection algorithms regional conservation plans ecological applications 136 17731789 carroll c noss r f paquet p c amp schumaker n h 2004 extinction debt protected areas developing landscapes conservation biology 184 11101120 craighead f l amp vyse e r 1996 browngrizzly bear metapopulations pages 325351 metapopulations wildlife conservation management island press washington dc cushman amp lewis j 2010 movement behavior explains genetic differentiation american black bears landscape ecology 2510 16131625 lande r 1995 mutation conservation conservation biology 94 782791 lyons l gaines w l begley j amp singleton p 2016 grizzly bear carrying capacity north cascades ecosystem contract report us 1505 skagit environmental endowment commission mattson j 2004 living fierce carnivores overview models mammalian carnivore conservation pages 151176 people predators conflict coexistence island press washington dc mattson j amp merrill 2002 extirpations grizzly bears contiguous united states 18502000 conservation biology 164 11231136 mattson j amp merrill 2004 modelbased appraisal habitat conditions grizzly bears cabinetyaak region montana idaho ursus 151 7689 mclellan b n amp hovey f w 2001 natal dispersal grizzly bears canadian journal zoology 795 838844 merrill mattson j wright r g amp quigley h b 1999 defining landscapes suitable restoration grizzly bears ursus arctos idaho biological conservation 872 231248 merrill amp mattson 2003 extent location habitat biophysically suitable grizzly bears yellowstone region ursus 171187 merrill 2005 grizzly bear conservation yellowstone yukon region yellowstone yukon conservation initiative technical report 6 mowat g heard c amp schwarz c j 2013 predicting grizzly bear density western north america plos one 812 e82757 norman j amp spong g 2015 single nucleotide polymorphismbased dispersal estimates using noninvasive sampling ecology evolution 515 30563065 peck c p manen f costello c haroldson landenburger l roberts l l amp mace r 2017 potential paths malemediated gene flow isolated grizzly bear population ecosphere 810 proctor f mclellan b n strobeck c amp barclay r 2004 genderspecific dispersal distances grizzly bears estimated genetic analysis canadian journal zoology 827 11081118 proctor f mclellan b n strobeck c amp barclay r 2005 genetic analysis reveals demographic fragmentation grizzly bears yielding vulnerably small populations proceedings royal society london b biological sciences 2721579 24092416 proctor f paetkau mclellan b n stenhouse g b kendall k c mace r amp wakkinen w l 2012 population fragmentation interecosystem movements grizzly bears western canada northern united states wildlife monographs 1801 146 proctor f nielsen e kasworm w f servheen c radandt g machutchon g amp boyce 2015 grizzly bear connectivity mapping canadaunited states transborder region journal wildlife management 794 544558 reed h ogrady j j brook b w ballou j amp frankham r 2003 estimates minimum viable population sizes vertebrates factors influencing estimates biological conservation 1131 2334 schwartz c c haroldson amp white g c 2010 hazards affecting grizzly bear survival greater yellowstone ecosystem journal wildlife management 744 654667 servheen c waller j amp sandstrom p 2001 identification management linkage zones grizzly bears large blocks public land northern rocky mountains university california davis road ecology center retrieved httpwwwescholarshiporgucitem9kr1w8fp støen g zedrosser sæbø amp swenson j e 2006 inversely densitydependent natal dispersal brown bears ursus arctos oecologia 1482 356 traill l w bradshaw c j amp brook b w 2007 minimum viable population size metaanalysis 30 years published estimates biological conservation 1391 159166 traill l w brook b w frankham r r amp bradshaw c j 2010 pragmatic population viability targets rapidly changing world biological conservation 1431 2834 us fish amp wildlife service 2011 grizzly bear ursus arctos horribilis 5year review summary evaluation grizzly bear recovery office missoula montana walker r amp craighead l 2001 analyzing wildlife movement corridors montana using gis retrieved 160filecmwpschoolgeog 4405analyzing wildlife movement corridors montana using gishtm 1302001 zedrosser støen g sæbø amp swenson j e 2007 stay go natal dispersal brown bear animal behaviour 743 369376 | 2,859 |
<p>When reality fails to confirm the “truths” held by the international financial establishment, the corporate media can be relied on to concoct more cooperative scenarios.</p>
<p>In the real world, Argentina’s economy has been one of the most robust in the world for the past decade. But in the world of corporate journalism, Argentina is an economic rogue on the road to ruin. When its economy is discussed in U.S. corporate media, it’s largely to portray it as an example of national leaders making bad economic choices, a model of what not to do. This is what happened when Argentina recently bucked neoliberal nostrums and renationalized its major oil company, YPF, which had been acquired by the Spanish firm Repsol in a 1999 privatization.</p>
<p>Argentine President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner (cc photo: Expectativa Online)</p>
<p>In the New York Times ( <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/19/world/americas/dismay-over-argentinas-nationalization-plan.html" type="external">4/19/12</a>), Latin American correspondent Simon Romero framed the “expropriation” in negative terms, larding his report with critics like the anonymous Latin American “financial experts” who greeted [Argentine President Cristina Fernández de] Kirchner’s abrupt decision with dismay, saying the nationalization and other economic policies were making Argentina more of a hemispheric outlier than a leader in a bold new economic era.</p>
<p>Mexican President Felipe Calderón, whose own country’s oil industry is nationalized along similar lines as Argentina’s, was quoted saying the YPF nationalization “did no one any good.” Romero also quoted one Brazilian newspaper columnist who wrote that “Argentina’s capacity to err seems unlimited,” and another who referred to Kirchner as a “Crazy Queen.”</p>
<p>Support for Argentina’s move was briefly noted and ominously framed. Cheer-leaders included Venezuela—“where President Chávez has exerted control over dozens of companies, including huge oil projects”—and Uruguayan President José Mujica, “a former member of the Tupamaros guerrilla group.”</p>
<p>Perhaps the most telling comment in the lopsided account was Chilean Economic Minister Pablo Longueira’s claim that Argentina’s action made Latin America a “less trustworthy region.” Longueira was clear about whose trust matters: “Capital flows exit to those places where there is more investor confidence.”</p>
<p>There was the obligatory Washington Post editorial ( <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/argentinas-president-rejects-stepping-into-the-future/2012/04/19/gIQABtB9TT_story.html" type="external">4/19/12</a>), headlined “Argen-tina’s President Rejects Stepping Into the Future,” which said Kirchner is “continuing to pursue the autocratic populism she practiced before the election.” As NACLA ( <a href="http://nacla.org/blog/2012/5/2/washington-posts-flimsy-denunciation-argentina" type="external">5/2/12</a>) noted ironically, Post editors find Kirchner autocratic because she “was reelected in an historic landslide, and had the temerity to continue the policies that gave her such strong approval in the first place.” In fact, YPF nationalization is even more popular than Kirchner in Argentina, garnering a 62 percent approval rating (MercoPress, <a href="http://en.mercopress.com/2012/04/23/ypf-seizure-approved-by-62-of-argentines-according-to-opinion-poll" type="external">4/23/12</a>).</p>
<p>Business Week ( <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-19/argentina-goes-rogue-again" type="external">4/19/12</a>) published a critical story about the nationalization and the recent trade restrictions Argentina has put in place to help bolster exports and protect its workers’ jobs. The piece claimed Kirchner was pursuing “ever more insular economic policies,” under the instructive headline: “Argentina Goes Rogue Again.”</p>
<p>Argentina has been declared a economic rogue many times over, beginning in 2002 when it refused to continue under an IMF austerity regime and purposely defaulted on its debt. For its temerity, IMF official Anne Krueger reportedly dubbed Argentina “the ‘A’ word” (International Herald Tribune, <a href="http://www.cepr.net/index.php/op-eds-&amp;-columns/op-eds-&amp;-columns/the-imf-has-lost-its-influence/" type="external">9/23/05</a>).</p>
<p>Corporate media reporting on Argentina takes its cues from U.S. and global economic elites, whose remarks about Argentina’s economy are routinely critical.</p>
<p>In 2009, then-CIA director Leon Panetta enraged Argentine officials when he suggested that their economy might be unstable (BBC News, <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7914027.stm" type="external">2/27/09</a>). The same year, CATO senior economist Daniel Mitchell attacked U.S. economic policy by equating it to “reckless” Argentina (Washington Times, <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/28/geithner-to-focus-on-trade-in-china/?page=all" type="external">5/28/09</a>): “The U.S. has become the Argentina of the industrialized world, with our reckless monetary policy and irresponsible fiscal policy.”</p>
<p>The U.S. should be so lucky.</p>
<p>Since defaulting on its debt in 2002 and extracting itself from an economic regime dictated by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Argentina’s economy has grown more rapidly than any in the Western Hemisphere (Guardian, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/24/cristina-kirchner-win-argentina-elections?INTCMP=SRCH" type="external">10/23/11</a>). While developing countries are expected to grow more rapidly than developed ones, the gap between Argentine growth since 2002 (a 7.4 percent per year average) is still impressive next to the U.S.’s almost flat 1.7 percent per annum growth rate (IMF World Economic Outlook Database, <a href="www.imf.org/" type="external">4/12</a>). (Some private estimates, such as those of <a href="http://www.ojf.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=8&amp;Itemid=6&amp;lang=en" type="external">Orlando J. Fererres &amp; Asociados</a>, put Argentina’s average annual growth over this period at about 1 percentage point less than the government/IMF data.)</p>
<p>And while Argentina has its share of economic issues—a persistent problem with inflation, to name one—this year the IMF estimates the country’s unemployment rate will fall to 6.7 percent, its lowest point since 1992.</p>
<p>Last year, economics blogger Yves Smith (Naked Capitalism, <a href="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/10/the-verboten-story-of-argentinas-economic-success.html" type="external">10/23/11</a>) noted how Argentina gets little credit in the U.S. media: “Ever notice nothing is ever said in the mainstream media about Argentina’s economy, save that it had a big default?” She pointed out that the country’s economy had grown “nearly twice as fast” as Brazil’s—which is often cited as a positive model in U.S. media—while increasing social spending “from 10.3 percent of GDP to 14.2 percent of GDP,” and decreasing inequality: “Poverty and extreme poverty have fallen by roughly two-thirds.”</p>
<p>The lesson here is that how well you do by your people has little value next to how well you do by bankers. Never mind that its economy has outperformed its better-behaved neighbors; Argentina is a bad example because it flouts international financial interests.</p>
<p>Irish protest against austerity economics.</p>
<p>By the same skewed reasoning that finds Argentina’s high-performing economy wanting, the U.S. corporate press presents Ireland’s stagnant economy as a positive model. “Madness in Spain Lingers as Ireland Chases Recovery,” was a Bloomberg headline ( <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-01/madness-in-spain-lingers-as-ireland-chases-recovery-mortgages.html" type="external">5/2/12</a>) over a piece that quoted one European expert, “Ireland faced up to its problems faster than others and we expect growth there rather soon.”</p>
<p>In a Wall Street Journal op-ed ( <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203388804576614460087620094.html" type="external">10/10/11</a>), “Lessons of the Irish Come-back,” U.S. bond trader Michael Hasenstab was even more explicit, touting Ireland’s severe austerity measures, including harsh cuts in jobs, wages and spending, along with sharp tax hikes, measures that supposedly made Ireland more competitive. The bond trader’s bullishness on the Irish economy earned him a glowing profile in the New York Times ( <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/business/a-contrarian-bets-ireland-and-hungary-will-rebound.html?pagewanted=all" type="external">2/8/12</a>), headlined “A Contrarian Bets Ireland and Hungary Will Rebound”; the report explained that “Mr. Hasenstab has been an evangelist for Ireland’s stoic response to the crisis.”</p>
<p>NPR interviewed European editor of the Economist John Peet ( <a href="http://m.npr.org/news/World/151670973" type="external">4/30/12</a>), who praised Ireland and recommended its austerity agenda:</p>
<p>Responding to a question about how austerity seems to be forcing some Euro nations into deeper recession, Peet told NPR’s Steve Inskeep:</p>
<p>While acknowledging that some economies didn’t seem to react well to austerity, Peet failed to respond to Inskeep’s question: “I mean, you’re saying that hardly anyone seems to be proposing seriously another way out?”</p>
<p>Do “professional economists” really agree that austerity measures should be more rapidly implemented; that there are no real alternatives; and, most fundamentally, that Ireland’s economy is on the rebound as austerity boosters insist?</p>
<p>The answer on all three counts is no.</p>
<p>New York Times columnist Paul Krugman is one of many well-known economists who say treating recessed or demand-starved economies with austerity is counterproductive. Krugman is fond of quoting John Maynard Keynes, a giant in economic theory, who said, “The boom, not the slump, is the right time for austerity at the Treasury.” Keynes said this just as FDR briefly embraced austerity and brought on the Recession of 1937.</p>
<p>Contrary to the shiny happy media accounts, Ireland is no model of the benefits of austerity. In his New York Times blog ( <a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/30/austerity-fantasies/" type="external">4/30/12</a>), Krugman responded to Peet’s claim that Ireland was “beginning to grow again” with a graph demonstrating an Irish economy still stuck in a prolonged slump.</p>
<p />
<p>Wrote Krugman: “To be fair, Peet isn’t alone. The legend of Irish recovery has somehow set in, and nobody on the pro-austerity side seems to feel any need to look at the data, even for a minute, to check whether the legend is true.”</p>
<p>The last quarter of 2011, according to the Irish Central Statistics Office ( <a href="http://cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/labourmarket/2011/qnhs_q32011.pdf" type="external">12/12/11</a>), marked the largest quarterly fall in employment in two years, leaving Ireland with unemployment hovering above 14 percent.</p>
<p>The jobs picture is so dire that large numbers of young Irish workers are leaving the country to seek work abroad. According to the Guardian ( <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/08/ireland-migration-young-liverpool" type="external">3/8/12</a>), unemployment has driven emigration to its highest level in two decades:</p>
<p>Argentina and Ireland are just the most recent examples of corporate media distorting the picture of various national economies to reinforce austerity and neoliberalism. There is no shortage of corporate media stories about how Greece, which is balking at the imposition of ever-harsher IMF/EU austerity measures, should follow the example of Latvia, which has begun to show growth after undergoing a harsh IMF/EU austerity regime (e.g., Wall Street Journal, <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304791704577418303635049204.html" type="external">5/21/12</a>).</p>
<p>In their quest to dissuade Greece from, say, taking the Argentine path and defaulting on its debt, corporate media usually obscure the fuller picture of Latvia, which has paid enormous economic and social costs for its alleged salvation. According to the Latvian census, from 2001 to 2011, the country’s population has receded from roughly 2.4 million to 2.1 million—losing one of every eight residents—according to the Latvian national statistics office (Baltic News Service, 1/18/12).</p>
<p>Despite recent growth, the country’s GDP is still more than 15 percent below its 2007 peak (Conscience of a Liberal, <a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/26/success-stories/" type="external">3/26/12</a>). And, after all this pain and dislocation, as academics Jeffrey Sommers, Arunas Juska and Michael Hudson point out (Naked Capitalism, <a href="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/12/no-people-no-problem-the-baltic-tigers%E2%80%99-false-prophets-of-austerity.html" type="external">12/6/11</a>), Latvia and its neighbor Lithuania remain in a deep financial hole, even as they are celebrated as models of success:</p>
<p>When corporate media report on other countries, the stories they tell have little to do with the actual functioning of their economies; they serve rather as morality tales that illustrate how those who follow neoliberal prescriptions are rewarded and those who deviate are punished. Reality conveys a quite different message.</p>
<p>Subscribe: <a href="" type="internal">Android</a> | <a href="" type="internal">RSS</a></p> | true | 4 | reality fails confirm truths held international financial establishment corporate media relied concoct cooperative scenarios real world argentinas economy one robust world past decade world corporate journalism argentina economic rogue road ruin economy discussed us corporate media largely portray example national leaders making bad economic choices model happened argentina recently bucked neoliberal nostrums renationalized major oil company ypf acquired spanish firm repsol 1999 privatization argentine president cristina fernandez de kirchner cc photo expectativa online new york times 41912 latin american correspondent simon romero framed expropriation negative terms larding report critics like anonymous latin american financial experts greeted argentine president cristina fernández de kirchners abrupt decision dismay saying nationalization economic policies making argentina hemispheric outlier leader bold new economic era mexican president felipe calderón whose countrys oil industry nationalized along similar lines argentinas quoted saying ypf nationalization one good romero also quoted one brazilian newspaper columnist wrote argentinas capacity err seems unlimited another referred kirchner crazy queen support argentinas move briefly noted ominously framed cheerleaders included venezuelawhere president chávez exerted control dozens companies including huge oil projectsand uruguayan president josé mujica former member tupamaros guerrilla group perhaps telling comment lopsided account chilean economic minister pablo longueiras claim argentinas action made latin america less trustworthy region longueira clear whose trust matters capital flows exit places investor confidence obligatory washington post editorial 41912 headlined argentinas president rejects stepping future said kirchner continuing pursue autocratic populism practiced election nacla 5212 noted ironically post editors find kirchner autocratic reelected historic landslide temerity continue policies gave strong approval first place fact ypf nationalization even popular kirchner argentina garnering 62 percent approval rating mercopress 42312 business week 41912 published critical story nationalization recent trade restrictions argentina put place help bolster exports protect workers jobs piece claimed kirchner pursuing ever insular economic policies instructive headline argentina goes rogue argentina declared economic rogue many times beginning 2002 refused continue imf austerity regime purposely defaulted debt temerity imf official anne krueger reportedly dubbed argentina word international herald tribune 92305 corporate media reporting argentina takes cues us global economic elites whose remarks argentinas economy routinely critical 2009 thencia director leon panetta enraged argentine officials suggested economy might unstable bbc news 22709 year cato senior economist daniel mitchell attacked us economic policy equating reckless argentina washington times 52809 us become argentina industrialized world reckless monetary policy irresponsible fiscal policy us lucky since defaulting debt 2002 extracting economic regime dictated international monetary fund imf argentinas economy grown rapidly western hemisphere guardian 102311 developing countries expected grow rapidly developed ones gap argentine growth since 2002 74 percent per year average still impressive next uss almost flat 17 percent per annum growth rate imf world economic outlook database 412 private estimates orlando j fererres amp asociados put argentinas average annual growth period 1 percentage point less governmentimf data argentina share economic issuesa persistent problem inflation name onethis year imf estimates countrys unemployment rate fall 67 percent lowest point since 1992 last year economics blogger yves smith naked capitalism 102311 noted argentina gets little credit us media ever notice nothing ever said mainstream media argentinas economy save big default pointed countrys economy grown nearly twice fast brazilswhich often cited positive model us mediawhile increasing social spending 103 percent gdp 142 percent gdp decreasing inequality poverty extreme poverty fallen roughly twothirds lesson well people little value next well bankers never mind economy outperformed betterbehaved neighbors argentina bad example flouts international financial interests irish protest austerity economics skewed reasoning finds argentinas highperforming economy wanting us corporate press presents irelands stagnant economy positive model madness spain lingers ireland chases recovery bloomberg headline 5212 piece quoted one european expert ireland faced problems faster others expect growth rather soon wall street journal oped 101011 lessons irish comeback us bond trader michael hasenstab even explicit touting irelands severe austerity measures including harsh cuts jobs wages spending along sharp tax hikes measures supposedly made ireland competitive bond traders bullishness irish economy earned glowing profile new york times 2812 headlined contrarian bets ireland hungary rebound report explained mr hasenstab evangelist irelands stoic response crisis npr interviewed european editor economist john peet 43012 praised ireland recommended austerity agenda responding question austerity seems forcing euro nations deeper recession peet told nprs steve inskeep acknowledging economies didnt seem react well austerity peet failed respond inskeeps question mean youre saying hardly anyone seems proposing seriously another way professional economists really agree austerity measures rapidly implemented real alternatives fundamentally irelands economy rebound austerity boosters insist answer three counts new york times columnist paul krugman one many wellknown economists say treating recessed demandstarved economies austerity counterproductive krugman fond quoting john maynard keynes giant economic theory said boom slump right time austerity treasury keynes said fdr briefly embraced austerity brought recession 1937 contrary shiny happy media accounts ireland model benefits austerity new york times blog 43012 krugman responded peets claim ireland beginning grow graph demonstrating irish economy still stuck prolonged slump wrote krugman fair peet isnt alone legend irish recovery somehow set nobody proausterity side seems feel need look data even minute check whether legend true last quarter 2011 according irish central statistics office 121211 marked largest quarterly fall employment two years leaving ireland unemployment hovering 14 percent jobs picture dire large numbers young irish workers leaving country seek work abroad according guardian 3812 unemployment driven emigration highest level two decades argentina ireland recent examples corporate media distorting picture various national economies reinforce austerity neoliberalism shortage corporate media stories greece balking imposition everharsher imfeu austerity measures follow example latvia begun show growth undergoing harsh imfeu austerity regime eg wall street journal 52112 quest dissuade greece say taking argentine path defaulting debt corporate media usually obscure fuller picture latvia paid enormous economic social costs alleged salvation according latvian census 2001 2011 countrys population receded roughly 24 million 21 millionlosing one every eight residentsaccording latvian national statistics office baltic news service 11812 despite recent growth countrys gdp still 15 percent 2007 peak conscience liberal 32612 pain dislocation academics jeffrey sommers arunas juska michael hudson point naked capitalism 12611 latvia neighbor lithuania remain deep financial hole even celebrated models success corporate media report countries stories tell little actual functioning economies serve rather morality tales illustrate follow neoliberal prescriptions rewarded deviate punished reality conveys quite different message subscribe android rss | 1,034 |
<p>The political divide in the U.S. has never seemed wider than it does now and our polarization never this great. Yet even though a chasm exists between opposing political sides, there is universal agreement that there is something special about America, what some call her “exceptionalism.”</p>
<p>What is&#160;this “something special” and how did it come about?</p>
<p>The roots of our national identity are buried deep in the earth and existed long before the first Europeans landed on our shores. No doubt our Founders and subsequent immigrants helped shape our identity, but the mosaic of who we are as Americans was already firmly established by the time they arrived.</p>
<p>The Land Shaped Us?</p>
<p>Most Americans would find the concept that the land itself defined and shaped us is one that borders on blasphemy and the ridiculous. Many identify the U.S. as a Christian nation, and thus the idea that the land can influence its inhabitants defies the Abrahamic tradition and is considered paganistic. The concept is equally heretical to the scientific and materialistic viewpoints.</p>
<p>But the fact is the land does&#160;have a profound influence upon us. We see this vividly with our political divide, which is also a regional divide. America has a Blue State/Red State orientation, where we are aggregated in distinct geographical areas according to our political perspectives (conservatives in the South, liberals in the North).&#160; And the idea that we cling to Civil War allegiances seems almost unimaginable.</p>
<p>The prescient analysis of Kevin Phillips in 1968, then a Republican strategist for the Nixon Administration, predicted our Red State (conservative)/Blue State (liberal) divide. His book, <a href="" type="internal">The Emerging Republican Majority</a>, forecasted a surging conservative movement as Americans moved from cities to suburbs and from the Northeast to the South and West. He believed that traditional Civil War alliances would dominate politics, becoming known as the “Republican’s Southern Strategy.”</p>
<p>Philips was correct, and the South benefitted from migration and saw its population explode relative to the North. The influx of new residents was a diversified mix of immigrants and citizens with a variety of political allegiances. Those migrating to the South were not all conservatives, yet the South remained predominantly conservative, consistently voting Republican during its growth spurt. For example, Georgia’s population doubled from 4.6 million (1970) to 9.7 million (2010), and its electoral votes increased from 12 to 16 in that same period. And Georgia’s voting record remained consistently conservative Republican, with the exception of when native sons Carter and Clinton ran for president. Interestingly 3.6 million of that 4.6 million, or 2/3 of the increase was to metro Atlanta, which you would think like other metro areas would vote democratic.</p>
<p>We also see our regional divide in the social fabric of religion and American values. Preceding the Civil War, the two largest protestant denominations, the Methodist Episcopal Church and the Baptist Church, split into Northern and Southern Branches over slavery. Free churches formed in the North for those denominations, or ministers, that refused to embrace Abolitionism.&#160; In the South, many clergy used their interpretation of the bible to condone slavery.</p>
<p>Today, southern Christian churches are speaking out against homosexuality and LGBT rights. They have been a force behind efforts to pass discriminatory laws such as North Carolina’s transgender restroom legislation.&#160; In contrast, northern churches such as the UU, UCC, and Episcopal churches, fully support LGBT rights.&#160; Not all Southerners are conservative and against equal rights for transgender citizens and not all Northerners are liberals and pro-LGBT. But regional influences can affect our thinking and behavior.</p>
<p>Why is it that some Americans still adhere to Civil War allegiances?&#160; In the last 50 years, the U.S. government has passed legislation to increase equality and reduce discrimination. Jobs created by corporate America have reduced economic disparities nationally. And our country has become standardized — just about every town has a Walmart and a McDonalds.&#160;&#160; As Americans, we dress similarly, shop at the same chain stores, and are captured by the same national crazes gone viral.&#160; Yet at another level we are as regionally divided as ever.</p>
<p>Jungian Archetypes</p>
<p>To better understand why our politics have remained regional while just about every other feature of our lives has become uniform, we turn to Carl Jung. Jung believed that humanity shared a “collective unconscious,” populated by our instincts and archetypes, and stemming from our ancestral and evolutionary past. He believed our collective unconscious exerts a tremendous influence upon us, shaping our thinking and behavior, both individually and collectively. He also believed that our collective unconscious is buried deep in the earth.</p>
<p>In <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1556433794/counterpunchmaga" type="external">Mind and Earth</a>, Jung states that archetypes are the “hidden foundation of the conscious mind.” To describe how our consciousness has developed, he used the metaphor of the construction of a building:</p>
<p>Its “upper story was erected in the nineteenth century, its ground floor dates back to the sixteenth century, and careful examination of the masonry reveals that it was reconstructed from a tower built in the eleventh century. In the cellar we come upon Roman foundations, and under the cellar a choked-up cave with Neolithic tools in the upper layer and remnants of fauna from the same period in the lower level.”</p>
<p>The implication is clear: who we are today, whether it be our national or regional identities, is the result of the memories built upon the land over the millennia by those who lived here before us. Basically, the Earth retains the memories and imprints of our ancestors, or predecessors, shaping who we are. Jung never discussed American regional differences, but he noted that different countries and people have different identities.</p>
<p>Jung saw America as an experiment in the transplantation of a race to another country:&#160;&#160; “Just as, in the process of evolution, the mind has been moulded by earthly conditions, so the same process repeats itself under our eyes today.”</p>
<p>America was not built upon virgin soil, but on the ancestral totems, or memories of Native Americans and other indigenous people.&#160; Jung stated, “The foreign land assimilates its conqueror …. Our contact with the unconscious chains us to the earth and makes it hard for us to move.” Put another way, the conqueror is conquered by the conquered. Jung points out how Australian Aborigines believe one cannot conquer a foreign soil because the ancestor spirits that dwell in the soil will reincarnate in the invader.</p>
<p>While European settlers helped shape America, who we are at our core as Americans is ultimately the result of the ancestors of Native Americans and other indigenous people before them. We have only added another floor, or addition, to Jung’s metaphorical building. We commonly believe that America was built over the last few hundred years, but the deep roots of our being go back millennia.&#160; Jung was so compelled by this idea that he referred to America as having a Native American soul.</p>
<p>America’s Native American Soul</p>
<p>So where can we see the influence of a Native American soul? In 1988, the U.S. Senate passed Hr. Cons. Res. 331, which recognized the profound influence the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) confederacy, its form of government, and its Great Law of Peace had on our Founders, on our form of government, and on our concepts of democracy. But there was a much greater influence that they did not acknowledge — that of the collective unconscious of the Haudenosaunee and previous Nations (Tribes) buried in the land that they inhabited, now the area of greater New York State.</p>
<p>The Peacemaker, a spiritual prophet of the Haudenosaunee tells their story. He arrived in upstate New York at a time of war, violence, torture, and cannibalism. He convinced the people to stop their blood feuding and forgive those who had injured them, and he united the warring tribes/nations into one Nation (Haudnosaunee/Iroquois.) He transformed the Adodarhoh, a vile and violent man, into the Tadodaho, a great spiritual leader and the greatest chief, a position still held and revered today.</p>
<p>The Peacemaker then gathered the people at Onondaga Lake (in Syracuse, New York.)&#160; As a symbol of peace, he uprooted a white pine tree and had the people throw their weapons into the stream below—thus the term “bury the hatchet.” The Peacemaker replanted the Tree of Peace and gave the people the Great Law of Peace.</p>
<p>When we examine the Haudenosaunee, its prophet (the Peacemaker), and his Great Law of Peace as how that law manifested in the actions and beliefs of the Nation, we begin to see in those people much that we hold dear about ourselves:</p>
<p>Democracy—the Great Law of Peace created democracy and contains familiar terms such as “we the people” and established a confederation, or union of tribes/nations.</p>
<p>Welcoming—“If any man or any nation shall obey the Laws of Peace … they may trace back the roots of the Tree … They shall be welcomed to take shelter beneath the Great Evergreen Tree.” (Great Law of Peace)</p>
<p>Peace/reconciliation—People were able to cast their differences aside and unite in peace. None of the advocates for peace killed anyone.</p>
<p>Women—were given an elevated status of clan mothers. Author, feminist, and scholar Sally Roesch Wagner was so impressed by this influence that she wrote a book about it, <a href="" type="internal">Sisters in Spirit, Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Influences on Early American Feminists</a>.</p>
<p>Transformation—America is the story of second acts, supposedly from immigrants finding a new home in a distant land. But the story of the Peacemaker tells of one of the most dramatic transformations ever, the rebirth of the Adodarhoh into the Tadodaho. Imagine the most violent and evil person being transformed into a spiritual leader!</p>
<p>Melting pot/uniting—Before the U.S. became a melting pot of various cultures and races, the five tribes that became the Haudenosaunee were united.</p>
<p>Spiritual—the Creator through the Peacemaker brought about peace.</p>
<p>Forgiveness—Everyone had to forgive, especially Hiawatha who had his daughters killed by the Adodarhoh while working with the Peacemaker. A powerful message seldom seen in “story arcs,” or stories, whether they are religious, or nonreligious.</p>
<p>This is what makes up the floor below us. But there are many other floors below that I imagine are very similar. Ones that were cumulatively shaped the Haudenosaunee and others before them.</p>
<p>We Have Been “Conquered”</p>
<p>Yes, there is something exceptional about America because there has always been something exceptional about the land we inhabit, from ancestral totems to aspects of Mother Earth. We must accept that we are not a conqueror, but that we have been conquered, as were the Haudenosaunee and others before them.&#160; The land we call home has subsumed us, and in the process we have been imbued with noblest of beliefs and ideals.</p>
<p>No doubt other factors have contributed to our development. But we need to recognize that we have been shaped by the Earth we call America; whether it be our national identity or our regional differences. Once we recognize that the land shapes us, we may begin to appreciate Mother Earth and see Her for who She is.</p>
<p>I like to imagine that many prophets and great souls walked the area of greater New York State long before the Haudenosaunee’s Peacemaker landed his canoe on the southern shore of Lake Ontario. I see the roots of the White Pine Tree that he planted have stretched around the world and know that concepts unimaginable at the time, such as democracy and the empowerment of women, have been embraced globally.</p>
<p>Yes, we have our political divisions, our perceived injustices, and the prospect of tyranny. And, yes, our Founders recognized slavery, viewed women as second class status citizens, and failed to allow everyone to vote. But the land conquered those inequities.&#160; HOW?&#160; It influenced its inhabitants to become reformers, leaders, and great souls.&#160; It will do so again.</p>
<p>The exceptionalism that defines us is a powerful force buried in the earth – neither the blood feuding and cannibalism at the time of the Peacemaker, nor the Civil War could stop the land’s force. That exceptionalism remains bubbling below the surface of the land looking to rise again.</p>
<p>The Earth will offer us a future, once again, of an even&#160; “more perfect union,” a more just and egalitarian society, and a community where all of creation and Mother Earth is revered.&#160; Great wonder awaits us.</p>
<p>The preceding was adapted from Sacred Sites in North Star Country:&#160; Places in Greater New York State (PA, OH, NJ, CT, MA, VT, ONT) That Changed the World.</p>
<p>Madis Senner is a former global money manager turned Seeker. In his previous life he published opinion pieces for the NY Times, Barron’s and others. As a Keeper, he takes care of maintains several sacred sites. Sacred Sites in North Star Country is his fourth book. He lives in the heart of North Star Country in Syracuse, NY. You can learn more about his thinking and <a href="http://motherearthprayers.blogspot.com" type="external">Mother Earth here</a>.</p>
<p>Thanks to Debra Schaffer for her editorial help and Monroe Bernold for his input.</p>
<p>Bibliography.</p>
<p>Jung, Carl; Mind and Earth, Volume 10 of his Collected Works.</p>
<p>Phillips, Kevin; The Emerging Republican Majority, Arlington House, NYC, NY, 1969</p>
<p>Sabini, Meredith; The Earth Has a Soul. The Nature Writings of C.G. Jung, North Atlantic Books, Berkeley Calif, 2008</p>
<p>Strong, Douglas M; Perfectionist Politics, Abolitionism and the Religious Tensions of American Democracy; Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, NY, 1999</p>
<p>Tacey, David: “Mind and Earth: Psychic Influence Beneath the Surface”, Jung Journal: Culture &amp; Psyche; Volume 3. No.2, pg 15-32.</p>
<p>The Great Law of Peace</p>
<p>Wagner, Sally Roesch; Sisters in Spirit, Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Influences on Early American Feminists; Native Voices, 2001</p> | true | 4 | political divide us never seemed wider polarization never great yet even though chasm exists opposing political sides universal agreement something special america call exceptionalism is160this something special come roots national identity buried deep earth existed long first europeans landed shores doubt founders subsequent immigrants helped shape identity mosaic americans already firmly established time arrived land shaped us americans would find concept land defined shaped us one borders blasphemy ridiculous many identify us christian nation thus idea land influence inhabitants defies abrahamic tradition considered paganistic concept equally heretical scientific materialistic viewpoints fact land does160have profound influence upon us see vividly political divide also regional divide america blue statered state orientation aggregated distinct geographical areas according political perspectives conservatives south liberals north160 idea cling civil war allegiances seems almost unimaginable prescient analysis kevin phillips 1968 republican strategist nixon administration predicted red state conservativeblue state liberal divide book emerging republican majority forecasted surging conservative movement americans moved cities suburbs northeast south west believed traditional civil war alliances would dominate politics becoming known republicans southern strategy philips correct south benefitted migration saw population explode relative north influx new residents diversified mix immigrants citizens variety political allegiances migrating south conservatives yet south remained predominantly conservative consistently voting republican growth spurt example georgias population doubled 46 million 1970 97 million 2010 electoral votes increased 12 16 period georgias voting record remained consistently conservative republican exception native sons carter clinton ran president interestingly 36 million 46 million 23 increase metro atlanta would think like metro areas would vote democratic also see regional divide social fabric religion american values preceding civil war two largest protestant denominations methodist episcopal church baptist church split northern southern branches slavery free churches formed north denominations ministers refused embrace abolitionism160 south many clergy used interpretation bible condone slavery today southern christian churches speaking homosexuality lgbt rights force behind efforts pass discriminatory laws north carolinas transgender restroom legislation160 contrast northern churches uu ucc episcopal churches fully support lgbt rights160 southerners conservative equal rights transgender citizens northerners liberals prolgbt regional influences affect thinking behavior americans still adhere civil war allegiances160 last 50 years us government passed legislation increase equality reduce discrimination jobs created corporate america reduced economic disparities nationally country become standardized every town walmart mcdonalds160160 americans dress similarly shop chain stores captured national crazes gone viral160 yet another level regionally divided ever jungian archetypes better understand politics remained regional every feature lives become uniform turn carl jung jung believed humanity shared collective unconscious populated instincts archetypes stemming ancestral evolutionary past believed collective unconscious exerts tremendous influence upon us shaping thinking behavior individually collectively also believed collective unconscious buried deep earth mind earth jung states archetypes hidden foundation conscious mind describe consciousness developed used metaphor construction building upper story erected nineteenth century ground floor dates back sixteenth century careful examination masonry reveals reconstructed tower built eleventh century cellar come upon roman foundations cellar chokedup cave neolithic tools upper layer remnants fauna period lower level implication clear today whether national regional identities result memories built upon land millennia lived us basically earth retains memories imprints ancestors predecessors shaping jung never discussed american regional differences noted different countries people different identities jung saw america experiment transplantation race another country160160 process evolution mind moulded earthly conditions process repeats eyes today america built upon virgin soil ancestral totems memories native americans indigenous people160 jung stated foreign land assimilates conqueror contact unconscious chains us earth makes hard us move put another way conqueror conquered conquered jung points australian aborigines believe one conquer foreign soil ancestor spirits dwell soil reincarnate invader european settlers helped shape america core americans ultimately result ancestors native americans indigenous people added another floor addition jungs metaphorical building commonly believe america built last hundred years deep roots go back millennia160 jung compelled idea referred america native american soul americas native american soul see influence native american soul 1988 us senate passed hr cons res 331 recognized profound influence haudenosaunee iroquois confederacy form government great law peace founders form government concepts democracy much greater influence acknowledge collective unconscious haudenosaunee previous nations tribes buried land inhabited area greater new york state peacemaker spiritual prophet haudenosaunee tells story arrived upstate new york time war violence torture cannibalism convinced people stop blood feuding forgive injured united warring tribesnations one nation haudnosauneeiroquois transformed adodarhoh vile violent man tadodaho great spiritual leader greatest chief position still held revered today peacemaker gathered people onondaga lake syracuse new york160 symbol peace uprooted white pine tree people throw weapons stream belowthus term bury hatchet peacemaker replanted tree peace gave people great law peace examine haudenosaunee prophet peacemaker great law peace law manifested actions beliefs nation begin see people much hold dear democracythe great law peace created democracy contains familiar terms people established confederation union tribesnations welcomingif man nation shall obey laws peace may trace back roots tree shall welcomed take shelter beneath great evergreen tree great law peace peacereconciliationpeople able cast differences aside unite peace none advocates peace killed anyone womenwere given elevated status clan mothers author feminist scholar sally roesch wagner impressed influence wrote book sisters spirit haudenosaunee iroquois influences early american feminists transformationamerica story second acts supposedly immigrants finding new home distant land story peacemaker tells one dramatic transformations ever rebirth adodarhoh tadodaho imagine violent evil person transformed spiritual leader melting potunitingbefore us became melting pot various cultures races five tribes became haudenosaunee united spiritualthe creator peacemaker brought peace forgivenesseveryone forgive especially hiawatha daughters killed adodarhoh working peacemaker powerful message seldom seen story arcs stories whether religious nonreligious makes floor us many floors imagine similar ones cumulatively shaped haudenosaunee others conquered yes something exceptional america always something exceptional land inhabit ancestral totems aspects mother earth must accept conqueror conquered haudenosaunee others them160 land call home subsumed us process imbued noblest beliefs ideals doubt factors contributed development need recognize shaped earth call america whether national identity regional differences recognize land shapes us may begin appreciate mother earth see like imagine many prophets great souls walked area greater new york state long haudenosaunees peacemaker landed canoe southern shore lake ontario see roots white pine tree planted stretched around world know concepts unimaginable time democracy empowerment women embraced globally yes political divisions perceived injustices prospect tyranny yes founders recognized slavery viewed women second class status citizens failed allow everyone vote land conquered inequities160 how160 influenced inhabitants become reformers leaders great souls160 exceptionalism defines us powerful force buried earth neither blood feuding cannibalism time peacemaker civil war could stop lands force exceptionalism remains bubbling surface land looking rise earth offer us future even160 perfect union egalitarian society community creation mother earth revered160 great wonder awaits us preceding adapted sacred sites north star country160 places greater new york state pa oh nj ct vt ont changed world madis senner former global money manager turned seeker previous life published opinion pieces ny times barrons others keeper takes care maintains several sacred sites sacred sites north star country fourth book lives heart north star country syracuse ny learn thinking mother earth thanks debra schaffer editorial help monroe bernold input bibliography jung carl mind earth volume 10 collected works phillips kevin emerging republican majority arlington house nyc ny 1969 sabini meredith earth soul nature writings cg jung north atlantic books berkeley calif 2008 strong douglas perfectionist politics abolitionism religious tensions american democracy syracuse university press syracuse ny 1999 tacey david mind earth psychic influence beneath surface jung journal culture amp psyche volume 3 no2 pg 1532 great law peace wagner sally roesch sisters spirit haudenosaunee iroquois influences early american feminists native voices 2001 | 1,251 |
<p>Michele Penner Angrist</p>
<p>Last Friday, Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali fled Tunisia after 23 years as president. He was driven out of the country by the cumulative pressure of a month of protests, sparked by a young man's economic despair and subsequent self-immolation. Much of the reporting on the demonstrations has emphasized Tunisians' economic grievances: unemployment, inflation, and the high cost of living.</p>
<p>But material difficulties were not the central driver in pushing Ben Ali from power. After all, economically motivated riots broke out in Tunisia in the early 1980s but did not bring down the government of then President Habib Bourguiba. And Ben Ali's promises in the middle of the most recent unrest to boost employment and cut the prices of basic goods could not stop the momentum of the protests.</p>
<p>On a more fundamental level, Tunisians are protesting dictatorship. They have had just two presidents since the country's independence from France in 1956. The first was Bourguiba, who led the independence battle against the French and then erected a secular, single-party authoritarian regime. The second was Ben Ali, who engineered Bourguiba's ouster in 1987, when it appeared that Bourguiba had grown too old and detached to govern effectively. Despite his early rhetoric emphasizing political pluralism, Ben Ali cracked down against free speech and any potential dissent. He cited the danger posed by the country's Islamists, who gave some cause for concern over the extent to which, if elected, they would respect democracy and the relatively equal rights Tunisian women had achieved after independence. During the 1990s, he eliminated the Islamist movement and consolidated an even darker and more repressive dictatorship than that of Bourguiba. Ben Ali retained Bourguiba's governing political party, renaming it the Constitutional Democratic Rally. The name was a cynical choice, for Ben Ali's Tunisia would come to have zero press freedoms, a censored Internet, monitored phone and e-mail communications, and only token opposition in a toothless parliament.</p>
<p>Yet these were not necessarily the features of the regime against which tens of thousands of Tunisians demonstrated last week. Ben Ali's was a particularly insulting dictatorship. The state-run media participated in grotesque displays of hagiography and helped produce a cult of personality around the president, whose portrait hung everywhere. The media lauded his initiatives as unambiguously and gloriously advancing the interests of all Tunisians, with Ben Ali the ever avuncular and enlightened ruler.</p>
<p>The reality was much more grim: dissidents were tortured and everyday Tunisians struggled to build livelihoods, while the families of the president and those connected to him enriched themselves and flaunted their wealth. The Ben Ali regime was contemptuous of its citizens, treating them as too unsophisticated to entrust with freedoms - and betting that they would be too meek to call the regime to account for its excesses.</p>
<p>This calculus held, however tenuously, for more than two decades. Few saw last week's events coming. In this regard, the fall of Ben Ali had much in common with the street protests that swept communist rulers from power in Eastern Europe in the late 1980s. No one predicted those governments would collapse, either - yet in 1989, the world witnessed what Timur Kuran, the Duke professor and economist, would later call "now out of never." Kuran argued that under such dictatorships, citizens are required to act in public as if they are content with the status quo. If they do not, the wrath of the security apparatus falls upon them.</p>
<p>But people bear an internal cost - to their sense of autonomy and personal integrity - of pretending that the status quo is acceptable. And when the cost of pretending becomes intolerably high for a few citizens, sudden and surprising mass protests can erupt. The actions of these few can trigger similar actions by others, who, when they see how many others feel as they do and are willing to show it publicly, join in the opposition. The larger the number of protestors becomes, the more others are willing to join them.</p>
<p>When Mohamed Bouazizi, distraught after authorities shut down his vegetable stall for operating without a license, set himself on fire in the city of Sidi Bouzid on December 17, 2010, the act was so dramatic - so beyond the parameters of normal experience - that for some Tunisians the costs of continuing to behave as if they approved of Ben Ali became unbearable. These were the first protestors, who rioted in the streets of Sidi Bouzid. Their actions triggered bandwagoning by thousands more who joined the demonstrations, emboldened by the sight of their fellow citizens daring to confront the regime.</p>
<p>As Ben Ali flew to exile in Saudi Arabia, Prime Minister Mohamed Ghannouchi assumed temporary command of the state; he quickly stepped down and ceded power to Fouad Mebazaa, the head of Tunisia's parliament. Mebazaa has assembled an interim coalition government and claims that new elections will be held in the coming months. Yet instability remains, with the military increasingly moving to confront and sideline the police and security services loyal to Ben Ali.</p>
<p>It is not yet clear how, or even if, the political dust will settle. Officials in the ruling party, the executive branch, and the security services have an enormous stake in the status quo and will try to preserve it. It appears that elements of the military pushed Ben Ali to depart the country, perhaps in the hope that sacrificing him and making modest concessions to the demonstrators - new elections, broader press freedoms, more leeway for the opposition, and so on - will suffice to restore order and leave the status quo more or less intact.</p>
<p>This will be a tough sell. In 1987, Ben Ali's rule was welcomed because most Tunisians were convinced that the aging and erratic Bourguiba was on a dangerous collision course with his Islamist challengers. Ben Ali retained grudging support throughout the 1990s because of the bloody civil war in neighboring Algeria between its secular single-party regime and its own Islamist opposition. To many in Tunisia, tolerating Ben Ali seemed like a small price to pay to avoid such a fate. But Algeria's war is long over; it provides no political cover to Ben Ali's successors and those in his inner circle who are attempting to cling to power. Although demonstrators did not articulate specific demands beyond Ben Ali's departure, cosmetic changes to the state are not likely to be enough to satisfy most Tunisians today.</p>
<p>But it is unclear who or what is a viable alternative. For a generation, Ben Ali suffocated the political arena to such a degree that there is no force capable of governing Tunisia other than the ruling party and the military. The country's handful of legal opposition parties has not been allowed to develop real constituencies and nationwide organizational structures. And the members of the Tunisian Islamist movement - which, for better or worse, constituted a real political alternative in the 1980s and early 1990s - are in no position to govern. Many of these Islamists have adopted more moderate views that could make them an attractive force, but these figures have been in exile for years. It is difficult to imagine a short-term future for Tunisia other than sustained instability as the protectors of the regime battle street protesters, or a military takeover to stem the anarchy threatening the nation.</p>
<p>Rulers of Arab countries whose political systems most resemble Tunisia's - the secular single-party authoritarian republics of Egypt and Syria - undoubtedly watched Ben Ali's fall with knots in their stomachs. Internet users and bloggers throughout the region reveled in what Tunisian protestors had achieved, calling for copycat actions elsewhere. The monarchies of Jordan, Morocco, and the Gulf states also have cause for concern.</p>
<p>Yet the dominoes may not fall so fast. Tunisia's military is smaller, more professional, and less politicized than the militaries in Egypt and Syria. Reports suggest that the Tunisian military refused to fire on citizen protestors; militaries in Egypt and Syria, however, are much closer to the ruling regimes and may not be so hesitant to shoot. They might not even need to - if Tunisia descends into anarchy, publics in nearby countries may be reluctant to destabilize their incumbent regimes.</p>
<p>Arab dictators have proven resilient in the face of similarly daunting challenges. In the 1980s and 1990s, as democratization spread across the globe, the rulers of Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria retained their power through combinations of modest liberalization, cooptation, and repression. At the same time, many Arab regimes enjoy Western support due to their moderate stances toward Israel, oil resources, assistance in the war on terror, and the fact that they face powerful domestic Islamist opponents whom Western governments are not eager to see take power.</p>
<p>True, Ben Ali's Western backers were not there for him in his hour of need: France would not receive him into exile, and U.S. President Barack Obama applauded the dignity and courage of the protestors. But Tunisia is a peripheral interest for Washington and its allies. It does not have much oil and has no Islamist movement waiting to assume power. Were the regimes in Egypt or Jordan on the line, Western support for the status quo might well be more vigorous.</p>
<p>For Washington, the quick fall of Ben Ali is a reminder that stability can be deceptive. Although it is necessary to work with existing, if unsavory, regimes to advance regional objectives, it is impossible to predict when these regimes' hold on power may unravel. And when it does, the absence of strong political institutions that are capable of managing transition can lead to a climate of dangerous instability. Atrophied, disorganized opposition groups make achieving stability even more difficult. Thus, although it may be a delicate and difficult task, the United States should encourage the development of stronger, more autonomous political institutions, as well as credible alternative power centers within its authoritarian allies.</p> | true | 4 | michele penner angrist last friday zine elabidine ben ali fled tunisia 23 years president driven country cumulative pressure month protests sparked young mans economic despair subsequent selfimmolation much reporting demonstrations emphasized tunisians economic grievances unemployment inflation high cost living material difficulties central driver pushing ben ali power economically motivated riots broke tunisia early 1980s bring government president habib bourguiba ben alis promises middle recent unrest boost employment cut prices basic goods could stop momentum protests fundamental level tunisians protesting dictatorship two presidents since countrys independence france 1956 first bourguiba led independence battle french erected secular singleparty authoritarian regime second ben ali engineered bourguibas ouster 1987 appeared bourguiba grown old detached govern effectively despite early rhetoric emphasizing political pluralism ben ali cracked free speech potential dissent cited danger posed countrys islamists gave cause concern extent elected would respect democracy relatively equal rights tunisian women achieved independence 1990s eliminated islamist movement consolidated even darker repressive dictatorship bourguiba ben ali retained bourguibas governing political party renaming constitutional democratic rally name cynical choice ben alis tunisia would come zero press freedoms censored internet monitored phone email communications token opposition toothless parliament yet necessarily features regime tens thousands tunisians demonstrated last week ben alis particularly insulting dictatorship staterun media participated grotesque displays hagiography helped produce cult personality around president whose portrait hung everywhere media lauded initiatives unambiguously gloriously advancing interests tunisians ben ali ever avuncular enlightened ruler reality much grim dissidents tortured everyday tunisians struggled build livelihoods families president connected enriched flaunted wealth ben ali regime contemptuous citizens treating unsophisticated entrust freedoms betting would meek call regime account excesses calculus held however tenuously two decades saw last weeks events coming regard fall ben ali much common street protests swept communist rulers power eastern europe late 1980s one predicted governments would collapse either yet 1989 world witnessed timur kuran duke professor economist would later call never kuran argued dictatorships citizens required act public content status quo wrath security apparatus falls upon people bear internal cost sense autonomy personal integrity pretending status quo acceptable cost pretending becomes intolerably high citizens sudden surprising mass protests erupt actions trigger similar actions others see many others feel willing show publicly join opposition larger number protestors becomes others willing join mohamed bouazizi distraught authorities shut vegetable stall operating without license set fire city sidi bouzid december 17 2010 act dramatic beyond parameters normal experience tunisians costs continuing behave approved ben ali became unbearable first protestors rioted streets sidi bouzid actions triggered bandwagoning thousands joined demonstrations emboldened sight fellow citizens daring confront regime ben ali flew exile saudi arabia prime minister mohamed ghannouchi assumed temporary command state quickly stepped ceded power fouad mebazaa head tunisias parliament mebazaa assembled interim coalition government claims new elections held coming months yet instability remains military increasingly moving confront sideline police security services loyal ben ali yet clear even political dust settle officials ruling party executive branch security services enormous stake status quo try preserve appears elements military pushed ben ali depart country perhaps hope sacrificing making modest concessions demonstrators new elections broader press freedoms leeway opposition suffice restore order leave status quo less intact tough sell 1987 ben alis rule welcomed tunisians convinced aging erratic bourguiba dangerous collision course islamist challengers ben ali retained grudging support throughout 1990s bloody civil war neighboring algeria secular singleparty regime islamist opposition many tunisia tolerating ben ali seemed like small price pay avoid fate algerias war long provides political cover ben alis successors inner circle attempting cling power although demonstrators articulate specific demands beyond ben alis departure cosmetic changes state likely enough satisfy tunisians today unclear viable alternative generation ben ali suffocated political arena degree force capable governing tunisia ruling party military countrys handful legal opposition parties allowed develop real constituencies nationwide organizational structures members tunisian islamist movement better worse constituted real political alternative 1980s early 1990s position govern many islamists adopted moderate views could make attractive force figures exile years difficult imagine shortterm future tunisia sustained instability protectors regime battle street protesters military takeover stem anarchy threatening nation rulers arab countries whose political systems resemble tunisias secular singleparty authoritarian republics egypt syria undoubtedly watched ben alis fall knots stomachs internet users bloggers throughout region reveled tunisian protestors achieved calling copycat actions elsewhere monarchies jordan morocco gulf states also cause concern yet dominoes may fall fast tunisias military smaller professional less politicized militaries egypt syria reports suggest tunisian military refused fire citizen protestors militaries egypt syria however much closer ruling regimes may hesitant shoot might even need tunisia descends anarchy publics nearby countries may reluctant destabilize incumbent regimes arab dictators proven resilient face similarly daunting challenges 1980s 1990s democratization spread across globe rulers morocco tunisia egypt jordan syria retained power combinations modest liberalization cooptation repression time many arab regimes enjoy western support due moderate stances toward israel oil resources assistance war terror fact face powerful domestic islamist opponents western governments eager see take power true ben alis western backers hour need france would receive exile us president barack obama applauded dignity courage protestors tunisia peripheral interest washington allies much oil islamist movement waiting assume power regimes egypt jordan line western support status quo might well vigorous washington quick fall ben ali reminder stability deceptive although necessary work existing unsavory regimes advance regional objectives impossible predict regimes hold power may unravel absence strong political institutions capable managing transition lead climate dangerous instability atrophied disorganized opposition groups make achieving stability even difficult thus although may delicate difficult task united states encourage development stronger autonomous political institutions well credible alternative power centers within authoritarian allies | 922 |
<p>Austin, Texas</p>
<p>If it hadn’t been for that moment when the potassium imbalance brought about by her bulimia caused Terri’s heart to stop, she might have been the woman in the television ad I just watched, selling the latest weight-loss method. “I lost a hundred pounds,” declares the svelte looking woman on TV, “you too can lose weight and keep it off.”</p>
<p>If we had any amount of decency in our culture, weight-loss ads would have been hastily pulled off the air this week, as Terri Schiavo’s body died from lack of water.</p>
<p>There is much to be angry about the indignant, callous manner the right-wing has exploited the plight of this family. They have taken hypocrisy to new levels, and much ink has been spilt on that. But I am disappointed that the progressive community has not seized upon the publicity generated by this tragedy to do more on two very important moral issues.</p>
<p>One is that this is an opportunity to shout from many rooftops that the cause of her condition is bulimia, and that her plight was not so far removed from that of the typical woman trying to keep her weight at a level that is considered socially desirable but is, in fact, nearly impossible for most women without heroic measures, such as forcing yourself to throwing up your food, eating too little to nourish your body, or exercising obsessively.</p>
<p>Second, that there is genuine reason to “err on the side of life” — and that a system that gives a husband or a parent the right to terminate a person’s life based on the argument that “she wouldn’t want to live like that” is fraught with grave danger for the sick and the disabled. That’s why many in the disability-rights community cheered when Federal courts intervened, however hypocritical the source of that intervention might have been. Frankly, when someone is coming to yank your feeding tube, and you can’t speak, you take whatever help you can get.</p>
<p>Progressives should give be better allies to them. The current alignment means that many in the disability-rights community are forced to work with an outrageously-hypocritical right-wing political machine. As a case in point, Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa, a well-known advocate of disability-rights, chose to work with the Republicans in this case. This is no aberrant occurrence; many of the issues raised in the Schiavo case are of genuine concern to people with disabilities and chronic illnesses.</p>
<p>I personally know of one person who was thought to be a “vegetable” and abandoned in a corner, unable to communicate, who was, in fact, very much cognizant and, if anything, wickedly intelligent. The reason that he ended up in law school rather than in a hospice where he might well have been put to death because of “lack of quality of life” is a story of luck, perseverance and very good advocates — the kind of advocates that appear irrational, and looking for hope when there is none, until proven right.</p>
<p>About a week ago, I wrote on my blog that I found it hard to believe that her husband was oblivious to her bulimia, and that her parents were obviously in denial about it. (http://www.underthesamesun.org/content/2005/03/forcestarved_to_1.html) Michael Schiavo knew “she had peculiar eating patterns.” She had lost more than a hundred pounds. She had stopped menstruating regularly. She was trying to survive on liquids. I got a lot of angry letters from people with eating disorders and their loved-ones about the secretive nature the illness. Terri’s condition, bulimia, brings about its own shame and secrecy. Many argued out that it was unfair to blame him for her actions, which she most likely kept secret.</p>
<p>Fair enough. Maybe Michael Schiavo could not see. Maybe neither he nor the rest of the family could recognize the signs. That simply highlights the urgency of talking about this subject. Terri was just 110 pounds when she collapsed, down from more than 200 in her high school years.</p>
<p>Most people’s first reaction to such a drastic weight-loss would be to congratulate the person. As Schiavo’s case illustrates, concern may be more appropriate. And her behavior was practically broadcasting that something was amiss. In his Larry King interview, Michael Schiavo said that “When I was with her, when we were together, Terri would eat and eat and eat” — yet she was able to maintain her weight-loss. Michael’s brother, Scott remembers noticing in family gathering that, “Terri was eating a huge plate of food, but she was thinner than ever.” How can you eat like that and still be so thin, he asked her. “She laughed,” recalls Scott, “and said she must just have a good metabolism.” It is not really possible for someone who has a propensity to gain weight, as Terri obviously did, to suddenly develop a “good metabolism.”</p>
<p>Although we don’t know, there might have been other typical signs of bulimia present in Terri. Bloodshot eyes, as the eye vessels burst during the forced throwing up. Chronic sore throats. Brittle nails. Dull hair. Rapid weight-shifts and a fluctuating weight. Frequently bruising. Menstrual irregularities. Smell of vomit in hair or hands. And, yes, cardiac arrest in A 26-year-old.</p>
<p>Frankly, it was no comfort to hear Michael Schiavo’s long-time lawyer, George Felos, declare that he’d never seen “such a look of peace and beauty upon her,” as Terri Schiavo was more than a week into her starvation. With this level perversity among Michael Schiavo’s team, one could not help but wish that Terri Schiavo had had independent protection. In fact, all these last two weeks, I have kept hearing many people, progressives among them, say “this is a private matter” and “government should stay out of this.”</p>
<p>This is very hard to understand. I keep wondering do these people really not understand how hostile and uncaring families can become when faced with a member who requires long-term care? One often hears of stories of remarkable heroism and perseverance from family members of the disabled and the chronically-ill. Outside of Planet Reader’s Digest, there are also other stories.</p>
<p>It is very human for loved ones of people who are seriously sick or disabled to project their own wishes unto the situation. From every reading of the story, it seems clear that Michael Schiavo first tried very hard to see if she could recover, realized that the chances were almost zero, and gave up and moved on with his life; forming a new family and having two kids. In such a situation, he would humanly be tempted to see Terri, who is obviously gone as a person, also be gone in body. There is a genuine conflict of interest here, regardless of the lack of interest in Terri Schiavo the Republican leadership has shown.</p>
<p>And the problem here is much bigger than Terri Schiavo. In her case, there has been enough controversy that we have a reasonable belief that she may have had no brain-activity. Her EEG was flat. Most of her brain had been replaced with fluid. Not all people whose quality of life may be deemed “too low to be worth living” have such clear medical diagnosis. Many in disability-rights community fear the consequences giving legal guardians such sweeping authority over life-and-death. The same issue comes up with the right to euthanasia. While I also believe in a person’s right to choose to die, I am truly scared of the consequences of this right if it is not coupled with very strong social support in favor of people who wish to live with their disability. To put it bluntly, if the right to assisted suicide is recognized, some of the time, it will bring down pressure on the disabled to commit suicide.</p>
<p>Just think about it: many families can have bitter, cruel fights over who will inherit that valuable piece of jewelry. Can you imagine the kind of bitterness and resentment that accumulates upon a severely-disabled family member whose care is incumbent upon the family? I have hard many stories of loving, caring families, but I have also heard many horror stories.</p>
<p>I have a friend who has very severe cerebral palsy caused by lack of oxygen to his brain during birth. For the first many years of his life, it was assumed he was almost like “a vegetable,” and he was parked in a corner of his family’s home. He could not talk, and he had almost no control over body. Yet, somehow, his mind persevered. He learned to read through the scattered observations he could make from his corner. Years later, he managed to trace out a few letters, enough to alert people to the fact that perhaps there was a person “in there.” With much intensive therapy, a means for him to communicate was devised — he can shape his mouth and throat to the words he is trying to vocalize and he makes up the kind of sounds that Terri’s parents got ridiculed for saying that their daughter was trying to make: saying “aaaaaah, whaaaaa” in order to start the sentence “I want to live.” I understand that, in a persistent vegetative state, those are sounds not words.</p>
<p>But that’s exactly how my friend speaks. Only trained-interpreters and his close friends can understand his words. The reaction to claims made by Terri’s parents scared me. It scares me to see the idea that someone could communicate in spite of severe speech impediments ridiculed. In fact, most people’s first reaction to hear my friend speak is that the interpreter is making it up — a conclusion soon overcome as one’s ear gets used to his articulations and one starts recognizing a few words here and there. (Besides, my friend’s vocabulary and range of knowledge is often much greater than that of his interpreters.)</p>
<p>To make it clear, I do support the right to die. Many of our methods of artificially extending life for people who are terminally ill and in pain are downright cruel and perverse. But there should be extraordinary pause in cases where the person is not terminally ill remember Terri Schiavo was not dying; the required assistance is minimal, a feeding-tube, not a respirator; and the wishes of the person is unclear.</p>
<p>Terri Schiavo’s situation has apparently prompted a boom in living-wills; I wish it would also prompt a will-to-live among all the women who may have skipped or thrown-up their breakfast, lunch, or dinner this very day. I also hope it prompts a deeper dialogue between progressives and the disability-rights community about the right to live with dignity, as well as about the right to die with dignity.</p>
<p>ZEYNEP TOUFE publishes the blog <a href="http://www.underthesamesun.org/" type="external">Under the Same Sun</a>. She can be reached at: <a href="mailto:z@underthesamesun.org" type="external">z@underthesamesun.org</a>.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | austin texas hadnt moment potassium imbalance brought bulimia caused terris heart stop might woman television ad watched selling latest weightloss method lost hundred pounds declares svelte looking woman tv lose weight keep amount decency culture weightloss ads would hastily pulled air week terri schiavos body died lack water much angry indignant callous manner rightwing exploited plight family taken hypocrisy new levels much ink spilt disappointed progressive community seized upon publicity generated tragedy two important moral issues one opportunity shout many rooftops cause condition bulimia plight far removed typical woman trying keep weight level considered socially desirable fact nearly impossible women without heroic measures forcing throwing food eating little nourish body exercising obsessively second genuine reason err side life system gives husband parent right terminate persons life based argument wouldnt want live like fraught grave danger sick disabled thats many disabilityrights community cheered federal courts intervened however hypocritical source intervention might frankly someone coming yank feeding tube cant speak take whatever help get progressives give better allies current alignment means many disabilityrights community forced work outrageouslyhypocritical rightwing political machine case point senator tom harkin iowa wellknown advocate disabilityrights chose work republicans case aberrant occurrence many issues raised schiavo case genuine concern people disabilities chronic illnesses personally know one person thought vegetable abandoned corner unable communicate fact much cognizant anything wickedly intelligent reason ended law school rather hospice might well put death lack quality life story luck perseverance good advocates kind advocates appear irrational looking hope none proven right week ago wrote blog found hard believe husband oblivious bulimia parents obviously denial httpwwwunderthesamesunorgcontent200503forcestarved_to_1html michael schiavo knew peculiar eating patterns lost hundred pounds stopped menstruating regularly trying survive liquids got lot angry letters people eating disorders lovedones secretive nature illness terris condition bulimia brings shame secrecy many argued unfair blame actions likely kept secret fair enough maybe michael schiavo could see maybe neither rest family could recognize signs simply highlights urgency talking subject terri 110 pounds collapsed 200 high school years peoples first reaction drastic weightloss would congratulate person schiavos case illustrates concern may appropriate behavior practically broadcasting something amiss larry king interview michael schiavo said together terri would eat eat eat yet able maintain weightloss michaels brother scott remembers noticing family gathering terri eating huge plate food thinner ever eat like still thin asked laughed recalls scott said must good metabolism really possible someone propensity gain weight terri obviously suddenly develop good metabolism although dont know might typical signs bulimia present terri bloodshot eyes eye vessels burst forced throwing chronic sore throats brittle nails dull hair rapid weightshifts fluctuating weight frequently bruising menstrual irregularities smell vomit hair hands yes cardiac arrest 26yearold frankly comfort hear michael schiavos longtime lawyer george felos declare hed never seen look peace beauty upon terri schiavo week starvation level perversity among michael schiavos team one could help wish terri schiavo independent protection fact last two weeks kept hearing many people progressives among say private matter government stay hard understand keep wondering people really understand hostile uncaring families become faced member requires longterm care one often hears stories remarkable heroism perseverance family members disabled chronicallyill outside planet readers digest also stories human loved ones people seriously sick disabled project wishes unto situation every reading story seems clear michael schiavo first tried hard see could recover realized chances almost zero gave moved life forming new family two kids situation would humanly tempted see terri obviously gone person also gone body genuine conflict interest regardless lack interest terri schiavo republican leadership shown problem much bigger terri schiavo case enough controversy reasonable belief may brainactivity eeg flat brain replaced fluid people whose quality life may deemed low worth living clear medical diagnosis many disabilityrights community fear consequences giving legal guardians sweeping authority lifeanddeath issue comes right euthanasia also believe persons right choose die truly scared consequences right coupled strong social support favor people wish live disability put bluntly right assisted suicide recognized time bring pressure disabled commit suicide think many families bitter cruel fights inherit valuable piece jewelry imagine kind bitterness resentment accumulates upon severelydisabled family member whose care incumbent upon family hard many stories loving caring families also heard many horror stories friend severe cerebral palsy caused lack oxygen brain birth first many years life assumed almost like vegetable parked corner familys home could talk almost control body yet somehow mind persevered learned read scattered observations could make corner years later managed trace letters enough alert people fact perhaps person much intensive therapy means communicate devised shape mouth throat words trying vocalize makes kind sounds terris parents got ridiculed saying daughter trying make saying aaaaaah whaaaaa order start sentence want live understand persistent vegetative state sounds words thats exactly friend speaks trainedinterpreters close friends understand words reaction claims made terris parents scared scares see idea someone could communicate spite severe speech impediments ridiculed fact peoples first reaction hear friend speak interpreter making conclusion soon overcome ones ear gets used articulations one starts recognizing words besides friends vocabulary range knowledge often much greater interpreters make clear support right die many methods artificially extending life people terminally ill pain downright cruel perverse extraordinary pause cases person terminally ill remember terri schiavo dying required assistance minimal feedingtube respirator wishes person unclear terri schiavos situation apparently prompted boom livingwills wish would also prompt willtolive among women may skipped thrownup breakfast lunch dinner day also hope prompts deeper dialogue progressives disabilityrights community right live dignity well right die dignity zeynep toufe publishes blog sun reached zunderthesamesunorg 160 160 160 160 160 160 | 917 |
<p>The Broken Record</p>
<p>It shouldn’t be a secret that the Left is like a needle stuck in a broken record.&#160; Right now the major narrative seems to be how terrible Trump is rather than how to effectively create alternatives to his forthcoming regime.&#160; There is lots of remorse and depression, an occasional bashing of “identity politics” (among the more reflective), and fantasies about leaving the country. (For those who have already left, this is not really an option).&#160; One response to crises of this sort is the “talking cure,” i.e. the idea that talking about a problem will solve it.&#160; In this case, the talking cure is a kind of repression of the real, needed solutions.&#160; The Left is very much still, regrettably and without remorse, addicted to deconstruction and piecemeal politics.&#160; Trump thinks big and integrates issues in a dystopian fashion.&#160; The Left tends to think very small and atomizes issues in a dystopian fashion.&#160; The Left is unable to transform specialized issues attached to a certain social position or particularized form of oppression to a linkage with a larger system of power. &#160;Sometimes this is done rhetorically, but rarely is the rhetoric materialized. In contrast, Trump always combines his specific transgressions with a larger actually existing power accumulation system.</p>
<p>The Left as Little Dutch Boy and Petitioner of the State</p>
<p>Some who talk now about “fighting back” seemed to have learned zero from the failed effort to “fight back” against Ronald Reagan and the two George Bushes.&#160; These efforts largely led nowhere other than Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama.&#160; How do we know this?&#160; We have a cycle in which Bushes and Trumps follow Clintons and Obamas.&#160; The Left’s petitioning power strategy usually fails with the resulting vacuum filled by Democratic Party messiahs who turn out to be rather much like the Little Dutch Boy who puts his finger in the dike to save the day, only in this parable the Little Dutch Boy is also setting various houses and forests on fire.&#160; The Reactionary Republican flood was averted, but the fires lead to soil erosion which potentially generates floods.&#160;&#160; Yes, you say, “naughty Dutch Boy”—but why are so many dependent on him?</p>
<p>We need to think about why the Left is always putting its fingers into dikes to stem major floods rather than eliminating the original causes of these floods.&#160; One reason is that a simple reading of history and acting accordingly is not performed.&#160; In a 1971 essay for Liberation, “Protest, Power and the People,” Norman Fruchter wrote of the anti-Vietnam War movement: “Instead of confronting the question of power, we have continued to play out a series of strategies which are actually attempts to persuade power to change its mind, through demonstrations of our numbers or the intensity of our convictions.&#160; What we have done, for six years, amounts to different forms of petitioning. The mass peaceful demonstration is a way of saying, to the executive as well as to the nation via the mass media, that all these numbers of people want the war to end: it is a way of indicating the strength of opposition through show of numbers.” Some forty-five years later, not much has changed.</p>
<p>From High Plains Drifter to Political Obituaries</p>
<p>Each new Trump appointment, and the presidential election of 2016, reminds me of the Clint Eastwood Western, High Plains Drifter.&#160; That film starts off with a town unable to rid itself of threatening bandits.&#160; The leaders offer anything to a top gunman known as “The Stranger” to take the job.&#160; Eventually, the Stranger does so and makes a series of bizarre appointments of deputies who are completely beholden to him.&#160; The film ends in a major battle that destroys large parts of the town.&#160; The Stranger gets the job in the first place because the incumbents (read “messiahs,” Democratic Party elite) could not do the job in the first place, lacking competence, having blood on their hands, and provoking the wrath of various hoodlums. &#160;The film is about unscrupulous sorts paying any price to correct for problems which require a kind of Faustian bargain for their resolution.</p>
<p>A friend of mine once referred to Left writing as a kind of narrative of “political obituaries.”&#160; This most brilliant remark extends to the somewhat extensive frontiers of Left journalism and academic texts that usually replace strategic visions with moral pronouncements.&#160; The Standing Rock victory, while a welcome development and important, potentially will be erased by the new regime.&#160; At the very least, the Trans-Canada pipeline is also on the table.&#160; Trump assures us that he will take care of these very quickly once he assumes power.&#160; In any case, while the Left has these two important victories under its belt, the appointment of an oil executive to run the State Department is a sign that a cascading parade of non-victories awaits us.&#160; Therefore, we need to carefully trace how Trump got to where he is now and what we should do about it.</p>
<p>The Accumulation and Extension of Trump’s Capital</p>
<p>In the beginning Trump’s father lent him money which he bankrolled, with assistance from supporting institutions (like government tax breaks, via the “promise” of job creation), into a larger real estate fortune.&#160; Trump’s deal making and life style became interesting for various journalists, giving Trump an initial reservoir of media capital. Thus, phase one is to pool initial economic capital to leverage state support (political capital), greater economic capital and initial media capital.</p>
<p>Later, Trump used the architectural and symbolic space of properties he owned to launch a brand, the Trump name, from which he got lucrative royalties. Therefore, phase two is to leverage symbolic politics and a brand from expanded economic, political and media capital.</p>
<p>The accumulated economic capital and Trump brand became a foundation for producing and hosting the well-known television program, The Apprentice, founded in 2003 and watched by millions.&#160; Trump has had a radio program, made cameo appearances in movies and other television programs.&#160; Thus, phase three is the transformation of economic, political and initial media and symbolic capital into further developed media capital. This media capital included strategic use of a Twitter account to bypass established media. &#160;Media audiences were transformed into voters.</p>
<p>Eventually, Trump traded on his celebrity status, the compounding of his symbolic and media capital, into a presidential run.&#160; There Trump exploited various “memes” tied to economic restructuring in the form of deindustrialization, racism, Islamophobia, sexism, contempt for Wall Street and elite bankers, and a militarist foreign policy.&#160; His formula was to link truths symbolically or tangentially related to such matters (job loss, violence in cities, terrorist threats, macho culture, the financial crisis, and destructive wars) with lies regarding solutions or resolutions. &#160;The truths relate to fragments of reality and not moral stances.&#160; The media celebrated Trump even while criticizing him, with audiences sufficiently disinterested in these criticisms to help elect him as President.&#160; Thus, phase four is the transformation of economic, symbolic and media capital into political capital.</p>
<p>In his presidency, Trump will use his Twitter account and presidency to validate and invalidate companies, politicians and individuals he does not like, extend his symbolic and media capital, and thus the potential value of his future royalty licenses. He has already used presidential appointments to complement the strategic power of the real estate industry with the extensive power of the oil industry. The presidency will become an engine for accumulation of all forms of capital with potential spin-offs including: a new media network, an institutionalized “party within the party” challenging established Republicans, and various new economic ventures.</p>
<p>Three Lessons for the Left: Learn to Accumulate Power</p>
<p>Someone reading this might say, “it’s just about established money and corporate power.”&#160; Yet, when we compare the investments the Left makes in petitioning the state to the dynamic power accumulation system of Donald Trump, one sees other possibilities.&#160; For example, in contrast to the tangential “occupying” of space (sometimes represented by the notion of “The Commons”), Trump owns spaces or gains leasing arrangements with them.&#160; Therefore, lesson one is for the Left (i.e. the larger citizenry) to own things. This can take the form of private cooperatives and banks, public banks, or cooperative or municipal utilities and broadcasting platforms.</p>
<p>Notice how Trump leverages one form of economic capital and turns that into another, i.e. he follows market and entrepreneurial logics.&#160; This means that lesson two is to leverage upstream capital at a smaller scale into downstream capital at a larger scale.&#160; This is not about celebrating capitalism.&#160; Consider the Mondragon Industrial Cooperatives which presently have 12.1 billion Euro in revenue and employ more than 74,000 persons through 261 businesses and&#160; cooperatives.&#160; These cooperatives began with a relatively small scale entrepreneurial platform.</p>
<p>Finally, what do these lessons have to do with the recent election?&#160; Should we say, once you lose and election, just wait for the next round?&#160; No, Trump shows us that it is far more complicated than that.&#160; Lesson three for the Left should be, use elections as front organizations for accumulating economic and media capital.&#160; Let us go back more than thirty years ago to New York Magazine, April 1, 1985.&#160; There, in an otherwise inconsequential article by Michael Kramer, “Koch’s Re-Election Strategy,” we find a description of the late Frank Barbaro who challenged Ed Koch for mayor of New York City in the 1981 primary.&#160; Kramer writes that Barbaro’s “favorite target, besides Koch and Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau…is Donald Trump.&#160; Everything would be okay, says Barbaro, if Trump and his real-estate buddies paid their fair share of taxes.”</p>
<p>Why is this item so important?&#160; In 1981, Barbaro got 209,369 votes in the primary against Koch (36% of the vote) and 162,719 votes as a radical third party candidate (also opposed to Koch, with 13% of the vote).&#160; Many of these votes were the byproduct of an intensive grassroots campaign and political canvass operation.&#160; Imagine if the Barbaro movement had also extended their canvass into a move-your-money operation supporting an alternative bank or consumer cooperatives?&#160; Here we see how an early defeat for the forces opposed to Trump allowed a kind of multiplier of costs down the road.&#160; Let’s not forget that in many ways New York City was the incubator for Donald Trump.&#160; Likewise, the City was the incubator for the Occupy movement which largely operated in a vacuum vis-à-vis the three lessons enumerated above.&#160; Even the Bernie Sanders campaign could have made much more of these lessons instead of narrowly focusing on the political frontiers of capital accumulation.&#160; In sum, a politics of economic reconstruction is now needed to oppose Trump.&#160; Otherwise, we can expect infinite dystopia and an endless cycle of political failures and their recycling as remorse.</p> | true | 4 | broken record shouldnt secret left like needle stuck broken record160 right major narrative seems terrible trump rather effectively create alternatives forthcoming regime160 lots remorse depression occasional bashing identity politics among reflective fantasies leaving country already left really option160 one response crises sort talking cure ie idea talking problem solve it160 case talking cure kind repression real needed solutions160 left much still regrettably without remorse addicted deconstruction piecemeal politics160 trump thinks big integrates issues dystopian fashion160 left tends think small atomizes issues dystopian fashion160 left unable transform specialized issues attached certain social position particularized form oppression linkage larger system power 160sometimes done rhetorically rarely rhetoric materialized contrast trump always combines specific transgressions larger actually existing power accumulation system left little dutch boy petitioner state talk fighting back seemed learned zero failed effort fight back ronald reagan two george bushes160 efforts largely led nowhere bill clinton barrack obama160 know this160 cycle bushes trumps follow clintons obamas160 lefts petitioning power strategy usually fails resulting vacuum filled democratic party messiahs turn rather much like little dutch boy puts finger dike save day parable little dutch boy also setting various houses forests fire160 reactionary republican flood averted fires lead soil erosion potentially generates floods160160 yes say naughty dutch boybut many dependent need think left always putting fingers dikes stem major floods rather eliminating original causes floods160 one reason simple reading history acting accordingly performed160 1971 essay liberation protest power people norman fruchter wrote antivietnam war movement instead confronting question power continued play series strategies actually attempts persuade power change mind demonstrations numbers intensity convictions160 done six years amounts different forms petitioning mass peaceful demonstration way saying executive well nation via mass media numbers people want war end way indicating strength opposition show numbers fortyfive years later much changed high plains drifter political obituaries new trump appointment presidential election 2016 reminds clint eastwood western high plains drifter160 film starts town unable rid threatening bandits160 leaders offer anything top gunman known stranger take job160 eventually stranger makes series bizarre appointments deputies completely beholden him160 film ends major battle destroys large parts town160 stranger gets job first place incumbents read messiahs democratic party elite could job first place lacking competence blood hands provoking wrath various hoodlums 160the film unscrupulous sorts paying price correct problems require kind faustian bargain resolution friend mine referred left writing kind narrative political obituaries160 brilliant remark extends somewhat extensive frontiers left journalism academic texts usually replace strategic visions moral pronouncements160 standing rock victory welcome development important potentially erased new regime160 least transcanada pipeline also table160 trump assures us take care quickly assumes power160 case left two important victories belt appointment oil executive run state department sign cascading parade nonvictories awaits us160 therefore need carefully trace trump got accumulation extension trumps capital beginning trumps father lent money bankrolled assistance supporting institutions like government tax breaks via promise job creation larger real estate fortune160 trumps deal making life style became interesting various journalists giving trump initial reservoir media capital thus phase one pool initial economic capital leverage state support political capital greater economic capital initial media capital later trump used architectural symbolic space properties owned launch brand trump name got lucrative royalties therefore phase two leverage symbolic politics brand expanded economic political media capital accumulated economic capital trump brand became foundation producing hosting wellknown television program apprentice founded 2003 watched millions160 trump radio program made cameo appearances movies television programs160 thus phase three transformation economic political initial media symbolic capital developed media capital media capital included strategic use twitter account bypass established media 160media audiences transformed voters eventually trump traded celebrity status compounding symbolic media capital presidential run160 trump exploited various memes tied economic restructuring form deindustrialization racism islamophobia sexism contempt wall street elite bankers militarist foreign policy160 formula link truths symbolically tangentially related matters job loss violence cities terrorist threats macho culture financial crisis destructive wars lies regarding solutions resolutions 160the truths relate fragments reality moral stances160 media celebrated trump even criticizing audiences sufficiently disinterested criticisms help elect president160 thus phase four transformation economic symbolic media capital political capital presidency trump use twitter account presidency validate invalidate companies politicians individuals like extend symbolic media capital thus potential value future royalty licenses already used presidential appointments complement strategic power real estate industry extensive power oil industry presidency become engine accumulation forms capital potential spinoffs including new media network institutionalized party within party challenging established republicans various new economic ventures three lessons left learn accumulate power someone reading might say established money corporate power160 yet compare investments left makes petitioning state dynamic power accumulation system donald trump one sees possibilities160 example contrast tangential occupying space sometimes represented notion commons trump owns spaces gains leasing arrangements them160 therefore lesson one left ie larger citizenry things take form private cooperatives banks public banks cooperative municipal utilities broadcasting platforms notice trump leverages one form economic capital turns another ie follows market entrepreneurial logics160 means lesson two leverage upstream capital smaller scale downstream capital larger scale160 celebrating capitalism160 consider mondragon industrial cooperatives presently 121 billion euro revenue employ 74000 persons 261 businesses and160 cooperatives160 cooperatives began relatively small scale entrepreneurial platform finally lessons recent election160 say lose election wait next round160 trump shows us far complicated that160 lesson three left use elections front organizations accumulating economic media capital160 let us go back thirty years ago new york magazine april 1 1985160 otherwise inconsequential article michael kramer kochs reelection strategy find description late frank barbaro challenged ed koch mayor new york city 1981 primary160 kramer writes barbaros favorite target besides koch manhattan district attorney robert morgenthauis donald trump160 everything would okay says barbaro trump realestate buddies paid fair share taxes item important160 1981 barbaro got 209369 votes primary koch 36 vote 162719 votes radical third party candidate also opposed koch 13 vote160 many votes byproduct intensive grassroots campaign political canvass operation160 imagine barbaro movement also extended canvass moveyourmoney operation supporting alternative bank consumer cooperatives160 see early defeat forces opposed trump allowed kind multiplier costs road160 lets forget many ways new york city incubator donald trump160 likewise city incubator occupy movement largely operated vacuum visàvis three lessons enumerated above160 even bernie sanders campaign could made much lessons instead narrowly focusing political frontiers capital accumulation160 sum politics economic reconstruction needed oppose trump160 otherwise expect infinite dystopia endless cycle political failures recycling remorse | 1,048 |
<p>(Click <a href="" type="internal">here</a> for an update on this story.)</p>
<p>The Chinese Embassy in Belgrade after US bombing</p>
<p>A detailed investigative article in the October 17 London Observer reported that NATO deliberately bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade last May, after discovering that the embassy was relaying Yugoslav military radio signals.</p>
<p>The report contradicted the public assurances of NATO leaders that the missile attack had been an accident. The Observer‘s sources included “a flight controller operating in Naples, an intelligence officer monitoring Yugoslav radio traffic from Macedonia and a senior [NATO] headquarters officer in Brussels.”</p>
<p>So far, the reaction in the mainstream U.S. media has been a deafening silence. To date, none of America’s three major network evening news programs has mentioned the Observer’s findings. Neither has the New York Times or USA Today, even though the story was covered by AP, Reuters and other major wires. The Washington Post relegated the story to a 90-word news brief in its “World Briefing” (10/18/99), under the headline “NATO Denies Story on Embassy Bombing.”</p>
<p>By contrast, the story appeared in England not only in the Observer and its sister paper, the Guardian (10/17/99), but also in their leading rival, the Times of London, which ran a follow-up article on the official reaction the next day (10/18/99). The Globe and Mail, Canada’s most prestigious paper, ran the full Reuters account prominently in its international section (10/18/99). So did the Times of India, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Irish Times (all 10/18/99). The prominent Danish daily Politiken, which collaborated with the Observer on the investigation, was on strike, but ran the story on its website.</p>
<p>The difference in perspective with which American journalists have greeted this story can be observed by comparing the headlines over several international news agencies’ dispatches about the Observer exposé:</p>
<p>Reuters (U.K.): “NATO Bombed Chinese Embassy Deliberately–UK Paper” (10/18/99).</p>
<p>Agence France Presse (France): “NATO Bombed Chinese Embassy Deliberately: Report” (10/18/99).</p>
<p>Deutche Presse-Agentur (Germany): “NATO Bombed Chinese Embassy Deliberately, Observer Claims” (10/18/99).</p>
<p>Associated Press (U.S.): “NATO Denies Deliberate Embassy Hit.”</p>
<p>The U.S. media may today be uninterested in evidence that the attack was deliberate, but they had no trouble last May accepting NATO’s explanation that the bombing was a mistake. Even before U.S. officials emerged with a full account of how the embassy could have been “mistakenly” targeted–an “outdated map” of Belgrade played a prominent role in the official explanation–the U.S. media began regularly referring, without evidence, to the “accidental bombing” of the embassy.</p>
<p>When Chinese officials disputed the U.S. account, protesting that the attack could not have been a mistake, establishment journalists immediately took sides in this debate. New York Times diplomatic correspondent Jane Perlez (5/10/99) referred to “the accidental bombing, portrayed in China as deliberate.” A Washington Post editorial (5/17/99) that discussed China’s reaction to “NATO’s unintentional bombing of China’s embassy” was indignant that the official Chinese press was “milking the bombing for propaganda value” by reporting that the missile strike had been intentional. USA Today (10/20/99) continues to refer to the “accidental bombing” of the embassy.</p>
<p>Since the New York Times hasn’t published the new information about the embassy attack, it’s unclear whether the paper stands by its earlier reporting. Since May 7, the Times has referred to the “accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy” a total of 20 times. The last reference was in its October 17 edition–the day the Observer published its report. Since then, the Times has run an AP article on the Chinese president’s visit to London (10/19/99), which mentioned only that “China broke off talks with Washington and the European Union after NATO bombed the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia”–taking no stand on the intention behind the attack.</p>
<p>Even before the Observer‘s expose, there was no lack of evidence that China’s suspicions were correct. A few days after the bombing, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder took the highly unusual step of publicly questioning NATO’s explanation of the attack. “The explanation given by NATO on the tragic incident so far is far from enough and the Chinese government has every reason to demand a comprehensive, thorough, and in-depth investigation into the incident and affix the responsibility for it,” Schroeder said in Beijing (AFP, 5/12/99).</p>
<p>The London Daily Telegraph reported in June (6/27/99) that NATO’s precision-guided missiles “carefully singled out the most sensitive section of the embassy complex for attack”–the intelligence directorate. “That’s exactly why they don’t buy our explanation,” a Pentagon official was quoted as saying.</p>
<p>In July, CIA director George Tenet testified in Congress that out of the 900 targets struck by NATO during the three-month bombing campaign, only one was developed by the CIA: the Chinese Embassy (AP, 7/22/99).</p>
<p>What is perhaps most baffling about the major news outlets’ indifference to the Chinese embassy story is that the same outlets regularly devote a great deal of attention to other stories concerning China and its relations with the U.S. Elite media report extensively on China’s possible entry into the World Trade Organization, the political struggle between its “reformers” and conservatives, and allegations of Chinese nuclear spying and electoral influence-buying in the U.S. The op-ed pages abound with debates about China’s intentions toward America: Is the country a threat to be contained or an opportunity for trade and investment?</p>
<p>The Times of London noted in an October 21 book review that “the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade might yet turn out to be an important episode in a new Cold War.” One might think that a well-sourced investigative article in a respected foreign newspaper providing evidence that the bombing was deliberate would be viewed by editors in the United States with the same interest they have shown in other aspects of China’s relations with the West.</p>
<p>ACTION: Please call national and local media and ask them to follow up on the Observer‘s investigation of the China embassy bombing. Mention that news outlets should present the idea that the embassy was bombed by accident as a claim made by NATO, not an objective fact.</p>
<p>New York Times Andrew Rosenthal Foreign Editor andyr@nytimes.com</p>
<p>Washington Post Jim Hoagland Chief Foreign Correspondent hoaglandj@washpost.com</p>
<p>USA Today Douglas Stanglin World Editor dstanglin@usatoday.com</p> | true | 4 | click update story chinese embassy belgrade us bombing detailed investigative article october 17 london observer reported nato deliberately bombed chinese embassy belgrade last may discovering embassy relaying yugoslav military radio signals report contradicted public assurances nato leaders missile attack accident observers sources included flight controller operating naples intelligence officer monitoring yugoslav radio traffic macedonia senior nato headquarters officer brussels far reaction mainstream us media deafening silence date none americas three major network evening news programs mentioned observers findings neither new york times usa today even though story covered ap reuters major wires washington post relegated story 90word news brief world briefing 101899 headline nato denies story embassy bombing contrast story appeared england observer sister paper guardian 101799 also leading rival times london ran followup article official reaction next day 101899 globe mail canadas prestigious paper ran full reuters account prominently international section 101899 times india sydney morning herald irish times 101899 prominent danish daily politiken collaborated observer investigation strike ran story website difference perspective american journalists greeted story observed comparing headlines several international news agencies dispatches observer exposé reuters uk nato bombed chinese embassy deliberatelyuk paper 101899 agence france presse france nato bombed chinese embassy deliberately report 101899 deutche presseagentur germany nato bombed chinese embassy deliberately observer claims 101899 associated press us nato denies deliberate embassy hit us media may today uninterested evidence attack deliberate trouble last may accepting natos explanation bombing mistake even us officials emerged full account embassy could mistakenly targetedan outdated map belgrade played prominent role official explanationthe us media began regularly referring without evidence accidental bombing embassy chinese officials disputed us account protesting attack could mistake establishment journalists immediately took sides debate new york times diplomatic correspondent jane perlez 51099 referred accidental bombing portrayed china deliberate washington post editorial 51799 discussed chinas reaction natos unintentional bombing chinas embassy indignant official chinese press milking bombing propaganda value reporting missile strike intentional usa today 102099 continues refer accidental bombing embassy since new york times hasnt published new information embassy attack unclear whether paper stands earlier reporting since may 7 times referred accidental bombing chinese embassy total 20 times last reference october 17 editionthe day observer published report since times run ap article chinese presidents visit london 101999 mentioned china broke talks washington european union nato bombed chinese embassy yugoslaviataking stand intention behind attack even observers expose lack evidence chinas suspicions correct days bombing german chancellor gerhard schroeder took highly unusual step publicly questioning natos explanation attack explanation given nato tragic incident far far enough chinese government every reason demand comprehensive thorough indepth investigation incident affix responsibility schroeder said beijing afp 51299 london daily telegraph reported june 62799 natos precisionguided missiles carefully singled sensitive section embassy complex attackthe intelligence directorate thats exactly dont buy explanation pentagon official quoted saying july cia director george tenet testified congress 900 targets struck nato threemonth bombing campaign one developed cia chinese embassy ap 72299 perhaps baffling major news outlets indifference chinese embassy story outlets regularly devote great deal attention stories concerning china relations us elite media report extensively chinas possible entry world trade organization political struggle reformers conservatives allegations chinese nuclear spying electoral influencebuying us oped pages abound debates chinas intentions toward america country threat contained opportunity trade investment times london noted october 21 book review bombing chinese embassy belgrade might yet turn important episode new cold war one might think wellsourced investigative article respected foreign newspaper providing evidence bombing deliberate would viewed editors united states interest shown aspects chinas relations west action please call national local media ask follow observers investigation china embassy bombing mention news outlets present idea embassy bombed accident claim made nato objective fact new york times andrew rosenthal foreign editor andyrnytimescom washington post jim hoagland chief foreign correspondent hoaglandjwashpostcom usa today douglas stanglin world editor dstanglinusatodaycom | 628 |
<p />
<p>Let’s start with <a href="http://www.presidentelect.org/e1988.html" type="external">an electoral map</a> (scroll down) of the United States not long after George Bush beat a Massachusetts liberal for the presidency. If you take a quick glance at it, you’ll note that sea of blue stretching majestically from coast to coast with just a few isolated red states hanging off the northern border like the last ripe mangos of the growing season. Sound like the fabulous fantasy of some cockeyed Kerry supporter? Actually, it represents a distant reality — and not even one that you have to approach via some Star-Trek-style worm hole into an alternate political universe. You just have to go back 16 years to 1988 when George H. W. Bush pummeled Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis in a presidential race. Back in those days, as you might now have guessed, the blue states on the electoral map were Republican and the reds Democratic. (Someday, some enterprising young cultural scholar will tell us when, how, and why those colors were flipped and what it all means.) That map of a political stomp-fest is actually a reminder for all Democrats that the political world at the presidential level hasn’t always rolled directly downhill. In 1988, even massive fraud by the Democrats wouldn’t have helped.</p>
<p>Since 1988, however, we’ve entered a world of ever more extreme, polarizing words and images. Just this week, for instance, Bob Jones III, president of Bob Jones University, wrote in <a href="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_11_07.php#003973" type="external">a letter to George W. Bush</a>:</p>
<p />
<p>“In your re-election, God has graciously granted America — though she doesn’t deserve it — a reprieve from the agenda of paganism. You have been given a mandate. We the people expect your voice to be like the clear and certain sound of a trumpet. Because you seek the Lord daily, we who know the Lord will follow that kind of voice eagerly. Don’t equivocate. Put your agenda on the front burner and let it boil. You owe the liberals nothing. They despise you because they despise your Christ. Honor the Lord, and He will honor you.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=5652" type="external">In the right-wing Human Events on-line</a>, there’s even a “modest proposal,” filled with the usual levels of anger, resentment, and a sense of eternal victimhood, that calls for expelling the “liberal states” from the U.S. complete with instructions on how to do it. (“If the so-called ‘Red States’ [those that voted for George W. Bush] cannot be respected or at least tolerated by the ‘Blue States’ [those that voted for Al Gore and John Kerry], then the most disparate of them must live apart — not by secession of the former [a majority], but by expulsion of the latter.“) In the meantime, a <a href="http://sandhill.typepad.com/sandhill_trek/2004/11/jesus_land.html" type="external">rejiggered map</a> that shows North America divided into “The United States of Canada” and “Jesusland” — one of a number of similar embittered joke maps — has been zipping around the Internet among disappointed anti-Bush and/or Kerry voters.</p>
<p>I had my own polarizing moment, however, back in that extreme red/blue year of 1988. Not long after the election, looking at that pathetic little string of red Democratic states at the northern edge of our national map, I had an urge — which turned out to be a few years ahead of its time — and wrote my first piece for the Nation magazine. I invented two Canadian political scientists who, I claimed, had produced a massive pre-election report suggesting a logical political realignment of North America, incorporating those Dukakis states into an enlarged liberal Canadian commonwealth. (It turned out to be a realistic enough sounding scenario even then for a Canadian Broadcasting Company interviewer to call me looking for the two — quite fictional — scholars, having been unable to track them down either at their nonexistent institute in Toronto or at their home university in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan.) I thought, you hardcore weekend Tomdispatchers might find this peek into my archival past amusing and perhaps still of interest in the present context. Even then, as you’ll see, I was quite aware that this country was far more complex than any map filled with red-and-blue blocs of color could possibly begin to indicate.</p>
<p>Analysis of the 2004 election began pouring in from all quarters even before the counting ended; certainly before we could think straight about what had actually happened. I’ve generally found far more illuminating the many varieties of electoral maps that have begun to circulate. They do a better job of indicating how much more complex and confusing we are as a nation than any single electoral-college map could begin to catch. (Even these maps, focused as they are on the vote, can’t catch the complexities, ambiguities, and confusions with which Americans — those who did — went to the polls to make what, after all, is a black-or-white, red-or-blue choice). So let me just offer a little tour of these first post-election remappings of America, some of which might give you hope and others throw you into despair.</p>
<p>Here, as a start, is <a href="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2004/politics101/politics101_ecmap.html" type="external">the essential red-and-blue map</a> of this election. (Above it, you can click on and check out the red/blue configurations of elections from 1980 on. If you’re a Democrat and want to know what true depression is, try 1980 or 1984!) But red-and-blue blocs actually tell you remarkably little. So try checking out where Bush and Kerry votes <a href="http://bigpicture.typepad.com/writing/2004/11/where_did_their.html" type="external">actually came from</a>. You need to squint at these two maps a bit, but what you can see is that the split is less state by state than urban versus suburban and rural. Kerry, for instance, lost Missouri but carried St. Louis; lost Tennessee but carried Memphis; was crushed in Alabama but carried Selma; was dismantled in Texas but carried Austin and El Paso; <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/comment/story/0,14259,1349702,00.html" type="external">won California</a> but lost large rural and suburban hunks of the state, and so on. <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/sunday/commentary/la-oe-wilentz7nov07,1,893828.story?coll=la-sunday-commentary" type="external">Sean Wilentz</a> considered these splits in a recent Los Angeles Times Sunday opinion piece: “The real electoral division,” he wrote, “isn’t between the coasts and the heartland. It’s between cities all over the United States and the rest of the country…By perpetuating the easy impression of a nation divided into coastal liberals and heartland conservatives, reporters and commentators are misleading themselves and their audiences about the actual political state of the Union.” (However, the inclination of analysts to lump the rural and suburban vote together in the Republican column and think of it all in the context of some kind of metro/retro split probably makes little sense either. Whatever the Republican suburbs are — a subject to which Tomdispatch will return in a few weeks — they can’t be dismissed simply as “retro.”)</p>
<p>As soon as you consider the vote <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm" type="external">county by county</a>, the look of the red/blue configurations begins to change dramatically — even more so, if counties are essentially not awarded in toto to either candidate. Then you end up with a <a href="http://www.princeton.edu/%7Ervdb/JAVA/election2004/" type="external">“purple America” map</a> that begins to take into account the Bush voters in New York City and the Kerry voters in deepest Texas. If you’re really curious, scroll down two maps and try your luck at matching the purple electoral map against a dark-sky snapshot of electricity-use nationwide or simply check out a basic red-and-blue map <a href="http://www-personal.umich.edu/%7Emejn/election/" type="external">rescaled for population</a> (scroll down).</p>
<p>Or — to return to red-and-blue America — here are a couple of other ways to go at it: Consider what 2004 would have looked like in electoral-college terms if only <a href="http://www.musicforamerica.org/node/view/67061" type="external">voters 18-29</a> had trooped to the polls (scroll down). It would, of course, have been a Kerry electoral landslide. Or to slice into the electoral map on a different angle, check out a <a href="http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html" type="external">red-and-blue on-the-dole map</a> of the states that do (and don’t) take in more federal dollars than they pay out in taxes. It’s essentially a 2004 election map since “17 of the 20… states receiving the most federal spending per dollar of federal taxes paid are Red [Bush] States.”</p>
<p>By the way, if you have an extra moment, check out Barbara Ehrenreich’s latest piece, <a href="http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041129&amp;s=ehrenreich" type="external">The Faith Factor</a>, in the Nation magazine in which she argues that the “great awakening” of Christian “moral values” in Bush’s America isn’t exactly what it’s made out to be. “What these churches have to offer,” she writes, “in addition to intangibles like eternal salvation, is concrete, material assistance. They have become an alternative welfare state, whose support rests not only on ‘faith’ but also on the loyalty of the grateful recipients.” In other words, while attempting to dismantle one kind of welfare state, the President’s “moral majority” has been hard at work building up another (far more modest) version of the same inside the churches. As anyone knows who remembers those classic jobs-and-votes Democratic political machines in big cities like New York or Chicago, there’s nothing better for creating essential loyalty at the polls.</p>
<p>As if to support Ehrenreich’s position on the “moral values” debate, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2004/11/14/weekinreview/20041114_BELLUCK_MAP.html" type="external">a map in this Sunday’s New York Times Week in Review</a> accompanying a Pam Belluck article, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/weekinreview/14pamb.html?ex=1101445245&amp;ei=1&amp;en=3879b96040804f51" type="external">To Avoid Divorce Move to Massachusetts</a>, shows that the lowest divorce rates in the nation are “largely in the blue states” of the Northeast and upper Midwest. Go figure.</p>
<p>Or how about putting the 48% of America that officially voted for Kerry in a global context? Though <a href="http://bigpicture.typepad.com/writing/2004/11/red_blue_world.html" type="external">this map</a> isn’t completely accurate — preferences in some Asian countries like India and the Philippines seem to have been more mixed than it indicates — you’ll get the idea.</p>
<p>Then there are other curious questions maps can raise. For instance, a map floating around the e-universe in recent days shows <a href="http://bigpicture.typepad.com/writing/2004/11/voting_free_ves.html" type="external">Pre-Civil War Free vs. Slave States</a>. It is indeed an eerie historical snapshot. Throw in the “territories open to slavery” (and southern Ohio) and you essentially have the blue-red divide again. Perhaps this is a reminder that the great vote switch of our times wasn’t religious at all. It started with President Richard Nixon’s decision to pursue a “southern strategy” (based, in part, on seeing the strength of segregationist Governor George Wallace’s third-party presidential bid in 1968 in which he garnered 46 electoral votes and about 13% of the popular vote). It was meant to drive a wedge right into the greatest of all New Deal Democratic Party contradictions — the long-lived, increasingly uneasy alliance of the northern liberal and southern white conservative wings of the Party. The switch-over of this once racist vote flipped the South finally into the “red” camp and, to this day (however updated), proves decisive in election after election, especially as in 2004 in the Senate and the House of Representatives. The 2004 electoral map probably does tell us that, under the endless layers of a quarter-century of “culture wars” and “moral issues,” including those of abortion and gay marriage, lies the heavy historical burden of America’s slave past and racial history.</p>
<p>Recently, outside observer Paul Tiyambe Zeleza, Professor of African Studies and History at Pennsylvania State University — “I could not but be amused wondering what American commentators would say if this were an African election: I bet they would bemoan the regionalization of voting as a reflection of Africans incapacity to transcend primordial loyalties based on ‘tribalism’ and ‘regionalism’; voting misdeeds would be ascribed to the propensity of African governments for vote rigging and the ignorance of ‘illiterate’ voters unaccustomed to democracy.” — took up this subject. In “The Republicanization of America,” an essay not available on line, he wrote in part:</p>
<p />
<p>“It seems to me that this drift, what I would call the republicanization of America, can be attributed to the complex and combustible politics of race, empire, and globalization… The cultural values trumpeted by the Republicans and which find so much resonance among millions of Americans primarily tap into the racial codes of American life and are driven by the desire to unravel the civil rights settlement of the 1960s that sought to enfranchise and empower African Americans and other racial minorities… The politics of race ensured unity on the Republican side in this “war” (the party remains predominantly white and in the recent election attracted no more than 10 percent of the black vote), and dissension on the Democratic side as different identity and social projects competed for primacy (as can be seen in the heated debates about gay rights in the African American civil rights community).”</p>
<p>The one factor that might be impossible to map, so deep does it lie under the surface of American electoral consciousness, is the imperial factor. (Speaking of historical ironies, by the way, the racist southern senators of that old, white Democratic South tended to be far more anti-imperial and anti-interventionist, often for the obvious racial reasons, than the new right-wing senators of the Republican South.) If the harsh racial maps of electoral America are officially buried in the past, perhaps it would be reasonable to say that the imperial ones are “buried” in the future. Though most Americans don’t think of themselves or their country in imperial terms, it’s been clear in these last years that fears of a loss of supremacy abroad and what that might mean domestically have risen dramatically (even if overly focused on the single issue of terrorism and couched in the language of patriotism). My own belief is that there was an imperial vote in this election, a vote gripped by fear for what might be lost in the world.</p>
<p>But enough of that; now step with me through the electoral worm hole into the distant year 1988 and consider “the Canadian stratagem.”</p>
<p />
<p>The “Canadian Stratagem” By Tom Engelhardt [A satire published in the Nation magazine on December 19, 1988, soon after George Bush defeated Michael Dukakis in the presidential election]</p>
<p>Is there hope for a liberal America? Two Canadian political scientists, Martin Sheldon and Arthur Drake, of the University of Saskatchewan at Moose Jaw, hold out a glimmer to “L-worders” cowering in stunned silence in coastal and northern enclaves of the United States. However, their analysis — if correct — also spells ultimate success for U.S. conservatives.</p>
<p>Sheldon and Drake’s 345-page report, The New Realignment: Political Realities for North America in the 1990s, was issued last July by Canada’s prestigious Institute for Strategic Surveys (I.S.S.) in Toronto. Its title may sound bland, but the report makes explosive reading.</p>
<p>While U.S. political commentators argued about whether Michael Dukakis could take states ranging from Georgia and Texas to Ohio and California, Sheldon and Drake assumed that the Democratic nominee would, with the exceptions of Oregon, Iowa and Rhode Island, win only a series of states bordering on or close to Canada — specifically, Massachusetts, New York, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Washington. “It’s true,” says Sheldon, “that Dukakis lost the U.S.election, but looked at in another light, he won the southern Canadian election, and it’s this political reality that liberals and leftists should be facing and debating on both sides of the border.” Dukakis’s victories, Sheldon and Drake point out, fall roughly north of the old British claim-line for the Canadian border in the West. They believe that this particular configuration of states, which they call “the Northern Tier,” is no fluke of history.</p>
<p>As evidence that this “Canadian stratagem” has been consciously engineered, Sheldon and Drake cite the private comments of scores of Democratic politicos. Typically, one close Dukakis aide confided to them: “Someday, we’ll have a few things to teach Canadian liberals about how to run a country.” They also highlight a comment, unreported in the United States, that President-elect Bush made during the New Hampshire primary. Sitting by a radio microphone he thought was switched off, he turned to a New Hampshire supporter and said of the Democrats, “One more push and we’ll have them in Canada.”</p>
<p>From their pre-election analysis of the developing situation on both sides of the border, Sheldon and Drake conclude that we may be facing the first political and economic restructuring of North America since the American Revolution. In a chapter titled “The Northern Tier: Co-evolution or Chaos?” they suggest that the only way Canadian liberals and leftists can take on the historical task of guarding Canada’s fragile economic independence — symbolized in their recent attempts to hold back the U.S.-Canada free trade treaty — is by incorporating the part of the United States that clearly is no longer wanted.</p>
<p>The result — a Greater Canadian Commonwealth — if achieved without acrimony, would offer both countries enormous advantages. Canada would be thrown solidly into the “L” column, an economic giant able to coexist with its southern neighbor without fear of domination. At the same time, it would do the United States a historically unparalleled favor by turning it into a land relatively free of liberals.</p>
<p>Professors Sheldon and Drake, interviewed in their office in the New Age wing of the Toronto institute where both are spending a year on leave from Moose Jaw, noted that since their report was issued, events have only confirmed their analysis. When asked how two unknown Canadian academics could have spotted trends that escaped the rest of North America, senior author Sheldon, a tall, bushy-haired, 47-year-old wearing a green and red jogging suit, denied that this was so. “We’re no better at foreseeing the future than you are. You shouldn’t view our report as a predictive document but as a series of projections based on bedrock trends there for anyone to see.”</p>
<p>Arthur Drake, a rotund 40-year-old who spent the interview trimming a button fern, offered a somewhat different perspective. “At the risk of sounding impolite, the distinction here is between what Canadians can see and what you in the states can’t see. Remember, we come from a mythical country, one you don’t believe to exist — not a bad vantage point for grasping certain continental realities. It’s harder for you, and we’re sympathetic to that. But all you really had to do was watch the election night maps broadcast by your own networks: that day-glo blue stretching unbroken from sea to sea and the fragile string of red blobs hanging tenuously from the Canadian border. The unconscious sorting out of colors was enough. It told you everything you needed to know, even without our report.”</p>
<p>“Just one thing,” cut in Sheldon. “When you write this article, make it clear that there’s nothing pie-in-the-sky about the report. We’ve looked the problems square in the eye.”</p>
<p>Sheldon and Drake have, in fact, taken special pains to confront the possible criticisms their proposals are likely to raise. In three linked appendixes they deal with the most crucial and difficult of these:</p>
<p>* What to do with states like Maine. (Suggestions range from ragged or discontinuous borders — the so-called Alaska solution — to massive population exchanges with more conservative areas of Canada.)</p>
<p>* What to do with West Virginia, the District of Columbia, cities like Pittsburgh, and parts of Northern California and black areas in the South. (Suggestions range from the establishment of a “free city” policy inside the United States, to the setting up of Greater Canadian consulates throughout the country and an offer of asylum to Jesse Jackson and other black leaders.)</p>
<p>* What to do with the expected flow of refugees in both directions (a subject so complex that it will be the focus of an upcoming Nation article).</p>
<p>Nation readers are urged to consider the Sheldon and Drake report themselves ($12.95, I.S.S. Press, Toronto) while time still remains for a reasonable discussion of the issues it raises. With this in mind, an ominous signal of which Nation readers may already be aware was George Bush’s comment to hecklers during his postelection Florida vacation: “Read my lips: You’re Canadians.”</p>
<p>When this piece was written, Tom Engelhardt was a senior editor at Pantheon Books. His history of the Cold War, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1558491333/nationbooks08" type="external">The End of Victory Culture</a>, would not be published for another 7 years; his novel, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1558494022/nationbooks08" type="external">The Last Days of Publishing</a>, not for another 14 years. It would be 14 years before he created Tomdispatch.com, a weblog of the Nation Institute.</p>
<p>Copyright C1988 Tom Engelhardt</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | lets start electoral map scroll united states long george bush beat massachusetts liberal presidency take quick glance youll note sea blue stretching majestically coast coast isolated red states hanging northern border like last ripe mangos growing season sound like fabulous fantasy cockeyed kerry supporter actually represents distant reality even one approach via startrekstyle worm hole alternate political universe go back 16 years 1988 george h w bush pummeled massachusetts governor michael dukakis presidential race back days might guessed blue states electoral map republican reds democratic someday enterprising young cultural scholar tell us colors flipped means map political stompfest actually reminder democrats political world presidential level hasnt always rolled directly downhill 1988 even massive fraud democrats wouldnt helped since 1988 however weve entered world ever extreme polarizing words images week instance bob jones iii president bob jones university wrote letter george w bush reelection god graciously granted america though doesnt deserve reprieve agenda paganism given mandate people expect voice like clear certain sound trumpet seek lord daily know lord follow kind voice eagerly dont equivocate put agenda front burner let boil owe liberals nothing despise despise christ honor lord honor rightwing human events online theres even modest proposal filled usual levels anger resentment sense eternal victimhood calls expelling liberal states us complete instructions socalled red states voted george w bush respected least tolerated blue states voted al gore john kerry disparate must live apart secession former majority expulsion latter meantime rejiggered map shows north america divided united states canada jesusland one number similar embittered joke maps zipping around internet among disappointed antibush andor kerry voters polarizing moment however back extreme redblue year 1988 long election looking pathetic little string red democratic states northern edge national map urge turned years ahead time wrote first piece nation magazine invented two canadian political scientists claimed produced massive preelection report suggesting logical political realignment north america incorporating dukakis states enlarged liberal canadian commonwealth turned realistic enough sounding scenario even canadian broadcasting company interviewer call looking two quite fictional scholars unable track either nonexistent institute toronto home university moose jaw saskatchewan thought hardcore weekend tomdispatchers might find peek archival past amusing perhaps still interest present context even youll see quite aware country far complex map filled redandblue blocs color could possibly begin indicate analysis 2004 election began pouring quarters even counting ended certainly could think straight actually happened ive generally found far illuminating many varieties electoral maps begun circulate better job indicating much complex confusing nation single electoralcollege map could begin catch even maps focused vote cant catch complexities ambiguities confusions americans went polls make blackorwhite redorblue choice let offer little tour first postelection remappings america might give hope others throw despair start essential redandblue map election click check redblue configurations elections 1980 youre democrat want know true depression try 1980 1984 redandblue blocs actually tell remarkably little try checking bush kerry votes actually came need squint two maps bit see split less state state urban versus suburban rural kerry instance lost missouri carried st louis lost tennessee carried memphis crushed alabama carried selma dismantled texas carried austin el paso california lost large rural suburban hunks state sean wilentz considered splits recent los angeles times sunday opinion piece real electoral division wrote isnt coasts heartland cities united states rest countryby perpetuating easy impression nation divided coastal liberals heartland conservatives reporters commentators misleading audiences actual political state union however inclination analysts lump rural suburban vote together republican column think context kind metroretro split probably makes little sense either whatever republican suburbs subject tomdispatch return weeks cant dismissed simply retro soon consider vote county county look redblue configurations begins change dramatically even counties essentially awarded toto either candidate end purple america map begins take account bush voters new york city kerry voters deepest texas youre really curious scroll two maps try luck matching purple electoral map darksky snapshot electricityuse nationwide simply check basic redandblue map rescaled population scroll return redandblue america couple ways go consider 2004 would looked like electoralcollege terms voters 1829 trooped polls scroll would course kerry electoral landslide slice electoral map different angle check redandblue onthedole map states dont take federal dollars pay taxes essentially 2004 election map since 17 20 states receiving federal spending per dollar federal taxes paid red bush states way extra moment check barbara ehrenreichs latest piece faith factor nation magazine argues great awakening christian moral values bushs america isnt exactly made churches offer writes addition intangibles like eternal salvation concrete material assistance become alternative welfare state whose support rests faith also loyalty grateful recipients words attempting dismantle one kind welfare state presidents moral majority hard work building another far modest version inside churches anyone knows remembers classic jobsandvotes democratic political machines big cities like new york chicago theres nothing better creating essential loyalty polls support ehrenreichs position moral values debate map sundays new york times week review accompanying pam belluck article avoid divorce move massachusetts shows lowest divorce rates nation largely blue states northeast upper midwest go figure putting 48 america officially voted kerry global context though map isnt completely accurate preferences asian countries like india philippines seem mixed indicates youll get idea curious questions maps raise instance map floating around euniverse recent days shows precivil war free vs slave states indeed eerie historical snapshot throw territories open slavery southern ohio essentially bluered divide perhaps reminder great vote switch times wasnt religious started president richard nixons decision pursue southern strategy based part seeing strength segregationist governor george wallaces thirdparty presidential bid 1968 garnered 46 electoral votes 13 popular vote meant drive wedge right greatest new deal democratic party contradictions longlived increasingly uneasy alliance northern liberal southern white conservative wings party switchover racist vote flipped south finally red camp day however updated proves decisive election election especially 2004 senate house representatives 2004 electoral map probably tell us endless layers quartercentury culture wars moral issues including abortion gay marriage lies heavy historical burden americas slave past racial history recently outside observer paul tiyambe zeleza professor african studies history pennsylvania state university could amused wondering american commentators would say african election bet would bemoan regionalization voting reflection africans incapacity transcend primordial loyalties based tribalism regionalism voting misdeeds would ascribed propensity african governments vote rigging ignorance illiterate voters unaccustomed democracy took subject republicanization america essay available line wrote part seems drift would call republicanization america attributed complex combustible politics race empire globalization cultural values trumpeted republicans find much resonance among millions americans primarily tap racial codes american life driven desire unravel civil rights settlement 1960s sought enfranchise empower african americans racial minorities politics race ensured unity republican side war party remains predominantly white recent election attracted 10 percent black vote dissension democratic side different identity social projects competed primacy seen heated debates gay rights african american civil rights community one factor might impossible map deep lie surface american electoral consciousness imperial factor speaking historical ironies way racist southern senators old white democratic south tended far antiimperial antiinterventionist often obvious racial reasons new rightwing senators republican south harsh racial maps electoral america officially buried past perhaps would reasonable say imperial ones buried future though americans dont think country imperial terms clear last years fears loss supremacy abroad might mean domestically risen dramatically even overly focused single issue terrorism couched language patriotism belief imperial vote election vote gripped fear might lost world enough step electoral worm hole distant year 1988 consider canadian stratagem canadian stratagem tom engelhardt satire published nation magazine december 19 1988 soon george bush defeated michael dukakis presidential election hope liberal america two canadian political scientists martin sheldon arthur drake university saskatchewan moose jaw hold glimmer lworders cowering stunned silence coastal northern enclaves united states however analysis correct also spells ultimate success us conservatives sheldon drakes 345page report new realignment political realities north america 1990s issued last july canadas prestigious institute strategic surveys iss toronto title may sound bland report makes explosive reading us political commentators argued whether michael dukakis could take states ranging georgia texas ohio california sheldon drake assumed democratic nominee would exceptions oregon iowa rhode island win series states bordering close canada specifically massachusetts new york wisconsin minnesota washington true says sheldon dukakis lost uselection looked another light southern canadian election political reality liberals leftists facing debating sides border dukakiss victories sheldon drake point fall roughly north old british claimline canadian border west believe particular configuration states call northern tier fluke history evidence canadian stratagem consciously engineered sheldon drake cite private comments scores democratic politicos typically one close dukakis aide confided someday well things teach canadian liberals run country also highlight comment unreported united states presidentelect bush made new hampshire primary sitting radio microphone thought switched turned new hampshire supporter said democrats one push well canada preelection analysis developing situation sides border sheldon drake conclude may facing first political economic restructuring north america since american revolution chapter titled northern tier coevolution chaos suggest way canadian liberals leftists take historical task guarding canadas fragile economic independence symbolized recent attempts hold back uscanada free trade treaty incorporating part united states clearly longer wanted result greater canadian commonwealth achieved without acrimony would offer countries enormous advantages canada would thrown solidly l column economic giant able coexist southern neighbor without fear domination time would united states historically unparalleled favor turning land relatively free liberals professors sheldon drake interviewed office new age wing toronto institute spending year leave moose jaw noted since report issued events confirmed analysis asked two unknown canadian academics could spotted trends escaped rest north america senior author sheldon tall bushyhaired 47yearold wearing green red jogging suit denied better foreseeing future shouldnt view report predictive document series projections based bedrock trends anyone see arthur drake rotund 40yearold spent interview trimming button fern offered somewhat different perspective risk sounding impolite distinction canadians see states cant see remember come mythical country one dont believe exist bad vantage point grasping certain continental realities harder sympathetic really watch election night maps broadcast networks dayglo blue stretching unbroken sea sea fragile string red blobs hanging tenuously canadian border unconscious sorting colors enough told everything needed know even without report one thing cut sheldon write article make clear theres nothing pieinthesky report weve looked problems square eye sheldon drake fact taken special pains confront possible criticisms proposals likely raise three linked appendixes deal crucial difficult states like maine suggestions range ragged discontinuous borders socalled alaska solution massive population exchanges conservative areas canada west virginia district columbia cities like pittsburgh parts northern california black areas south suggestions range establishment free city policy inside united states setting greater canadian consulates throughout country offer asylum jesse jackson black leaders expected flow refugees directions subject complex focus upcoming nation article nation readers urged consider sheldon drake report 1295 iss press toronto time still remains reasonable discussion issues raises mind ominous signal nation readers may already aware george bushs comment hecklers postelection florida vacation read lips youre canadians piece written tom engelhardt senior editor pantheon books history cold war end victory culture would published another 7 years novel last days publishing another 14 years would 14 years created tomdispatchcom weblog nation institute copyright c1988 tom engelhardt | 1,843 |
<p>The Shi’a of Iraq are a mixed bag at this time, caught between Najaf of Iraq and Qom of Iran. Imam Hakim, by far the most powerful Imam, who spent several years in exile in Iran, has spoken for an Iraqi government, with Islamic principles, but not asked for a theocracy. Imam Sistani, who was able to stay in Iraq during the regime of Saddam Hussein and persist in being a true Shi’a leader, and a man who told his followers to cooperate with the American invasion, is a man on the bubble at this point. Imam Sadr, the son of martyr, Imam Sadr, is pushing for strength among the youth of Iraq in competition with Imam Sistani. There is also Imam Fartusi, an outspoken man who not only faced up to Saddam but also had the courage to face up to the American military as soon as they came into Iraq. These are the four major players among the Shi’a of Iraq, give or take a few others who do not have the clout of these four. All are devout Muslims, all want Islamic principles to be the foundation of the new Iraq, but each will have to work out how the country will develop as they go because they not only have to work with their Iraqi people, but must also contend, at least for a while, with the American/British occupation forces and the new dictators being foisted upon them by the Bush/Blair leadership in Washington and London.</p>
<p>The Shi’a of Iraq have been devout, but have not pushed for a theocracy such as exists in Iran. They also see their Islamic university of theology in Najaf as being superior to the Iranian Shi’a school in Qom (the late Imam Khomeni’s center of power).</p>
<p>The teachings in Najaf and Karbala are more liberal and have more philosophy in the curriculum than the schools in Iran; thus, the leading Iraqi imams have always tended to have a liberal outlook in the modern era post Khomeni. However, prior to Khomeni, the imams in Iran were more liberal and had a broader education and also had a sense of their Persian cultural background as well as that of their own brand of Islam.</p>
<p>At the present time, we cannot simply see the Shi’a of Iraq in a Muslim vacuum, but must also see it in the context of the American invasion and occupation.</p>
<p>Not one Shi’a leader now espouses working with the American/British occupation; all want Bush/Blair out of Iraq, PERIOD!</p>
<p>Are they willing to die to accomplish this? The answer is a clear and firm, Yes. Will they allow the Bush/Blair occupation to have any peace? No, not unless they are all killed–and this means 98% of the Iraqi people. Will they allow Bremer or the other American stooge, Chalabi to dictate to them? No. Will they recognize the new American judges and others to run the country? No. Will there be assassinations of American officials? Yes. Will an American be able to go out on the street unarmed or without heavy weaponry? No. Will Iraqis in other parts of the world join underground anti-American groups? Yes. Will they join</p>
<p>Al Qa’ida? Most likely not, but some will; but on the whole, they will act with other groups of Muslims in the world who are now more anti-American than any time in history. Will they have suicide bombers to resist Bush/Blair the way Palestinians have resisted Israel’s brutality? Not immediately, but if the Bush/Blair occupation persists and becomes more brutal, as it looks though it will, then this will also come into play. Do the Iraqis feel intimidated by the Bush/Blair troops? No, and they have lost respect for them and lose more each day as the thuggery, thefts, attacks from gangs gets worse and all law and order, medicine, food, water and sewage problem get worse. These are answers to important questions that one must ask of the situation.</p>
<p>Yes, law and order are breaking down even more, none of the sewage or water problems have been solved; yet, American firms are already working in the oil fields making money, talking about rebuilding roads and buidings–yet the people are without clean water, without clean food, without medicine and without security.</p>
<p>Obviously, they will not tolerate this much longer, as they see their children die of cholera and other dirty water diseases. Have they lost their respect for America as a democratic nation? Yes, and when they get the Ashcroft crew in, with Bremer and Rumsfeld as well, they will get fed up even faster and will respond in ways that will surprise the Bush/Blair troops and U.S. administration.</p>
<p>The Iraqis do not feel the West has that much to offer them; they have a strong belief in their own culture, and much of this is their firm belief in Islam. But, in their minds, they do not need Imams running the country, and would protest if any of the Imams tried to foist a Khomeni/Iran type of regime on them.</p>
<p>This does not mean that Imam Hakim and some others might not move in that direction, but once he sees the Iraq wind blowing against it, he will be an Iraqi type leader, not an Iranian type.</p>
<p>In fairness of Imam Hakim, he has learned from being in Iran, of the values and weaknesses of the Iranian system; this will help him, if he emerges as the top leader, of ways of operating that will be appropriate to Iraq and his people.</p>
<p>Imam Sistani still has a major following, but even he has moved to the right politically and to a degree religiously; but he is a man of character, as are all the men, and is willing to stand his ground and die if necessary rather than to be undone. He has great power in Najaf and Karbala, the two holiest cities of the Shi’a because he has been in charge of the tombs and the mosques in those areas.</p>
<p>Imam Sadr is younger, has his father’s cache, plus his own ethos that attracts many of the more militant young Iraqis who are knowledgeable about his fathers’ assassination by Saddam and who are worldly enough to understand America, Israel and the simmering situation in the Middle East. No matter what happens, each of the older Imams will try to get Imam Sadr to work with them to increase their base and appeal. His appeal is also strong in Najaf and Karbala, but he is also wooing other younger Iraqis in Baghdad, Basra and elsewhere.</p>
<p>Imam Fartusi, has always had a following, and has great respect for his standing up, even to arrest by the Americans, and is also another wild card in this situation. Theologically, he is very strong, has a fiery style and can move crowds in directions he wishes, especially in Baghdad.</p>
<p>I have not discussed theology because their education in Najaf and Karbala was relatively the same, but the politics of the present situation and their reaction to it will differentiate them in time.</p>
<p>As far as theology is concerned, they are closer to the Lebanese style of Shi’a, which I covered in a previous essay on CounterPunch, than they are to the Qom, Iranian school of repressive domination under the doctrine of a reactionary type of formal, non-progressive Islam. As I said earlier, I do not see them trying to impose a Khomeni type rule, but even if one of them is foolish enough to try this, it will not succeed.</p>
<p>As far as the situation of the occupation is concerned, allow me to say this, the Bush/Blair have tried to work with Sistani, have a fear of Hakim, don’t quite know how to deal with Sadr and are worried about Fartusi. My thought is that though they are leaders who are in competition with one another, they will join forces when necessary to deal with the Bush/Blair occupation, in order to oust the Bush/Blair group. This will lead to bloodshed, and obviously, some of them will be killed. But, people in the West must understand, they do not fear death the way people do in the West–a heroic death on the side of what they consider to be right, God’s way, is preferable to domination by a non-Muslim outsider. To a man, they have had enough of occupation and servitude; to them, the game is now on and they would rather die resisting than live in any further captivity.</p>
<p>SAM HAMOD is an expert on world affairs, especially the Arab and Muslim worlds, former editor of THIRD WORLD NEWS (in Wash, DC), a former professor at Princeton University, former Director of The National Islamic Center of Washington, DC, an advisor to the US State Department and author of ISLAM IN THE WORLD TODAY. He is the editor of <a href="http://www.todaysalternativenews.com/" type="external">www.todaysalternativenews.com</a>, and may be reached at <a href="maiilto:/shamod@cox.net" type="external">shamod@cox.net</a></p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | shia iraq mixed bag time caught najaf iraq qom iran imam hakim far powerful imam spent several years exile iran spoken iraqi government islamic principles asked theocracy imam sistani able stay iraq regime saddam hussein persist true shia leader man told followers cooperate american invasion man bubble point imam sadr son martyr imam sadr pushing strength among youth iraq competition imam sistani also imam fartusi outspoken man faced saddam also courage face american military soon came iraq four major players among shia iraq give take others clout four devout muslims want islamic principles foundation new iraq work country develop go work iraqi people must also contend least americanbritish occupation forces new dictators foisted upon bushblair leadership washington london shia iraq devout pushed theocracy exists iran also see islamic university theology najaf superior iranian shia school qom late imam khomenis center power teachings najaf karbala liberal philosophy curriculum schools iran thus leading iraqi imams always tended liberal outlook modern era post khomeni however prior khomeni imams iran liberal broader education also sense persian cultural background well brand islam present time simply see shia iraq muslim vacuum must also see context american invasion occupation one shia leader espouses working americanbritish occupation want bushblair iraq period willing die accomplish answer clear firm yes allow bushblair occupation peace unless killedand means 98 iraqi people allow bremer american stooge chalabi dictate recognize new american judges others run country assassinations american officials yes american able go street unarmed without heavy weaponry iraqis parts world join underground antiamerican groups yes join al qaida likely whole act groups muslims world antiamerican time history suicide bombers resist bushblair way palestinians resisted israels brutality immediately bushblair occupation persists becomes brutal looks though also come play iraqis feel intimidated bushblair troops lost respect lose day thuggery thefts attacks gangs gets worse law order medicine food water sewage problem get worse answers important questions one must ask situation yes law order breaking even none sewage water problems solved yet american firms already working oil fields making money talking rebuilding roads buidingsyet people without clean water without clean food without medicine without security obviously tolerate much longer see children die cholera dirty water diseases lost respect america democratic nation yes get ashcroft crew bremer rumsfeld well get fed even faster respond ways surprise bushblair troops us administration iraqis feel west much offer strong belief culture much firm belief islam minds need imams running country would protest imams tried foist khomeniiran type regime mean imam hakim others might move direction sees iraq wind blowing iraqi type leader iranian type fairness imam hakim learned iran values weaknesses iranian system help emerges top leader ways operating appropriate iraq people imam sistani still major following even moved right politically degree religiously man character men willing stand ground die necessary rather undone great power najaf karbala two holiest cities shia charge tombs mosques areas imam sadr younger fathers cache plus ethos attracts many militant young iraqis knowledgeable fathers assassination saddam worldly enough understand america israel simmering situation middle east matter happens older imams try get imam sadr work increase base appeal appeal also strong najaf karbala also wooing younger iraqis baghdad basra elsewhere imam fartusi always following great respect standing even arrest americans also another wild card situation theologically strong fiery style move crowds directions wishes especially baghdad discussed theology education najaf karbala relatively politics present situation reaction differentiate time far theology concerned closer lebanese style shia covered previous essay counterpunch qom iranian school repressive domination doctrine reactionary type formal nonprogressive islam said earlier see trying impose khomeni type rule even one foolish enough try succeed far situation occupation concerned allow say bushblair tried work sistani fear hakim dont quite know deal sadr worried fartusi thought though leaders competition one another join forces necessary deal bushblair occupation order oust bushblair group lead bloodshed obviously killed people west must understand fear death way people westa heroic death side consider right gods way preferable domination nonmuslim outsider man enough occupation servitude game would rather die resisting live captivity sam hamod expert world affairs especially arab muslim worlds former editor third world news wash dc former professor princeton university former director national islamic center washington dc advisor us state department author islam world today editor wwwtodaysalternativenewscom may reached shamodcoxnet 160 | 709 |
<p />
<p>At the Democratic debate in Miami on Wednesday, Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton each claimed he or she would be the best candidate to run against Republican front-runner Donald Trump in the general election.</p>
<p>To determine who’s right, <a href="http://www.democracynow.org/2016/3/10/hillary_clinton_or_bernie_sanders_who" type="external">“Democracy Now!” hosted</a> a debate between Nathan Robinson, editor of Current Affairs magazine, and professor Alan Draper of St. Lawrence University.</p>
<p>“Hillary Clinton is not well positioned to capture the particular national mood at the moment, which is an anti-establishment mood,” said Robinson. “And if the Democrats run an establishment candidate in an anti-establishment election cycle, they are going to lose.”</p>
<p />
<p>Draper cited the fact that Clinton has been under the scrutiny of the press for far longer than Sanders and is thus unlikely to have any skeletons in her closet that we can’t already guess at.</p>
<p>A transcript of the exchange follows.</p>
<p>—Posted by <a href="" type="internal">Alexander Reed Kelly</a>.</p>
<p>NERMEEN SHAIKH: At last night’s Democratic presidential debate in Miami hosted by Univision, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders claimed they would be the best candidate to take on Republican front-runner Donald Trump in a general election.</p>
<p>SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: I believe that our message of the need for people to stand up and tell corporate America and Wall Street that they cannot have it all is resonating across this country. And I think, in the coming weeks and months, we are going to continue to do extremely well, win a number of these primaries and convince superdelegates that Bernie Sanders is the strongest candidate to defeat Donald Trump.</p>
<p>HILLARY CLINTON: If I am so fortunate enough to be the Democratic nominee, there will be a lot of time to talk about him. I was the first one to call him out. I called him out when he was calling Mexicans rapists. When he was engaging in rhetoric that I found deeply offensive, I said, “Basta.” And I am pleased that others—others are also joining in making clear that his rhetoric, his demagoguery, his trafficking in prejudice and paranoia, has no place in our political system.</p>
<p>AMY GOODMAN: Well, the question of which Democratic candidate is best suited to challenge Republican front-runner Donald Trump is generating a lot of impassioned discussion and debate. So, who stands a better chance in the general elections—Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton? We’ll spend the rest of the hour talking about this.</p>
<p>In Boston, Massachusetts, we’re joined by Nathan Robinson, a doctoral student in sociology and social policy at Harvard University, editor-in-chief of Current Affairs, a new print magazine of political analysis. Robinson’s recent <a href="http://static.currentaffairs.org/2016/02/unless-the-democrats-nominate-sanders-a-trump-nomination-means-a-trump-presidency" type="external">piece</a> is called “Unless the Democrats Run Sanders, a Trump Nomination Means a Trump Presidency.”</p>
<p>And in Ottawa, Canada, we’re joined by Alan Draper, professor of government at St. Lawrence University. His recent <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-vote-for-bernie-sanders-is-a-vote-for-donald-trump-2016-02-29" type="external">article</a> in MarketWatch is “A Vote for Bernie Sanders is a Vote for Donald Trump.”</p>
<p>We welcome you both to Democracy Now! And, Professor Draper, thanks for going from St. Lawrence University up to Ottawa for this discussion. Why do you feel Hillary Clinton is the best candidate to beat Trump?</p>
<p>ALAN DRAPER: Well, I think Hillary has certain positives for her. Number one is experience. Number two is that she, it seems to me—everything is on the table with her. We know so much about her. With regard to Bernie, that film that was shown in the debate last night, in terms of his apologies for Castro and authoritarianism, how many—do we know how many other films like that are out there? Do we know what kind of petitions Bernie has signed? That’s all going to come out. So, in terms of the unknowns that Bernie Sanders presents, I just think Hillary is a safer candidate at this point.</p>
<p>Secondly, it seems to me, this question of Bernie versus—versus Sanders, who’s a better candidate, is moot at this point. People talk about Bernie winning Michigan, but he lost the delegate count that evening.</p>
<p>AMY GOODMAN: Because he lost Mississippi.</p>
<p>ALAN DRAPER: The window—yes. The window is closing very rapidly. So, those are some of the things to consider.</p>
<p>NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, Nathan Robinson, could you lay out the argument that you lay out in your <a href="http://static.currentaffairs.org/2016/02/unless-the-democrats-nominate-sanders-a-trump-nomination-means-a-trump-presidency" type="external">piece</a>, “Unless the Democrats Run Sanders, a Trump Nomination Means a Trump Presidency”?</p>
<p>NATHAN ROBINSON: Yeah. So, I respect absolutely the arguments for Hillary Clinton’s electability. The thing that I think is really important to consider and is not considered enough in these discussions is the fact that the Republican nominee is Donald Trump. Now, that changes everything. And the reason it changes everything is because of Trump’s unique campaigning style. Right? Trump traffics in the personal and the salacious and in gossip. And what that means is that all of Trump’s strengths play to all of Hillary Clinton’s unique weaknesses. And Trump has already shown this. If you see the way he talks about Hillary Clinton at his rallies versus the way he talks about Bernie Sanders, he goes after Hillary Clinton on Iraq. He goes after her on Libya, on the TPP, on NAFTA, on jobs. And so, all of these things make Trump a candidate that has a unique advantage over Clinton that he doesn’t have over Sanders, because Sanders speaks to the same kind of concerns that animate Trump’s base of support.</p>
<p>AMY GOODMAN: I mean, it’s very interesting when you see a sort of uber-capitalist—not clear how many billions he has. He’s not releasing his tax returns and people are all speculating.</p>
<p>NATHAN ROBINSON: It varies.</p>
<p>AMY GOODMAN: But the uber-capitalist versus the democratic socialist, Nathan Robinson?</p>
<p>NATHAN ROBINSON: Yeah. But the thing is that those two things seem a stark contrast at first, but I think what you see is that Trump and Sanders have different messages, but they’re targeting the same anxieties and the same audience. Right? So, whoever the Democratic nominee is in the fall can be assured that the Democratic base will support them, right? Because Trump has the support of the Klan, he’s, you know, called all Mexicans rapists, the Democratic base will be solid. What’s going to be difficult in the general election is winning over the working class, the so-called Reagan Democrats. And those are people that Trump has a message for. Trump has a message for people in Michigan who have lost their jobs. Trump has a message for people in rural Oklahoma. Those people come to his rallies. But those people also come to Bernie Sanders’s rallies. And Bernie Sanders has a message that resonates in those communities in a way that Hillary Clinton simply doesn’t, because of her record with Wall Street, because of her record with free trade. And so, I think what you see is that Hillary Clinton is not well positioned to capture the particular national mood at the moment, which is an antiestablishment mood. And if the Democrats run an establishment candidate in an antiestablishment election cycle, they are going to lose.</p>
<p>NERMEEN SHAIKH: Professor Alan Draper, your response to what Nathan Robinson says?</p>
<p>ALAN DRAPER: Yes. This notion that the 2016 election is unusual for being an antiestablishment election just isn’t true. First of all, most of this agitation is almost completely on the Republican side. The primary turnout in Republican—in Republican primaries is very high. That’s not the case in the Democratic primaries, where in fact the turnout has been exceedingly low.</p>
<p>AMY GOODMAN: Actually, it’s higher than it was in the last—</p>
<p>ALAN DRAPER: We don’t see the kind of agitation—</p>
<p>AMY GOODMAN: It’s higher than it was in 2008. It’s both up for Republicans and Democrats, just higher for Republicans. And neither is very high: 17 percent for Republicans so far, according to Pew, and 11.7 or something percent for Democrats, higher.</p>
<p>ALAN DRAPER: Well, 2008, OK. Well, that was an exceptional election also, because you had two very good candidates running for—against each other.</p>
<p>AMY GOODMAN: Well, higher than 2012. 2008 was much higher.</p>
<p>ALAN DRAPER: OK, OK. With regard to the question of how Democrats feel the government is doing, again, most Americans—I think it was—I saw in Dana Milbank’s article something like 64 percent are not pleased with how the government is performing. But again, most of that is Republicans, when you drill down into those numbers. So, in terms of the Democratic base being upset with where the country is going, it just doesn’t resonate as much. And what we’re seeing as an antiestablishment election, this is how the media always presents most primary elections in order to build a horse race. You saw that in 2012 with the rise of Herman Cain, 2008 with regard to Obama, that it’s always presented as an antiestablishment election, that the electorate is angry. That seems to me so much more so on the Republican side than it is on the Democratic side.</p>
<p>NERMEEN SHAIKH: Nathan Robinson, your response, very quickly, before we conclude?</p>
<p>NATHAN ROBINSON: Well, as you can see, the statistic that Professor Draper cited proves him wrong, because everyone is upset. It doesn’t matter that it’s Republicans, because everyone votes in the general election. Right? So what you need is, in a general election—</p>
<p>AMY GOODMAN: Well, half of Americans do.</p>
<p>NATHAN ROBINSON: —you have to appeal to those people. That’s—that’s who you need to appeal to in order to win. And those people, Bernie Sanders can appeal to. But Hillary Clinton, who Professor Draper, in his article, calls the candidate of “moral ambiguity”—you can’t, on a platform of moral ambiguity, get people to turn out to the polls. If turnout is low, you need to inspire people. Bernie Sanders inspires people. Hillary Clinton hemorrhages support all the time. Donald Trump builds support. Bernie Sanders builds support as [people get] to know him. As people get to know Hillary Clinton, they trust her less and less.</p>
<p>AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to have to leave it there, Nathan Robinson and Alan Draper. Thanks so much for joining us, and to Alan Draper especially for going to Canada for this interview. I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh. Thanks so much.</p> | true | 4 | democratic debate miami wednesday bernie sanders hillary clinton claimed would best candidate run republican frontrunner donald trump general election determine whos right democracy hosted debate nathan robinson editor current affairs magazine professor alan draper st lawrence university hillary clinton well positioned capture particular national mood moment antiestablishment mood said robinson democrats run establishment candidate antiestablishment election cycle going lose draper cited fact clinton scrutiny press far longer sanders thus unlikely skeletons closet cant already guess transcript exchange follows posted alexander reed kelly nermeen shaikh last nights democratic presidential debate miami hosted univision hillary clinton bernie sanders claimed would best candidate take republican frontrunner donald trump general election sen bernie sanders believe message need people stand tell corporate america wall street resonating across country think coming weeks months going continue extremely well win number primaries convince superdelegates bernie sanders strongest candidate defeat donald trump hillary clinton fortunate enough democratic nominee lot time talk first one call called calling mexicans rapists engaging rhetoric found deeply offensive said basta pleased othersothers also joining making clear rhetoric demagoguery trafficking prejudice paranoia place political system amy goodman well question democratic candidate best suited challenge republican frontrunner donald trump generating lot impassioned discussion debate stands better chance general electionsbernie sanders hillary clinton well spend rest hour talking boston massachusetts joined nathan robinson doctoral student sociology social policy harvard university editorinchief current affairs new print magazine political analysis robinsons recent piece called unless democrats run sanders trump nomination means trump presidency ottawa canada joined alan draper professor government st lawrence university recent article marketwatch vote bernie sanders vote donald trump welcome democracy professor draper thanks going st lawrence university ottawa discussion feel hillary clinton best candidate beat trump alan draper well think hillary certain positives number one experience number two seems meeverything table know much regard bernie film shown debate last night terms apologies castro authoritarianism manydo know many films like know kind petitions bernie signed thats going come terms unknowns bernie sanders presents think hillary safer candidate point secondly seems question bernie versusversus sanders whos better candidate moot point people talk bernie winning michigan lost delegate count evening amy goodman lost mississippi alan draper windowyes window closing rapidly things consider nermeen shaikh well nathan robinson could lay argument lay piece unless democrats run sanders trump nomination means trump presidency nathan robinson yeah respect absolutely arguments hillary clintons electability thing think really important consider considered enough discussions fact republican nominee donald trump changes everything reason changes everything trumps unique campaigning style right trump traffics personal salacious gossip means trumps strengths play hillary clintons unique weaknesses trump already shown see way talks hillary clinton rallies versus way talks bernie sanders goes hillary clinton iraq goes libya tpp nafta jobs things make trump candidate unique advantage clinton doesnt sanders sanders speaks kind concerns animate trumps base support amy goodman mean interesting see sort ubercapitalistnot clear many billions hes releasing tax returns people speculating nathan robinson varies amy goodman ubercapitalist versus democratic socialist nathan robinson nathan robinson yeah thing two things seem stark contrast first think see trump sanders different messages theyre targeting anxieties audience right whoever democratic nominee fall assured democratic base support right trump support klan hes know called mexicans rapists democratic base solid whats going difficult general election winning working class socalled reagan democrats people trump message trump message people michigan lost jobs trump message people rural oklahoma people come rallies people also come bernie sanderss rallies bernie sanders message resonates communities way hillary clinton simply doesnt record wall street record free trade think see hillary clinton well positioned capture particular national mood moment antiestablishment mood democrats run establishment candidate antiestablishment election cycle going lose nermeen shaikh professor alan draper response nathan robinson says alan draper yes notion 2016 election unusual antiestablishment election isnt true first agitation almost completely republican side primary turnout republicanin republican primaries high thats case democratic primaries fact turnout exceedingly low amy goodman actually higher last alan draper dont see kind agitation amy goodman higher 2008 republicans democrats higher republicans neither high 17 percent republicans far according pew 117 something percent democrats higher alan draper well 2008 ok well exceptional election also two good candidates running foragainst amy goodman well higher 2012 2008 much higher alan draper ok ok regard question democrats feel government americansi think wasi saw dana milbanks article something like 64 percent pleased government performing republicans drill numbers terms democratic base upset country going doesnt resonate much seeing antiestablishment election media always presents primary elections order build horse race saw 2012 rise herman cain 2008 regard obama always presented antiestablishment election electorate angry seems much republican side democratic side nermeen shaikh nathan robinson response quickly conclude nathan robinson well see statistic professor draper cited proves wrong everyone upset doesnt matter republicans everyone votes general election right need general election amy goodman well half americans nathan robinson appeal people thatsthats need appeal order win people bernie sanders appeal hillary clinton professor draper article calls candidate moral ambiguityyou cant platform moral ambiguity get people turn polls turnout low need inspire people bernie sanders inspires people hillary clinton hemorrhages support time donald trump builds support bernie sanders builds support people get know people get know hillary clinton trust less less amy goodman going leave nathan robinson alan draper thanks much joining us alan draper especially going canada interview im amy goodman nermeen shaikh thanks much | 892 |
<p>Production line at the Smith &amp; Wesson factory in Springfield, MassachusettsCharles Krupa/AP</p>
<p />
<p>In January 2013, a month after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, the state of New York passed gun control legislation that included a ban on the retail sale of assault weapons. Soon after, Remington Outdoor Company, the maker of the Bushmaster assault rifle used in the massacre, announced it would lay off workers at its 200-year-old factory in Ilion and move production to Huntsville, Alabama. Then CEO George Kollitides explained in a letter to New York officials that the move was brought on by “state policies affecting use of our products.”</p>
<p>The gun lobby crowed about political payback: “We hope that sends a very strong message,” remarked then National Rifle Association’s president, Jim Porter, on an NRA radio show. What Porter didn’t mention was what Alabama had done to sweeten the deal: By relocating to Huntsville, Remington, a $1 billion firearms conglomerate owned by the Manhattan private-equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, would receive state and local grants, tax breaks, and other incentives worth approximately $69 million—the equivalent of getting about $14 from every resident of Alabama.</p>
<p>Since 2003, state and local governments from Alabama to Tennessee have given more than $120 million worth of taxpayer funds to at least seven major firearms companies, according to research by Mother Jones. Most of those subsidies—nearly $100 million—have been pledged just over the past three years by states seeking to lure gun producers from the Northeast, where new firearm regulations have angered industry leaders.</p>
<p>“I’ve had CEOs in New England tell me that the offers from states’ economic development teams are so extraordinary that they could essentially move their factories for free,” Larry Keane, senior vice president of the National Shooting Sports Federation, <a href="http://www.gunsandammo.com/network-topics/culture-politics-network/gun-companies-moving/" type="external">told</a> Guns &amp; Ammo. “In some cases they’ve received these offers almost daily over extended periods of time.”</p>
<p>After Maryland passed stringent new gun regulations in 2013, Beretta announced it would shutter its factory there and relocate to a state that has shown “consistent, strong support for Second Amendment rights,” as its attorney, Jeff Reh, put it at the time. But politics wasn’t the only factor in Beretta’s move. The city of Gallatin, Tennessee, eventually won the new factory after it offered Beretta $14.4 million in state and local subsidies. “The level of community support was better,” a Beretta spokesman acknowledged in the Charlotte Business Journal, explaining why that city had lost its bid for the plant.</p>
<p>Southern states have long relied on financial and regulatory incentives to attract manufacturers from more industrialized parts of the country. “I think Remington is doing what Mercedes did for us in the automobile business—it opens the door to opportunity,” Porter <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/blog/2014/06/nra-president-says-more-gun-manufacturers-could-be.html" type="external">told</a> the Birmingham Business Journal. Yet Porter suggested gun companies would enjoy an exceptional welcome: “You will have the support of the administration, you will have the support of the population—everybody in the state is going to be lining up to work for Remington.”</p>
<p>Major politicians have gone the extra mile to attract gun companies. In wooing the Beretta factory, Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam flew to Italy and <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/print-edition/2014/02/21/whiskey-guitars-and-guns.html" type="external">met with the Beretta family</a> in a posh wine country villa. Haslam later invited Franco Gussalli Beretta, the head of the company’s American subsidiary, to the governor’s mansion for dinner. Nobody in Tennessee seemed to object to the deal’s $14.4 million price tag. “We believe that our brand as the state of Tennessee has taken on new luster because Beretta has chosen to locate here,” Haslan <a href="http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/gallatin/2014/08/28/beretta-breaks-ground-million-gallatin-plant/14751955/" type="external">said</a> at the groundbreaking ceremony, “and we are forever grateful.”</p>
<p>Another incentive for gun companies to relocate south has been lax labor laws. In an <a href="http://www.unionleader.com/article/20130711/OPINION01/130719911&amp;template=mobileart" type="external">interview</a> with the New Hampshire Union Leader, a Sturm Ruger spokesman admitted the company built a new plant in North Carolina instead of expanding an existing one in Newport, New Hampshire, because it wanted to set up shop in a <a href="" type="internal">right-to-work</a> state. Similarly, Remington’s move from New York to Alabama, another right-to-work state, decimated the New York plant’s trade union.</p>
<p>Some Northeastern states have also funneled tax dollars to the firearms industry. Between 2009 and 2014, New York-based Kimber Manufacturing received nearly $1 million in tax abatements and state and local grants—money meant to ensure the company would keep cranking out upwards of 150,000 handguns a year with its factory in Yonkers. Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts have also offered incentives to attract or retain gun manufacturers. But most such enticements are now in the South.</p>
<p>Here are the seven gun companies that have received state and local subsidies in recent years:</p>
<p>Remington Arms, Madison, North CarolinaMove: Owned by a New York private equity fund, Remington in 2014 laid off more than 100 workers at its 200-year-old unionized factory in Ilion, New York (the site of its original headquarters) and opened a new nonunion factory in Huntsville, Alabama.Subsidy: <a href="http://www.al.com/business/index.ssf/2014/02/alabamas_incentive_offer_to_re.html" type="external">$68.9 million</a> in cash, worker training, tax abatements, real estate, and construction work from state and local governments. The company also received nearly <a href="https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/550046/gun-subsidies.pdf" type="external">$12 million</a> in grants, tax credits, and other benefits from New York, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Oklahoma in exchange for training workers and expanding or retaining factories.</p>
<p>Sturm Ruger, &#160;Southport, ConnecticutMove:&#160; In 2014, the nation’s largest gun company opened a new factory in Mayodan, North Carolina, instead of expanding an existing factory in New Hampshire.Subsidy: <a href="http://nhlabornews.com/2013/10/epilogue-sturm-ruger-decision-to-move-to-n-c-all-about-the-benjamins/" type="external">$15.5 million</a> in state tax breaks, employee training, infrastructure construction, and other incentives. The company has also received $150,288 in training subsidies from New Hampshire.</p>
<p>Berretta USA, Accokeek, MarylandMove: The Italian gun maker last year closed its Maryland plant and <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/22/beretta-usa-announces-decision-to-move-its-entire-maryland-manufacturing-capabilities-to-tennessee/" type="external">moved all US production</a> to a massive factory in Gallatin, Tennessee.Subsidy: The company will receive <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/print-edition/2014/02/21/whiskey-guitars-and-guns.html" type="external">$10.41 million</a> in state-funded building improvements and job training grants. The town of Gallatin also kicked in land and tax abatements worth nearly $4 million.</p>
<p>Smith &amp; Wesson, Springfield, Massachusetts.Move: Publicly traded Smith &amp; Wesson announced in 2010 that it would move its hunting rifle division from New Hampshire to Springfield, Massachusetts.Subsidy: <a href="http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013/01/02/11989/gun-manufacturers-got-more-19-million-state-subsidies" type="external">$6.6 million</a> in state and local tax breaks. The company has also received <a href="https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/550046/gun-subsidies.pdf" type="external">$158,791</a> in worker-training subsidies from Massachusetts.</p>
<p>Colt’s Manufacturing, Hartford, ConnecticutMove: In 2011 Florida Gov. Rick Scott announced a deal in which the 180-year-old gun company would open a factory in Kissimmee, saying it showed the state was “a defender of our right to bear arms.” But then Colt walked away from the project <a href="http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/osceola/os-colt-repays-incentive-money-20141007-story.html" type="external">for unknown reasons</a>. The company declared bankruptcy last year.Subsidy: <a href="http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/rick-scott-gave-a-16-million-tax-subsidy-to-gun-company-6534822" type="external">$1.66 million</a> in state and local incentives. Government officials are now trying to <a href="http://www.wpxi.com/news/news/national/colt-fails-brings-jobs-osceola-tax-payers-will-hav/nk7tT/" type="external">claw back the money</a>.</p>
<p>O.F. Mossberg &amp; Sons, North Haven, Connecticut.Move: The world’s largest manufacturer of pump-action shotguns has gradually shifted manufacturing from Connecticut to a factory in Eagle Pass, Texas. In 2014, it added 116,000 square feet to the factory, which now accounts for <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/frankminiter/2014/07/11/americas-largest-shotgun-maker-shifts-more-jobs-to-texas/#4f03d2731e55" type="external">90 percent</a> of its production.Subsidy: A <a href="http://subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/subsidy-tracker/tx-maverick-arms" type="external">$300,000 grant</a> in 2014 from the taxpayer-funded Texas Enterprise Fund.</p>
<p>Kimber Manufacturing, Elmsford, New YorkMove: America’s largest manufacturer of 1911 pistols hasn’t moved out of New York—at least not yet. In 2012 the company <a href="http://nyagv.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Kimber-Opposition-Letter-to-Cuomo.pdf" type="external">warned</a> that the state’s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NY_SAFE_Act" type="external">NY SAFE</a> gun control law might “cause it to reconsider its current expansion.”Subsidy: In 2009, Kimber received a $700,000 <a href="http://esd.ny.gov/AboutUs/Data/BoardMaterials/November2009/111909_Kimber.pdf" type="external">state grant</a> to expand its manufacturing capacity in Yonkers. In 2012 and 2013, it received nearly $300,000 in local tax credits.&#160;</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | production line smith amp wesson factory springfield massachusettscharles krupaap january 2013 month mass shooting sandy hook elementary school state new york passed gun control legislation included ban retail sale assault weapons soon remington outdoor company maker bushmaster assault rifle used massacre announced would lay workers 200yearold factory ilion move production huntsville alabama ceo george kollitides explained letter new york officials move brought state policies affecting use products gun lobby crowed political payback hope sends strong message remarked national rifle associations president jim porter nra radio show porter didnt mention alabama done sweeten deal relocating huntsville remington 1 billion firearms conglomerate owned manhattan privateequity firm cerberus capital management would receive state local grants tax breaks incentives worth approximately 69 millionthe equivalent getting 14 every resident alabama since 2003 state local governments alabama tennessee given 120 million worth taxpayer funds least seven major firearms companies according research mother jones subsidiesnearly 100 millionhave pledged past three years states seeking lure gun producers northeast new firearm regulations angered industry leaders ive ceos new england tell offers states economic development teams extraordinary could essentially move factories free larry keane senior vice president national shooting sports federation told guns amp ammo cases theyve received offers almost daily extended periods time maryland passed stringent new gun regulations 2013 beretta announced would shutter factory relocate state shown consistent strong support second amendment rights attorney jeff reh put time politics wasnt factor berettas move city gallatin tennessee eventually new factory offered beretta 144 million state local subsidies level community support better beretta spokesman acknowledged charlotte business journal explaining city lost bid plant southern states long relied financial regulatory incentives attract manufacturers industrialized parts country think remington mercedes us automobile businessit opens door opportunity porter told birmingham business journal yet porter suggested gun companies would enjoy exceptional welcome support administration support populationeverybody state going lining work remington major politicians gone extra mile attract gun companies wooing beretta factory tennessee gov bill haslam flew italy met beretta family posh wine country villa haslam later invited franco gussalli beretta head companys american subsidiary governors mansion dinner nobody tennessee seemed object deals 144 million price tag believe brand state tennessee taken new luster beretta chosen locate haslan said groundbreaking ceremony forever grateful another incentive gun companies relocate south lax labor laws interview new hampshire union leader sturm ruger spokesman admitted company built new plant north carolina instead expanding existing one newport new hampshire wanted set shop righttowork state similarly remingtons move new york alabama another righttowork state decimated new york plants trade union northeastern states also funneled tax dollars firearms industry 2009 2014 new yorkbased kimber manufacturing received nearly 1 million tax abatements state local grantsmoney meant ensure company would keep cranking upwards 150000 handguns year factory yonkers maine new hampshire massachusetts also offered incentives attract retain gun manufacturers enticements south seven gun companies received state local subsidies recent years remington arms madison north carolinamove owned new york private equity fund remington 2014 laid 100 workers 200yearold unionized factory ilion new york site original headquarters opened new nonunion factory huntsville alabamasubsidy 689 million cash worker training tax abatements real estate construction work state local governments company also received nearly 12 million grants tax credits benefits new york kentucky arkansas oklahoma exchange training workers expanding retaining factories sturm ruger 160southport connecticutmove160 2014 nations largest gun company opened new factory mayodan north carolina instead expanding existing factory new hampshiresubsidy 155 million state tax breaks employee training infrastructure construction incentives company also received 150288 training subsidies new hampshire berretta usa accokeek marylandmove italian gun maker last year closed maryland plant moved us production massive factory gallatin tennesseesubsidy company receive 1041 million statefunded building improvements job training grants town gallatin also kicked land tax abatements worth nearly 4 million smith amp wesson springfield massachusettsmove publicly traded smith amp wesson announced 2010 would move hunting rifle division new hampshire springfield massachusettssubsidy 66 million state local tax breaks company also received 158791 workertraining subsidies massachusetts colts manufacturing hartford connecticutmove 2011 florida gov rick scott announced deal 180yearold gun company would open factory kissimmee saying showed state defender right bear arms colt walked away project unknown reasons company declared bankruptcy last yearsubsidy 166 million state local incentives government officials trying claw back money mossberg amp sons north connecticutmove worlds largest manufacturer pumpaction shotguns gradually shifted manufacturing connecticut factory eagle pass texas 2014 added 116000 square feet factory accounts 90 percent productionsubsidy 300000 grant 2014 taxpayerfunded texas enterprise fund kimber manufacturing elmsford new yorkmove americas largest manufacturer 1911 pistols hasnt moved new yorkat least yet 2012 company warned states ny safe gun control law might cause reconsider current expansionsubsidy 2009 kimber received 700000 state grant expand manufacturing capacity yonkers 2012 2013 received nearly 300000 local tax credits160 | 786 |
<p>While today’s America is fiercely divided over ideological differences, a notable exception is how both the Left and the Right buy into similar myths about U.S. social policy.</p>
<p>This is particularly evident in how Americans—and especially&#160;those in the economic and media elites—tend to view food stamps (now known as SNAP) benefits, versus how they regard Social Security.</p>
<p>SNAP, many believe, is “welfare,” and the two terms are sometimes even used interchangeably. Despite evidence from a UC Berkeley study released this week that nearly <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-child-care-poverty-20160711-snap-story.html" type="external">half of U.S. child care workers require some form of public assistance</a>, such as SNAP, to survive, much of the public accepts as fact that people who get SNAP don’t work and don’t want to work. They presume that recipients never help to pay for the program and are essentially mooching off too-generous governmental largess. They even take it for granted that most people who collect the benefits are non-white, when in fact the plurality of SNAP beneficiaries has always been white.</p>
<p>The conclusion these sometimes willfully misinformed individuals reach is that SNAP should not only be difficult to get but that recipients are not responsible enough to handle their own benefits and should be willing to submit to very strict micromanagement in terms of how they both obtain and utilize them.</p>
<p>On the other hand, few Americans equate Social Security payments with welfare—most believe that citizens pay for them during their working life and then simply access that same amount of money during retirement, taking back only what they put into the program.</p>
<p>Using this reasoning, it is no surprise that you would be hard-pressed to find an American that doesn’t believe Social Security payments should be easy to get and that recipients should be able to spend them however they like—whether that be on cases of soda or big-screen TVs.</p>
<p>But the underlying assumptions we have about both programs are just plain wrong.</p>
<p>Most people who collect SNAP benefits work, almost always in low-paying jobs. Therefore, they pay into the program over a lifetime of paying taxes. Few able-bodied citizens get help for more than a year at a time and they usually dip into the program only when they lose their jobs or otherwise can’t make ends meet while working. In fact, <a href="http://www.cbpp.org/research/the-relationship-between-snap-and-work-among-low-income-households" type="external">90 percent of adult SNAP recipients with children were employed</a> the year before and the year after obtaining these benefits.</p>
<p>In contrast, many Social Security beneficiaries take out far more than they put in and less frequently continue to work—eventually stopping all employment altogether as they age. According to the Urban Institute, a two-earner couple receiving an average wage—$44,600 per spouse in 2012 dollars—and turning 65 in 2010 would have paid $722,000 into Social Security and Medicare and can be expected to take out $966,000 in benefits.</p>
<p>And with increasing advances in health care, seniors are often paid for a far longer period than the program was initially designed to provide benefits for, resulting in a much higher cost. This is precisely why we continue the national debate over the long-term solvency of Social Security. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/upshot/rich-people-are-living-longer-thats-tilting-social-security-in-their-favor.html" type="external">Elders who live longer</a>—those who, overall, tend to be wealthier and whiter than the population as a whole—benefit the most.</p>
<p>Consequently, while much of the public and many politicians view SNAP as shameful welfare and Social Security as virtuous social insurance, each, in reality, embodies aspects of both. Yet due to these ungrounded beliefs about the programs, as well as a stubborn refusal by political leaders and the public to closely examine the facts, each are managed very differently by the government.</p>
<p>For example, Social Security benefits are easily available through federal offices where application procedures are standardized nationwide. But because of the insistence of Southern segregationists who ran key congressional committees when SNAP was first authorized in the 1960s, federal food assistance is ultimately controlled by states, which are individually able to place added barriers—different in every state—in the way of applicants. That’s why Social Security payments are usually a breeze to obtain and to maintain, while SNAP benefits require an onerous application process (often mandating piles of paperwork and requiring multiple visits to government offices) to get and to keep. As a result, nearly all individuals eligible for Social Security retirement benefits receive them, whereas more than a quarter of those eligible for SNAP benefits fail to do so.</p>
<p>And once families receive SNAP benefits, they are legally prohibited from spending them on diapers, toilet paper, vitamins, feminine hygiene products, or hot, prepared food, even if that food is the same price or cheaper than the alternatives—since hot food has been deemed a “luxury” by policymakers.</p>
<p>It should also be noted that the United States is the only major industrialized nation to run a food voucher program like SNAP. Other nations (which, for the most part, have less hunger than the United States) choose, instead, to trust low-income families with cash payments, which parents can allocate to food, rent, clothing, or other vital needs as they see fit.</p>
<p>And to make matters worse, many states with conservative governors now require unemployed SNAP recipients to attend often-useless job training programs which force aid recipients to take time away from frequently more productive job searches or educational activities.</p>
<p>This desire to micromanage the lives of poor people dates back a very long time. In medieval Europe, “sumptuary laws” were passed to prevent nonroyalty from wearing fancy looking clothing or eating gourmet food that was determined to be “above their station.” Throughout American history, one of the few things that has always seemed to unite wealthy conservatives and upper-middle-class liberals alike has been proclaiming that poor people should behave more virtuously than they themselves do. Some of the most ardent original proponents of alcohol’s prohibition were progressive, mostly upper and upper-middle class women’s rights advocates (who claimed they wanted to reduce domestic violence among low-income households) and reactionary Ku Klux Klan supporters (who wanted to keep booze away from Catholics and blacks).</p>
<p>So it should come as no surprise that key liberals and conservatives have been teaming up to prevent SNAP recipients from buying soda with their benefit cards. Now, if you really press them (and I do), the vast majority of these anti-soda advocates sheepishly admit that they do, occasionally, drink the sweetened beverages—but that they themselves are “responsible enough” to drink it in limited quantities. These champions of abstinence for the poor defend their choices by claiming that their own sugary drink purchases aren’t subsidized by taxpayers. But every soda in America is subsidized, in one way or another, because both sugar and corn syrup receive direct government support, and soda is delivered over government roads and through government ports and airports.</p>
<p>In 2013, when then New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed banning soda in the SNAP program, those same beverages were being given out for free in City Hall, and at events held at Gracie Mansion (where he did not live, but where he officially entertained). The employees at Bloomberg L.P.—the financial media, stock market data, and analysis company he founded and led—were even entitled to unlimited free sodas at work. Although Bloomberg later proposed a citywide ban on oversize sodas, he stopped short of proposing anything more stringent for the general population. Bloomberg’s attempts to more strictly restrict food purchases for SNAP recipients sent the appalling message to low-income New Yorkers that they were uniquely unsuited to making decisions about what is best for their own bodies.</p>
<p>More recently, right-wing Maine Governor Paul R. LePage has tried to essentially blackmail USDA by <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/22/the-governor-just-threatened-to-end-food-stamps-in-maine/" type="external">threatening to cut off SNAP to all 190,000 Maine residents</a> who desperately need them unless USDA agrees to his request to pick and choose what foods people can obtain in the program.</p>
<p>But beyond the philosophical objections to treating poor people differently than everyone else, it is vital to note that banning certain foods from purchase with SNAP dollars would almost certainly not advance the anti-obesity objectives of the scheme’s proponents. This was confirmed by a recent study conducted by <a href="http://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2015-march/restricting-sugar-sweetened-beverages-from-snap-purchases-not-likely-to-lower-consumption.aspx#.VvP1h2f2apq" type="external">the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service</a>.</p>
<p>It is likely that recipients would still use some of their limited non-SNAP food dollars to buy soda. And if you cut Coke from the menu, people with a sweet tooth would just buy other sugar-sweetened products or desserts that are allowed under the plan.</p>
<p>More importantly, there is no evidence that low-income families who receive SNAP benefits shop any less nutritiously than others with similarly low incomes. The problem isn’t that they make poor choices: the problem is that poor people can’t afford to make better choices—or that those healthier choices don’t exist in their neighborhood.</p>
<p>SNAP ban proponents assume that if we just eliminate a few “bad foods” from our diets, we will all be healthier. That’s ridiculous. For all types of people, good nutrition, as well as reaching and maintaining a healthy weight, are also about balance and adopting improved eating and exercise habits from cradle to grave.</p>
<p>A much better approach than banning so-called “bad” foods would be taking far more action to make healthier food affordable and available for struggling families in low-income neighborhoods. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s pilot project to allow some online food retailers to accept SNAP benefits is a step in the right direction, and should be expanded. Another positive development is the Obama Administration’s proposed rule that would require stores accepting SNAP benefits to stock healthier food.</p>
<p>It makes far more sense to expect just a little bit more from the companies that receive big government bucks than to further micromanage the lives of the most vulnerable. Let’s start treating all of our citizens who are able to receive help when they need it most—whether they are retiring seniors or struggling working families—with the respect and dignity they deserve.</p> | true | 4 | todays america fiercely divided ideological differences notable exception left right buy similar myths us social policy particularly evident americansand especially160those economic media elitestend view food stamps known snap benefits versus regard social security snap many believe welfare two terms sometimes even used interchangeably despite evidence uc berkeley study released week nearly half us child care workers require form public assistance snap survive much public accepts fact people get snap dont work dont want work presume recipients never help pay program essentially mooching toogenerous governmental largess even take granted people collect benefits nonwhite fact plurality snap beneficiaries always white conclusion sometimes willfully misinformed individuals reach snap difficult get recipients responsible enough handle benefits willing submit strict micromanagement terms obtain utilize hand americans equate social security payments welfaremost believe citizens pay working life simply access amount money retirement taking back put program using reasoning surprise would hardpressed find american doesnt believe social security payments easy get recipients able spend however likewhether cases soda bigscreen tvs underlying assumptions programs plain wrong people collect snap benefits work almost always lowpaying jobs therefore pay program lifetime paying taxes ablebodied citizens get help year time usually dip program lose jobs otherwise cant make ends meet working fact 90 percent adult snap recipients children employed year year obtaining benefits contrast many social security beneficiaries take far put less frequently continue workeventually stopping employment altogether age according urban institute twoearner couple receiving average wage44600 per spouse 2012 dollarsand turning 65 2010 would paid 722000 social security medicare expected take 966000 benefits increasing advances health care seniors often paid far longer period program initially designed provide benefits resulting much higher cost precisely continue national debate longterm solvency social security elders live longerthose overall tend wealthier whiter population wholebenefit consequently much public many politicians view snap shameful welfare social security virtuous social insurance reality embodies aspects yet due ungrounded beliefs programs well stubborn refusal political leaders public closely examine facts managed differently government example social security benefits easily available federal offices application procedures standardized nationwide insistence southern segregationists ran key congressional committees snap first authorized 1960s federal food assistance ultimately controlled states individually able place added barriersdifferent every statein way applicants thats social security payments usually breeze obtain maintain snap benefits require onerous application process often mandating piles paperwork requiring multiple visits government offices get keep result nearly individuals eligible social security retirement benefits receive whereas quarter eligible snap benefits fail families receive snap benefits legally prohibited spending diapers toilet paper vitamins feminine hygiene products hot prepared food even food price cheaper alternativessince hot food deemed luxury policymakers also noted united states major industrialized nation run food voucher program like snap nations part less hunger united states choose instead trust lowincome families cash payments parents allocate food rent clothing vital needs see fit make matters worse many states conservative governors require unemployed snap recipients attend oftenuseless job training programs force aid recipients take time away frequently productive job searches educational activities desire micromanage lives poor people dates back long time medieval europe sumptuary laws passed prevent nonroyalty wearing fancy looking clothing eating gourmet food determined station throughout american history one things always seemed unite wealthy conservatives uppermiddleclass liberals alike proclaiming poor people behave virtuously ardent original proponents alcohols prohibition progressive mostly upper uppermiddle class womens rights advocates claimed wanted reduce domestic violence among lowincome households reactionary ku klux klan supporters wanted keep booze away catholics blacks come surprise key liberals conservatives teaming prevent snap recipients buying soda benefit cards really press vast majority antisoda advocates sheepishly admit occasionally drink sweetened beveragesbut responsible enough drink limited quantities champions abstinence poor defend choices claiming sugary drink purchases arent subsidized taxpayers every soda america subsidized one way another sugar corn syrup receive direct government support soda delivered government roads government ports airports 2013 new york city mayor michael bloomberg proposed banning soda snap program beverages given free city hall events held gracie mansion live officially entertained employees bloomberg lpthe financial media stock market data analysis company founded ledwere even entitled unlimited free sodas work although bloomberg later proposed citywide ban oversize sodas stopped short proposing anything stringent general population bloombergs attempts strictly restrict food purchases snap recipients sent appalling message lowincome new yorkers uniquely unsuited making decisions best bodies recently rightwing maine governor paul r lepage tried essentially blackmail usda threatening cut snap 190000 maine residents desperately need unless usda agrees request pick choose foods people obtain program beyond philosophical objections treating poor people differently everyone else vital note banning certain foods purchase snap dollars would almost certainly advance antiobesity objectives schemes proponents confirmed recent study conducted us department agricultures economic research service likely recipients would still use limited nonsnap food dollars buy soda cut coke menu people sweet tooth would buy sugarsweetened products desserts allowed plan importantly evidence lowincome families receive snap benefits shop less nutritiously others similarly low incomes problem isnt make poor choices problem poor people cant afford make better choicesor healthier choices dont exist neighborhood snap ban proponents assume eliminate bad foods diets healthier thats ridiculous types people good nutrition well reaching maintaining healthy weight also balance adopting improved eating exercise habits cradle grave much better approach banning socalled bad foods would taking far action make healthier food affordable available struggling families lowincome neighborhoods us department agricultures pilot project allow online food retailers accept snap benefits step right direction expanded another positive development obama administrations proposed rule would require stores accepting snap benefits stock healthier food makes far sense expect little bit companies receive big government bucks micromanage lives vulnerable lets start treating citizens able receive help need mostwhether retiring seniors struggling working familieswith respect dignity deserve | 938 |
<p>Saying this gives me no pleasure, but it needs to be said.&#160; The 13 former confederate states now account for 144 seats in the Congress and 26 seats in the Senate.&#160; That’s a lot of government power for a group of constituents who, 150 years ago, hated the federal government so much they wanted to secede from it and who, arguably, still hate it today.</p>
<p>It wouldn’t matter so much if, instead of a democratic republic, we were ruled by a king or military junta.&#160; If we lived under a non-participatory form of government, people’s ignorance and prejudices, no matter how shriekingly offensive, would do little more than annoy the hell out of us.&#160; Unfortunately, that’s not the case.&#160; Southern voters not only influence important decisions, but given today’s razor-thin pluralities, they more or less control our destiny.&#160; It’s all about the votes.</p>
<p>Before anyone raises their hackles, let’s make two things clear:&#160; First, no one is saying everyone in the South is backward; obviously, there are exceptions.&#160; And, second, ignorant people are found everywhere, even (especially?) in my home state of California, whose voters, on a whim, once recalled a perfectly adequate governor and replaced him with an Austrian-born body-builder who (surprise!) wasn’t up to the job.</p>
<p>But the reason the Deep South so easily trumps the rest of the country in the ignorance and bigotry departments is that these characteristics have not only been crystallized, they’ve been institutionalized.&#160; They’re embedded in the region’s cultural fabric.</p>
<p>There’s some history to this.&#160; Hoping to heal the nation’s wounds (and not be accused of “cultural usurpation”), the federal government, over a century ago, failed in its obligation to hold the South to a higher standard.&#160; It was our fault, not theirs.&#160; In order not to appear vindictive or retaliatory, we unwisely cut them too much slack.&#160; While the rest of the country inched forward socially and culturally, the South was allowed to hang back.</p>
<p>Again, this is all about the votes.&#160; Because the former Confederacy now elects more than one-fourth of the country’s congressmen and senators, our tolerance for “one’s right to one’s opinion” has come back to haunt us.&#160; In fact, at the moment, it’s doing more than haunting us; it’s holding us hostage.</p>
<p>Consider:&#160; They’re backward.&#160; Despite the country’s lowest per capita income, the South hates labor unions.&#160; They reject the one institution capable of raising their standard of living by providing higher wages and better benefits, and they do it because they believe labor collectivism is a form of socialism, and socialism is a form of Satanism.&#160; In other words, they’d rather walk around with four teeth in their mouths than belong to a union dental plan.</p>
<p>Even the Asians realize the American South is culturally backward.&#160; Yes, word of Dixie’s unique individualism has reached all the way to corporate headquarters in Tokyo.&#160; It’s not by accident that Nissan, Honda and Toyota are falling over themselves building new plants down there, lured by lucrative subsidies and virulent anti-unionism.</p>
<p>Consider:&#160; They’re ignorant.&#160; They’re not only openly anti-progressive and anti-intellectual, they’re proud of it.&#160; They boast of it.&#160; Which is why some of their schools teach Creationism and Intelligent Design.&#160; Not in a church school, mind you, not in a World History class or an after-school program, but in their public school science classes.</p>
<p>Consider:&#160; They’re hypocrites.&#160; The same people who, barely 50 years ago, attacked little black girls on their way to desegregated schools, and made a practice of lynching Negroes, are the same ones who piously profess love for Jesus Christ.&#160; No region of the United States waves the flag more, invokes the name of God more, or has more churches per square inch than Dixie.</p>
<p>Consider:&#160; They’re squirrelly.&#160; Even though the South promotes this image of gentility and rock-ribbed American family values, the Bible Belt pretty much leads the nation in divorces, teen pregnancies, high school dropouts, and venereal disease.&#160; If you don’t believe it, look it up on Google.&#160; These salt-of-earth folks are, in fact, recklessly anti-family.&#160; Shocking.</p>
<p>Ridiculing Southerners used to be fun.&#160; In a goofy, Boss Hogg, Lil’ Abner sort of way, “redneck jokes” seemed to make sense.&#160; But because the South now calls the shots on so many critical issues—health care, military spending, immigration, foreign policy, climate change, renewable energy—we no longer have the luxury of amused condescension.&#160; It’s all about the votes.</p>
<p>Are we being unfair?&#160; Is it only the South that’s repulsive?&#160; Aren’t “elite” Eastern liberals equally annoying in their smug certitude?&#160; Of course they are.&#160; In fact, I would go so far as to say that pompous, holier-than-thou liberals are, on a personal level, even more obnoxious than the average down-home Southerner you’re apt to meet.&#160; But at least these “elitists” are educated, know how to use a condom, and don’t hate Europe.</p>
<p>In any event, we can no longer afford having our most backward citizens make our most important decisions.&#160; The stakes are simply too high.&#160; That’s why we should let the South go its own way.&#160; If they still wish to secede, so be it.&#160; We should let ‘em do it.&#160; At the very least, Florida would no longer be a “swing state.”</p>
<p>DAVID MACARAY, an LA playwright and author (“It’s Never Been Easy:&#160; Essays on Modern Labor”), was a former union rep. &#160; He is a contributor to&#160; <a href="" type="internal">Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion</a>, published by AK Press. Hopeless is also available in a&#160; <a href="" type="internal">Kindle edition</a>. He can be reached at&#160; <a href="mailto:dmacaray@earthlink.net" type="external">dmacaray@earthlink.net</a></p>
<p>COMING IN SEPTEMBER</p>
<p>A Special Memorial Issue of CounterPunch</p>
<p>Featuring recollections of Alexander Cockburn from Jeffrey St. Clair, Peter Linebaugh, Paul Craig Roberts, Noam Chomsky, Mike Whitney, Doug Peacock, Perry Anderson, Becky Grant, Dennis Kucinich, Michael Neumann, Susannah Hecht, P. Sainath, Ben Tripp, Alison Weir, James Ridgeway, JoAnn Wypijewski, John Strausbaugh, Pierre Sprey, Carolyn Cooke, Conn Hallinan, James Wolcott, Laura Flanders, Ken Silverstein, Tariq Ali and many others …</p>
<p><a href="http://www.easycartsecure.com/CounterPunch/Annual_Subscriptions.html" type="external">Subscribe to CounterPunch Today to Reserve Your Copy</a></p> | true | 4 | saying gives pleasure needs said160 13 former confederate states account 144 seats congress 26 seats senate160 thats lot government power group constituents 150 years ago hated federal government much wanted secede arguably still hate today wouldnt matter much instead democratic republic ruled king military junta160 lived nonparticipatory form government peoples ignorance prejudices matter shriekingly offensive would little annoy hell us160 unfortunately thats case160 southern voters influence important decisions given todays razorthin pluralities less control destiny160 votes anyone raises hackles lets make two things clear160 first one saying everyone south backward obviously exceptions160 second ignorant people found everywhere even especially home state california whose voters whim recalled perfectly adequate governor replaced austrianborn bodybuilder surprise wasnt job reason deep south easily trumps rest country ignorance bigotry departments characteristics crystallized theyve institutionalized160 theyre embedded regions cultural fabric theres history this160 hoping heal nations wounds accused cultural usurpation federal government century ago failed obligation hold south higher standard160 fault theirs160 order appear vindictive retaliatory unwisely cut much slack160 rest country inched forward socially culturally south allowed hang back votes160 former confederacy elects onefourth countrys congressmen senators tolerance ones right ones opinion come back haunt us160 fact moment haunting us holding us hostage consider160 theyre backward160 despite countrys lowest per capita income south hates labor unions160 reject one institution capable raising standard living providing higher wages better benefits believe labor collectivism form socialism socialism form satanism160 words theyd rather walk around four teeth mouths belong union dental plan even asians realize american south culturally backward160 yes word dixies unique individualism reached way corporate headquarters tokyo160 accident nissan honda toyota falling building new plants lured lucrative subsidies virulent antiunionism consider160 theyre ignorant160 theyre openly antiprogressive antiintellectual theyre proud it160 boast it160 schools teach creationism intelligent design160 church school mind world history class afterschool program public school science classes consider160 theyre hypocrites160 people barely 50 years ago attacked little black girls way desegregated schools made practice lynching negroes ones piously profess love jesus christ160 region united states waves flag invokes name god churches per square inch dixie consider160 theyre squirrelly160 even though south promotes image gentility rockribbed american family values bible belt pretty much leads nation divorces teen pregnancies high school dropouts venereal disease160 dont believe look google160 saltofearth folks fact recklessly antifamily160 shocking ridiculing southerners used fun160 goofy boss hogg lil abner sort way redneck jokes seemed make sense160 south calls shots many critical issueshealth care military spending immigration foreign policy climate change renewable energywe longer luxury amused condescension160 votes unfair160 south thats repulsive160 arent elite eastern liberals equally annoying smug certitude160 course are160 fact would go far say pompous holierthanthou liberals personal level even obnoxious average downhome southerner youre apt meet160 least elitists educated know use condom dont hate europe event longer afford backward citizens make important decisions160 stakes simply high160 thats let south go way160 still wish secede it160 let em it160 least florida would longer swing state david macaray la playwright author never easy160 essays modern labor former union rep 160 contributor to160 hopeless barack obama politics illusion published ak press hopeless also available a160 kindle edition reached at160 dmacarayearthlinknet coming september special memorial issue counterpunch featuring recollections alexander cockburn jeffrey st clair peter linebaugh paul craig roberts noam chomsky mike whitney doug peacock perry anderson becky grant dennis kucinich michael neumann susannah hecht p sainath ben tripp alison weir james ridgeway joann wypijewski john strausbaugh pierre sprey carolyn cooke conn hallinan james wolcott laura flanders ken silverstein tariq ali many others subscribe counterpunch today reserve copy | 584 |
<p>Yang Lei/Xinhua/ZUMA</p>
<p>This <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175850/" type="external">story</a> first appeared on the <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/" type="external">TomDispatch</a> website.</p>
<p>It was a key match in the World Cup of Ideas. The teams vied furiously for the ball. The all-star feminist team tried repeatedly to kick it through the goalposts marked Widespread Social Problems, while the opposing team, staffed by the mainstream media and mainstream dudes, was intent on getting it into the usual net called Isolated Event. To keep the ball out of his net, the mainstream’s goalie shouted “mental illness” again and again. That “ball,” of course, was the meaning of the massacre of students in Isla Vista, California, by one of their peers.</p>
<p>All weekend the struggle to define his acts raged. Voices in the mainstream insisted he was mentally ill, as though that settled it, as though the world were divided into two countries called Sane and Crazy that share neither border crossings nor a culture. Mental illness is, however, more often a matter of degree, not kind, and a great many people who suffer it are gentle and compassionate. And by many measures, including injustice, insatiable greed, and ecological destruction, madness, like meanness, is central to our society, not simply at its edges.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com" type="external" /></p>
<p>In a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/opinion/luhrmann-the-violence-in-our-heads.html" type="external">fascinating op-ed piece</a> last year, T.M. Luhrmann noted that when schizophrenics hear voices in India, they’re more likely to be told to clean the house, while Americans are more likely to be told to become violent. Culture matters. Or as my friend, the criminal-defense investigator who knows insanity and violence intimately, put it, “When one begins to lose touch with reality, the ill brain latches obsessively and delusionally onto whatever it’s immersed in—the surrounding culture’s illness.”</p>
<p>The murderer at Isla Vista was also repeatedly called “aberrant,” as if to emphasize that he was nothing like the rest of us. But other versions of such violence are all around us, most notably in the pandemic of hate toward and violence against women.&#160;</p>
<p>In the end, this struggle over the meaning of one man’s killing spree may prove to be a watershed moment in the history of feminism, which always has been and still is in a struggle to name and define, to speak and be heard. “The battle of the story” the Center for Story-Based Strategy calls it, because you win or lose your struggle in large part through the language and narrative you use.</p>
<p>As media critic Jennifer Pozner <a href="http://www.wimnonline.org/WIMNsVoicesBlog/2010/06/08/will-media-report-fl-shooting-as-gender-based-hate-crime/" type="external">put it</a> in 2010 about another massacre by a woman-hating man,</p>
<p>I am sick to death that I have to keep writing some version of this same article or blog post on loop. But I have to, because in all of these cases, gender-based violence lies at the heart of these crimes—and leaving this motivating factor uninvestigated not only deprives the public of the full, accurate picture of the events at hand, but leaves us without the analysis and context needed to understand the violence, recognize warning signs, and take steps to prevent similar massacres in the future.”</p>
<p>The Isla Vista murderer took out men as well as women, but blowing away members of a sorority seems to have been the goal of his rampage. He evidently interpreted his lack of sexual access to women as offensive behavior by women who, he imagined in a <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/27/your-princess-is-in-another-castle-misogyny-entitlement-and-nerds.html?utm_content=buffer53ef3&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_source=twitter.com&amp;utm_campaign=buffer" type="external">sad mix</a> of entitlement and self-pity, owed him fulfillment. &#160;</p>
<p>#YesAllWomen</p>
<p>Richard Martinez, the father of one of the young victims, <a href="http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2014/05/27/richard-martinez-remembers-his-son-killed-in-isla-vista-and-calls-for-action/" type="external">spoke powerfully</a> on national TV about gun control and the spinelessness of the politicians who have caved to the gun lobby, as well as about the broader causes of such devastation. A public defender in Santa Barbara County, he has for decades dealt with violence against women, gun users, and mental illness, as does everyone in his field. He and Christopher Michaels-Martinez’s mother, a deputy district attorney, knew the territory intimately before they lost their only child. The bloodbath was indeed about guns and <a href="http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/patterns-mass-shootings-conversation-men/" type="external">toxic versions</a> of <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/05/24/elliot_rodger_the_pick_up_artist_community_s_predictable_horrible_response.html" type="external">masculinity and entitlement</a>, and also about misery, <a href="http://bangordailynews.com/2014/05/28/opinion/american-murder-the-hollywood-ending-that-nobody-acknowledges/" type="external">cliché, and action-movie</a> solutions to emotional problems. It was, above all, about the hatred of women.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/1608463869/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20" type="external" />According to <a href="http://mashable.com/2014/05/26/yesallwomen-hashtag/#:eyJzIjoidCIsImkiOiJfa3Z0YWFnemoxdmVxbzlxbCJ9" type="external">one account</a> of the feminist conversation that followed, a young woman with the online name Kaye (who has since been harassed or intimidated into withdrawing from the public conversation) decided to start tweeting with the hashtag #YesAllWomen at some point that Saturday after the massacre. By Sunday night, half a million #yesallwomen tweets had appeared around the world, as though a dam had burst. And perhaps it had. The phrase described the hells and terrors women face and specifically critiqued a <a href="http://time.com/79357/not-all-men-a-brief-history-of-every-dudes-favorite-argument/" type="external">stock male response</a> when women talked about their oppression: “ <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/05/27/not_all_men_how_discussing_women_s_issues_gets_derailed.html" type="external">Not all men</a>.”</p>
<p>It’s the way some men say, “I’m not the problem” or that they shifted the conversation from actual corpses and victims as well as perpetrators to protecting the comfort level of bystander males. An exasperated woman remarked to me, “What do they want—a cookie for not hitting, raping, or threatening women?” Women are afraid of being raped and murdered all the time and sometimes that’s more important to talk about than protecting male comfort levels. Or as someone named Jenny Chiu tweeted, “Sure <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NotAllMen?src=hash" type="external">#NotAllMen</a> are misogynists and rapists. That’s not the point. The point is that <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/YesAllWomen?src=hash" type="external">#YesAllWomen</a> live in fear of the ones that are.”</p>
<p>Women—and men (but mostly women)—said scathing things brilliantly.</p>
<p>—#YesAllWomen because I can’t tweet about feminism without getting threats and perverted replies. Speaking out shouldn’t scare me.</p>
<p>— #YesAllWomen because I’ve seen more men angry at the hashtag rather than angry at the things happening to women.</p>
<p>— #YesAllWomen because if you’re too nice to them you’re “leading them on” &amp; if you’re too rude you risk violence. Either way you’re a bitch.</p>
<p>It was a shining media moment, a vast conversation across all media, including millions of participants on Facebook and Twitter—which is significant since <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/witw/articles/2013/09/05/my-run-in-with-anti-feminist-twitter-death-threats.html" type="external">Twitter</a> has been a favorite means of delivering <a href="http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/women-arent-welcome-internet-72170/" type="external">rape and death threats</a> to outspoken women. As Astra Taylor has pointed out in her new book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/0805093567/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20" type="external">The People’s Platform</a>, the language of free speech is used to protect hate speech, itself an attempt to deprive others of their freedom of speech, to scare them into shutting up.</p>
<p>Laurie Penny, one of the important feminist voices of our times, wrote,</p>
<p>“When news of the murders broke, when the digital world began to absorb and discuss its meaning, I had been about to email my editor to request a few days off, because the impact of some particularly horrendous rape threats had left me shaken, and I needed time to collect my thoughts. Instead of taking that time, I am writing this blog, and I am doing so in rage and in grief—not just for the victims of the Isla Vista massacre, but for what is being lost everywhere as the language and ideology of the new misogyny continues to be excused… I am sick of being told to empathize with the perpetrators of violence any time I try to talk about the victims and survivors.” &#160;</p>
<p>Our Words Are Our Weapons</p>
<p>In 1963, Betty Friedan published a landmark book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/0393322572/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20" type="external">The Feminine Mystique</a>, in which she wrote, “The problem that has no name—which is simply the fact that American women are kept from growing to their full human capacities—is taking a far greater toll on the physical and mental health of our country than any known disease.” In the years that followed, that problem gained several names: male chauvinism, then sexism, misogyny, inequality, and oppression. The cure was to be “women’s liberation,” or “women’s lib,” or “feminism.” These words, which might seem worn out from use now, were fresh then.</p>
<p>Since Friedan’s manifesto, feminism has proceeded in part by naming things. The term “ <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_harassment#Coining_the_term_and_history" type="external">sexual harassment</a>,” for example, was coined in the 1970s, first used in the legal system in the 1980s, given legal status by the Supreme Court in 1986, and given widespread coverage in the upheaval after Anita Hill’s <a href="http://gos.sbc.edu/h/hill.html" type="external">testimony</a> against her former boss, Clarence Thomas, in the 1991 Senate hearings on his Supreme Court nomination. The all-male interrogation team patronized and bullied Hill, while many men in the Senate and elsewhere failed to grasp why it mattered if your boss said lecherous things and demanded sexual services. Or they just denied that such things happen.</p>
<p>Many women were outraged. It was, like the post-Isla Vista weekend, a watershed moment in which the conversation changed, in which those who got it pushed hard on those who didn’t, opening some minds and updating some ideas. The bumper sticker “I Believe You Anita” was widespread for a while. Sexual harassment is now considerably less common in workplaces and schools, and its victims have far more recourse, thanks in part to <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-03-21/new-anita-hill-film-recalls-when-the-us-first-met-sexual-harassment" type="external">Hill’s brave testimony</a> and the earthquake that followed.</p>
<p>So many of the words with which a woman’s right to exist is adjudicated are of recent coinage: “domestic violence,” for example, replaced “wife-beating” as the law began to take a (mild) interest in the subject. A woman is still beaten <a href="http://www.padv.org/documents/Statistics_DV.pdf" type="external">every nine seconds</a> in this country, but thanks to the <a href="http://www.vawnet.org/domestic-violence/DVPreventionTimeline/" type="external">heroic feminist campaigns</a> of the 1970s and 1980s, she now has access to legal remedies that occasionally work, occasionally protect her, and—even more occasionally—send her abuser to jail. In 1990, the Journal of the American Medical Association <a href="http://www.padv.org/documents/DVFactSheet.pdf" type="external">reported</a>, “Studies of the Surgeon General’s office reveal that <a href="http://www.guernicamag.com/features/it-will-look-like-a-sunset/" type="external">domestic violence</a> is the leading cause of injury to women between the ages of 15 and 44, more common than automobile accidents, muggings, and cancer deaths combined.”&#160;</p>
<p>I go to check this fact and arrive at an Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence <a href="http://www.icadvinc.org/what-is-domestic-violence/history-of-battered-womens-movement/" type="external">website</a> that warns viewers their browsing history might be monitored at home and offers a domestic-violence hotline number. The site is informing women that their abusers may punish them for seeking information or naming their situation. It’s like that out there.</p>
<p>One of the more shocking things I read recently was an <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/179250/missing-story" type="external">essay</a> in the Nation about the infamous slaying of Catherine “Kitty” Genovese in a neighborhood in Queens, New York, in 1964. The author, Peter Baker, reminds us that some of the neighbors who witnessed parts of her rape and murder from their windows likely mistook the savage assault by a stranger for a man exercising his rights over “his” woman. “Surely it matters that, at the time, violence inflicted by a man on his wife or romantic partner was widely considered a private affair. Surely it matters that, in the eyes of the law as it stood in 1964, it was impossible for a man to rape his wife.”</p>
<p>Terms like acquaintance rape, date rape, and <a href="http://www.law.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/files/hasday41.pdf" type="external">marital rape</a> had yet to be invented. &#160;</p>
<p>Twenty-First Century Words</p>
<p>I apparently had something to do with the birth of the word “mansplaining,” though I didn’t coin it myself. My 2008 essay “Men Explain Things to Me” (now the title piece in <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/1608463869/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20" type="external">my new book</a> about gender and power) is often credited with inspiring the pseudonymous person who did coin it <a href="http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/mansplaining" type="external">on a blog</a> shortly thereafter.&#160; From there, it began to spread.</p>
<p>For a long time, I was squeamish about the term, because it seemed to imply that men in general were flawed rather than that particular specimens were prone to explain things they didn’t understand to women who already did. Until this spring, that is, when a young PhD candidate at the University of California, Berkeley, told me that the word allowed women to identify another “problem with no name,” something that often happened but was hard to talk about until the term arose.</p>
<p>Language is power. When you turn “torture” into “enhanced interrogation,” or murdered children into “collateral damage,” you break the power of language to convey meaning, to make us see, feel, and care. But it works both ways. You can use the power of words to bury meaning or to excavate it. &#160;If you lack words for a phenomenon, an emotion, a situation, you can’t talk about it, which means that you can’t come together to address it, let alone change it. Vernacular phrases—Catch-22, monkeywrenching, cyberbullying, the 99% and the 1%—have helped us to describe but also to reshape our world. This may be particularly true of feminism, a movement focused on giving voice to the voiceless and power to the powerless.</p>
<p>One of the compelling new phrases of our time is “rape culture.” The term came into widespread circulation in late 2012 when sexual assaults in New Delhi, India, and Steubenville, Ohio, became major news stories. As a particularly strongly worded <a href="http://www.marshall.edu/wcenter/sexual-assault/rape-culture/" type="external">definition</a> puts it:</p>
<p>“Rape culture is an environment in which rape is prevalent and in which sexual violence against women is normalized and excused in the media and popular culture. Rape culture is perpetuated through the use of misogynistic language, the objectification of women’s bodies, and the glamorization of sexual violence, thereby creating a society that disregards women’s rights and safety. Rape culture affects every woman. Most women and girls limit their behavior because of the existence of rape. Most women and girls live in fear of rape. Men, in general, do not. That’s how rape functions as a powerful means by which the whole female population is held in a subordinate position to the whole male population, even though many men don’t rape, and many women are never victims of rape.”</p>
<p>Sometimes I’ve heard “rape culture” used to describe specifically what’s called “ <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10657789/Sexist-lad-culture-can-British-universities-ever-get-rid-of-it.html" type="external">lad culture</a>“—the jeering, leering subculture in which some young men are lodged. Other times it’s used to indict the mainstream, which oozes with misogyny in its entertainment, its everyday inequalities, its legal loopholes. The term helped us stop pretending that rapes are anomalies, that they have nothing to do with the culture at large or are even antithetical to its values. If they were, <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf" type="external">a fifth</a> of all American women (and one in 71 men) wouldn’t be rape survivors; if they were, 19% of female college students wouldn’t have to cope with sexual assault; if they were, the military wouldn’t be stumbling through an epidemic of sexual violence. The term rape culture lets us begin to address the roots of the problem in the culture as a whole.</p>
<p>The term “ <a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/10/24/5_ways_sexual_assault_is_really_about_entitlement/" type="external">sexual entitlement</a>” was used in 2012 in reference to sexual assaults by <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/boston-university-ice-hockey-teams-sexual-entitlement-culture/story?id=17171271" type="external">Boston University’s hockey team</a>, though you can find earlier uses of the phrase. I first heard it in 2013 in a <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/health-24021573" type="external">BBC report</a> on a study of rape in Asia. The study concluded that in many cases the motive for rape was the idea that a man has the right to have sex with a woman regardless of her desires. In other words, his rights trump hers, or she has none. This sense of being owed sex is <a href="http://whenwomenrefuse.tumblr.com" type="external">everywhere</a>. Many women are told, as was I in my youth, that something we did or said or wore or just the way we looked or the fact that we were female had excited desires we were thereby contractually obliged to satisfy. We owed them. They had a right. To us.</p>
<p>Male fury at not having emotional and sexual needs met is far too common, as is the idea that you can rape or punish one woman to get even for what other women have done or not done. A teenager was <a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/04/26/milford-teens-mourn-classmate-friend-killed-hours-before-junior-prom/" type="external">stabbed to death</a> for turning down a boy’s invitation to go to the prom this spring; a 45-year-old mother of two was <a href="http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/warren-county/express-times/index.ssf/2014/05/washington_murder_should_serve.html" type="external">murdered</a> May 14th for trying to “distance herself” from a man she was dating; the same night as the Isla Vista shootings, a California man <a href="http://www.policymic.com/articles/89937/just-hours-after-the-ucsb-shooting-another-violent-act-of-misogyny-occurred-in-california" type="external">shot at</a> women who declined sex. After the killings in Isla Vista, the term “sexual entitlement” was suddenly everywhere, and blogs and commentary and conversations began to address it with brilliance and fury. I think that May 2014 marks the entry of the phrase into everyday speech. It will help people identify and discredit manifestations of this phenomenon. It will help change things. Words matter. &#160;</p>
<p>Crimes, Small and Large</p>
<p>The 22-year-old who, on May 23rd, murdered six of his peers and attempted to kill many more before taking his own life framed his unhappiness as due to others’ failings rather than his own and vowed to punish the young women who, he believed, had rejected him. In fact, he already had done so, repeatedly, with minor acts of violence that foreshadowed his final outburst. In his long, sad autobiographical rant, he recounts that his first week in college,</p>
<p>“I saw two hot blonde girls waiting at the bus stop. I was dressed in one of my nice shirts, so I looked at them and smiled. They looked at me, but they didn’t even deign to smile back. They just looked away as if I was a fool. In a rage, I made a U-turn, pulled up to their bus stop and splashed my Starbucks latte all over them. I felt a feeling [of] spiteful satisfaction as I saw it stain their jeans. How dare those girls snub me in such a fashion! How dare they insult me so! I raged to myself repeatedly. They deserved the punishment I gave them. It was such a pity that my latte wasn’t hot enough to burn them. Those girls deserved to be dumped in boiling water for the crime of not giving me the attention and adoration I so rightfully deserve!”</p>
<p>Domestic violence, mansplaining, rape culture, and sexual entitlement are among the linguistic tools that redefine the world many women encounter daily and open the way to begin to change it.</p>
<p>The nineteenth-century geologist and survey director Clarence King and twentieth-century biologists have used the term “punctuated equilibrium” to describe a pattern of change that involves slow, quiet periods of relative stasis interrupted by turbulent intervals. The history of feminism is one of punctuated equilibriums in which our conversations about the nature of the world we live in, under the pressure of unexpected events, suddenly lurch forward. It’s then that we change the story.</p>
<p>I think we are in such a crisis of opportunity now, as not one miserable, murderous young man but the whole construct in which we live is brought into question. On that Friday in Isla Vista, our equilibrium was disrupted, and like an earthquake releasing tension between tectonic plates, the realms of gender shifted a little. They shifted not because of the massacre, but because millions came together in a vast conversational network to share experiences, revisit meanings and definitions, and arrive at new understandings. At the memorials across California, people held up candles; in this conversation people held up ideas, words, and stories that also shone in the darkness. Maybe this change will grow, will last, will matter, and will be a lasting memorial to the victims.</p>
<p>Six years ago, when I sat down and wrote the essay “Men Explain Things to Me,” here’s what surprised me: though I began with a ridiculous example of being patronized by a man, I ended with rapes and murders. We tend to treat violence and the abuse of power as though they fit into airtight categories: harassment, intimidation, threat, battery, rape, murder. But I realize now that what I was saying is: it’s a slippery slope. That’s why we need to address that slope, rather than compartmentalizing the varieties of misogyny and dealing with each separately. Doing so has meant fragmenting the picture, seeing the parts, not the whole.</p>
<p>A man acts on the belief that you have no right to speak and that you don’t get to define what’s going on. That could just mean cutting you off at the dinner table or the conference. It could also mean telling you to shut up, or threatening you if you open your mouth, or beating you for speaking, or killing you to silence you forever. He could be your husband, your father, your boss or editor, or the stranger at some meeting or on the train, or the guy you’ve never seen who’s mad at someone else but thinks “women” is a small enough category that you can stand in for “her.” He’s there to tell you that you have no rights.</p>
<p>Threats often precede acts, which is why the targets of online rape and death threats take them seriously, even though the sites that allow them and the law enforcement officials that generally ignore them apparently do not. Quite a lot of women are murdered after leaving a boyfriend or husband who believes he owns her and that she has no right to self-determination. &#160;</p>
<p>Despite this dismal subject matter, I’m impressed with the powers feminism has flexed of late. Watching Amanda Hess, Jessica Valenti, Soraya Chemaly, Laurie Penny, Amanda Marcotte, Jennifer Pozner, and other younger feminists swing into action the weekend after the Rodgers killing spree was thrilling, and the sudden explosion of #YesAllWomen tweets, astonishing. The many men who spoke up thoughtfully were heartening. More and more men are actively engaged instead of just being Not All Men bystanders.</p>
<p>You could see once-radical ideas blooming in the mainstream media. You could see our arguments and whole new ways of framing the world gaining ground and adherents. Maybe we had all just grown unbearably weary of the defense of unregulated guns after <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/02/13/at-least-44-school-shootings-since-newtown-new-analysis/" type="external">more than 40</a> school shootings since Sandy Hook Elementary School in December 2012, of the wages of macho fantasies of control and revenge, of the hatred of women.</p>
<p>If you look back to Betty Friedan’s “problem that has no name,” you see a world that was profoundly different from the one we now live in, one in which women had far fewer rights and far less voice. Back then, arguing that women should be equal was a marginal position; now arguing that we should not be is marginal in this part of the world and the law is mostly on our side. The struggle has been and will be long and harsh and sometimes ugly, and the backlash against feminism remains savage, strong, and omnipresent, but it is not winning. The world has changed profoundly, it needs to change far more—and on that weekend of mourning and introspection and conversation just passed, you could see change happen.</p>
<p>Rebecca Solnit’s new <a href="http://www.bookweb.org/sites/default/wp-content/uploads/regional_bestseller/140528sc.txt" type="external">bestselling</a> book of essays on women, power, and violence, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/1608463869/ref=nosim/?tag=tomdispatch-20" type="external">Men Explain Things to Me</a> (Dispatch Books, Haymarket Books), has just been published. Its title comes from <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175584/rebecca_solnit_the_archipelago_of_ignorance" type="external">the essay</a> (now updated) that Solnit posted at <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/" type="external">TomDispatch</a> in 2008, and which has been making the rounds ever since. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com <a href="http://tomdispatch.us2.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=6cb39ff0b1f670c349f828c73&amp;id=1e41682ade" type="external">here</a>.</p> | true | 4 | yang leixinhuazuma story first appeared tomdispatch website key match world cup ideas teams vied furiously ball allstar feminist team tried repeatedly kick goalposts marked widespread social problems opposing team staffed mainstream media mainstream dudes intent getting usual net called isolated event keep ball net mainstreams goalie shouted mental illness ball course meaning massacre students isla vista california one peers weekend struggle define acts raged voices mainstream insisted mentally ill though settled though world divided two countries called sane crazy share neither border crossings culture mental illness however often matter degree kind great many people suffer gentle compassionate many measures including injustice insatiable greed ecological destruction madness like meanness central society simply edges fascinating oped piece last year tm luhrmann noted schizophrenics hear voices india theyre likely told clean house americans likely told become violent culture matters friend criminaldefense investigator knows insanity violence intimately put one begins lose touch reality ill brain latches obsessively delusionally onto whatever immersed inthe surrounding cultures illness murderer isla vista also repeatedly called aberrant emphasize nothing like rest us versions violence around us notably pandemic hate toward violence women160 end struggle meaning one mans killing spree may prove watershed moment history feminism always still struggle name define speak heard battle story center storybased strategy calls win lose struggle large part language narrative use media critic jennifer pozner put 2010 another massacre womanhating man sick death keep writing version article blog post loop cases genderbased violence lies heart crimesand leaving motivating factor uninvestigated deprives public full accurate picture events hand leaves us without analysis context needed understand violence recognize warning signs take steps prevent similar massacres future isla vista murderer took men well women blowing away members sorority seems goal rampage evidently interpreted lack sexual access women offensive behavior women imagined sad mix entitlement selfpity owed fulfillment 160 yesallwomen richard martinez father one young victims spoke powerfully national tv gun control spinelessness politicians caved gun lobby well broader causes devastation public defender santa barbara county decades dealt violence women gun users mental illness everyone field christopher michaelsmartinezs mother deputy district attorney knew territory intimately lost child bloodbath indeed guns toxic versions masculinity entitlement also misery cliché actionmovie solutions emotional problems hatred women according one account feminist conversation followed young woman online name kaye since harassed intimidated withdrawing public conversation decided start tweeting hashtag yesallwomen point saturday massacre sunday night half million yesallwomen tweets appeared around world though dam burst perhaps phrase described hells terrors women face specifically critiqued stock male response women talked oppression men way men say im problem shifted conversation actual corpses victims well perpetrators protecting comfort level bystander males exasperated woman remarked wanta cookie hitting raping threatening women women afraid raped murdered time sometimes thats important talk protecting male comfort levels someone named jenny chiu tweeted sure notallmen misogynists rapists thats point point yesallwomen live fear ones womenand men mostly womensaid scathing things brilliantly yesallwomen cant tweet feminism without getting threats perverted replies speaking shouldnt scare yesallwomen ive seen men angry hashtag rather angry things happening women yesallwomen youre nice youre leading amp youre rude risk violence either way youre bitch shining media moment vast conversation across media including millions participants facebook twitterwhich significant since twitter favorite means delivering rape death threats outspoken women astra taylor pointed new book peoples platform language free speech used protect hate speech attempt deprive others freedom speech scare shutting laurie penny one important feminist voices times wrote news murders broke digital world began absorb discuss meaning email editor request days impact particularly horrendous rape threats left shaken needed time collect thoughts instead taking time writing blog rage griefnot victims isla vista massacre lost everywhere language ideology new misogyny continues excused sick told empathize perpetrators violence time try talk victims survivors 160 words weapons 1963 betty friedan published landmark book feminine mystique wrote problem namewhich simply fact american women kept growing full human capacitiesis taking far greater toll physical mental health country known disease years followed problem gained several names male chauvinism sexism misogyny inequality oppression cure womens liberation womens lib feminism words might seem worn use fresh since friedans manifesto feminism proceeded part naming things term sexual harassment example coined 1970s first used legal system 1980s given legal status supreme court 1986 given widespread coverage upheaval anita hills testimony former boss clarence thomas 1991 senate hearings supreme court nomination allmale interrogation team patronized bullied hill many men senate elsewhere failed grasp mattered boss said lecherous things demanded sexual services denied things happen many women outraged like postisla vista weekend watershed moment conversation changed got pushed hard didnt opening minds updating ideas bumper sticker believe anita widespread sexual harassment considerably less common workplaces schools victims far recourse thanks part hills brave testimony earthquake followed many words womans right exist adjudicated recent coinage domestic violence example replaced wifebeating law began take mild interest subject woman still beaten every nine seconds country thanks heroic feminist campaigns 1970s 1980s access legal remedies occasionally work occasionally protect andeven occasionallysend abuser jail 1990 journal american medical association reported studies surgeon generals office reveal domestic violence leading cause injury women ages 15 44 common automobile accidents muggings cancer deaths combined160 go check fact arrive indiana coalition domestic violence website warns viewers browsing history might monitored home offers domesticviolence hotline number site informing women abusers may punish seeking information naming situation like one shocking things read recently essay nation infamous slaying catherine kitty genovese neighborhood queens new york 1964 author peter baker reminds us neighbors witnessed parts rape murder windows likely mistook savage assault stranger man exercising rights woman surely matters time violence inflicted man wife romantic partner widely considered private affair surely matters eyes law stood 1964 impossible man rape wife terms like acquaintance rape date rape marital rape yet invented 160 twentyfirst century words apparently something birth word mansplaining though didnt coin 2008 essay men explain things title piece new book gender power often credited inspiring pseudonymous person coin blog shortly thereafter160 began spread long time squeamish term seemed imply men general flawed rather particular specimens prone explain things didnt understand women already spring young phd candidate university california berkeley told word allowed women identify another problem name something often happened hard talk term arose language power turn torture enhanced interrogation murdered children collateral damage break power language convey meaning make us see feel care works ways use power words bury meaning excavate 160if lack words phenomenon emotion situation cant talk means cant come together address let alone change vernacular phrasescatch22 monkeywrenching cyberbullying 99 1have helped us describe also reshape world may particularly true feminism movement focused giving voice voiceless power powerless one compelling new phrases time rape culture term came widespread circulation late 2012 sexual assaults new delhi india steubenville ohio became major news stories particularly strongly worded definition puts rape culture environment rape prevalent sexual violence women normalized excused media popular culture rape culture perpetuated use misogynistic language objectification womens bodies glamorization sexual violence thereby creating society disregards womens rights safety rape culture affects every woman women girls limit behavior existence rape women girls live fear rape men general thats rape functions powerful means whole female population held subordinate position whole male population even though many men dont rape many women never victims rape sometimes ive heard rape culture used describe specifically whats called lad culturethe jeering leering subculture young men lodged times used indict mainstream oozes misogyny entertainment everyday inequalities legal loopholes term helped us stop pretending rapes anomalies nothing culture large even antithetical values fifth american women one 71 men wouldnt rape survivors 19 female college students wouldnt cope sexual assault military wouldnt stumbling epidemic sexual violence term rape culture lets us begin address roots problem culture whole term sexual entitlement used 2012 reference sexual assaults boston universitys hockey team though find earlier uses phrase first heard 2013 bbc report study rape asia study concluded many cases motive rape idea man right sex woman regardless desires words rights trump none sense owed sex everywhere many women told youth something said wore way looked fact female excited desires thereby contractually obliged satisfy owed right us male fury emotional sexual needs met far common idea rape punish one woman get even women done done teenager stabbed death turning boys invitation go prom spring 45yearold mother two murdered may 14th trying distance man dating night isla vista shootings california man shot women declined sex killings isla vista term sexual entitlement suddenly everywhere blogs commentary conversations began address brilliance fury think may 2014 marks entry phrase everyday speech help people identify discredit manifestations phenomenon help change things words matter 160 crimes small large 22yearold may 23rd murdered six peers attempted kill many taking life framed unhappiness due others failings rather vowed punish young women believed rejected fact already done repeatedly minor acts violence foreshadowed final outburst long sad autobiographical rant recounts first week college saw two hot blonde girls waiting bus stop dressed one nice shirts looked smiled looked didnt even deign smile back looked away fool rage made uturn pulled bus stop splashed starbucks latte felt feeling spiteful satisfaction saw stain jeans dare girls snub fashion dare insult raged repeatedly deserved punishment gave pity latte wasnt hot enough burn girls deserved dumped boiling water crime giving attention adoration rightfully deserve domestic violence mansplaining rape culture sexual entitlement among linguistic tools redefine world many women encounter daily open way begin change nineteenthcentury geologist survey director clarence king twentiethcentury biologists used term punctuated equilibrium describe pattern change involves slow quiet periods relative stasis interrupted turbulent intervals history feminism one punctuated equilibriums conversations nature world live pressure unexpected events suddenly lurch forward change story think crisis opportunity one miserable murderous young man whole construct live brought question friday isla vista equilibrium disrupted like earthquake releasing tension tectonic plates realms gender shifted little shifted massacre millions came together vast conversational network share experiences revisit meanings definitions arrive new understandings memorials across california people held candles conversation people held ideas words stories also shone darkness maybe change grow last matter lasting memorial victims six years ago sat wrote essay men explain things heres surprised though began ridiculous example patronized man ended rapes murders tend treat violence abuse power though fit airtight categories harassment intimidation threat battery rape murder realize saying slippery slope thats need address slope rather compartmentalizing varieties misogyny dealing separately meant fragmenting picture seeing parts whole man acts belief right speak dont get define whats going could mean cutting dinner table conference could also mean telling shut threatening open mouth beating speaking killing silence forever could husband father boss editor stranger meeting train guy youve never seen whos mad someone else thinks women small enough category stand hes tell rights threats often precede acts targets online rape death threats take seriously even though sites allow law enforcement officials generally ignore apparently quite lot women murdered leaving boyfriend husband believes owns right selfdetermination 160 despite dismal subject matter im impressed powers feminism flexed late watching amanda hess jessica valenti soraya chemaly laurie penny amanda marcotte jennifer pozner younger feminists swing action weekend rodgers killing spree thrilling sudden explosion yesallwomen tweets astonishing many men spoke thoughtfully heartening men actively engaged instead men bystanders could see onceradical ideas blooming mainstream media could see arguments whole new ways framing world gaining ground adherents maybe grown unbearably weary defense unregulated guns 40 school shootings since sandy hook elementary school december 2012 wages macho fantasies control revenge hatred women look back betty friedans problem name see world profoundly different one live one women far fewer rights far less voice back arguing women equal marginal position arguing marginal part world law mostly side struggle long harsh sometimes ugly backlash feminism remains savage strong omnipresent winning world changed profoundly needs change far moreand weekend mourning introspection conversation passed could see change happen rebecca solnits new bestselling book essays women power violence men explain things dispatch books haymarket books published title comes essay updated solnit posted tomdispatch 2008 making rounds ever since stay top important articles like sign receive latest updates tomdispatchcom | 1,997 |
<p>your email</p>
<p>your name</p>
<p>recipient(s) email (comma separated)</p>
<p />
<p>message</p>
<p>captcha</p>
<p />
<p>Reality television workers often face irregular production hours, unsafe production zones and lack of overtime pay. (Lance Lundstrom / Wikimedia Commons) &#160;</p>
<p>Tricky bosses, faked timecards, excruciating hours, dangerous scrapes … It sounds like fodder for a reality TV show, perhaps “America’s Next Worst Job.”</p>
<p>But workers say these are the conditions in reality TV itself, known more formally as the nonfiction television industry.</p>
<p>“We are told to be loyal, that this is normal,” said Lauren Veloski of the long unpaid hours she worked for several production companies. “You should anticipate that your workday will be 12 hours long,” one employer informed her.</p>
<p>Veloski said she and her co-workers were required to fake timecards saying they worked from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. In fact, she said, she often worked past midnight, even until dawn.</p>
<p>The companies didn’t pay a penny of overtime. Indeed, the extra work was entirely unpaid in most cases.</p>
<p>Employees also said the companies, in turn, have no loyalty to their workers, sometimes putting them in dangerous situations.</p>
<p>“They don’t care about safety at all. People climb mountains, do things that are unsafe. If they get hurt they [the employers] don’t answer their phone calls or hire them again,” said 30-year industry veteran Helen Smith, who asked me not to use her real name for fear of retaliation.</p>
<p>The Writers Guild is wading into this swamp, trying to elevate work standards in an industry that’s famously haphazard and exploitative.</p>
<p>Reality TV now accounts for a quarter of the workers in TV production, including 15,000 workers in New York City. Of those, the Guild is organizing 2,000 writer-producers.</p>
<p>“Not everyone is aware that the shows we watch don’t just unfold in real time while the camera is running,” said Writers Guild of America East director Lowell Peterson.</p>
<p>Instead, writer-producers write the narrative arcs of each season, craft storylines, and write narration. “Yes, sometimes they even write the dialog,” he said.</p>
<p>Ten years ago, reality TV was even more like the Wild West, with a large number of unstable employers. But a series of recent mergers has made the industry a better bet for organizers. “Before that, collective bargaining would have been very difficult,” Peterson said.</p>
<p>It’s also more profitable than ever, with reality show-heavy networks like TLC and Discovery making profit margins well above 50 percent, a union analysis says.</p>
<p>The production companies themselves are being bought up for substantial sums by bigger companies, including many based overseas. British media company ITV just paid $360 million for Leftfield Entertainment, which produces the top reality show “Pawn Stars.”</p>
<p>ITV also recently acquired Gurney, which makes “Duck Dynasty,” and the companies producing “Marriage Boot Camp,” “Celebrity Home Raiders,” and “Cake Boss.”</p>
<p>To plump up profits still more, employers are demanding “ever-shorter schedules and ever-longer hours,” said David Van Taylor, a 25-year industry veteran, at a recent New York City Council hearing.</p>
<p>Most reality TV writer-producers work in short stints for shows, getting classified either as independent contractors or as employees who are overtime-exempt—though they clearly don’t fit the legal definition.</p>
<p>That means companies get away with paying a flat rate with no overtime pay at all, never mind overtime premium. “When I work on the weekend to meet these deadlines, there’s no extra pay for that,” said Taylor.</p>
<p>But there’s pressure to put in the hours anyway because the job is so insecure. “If don’t meet the deadline, I get the reputation of someone who doesn’t deliver,” he said. “I have to get a new gig every 12 weeks. That reputation would be very dangerous to my livelihood.”</p>
<p>He said some shows that used to be developed in nine weeks are now being expected to wrap in six.</p>
<p>Pay has also gone down, from $2,500 a week two decades ago to $1,000 or less, Smith said. For a 100-hour week (about seven 14-hour days), which workers said was not unusual, that works out to $10 an hour.</p>
<p>Meanwhile in the unionized, script-based segment of TV production, said Peterson, most scriptwriters are paid well and get health care, vacations, pensions, and residuals when the shows are replayed.</p>
<p>“A lot of people don’t know how good it can be,” said Smith, who worked union shows before she worked non-union.</p>
<p>The Guild has spent four years trying to bring that alternate reality to New York’s nonfiction TV employers. So far three shops, accounting for around 500 workers, have won contracts. Another company is in negotiation, and two others are fighting elections before the National Labor Relations Board.</p>
<p>The prospect of being hauled into court for wage theft has helped encourage some employers to submit to elections.</p>
<p>Because the gigs are so short-term, the labor board includes in the election vote anyone who has worked a substantial time for the employer in the past year, said Guild organizer Justin Molito. This is good news for the union, because it means many of those voting don’t have to face a boss every day telling them to vote no.</p>
<p>The union hopes to win enough density in the industry to create an umbrella contract, like the one that governs scripted shows, said Molito.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the shops with contracts have seen big improvements in their conditions, although not up to the level of scripted shows, Peterson said: “We just don’t have the density yet.”</p>
<p>Even the threat of organizing has helped. In the same meeting where company managers announced that the Writers Guild had filed for an election, Taylor said, they also announced that workers would get health insurance for the first time.</p>
<p>Workers are asking New York’s City Council to create at least a voluntary code of conduct for the industry. They also want to make sure that when reality TV companies come looking for a tax handout, public officials are aware of the dire working conditions and rampant wage theft.</p>
<p>Testifiers at the June 25 hearing acknowledged that some of their work does not have the cachet of scripted dramas. According to Smith, “Duck Dynasty” writers reworked scripts from the 1960’s sitcom “The Beverly Hillbillies.”</p>
<p>“Some of the shows are frivolous and throwaway, no kidding,” said Veloski, but “these are hard-working people.”</p>
<p>“Well, quality is not really a union issue,” said Smith, sighing.</p>
<p>Reprinted with permission from <a href="http://labornotes.org/2014/07/jobs-gone-bad-reality-tv-workers-organize" type="external">Labor Notes.</a></p> | true | 4 | email name recipients email comma separated message captcha reality television workers often face irregular production hours unsafe production zones lack overtime pay lance lundstrom wikimedia commons 160 tricky bosses faked timecards excruciating hours dangerous scrapes sounds like fodder reality tv show perhaps americas next worst job workers say conditions reality tv known formally nonfiction television industry told loyal normal said lauren veloski long unpaid hours worked several production companies anticipate workday 12 hours long one employer informed veloski said coworkers required fake timecards saying worked 10 6 pm fact said often worked past midnight even dawn companies didnt pay penny overtime indeed extra work entirely unpaid cases employees also said companies turn loyalty workers sometimes putting dangerous situations dont care safety people climb mountains things unsafe get hurt employers dont answer phone calls hire said 30year industry veteran helen smith asked use real name fear retaliation writers guild wading swamp trying elevate work standards industry thats famously haphazard exploitative reality tv accounts quarter workers tv production including 15000 workers new york city guild organizing 2000 writerproducers everyone aware shows watch dont unfold real time camera running said writers guild america east director lowell peterson instead writerproducers write narrative arcs season craft storylines write narration yes sometimes even write dialog said ten years ago reality tv even like wild west large number unstable employers series recent mergers made industry better bet organizers collective bargaining would difficult peterson said also profitable ever reality showheavy networks like tlc discovery making profit margins well 50 percent union analysis says production companies bought substantial sums bigger companies including many based overseas british media company itv paid 360 million leftfield entertainment produces top reality show pawn stars itv also recently acquired gurney makes duck dynasty companies producing marriage boot camp celebrity home raiders cake boss plump profits still employers demanding evershorter schedules everlonger hours said david van taylor 25year industry veteran recent new york city council hearing reality tv writerproducers work short stints shows getting classified either independent contractors employees overtimeexemptthough clearly dont fit legal definition means companies get away paying flat rate overtime pay never mind overtime premium work weekend meet deadlines theres extra pay said taylor theres pressure put hours anyway job insecure dont meet deadline get reputation someone doesnt deliver said get new gig every 12 weeks reputation would dangerous livelihood said shows used developed nine weeks expected wrap six pay also gone 2500 week two decades ago 1000 less smith said 100hour week seven 14hour days workers said unusual works 10 hour meanwhile unionized scriptbased segment tv production said peterson scriptwriters paid well get health care vacations pensions residuals shows replayed lot people dont know good said smith worked union shows worked nonunion guild spent four years trying bring alternate reality new yorks nonfiction tv employers far three shops accounting around 500 workers contracts another company negotiation two others fighting elections national labor relations board prospect hauled court wage theft helped encourage employers submit elections gigs shortterm labor board includes election vote anyone worked substantial time employer past year said guild organizer justin molito good news union means many voting dont face boss every day telling vote union hopes win enough density industry create umbrella contract like one governs scripted shows said molito meanwhile shops contracts seen big improvements conditions although level scripted shows peterson said dont density yet even threat organizing helped meeting company managers announced writers guild filed election taylor said also announced workers would get health insurance first time workers asking new yorks city council create least voluntary code conduct industry also want make sure reality tv companies come looking tax handout public officials aware dire working conditions rampant wage theft testifiers june 25 hearing acknowledged work cachet scripted dramas according smith duck dynasty writers reworked scripts 1960s sitcom beverly hillbillies shows frivolous throwaway kidding said veloski hardworking people well quality really union issue said smith sighing reprinted permission labor notes | 652 |
<p>Leo Panitch is the Senior Scholar and Emeritus Professor of Political Science at York University. He is the author of many books, the most recent of which include UK Deutscher Memorial Prize winner The Making of Global Capitalism: The Political Economy of American Empire, In and Out of Crisis: The Global Financial Meltdown and Left Alternatives, , <a href="https://www.amazon.ca/Renewing-Socialism-Democracy-Strategy-Imagination/dp/0813398215" type="external">Renewing Socialism: Democracy, Strategy and Imagination</a> and The End of Parliamentary Socialism: From New Left to New Labour. He is also a co-editor of the Socialist Register, whose 2017 volume, which will be released in time for the Labour Party Conference and launched in London in November, is entitled Rethinking Revolution</p>
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p /> SHARMINI PERIES, EXEC. PRODUCER, TRNN: Welcome to the Real News Network.
<p />
<p />I'm Sharmini Peries coming to you from Baltimore. British MP Jeremy Corbyn is expected to win the Labour Party elections underway and become the next leader. Corbyn jumped into the race in June on an anti-austerity and anti-war platform, and is a self-described democratic socialist. Polls close on Thursday with the results expected to be announced on Saturday.
<p />
<p />To discuss these developments I'm joined by Leo Panitch. Leo is the Canada Research Chair in comparative political economy and a Distinguished Research Professor of political science at York University in Toronto. He is the author of many books, among them The End of Parliamentary Socialism: From New Left to New Labor, and Renewing Socialism: Transforming Democracy, Strategy, and Imagination. Leo, as always, thank you for joining us today.
<p />
<p />LEO PANITCH: Hi, Sharmini. Happy to be talking about this subject, especially.
<p />
<p />PERIES: So Leo, what's the significance of Jeremy Corbyn's popularity and the future of the Labour Party in the UK?
<p />
<p />PANITCH: Well, it's an amazing development, really. It is part of what is going to continue to happen through the 21st century. It is part of the renewal of socialist politics in the face of this increasingly unequal capitalism that we're seeing, one that is unable to exit in any dynamic way out of the crisis, one that is imposing austerity, cutting back on social benefits, et cetera.
<p />
<p />We're going to see in one way or another what we've seen in Spain or in Greece, and in the British case it's taking place through the Labour Party. And that's very exciting.
<p />
<p />PERIES: And Leo, you tell me that this particular measure of doing a poll for the party leadership is something new. Explain that.
<p />
<p />PANITCH: Well, I have to say that to understand this properly you really have to go back to the way in which the revolt of the 1960s, the new left of the 1960s, impacted on the Labour Party. It created after the disappointments with the Labour governments of the 1960s an emphasis on participatory democracy and an era of trade union militancy, an emphasis on trying to get not only the unions but the social movements behind the Labour Party as active social movements, having an influence on it over and above the way in which the parliamentarians always ran the Labour Party.
<p />
<p />There was a campaign for Labour Party democracy through the 1970s, the great voice of that was Tony Benn, the greatest leader the Labour Party never had as its leader. He spearheaded that. There was also a strong representation of that in the local municipalities. Ken Livingston, the greater London council, was part of that. Jeremy Corbyn came out of that municipal politics. And they were running on the slogan that if you can't democratize the Labour Party you can't democratize the British state.
<p />
<p />The way in which leaders were elected was changed by that campaign. It used to be the case that only parliamentarians, existing MPs, voted for the leader. The millions of people in the party, the trade union affiliates, had no say. One of the victories of that movement was to move that to electing a leader being based on one-third of parliamentarians, one-third on the unions, and one-third on local party members. And that was the way in which leaders have been elected ever since.
<p />
<p />Most recently, partly out of the hubris of the right of the party, the part of the party which ended up as so-called new Labour, the Blairites, who so viciously defeated the Labour left, aided by Thatcherism with a good many of people in the center and the right of the party coming to the conclusion that you had to pull everybody together who was the left of Thatcher, and you couldn't be bothered with things like democratizing the party, democratizing the British state, democratizing the economy. You just had to get rid of Thatcher. Well, in the end that new Labour actually absorbed a lot of Thatcherism. Sat down with Murdoch and got the Murdoch press off their backs. And you got Tony Blair, and you got support for the invasion of Iraq. Support for the financialization of capitalism through the city of London, and so on.
<p />
<p />One of the reactions to that was Ed Milliband's election, who ran against the Iraq war, who argued that the Blairite reaction had gone too far against the membership, against the class basis of the Labour Party. But he himself was standing in the middle, by no means wanting to go back to the kinds of vision that the Bennites had put forward. And as one of the things he did as leader, partly in order to actually distance the party from the trade union bosses, or at least from the claim that trade union bosses control the party, was he moved the party to a one-person, one-vote leadership election.
<p />
<p />The right was in favor of this, because they tend to think that it's only a very few of us, a handful of people who watch The Real News, who are actually democratic socialists. All the rest of the population, they think, are enthused by the markets. They were wrong. And what Ed did was he introduced a one-person, one-vote way of electing the party. The parliamentarians don't have a special vote, the trade union leaders don't. It's individual members that do. And partly they were looking to the American primaries as a way of doing this. You could register as a supporter of the Labour Party. And in the case of trade unionists you weren't affiliated just because you were a trade union member. You actually had to agree to sign up as a Labour Party member.
<p />
<p />Well, the result of that, astonishingly, since the election this May when Ed resigned and the leadership election was called, is that almost 400,000 new members and supporters have joined the Labour Party. There were only 200,000 in May. They've got 80,000 new members in the constituency parties. They've got 180,000 trade union members. And they've got a couple of hundred thousand supporters who paid three pounds to be able to [vote] in this election.
<p />
<p />PERIES: Leo, this is a significant development. So give us a sense of what Jeremy Corbyn's platform looks like. He's clearly come out against austerity, but what more?
<p />
<p />PANITCH: Well, he goes back to a lot of the things the Labour left stood for. He wants to reopen the question of whether Britain should have a nuclear deterrent, as with the Scottish Labour party, that is opposed to the Trident submarine, the nuclear submarine which is Britain's nuclear contribution. He's in favor of scrapping it. And in fact he is one of the vice chairs of the Campaign for Unilateral Disarmament, which goes back to the British left in the '60s.
<p />
<p />He stands for democratizing the party, returning to the party conference, the kind of control over party policy that the Bennites were trying to establish back in the '70s and '80s. He explicitly, as you said in the intro, calls himself a democratic socialist, and he very clearly puts the onus for the crisis on the banks. On the financial system. So for all those kinds of reasons he was the vice chair of the Stop the War coalition, which was the big British mass movement against the Iraq war.
<p />
<p />These are the kinds of things that of course make careerist politicians, who come out of Oxford and Cambridge and decide at a young age that their career will be a Labour Party politician. This makes them tear their heads out--hair out rather, sorry, because they will be seen as too radical by the mainstream press, by the establishment, [et cetera]. Even the Guardian.
<p />
<p />PERIES: We have a clip here, Leo, of his position on the Iraq war. Let's have a look.
<p />
<p />JEREMY CORBYN: The ISIS forces, yes they are brutal, yes they are, some of what they've done is quite appalling. Likewise, what the Americans did in Fallujah and other places is appalling. But there has to be seen to be an acceptance of a much wider view of the world than is apparent at the present time [inaud.] government.
<p />
<p />PERIES: So he clearly took an anti-war position on the war in Iraq. And he's also at the moment being critiqued quite a bit, Leo, for his position he took back then, and why is this, and how is the rest of the party on this particular issue?
<p />
<p />PANITCH: Well, on that issue--I think that's been a key issue. I think that is the thing that got Ed Milliband elected, that those people who stayed in the Labour Party, who didn't leave it out of despair at the way in which the Blairites embraced Thatcherism and financial capitalism, those who stayed in were disgusted to their core by Blair's support for the American intervention and his insertion of the British military establishment as part of that. So that was the beginning of the great alienation of the Blairites from their own base. And so that's been key.
<p />
<p />But what also is very important, going beyond this, has been the anti-austerity thrust of Corbyn's policies.
<p />
<p />PERIES: Let's have a look, I have a clip of that, his position on the austerity discussion.
<p />
<p />CORBYN: I'm glad that people are taking notice of our campaign, where we're challenging the agenda of austerity. Austerity which has led to greater inequality in our society, greater poverty in our society, and now a budget and a welfare reform bill which will deepen that, impoverish more children in large, poor families. Surely we can do better than that. Surely the Labour Party can do better than that and offer a real economic alternative which is about expanding manufacturing industry, expanding our economy, and the welfare state that eliminates poverty and the gross inequality that exists in Britain today.
<p />
<p />PERIES: So Leo, is the UK and the Labour Party in particular catching up in terms of the wave of anti-austerity activity on the part of social movements in Europe?
<p />
<p />PANITCH: Yes. You know, I think that while Ed Milliband distanced himself somewhat from Blair's embrace of neoliberalism he at the same time, partly because he was surrounded by Blairites, was loath to not play the balance the budget kind of line. And he treated deficits with the kind of deference to getting rid of them that most politicians have been cowed into doing. Jeremy has been much more upfront, has been very upfront, about the necessity and the rationality of running deficits in the face of the kind of stagnation that we have. But at the same time, calling for increased taxation on the wealthy.
<p />
<p />So in other words he represents the reaction that you've seen across Europe to the way in which social democracy has embraced neoliberalism.
<p />
<p />PERIES: Leo, we hope to have you back on Monday after we know the results of the party poll.
<p />
<p />PANITCH: Sharmini, it's been great to talk to you about this. And it just goes to show that the struggle for socialism is not a sprint but is a marathon. If someone like Jeremy Corbyn, who led the attempt, was one of the key leaders with Tony Benn, of the attempt to turn the Labour Party into an active, dynamic democratic socialist party back in the '70s and '80s is about to be elected leader of the Labour Party now 30 years after that attempt was marginalized, defeated, et cetera, you can see that we may yet win this marathon.
<p />
<p />PERIES: Leo, thank you for joining us, and we hope you join us again on Monday coming up.
<p />
<p />PANITCH: So long, Sharmini.
<p />
<p />PERIES: Thank you for joining us on the Real News Network.
<p />
<p />End
<p />
<p />DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy. | true | 4 | leo panitch senior scholar emeritus professor political science york university author many books recent include uk deutscher memorial prize winner making global capitalism political economy american empire crisis global financial meltdown left alternatives renewing socialism democracy strategy imagination end parliamentary socialism new left new labour also coeditor socialist register whose 2017 volume released time labour party conference launched london november entitled rethinking revolution sharmini peries exec producer trnn welcome real news network im sharmini peries coming baltimore british mp jeremy corbyn expected win labour party elections underway become next leader corbyn jumped race june antiausterity antiwar platform selfdescribed democratic socialist polls close thursday results expected announced saturday discuss developments im joined leo panitch leo canada research chair comparative political economy distinguished research professor political science york university toronto author many books among end parliamentary socialism new left new labor renewing socialism transforming democracy strategy imagination leo always thank joining us today leo panitch hi sharmini happy talking subject especially peries leo whats significance jeremy corbyns popularity future labour party uk panitch well amazing development really part going continue happen 21st century part renewal socialist politics face increasingly unequal capitalism seeing one unable exit dynamic way crisis one imposing austerity cutting back social benefits et cetera going see one way another weve seen spain greece british case taking place labour party thats exciting peries leo tell particular measure poll party leadership something new explain panitch well say understand properly really go back way revolt 1960s new left 1960s impacted labour party created disappointments labour governments 1960s emphasis participatory democracy era trade union militancy emphasis trying get unions social movements behind labour party active social movements influence way parliamentarians always ran labour party campaign labour party democracy 1970s great voice tony benn greatest leader labour party never leader spearheaded also strong representation local municipalities ken livingston greater london council part jeremy corbyn came municipal politics running slogan cant democratize labour party cant democratize british state way leaders elected changed campaign used case parliamentarians existing mps voted leader millions people party trade union affiliates say one victories movement move electing leader based onethird parliamentarians onethird unions onethird local party members way leaders elected ever since recently partly hubris right party part party ended socalled new labour blairites viciously defeated labour left aided thatcherism good many people center right party coming conclusion pull everybody together left thatcher couldnt bothered things like democratizing party democratizing british state democratizing economy get rid thatcher well end new labour actually absorbed lot thatcherism sat murdoch got murdoch press backs got tony blair got support invasion iraq support financialization capitalism city london one reactions ed millibands election ran iraq war argued blairite reaction gone far membership class basis labour party standing middle means wanting go back kinds vision bennites put forward one things leader partly order actually distance party trade union bosses least claim trade union bosses control party moved party oneperson onevote leadership election right favor tend think us handful people watch real news actually democratic socialists rest population think enthused markets wrong ed introduced oneperson onevote way electing party parliamentarians dont special vote trade union leaders dont individual members partly looking american primaries way could register supporter labour party case trade unionists werent affiliated trade union member actually agree sign labour party member well result astonishingly since election may ed resigned leadership election called almost 400000 new members supporters joined labour party 200000 may theyve got 80000 new members constituency parties theyve got 180000 trade union members theyve got couple hundred thousand supporters paid three pounds able vote election peries leo significant development give us sense jeremy corbyns platform looks like hes clearly come austerity panitch well goes back lot things labour left stood wants reopen question whether britain nuclear deterrent scottish labour party opposed trident submarine nuclear submarine britains nuclear contribution hes favor scrapping fact one vice chairs campaign unilateral disarmament goes back british left 60s stands democratizing party returning party conference kind control party policy bennites trying establish back 70s 80s explicitly said intro calls democratic socialist clearly puts onus crisis banks financial system kinds reasons vice chair stop war coalition big british mass movement iraq war kinds things course make careerist politicians come oxford cambridge decide young age career labour party politician makes tear heads outhair rather sorry seen radical mainstream press establishment et cetera even guardian peries clip leo position iraq war lets look jeremy corbyn isis forces yes brutal yes theyve done quite appalling likewise americans fallujah places appalling seen acceptance much wider view world apparent present time inaud government peries clearly took antiwar position war iraq hes also moment critiqued quite bit leo position took back rest party particular issue panitch well issuei think thats key issue think thing got ed milliband elected people stayed labour party didnt leave despair way blairites embraced thatcherism financial capitalism stayed disgusted core blairs support american intervention insertion british military establishment part beginning great alienation blairites base thats key also important going beyond antiausterity thrust corbyns policies peries lets look clip position austerity discussion corbyn im glad people taking notice campaign challenging agenda austerity austerity led greater inequality society greater poverty society budget welfare reform bill deepen impoverish children large poor families surely better surely labour party better offer real economic alternative expanding manufacturing industry expanding economy welfare state eliminates poverty gross inequality exists britain today peries leo uk labour party particular catching terms wave antiausterity activity part social movements europe panitch yes know think ed milliband distanced somewhat blairs embrace neoliberalism time partly surrounded blairites loath play balance budget kind line treated deficits kind deference getting rid politicians cowed jeremy much upfront upfront necessity rationality running deficits face kind stagnation time calling increased taxation wealthy words represents reaction youve seen across europe way social democracy embraced neoliberalism peries leo hope back monday know results party poll panitch sharmini great talk goes show struggle socialism sprint marathon someone like jeremy corbyn led attempt one key leaders tony benn attempt turn labour party active dynamic democratic socialist party back 70s 80s elected leader labour party 30 years attempt marginalized defeated et cetera see may yet win marathon peries leo thank joining us hope join us monday coming panitch long sharmini peries thank joining us real news network end disclaimer please note transcripts real news network typed recording program trnn guarantee complete accuracy | 1,056 |
<p>By Ronald W. PierceEditor’s note: This is the third story in a seven-part series exclusive to Truthdig called “ <a href="" type="internal">Going Home</a>.” Read <a href="" type="internal">Part 1</a>, <a href="" type="internal">Part 2</a>, <a href="" type="internal">Part 4</a>, <a href="" type="internal">Part 5</a>, <a href="" type="internal">Part 6</a> and <a href="" type="internal">Part 7</a>.</p>
<p>I am preparing to go to breakfast. It is March 20, 2016. The wing correction officer comes to my cell. He tells me to report to the star sergeant. My mouth goes dry. I will appear before the parole board after 31 years in prison for murder.</p>
<p>I have three days of stubble. My khaki uniform is wrinkled from the prison laundry. Two transport officers are waiting for me. There is no time to eat. My stomach is flipping kittens. I am not thinking about food. I am placed in the chair that examines body cavities for contraband. I am escorted into the strip room. I remove my clothing. I hand my clothes to the officer who inspects them. My body is searched for contraband. My feet are shackled. My hands are cuffed and belted to my side.</p>
<p>I am walked to the “dog kennel,” a vehicle similar to the police van Freddie Gray was so badly injured in after being arrested in Baltimore in 2015 that he soon died. It has no seat belts. You hold on to a strap between your legs to keep from being thrown against the van’s metal walls. Why we do we call it the dog kennel? The Humane Society would never let a dog be transported in such a death trap. Over the years I refused to take medical trips in the dog kennel. I feared hurting myself. I chose not to jeopardize my life for medical procedures such as physical therapy after joint replacement surgery, stress tests for my heart condition and other tests. However, for parole, the risks equaled the rewards. Anxiety riddles through me the moment I enter the van. I sit sideways on a metal bench with skid-resistant material. I am facing a metal wall a foot-and-a-half from my face. I strain to grab the strap as the handcuffs bite into my wrists. The padlock of the belt stabs into my back. The van pulls away from the prison.</p>
<p />
<p>The trip to New Jersey State Prison (formerly Trenton State Prison) takes 45 minutes. My nerves are peeking. My stomach is grumbling and is tied into knots. My focus wanders. I question every choice. I didn’t feel ready for the hearing. Maybe I should have practiced in mock hearings. I have not prepared a closing statement. I am trying to go through everything in my mind. My thoughts run amok in a sea of disconnected thoughts. My heart starts racing when we reach the familiar prison walls. I worry I will have another heart attack. I don’t want to disappoint my family and my fiancé, Karen. I don’t want them to think the government is right to deny me parole. I don’t want them to think I am unfit to live in society.</p>
<p>The van backs into the darkened mouth of the beast. I resolve that I will not be what they portray me to be. I will make my case with all my ability. The officers open the outer van door. Then they open the kennel door. I step down into the garage. The time for doubt is over.</p>
<p>I go through processing. It is the same processing I endured at Rahway but in reverse. I am unshackled. I have to strip and expose for inspection each of my body cavities, including my mouth and anus. There is a complete body inspection under my arms, behind my ears, under my testicles and the bottom of my feet. This process is to ensure I did not somehow manage to get contraband planted on me during my ride in the dog kennel. After this process, I get dressed. I sit in the body cavity search chair to complete the processing procedure. I then am taken to a holding cell.</p>
<p>Thomas Renahan enters after five minutes. He sits on the bench across from me. He tells me he is a member of the parole board. I worry he has come to tell me it is all a mistake, and the board would not see me. I worry I will receive a Future Eligibility Term, or FET, meaning your parole has been denied in the mail. Instead, he gives me an addendum to the record for the parole board and an overview of the hearing. He tells me that if I need a break or to use the restroom, to look over at him. He will ask for a recess.</p>
<p>When he leaves, I begin to prepare myself to listen to the truths of my life and answer questions that will determine my fate. People I do not know will decide where my body will reside in the future.</p>
<p>I go into the hearing room. There are four long tables arranged in a square. The 13 board members introduce themselves. There are three others in the room, sitting in the gallery. The rumor in prison is that one is a psychiatrist, one is a body language expert and one is a voice inflection expert. The three people in the gallery supposedly assist the board in its deliberations.</p>
<p>One by one the board members begin to ask questions. This takes approximately three hours. They have done their homework. I begin to believe they know more about me than I know about myself. Their questions are sharp and specific. Some of the questions are pointed, some designed to lead me on, some an obvious trap door. Some ask follow-up questions about an answer I give to another board member. There are so many questions I cannot remember, although I remember them telling me not to tell them what I think they want to hear.</p>
<p>“If I were sitting where you are and you were here, what is the one question you would ask me that I have not asked you?” a board member asks.</p>
<p>I think for a moment. I say this is a good question. I contemplate my answer.</p>
<p>“What can I look at in your record that will give me the confidence I need to know that if I give you my vote, I will not come to regret it?” I say.</p>
<p>“That’s a good question,” the young, well-dressed African-American board member says. “Now answer it.”</p>
<p>I tell them about the prison programs I was involved in. I talk about the change in my patterns of behavior, about my emotional growth, maintaining minimum (security) status, holding the same job for over a decade, good disciplinary records and reports over the course of my incarceration.</p>
<p>“I don’t hear you talk about remorse,” says a white male board member who is thickset and has salt-and-pepper hair and a mustache.</p>
<p>“I not only took a man’s life. I took away any decision he could have made from that day until this,” I say. “I shattered the lives of his family. I denied society the contributions he might have made. I feel remorse. I devastated my family. I brought shame to them through my horrendous act. I exacted a huge cost from society. What I did had a ripple effect. It negatively affected many people.”</p>
<p>The questioning ends.</p>
<p>The chairman asks if I have any closing remarks.</p>
<p>“I want to thank the board for its time and consideration,” I say. “I know how busy you are.”</p>
<p>When that one board member asked me what question I would ask, I had thought of answering, “What would you say if you were in front of Wayne’s (the victim’s) family?” My answer would have been “nothing.” I would be afraid that my voice would cause them more pain. I would answer their questions. I would let them decide the direction of the conversation. This is what I am thinking.</p>
<p>I thank them again for listening. I am taken back to the holding cell to await their decision.</p>
<p>I go over every response I’d given. I can’t sit still. I pace back and forth. It seems like I am in the holding cell for 10 or 15 hours although it is only 10 or 15 minutes. The officers come to get me from the holding cell after the 15 minutes. I make the long walk back to the visit hall from intake. It seems like an eternity. My stomach is in butterflies. It feels as if there is a flock of geese in there.</p>
<p>I walk into the room. I look toward the table about 25 feet away where I had been sitting. I see a long green sheet of paper in front of my chair. When you get a FET it is printed out on a long green sheet of paper. Your parole has been denied. Appealing this decision takes one or two years. My legs become weak. My body begins to shake. My mouth goes dry. My heart sinks. I walk sluggishly to the chair. I wonder how much longer I will be incarcerated before I have another parole hearing. Will I ever see my mother again? Her age and health are not in our favor. Will Karen stay with me through more years of separation and at what cost to her well being?</p>
<p>I sit down. I look at the paper on the table. I focus on the words. It reads: “Notice of Release.”</p>
<p>My eyes fill with tears. The room begins to spin. The chairman explains the conditions of the decision. I am unable to focus on his words. I want to scream, “Thank you!” I want to promise them that they will never regret their decision. I barely can manage a whispered “Thank you.” I walk out of the hearing room. I mouth the words “Thank you” to Mr. Robinson, one of the two members who gave me the opportunity to see the full board. I am emotionally overwhelmed.</p>
<p>I want to get back to Rahway so I can email Karen. I tell myself on the ride back that I will keep the news to myself until I get her response. There are many people awaiting my return to find out how it went, especially the other students in the <a href="http://njstep.newark.rutgers.edu/" type="external">NJ-STEP college program</a>.</p>
<p>I can’t contain myself. I get back in time to go to class. It is Western Political Theory with professor Chris Hedges. I am supposed to give a presentation on Chapter 10 of Sheldon S. Wolin’s “Politics and Vision: The Age of Organization and the Sublimation of Politics.”</p>
<p>“I am not focused or prepared to give my presentation,” I say. “I went to the full board for my parole hearing. I am being paroled.”</p>
<p>The class bursts into applause.</p>
<p>Part 4 of the “ <a href="" type="internal">Going Home</a>” series will be published on Truthdig on Saturday.</p>
<p>Ronald W. Pierce served 30 years, eight months and 14 days in New Jersey prisons for murder. Released in 2016, Pierce now is living in Jackson, N.J., and completing his Bachelor of Arts study at Rutgers University. He is an honors student, majoring in justice studies with a minor in sociology.</p> | true | 4 | ronald w pierceeditors note third story sevenpart series exclusive truthdig called going home read part 1 part 2 part 4 part 5 part 6 part 7 preparing go breakfast march 20 2016 wing correction officer comes cell tells report star sergeant mouth goes dry appear parole board 31 years prison murder three days stubble khaki uniform wrinkled prison laundry two transport officers waiting time eat stomach flipping kittens thinking food placed chair examines body cavities contraband escorted strip room remove clothing hand clothes officer inspects body searched contraband feet shackled hands cuffed belted side walked dog kennel vehicle similar police van freddie gray badly injured arrested baltimore 2015 soon died seat belts hold strap legs keep thrown vans metal walls call dog kennel humane society would never let dog transported death trap years refused take medical trips dog kennel feared hurting chose jeopardize life medical procedures physical therapy joint replacement surgery stress tests heart condition tests however parole risks equaled rewards anxiety riddles moment enter van sit sideways metal bench skidresistant material facing metal wall footandahalf face strain grab strap handcuffs bite wrists padlock belt stabs back van pulls away prison trip new jersey state prison formerly trenton state prison takes 45 minutes nerves peeking stomach grumbling tied knots focus wanders question every choice didnt feel ready hearing maybe practiced mock hearings prepared closing statement trying go everything mind thoughts run amok sea disconnected thoughts heart starts racing reach familiar prison walls worry another heart attack dont want disappoint family fiancé karen dont want think government right deny parole dont want think unfit live society van backs darkened mouth beast resolve portray make case ability officers open outer van door open kennel door step garage time doubt go processing processing endured rahway reverse unshackled strip expose inspection body cavities including mouth anus complete body inspection arms behind ears testicles bottom feet process ensure somehow manage get contraband planted ride dog kennel process get dressed sit body cavity search chair complete processing procedure taken holding cell thomas renahan enters five minutes sits bench across tells member parole board worry come tell mistake board would see worry receive future eligibility term fet meaning parole denied mail instead gives addendum record parole board overview hearing tells need break use restroom look ask recess leaves begin prepare listen truths life answer questions determine fate people know decide body reside future go hearing room four long tables arranged square 13 board members introduce three others room sitting gallery rumor prison one psychiatrist one body language expert one voice inflection expert three people gallery supposedly assist board deliberations one one board members begin ask questions takes approximately three hours done homework begin believe know know questions sharp specific questions pointed designed lead obvious trap door ask followup questions answer give another board member many questions remember although remember telling tell think want hear sitting one question would ask asked board member asks think moment say good question contemplate answer look record give confidence need know give vote come regret say thats good question young welldressed africanamerican board member says answer tell prison programs involved talk change patterns behavior emotional growth maintaining minimum security status holding job decade good disciplinary records reports course incarceration dont hear talk remorse says white male board member thickset saltandpepper hair mustache took mans life took away decision could made day say shattered lives family denied society contributions might made feel remorse devastated family brought shame horrendous act exacted huge cost society ripple effect negatively affected many people questioning ends chairman asks closing remarks want thank board time consideration say know busy one board member asked question would ask thought answering would say front waynes victims family answer would nothing would afraid voice would cause pain would answer questions would let decide direction conversation thinking thank listening taken back holding cell await decision go every response id given cant sit still pace back forth seems like holding cell 10 15 hours although 10 15 minutes officers come get holding cell 15 minutes make long walk back visit hall intake seems like eternity stomach butterflies feels flock geese walk room look toward table 25 feet away sitting see long green sheet paper front chair get fet printed long green sheet paper parole denied appealing decision takes one two years legs become weak body begins shake mouth goes dry heart sinks walk sluggishly chair wonder much longer incarcerated another parole hearing ever see mother age health favor karen stay years separation cost well sit look paper table focus words reads notice release eyes fill tears room begins spin chairman explains conditions decision unable focus words want scream thank want promise never regret decision barely manage whispered thank walk hearing room mouth words thank mr robinson one two members gave opportunity see full board emotionally overwhelmed want get back rahway email karen tell ride back keep news get response many people awaiting return find went especially students njstep college program cant contain get back time go class western political theory professor chris hedges supposed give presentation chapter 10 sheldon wolins politics vision age organization sublimation politics focused prepared give presentation say went full board parole hearing paroled class bursts applause part 4 going home series published truthdig saturday ronald w pierce served 30 years eight months 14 days new jersey prisons murder released 2016 pierce living jackson nj completing bachelor arts study rutgers university honors student majoring justice studies minor sociology | 906 |
<p>The past few weeks have been hellish for Americans. With one assault after another on our Constitution and our rights, it has felt like an endless stream of slaps to the face and punches to the gut.</p>
<p>From the decision by Federal Communications Commission Chair Ajit Pai to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2017/11/27/what-fcc-chair-ajit-pai-gets-wrong-about-net-neutrality/?utm_term=.2f958e0fbe59" type="external">end net neutrality</a> to the unconscionable late-night vote Friday by Senate Republicans on a tax reform bill that had amendments <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/us/politics/hand-scribbled-tax-bill-outcry.html?_r=0" type="external">scribbled in by hand</a> to Donald Trump’s unprecedented <a href="http://beta.latimes.com/nation/la-fg-trump-national-monuments-20171204-story.html" type="external">undoing of national monument designations</a> in Utah to the Supreme Court’s <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/04/us/politics/trump-travel-ban-supreme-court.html" type="external">Muslim ban-affirming order</a> on Monday, it feels as though the entire nation is under attack all at once.</p>
<p>No amount of controversy around special prosecutor <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/01/politics/michael-flynn-charged/index.html" type="external">Robert Mueller’s charges</a>, Trump’s apparent <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/did-trump-obstruct-justice-timing-is-everything/" type="external">obstruction of justice</a> or the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-deutsche-bank/trump-lawyer-denies-deutsche-bank-got-subpoena-on-trump-accounts-idUSKBN1DZ0XN?il=0" type="external">subpoena of his personal finances</a> appears to derail the momentum of the radical Republican agenda.</p>
<p>While we are reeling in our efforts to make sense of what has transpired in the past few days, party members are already on to bigger and better things, such as <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/02/us/politics/tax-cuts-republicans-entitlements-medicare-social-security.html" type="external">cutting spending</a> in the upcoming government budget negotiations, as if they realize that if they slow down for even a moment, we might catch our collective breath long enough to revolt.</p>
<p />
<p>It has been overwhelming, exhausting and traumatic. But that is because we are receiving each report in gut-wrenching isolation rather than as a single brick in a larger unified wall of injustice. Because there is little mainstream discussion of the broad outlines of the pro-corporate/conservative agenda, we are responding piecemeal to the assaults by our elected representatives. That is our greatest weakness. What we need is a Grand Unified Theory of politics to fuel our resistance.</p>
<p><a href="http://nautil.us/issue/46/balance/a-brief-history-of-the-grand-unified-theory-of-physics" type="external">Particle physicists</a> have been in search of a Grand Unified Theory for years. But politics is easier than particle physics. If it isn’t immediately apparent what the GOP’s end goal was in passing a $1.5 trillion, deficit-causing, tax reform bill, it helps to step back and look at what the party’s overarching goal has been for decades: to undermine the power of government at every turn and make it subservient to corporations. Republicans are in it to break government from the inside out. So it should come as no surprise that the party’s next move is to deeply cut spending as a deadline for a government budget looms.</p>
<p>In fact, cutting spending was the Republican Party’s goal all along, which simply translates into cutting Social Security and Medicare, as Republican Sen.&#160; <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/tax-plan-social-security-medicare-welfare-republicans-rubio-729133" type="external">Marco Rubio recently admitted</a>. The initial Republican argument about simplifying everyone’s taxes was a ruse. Rather than cutting spending first—which is unpopular—Republicans have passed a bill to cut revenue first by about $1.5 trillion over 10 years, so that spending cuts then appear as a reaction to a cash-strapped Treasury rather than a proactive attack on Americans. The big question is, will Americans fall for this con?</p>
<p>Republicans are very skilled manipulators, and their leader is the master of them all. Trump has risen to the top of the Republican ranks (despite some in the party who are loath to accept such an uncouth and vulgar king) because he uses language to sell people the exact opposite of what he is delivering. A prime example is his <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGuY9Y2bc8w" type="external">speech on Monday in Utah</a>—one that should be lauded as a spectacular example of Orwellian doublespeak. Trump announced his unprecedented decision to roll back federal protections of lands designated national monuments by Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. But he began by praising Utah’s stunning natural beauty, using the language of a conservationist rather than a conservative:</p>
<p>I know all of you feel blessed to be living among some of the most glorious natural wonders anywhere in the world. You cherish Utah’s gleaming rivers and sweeping valleys, you take inspiration from its majestic peaks and when you look upon its many winding canyons and glowing vistas you marvel at the beauty of God’s greatest creation.</p>
<p>Trump then quickly pivoted to the idea that the government is ruining the state’s natural beauty, saying, “Some people think that the natural resources of Utah should be controlled by a small handful of very distant bureaucrats located in Washington,” which he then followed with a convincing argument to free the land from government’s clutches. Of course, he made no mention of the “small handful” of corporate elites who will then be free to plunder the oil and gas trapped beneath Utah’s mountains and valleys. He also repeatedly referred to the federal government’s “control,” rather than “protection,” of the land. National monuments are so designated precisely so that people can enjoy their public lands and protect them from devastation.</p>
<p>Trump and his party know full well that if they spell out what they really want to do to our commons, we will have none of it. Indeed, <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/12/national-monuments-in-utah-are-far-more-popular-than-trump-thinks/" type="external">polls show</a> that federal protection of our lands is hugely popular among ordinary Americans. “Your timeless bond with the outdoors should not be replaced with the whims of regulators,” Trump said, refusing to mention that the same bond would be at the whims of voracious extractive industries instead. Trump also made no mention of the outrage among five indigenous tribes that fought for national monument designation for years and have now launched a <a href="http://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2017/12/04/five-american-indian-tribes-furious-over-trump-shrinking-bears-ears-sue-the-president/" type="external">lawsuit against the president</a>.</p>
<p>Cognitive linguists such as George Lakoff have explained how the right skillfully reframes issues, as Trump did in Utah, in order to appeal to its base. In recent months, psychologists have used a similar concept, called the <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/520737/a-better-way-to-argue-about-politics/" type="external">moral foundations theory</a>, to explain why rank-and-file conservatives respond to certain framing and language. Certainly, reframing right-wing rhetoric is crucial to a common understanding of the great heist that is underway. But even more important, once Republican talking points are reframed, is seeing every action as part of a pattern of plunder, especially the attacks on communities of color that have been facing immediate dangers to their safety and dignity over the past year.</p>
<p>Indigenous Americans, along with African-Americans, undocumented immigrants, Muslims and LGBTQ communities, have borne the brunt of Trump and the GOP’s cruelty.</p>
<p>Responding to the Supreme Court order on the latest version of Trump’s Muslim ban, Zahra Billoo of the <a href="http://www.cair.com" type="external">Council on American-Islamic Relations</a> told me in an interview that it is important to see the decision as linked to the attacks on various communities, the environment, the fallout from the tax bill, etc: “All of them are related and all of them are part of the Trump administration’s white supremacist and classist agenda.” She is right. The Muslim ban is part of a broad agenda of racial/religious intolerance and, even more broadly, the oppression of minority groups. That injustice goes hand in hand with the right-wing assault on our commons, our environment, our health and well-being and our ability to collectively organize and thrive.</p>
<p>The Movement for Black Lives (MBL) recognized this when it released a <a href="https://policy.m4bl.org/platform/" type="external">broad platform</a> last year demanding an “end to the war on black people,” at the same time calling for economic justice, community control and political power. In a sense, the organization was expressing a Grand Unified Theory by articulating demands that are seemingly disparate and unifying them into a single platform.</p>
<p>Despite what Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his technocratic ilk may say about supporting Black Lives Matter, and despite the support that the Democratic Party establishment expresses for people of color, in the end, wealthy liberal elites (yes, this is a favored phrase of the right, but one that actually does apply) refuse to swap profits for racial and gender justice. MBL and other groups have long understood that corporate elites won’t trade economic power for the common good because they equate market freedom with human freedoms.</p>
<p>Corporate elites are the problem, no matter where they fall on the spectrum of social politics. The folks who claim, “I’m a social liberal but a fiscal conservative,” are a part of same problem as those who are social and fiscal conservatives.</p>
<p>A prime example is the plunder of lands owned or considered sacred by indigenous groups, as the Utah story demonstrates—corporate entities put profits over the rights of this nation’s original inhabitants. Another example is the impunity of police and the disproportionate mass incarceration of black Americans: Private corporations stand to make huge amounts of money on government prison contracts and the militarization of police. A similar analysis can be made of the renewed crackdown on immigrants and the thriving immigrant detention industry. Or the promotion of wars against brown people in foreign nations that drive profits for weapons manufacturers and private mercenary firms.</p>
<p>The Grand Unified Theory of politics is that there is a small group of wealthy, corporate elites who have taken political power by means of the massive wealth they have amassed, and their goal is to amass even more wealth. Through a corporate profit-making lens, there is no profit value in addressing racial and gender justice. There is no value in universal health care, quality education, higher wages or pristine air, water and land, because funding such goals leaves less money for the wealthy elites.</p>
<p>Writing about precisely this issue is longtime writer, activist and academic Charles Derber, a sociology professor at Boston College. <a href="http://www.risingupwithsonali.com/welcome-to-the-revolution-universalizing-resistance-for-social-justice-and-democracy-in-perilous-times/" type="external">In an interview</a> about his new book, “Welcome to the Revolution: Universalizing Resistance for Social Justice and Democracy in Perilous Times,” Derber said that the idea of “intersectionality is very important”:</p>
<p>All of the various crises that we’re facing—climate change, predatory capitalism, militarism, extreme sexism and racism, anti-immigration and so forth—these issues are largely viewed in the media and for quite a few years on the left as relatively autonomous from each other. And the understanding that these issues are systemically intertwined, like DNA all wrapped up with each other, has been lost to a large degree.</p>
<p>Derber cited Martin Luther King Jr. near the end of his life as having made the crucial links between racism, militarism and capitalism in a way that made him a formidable enemy of the state. In fact, says the author, the 1960s was the last time masses of people in the U.S. “universalized” their resistance to power. It was no coincidence that it was also the last time so many Americans were politically educated and mobilized.</p>
<p>If we are to effectively take on Trumpism and the Republican Party agenda, we need to adopt a universal approach, or a Grand Unified Theory of political resistance and organizing. Indeed, the right has done precisely that, equating prosperity with morality to take political power and reshape the nation in its worldview. It is time for the rest of us to catch up. It is the only path to feeling powerful in the face of relentless assaults, as opposed to the powerlessness that is leaving many of us feeling paralyzed.</p> | true | 4 | past weeks hellish americans one assault another constitution rights felt like endless stream slaps face punches gut decision federal communications commission chair ajit pai end net neutrality unconscionable latenight vote friday senate republicans tax reform bill amendments scribbled hand donald trumps unprecedented undoing national monument designations utah supreme courts muslim banaffirming order monday feels though entire nation attack amount controversy around special prosecutor robert muellers charges trumps apparent obstruction justice subpoena personal finances appears derail momentum radical republican agenda reeling efforts make sense transpired past days party members already bigger better things cutting spending upcoming government budget negotiations realize slow even moment might catch collective breath long enough revolt overwhelming exhausting traumatic receiving report gutwrenching isolation rather single brick larger unified wall injustice little mainstream discussion broad outlines procorporateconservative agenda responding piecemeal assaults elected representatives greatest weakness need grand unified theory politics fuel resistance particle physicists search grand unified theory years politics easier particle physics isnt immediately apparent gops end goal passing 15 trillion deficitcausing tax reform bill helps step back look partys overarching goal decades undermine power government every turn make subservient corporations republicans break government inside come surprise partys next move deeply cut spending deadline government budget looms fact cutting spending republican partys goal along simply translates cutting social security medicare republican sen160 marco rubio recently admitted initial republican argument simplifying everyones taxes ruse rather cutting spending firstwhich unpopularrepublicans passed bill cut revenue first 15 trillion 10 years spending cuts appear reaction cashstrapped treasury rather proactive attack americans big question americans fall con republicans skilled manipulators leader master trump risen top republican ranks despite party loath accept uncouth vulgar king uses language sell people exact opposite delivering prime example speech monday utahone lauded spectacular example orwellian doublespeak trump announced unprecedented decision roll back federal protections lands designated national monuments barack obama bill clinton began praising utahs stunning natural beauty using language conservationist rather conservative know feel blessed living among glorious natural wonders anywhere world cherish utahs gleaming rivers sweeping valleys take inspiration majestic peaks look upon many winding canyons glowing vistas marvel beauty gods greatest creation trump quickly pivoted idea government ruining states natural beauty saying people think natural resources utah controlled small handful distant bureaucrats located washington followed convincing argument free land governments clutches course made mention small handful corporate elites free plunder oil gas trapped beneath utahs mountains valleys also repeatedly referred federal governments control rather protection land national monuments designated precisely people enjoy public lands protect devastation trump party know full well spell really want commons none indeed polls show federal protection lands hugely popular among ordinary americans timeless bond outdoors replaced whims regulators trump said refusing mention bond would whims voracious extractive industries instead trump also made mention outrage among five indigenous tribes fought national monument designation years launched lawsuit president cognitive linguists george lakoff explained right skillfully reframes issues trump utah order appeal base recent months psychologists used similar concept called moral foundations theory explain rankandfile conservatives respond certain framing language certainly reframing rightwing rhetoric crucial common understanding great heist underway even important republican talking points reframed seeing every action part pattern plunder especially attacks communities color facing immediate dangers safety dignity past year indigenous americans along africanamericans undocumented immigrants muslims lgbtq communities borne brunt trump gops cruelty responding supreme court order latest version trumps muslim ban zahra billoo council americanislamic relations told interview important see decision linked attacks various communities environment fallout tax bill etc related part trump administrations white supremacist classist agenda right muslim ban part broad agenda racialreligious intolerance even broadly oppression minority groups injustice goes hand hand rightwing assault commons environment health wellbeing ability collectively organize thrive movement black lives mbl recognized released broad platform last year demanding end war black people time calling economic justice community control political power sense organization expressing grand unified theory articulating demands seemingly disparate unifying single platform despite facebook founder mark zuckerberg technocratic ilk may say supporting black lives matter despite support democratic party establishment expresses people color end wealthy liberal elites yes favored phrase right one actually apply refuse swap profits racial gender justice mbl groups long understood corporate elites wont trade economic power common good equate market freedom human freedoms corporate elites problem matter fall spectrum social politics folks claim im social liberal fiscal conservative part problem social fiscal conservatives prime example plunder lands owned considered sacred indigenous groups utah story demonstratescorporate entities put profits rights nations original inhabitants another example impunity police disproportionate mass incarceration black americans private corporations stand make huge amounts money government prison contracts militarization police similar analysis made renewed crackdown immigrants thriving immigrant detention industry promotion wars brown people foreign nations drive profits weapons manufacturers private mercenary firms grand unified theory politics small group wealthy corporate elites taken political power means massive wealth amassed goal amass even wealth corporate profitmaking lens profit value addressing racial gender justice value universal health care quality education higher wages pristine air water land funding goals leaves less money wealthy elites writing precisely issue longtime writer activist academic charles derber sociology professor boston college interview new book welcome revolution universalizing resistance social justice democracy perilous times derber said idea intersectionality important various crises facingclimate change predatory capitalism militarism extreme sexism racism antiimmigration forththese issues largely viewed media quite years left relatively autonomous understanding issues systemically intertwined like dna wrapped lost large degree derber cited martin luther king jr near end life made crucial links racism militarism capitalism way made formidable enemy state fact says author 1960s last time masses people us universalized resistance power coincidence also last time many americans politically educated mobilized effectively take trumpism republican party agenda need adopt universal approach grand unified theory political resistance organizing indeed right done precisely equating prosperity morality take political power reshape nation worldview time rest us catch path feeling powerful face relentless assaults opposed powerlessness leaving many us feeling paralyzed | 978 |
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>When I was hanging out with the youth element of the Revolutionary Unions (RU) back in the early to mid-1970s, there was a fellow member who attended American University and was part of our branch. While returning from a meeting in Washington, DC one afternoon, our conversation turned to what brought us to leftist politics. During the course of the conversation, she related that she was originally interested in libertarianism until Alex-an RU organizer and member of our branch-explained via the use of history that even if capitalism could exist as the libertarians envisioned, it could not remain within that vision because capitalism requires profit to survive. Since profit requires a continual expansion (or atomization) of markets and the accrual of profit by some capitalists means that other capitalists would not be able to make a profit since the amount of capital (money) is finite. This creates intensified competition among the capitalists, which in turn causes the less predatory businesses to fail, thereby creating monopolies and inequality in their wake. In other words, a fair capitalism that depended completely on the fairness of the market could not exist for any amount of time because the market can not remain fair. That’s the only verifiable outcome of the capitalist economic experience.</p>
<p>But this piece isn’t about libertarianism in the general sense of the word. In fact, it is about the current campaign run by Ron Paul and his supporters for nomination to be the GOP’s standard bearer for the 2008 presidential election. More specifically, it is about a growing trend on the left side of the spectrum to support that campaign. Naturally, I am in total support of Mr. Paul’s call to end the war and occupation of Iraq immediately and I applaud his ability to make that call something that other politicians must respond to. I also support the standard libertarian call for legalization of marijuana. In addition, there are other elements of Paul’s campaign that are quite appealing. However, the Libertarian hatred of labor unions and public education, opposition to universal health care and their generally objectivist (as in Ayn Rand) approach to human societal relations leaves me cold.</p>
<p>When one reads most left/progressive calls to support Mr. Paul, they tend to dismiss these and other libertarian aspects of Paul’s program by stating that these extremist views will never succeed because the moderate and progressive voices in Congress won’t allow them to. This argument is politically naïve and potentially dangerous. After all, who would have ever thought that the moderate and progressive voices in Congress would have passed the PATRIOT Act, given the White House blanket permission to wage war whenever and wherever it wishes, and steal billions of dollars from working Americans to hand to their wealthiest countrymen? In essence, what I’m saying here is that Congress can be convinced to do almost anything contrary to the majority of its constituents’ interests.</p>
<p>The solution Ron Paul appears to provide is inviting if for no other reason than its sheer simplicity. Vote for Paul in the GOP primaries and get him into the presidential race. Then elect him president. Then he will end the war. That alone is reason enough for many fervent (and not-so-fervent) anti-warriors. Hell, a half-dozen of my old leftie friends are seriously considering the idea and I have to admit there are times it even appeals to me. After all, not too many other candidates have consistently opposed allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant or continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight. Even fewer said of the 2001 attack on Afghanistan while connecting it to Unocal’s desire to build a gas pipeline through the country: “The terrorist enemy is no more an entity than the “mob”or some international criminal gang. It certainly is not a country, nor is it the Afghan people…. The Afghan people did nothing to deserve another war.”</p>
<p>However, I can’t give my vote to Mr. Paul. I can’t ignore the repercussions of the libertarian capitalism Mr. Paul espouses, especially in a world where corporate monopolies have been ruling the market for over a hundred years and, by doing so, have made any possibility of a free, much less fair, market absolutely impossible. I can’t ignore his musings about preventing people from so-called terrorist countries from visiting the United States. I can’t ignore his yes votes on building a fence along the Mexican border, or his vote against tipping off immigrants about the Minuteman Project, or on reporting undocumented residents who receive hospital treatment. Furthermore, his calls to find and deport every person living in the United States with an invalid (or no) visa and to end the constitutionally guaranteed citizenship of every person born in the United States are just plain wrong and would increase the police state he claims to oppose. I can’t ignore his votes against restricting employer interference in union organizing or his opposition to increasing the minimum wage. I couldn’t ignore Ronald Reagan or George Bush’s fundamentally anti-labor positions and I won’t ignore Mr. Paul’s. Nor can I ignore Mr. Paul’s position against women’s reproductive choice. His vote to ban gay adoptions in DC ticks me off as does his vote against continuing the moratorium on drilling for oil offshore, his vote for continuing military recruitment on college campuses, and his support for the Star Wars weaponry plan (SDI).</p>
<p>What the support for Ron Paul among potentially progressive voters signifies to me is the failure of today’s left to enunciate an anti-imperialist position better than that put forth by the libertarian right. This is not a new phenomenon in US history. Indeed, some of the members of the Anti-Imperialist League of the late nineteenth century were much closer to the Ron Paul philosophy than anything Marx, Lenin, or Luxembourg ever wrote. This is not necessarily because that philosophy is a better one, but it is certainly better received in a capitalist nation like the US. The most positive thing I can pull out of the Ron Paul phenomenon is that the people of the United States want something radically different. In a capitalist society, radical capitalism is as far as many folks will go–and that’s essentially what libertarianism is.</p>
<p>But, say the supporters of Paul who consider themselves progressive or left, he has promised to end the war. My immediate response is, so have Kucinich and Mike Gravel, so why not lend them your support? At least on the slight chance they got elected they wouldn’t want to turn the country into a greater paradise for predatory capitalism than it already is. My more thoughtful response is that nothing-especially nothing as important as ending the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan-can be solved simply by voting another face into the White House. Getting rid of the current one and replacing him with someone who has at least expressed a desire to end those adventures is certainly a step in the right direction, but only a widespread and mobilized movement willing to use a multitude of tactics is going to accomplish that. On the other hand, do I think it’s the end of the world if Ron Paul gets your vote (or gets elected)? Of course not. In fact, a vote for Ron Paul is certainly a better use of the franchise than a vote for almost any of the other candidates currently running. For better or worse.</p>
<p>RON JACOBS is author of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1859841678/counterpunchmaga" type="external">The Way the Wind Blew: a history of the Weather Underground</a>, which is just republished by Verso. Jacobs’ essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch’s collection on music, art and sex, <a href="http://www.easycarts.net/ecarts/CounterPunch/CP_Books.html" type="external">Serpents in the Garden</a>. His first novel, <a href="" type="internal">Short Order Frame Up,</a> is published by Mainstay Press. He can be reached at: <a href="mailto:rjacobs3625@charter.net" type="external">rjacobs3625@charter.net</a></p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | 160 hanging youth element revolutionary unions ru back early mid1970s fellow member attended american university part branch returning meeting washington dc one afternoon conversation turned brought us leftist politics course conversation related originally interested libertarianism alexan ru organizer member branchexplained via use history even capitalism could exist libertarians envisioned could remain within vision capitalism requires profit survive since profit requires continual expansion atomization markets accrual profit capitalists means capitalists would able make profit since amount capital money finite creates intensified competition among capitalists turn causes less predatory businesses fail thereby creating monopolies inequality wake words fair capitalism depended completely fairness market could exist amount time market remain fair thats verifiable outcome capitalist economic experience piece isnt libertarianism general sense word fact current campaign run ron paul supporters nomination gops standard bearer 2008 presidential election specifically growing trend left side spectrum support campaign naturally total support mr pauls call end war occupation iraq immediately applaud ability make call something politicians must respond also support standard libertarian call legalization marijuana addition elements pauls campaign quite appealing however libertarian hatred labor unions public education opposition universal health care generally objectivist ayn rand approach human societal relations leaves cold one reads leftprogressive calls support mr paul tend dismiss libertarian aspects pauls program stating extremist views never succeed moderate progressive voices congress wont allow argument politically naïve potentially dangerous would ever thought moderate progressive voices congress would passed patriot act given white house blanket permission wage war whenever wherever wishes steal billions dollars working americans hand wealthiest countrymen essence im saying congress convinced almost anything contrary majority constituents interests solution ron paul appears provide inviting reason sheer simplicity vote paul gop primaries get presidential race elect president end war alone reason enough many fervent notsofervent antiwarriors hell halfdozen old leftie friends seriously considering idea admit times even appeals many candidates consistently opposed allowing electronic surveillance without warrant continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight even fewer said 2001 attack afghanistan connecting unocals desire build gas pipeline country terrorist enemy entity mobor international criminal gang certainly country afghan people afghan people nothing deserve another war however cant give vote mr paul cant ignore repercussions libertarian capitalism mr paul espouses especially world corporate monopolies ruling market hundred years made possibility free much less fair market absolutely impossible cant ignore musings preventing people socalled terrorist countries visiting united states cant ignore yes votes building fence along mexican border vote tipping immigrants minuteman project reporting undocumented residents receive hospital treatment furthermore calls find deport every person living united states invalid visa end constitutionally guaranteed citizenship every person born united states plain wrong would increase police state claims oppose cant ignore votes restricting employer interference union organizing opposition increasing minimum wage couldnt ignore ronald reagan george bushs fundamentally antilabor positions wont ignore mr pauls ignore mr pauls position womens reproductive choice vote ban gay adoptions dc ticks vote continuing moratorium drilling oil offshore vote continuing military recruitment college campuses support star wars weaponry plan sdi support ron paul among potentially progressive voters signifies failure todays left enunciate antiimperialist position better put forth libertarian right new phenomenon us history indeed members antiimperialist league late nineteenth century much closer ron paul philosophy anything marx lenin luxembourg ever wrote necessarily philosophy better one certainly better received capitalist nation like us positive thing pull ron paul phenomenon people united states want something radically different capitalist society radical capitalism far many folks goand thats essentially libertarianism say supporters paul consider progressive left promised end war immediate response kucinich mike gravel lend support least slight chance got elected wouldnt want turn country greater paradise predatory capitalism already thoughtful response nothingespecially nothing important ending occupation iraq afghanistancan solved simply voting another face white house getting rid current one replacing someone least expressed desire end adventures certainly step right direction widespread mobilized movement willing use multitude tactics going accomplish hand think end world ron paul gets vote gets elected course fact vote ron paul certainly better use franchise vote almost candidates currently running better worse ron jacobs author way wind blew history weather underground republished verso jacobs essay big bill broonzy featured counterpunchs collection music art sex serpents garden first novel short order frame published mainstay press reached rjacobs3625charternet 160 160 | 702 |
<p>Noam ChomskyPhoto Credit: The Real News Network</p>
<p>As the war of words between presidential candidates has only begun to ratchet up, I’ve already grown battle-weary, anxious and disheartened.</p>
<p>While critiquing the existing state of affairs in his essay “State of the Union” (The Nation, 1975), Gore Vidal shared the following observation: “There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat.” Far from a mere witty turn of phrase, what Vidal alluded to was the not so inconspicuous trend of both camps gradually realigning themselves further “right” (conventional, constrained) on issues despite enthralling rhetoric that would suggest otherwise. Forty years later, his&#160; <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra_%28metaphor%29" type="external">Cassandra dilemma&#160;</a>regarding the abandonment of liberalism still rings true though its significance holds no sway over those deafened by partisan favoritism.</p>
<p>In my piece “ <a href="//www.patheos.com/blogs/notesfromanapostate/2015/08/under-the-microscope-black-conservatives/" type="external">Under the Microscope: Black Conservatives</a>,” I clarify that, though I hold very progressive political views contra conservatism, I do&#160;not&#160;identify as a Democrat. Part of the reason is due to the fact that many Democrat officials—and thus the political platform they epitomize and endorse—simply don’t push for truly liberal-leaning policies that would catalyze radical change this nation so desperately needs.</p>
<p>The term liberal comes from the Latin&#160;liberalis, which means “pertaining to a free person.” Within the confines of political discourse, liberalism prescriptively refers to one open to new behavior and willing to discard traditional values, the antithesis of “Traditional Values™,” a revered cornerstone of conservative ideation. Why, then, does it appear Democrats have a tendency to disavow programs that would coincide with their adoptive moniker?</p>
<p>Seeking insight regarding this political malaise, I was able to pick the brain of Professor Noam Chomsky, renowned philosopher and linguist. The world’s leading political theorist had this to say about today’s incarnation of the Democrat and Republican parties:</p>
<p>Both parties have shifted well to the right, the Republicans almost off the spectrum. Respected conservative commentator Norman Ornstein described them, plausible, as a "radical insurgency" that has largely abandoned parliamentary politics. Democrats now are mostly what used to be called "moderate Republicans." There’s ample evidence that most of the population, at the lower end of the income spectrum, is effectively disenfranchised – their representatives pay no attention to their opinions. Moving up the income ladder, influence increases slowly, but it’s only at the very top that it has real impact. Plutocracy masquerading as formal democracy.</p>
<p>The frameworks of this nation’s political system is an&#160; <a href="//talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/princeton-scholar-demise-of-democracy-america-tpm-interview" type="external">ostensible democracy as studies reveal</a>, which is only a secret to the apathetic or those living under a rock. In an in-depth interview to be published later this week, Professor Justin Lewis—political analyst and media critic—echoes the sentiment of Chomsky regarding the erasure of left representation, which makes sense given their collaborative work titled&#160; <a href="//www.mediaed.org/assets/products/114/transcript_114.pdf" type="external">The Myth of the Liberal Media: The Propaganda Model of News&#160;</a>(see&#160; <a href="https://youtu.be/E8oHl3ooeZo" type="external">video here</a>).</p>
<p>Much of Lewis’ research focuses on how there’s many issues wherein the U.S. public are to the left of both main parties but that such polling results are rarely referenced due to it conflicting with conventional political agenda. By contrast, what we tend to see is polling data that reinforces views aligned with mainstream party debates: That which is “Part of the Plan.”</p>
<p>Now, regarding my despondency.</p>
<p>None of the presidential hopefuls impress me, which is par for the course. That said, Bernie Sanders appears to be an apparition of hope for real social progress that would be absent within the&#160;neo-conservative&#160;seriously-not-liberal regime of Hilary Clinton and would degenerate midst the clutches of any Republican candidacy. There are significant drawbacks with Sanders (e.g., insinuations that he’d maintain “business as usual” regarding foreign policy is egregious), but in a race advertising 31 flavors of the horrible and grotesque, he’s a somewhat bitter-sweet relief for those desiring a faint taste of liberal representation.</p>
<p>Chomsky seems to agree. When asked about the more noteworthy contenders in the 2016 presidential race, he said:</p>
<p>Sanders is a decent New Dealer, way to the left in the current U.S. political system. I don’t agree with some of his stands, but he’s a breath of fresh air. Clinton’s a centrist Democrat, Bush a right-wing Republican, sane by today’s weird standards. Trump is a very dangerous demagogue, though one can understand his appeal after decades of stagnation and loss of hope, even though the targets of the fears and angers are misplaced.</p>
<p>The problem is the Wu Tang Clan were right: cash rules everything around me. The Big Two (re: Democrats, Republicans) receive a substantial chunk of financial support from corporate entities that demand politicians reciprocate with supporting policies that favor them. Those who don’t capitulate to these typically conservative forces aren’t likely to be viable contenders, which is one of the reasons why Bernie Sanders is seen as an underdog compared to corporate sycophant Hilary Clinton.</p>
<p>It’s still difficult for me to take Donald Trump’s run seriously. I get that his sideshow bravado swept up in mainstream media’s captivation is dangerous in a way. I also concede with many points made regarding Trump being&#160; <a href="//www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/28/donald-trump-is-the-new-face-of-white-supremacy/" type="external">the new face of white supremacy</a>. The thing is, the appeal of this uncouth loudmouth isn’t proof that his explicitly racist, sexist, Islamophobic, and privilege-induced ramblings are in any way valid, but rather a collective sigh of discontent with common political sophistry. We live in a society that craves entertainment and those with whom we can identify—Trump delivers on these attributes though lacking any real substance sheltered away behind that obtuse curtain guarded by blowhard antics. Also, keep in mind this white-oriented culture just endured eight years of having to call a&#160;Black&#160;man their leader…Trump’s present success—given what he represents—doesn’t surprise me.</p>
<p>Moreover, people want tangible change that amounts to more than just a catchy slogan. For the right, that means supporting candidates that thrive on victim blaming, yearn to hinder and divest in policies that aid women, LGBTQIA, immigrants, and people of color, and will greenlight stricter theocratic legislation. For the ostensible left, that means (thus far) placing odds on one of two choices: one with considerable clout but a distant stranger to liberal principles though she feigns otherwise, and one who, though far from flawless, actually bears resemblance to a liberal candidate.</p>
<p>Liberalism is important to me, and likely to anyone else of a similar mindset, because the way progress is effectively enacted across social institutions—the complex of positions, roles, norms and values lodged in particular types of social structures—is by way of evolving and forward-thinking. These standards are prone to stimulate directives targeting the marginalized and support multiculturalism, which literally (seriously,&#160;literally) contradicts the motivations and interests of conservative ideology.</p>
<p>You’d think more would be on board for further development and more inclusionary lawmaking…but then I remember those who benefit from the status quo are more inclined to relish the current horse-and-buggy-pace of societal maturation, or even champion a&#160;devolution&#160;to “The Good Old Days” (read: Dixiecratic, “Jim Crow wasn’t so bad” resolve) where it’d be more widely acceptable to not consider classism, ableism, toxic masculinity, racism, transantagonism, etc. I understand being a decent person is “hard” for those who adore their&#160; <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privilege_%28social_inequality%29" type="external">privilege</a>. These are the people who perceive their abject disconnect from those who are&#160; <a href="https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/othering" type="external">othered&#160;</a>as a sign of the outsider’s weakness instead of realizing the frailty is their own.</p>
<p>And so I sit, battle weary, anxious, and disheartened. Liberalism isn’t dead, but when it comes to a political institution that prefers stagnancy, it sure is hard to come by.</p>
<p>Sincere Kirabo ( <a href="https://twitter.com/sinkirabo" type="external">@sinkirabo</a>) is the social justice coordinator with the American Humanist Association. He writes about secular humanism, culture and politics from an intersectional approach.</p> | true | 4 | noam chomskyphoto credit real news network war words presidential candidates begun ratchet ive already grown battleweary anxious disheartened critiquing existing state affairs essay state union nation 1975 gore vidal shared following observation one party united states property party two right wings republican democrat far mere witty turn phrase vidal alluded inconspicuous trend camps gradually realigning right conventional constrained issues despite enthralling rhetoric would suggest otherwise forty years later his160 cassandra dilemma160regarding abandonment liberalism still rings true though significance holds sway deafened partisan favoritism piece microscope black conservatives clarify though hold progressive political views contra conservatism do160not160identify democrat part reason due fact many democrat officialsand thus political platform epitomize endorsesimply dont push truly liberalleaning policies would catalyze radical change nation desperately needs term liberal comes latin160liberalis means pertaining free person within confines political discourse liberalism prescriptively refers one open new behavior willing discard traditional values antithesis traditional values revered cornerstone conservative ideation appear democrats tendency disavow programs would coincide adoptive moniker seeking insight regarding political malaise able pick brain professor noam chomsky renowned philosopher linguist worlds leading political theorist say todays incarnation democrat republican parties parties shifted well right republicans almost spectrum respected conservative commentator norman ornstein described plausible radical insurgency largely abandoned parliamentary politics democrats mostly used called moderate republicans theres ample evidence population lower end income spectrum effectively disenfranchised representatives pay attention opinions moving income ladder influence increases slowly top real impact plutocracy masquerading formal democracy frameworks nations political system an160 ostensible democracy studies reveal secret apathetic living rock indepth interview published later week professor justin lewispolitical analyst media criticechoes sentiment chomsky regarding erasure left representation makes sense given collaborative work titled160 myth liberal media propaganda model news160see160 video much lewis research focuses theres many issues wherein us public left main parties polling results rarely referenced due conflicting conventional political agenda contrast tend see polling data reinforces views aligned mainstream party debates part plan regarding despondency none presidential hopefuls impress par course said bernie sanders appears apparition hope real social progress would absent within the160neoconservative160seriouslynotliberal regime hilary clinton would degenerate midst clutches republican candidacy significant drawbacks sanders eg insinuations hed maintain business usual regarding foreign policy egregious race advertising 31 flavors horrible grotesque hes somewhat bittersweet relief desiring faint taste liberal representation chomsky seems agree asked noteworthy contenders 2016 presidential race said sanders decent new dealer way left current us political system dont agree stands hes breath fresh air clintons centrist democrat bush rightwing republican sane todays weird standards trump dangerous demagogue though one understand appeal decades stagnation loss hope even though targets fears angers misplaced problem wu tang clan right cash rules everything around big two democrats republicans receive substantial chunk financial support corporate entities demand politicians reciprocate supporting policies favor dont capitulate typically conservative forces arent likely viable contenders one reasons bernie sanders seen underdog compared corporate sycophant hilary clinton still difficult take donald trumps run seriously get sideshow bravado swept mainstream medias captivation dangerous way also concede many points made regarding trump being160 new face white supremacy thing appeal uncouth loudmouth isnt proof explicitly racist sexist islamophobic privilegeinduced ramblings way valid rather collective sigh discontent common political sophistry live society craves entertainment identifytrump delivers attributes though lacking real substance sheltered away behind obtuse curtain guarded blowhard antics also keep mind whiteoriented culture endured eight years call a160black160man leadertrumps present successgiven representsdoesnt surprise moreover people want tangible change amounts catchy slogan right means supporting candidates thrive victim blaming yearn hinder divest policies aid women lgbtqia immigrants people color greenlight stricter theocratic legislation ostensible left means thus far placing odds one two choices one considerable clout distant stranger liberal principles though feigns otherwise one though far flawless actually bears resemblance liberal candidate liberalism important likely anyone else similar mindset way progress effectively enacted across social institutionsthe complex positions roles norms values lodged particular types social structuresis way evolving forwardthinking standards prone stimulate directives targeting marginalized support multiculturalism literally seriously160literally contradicts motivations interests conservative ideology youd think would board development inclusionary lawmakingbut remember benefit status quo inclined relish current horseandbuggypace societal maturation even champion a160devolution160to good old days read dixiecratic jim crow wasnt bad resolve itd widely acceptable consider classism ableism toxic masculinity racism transantagonism etc understand decent person hard adore their160 privilege people perceive abject disconnect are160 othered160as sign outsiders weakness instead realizing frailty sit battle weary anxious disheartened liberalism isnt dead comes political institution prefers stagnancy sure hard come sincere kirabo sinkirabo social justice coordinator american humanist association writes secular humanism culture politics intersectional approach | 748 |
<p />
<p><a href="#one" type="external">Howard Dean, Frontrunner?</a> Who knew? Vermont’s angriest doctor isn’t just a vanity candidate any more.</p>
<p><a href="#two" type="external">Sticking to a Cease-Fire</a> Palestinians and Israelis see a lot of the same-old same-old. They also see a crucial moment.</p>
<p><a href="#three" type="external">Greenpeace Ousted</a> The organization charged with protecting our seas thinks activists are more dangerous than rusty tankers.</p>
<p />
<p><a type="external" href="">Howard Dean, Frontrunner?</a> For Howard Dean, it’s been a good couple of days. The Democratic presidential candidate and former Governor of Vermont placed first in MoveOn.org’s nonbinding but influential <a href="/news/dailymojo/2003/06/we_473_01.html" type="external">online primary</a> last week, soundly beating the field’s nominal frontrunner, John Kerry, as well as lefty favorite Dennis Kucinich. And just yesterday, Dean announced that his fundraising totals for the second quarter would <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48629-2003Jun29.html?nav=hptoc_p" type="external">top $6 million</a> — possibly more than any other Democratic candidate, and certainly more than anyone expected from his insurgent campaign.</p>
<p>Dean’s early success is due in no small part to the Internet. He has <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/06/30/dean.internet.ap/" type="external">tapped its power</a> in a way that no other candidate ever has, launching a surging grassroots organizing effort through his official <a href="http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer" type="external">site</a>, and raking in donations online. Along the way, Dean has inspired excitement in voters — largely due to his willingness to take on the White House aggressively. As Time‘s Joe Klein notes, ” … [T]he former Governor of Vermont has emerged as <a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030630-460238,00.html" type="external">the one Democrat who can draw a crowd</a>.”</p>
<p />
<p>“In any case, Dean has unlocked a fairly new and vibrant Democratic constituency that transcends his left-wing peacenik stereotype. It is young, middle class, white and wired.”</p>
<p>Dean also seems poised to inherit John McCain’s <a href="http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/174/nation/For_Dean_insurgent_tactics_can_cut_two_ways+.shtml" type="external">“Straight Talk” mantle</a> from the last presidential race, as the Boston Globe‘s Sarah Schweitzer reports. Though McCain himself is <a href="http://www2.bostonherald.com/news/national/kerr06302003.htm" type="external">pulling for Kerry</a> to win the nomination, the similarities between Dean and the maverick Republican are apparent.</p>
<p />
<p>“As he formally declares his bid for the presidency today, Dean is tapping into the tell-it-like-it-is strategy that Senator John S. McCain, Republican of Arizona, used in the 2000 primary. To supporters, Dean is the candidate most aggressively lobbing criticism at Bush, often with a work-with-me-here, raised eyebrow.</p>
<p>‘He is the only one making the noises I want to hear,’ said Bob Hedler of Manchester, after hearing Dean offer his oft-repeated mantra of beating Bush by not being like him.”</p>
<p>For better or worse, then, Dean is no longer a dark horse. He has become a contender. And with his new status comes new danger. Suddenly, his critics are legion: Republicans and mainstream Democrats are demonizing him for his supposed radical liberal politics. Critics on the left, however, having looked at his intermittently progressive record, are wondering what all the fuss is about.</p>
<p>In a typically vitriolic piece on the right-wing American Daily, Doug Patton castigates Dean for his <a href="http://www.americandaily.com/item/1032" type="external">supposedly far-left agenda</a>.</p>
<p />
<p>“Back here in the real world, a man named Howard Dean is running for president, and what he is selling is a snake oil worse than anything ever pedaled door-to-door or at any MLM convention. In fact, what Howard Dean is pushing would make FDR gasp and Lenin applaud.”</p>
<p>Nor is the Washington establishment embracing him with open arms. A recent Washington Post editorial read like a laundry list of Dean’s faults, and ended with these grudging sentiments: “And so, Mr. Dean: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43459-2003Jun27.html" type="external">Welcome to the race — we suppose</a>.” Additionally, the centrist Democratic Leadership Council — which is tied to Connecticut Senator and presidential hopeful Joseph Lieberman — clearly views Dean as a threat, as it demonstrated in a <a href="http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=127&amp;subid=900056&amp;contentid=%20251690" type="external">sneering, now-infamous memo</a> sent out in May.</p>
<p />
<p>“What activists like Dean call the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party is an aberration: the McGovern-Mondale wing, defined principally by weakness abroad and elitist, interest-group liberalism at home. That’s the wing that lost 49 states in two elections, and transformed Democrats from a strong national party into a much weaker regional one.”</p>
<p>Dean’s politics, though, bear little resemblance to those of the Democrats’ most notorious losers. In fact, they look more like one of its most enduringly popular (albeit divisive) figures: Bill Clinton. While Dean is pro-choice and supports same-sex civil unions, he is pro-gun, pro-death penalty, and as hawkish on <a href="http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16280" type="external">Iran and Israel</a> as many of the neoconservatives running the White House today.</p>
<p>Indeed, as Norman Solomon observes, there’s <a href="http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=15232&amp;CFID=81%2078495&amp;CFTOKEN=3253804" type="external">a real disconnect</a> between Dean’s media image and his record.</p>
<p />
<p>“But the Democratic Leadership Council need not despair. Most of the nation’s political journalists, including pro-Democrat pundits, insist that the party should not nominate someone too far ‘left’ — which usually means anybody who’s appreciably more progressive than the DLC. That bias helps to account for the frequent mislabeling of Howard Dean, the former Vermont governor who has risen to the top tier of contenders for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination.</p>
<p>After Dean officially announced his campaign on June 23, some news stories identified him with the left. It’s a case of mistaken identity. ‘He’s really a classic Rockefeller Republican — a fiscal conservative and social liberal,’ according to University of Vermont political scientist Garrison Nelson.”</p>
<p>Slate‘s William Saletan notices the discrepancy, too. The establishment doesn’t have much to worry about, he writes: “Dean <a href="http://slate.msn.com/id/2084735/" type="external">isn’t nearly the left-winger his fans or critics imagine</a>.”</p>
<p />
<p><a type="external" href="">Sticking to a Cease-Fire</a> After months of refusing to budge on the precise prerequisites for a cease-fire, both Ariel Sharon and the Palestinian armed-factions have agreed to temporarily put down their weapons. After thirty-three months of fighting, neither Palestinians, Israelis nor political analysts are holding out much hope that the violence will end for more than a moment. There is the expected despair and pessimism, but there are also several important developments.</p>
<p>The Sharon administration’s actions have seemed as schizophrenic as usual. On the one hand, the same old “terrorist” labels are being thrown around. Silvan Shalom, Israel’s Foreign Minister <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,987781,00.html" type="external">while meeting with Condoleezza Rice</a> called the cease-fire was a “ticking bomb” that would “maintain the infrastructure of terror.” On the other hand, the Israeli army is actually pulling out of parts of Gaza and planning to remove additional troops from the West Bank later in the week. Even Sharon displayed <a href="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&amp;cid=540&amp;e=1&amp;u=/ap/20030630/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians" type="external">a rare patience</a> with the Palestinian Authority after the fatal shooting of one Israel’s foreign workers in the West Bank. Sharon told Knesset members: “Even if the Palestinians were the fastest in the world and the most determined, you can’t expect them to destroy terrorism in a moment, since this morning.” That statement is a far cry from Sharon’s recent demands for zero violence before a cease-fire. In addition to that somewhat more lenient take on the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade attack, Sharon plans to meet with Abbas on Tuesday to further discuss the roadmap.</p>
<p>It’s significant that Hamas and Islamic Jihad have agreed to suspend their attacks for three months, even if the Al-Aqsa Brigade did not agree to the hudna (cease-fire) agreement. Palestinian journalist, Daoud Kuttab, writes in the Lebanon Daily Star that Hamas’ agreement to a “hudna” could signify an important shift in Palestinian politics. Kuttab notes that by using the Koranic phrase, the Palestinian Authority is lending the two Islamic movements an “ <a href="http://www.dailystar.com.lb/opinion/28_06_03_e1.asp" type="external">ideological ladder to climb down from</a>.”</p>
<p>“[W]hile the cessation of anti-Israeli violence is the declared goal of this hudna, the real goal should be the successful integration of these hard-line groups into a pragmatic political process in which they can participate in the decision-making apparatus with the responsibilities that this entails.</p>
<p>From the hard-liner who spoke about a violent struggle until all of historic Palestine is liberated (without much discussion of where the Israeli Jewish population would go) to more moderate Islamists who said that their military resistance would continue until the end of the 1967 occupation and that after that their struggle would be political. The real meaning of this hudna is therefore the capitulation of both these positions.”</p>
<p>In the long-term, a viable political way out for the Islamic militants is clearly essential. In the short run, most Palestinians are doubtful that the cease-fire will change the status quo. One Palestinian official told Ha’aretz that the hudna will only work if the <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=312744&amp;contrassID=2&amp;subContrassID=1&amp;sbSubContrassID=0&amp;listSrc=Y" type="external">United States pressures Israel to comply with the first stages of the road map</a>, like pulling Israeli troops from parts of the West Bank and Gaza and freezing all settlement activity.</p>
<p>Even though the Israeli tanks are rolling out of Palestinian communities, Palestinians don’t see much cause for celebration. Islam Online reports that impoverished Gazans see Israel’s cease-fire as a <a href="http://palestinechronicle.com/article.php?story=20030630181522830" type="external">dishonest political maneuver</a>. As one woman interviewed put it: “The truce is just an ink on paper, as the Israeli government would not comply with it.” She pointed to the remains of her demolished house and added: “Before they set down for talks with Israel, they should have come here.”</p>
<p>But as Bradley Burston reports in Ha’aretz many Palestinians and Israelis are pushing their leaders towards a cease-fire out of <a href="http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=313081&amp;displayTypeCd=1&amp;sideCd=1&amp;contrassID=2" type="external">economic necessity</a>. One self-identified right-wing Israeli man in the working-class town of Dimona explained that there is “no way around” negotiations.</p>
<p>“Palestinians want to go out to work, without a Merkava (tank cannon) barrel swinging at them, and Israelis want to get on the bus to work in the morning without being blown threw [sic] the roof.”</p>
<p>In that spirit of necessity, hundreds of Palestinian and Israeli civilians met in Ramallah this weekend for a <a href="http://www.gush-shalom.org/english/popup.html" type="external">peace-building summit</a>. The event was organized by Palestinian and Israeli leaders, including Palestinian negotiation Hanan Ashrawi and Israeli writer Uri Avnery. The group issued a statement welcoming the cease-fire, but emphasizing the need to place current events in a larger context:</p>
<p />
<p>“We welcome the increasing move towards Hudna […] and the chance to break the cycle of violence, bloodshed and killing of innocent Israelis and Palestinians — but a cease-fire can be no more than one step in the right direction. A stable and lasting peace cannot be achieved without putting a complete end to the occupation which is the root cause of the hatred and bloodshed. Leaders, politicians and diplomats cannot be relied on to do the job alone. There is needed a daily struggle for peace, a grassroots struggle, a joint struggle of committed citizens from both sides, acting together.”</p>
<p>Ultimately, analysts agree that the conflict has reached a pivotal moment. Akiva Eldar of Ha’aretz warns that another failed cease-fire could intensify the violence and lead Palestinian and Israeli extremists <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=312764&amp;contrassID=2&amp;subContrassID=4&amp;sbSubContrassID=0&amp;listSrc=Y" type="external">to become even more entrenched in their positions</a>.</p>
<p />
<p>“The cease-fire is playing with fire. In order to limit the danger that it will lead to a third intifada, worse than its predecessors, all the sides involved must stay within the bounds of the current game — stopping the violence and incitement on one side, and stopping construction of Jewish settlements and the separation fence on the other.”</p>
<p />
<p />
<p><a type="external" href="">Greenpeace Ousted</a> Greenpeace — a longtime advocate for eco-justice, well known for its subversive but often effective techniques — may be forced out of its decade-long tenure as a consultant on the board of the <a href="http://www.imo.org/" type="external">International Maritime Organization’s</a>. IMO’s suprise decision has sparked a debate as to whether Greenpeace’s unorthodox protest methods are cutting edge or, as IMO claims, unsafe. But Greenpeace — which joined the IMO’s advisory board after the <a href="http://www.oilspill.state.ak.us/facts/details.html" type="external">Exxon Valdez spill</a> in 1989 — claims that IMO’s decision is largely due to the pressure Greenpeace has exerted on the IMO to fix its safety standards for the tanker industry’s dilapidated cargo boats.</p>
<p>IMO is a United Nations body ostensibly dedicated to the health and safety of the sea — it is intended to serve as a regulating body for the oceans’ well-being. But two weeks ago, in its 90th session meeting, it gave notice that it may oust Greenpeace — along with other non government organizations such as the Iberoamerican Institute of Maritime Law (IIDM) and the International Bar Association (IBA) — from its decision process by removing their observer status.</p>
<p>Greenpeace has been actively involved in protesting against countries that use unsafe cargo ships in order to cut costs, even when transporting oil, plutonium, and toxic waste. Two of those countries, Turkey and Australia, have lodged complaints with the IMO about Greenpeace’s methods. Greenpeace’s techniques — which have included activists chaining themselves to ships that carry dangerous cargo or <a href="http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0306/S00402.htm" type="external">illegal timber</a> — are a major affront to the shipping industry. The Environmental News Service writes:</p>
<p />
<p>“The complaint to the IMO from Turkey notes that in July of 2002, activists chained themselves to various parts of the oil tanker ‘Crude Dio’ and hung a banner reading “Stop the Oil Industry. Clean Energy Now!’</p>
<p>…</p>
<p>The shipping industry has been trying to brand Greenpeace actions as ‘dangerous’ for years, despite the organization’s view that the ‘real dangers are the cargoes such as oil, plutonium, and toxic wastes.'”</p>
<p>But Greenpeace remains adamant that its activists are <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=283904" type="external">well-versed in nautical standards</a> and that it would not place them in danger:</p>
<p />
<p>“Safety is parmount to Greenpeace at all times. Our activists are thoroughly trained, our nautical standards and expertise have earned the respect of coast guards and maritime specialists around the world. Unlike the oil industry, we don’t put other people’s lives or the environment at risk with our actions.”</p>
<p>The IMO’s final decision — which will be handed down this November — could leave the tanker companies as the only consultants to the IMO. Greenpeace claims that this incestuous relationship exists because the IMO is <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/news/details?item_id=283904" type="external">financially dependent on the tanker industry</a>:</p>
<p />
<p>“Despite the faade of noble purpose, the IMO is in fact financially dependent on the tanker industry. The dues paid by each country are determined by the tonnage of their respective fleets, which makes the large flag of convenience countries – Panama, Liberia, Greece, Cyprus, and others — the largest contributors; in turn the oil companies often pay these dues and will even represent these countries directly at the IMO. Longtime Greenpeace representative RŽmi Parmentier said ‘I remember once a Panamanean delegate with a double sided business card: one side saying Panama Consulate and the other one saying “Exxon Legal Office, NY.”‘”</p>
<p>Although Greenpeace’s status remains, as of yet, unchanged, come November, the shipping industry may have carte-blanche access to the seas. According to Greenpeace, the IMO’s statement of intention further demonstrates how the shipping industry threatens to reign supreme over the well-being of the world’s oceans:</p>
<p />
<p>“At a time when United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan has called for a strengthening of the role of civil society at all levels of the UN, removing Greenpeace from the IMO simply demonstrates the unfettered powers of the oil industry and multinational corporations in today’s world. As the doors of the IMO close to all but the corporate dealmakers and backroom politicos, Greenpeace will continue its fight to protect our oceans and its struggle against unsafe cargoes. This fragile earth deserves a voice. The IMO has a duty to listen.”</p>
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p /> | true | 4 | howard dean frontrunner knew vermonts angriest doctor isnt vanity candidate sticking ceasefire palestinians israelis see lot sameold sameold also see crucial moment greenpeace ousted organization charged protecting seas thinks activists dangerous rusty tankers howard dean frontrunner howard dean good couple days democratic presidential candidate former governor vermont placed first moveonorgs nonbinding influential online primary last week soundly beating fields nominal frontrunner john kerry well lefty favorite dennis kucinich yesterday dean announced fundraising totals second quarter would top 6 million possibly democratic candidate certainly anyone expected insurgent campaign deans early success due small part internet tapped power way candidate ever launching surging grassroots organizing effort official site raking donations online along way dean inspired excitement voters largely due willingness take white house aggressively times joe klein notes former governor vermont emerged one democrat draw crowd case dean unlocked fairly new vibrant democratic constituency transcends leftwing peacenik stereotype young middle class white wired dean also seems poised inherit john mccains straight talk mantle last presidential race boston globes sarah schweitzer reports though mccain pulling kerry win nomination similarities dean maverick republican apparent formally declares bid presidency today dean tapping tellitlikeitis strategy senator john mccain republican arizona used 2000 primary supporters dean candidate aggressively lobbing criticism bush often workwithmehere raised eyebrow one making noises want hear said bob hedler manchester hearing dean offer oftrepeated mantra beating bush like better worse dean longer dark horse become contender new status comes new danger suddenly critics legion republicans mainstream democrats demonizing supposed radical liberal politics critics left however looked intermittently progressive record wondering fuss typically vitriolic piece rightwing american daily doug patton castigates dean supposedly farleft agenda back real world man named howard dean running president selling snake oil worse anything ever pedaled doortodoor mlm convention fact howard dean pushing would make fdr gasp lenin applaud washington establishment embracing open arms recent washington post editorial read like laundry list deans faults ended grudging sentiments mr dean welcome race suppose additionally centrist democratic leadership council tied connecticut senator presidential hopeful joseph lieberman clearly views dean threat demonstrated sneering nowinfamous memo sent may activists like dean call democratic wing democratic party aberration mcgovernmondale wing defined principally weakness abroad elitist interestgroup liberalism home thats wing lost 49 states two elections transformed democrats strong national party much weaker regional one deans politics though bear little resemblance democrats notorious losers fact look like one enduringly popular albeit divisive figures bill clinton dean prochoice supports samesex civil unions progun prodeath penalty hawkish iran israel many neoconservatives running white house today indeed norman solomon observes theres real disconnect deans media image record democratic leadership council need despair nations political journalists including prodemocrat pundits insist party nominate someone far left usually means anybody whos appreciably progressive dlc bias helps account frequent mislabeling howard dean former vermont governor risen top tier contenders 2004 democratic presidential nomination dean officially announced campaign june 23 news stories identified left case mistaken identity hes really classic rockefeller republican fiscal conservative social liberal according university vermont political scientist garrison nelson slates william saletan notices discrepancy establishment doesnt much worry writes dean isnt nearly leftwinger fans critics imagine sticking ceasefire months refusing budge precise prerequisites ceasefire ariel sharon palestinian armedfactions agreed temporarily put weapons thirtythree months fighting neither palestinians israelis political analysts holding much hope violence end moment expected despair pessimism also several important developments sharon administrations actions seemed schizophrenic usual one hand old terrorist labels thrown around silvan shalom israels foreign minister meeting condoleezza rice called ceasefire ticking bomb would maintain infrastructure terror hand israeli army actually pulling parts gaza planning remove additional troops west bank later week even sharon displayed rare patience palestinian authority fatal shooting one israels foreign workers west bank sharon told knesset members even palestinians fastest world determined cant expect destroy terrorism moment since morning statement far cry sharons recent demands zero violence ceasefire addition somewhat lenient take alaqsa martyrs brigade attack sharon plans meet abbas tuesday discuss roadmap significant hamas islamic jihad agreed suspend attacks three months even alaqsa brigade agree hudna ceasefire agreement palestinian journalist daoud kuttab writes lebanon daily star hamas agreement hudna could signify important shift palestinian politics kuttab notes using koranic phrase palestinian authority lending two islamic movements ideological ladder climb cessation antiisraeli violence declared goal hudna real goal successful integration hardline groups pragmatic political process participate decisionmaking apparatus responsibilities entails hardliner spoke violent struggle historic palestine liberated without much discussion israeli jewish population would go moderate islamists said military resistance would continue end 1967 occupation struggle would political real meaning hudna therefore capitulation positions longterm viable political way islamic militants clearly essential short run palestinians doubtful ceasefire change status quo one palestinian official told haaretz hudna work united states pressures israel comply first stages road map like pulling israeli troops parts west bank gaza freezing settlement activity even though israeli tanks rolling palestinian communities palestinians dont see much cause celebration islam online reports impoverished gazans see israels ceasefire dishonest political maneuver one woman interviewed put truce ink paper israeli government would comply pointed remains demolished house added set talks israel come bradley burston reports haaretz many palestinians israelis pushing leaders towards ceasefire economic necessity one selfidentified rightwing israeli man workingclass town dimona explained way around negotiations palestinians want go work without merkava tank cannon barrel swinging israelis want get bus work morning without blown threw sic roof spirit necessity hundreds palestinian israeli civilians met ramallah weekend peacebuilding summit event organized palestinian israeli leaders including palestinian negotiation hanan ashrawi israeli writer uri avnery group issued statement welcoming ceasefire emphasizing need place current events larger context welcome increasing move towards hudna chance break cycle violence bloodshed killing innocent israelis palestinians ceasefire one step right direction stable lasting peace achieved without putting complete end occupation root cause hatred bloodshed leaders politicians diplomats relied job alone needed daily struggle peace grassroots struggle joint struggle committed citizens sides acting together ultimately analysts agree conflict reached pivotal moment akiva eldar haaretz warns another failed ceasefire could intensify violence lead palestinian israeli extremists become even entrenched positions ceasefire playing fire order limit danger lead third intifada worse predecessors sides involved must stay within bounds current game stopping violence incitement one side stopping construction jewish settlements separation fence greenpeace ousted greenpeace longtime advocate ecojustice well known subversive often effective techniques may forced decadelong tenure consultant board international maritime organizations imos suprise decision sparked debate whether greenpeaces unorthodox protest methods cutting edge imo claims unsafe greenpeace joined imos advisory board exxon valdez spill 1989 claims imos decision largely due pressure greenpeace exerted imo fix safety standards tanker industrys dilapidated cargo boats imo united nations body ostensibly dedicated health safety sea intended serve regulating body oceans wellbeing two weeks ago 90th session meeting gave notice may oust greenpeace along non government organizations iberoamerican institute maritime law iidm international bar association iba decision process removing observer status greenpeace actively involved protesting countries use unsafe cargo ships order cut costs even transporting oil plutonium toxic waste two countries turkey australia lodged complaints imo greenpeaces methods greenpeaces techniques included activists chaining ships carry dangerous cargo illegal timber major affront shipping industry environmental news service writes complaint imo turkey notes july 2002 activists chained various parts oil tanker crude dio hung banner reading stop oil industry clean energy shipping industry trying brand greenpeace actions dangerous years despite organizations view real dangers cargoes oil plutonium toxic wastes greenpeace remains adamant activists wellversed nautical standards would place danger safety parmount greenpeace times activists thoroughly trained nautical standards expertise earned respect coast guards maritime specialists around world unlike oil industry dont put peoples lives environment risk actions imos final decision handed november could leave tanker companies consultants imo greenpeace claims incestuous relationship exists imo financially dependent tanker industry despite faade noble purpose imo fact financially dependent tanker industry dues paid country determined tonnage respective fleets makes large flag convenience countries panama liberia greece cyprus others largest contributors turn oil companies often pay dues even represent countries directly imo longtime greenpeace representative rŽmi parmentier said remember panamanean delegate double sided business card one side saying panama consulate one saying exxon legal office ny although greenpeaces status remains yet unchanged come november shipping industry may carteblanche access seas according greenpeace imos statement intention demonstrates shipping industry threatens reign supreme wellbeing worlds oceans time united nations secretary general kofi annan called strengthening role civil society levels un removing greenpeace imo simply demonstrates unfettered powers oil industry multinational corporations todays world doors imo close corporate dealmakers backroom politicos greenpeace continue fight protect oceans struggle unsafe cargoes fragile earth deserves voice imo duty listen | 1,422 |
<p>The Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives narrowly passed a “trickle-down” economic stimulus package on a party-line vote that is now on the Senate’s agenda for consideration. The contentious issues boil down to a classical haves vs. have-nots conflict as the House-passed bill gives fat tax cut giveaways totaling $70 billion to big corporate and wealthy elites rather than helping out unemployed workers by increasing unemployment and health benefits.</p>
<p>The House-passed stimulus package gave the Enron Corporation a $254 million dollar tax relief gift. Enron is a Houston-based energy giant headed by Kenneth Lay, who has been a close friend of George W. Bush and a principal financier of Bush’s political endeavors. When Bush was Governor of Texas, Lay recommended appointments to state boards and called on Bush to meet with dignitaries from countries with whom Enron was hoping to do business. The longstanding corporate/political relationship goes back to the first Bush Administration when George W. used the family name to promote Enron’s ventures in Argentina. Enron was the major supplier of gas to California and, in the fourth quarter of last year, their revenues had tripled from a year earlier as energy prices soared in California’s deregulated market.</p>
<p>Enron was the largest contributor from the oil and gas industry in the 1999-2000 election cycle, giving $2.3 million in contributions. In that election cycle the oil and gas industry gave 78% of their contributions to Republicans and Bush got $1.8 million, which was more than any federal candidate received in the last 10 years. There was much speculation that Lay would become Bush’s Secretary of Energy and he has been a key advisor in shaping the Bush/Cheney energy policy that has come under legal attack by the Congressional Office of Management and Budget for being designed in secrecy by big energy executives and the White House. It calls for vastly increased gas and oil production in the United States, but belittles conservation and developing renewable energy sources.</p>
<p>In a rapid reversal of fortunes, it appears that Enron, the big energy insider, is running on empty. There is mounting evidence of indictable evil-doing by top officials of Enron, causing the N.Y. Times to report on November 7 that “various off-balance-sheet debts and related-party transactions..have drawn the attention of the S.E.C.(Securities and Exchange Commission). On November 5, the Wall Street Journal reported that “the company in March made a $35 million purchase from an entity run by a company officer.” The Journal said the payment was part of a complex series of transactions that allowed Enron to keep “hundreds of millions of dollars of debt off its balance sheets the past three years, during which the energy-trading giant has grown rapidly.” And, “In recent weeks, Enron’s labyrinth of financial transactions, particularly with members of company management, has come under intense scrutiny from investors and regulators.” Enron admitted the S.E.C. has begun a formal investigation. The Journal also reported that Enron’s auditor, Arthur Andersen, could face legal scrutiny on the clarity of Enron disclosures.</p>
<p>The Wall Street Journal also reported on the gloomy employment picture on November 5 in a front page story with headlines reading, “Slow Economy Takes Unusually Heavy Toll On White-Collar Jobs” and “As Service Sector Weakens, Once-Hot Labor Market Is Quickly Turning Cold.” On November 6, the Journal again reported on the worsening job market with a story headlined with, “Small Businesses Do What Big Firms Have Done-Cut Jobs.” The N.Y. Times told about job losses in the Cincinnati area under a headline “The Heartland Hunkers Down” and U.S.A. Today had a story entitled, “Recession Conditions Sink Several Sectors.”</p>
<p>On November 5, I received an e-mail from a women in Wisconsin who had just read an essay I wrote about the unfairness of the House version of the stimulus package. She wrote, “Dear Tom: I was just forwarded your article-Terrorizing the Poor and Subsidizing the Rich. I found it to be so true. My husband lost his job on September 19 and still hasn’t found another. He has sent out many, many resumes and has agencies also looking for him. We live 20 miles north of Milwaukee, WI. and the job market is very slim. Our unemployment check is $266 a week. The amount doesn’t even cover our mortgage payment. We don’t have any health insurance because there is no way we can afford it. My husband has been looking for agencies that might help us. He is a Vietnam Vet. So much for giving to your country when they need you. I can’t tell you how stressful this has been. Every single day it’s a worry how we will pay our bills and will we end up losing our house we have worked our entire lives for. What can we do, who can we write to and who will listen???”</p>
<p>Write your U.S. Senators and demand they stand up to corruption and evil-doers like Enron. The Senate should take away Enron’s $254 million gift and most of the $70 billion given to business interests in the House-passed stimulus bill. Jobless workers deserve the stimulus money to pay their bills and survive with dignity. CP</p>
<p>Tom Turnipseed is an attorney, writer and civil rights activist in Columbia, South Carolina. Visit his website at: <a href="http://www.turnipseed.net/" type="external">www.turnipseed.net</a></p> | true | 4 | republicancontrolled us house representatives narrowly passed trickledown economic stimulus package partyline vote senates agenda consideration contentious issues boil classical haves vs havenots conflict housepassed bill gives fat tax cut giveaways totaling 70 billion big corporate wealthy elites rather helping unemployed workers increasing unemployment health benefits housepassed stimulus package gave enron corporation 254 million dollar tax relief gift enron houstonbased energy giant headed kenneth lay close friend george w bush principal financier bushs political endeavors bush governor texas lay recommended appointments state boards called bush meet dignitaries countries enron hoping business longstanding corporatepolitical relationship goes back first bush administration george w used family name promote enrons ventures argentina enron major supplier gas california fourth quarter last year revenues tripled year earlier energy prices soared californias deregulated market enron largest contributor oil gas industry 19992000 election cycle giving 23 million contributions election cycle oil gas industry gave 78 contributions republicans bush got 18 million federal candidate received last 10 years much speculation lay would become bushs secretary energy key advisor shaping bushcheney energy policy come legal attack congressional office management budget designed secrecy big energy executives white house calls vastly increased gas oil production united states belittles conservation developing renewable energy sources rapid reversal fortunes appears enron big energy insider running empty mounting evidence indictable evildoing top officials enron causing ny times report november 7 various offbalancesheet debts relatedparty transactionshave drawn attention secsecurities exchange commission november 5 wall street journal reported company march made 35 million purchase entity run company officer journal said payment part complex series transactions allowed enron keep hundreds millions dollars debt balance sheets past three years energytrading giant grown rapidly recent weeks enrons labyrinth financial transactions particularly members company management come intense scrutiny investors regulators enron admitted sec begun formal investigation journal also reported enrons auditor arthur andersen could face legal scrutiny clarity enron disclosures wall street journal also reported gloomy employment picture november 5 front page story headlines reading slow economy takes unusually heavy toll whitecollar jobs service sector weakens oncehot labor market quickly turning cold november 6 journal reported worsening job market story headlined small businesses big firms donecut jobs ny times told job losses cincinnati area headline heartland hunkers usa today story entitled recession conditions sink several sectors november 5 received email women wisconsin read essay wrote unfairness house version stimulus package wrote dear tom forwarded articleterrorizing poor subsidizing rich found true husband lost job september 19 still hasnt found another sent many many resumes agencies also looking live 20 miles north milwaukee wi job market slim unemployment check 266 week amount doesnt even cover mortgage payment dont health insurance way afford husband looking agencies might help us vietnam vet much giving country need cant tell stressful every single day worry pay bills end losing house worked entire lives write listen write us senators demand stand corruption evildoers like enron senate take away enrons 254 million gift 70 billion given business interests housepassed stimulus bill jobless workers deserve stimulus money pay bills survive dignity cp tom turnipseed attorney writer civil rights activist columbia south carolina visit website wwwturnipseednet | 513 |
<p>John M. Ackerman is a professor at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Editor-in-Chief of the Mexican Law Review and a columnist with both La Jornada newspaper and Proceso magazine. Blog: www.johnackerman.blogspot.com Twitter: @JohnMAckerman</p>
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p /> JAISAL NOOR, TRNN PRODUCER: Welcome to The Real News Network. I'm Jaisal Noor in Baltimore.
<p />
<p />What are being described as historic protests are gripping Mexico over the disappearance of 43 college students. Government officials are now saying three suspects from a narco gang confessed to the killings and disposing of the students' bodies. Thousands have taken part in the protests that have raged across the country in recent days, and including the burning of the door of the ceremonial presidential Palace in Mexico City. The students belong to a radical teachers college, and on September 26, traveled to Iguala in the southern Mexican state of Guerrero to commandeer buses for a later protest, when police allegedly opened fire on them, killing six. Then the 43 were handed over to a notorious local drug gang with connections to the town's mayor, who along with his wife are among the dozens who have been arrested in connection to the disappearances.
<p />
<p />Now joining us to discuss this from Paris, France, is John M. Ackerman. He's a professor at the National Autonomous University of Mexico and editor-in-chief of the Mexican Law Review.
<p />
<p />Thank you so much for joining us again, John.
<p />
<p />JOHN ACKERMAN, LAW PROFESSOR, UNAM: Jaisal, a pleasure as always to be with The Real News.
<p />
<p />NOOR: So, John, why have the recent statements by authorities that they have a confession and may have found the remains of the students not calmed the protest and the families of the missing students?
<p />
<p />ACKERMAN: Well, they have actually made things worst worse, because this press conference [incompr.] by the attorney general last Friday was just full of contradictions. It didn't present any definitive information or conclusions of the investigation. We've now been six weeks, almost, since this massacre in Iguala, Guerrero, which took place on September 26, and the authorities are still struggling in their own labyrinth of complicity and impunity. That's the only way I can put it.
<p />
<p />They are trying to--their political strategy is very clear: they're trying to focus all the attention on the local government, on the municipal president, on the narcos, as if this was just a case of some corrupt local mayor in cahoots with some bad guys in the narcos. But actually what this is reflecting, the situation, is a national crisis. In fact, I think this is an international crisis.
<p />
<p />And it's really been unfortunate that the U.S. government, Obama, the U.S. Congress, has not paid more attention to this. We understand they're busy with other sorts of adventures abroad, but this is right at home in Mexico. And Mexico is really up in arms. And there's a vast social mobilization which has rosen up with the Mexican people, demanding not just justice for this massacre, but democracy, authentic democracy, political change in Mexico, because Mexico doesn't feel a whole lot like a democracy these days, not only because of this massacre, but because of the last two years of consistent repression of social movements, censorship of the media, the approval of political and economic reforms which go directly against the basic foundations of the modern Mexican state. You guys, The Real News, have given some great coverage to this over the last couple of years. And this is really kind of the straw that broke the camels back.
<p />
<p />NOOR: Now, John, we want to unpack all these points, these great points you're making. So official crime numbers are down under the current administration of Peña Nieto.
<p />
<p />ACKERMAN: No.
<p />
<p />NOOR: So that's kind of what he's arguing. But some of the points you've raised, including the fact that several mass graves were found in the search for these students, this underscores the power of the narco gangs and their relationship with the political elite. Can you talk a little bit about what's been happening across Mexico and why people are starting to challenge the claims of the Peña Nieto administration.
<p />
<p />ACKERMAN: Yeah, well, actually, the crime statistics are highly debated. In general, crime is not down. The national statistics bureau recently issued their report for 2003 [2013], which is the first year of Enrique Peña Nieto's administration. The number of homicides has come down slightly, which means from a high number of 22 to 20,000 in a year. This doesn't mean that things are actually changing for the better, especially when you take into account that kidnappings have gone up and in general crime is worse. The economy's doing pretty bad as well.
<p />
<p />And the political class has lost its dynamism that it had before. We no longer have this sort of plural Congress. Everything's decided in the executive by the president, as it was in the past. So things are not moving forward in Mexico. To the contrary.
<p />
<p />And precisely, yes, this crisis has created a very complicated situation, because once the authorities started to investigate, they started to find not one, but two, but three, over a dozen mass grave sites, most of them filled with bones or other remnants, human remains, in the area around Iguala. Apparently, this area of Iguala is a totally narco-controlled area, and supposedly nobody knew about this, even though there are army bases stationed there, there are federal police presence there constantly in Guerrero.
<p />
<p />Two years ago, I remember, I was in an interview with you guys, with Paul, Paul Jay in The Real News, and it was just a couple of weeks after in Iguala itself two activists had been assassinated by orders of this mayor. That crime was never cleared up, never investigated, so much so that this mayor once again today comes to the top of the headlines.
<p />
<p />But once again, this is not just about a mayor or not just about the narcos. These are federal crimes--organized crime, narco trafficking--and the responsibility for investigating and prosecuting them rests solidly and directly on the federal government. So it's a mistake to think that somehow Peña Nieto's going to resolve all this. And the people on the ground in Mexico are very clear on this. Their protests are not just against the mayor of Iguala or not just against the narcos; they are against the narco state, the narco government which rules Mexico from the top to the bottom.
<p />
<p />NOOR: And you argue that this current crisis, as it's unfolded, it's united three different social movements that never quite achieved their goals in the last several years. And their combining forces and combining power may provide an opportunity to do that, to transform Mexican society and really challenge the powers that have so tightly gripped control there.
<p />
<p />ACKERMAN: We'll see. You know, this could fizzle out just like so many other springs and falls throughout the world, from Brazil to Egypt to Occupy Wall Street. This could just be another flash in the pan. But it seems like it has more legs than that, precisely because, as you mentioned, Jaisal, this brings together various different currents of discontent. It's not just one, and it's not just about social networks, although social networks, of course, have played a role.
<p />
<p />So we've been having protests for many years against the drug war, and most notably in 2011, led by poet Javier Sicilia and Movimiento por la Paz, the Movement for Peace. He even came to the United States and did a caravan in the United States. That was a very important movement, 2011.
<p />
<p />Then, in 2012, there was a very active student movement, the Yo Soy 132 student movement, which was against Peña Nieto directly during the electoral campaign, presidential campaign, in 2012.
<p />
<p />And then after that, in 2013, we had a very important outbreak of protest in the area of education reform. Peña Nieto passed reform which looks to basically impose the sort of privatized, standardized testing framework which is used in the United States to the Mexican educational system, which historically has had much more of a humanist and critical approach. And so this led to--and also fire teachers, which is the most delicate reason for the protest. Teachers have lots of experience. And, for instance, the kids who were shot down and disappeared on September 26 are from a teachers college. This is a teachers college, which, with Enrique Peña Nieto's neoliberal education reforms, would be eventually disappeared, and which these kids would no longer have jobs available to them after they graduate.
<p />
<p />And so we have protests against neoliberalism, we have protests against the drug war, and we have protests against authoritarianism, Peña Nieto. All three of these are coming together, and that's what's really creating this explosion throughout the country and all over the world. We've had over 80 cities, some say even 100 cities throughout the world with solidarity protests, solidarity protests with the Mexican students. And that's why this has gotten so big so quickly.
<p />
<p />NOOR: And finally, John, what can the American public do? Because all the policies you just mentioned, there's a strong case that can be made that those are being driven from the United States, from the U.S. government and on other institutions here. So what do Mexicans want Americans to do about this?
<p />
<p />ACKERMAN: Well, I can't for the next be a spokesman for the Mexican people.
<p />
<p />I am a citizen of both countries, and it seems to me that both the United States and Mexico are together in this history and this story and this reality. And, of course, Latinos, for instance, in the United States would greatly benefit by having a democratic Mexico, a Mexico who had a government who was actually accountable to its people and a represented the interests of the people. That could have a big influence in Washington and in the United States for, for instance, immigration reform, not like Peña Nieto today, who basically is a lackey to Obama and his plans. So that would be in the interest of Latinos in the United States.
<p />
<p />And also, Mexicans in Mexico very much need the support of Latinos and, in general, U.S. civil society to support their struggles in Mexico for justice, for human rights. And this is an interests of, I think, both sides of the border. And it very much it is important, the international solidarity is important from the United States to the people in Mexico, because, for instance, today the Mexican military, they've started to make some very dangerous commentary, public declarations which imply that they might even be willing to get closer to political power, a coup or something like that. They don't say it directly, but it's very scary. And they would only be daring to do that, to say those kinds of things if they felt--and they do feel--that they have the undying blind support of the Obama administration in his military and his drug war.
<p />
<p />Now, to counteract that in Mexico, we're going to need a lot of support from the people from civil society in the United States to prevent Mexico continuing to be a killing field and just a place where the United States goes to get oil and doesn't care about the people.
<p />
<p />NOOR: Well, we're going to certainly keep following this story. John Ackerman, thank you so much for joining us.
<p />
<p />ACKERMAN: Thank you very much, Jaisal. An honor.
<p />
<p />NOOR: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.
<p />
<p />End
<p />
<p />DISCLAIMER: Please note that transcripts for The Real News Network are typed from a recording of the program. TRNN cannot guarantee their complete accuracy. | true | 4 | john ackerman professor national autonomous university mexico unam editorinchief mexican law review columnist la jornada newspaper proceso magazine blog wwwjohnackermanblogspotcom twitter johnmackerman jaisal noor trnn producer welcome real news network im jaisal noor baltimore described historic protests gripping mexico disappearance 43 college students government officials saying three suspects narco gang confessed killings disposing students bodies thousands taken part protests raged across country recent days including burning door ceremonial presidential palace mexico city students belong radical teachers college september 26 traveled iguala southern mexican state guerrero commandeer buses later protest police allegedly opened fire killing six 43 handed notorious local drug gang connections towns mayor along wife among dozens arrested connection disappearances joining us discuss paris france john ackerman hes professor national autonomous university mexico editorinchief mexican law review thank much joining us john john ackerman law professor unam jaisal pleasure always real news noor john recent statements authorities confession may found remains students calmed protest families missing students ackerman well actually made things worst worse press conference incompr attorney general last friday full contradictions didnt present definitive information conclusions investigation weve six weeks almost since massacre iguala guerrero took place september 26 authorities still struggling labyrinth complicity impunity thats way put trying totheir political strategy clear theyre trying focus attention local government municipal president narcos case corrupt local mayor cahoots bad guys narcos actually reflecting situation national crisis fact think international crisis really unfortunate us government obama us congress paid attention understand theyre busy sorts adventures abroad right home mexico mexico really arms theres vast social mobilization rosen mexican people demanding justice massacre democracy authentic democracy political change mexico mexico doesnt feel whole lot like democracy days massacre last two years consistent repression social movements censorship media approval political economic reforms go directly basic foundations modern mexican state guys real news given great coverage last couple years really kind straw broke camels back noor john want unpack points great points youre making official crime numbers current administration peña nieto ackerman noor thats kind hes arguing points youve raised including fact several mass graves found search students underscores power narco gangs relationship political elite talk little bit whats happening across mexico people starting challenge claims peña nieto administration ackerman yeah well actually crime statistics highly debated general crime national statistics bureau recently issued report 2003 2013 first year enrique peña nietos administration number homicides come slightly means high number 22 20000 year doesnt mean things actually changing better especially take account kidnappings gone general crime worse economys pretty bad well political class lost dynamism longer sort plural congress everythings decided executive president past things moving forward mexico contrary precisely yes crisis created complicated situation authorities started investigate started find one two three dozen mass grave sites filled bones remnants human remains area around iguala apparently area iguala totally narcocontrolled area supposedly nobody knew even though army bases stationed federal police presence constantly guerrero two years ago remember interview guys paul paul jay real news couple weeks iguala two activists assassinated orders mayor crime never cleared never investigated much mayor today comes top headlines mayor narcos federal crimesorganized crime narco traffickingand responsibility investigating prosecuting rests solidly directly federal government mistake think somehow peña nietos going resolve people ground mexico clear protests mayor iguala narcos narco state narco government rules mexico top bottom noor argue current crisis unfolded united three different social movements never quite achieved goals last several years combining forces combining power may provide opportunity transform mexican society really challenge powers tightly gripped control ackerman well see know could fizzle like many springs falls throughout world brazil egypt occupy wall street could another flash pan seems like legs precisely mentioned jaisal brings together various different currents discontent one social networks although social networks course played role weve protests many years drug war notably 2011 led poet javier sicilia movimiento por la paz movement peace even came united states caravan united states important movement 2011 2012 active student movement yo soy 132 student movement peña nieto directly electoral campaign presidential campaign 2012 2013 important outbreak protest area education reform peña nieto passed reform looks basically impose sort privatized standardized testing framework used united states mexican educational system historically much humanist critical approach led toand also fire teachers delicate reason protest teachers lots experience instance kids shot disappeared september 26 teachers college teachers college enrique peña nietos neoliberal education reforms would eventually disappeared kids would longer jobs available graduate protests neoliberalism protests drug war protests authoritarianism peña nieto three coming together thats whats really creating explosion throughout country world weve 80 cities say even 100 cities throughout world solidarity protests solidarity protests mexican students thats gotten big quickly noor finally john american public policies mentioned theres strong case made driven united states us government institutions mexicans want americans ackerman well cant next spokesman mexican people citizen countries seems united states mexico together history story reality course latinos instance united states would greatly benefit democratic mexico mexico government actually accountable people represented interests people could big influence washington united states instance immigration reform like peña nieto today basically lackey obama plans would interest latinos united states also mexicans mexico much need support latinos general us civil society support struggles mexico justice human rights interests think sides border much important international solidarity important united states people mexico instance today mexican military theyve started make dangerous commentary public declarations imply might even willing get closer political power coup something like dont say directly scary would daring say kinds things feltand feelthat undying blind support obama administration military drug war counteract mexico going need lot support people civil society united states prevent mexico continuing killing field place united states goes get oil doesnt care people noor well going certainly keep following story john ackerman thank much joining us ackerman thank much jaisal honor noor thank joining us real news network end disclaimer please note transcripts real news network typed recording program trnn guarantee complete accuracy | 988 |
<p>A mural of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump outside a bar in Vilnius, Lithuania, in May. Mindaugas Kulbis/AP</p>
<p />
<p>Sen. Tim Kaine dropped Vladimir Putin’s name more than 20 times in last night’s <a href="" type="internal">vice-presidential debate</a>, suggesting that Gov. Mike Pence and his running mate, Donald Trump, shared an unseemly admiration for the Russian president. “You guys love Russia… You both have said Vladimir Putin is a better leader than the president,” Kaine said, referring to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/09/08/mike-pence-says-its-inarguable-that-putin-is-a-stronger-leader-than-obama/" type="external">recent statements</a> by both Republicans that contrasted Putin’s supposed strength with President Barack Obama’s weakness. Pence pushed back, calling Putin “small and bullying,” and saying that a Trump administration would respond to Russian provocation “with strong, broad-shouldered American leadership.”</p>
<p>The larger context for Kaine’s not-so-subtle attacks is Trump’s very public, largely one-sided relationship with Putin, which has often blurred the line between holding up Putin as Obama’s foil and starry-eyed fanboydom. Here’s a timeline of the ups and downs of the Trump-Putin bromance, which blossomed over the past few years as American-Russian relations frayed.</p>
<p>October 2007: Five months after Russia is accused of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/may/17/topstories3.russia" type="external">unleashing a</a> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/may/17/topstories3.russia" type="external">cyberwa</a>r on the small Baltic country of Estonia, Trump <a href="http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0710/15/lkl.01.html" type="external">tells Larry King</a> that Putin is doing a great job: “Look at Putin—what he’s doing with Russia—I mean, you know, what’s going on over there. I mean this guy has done—whether you like him or don’t like him—he’s doing a great job in rebuilding the image of Russia and also rebuilding Russia period.”</p>
<p>2008: Donald Trump Jr. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/heres-what-we-know-about-donald-trump-and-his-ties-to-russia/2016/07/29/1268b5ec-54e7-11e6-88eb-7dda4e2f2aec_story.html" type="external">tells</a> a real estate conference, “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.…We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”</p>
<p>December 2011: In his book <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=Tp80hJFYqCMC&amp;pg=PA95&amp;lpg=PA95&amp;dq=%22Putin+has+big+plans+for+Russia.+He+wants+to+edge+out%22&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=4oAikxHOf6&amp;sig=qmOPOPauWboSueBAyye_nROS48g&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjug4LD-cHPAhWFKWMKHfAuAnkQ6AEIJTAB#v=onepage&amp;q=%22Putin%20has%20big%20plans%20for%20Russia.%20He%20wants%20to%20edge%20out%22&amp;f=false" type="external">Time to Get Tough</a>, Trump praises Putin while deriding Obama’s inability to contain him: “Putin has big plans for Russia. He wants to edge out its neighbors so that Russia can dominate oil supplies to all of Europe. Putin has also announced his grand vision: the creation of a ‘Eurasian Union’ made up of former Soviet nations that can dominate the region. I respect Putin and the Russians but cannot believe our leader allows them to get away with so much…Hats off to the Russians…Obama’s plan to have Russia stand up to Iran was a horrible failure that turned America into a laughingstock.”</p>
<p>June 2012: As President Obama meets with Putin, Trump <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/215206040449462272" type="external">tweets</a>, “Putin has no respect for our President — really bad body language.”</p>
<p>June 2013: Shortly after Russia <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/30/russia-passes-anti-gay-law" type="external">passes anti-gay laws</a> banning gay “propaganda,” Trump <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/347191326112112640?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" type="external">tweets</a>: “Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow—if so, will he become my new best friend?”</p>
<p />
<p>March 2014: At the Conservative Political Action Conference, Trump <a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2014/03/06/donald-trump-peppers-cpac-speeches-with-humblebrags" type="external">boasts</a>, “I was in Moscow a couple of months ago, I own the Miss Universe Pageant and they treated me so great. Putin even sent me a present, a beautiful present.” Just after <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/18/world/europe/ukraine-crisis/" type="external">Russia annexes</a> Crimea from Ukraine, <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/447191888630927360?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" type="external">Trump tweets</a>, “I believe Putin will continue to re-build the Russian Empire. He has zero respect for Obama or the U.S.!” <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/447191138962014208" type="external">Also</a>: “Putin has become a big hero in Russia with an all time high popularity. Obama, on the other hand, has fallen to his lowest ever numbers. SAD”</p>
<p>April 2014: Doubling down on his earlier tweet, Trump <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/456895966327480320?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" type="external">casts Obama</a> as a weakling compared to Putin: “America is at a great disadvantage. Putin is ex-KGB, Obama is a community organizer. Unfair.” NATO had just <a href="http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_108501.htm" type="external">condemned</a> Russia’s “illegal intervention” in Ukraine.</p>
<p />
<p>May 2014: Speaking at the National Press Club, Trump says he’s kinda sorta <a href="" type="internal">spoken with Putin:</a> “I was in Russia, I was in Moscow recently and I spoke, indirectly and directly, with President Putin, who could not have been nicer, and we had a tremendous success.”</p>
<p>July 2015: Now the Republican presidential front-runner, Trump says he’d “ <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-says-he-would-get-along-very-well-putin-n401051" type="external">get along very well</a>” with the Russian president during an interview with reporters in Scotland. “I just think so. People say, ‘What do you mean?’ I think I would get along well with him.” He adds: “He hates Obama, Obama hates him. We have unbelievably bad relationships. Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. She was the worst secretary of state in the history of our country. The world blew apart during her reign. Now she wants to be president.”</p>
<p>October 2015: On CBS’ Face the Nation, Trump <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/11/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-2016" type="external">talks about sharing</a> air time with Putin on a 60 Minutes episode: “I think the biggest thing we have is that we were on 60 Minutes together and we had fantastic ratings. One of your best-rated shows in a long time. So that was good, right? So we were stablemates.” (Trump and Putin were on different continents, were interviewed separately, and according <a href="http://time.com/4108198/donald-trump-60-minutes-putin/" type="external">Time</a>, the ratings weren’t all that great.) Less than two weeks earlier, Russia had launched <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/30/politics/russia-syria-airstrikes-isis/" type="external">its first airstrikes</a> in Syria in support of the Assad regime.</p>
<p>Despite <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/14/politics/donald-trump-mh17-plane-russians/" type="external">overwhelming</a> <a href="" type="internal">evidence</a> to the contrary, Trump insists that there isn’t enough proof to point to pro-Russian separatists for shooting down a Malaysian Airlines flight over eastern Ukraine in the summer of 2014. “They say it wasn’t them,” he <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/14/politics/donald-trump-mh17-plane-russians/" type="external">says</a>. “It may have been their weapon, but they didn’t use it, they didn’t fire it, they even said the other side fired it to blame them. I mean to be honest with you, you’ll probably never know for sure.”</p>
<p>November 2015: During a <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/live-blogging-fourth-gop-presidential-debate-9pm-et-n460901?abc=123" type="external">Republican debate</a>, Trump gets back in the barn with Putin: “I got to know him very well because we were both on 60 Minutes, we were stablemates, and we did very well that night.”</p>
<p>December 17, 2015: In a rare moment of <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/putin-no-major-gaps-with-washington-over-efforts-to-end-syria-conflict/2015/12/17/a178255e-a431-11e5-8318-bd8caed8c588_story.html" type="external">recognition</a>, Putin praises Trump, saying that he is “a very lively man, talented without doubt,” adding that Trump is the “absolute leader in the presidential race.” Before the day ends, Trump <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-great-honor-compliments-highly-respected-putin/story?id=35829618" type="external">returns the favor</a>. “It is always a great honor to be so nicely complimented by a man so highly respected within his own country and beyond,” he says of Putin.</p>
<p>December 18, 2015: On <a href="http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/trump--putin-is-a-leader--unlike-our-president-588186691983" type="external">Morning Joe</a>, Trump defends Putin from allegations that he’s murdered journalists and political opponents. “He’s running his country, and at least he’s a leader. Unlike what we have in this country.” He adds, “I think our country does plenty of killing, also, Joe.”</p>
<p>February 17, 2016: At a <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/28/politics/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-quotes/" type="external">rally in South Carolina</a>, Trump inserts a little distance between himself and Putin. “I have no relationship with him other than he called me a genius. He said Donald Trump is a genius and he is going to be the leader of the party and he’s going to be the leader of the world or something.” (The word “genius” was Trump’s, not Putin’s.)</p>
<p>April 28, 2016: After <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2016/04/29/donald-trump-on-his-foreign-policy-strategy/" type="external">Bill O’Reilly asks</a> whether he and Putin would get along well, Trump responds, “Maybe we will, maybe we won’t. If we can make a great deal for our country and get along with Russia, that would be a tremendous thing. I would love to try it.”</p>
<p>June 17, 2016: Once again, Putin <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/putin-praises-trump-224485" type="external">compliments</a> Trump, calling him a “bright” person. On the same day, Russia <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-ignores-warnings-bombs-u-s-backed-syrian-rebel-group/" type="external">bombs American-backed</a> rebels in Syria.</p>
<p>July 25, 2016: After Democratic National Committee emails are leaked by WikiLeaks, Trump takes to Twitter to suggest the Russians were behind the hack because Putin “likes” him.</p>
<p />
<p>July 27, 2016: Still gleeful over the DNC hack, Trump <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html?_r=0" type="external">calls on Moscow</a> to hack Hillary Clinton’s email. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he says during a news conference. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.” He then <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-putin-russia_us_5798e7b4e4b02d5d5ed3d2fc" type="external">declares</a>, “I never met Putin. I don’t know who Putin is. He said one nice thing about me. He said I’m a genius. I said, ‘Thank you very much’ to the newspaper, and that was the end of it. I never met Putin.” Trump says he’d be firm with Putin, but also r <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/27/donald-trumps-falsehood-laden-press-conference-annotated/" type="external">efuses to tell him</a> to stay out of the presidential election: “I’m not going to tell Putin what to do. Why should I tell Putin what to do?”</p>
<p>August 1, 2016: In <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/31/politics/donald-trump-russia-ukraine-crimea-putin/" type="external">an interview</a> with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, Trump claims that Russia isn’t going to take military action in Ukraine—despite having already done so. “He’s not going into Ukraine, okay, just so you understand. He’s not going to go into Ukraine, all right? You can mark it down. You can put it down. You can take it anywhere you want.”</p>
<p>September 8, 2016: At a national security forum hosted by Matt Lauer, Trump <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/trump-putin-leader-far-more-obama-496475" type="external">says</a> the Russian president “has been a leader far more than our president has been.”</p>
<p>September 14, 2016: Perhaps forgetting his August statement that Russia wouldn’t go into Ukraine, Trump <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/775897251533160448" type="external">tweets</a> about Russia’s annexation of Crimea: “Russia took Crimea during the so-called Obama years. Who wouldn’t know this and why does Obama get a free pass?”</p>
<p>September 19, 2016: Russia allegedly <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/20/un-aid-convoy-attack-syria-us-russia" type="external">bombs a United Nations aid convoy</a> outside besieged Syrian city of Aleppo, dashing hopes of reestablishing a US-Russia brokered ceasefire.</p>
<p>October 4, 2016: During the vice presidential debate, Trump <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/783490959027732484" type="external">tweets</a> a link to a campaign press release titled, “Clinton’s Close Ties To Putin Deserve Scrutiny.”</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | mural russian president vladimir putin donald trump outside bar vilnius lithuania may mindaugas kulbisap sen tim kaine dropped vladimir putins name 20 times last nights vicepresidential debate suggesting gov mike pence running mate donald trump shared unseemly admiration russian president guys love russia said vladimir putin better leader president kaine said referring recent statements republicans contrasted putins supposed strength president barack obamas weakness pence pushed back calling putin small bullying saying trump administration would respond russian provocation strong broadshouldered american leadership larger context kaines notsosubtle attacks trumps public largely onesided relationship putin often blurred line holding putin obamas foil starryeyed fanboydom heres timeline ups downs trumpputin bromance blossomed past years americanrussian relations frayed october 2007 five months russia accused unleashing cyberwar small baltic country estonia trump tells larry king putin great job look putinwhat hes russiai mean know whats going mean guy donewhether like dont like himhes great job rebuilding image russia also rebuilding russia period 2008 donald trump jr tells real estate conference russians make pretty disproportionate crosssection lot assetswe see lot money pouring russia december 2011 book time get tough trump praises putin deriding obamas inability contain putin big plans russia wants edge neighbors russia dominate oil supplies europe putin also announced grand vision creation eurasian union made former soviet nations dominate region respect putin russians believe leader allows get away muchhats russiansobamas plan russia stand iran horrible failure turned america laughingstock june 2012 president obama meets putin trump tweets putin respect president really bad body language june 2013 shortly russia passes antigay laws banning gay propaganda trump tweets think putin going miss universe pageant november moscowif become new best friend march 2014 conservative political action conference trump boasts moscow couple months ago miss universe pageant treated great putin even sent present beautiful present russia annexes crimea ukraine trump tweets believe putin continue rebuild russian empire zero respect obama us also putin become big hero russia time high popularity obama hand fallen lowest ever numbers sad april 2014 doubling earlier tweet trump casts obama weakling compared putin america great disadvantage putin exkgb obama community organizer unfair nato condemned russias illegal intervention ukraine may 2014 speaking national press club trump says hes kinda sorta spoken putin russia moscow recently spoke indirectly directly president putin could nicer tremendous success july 2015 republican presidential frontrunner trump says hed get along well russian president interview reporters scotland think people say mean think would get along well adds hates obama obama hates unbelievably bad relationships hillary clinton secretary state worst secretary state history country world blew apart reign wants president october 2015 cbs face nation trump talks sharing air time putin 60 minutes episode think biggest thing 60 minutes together fantastic ratings one bestrated shows long time good right stablemates trump putin different continents interviewed separately according time ratings werent great less two weeks earlier russia launched first airstrikes syria support assad regime despite overwhelming evidence contrary trump insists isnt enough proof point prorussian separatists shooting malaysian airlines flight eastern ukraine summer 2014 say wasnt says may weapon didnt use didnt fire even said side fired blame mean honest youll probably never know sure november 2015 republican debate trump gets back barn putin got know well 60 minutes stablemates well night december 17 2015 rare moment recognition putin praises trump saying lively man talented without doubt adding trump absolute leader presidential race day ends trump returns favor always great honor nicely complimented man highly respected within country beyond says putin december 18 2015 morning joe trump defends putin allegations hes murdered journalists political opponents hes running country least hes leader unlike country adds think country plenty killing also joe february 17 2016 rally south carolina trump inserts little distance putin relationship called genius said donald trump genius going leader party hes going leader world something word genius trumps putins april 28 2016 bill oreilly asks whether putin would get along well trump responds maybe maybe wont make great deal country get along russia would tremendous thing would love try june 17 2016 putin compliments trump calling bright person day russia bombs americanbacked rebels syria july 25 2016 democratic national committee emails leaked wikileaks trump takes twitter suggest russians behind hack putin likes july 27 2016 still gleeful dnc hack trump calls moscow hack hillary clintons email russia youre listening hope youre able find 30000 emails missing says news conference think probably rewarded mightily press declares never met putin dont know putin said one nice thing said im genius said thank much newspaper end never met putin trump says hed firm putin also r efuses tell stay presidential election im going tell putin tell putin august 1 2016 interview abcs george stephanopoulos trump claims russia isnt going take military action ukrainedespite already done hes going ukraine okay understand hes going go ukraine right mark put take anywhere want september 8 2016 national security forum hosted matt lauer trump says russian president leader far president september 14 2016 perhaps forgetting august statement russia wouldnt go ukraine trump tweets russias annexation crimea russia took crimea socalled obama years wouldnt know obama get free pass september 19 2016 russia allegedly bombs united nations aid convoy outside besieged syrian city aleppo dashing hopes reestablishing usrussia brokered ceasefire october 4 2016 vice presidential debate trump tweets link campaign press release titled clintons close ties putin deserve scrutiny | 888 |
<p>Since NATO began bombing Libya in March, the global peace movement has been split into two camps. One side portrays the bombing campaign as a “humanitarian intervention” to protect Libyan civilians, comparing it to 1990s attacks on Serbia. This side tends to downplay reports of civilian casualties from the bombings and rebel attacks, and depicts the Libyan rebels as armed pro-democracy protesters. The other side asserts the NATO actions have more to do with oil than with human rights, and that the West exercises a double standard by backing dictators in Yemen, Bahrain and elsewhere. This side tends to depict Qaddafi as an anti-imperialist (which the US has been gunning for since Reagan’s 1986 bombings), and the Libyan rebels as Contras motivated by tribal loyalties or jihadism.</p>
<p>Some war opponents (such as myself) agree that Qaddafi is a tyrant who has lost his past anti-imperialist credentials–by collaborating with conservative politicians and the CIA– and sympathize with pro-democracy protesters. But we still oppose the NATO bombing–on the grounds that two wrongs don’t make a right. Toppling a murderous dictator should not be a rationale for imposing Western domination. The most important period in the Libya War is not during the fighting, but after the fighting ceases, because that is when we will see if Libya will continue as a truly independent country, or follow the path of Iraq and Afghanistan.</p>
<p>No matter what our stand on the NATO intervention, the antiwar movement could unite around a common demand of letting Libya continue to be ruled by Libyans. If the motives for NATO intervention were so humanitarian, and the revolution so democratic, then surely the NATO powers would now renounce any spoils of war for themselves. They could now withdraw completely from Libyan military, economic and political decision-making, preferring to leave those decisions to the Libyan people themselves. Specifically, Western powers should renounce the use of Libyan military bases, let Libya’s oil economy primarily benefit the Libyan people, and avoid the temptation to steer Libyan politics and station advisors in Libyan government ministries.</p>
<p>No Foreign Military Bases</p>
<p>One of the patterns of recent U.S. military interventions is that they have left behind new, permanent military bases that have expanded the U.S. military sphere of influence into the Middle East, Central Europe and Central Asia. The bases are not simply stationed in order to wage the wars, but the wars are wages in order to station the bases. The bases enable the U.S. to further interfere in domestic politics, and serve as a tripwire for military intervention. The string of new bases from Bosnia to Afghanistan not only host military personnel, aircraft and surveillance, but private security contractors who have become the mercenaries of the 21st century.</p>
<p>Under the Libyan monarchy, U.S. had a key military base just outside Tripoli.&#160; At least 4,600 Americans were stationed at Wheelus Air Base, which was run by the Strategic Air Command. The U.S. Ambasador to Libya called the base “a Little America…on the sparkling shores of the Mediterranean.” The Americans left in 1970, eight months after Qaddafi came to power, and the installation was taken over by the Libyan Air Force, which sustained damage in Reagan’s 1986 bombing attack. A decade later, the base became the Mitiga civilian airport.</p>
<p>The U.S. had no permanent military bases left in Africa, until Djibouti agreed to host a base after 9/11. The Pentagon set up its Africa Command in 2008, but no African country has so far agreed to host AFRICOM headquarters (even the traditional U.S. client state of Liberia), so the HQ is still in Stuttgart, Germany. The Libya War was AFRICOM’s first combat action, and the Pentagon will probably seek a new Libyan home for AFRICOM.</p>
<p>NATO forces have had “zero casualties” in Libya, while many Libyans have died in their civil war. The Obama Administration is hoping that the bombing campaign helps to lessen the “Iraq Syndrome” that (like the so-called Vietnam Syndrome) made the public averse to foreign interventions. For the first time in world history, an overconfident country feels it can wage war with absolutely no risk to its own forces–guaranteeing that it will intervene in more wars. Clinton’s zero-casualty Kosovo War made the Afghanistan and Iraq wars more likely, and Obama’s zero-casualty Libya War could make U.S. citizens more likely to accept a future intervention in Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, or beyond.</p>
<p>No Foreign Economic Domination</p>
<p>If Iraq is any guide, the Western reconquest of Libya could lead to new frenzy of privatization, particularly in rebuilding the energy and water infrastructure damaged in the bombing and civil war.&#160; Qaddafi himself has carried out neoliberal economic policies, but has left the key pillar of the economy in state hands. Although Western oil companies have long been present in Qaddafi’s Libya, so far the National Oil Company (NOC) controls about 50 percent of the oil resources. Qaddafi threatened in 2009 to nationalize the rest, as well as to invite in Russian and Chinese competitors. Now that Qaddafi is out of the picture, Western companies see a new opening in the rebel-led government. But would a new rebel government prefer that the profits for Libyan oil go to foreigners, instead of Libya’s own development? If their revolution is truly democratic, part of a real democracy would be that the profits from Libyan oil benefit the Libyan people.</p>
<p>In a November 6, 2007 U.S. Embassy cable “Growth of Resource Nationalism in Libya” (recently released by Wikileaks), staffer Chris Stevens warned that “the removal of U.S. and UN sanctions and Libya’s attendant opening to the world have prompted a resurgence of measures designed to increase the Government of Libya’s control over and share of revenue from hydrocarbon resources.” He also relayed “a growing concern in the International Oil Company community that NOC, emboldened by soaring oil prices and the press of would-be suitors, will seek better terms on both concession and production-sharing agreements… Libyan labor laws have also been amended to ‘Libyanize’ the economy in several key sectors.” Stevens concluded that “Effective U.S. engagement on this issue should take the form of demonstrating the clear downsides to the Government of Libya of pursuing this approach, particularly with respect to attracting participation by credible international oil companies in the oil/gas sector and foreign direct investment.”</p>
<p>Whether or not the Libya War has been another Western war for oil, in the case of France toppling Qaddafi is the last battle in its war for uranium. African uranium is to (nuclear energy-reliant) France what Persian Gulf oil is to the United States. Since the 1970s, French forces have battled Libyan troops in the uranium-rich Tibesti Mountains of northern Chad, a region coveted by both countries.&#160; It comes as no surprise that France led the charge to dismantle Qaddafi’s nuclear program and then to eliminate him, thereby having unfettered future access to the region’s nuclear fuel.</p>
<p>No Foreign Advisors</p>
<p>In Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. positioned “advisers” in the ministries of the new governments it installed in power. These advisers have led the privatization of industries, and made the governments economically dependent on foreign aid and NGOs, and corporate expertise and infrastructure, rather than training the population how to develop their own economy. The same pattern may reoccur in Libya, though perhaps in the guise of the United Nations and foreign NGOs. It will be telling to see if the Libyan rebels’ transitional government can demonstrate true independence on foreign policy, for example on the questions of Palestinian statehood and bolstering the African Union.</p>
<p>Western security advisers also tend to exacerbate internal differences (religious, ethnic, and tribal) by dividing the population into “Good Guys” who cooperate with Western plans, and “Bad Guys” who oppose them. As shown in Iraq and Afghanistan (not to mention Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, etc.) these divisions do not correspond to a commitment to human rights.&#160; Yesterday’s thuggish friends can easily become today’s thuggish enemies, or (as in case of Libyan jihadist rebels) the other way around.&#160; Even if they try to reconcile warring factions, foreign advisors also tend to leave out civil society (such as the women, the youth, and elders who have traditionally had an internal peacemaking role), giving a voice only to warlords who have their own militias.</p>
<p>If the Western powers wish to portray their war aims as humanitarian, they should renounce any designs for military bases, economic control, or government advisers in Libya. But I’m not holding my breath. Some of the Libyan rebel leadership have enjoyed close relations in exile with U.S., British and French intelligence agencies (much like the Western-rehabilitated Qaddafi), and show no signs of reigning in foreign oil companies. The global human rights community has to hold both Qaddafi and rebel forces accountable to the Libyan people, and demand that their own governments not pressure Libyans to accept a long-term foreign presence. The global peace movement can continue its debate over the war, but unite around the demand of “Libya for the Libyans.”</p>
<p>Dr. Zoltan Grossman is a professor of geography at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington. He is a civilian Member of the Board of G.I. Voice, an antiwar veterans group that runs the Coffee Strong resource center for soldiers outside Fort Lewis:&#160; <a href="http://www.coffeestrong.org/" type="external">http://www.coffeestrong.org</a>&#160;&#160;His website is at&#160; <a href="http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz" type="external">http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz</a>&#160;and he can be reached at <a href="mailto:grossmaz@evergreen.edu" type="external">grossmaz@evergreen.edu</a>&#160;&#160;</p> | true | 4 | since nato began bombing libya march global peace movement split two camps one side portrays bombing campaign humanitarian intervention protect libyan civilians comparing 1990s attacks serbia side tends downplay reports civilian casualties bombings rebel attacks depicts libyan rebels armed prodemocracy protesters side asserts nato actions oil human rights west exercises double standard backing dictators yemen bahrain elsewhere side tends depict qaddafi antiimperialist us gunning since reagans 1986 bombings libyan rebels contras motivated tribal loyalties jihadism war opponents agree qaddafi tyrant lost past antiimperialist credentialsby collaborating conservative politicians cia sympathize prodemocracy protesters still oppose nato bombingon grounds two wrongs dont make right toppling murderous dictator rationale imposing western domination important period libya war fighting fighting ceases see libya continue truly independent country follow path iraq afghanistan matter stand nato intervention antiwar movement could unite around common demand letting libya continue ruled libyans motives nato intervention humanitarian revolution democratic surely nato powers would renounce spoils war could withdraw completely libyan military economic political decisionmaking preferring leave decisions libyan people specifically western powers renounce use libyan military bases let libyas oil economy primarily benefit libyan people avoid temptation steer libyan politics station advisors libyan government ministries foreign military bases one patterns recent us military interventions left behind new permanent military bases expanded us military sphere influence middle east central europe central asia bases simply stationed order wage wars wars wages order station bases bases enable us interfere domestic politics serve tripwire military intervention string new bases bosnia afghanistan host military personnel aircraft surveillance private security contractors become mercenaries 21st century libyan monarchy us key military base outside tripoli160 least 4600 americans stationed wheelus air base run strategic air command us ambasador libya called base little americaon sparkling shores mediterranean americans left 1970 eight months qaddafi came power installation taken libyan air force sustained damage reagans 1986 bombing attack decade later base became mitiga civilian airport us permanent military bases left africa djibouti agreed host base 911 pentagon set africa command 2008 african country far agreed host africom headquarters even traditional us client state liberia hq still stuttgart germany libya war africoms first combat action pentagon probably seek new libyan home africom nato forces zero casualties libya many libyans died civil war obama administration hoping bombing campaign helps lessen iraq syndrome like socalled vietnam syndrome made public averse foreign interventions first time world history overconfident country feels wage war absolutely risk forcesguaranteeing intervene wars clintons zerocasualty kosovo war made afghanistan iraq wars likely obamas zerocasualty libya war could make us citizens likely accept future intervention iran venezuela cuba beyond foreign economic domination iraq guide western reconquest libya could lead new frenzy privatization particularly rebuilding energy water infrastructure damaged bombing civil war160 qaddafi carried neoliberal economic policies left key pillar economy state hands although western oil companies long present qaddafis libya far national oil company noc controls 50 percent oil resources qaddafi threatened 2009 nationalize rest well invite russian chinese competitors qaddafi picture western companies see new opening rebelled government would new rebel government prefer profits libyan oil go foreigners instead libyas development revolution truly democratic part real democracy would profits libyan oil benefit libyan people november 6 2007 us embassy cable growth resource nationalism libya recently released wikileaks staffer chris stevens warned removal us un sanctions libyas attendant opening world prompted resurgence measures designed increase government libyas control share revenue hydrocarbon resources also relayed growing concern international oil company community noc emboldened soaring oil prices press wouldbe suitors seek better terms concession productionsharing agreements libyan labor laws also amended libyanize economy several key sectors stevens concluded effective us engagement issue take form demonstrating clear downsides government libya pursuing approach particularly respect attracting participation credible international oil companies oilgas sector foreign direct investment whether libya war another western war oil case france toppling qaddafi last battle war uranium african uranium nuclear energyreliant france persian gulf oil united states since 1970s french forces battled libyan troops uraniumrich tibesti mountains northern chad region coveted countries160 comes surprise france led charge dismantle qaddafis nuclear program eliminate thereby unfettered future access regions nuclear fuel foreign advisors iraq afghanistan us positioned advisers ministries new governments installed power advisers led privatization industries made governments economically dependent foreign aid ngos corporate expertise infrastructure rather training population develop economy pattern may reoccur libya though perhaps guise united nations foreign ngos telling see libyan rebels transitional government demonstrate true independence foreign policy example questions palestinian statehood bolstering african union western security advisers also tend exacerbate internal differences religious ethnic tribal dividing population good guys cooperate western plans bad guys oppose shown iraq afghanistan mention pakistan yemen somalia etc divisions correspond commitment human rights160 yesterdays thuggish friends easily become todays thuggish enemies case libyan jihadist rebels way around160 even try reconcile warring factions foreign advisors also tend leave civil society women youth elders traditionally internal peacemaking role giving voice warlords militias western powers wish portray war aims humanitarian renounce designs military bases economic control government advisers libya im holding breath libyan rebel leadership enjoyed close relations exile us british french intelligence agencies much like westernrehabilitated qaddafi show signs reigning foreign oil companies global human rights community hold qaddafi rebel forces accountable libyan people demand governments pressure libyans accept longterm foreign presence global peace movement continue debate war unite around demand libya libyans dr zoltan grossman professor geography evergreen state college olympia washington civilian member board gi voice antiwar veterans group runs coffee strong resource center soldiers outside fort lewis160 httpwwwcoffeestrongorg160160his website at160 httpacademicevergreeneduggrossmaz160and reached grossmazevergreenedu160160 | 910 |
<p>When a private equity firm "succeeds" (usually after buying an above-average business), much of their gains are reaped simply by transferring large amounts of wealth to themselves.</p>
<p>Private equity funds first emerged in the late '70s and '80s as part of an ideological shift toward making the most for shareholders, giving momentum to an early wave of banking deregulation and to changes in the tax code that made financial engineering more profitable. Firms like Bain Capital, spun off in 1984 from the consulting firm Bain &amp; Company, benefited both from the elimination of old controls and from the new rules encouraging globalization and financialization.</p>
<p>Here's how it works: The managers of private equity firms create big investment funds in which they are “general partners.” They pool unregulated private money from a variety of “limited partners,” ranging from public pension funds to rich individuals (including, in the case of Bain, dubious Central American plutocrats operating out of tax havens such as Panama). The general partners then buy a business in what is called a “ <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/why-private-equity-firms-like-bain-really-are-the-worst-of-capitalism-20120523" type="external">leveraged buyout</a>,” using more limited-partner capital and a huge loan, but very little of their own money.</p>
<p>The high debt, or “leverage,” greatly multiplies the profit on successes, but also increases financial instability. The loans must be paid off even if business slows–a minor worry for the private equity fund, because it isn't responsible for those payments. Instead, the purchased business owes the debt created to buy it. The interest on this debt is tax-deductible (meaning that these deals are taxpayer-subsidized), but paying down the principal still puts pressure on the acquired businesses. They in turn typically squeeze employees as the easiest, quickest way to meet interest payments and profit targets.</p>
<p>After Bain-style buyouts, employees often face wage and benefit cuts or mass layoffs. Businesses can also use takeovers to renege on implied contracts or to engineer bankruptcies, thus avoiding obligations to workers such as pension payments.</p>
<p>After a few years, maybe a decade, the fund's partners typically try to sell the business at a profit. But the funds also have quicker ways to make money. They sometimes arrange for the businesses they buy to borrow money to pay extraordinary dividends in the first year, so that a firm such as Bain can quickly return to the general partners many times their original investment.</p>
<p>In a Vanity Fair <a href="http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/08/investigating-mitt-romney-offshore-accounts" type="external">article</a>, reporter Nicholas Shaxson relates what happened after Bain took over and merged two medical firms in 1994. First, Bain cut Dade Behring's research budget to half its competitors' level and began closing branches, even where the two firms had recently received location-based tax incentives for job creation. It converted traditional pensions to inferior alternatives (saving up to $40 million) and nickeled-and-dimed employees on benefit payments. Then Bain had Dade Behring borrow $421 million to pay itself, Goldman Sachs and some top managers $365 million in dividends. These participants had only invested $85 million. Romney continued to profit from the deal until at least 2001, one year before Dade went bankrupt.</p>
<p>Such outsized profits, even from unsuccessful businesses, are still not enough for some private equity firms. They also charge fees to their own investors. In a forthcoming issue of Challenge: The Magazine of Economic Affairs, Eileen Appelbaum, a Center for Economic and Policy Research economist, and Rosemary Batt, a Cornell professor, <a href="http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/private-equity-2012-02.pdf" type="external">explain</a> that private equity funds typically charge limited partners–such as pension funds or insurance companies–2 percent of their investment each year as a “management fee” to participate, plus 20 percent of any profit (though Bain charges a heftier 30 percent). After taking fees and other factors into account (such as having an investment tied up for years), Appelbaum and Batt calculate that most limited partners would actually profit more from buying a broad stock index fund. But a minority of private equity funds sometimes provide spectacular returns, enticing players to return to this casino.</p>
<p>General partners also benefit from the notorious “carried interest” loophole. It allows their pay for managing the fund, which would be taxed as regular income, to instead be taxed as capital gains at a rate less than half of what most would otherwise pay.</p>
<p>Sometimes private equity firms do “add value” to a company by improving business operations, increasing skills or adding new equipment, but that story isn't typical. While New York Times columnist David Brooks portrays Romney as taking “companies that were mediocre and sclerotic and try[ing] to make them efficient and dynamic,” Appelbaum's research shows that most private-equity takeover targets are successful companies growing faster than average before the buyout; less than 3 percent are distressed or “mediocre.”</p>
<p>Appelbaum also finds that when private equity firms take over, they do not create jobs faster than comparable businesses, but they do destroy jobs faster. (So much for “job creation.”) Meanwhile, Shaxson reports that a Bain internal study concluded that there is “little evidence that private equity owners, overall, added value” to the companies they took over.</p>
<p>All this means that even when a private equity firm “succeeds” (usually after buying an above-average business), much of their gains are reaped simply by transferring large amounts of wealth to themselves. The losers are usually the companies they acquire, their investor partners, taxpayers, government agencies and workers–ultimately, the entire economy.</p>
<p>This article orginally appeared as a sidebar to our September cover story&#160;” <a href="" type="internal">The Bain Legacy</a>.”&#160;</p>
<p>Like what you’ve read? <a href="https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/itt-subscription-offer?refcode=WS_ITT_Article_Footer&amp;noskip=true" type="external">Subscribe to In These Times magazine</a>, or <a href="https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/support-in-these-times?refcode=WS_ITT_Article_Footer&amp;noskip=true" type="external">make a tax-deductible donation to fund this reporting</a>.</p>
<p>David Moberg, a senior editor of In These Times, has been on the staff of the magazine since it began publishing in 1976. Before joining In These Times, he completed his work for a Ph.D. in anthropology at the University of Chicago and worked for Newsweek. He has received fellowships from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the Nation Institute for research on the new global economy. He can be reached at davidmoberg@inthesetimes.com.</p> | true | 4 | private equity firm succeeds usually buying aboveaverage business much gains reaped simply transferring large amounts wealth private equity funds first emerged late 70s 80s part ideological shift toward making shareholders giving momentum early wave banking deregulation changes tax code made financial engineering profitable firms like bain capital spun 1984 consulting firm bain amp company benefited elimination old controls new rules encouraging globalization financialization heres works managers private equity firms create big investment funds general partners pool unregulated private money variety limited partners ranging public pension funds rich individuals including case bain dubious central american plutocrats operating tax havens panama general partners buy business called leveraged buyout using limitedpartner capital huge loan little money high debt leverage greatly multiplies profit successes also increases financial instability loans must paid even business slowsa minor worry private equity fund isnt responsible payments instead purchased business owes debt created buy interest debt taxdeductible meaning deals taxpayersubsidized paying principal still puts pressure acquired businesses turn typically squeeze employees easiest quickest way meet interest payments profit targets bainstyle buyouts employees often face wage benefit cuts mass layoffs businesses also use takeovers renege implied contracts engineer bankruptcies thus avoiding obligations workers pension payments years maybe decade funds partners typically try sell business profit funds also quicker ways make money sometimes arrange businesses buy borrow money pay extraordinary dividends first year firm bain quickly return general partners many times original investment vanity fair article reporter nicholas shaxson relates happened bain took merged two medical firms 1994 first bain cut dade behrings research budget half competitors level began closing branches even two firms recently received locationbased tax incentives job creation converted traditional pensions inferior alternatives saving 40 million nickeledanddimed employees benefit payments bain dade behring borrow 421 million pay goldman sachs top managers 365 million dividends participants invested 85 million romney continued profit deal least 2001 one year dade went bankrupt outsized profits even unsuccessful businesses still enough private equity firms also charge fees investors forthcoming issue challenge magazine economic affairs eileen appelbaum center economic policy research economist rosemary batt cornell professor explain private equity funds typically charge limited partnerssuch pension funds insurance companies2 percent investment year management fee participate plus 20 percent profit though bain charges heftier 30 percent taking fees factors account investment tied years appelbaum batt calculate limited partners would actually profit buying broad stock index fund minority private equity funds sometimes provide spectacular returns enticing players return casino general partners also benefit notorious carried interest loophole allows pay managing fund would taxed regular income instead taxed capital gains rate less half would otherwise pay sometimes private equity firms add value company improving business operations increasing skills adding new equipment story isnt typical new york times columnist david brooks portrays romney taking companies mediocre sclerotic trying make efficient dynamic appelbaums research shows privateequity takeover targets successful companies growing faster average buyout less 3 percent distressed mediocre appelbaum also finds private equity firms take create jobs faster comparable businesses destroy jobs faster much job creation meanwhile shaxson reports bain internal study concluded little evidence private equity owners overall added value companies took means even private equity firm succeeds usually buying aboveaverage business much gains reaped simply transferring large amounts wealth losers usually companies acquire investor partners taxpayers government agencies workersultimately entire economy article orginally appeared sidebar september cover story160 bain legacy160 like youve read subscribe times magazine make taxdeductible donation fund reporting david moberg senior editor times staff magazine since began publishing 1976 joining times completed work phd anthropology university chicago worked newsweek received fellowships john catherine macarthur foundation nation institute research new global economy reached davidmoberginthesetimescom | 599 |
<p>Photo courtesy of wikimedia used under a &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Federal_Reserve.jpg" target="blank"&gt;Creative Commons&lt;/a&gt; license.</p>
<p />
<p>On Wednesday, after weeks of the requisite press leaks and prefabricated spin, the Obama administration released details of its new “rules of the road” financial regulations, which had been billed as the most sweeping overhaul of the financial system since the Great Depression.</p>
<p>Obama, alas, is no FDR. Roosevelt’s New Deal reforms included the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, which split complex financial institutions into commercial banks (for consumers) and investment banks (for speculators). This enabled government to safeguard the boring, conventional activities of consumer banking without insuring the dice-rolls of high-risk investors. His reforms also opened the banking sector to independent audits to ensure financial soundness—as opposed to just taking the banks’ word for it, as Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s recent stress tests <a href="" type="internal">effectively did</a>—and established the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation, which helped people at risk of foreclosure cover their mortgages.</p>
<p>The administration’s new 88-page <a href="" type="internal">white paper</a>, titled “Financial Regulatory Reform: A New Foundation,” focuses more on alterations than true reform. Some of them are useful, like requiring lenders to keep a stake in the loans they make, and requiring banks to keep adequate capital on hand. The bill would also regulate a portion of the problematic financial instruments known as over-the-counter derivatives. But other aspects are ill advised, like giving the Federal Reserve more oversight, creating an uber-regulator, and allowing Wall Street’s biggest players to keep their hands in every pot imaginable.</p>
<p>Let’s break it down:</p>
<p>The Good Obama’s plan consolidates certain regulatory functions and imposes restrictions on certain securities. The Office of Thrift Supervision, which monitors thrifts and S&amp;Ls, including AIG—which was misclassified as an S&amp;L even though it operated an insurance company hedge fund—gets the axe. The duties of OTS and another regulatory body, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, would go to a new agency called the National Bank Supervisor. Now OTS was an easy target, since few who aren’t employed there really care one way or the other. Still, it’ll be a while before we know whether the move really does anything to streamline the regulatory system.</p>
<p>A stronger provision of the Obama proposal gives the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation wider authority over banks on the brink of failure. So far, the FDIC has done an excellent job resolving failed banks—selling their assets, renegotiating loans with consumers—and bringing them back to health. So giving it additional responsibility makes sense.</p>
<p>Obama’s plan would also establish the Consumer Financial Protection Agency to oversee mortgage- and other credit-related consumer products, and to enforce the Community Reinvestment Act, which encourages banks to make loans in disadvantaged areas. If the CFPA is given the enforcement and indictment power of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and actually uses it (unlike the SEC), then so much the better.</p>
<p>Other winners include a proposal to weaken the influence of credit ratings by agencies like Moody’s and Standard &amp; Poor’s, which helped drive the crisis by downplaying the risk of subprime and other risky securities. Then there’s Team Obama’s requirement that lenders keep 5 percent of their loan risk on the books rather than selling all of it to Wall Street—a move that will make lenders think twice before handing half a million bucks to some McDonald’s cashier, but one that Wall Street is already fighting.</p>
<p>Another nice idea, though it doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell, calls for bankers in these complex securities deals to be paid based on the long-term performance of the product, as opposed to simply taking their cut as soon as the deal closes. In practice, though, this would be a bureaucratic nightmare—policing it would require almost as many regulators as there were bankers involved. &#160;&#160; The Bad To oversee big insurers, the Obama team wants to create an Office of National Insurance within the Treasury Department. Now, if it weren’t for the fact that many insurance companies, notably AIG, had themselves classified as S&amp;Ls, while others are housed within the bank holding company complexes of firms like Citigroup—thanks to the <a href="" type="internal">repeal of Glass-Steagall</a> in 1999—this plan might even work. But this isn’t the case, and since the plan makes no mention of reconstructing the financial system, this part of it is unlikely to help matters. &#160; Establishing a Financial Services Oversight Council chaired by the Treasury Department seems redundant; slapping a new layer of regulatory bureaucracy on an increasingly complex banking system seems more an exercise in appearances than action.</p>
<p>On the subject of derivatives, the clear winner is Wall Street. “We propose to bring the markets for all OTC [over-the-counter, meaning they are traded between private parties] derivatives and asset-backed securities into a coherent and coordinated regulatory framework,” notes the Obama white paper.</p>
<p>If you didn’t quite get that, neither does anybody else. The paper gives no hints about how this would be accomplished, the constraints of this so-called framework, or the reporting requirements. And by noting that the derivatives in question include “all standardized OTC derivative transactions,” the white paper implies that the derivatives deemed too complex to be traded in this more generic fashion can still trade off-exchange—a loophole <a href="" type="internal">coveted by the banks</a> that lets them continue to create convoluted securities <a href="" type="internal">with little scrutiny</a>. (Mojo’s <a href="" type="internal">Nick Baumann</a> has <a href="" type="internal">more on this</a>, as does <a href="" type="internal">Rachel Morris</a>: <a href="" type="internal">Cap-and-trade derivatives</a>, anyone?)</p>
<p>The Weak</p>
<p>Obama blames the financial crisis on a “culture of irresponsibility,” but the absolute worst of his new proposals is to give the Fed more authority. That’s like rewarding the king of this irresponsible culture, or at least its chief banker and liquidity provider, with a larger kingdom.</p>
<p>The biggest bank bailouts of all went to Citigroup, which grabbed $388 billion in public assistance, and Bank of America, which scored $220 billion—as much as AIG. And who was their regulator? The Fed.</p>
<p>So the OTS gets annihilated for its failure vis-à-vis AIG, but the Fed gets rewarded. Why? Because the Fed, while not a fully public agency, is the banking system. During the past 15 months, it has amassed $7.9 trillion worth of facilities and other entities through which it has lavished cheap loans in return for questionable collateral from banks. It has kept the true nature of these transactions a secret despite numerous FOIA requests. And it has actively promoted the creation of bigger financial institutions in a chaotic environment, rather than putting the brakes on the creation of these giants.</p>
<p>Yet under Obama’s plan, the Fed would be crowned as the supreme systemic-risk regulator, supervising the largest and most interconnected firms. This is plain wrong. It rewards an entity that <a href="" type="internal">neglected its regulatory obligations</a> to begin with, that paid unprecedented sums to correct its mistakes, that never exercised its ability to contain the size of banks—blessing rather than questioning those that would become “too big to fail” (or to regulate)—and that shunned transparency. This is not the way to stabilize and provide necessary responsibility to the system.</p>
<p>Rather than regulate a complicated industry by creating more regulatory layers and giving more power to the Fed—which deserves its own stringent audit—a more lasting solution would be to restructure the banking industry itself. The smart move would be to divide banks once again into separate consumer and investment entities. This would make them far easier to regulate, and alleviate the need for government to play catch-up—and subsidize ever larger, more complex firms.</p>
<p>Yet as long as the <a href="" type="internal">Gramm</a>-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (which repealed Glass-Steagall, and then some) remains intact, and as long as the Fed serves as marriage counselor and financier for the banks, then investment houses, commercial banks, S&amp;Ls, and insurers can and will continue to merge operations. That fact alone renders it extremely difficult to monitor and control our banking system, or to achieve the stability Obama promises—and the rest of us seek.</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | photo courtesy wikimedia used lta hrefhttpenwikipediaorgwikifilefederal_reservejpg targetblankgtcreative commonsltagt license wednesday weeks requisite press leaks prefabricated spin obama administration released details new rules road financial regulations billed sweeping overhaul financial system since great depression obama alas fdr roosevelts new deal reforms included glasssteagall act 1933 split complex financial institutions commercial banks consumers investment banks speculators enabled government safeguard boring conventional activities consumer banking without insuring dicerolls highrisk investors reforms also opened banking sector independent audits ensure financial soundnessas opposed taking banks word treasury secretary tim geithners recent stress tests effectively didand established home owners loan corporation helped people risk foreclosure cover mortgages administrations new 88page white paper titled financial regulatory reform new foundation focuses alterations true reform useful like requiring lenders keep stake loans make requiring banks keep adequate capital hand bill would also regulate portion problematic financial instruments known overthecounter derivatives aspects ill advised like giving federal reserve oversight creating uberregulator allowing wall streets biggest players keep hands every pot imaginable lets break good obamas plan consolidates certain regulatory functions imposes restrictions certain securities office thrift supervision monitors thrifts sampls including aigwhich misclassified sampl even though operated insurance company hedge fundgets axe duties ots another regulatory body office comptroller currency would go new agency called national bank supervisor ots easy target since arent employed really care one way still itll know whether move really anything streamline regulatory system stronger provision obama proposal gives federal deposit insurance corporation wider authority banks brink failure far fdic done excellent job resolving failed banksselling assets renegotiating loans consumersand bringing back health giving additional responsibility makes sense obamas plan would also establish consumer financial protection agency oversee mortgage creditrelated consumer products enforce community reinvestment act encourages banks make loans disadvantaged areas cfpa given enforcement indictment power securities exchange commission actually uses unlike sec much better winners include proposal weaken influence credit ratings agencies like moodys standard amp poors helped drive crisis downplaying risk subprime risky securities theres team obamas requirement lenders keep 5 percent loan risk books rather selling wall streeta move make lenders think twice handing half million bucks mcdonalds cashier one wall street already fighting another nice idea though doesnt stand snowballs chance hell calls bankers complex securities deals paid based longterm performance product opposed simply taking cut soon deal closes practice though would bureaucratic nightmarepolicing would require almost many regulators bankers involved 160160 bad oversee big insurers obama team wants create office national insurance within treasury department werent fact many insurance companies notably aig classified sampls others housed within bank holding company complexes firms like citigroupthanks repeal glasssteagall 1999this plan might even work isnt case since plan makes mention reconstructing financial system part unlikely help matters 160 establishing financial services oversight council chaired treasury department seems redundant slapping new layer regulatory bureaucracy increasingly complex banking system seems exercise appearances action subject derivatives clear winner wall street propose bring markets otc overthecounter meaning traded private parties derivatives assetbacked securities coherent coordinated regulatory framework notes obama white paper didnt quite get neither anybody else paper gives hints would accomplished constraints socalled framework reporting requirements noting derivatives question include standardized otc derivative transactions white paper implies derivatives deemed complex traded generic fashion still trade offexchangea loophole coveted banks lets continue create convoluted securities little scrutiny mojos nick baumann rachel morris capandtrade derivatives anyone weak obama blames financial crisis culture irresponsibility absolute worst new proposals give fed authority thats like rewarding king irresponsible culture least chief banker liquidity provider larger kingdom biggest bank bailouts went citigroup grabbed 388 billion public assistance bank america scored 220 billionas much aig regulator fed ots gets annihilated failure visàvis aig fed gets rewarded fed fully public agency banking system past 15 months amassed 79 trillion worth facilities entities lavished cheap loans return questionable collateral banks kept true nature transactions secret despite numerous foia requests actively promoted creation bigger financial institutions chaotic environment rather putting brakes creation giants yet obamas plan fed would crowned supreme systemicrisk regulator supervising largest interconnected firms plain wrong rewards entity neglected regulatory obligations begin paid unprecedented sums correct mistakes never exercised ability contain size banksblessing rather questioning would become big fail regulateand shunned transparency way stabilize provide necessary responsibility system rather regulate complicated industry creating regulatory layers giving power fedwhich deserves stringent audita lasting solution would restructure banking industry smart move would divide banks separate consumer investment entities would make far easier regulate alleviate need government play catchupand subsidize ever larger complex firms yet long grammleachbliley act 1999 repealed glasssteagall remains intact long fed serves marriage counselor financier banks investment houses commercial banks sampls insurers continue merge operations fact alone renders extremely difficult monitor control banking system achieve stability obama promisesand rest us seek | 778 |
<p>Arizona’s legislature passed the highly contested Senate Bill 1070 last April. The bill targets people who have crossed our southern border without documentation in a variety of ways. One example is that Arizona law enforcement officers, if following SB1070 as it was written, are required to obtain citizenship/legal residency information of anyone they come across who could have crossed the border without papers. Essentially, this rule requires officers to profile the people they see in daily interactions. As undocumented immigrants are deemed ‘illegal’ by Arizona’s power structure, the consequences of daily activities like shopping, taking kids to school or taking a stroll could result in the destruction of a livelihood or a family by arrest and deportation.</p>
<p>The passing of SB1070 occurred near the end of the eight month period from September 2009 through May 2010, when the bodies of 110 hopeful immigrants were recovered on the US side of the Arizona-Mexico border, many of which were completely unidentifiable by the time they were discovered. As a supposed method to combat non-legal border crossings, support for SB1070 spread quickly along southern states. Within a few weeks of SB1070’s approval, eleven other states readied themselves to create and implement copycat laws. News pundits jumped on the story and comfortably took their places in the hype of the “immigration debate” that appeals to most of their viewers, which is characterized by an Us versus Them approach.</p>
<p>What was broadcast over mainstream airwaves was a narrative that erased many complexities of immigration in favor of a simple and stereotypical polarizing approach. In those “immigration debates” it was rare to hear any mention of why people might be leaving their homes, their families, and their lives as they know them in order to be in the US. Also lacking was any clear definition of ‘immigration’ in a context of two countries whose borders changed barely 150 years ago with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (which is why the question of who crossed the border and who the border crossed should be brought up as a major part of the conversation).</p>
<p>Nationalizing a Local Movement</p>
<p>Soon after SB1070’s passing, people took to the streets all around the country in protest (and in the case of some ‘Tea Party’ activists, support). Leilani Clark is a community activist in Tucson, and a member of a group now called the Capitol Nine. On April 20th, she and eight others chained themselves to the state capitol building in Phoenix. In her words, the group was “chained to this building just like our community is chained to this legislation.” In that respect, Clark approached the action through her responsibility as a community member. Action is all she could hope for to create change in such a racially divisive legal reform, and the group took action “as a massive call out to nonviolent civil disobedience, not only in Arizona but all across the country.”</p>
<p>Soon after, fourteen young people in Los Angeles were arrested for chaining themselves to an intersection in protest of SB1070. A few weeks later, House Bill 2281 passed in Arizona, banning Ethnic Studies. A group of fifteen Ethnic Studies students and alumni protested by occupying the State Building in Tucson.</p>
<p>These are just a few examples of the nonviolent actions taken before SB1070 was implemented on July 29th. What seems to fall through the cracks too often in discussions of the actions, however, is their level of coordination.</p>
<p>Movement Building Arizona Style</p>
<p>A few weeks ago, the Catalyst Project, a San Francisco organization focused around building a movement against racism especially in white communities, facilitated a report-back featuring activists who had been organizing against SB1070 in Arizona prior to July 29th. One segment of the report-back was an important analysis of the effectiveness of the movement building process in Arizona. For context’s sake, the process was contrasted with the organizing experience of the 1999 World Trade Organization protests in Seattle.</p>
<p>Organizing against the WTO turned into massive street rebellions, where activists clashed with police in virtually unprecedented ways, from enormous levels of chemical agents being dispersed (tear gas, pepper spray) to an incredible dedication by activists to continue fighting for their cause of Global Justice. From the streets of Seattle to Quebec to Miami and the beginnings of the World Social Forum process, the early 2000s seemed ready and ripe for a Global Justice revolution.</p>
<p>But Seattle’s organizing model was off. As described by the Catalyst project, Seattle’s model followed a flawed logic that setting a date and creating a public (and online) call to action with a specific list of targets would itself engage a critical mass of activists to build the movement for Global Justice. The point of those tactics were to be anonymous, uncoordinated and spontaneous. In other words perhaps, this could mean either that the approach was actually non-existant, or at best did not allow for accountability from within the movement. For Seattle, the magic was in the mystery of it all.</p>
<p>Eleven years later, the struggle for justice in Arizona created its own model. While small groups like the Capitol Nine attracted media attention and sent out a call to action around the country, community activists around the country were working on coordinated campaigns. While the headquarters of struggle found a base at Tona Tierra, a Phoenix community organization for eco- racial- and indigenous- rights, it was hard to go more than a few days in activist communities anywhere in the country without seeing mention of SB1070 or the struggle against it. At the US Social Forum for example, dozens of workshops and hundreds if not thousands of people focused their energy on creating strategy for immigration justice.</p>
<p>The Arizona model of organizing is articulated by direct action, but more for the purpose of publicity than for creating change through action. In Arizona, activists knocked on doors and facilitated community gatherings to discuss the expected impact of SB1070 for months leading up to the law’s implementation. Within the movement, there were known organizers and leaders who were able to take critical steps and actions with small groups as well as coordinate with other leaders and organizers who were transparent about their roles and intentions. Whereas the WTO protests focused on anonymity, Arizona organizing has allowed for accountability.</p>
<p>Additionally, there were many action plans with room for anyone to be involved, no matter their level of commitment or amount of time they could dedicate. This meant that while some folks were responsible for childcare or finding food donations, others were writing press releases or discussing tactics and effective actions. What is different from other models is that people were able to participate in a variety of ways and that space was created specifically for people to take action within the legal framework as well as for those who were dedicated to taking action outside of legal limitations.</p>
<p>What we saw in Arizona over the summer showed a new model of organizing, wherein cooperation between people who are dedicated to different tactics as well as space for accountability within the struggle takes center stage. As opposed to Seattle’s magic being in the mystery, the Catalyst Project described Arizona’s magic as in the coordination that allows for resistance through action, both coordinated and organic. Perhaps the organization that is embedded in the Arizona movement building strategy, however, proves that the magic is nonexistent. Instead, coordination takes priority, and all it needs is a niche within a movement of people ready to take on collective action for collective liberation.</p>
<p>JESSE STRAUSS is an independent journalist, born and raised in Oakland, Reach him at jstrauss (at) riseup.net.</p> | true | 4 | arizonas legislature passed highly contested senate bill 1070 last april bill targets people crossed southern border without documentation variety ways one example arizona law enforcement officers following sb1070 written required obtain citizenshiplegal residency information anyone come across could crossed border without papers essentially rule requires officers profile people see daily interactions undocumented immigrants deemed illegal arizonas power structure consequences daily activities like shopping taking kids school taking stroll could result destruction livelihood family arrest deportation passing sb1070 occurred near end eight month period september 2009 may 2010 bodies 110 hopeful immigrants recovered us side arizonamexico border many completely unidentifiable time discovered supposed method combat nonlegal border crossings support sb1070 spread quickly along southern states within weeks sb1070s approval eleven states readied create implement copycat laws news pundits jumped story comfortably took places hype immigration debate appeals viewers characterized us versus approach broadcast mainstream airwaves narrative erased many complexities immigration favor simple stereotypical polarizing approach immigration debates rare hear mention people might leaving homes families lives know order us also lacking clear definition immigration context two countries whose borders changed barely 150 years ago treaty guadalupe hidalgo question crossed border border crossed brought major part conversation nationalizing local movement soon sb1070s passing people took streets around country protest case tea party activists support leilani clark community activist tucson member group called capitol nine april 20th eight others chained state capitol building phoenix words group chained building like community chained legislation respect clark approached action responsibility community member action could hope create change racially divisive legal reform group took action massive call nonviolent civil disobedience arizona across country soon fourteen young people los angeles arrested chaining intersection protest sb1070 weeks later house bill 2281 passed arizona banning ethnic studies group fifteen ethnic studies students alumni protested occupying state building tucson examples nonviolent actions taken sb1070 implemented july 29th seems fall cracks often discussions actions however level coordination movement building arizona style weeks ago catalyst project san francisco organization focused around building movement racism especially white communities facilitated reportback featuring activists organizing sb1070 arizona prior july 29th one segment reportback important analysis effectiveness movement building process arizona contexts sake process contrasted organizing experience 1999 world trade organization protests seattle organizing wto turned massive street rebellions activists clashed police virtually unprecedented ways enormous levels chemical agents dispersed tear gas pepper spray incredible dedication activists continue fighting cause global justice streets seattle quebec miami beginnings world social forum process early 2000s seemed ready ripe global justice revolution seattles organizing model described catalyst project seattles model followed flawed logic setting date creating public online call action specific list targets would engage critical mass activists build movement global justice point tactics anonymous uncoordinated spontaneous words perhaps could mean either approach actually nonexistant best allow accountability within movement seattle magic mystery eleven years later struggle justice arizona created model small groups like capitol nine attracted media attention sent call action around country community activists around country working coordinated campaigns headquarters struggle found base tona tierra phoenix community organization eco racial indigenous rights hard go days activist communities anywhere country without seeing mention sb1070 struggle us social forum example dozens workshops hundreds thousands people focused energy creating strategy immigration justice arizona model organizing articulated direct action purpose publicity creating change action arizona activists knocked doors facilitated community gatherings discuss expected impact sb1070 months leading laws implementation within movement known organizers leaders able take critical steps actions small groups well coordinate leaders organizers transparent roles intentions whereas wto protests focused anonymity arizona organizing allowed accountability additionally many action plans room anyone involved matter level commitment amount time could dedicate meant folks responsible childcare finding food donations others writing press releases discussing tactics effective actions different models people able participate variety ways space created specifically people take action within legal framework well dedicated taking action outside legal limitations saw arizona summer showed new model organizing wherein cooperation people dedicated different tactics well space accountability within struggle takes center stage opposed seattles magic mystery catalyst project described arizonas magic coordination allows resistance action coordinated organic perhaps organization embedded arizona movement building strategy however proves magic nonexistent instead coordination takes priority needs niche within movement people ready take collective action collective liberation jesse strauss independent journalist born raised oakland reach jstrauss riseupnet | 709 |
<p>Trump and establishment Democrats are trading allegations about “fake news.”</p>
<p>Trump attacks CNN and others in the mass media with his typical lack of supporting evidence for his assertions. Nevertheless, progressives can agree with Trump that during the election major mass media selected Clinton as their candidate early on. They accordingly discounted and ignored Sanders during the primary while promoting Trump, and then promoted Clinton against Trump in the general election.</p>
<p>The plutocratic media went beyond their usual propaganda role of merely defining the limits of public discussion and setting the agenda. This time in desperation about a mobilized populist/progressive electorate they intervened in the election on behalf of the reliably plutocratic status quo candidate, Clinton.</p>
<p>Trump supporters are justifiably angry with the media. Progressives able to separate from neoliberal Democrats can concede the reality of their concerns. But such progressives also insist on consequences beyond Trumpian rants and unsupported name-calling. The latter are too easily rebutted threats against the legitimate role of the press in a democracy.</p>
<p>Trump needs to discover the policy-making tool of a commission of experts which could gather the examples of the mass media’s illegitimate role in the 2016 election and report a common set of facts. Only then can the country can move forward with policy-making that will prevent the plutocratic media from such direct intervention in an election in the future. Trump should establish a Propaganda Monitoring Commission to seriously study the occurrence of this new phenomenon of what did amount to partisan pathological lying by the mass media during the 2016 election.</p>
<p>The Democrats introduced the term “fake news” just days after losing the election. This charge expanded to support their propaganda initiative that the “Russians hacked the election.” The same propagandists who did intervene on behalf of Clinton claimed that Putin “intervened on behalf of” Trump, “a Putin puppet.”</p>
<p>“Hacked,” being a term with a specific meaning related to digital security, could refer with any concrete relevance only to two matters. One is Wikileaks publishing of information that is accurate and relevant, but intended to remain secret from the American people. This information could potentially but not necessarily be obtained by a hack. The importance of such disclosures to a democracy is demonstrated by an intelligence professional who reminds us of counterfactual circumstances where voters’ knowledge of information kept secret from them could have saved lives and decisively changed US political history by defeating Nixon twice. Publishing such information is not a bad thing.</p>
<p>The other such use of the term “hacking” could relate to tampering with digital election machines, the only credible examples of which occurred in the Democratic primary elections where Clinton’s results were suspect because the were contradicted by exit polls.</p>
<p>Trump, who “manages at times to reveal the truth,” himself vaguely alluded during the primaries to this concern by Sanders’ supporters when he alleged “rigging” of the Democratic primary against Sanders. Progressives oppose his recent attempt to convert this concern with fraudulent administration of elections – the kind of election fraud that Greg Palast documents – into a wholly unsupported assertion of voter fraud. This reversal serves to advance one of the Republican’s Swamp projects of enacting legislation that will suppress the vote under the pretense of preventing a non-existent problem.</p>
<p>The term “hack” has also been ambiguously used by Democrats to refer to some actual fake news that favored Trump more than Clinton, they claim. The implication is that some of these stories were generated by Russians. Democrats and the Clinton-supporting neoliberal media have been accused of having “not one shred of actual evidence to support these claims.” As Patrick Cockburn argues “It is difficult to see where Trump is wrong when he tweeted that ‘the Democrats had to come up with a story as to why they lost the election … so they made up a story – RUSSIA. Fake news!’”</p>
<p>Documented evidence that Russia did anything of this nature which resulted in electing Trump would require showing that some false story, not the true ones on Wikileaks, but a false story on say RT, or even other lesser known sources, was so effective that it changed public opinion sufficiently to account for Trump’s election. No candidate for such a story has been advanced. More important, no polling data has been offered to show that enough people to elect Trump did not vote for Clinton because of some such fake news issue.</p>
<p>The truth is that there was only one example of such provably fake news important enough to cause Trump to win the election. I wrote an article on that fake news in Huffington Post before the 2016 primary season. I was motivated to write the article to counter the mass media’s blatant and pervasive misrepresentation of Bernie Sanders as not a serious candidate amidst their combination of attacks on and deliberate neglect of him. That article warned in its title “That Democrats Underrate Sanders’ Superior Electability at Their Peril.”</p>
<p>The article reported polling data showing that the Independent plurality of voters, who were barred from voting in many Democratic closed primaries but who do vote in general elections, favored Bernie Sanders by 36% over Clinton. This explained why other polls consistently showed Sanders to be a likely winner against any Republican,&#160;while leaving Clinton only a toss-up chance in November.</p>
<p>At the same time, polling also showed Democrats to be unaware of that fact. On the big “electability” question, 38% more Democrats thought Clinton “would have a good chance of defeating the Republican nominee” (87%) than would Sanders. Because Clinton was found very unlikeable and untrustworthy compared to Sanders, electability was a serious factor for many voters. I wrote: “Democratic voters thus have it exactly backwards. … Democrats are not just misinformed, but grossly misinformed, about the key issue of whether Clinton or Sanders will more likely win against Republicans.” One labor leader, ”with a special nod to NBC/MSNBC,” alleged the existence of a well-funded effort to “consciously mislead” Democrats into believing “that [Sanders] cannot win.” Polls prove that they were effective in purveying the fake news that Clinton was more electable.</p>
<p>My article concluded that “Democrats’ erroneous guess as to which candidate can best defeat the Republicans could result in their nominating the wrong candidate, for the wrong reasons.” This is what happened, and is the reason Trump won. This is the actual “fake news” story of 2016.</p>
<p>Because this story is not being told and discussed, Clinton Democrats still suffer from the same fake news syndrome that caused their selection of a potential loser. They remain in denial that favorability polling consistently showed Sanders defeating Republicans, and especially Trump, by landslide proportions. Many of the loudest protesters against Trump are responsible for his victory.</p>
<p>That establishment Democrats continue to lie about the reason Trump was elected remains an important issue that should not be forgotten in the midst of obsession with its consequences. Understanding causes is essential to formulation of strategy.</p>
<p>The Clinton neoliberal wing either ignorantly or deliberately risked nominating a possible loser instead of a probable winner against consistent polling evidence warning of the consequences. If deliberate, the fact that the loser was widely known to be a corrupt scandal-prone centrist and the winner would have been a scandal-free progressive with greater public service experience suggests a bias by neoliberal Democrats against progressives so strong that they would prefer to lose to Trump than be responsible for electing a progressive-leaning Democrat. To avoid facing up to this truth with their supporters, they are now going to the extreme of waging a propaganda campaign against Russia, always a convenient whipping post for imperialists to deflect attention from their anti-democratic influence on domestic policy.</p>
<p>This neoliberal Democrat diversion about Russia is evidence of either pathological self-delusion, or more deliberate lies. None of the potential motivations why Clinton Democrats elected Trump or for their Russia coverup make them reliable partners for progressives. If progressives should decide to return to the framework of the Democratic Party in 2018 to&#160;primary every Clinton-supporter, which includes almost all incumbents, it must be done so in the spirit that neoliberal Democrats who grasped defeat from the jaws of victory in 2016 are not allies. They are rather as much opponents as are the Republican politicians who, like Trump, are similarly betraying their Independent voters as he helps the Swamp rise.</p> | true | 4 | trump establishment democrats trading allegations fake news trump attacks cnn others mass media typical lack supporting evidence assertions nevertheless progressives agree trump election major mass media selected clinton candidate early accordingly discounted ignored sanders primary promoting trump promoted clinton trump general election plutocratic media went beyond usual propaganda role merely defining limits public discussion setting agenda time desperation mobilized populistprogressive electorate intervened election behalf reliably plutocratic status quo candidate clinton trump supporters justifiably angry media progressives able separate neoliberal democrats concede reality concerns progressives also insist consequences beyond trumpian rants unsupported namecalling latter easily rebutted threats legitimate role press democracy trump needs discover policymaking tool commission experts could gather examples mass medias illegitimate role 2016 election report common set facts country move forward policymaking prevent plutocratic media direct intervention election future trump establish propaganda monitoring commission seriously study occurrence new phenomenon amount partisan pathological lying mass media 2016 election democrats introduced term fake news days losing election charge expanded support propaganda initiative russians hacked election propagandists intervene behalf clinton claimed putin intervened behalf trump putin puppet hacked term specific meaning related digital security could refer concrete relevance two matters one wikileaks publishing information accurate relevant intended remain secret american people information could potentially necessarily obtained hack importance disclosures democracy demonstrated intelligence professional reminds us counterfactual circumstances voters knowledge information kept secret could saved lives decisively changed us political history defeating nixon twice publishing information bad thing use term hacking could relate tampering digital election machines credible examples occurred democratic primary elections clintons results suspect contradicted exit polls trump manages times reveal truth vaguely alluded primaries concern sanders supporters alleged rigging democratic primary sanders progressives oppose recent attempt convert concern fraudulent administration elections kind election fraud greg palast documents wholly unsupported assertion voter fraud reversal serves advance one republicans swamp projects enacting legislation suppress vote pretense preventing nonexistent problem term hack also ambiguously used democrats refer actual fake news favored trump clinton claim implication stories generated russians democrats clintonsupporting neoliberal media accused one shred actual evidence support claims patrick cockburn argues difficult see trump wrong tweeted democrats come story lost election made story russia fake news documented evidence russia anything nature resulted electing trump would require showing false story true ones wikileaks false story say rt even lesser known sources effective changed public opinion sufficiently account trumps election candidate story advanced important polling data offered show enough people elect trump vote clinton fake news issue truth one example provably fake news important enough cause trump win election wrote article fake news huffington post 2016 primary season motivated write article counter mass medias blatant pervasive misrepresentation bernie sanders serious candidate amidst combination attacks deliberate neglect article warned title democrats underrate sanders superior electability peril article reported polling data showing independent plurality voters barred voting many democratic closed primaries vote general elections favored bernie sanders 36 clinton explained polls consistently showed sanders likely winner republican160while leaving clinton tossup chance november time polling also showed democrats unaware fact big electability question 38 democrats thought clinton would good chance defeating republican nominee 87 would sanders clinton found unlikeable untrustworthy compared sanders electability serious factor many voters wrote democratic voters thus exactly backwards democrats misinformed grossly misinformed key issue whether clinton sanders likely win republicans one labor leader special nod nbcmsnbc alleged existence wellfunded effort consciously mislead democrats believing sanders win polls prove effective purveying fake news clinton electable article concluded democrats erroneous guess candidate best defeat republicans could result nominating wrong candidate wrong reasons happened reason trump actual fake news story 2016 story told discussed clinton democrats still suffer fake news syndrome caused selection potential loser remain denial favorability polling consistently showed sanders defeating republicans especially trump landslide proportions many loudest protesters trump responsible victory establishment democrats continue lie reason trump elected remains important issue forgotten midst obsession consequences understanding causes essential formulation strategy clinton neoliberal wing either ignorantly deliberately risked nominating possible loser instead probable winner consistent polling evidence warning consequences deliberate fact loser widely known corrupt scandalprone centrist winner would scandalfree progressive greater public service experience suggests bias neoliberal democrats progressives strong would prefer lose trump responsible electing progressiveleaning democrat avoid facing truth supporters going extreme waging propaganda campaign russia always convenient whipping post imperialists deflect attention antidemocratic influence domestic policy neoliberal democrat diversion russia evidence either pathological selfdelusion deliberate lies none potential motivations clinton democrats elected trump russia coverup make reliable partners progressives progressives decide return framework democratic party 2018 to160primary every clintonsupporter includes almost incumbents must done spirit neoliberal democrats grasped defeat jaws victory 2016 allies rather much opponents republican politicians like trump similarly betraying independent voters helps swamp rise | 769 |
<p />
<p>At Girasole, a fine Italian restaurant on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, my antipasti dish, “Gamberi e Fagiolini,” arrives with a flourish: a dozen blushing white shrimp in a chilled nest of baby green string beans topped with a vinegar dressing. Tender and tart, the shrimp are as large as hooked pinkies; I devour each one down to the last tail.</p>
<p>The chef assures me the shrimp are the best on the market, from Ecuador. I tell him what I have just heard: that an Ecuadorean environmental group has called for a worldwide boycott of its nation’s shrimp. The plate of shrimp on which I have just feasted was the end product of an international industry embroiled in a conflict so virulent that it’s caused people to kill one another.</p>
<p>A third of the world’s shrimp are now raised in ponds, an aquacultural enterprise that in the past 20 years has grown from nothing to a $4 billion industry. Shrimp, often described as the “miracle export,” have also spawned intense environmental, economic, and political problems.</p>
<p>“One of the worst environmental problems in Southeast Asia and Latin America today is also one of the least well-known: the damage resulting from the expansion of shrimp aquaculture in coastal areas,” says Peter Riggs of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund in New York City, who has spent 10 years working on Asian issues. He hopes, somehow, to raise public alarm over farmed shrimp the way the Rainforest Action Network made a pariah out of “rainforest beef” in the late 1980s.</p>
<p />
<p>Twenty years ago, Midwesterners ate shrimp from cans. Other Americans, if they enjoyed this expensive delicacy at all, generally nibbled on breaded shrimp or cold shrimp cocktail. Today, as we know from Forrest Gump, shrimp is a democratic luxury. Thanks to the tremendous growth of the global shrimp catch and the rapid rise of shrimp aquaculture in South America and Southeast Asia, the U.S. supply has doubled over the past decade to almost 1 billion pounds per year, making shrimp our second-favorite seafood after tuna fish.</p>
<p>Our new hunger for shrimp is a timely combination of the increasing popularity of Asian cuisine, seafood as an alternative to red meat, and plummeting prices. A pound of medium-sized shrimp that cost upwards of $14 a decade ago today sells for $5.99. In other words, Americans can eat so much shrimp because of the tremendous growth in the shrimp-farming industry; conversely, this new form of intensive aquaculture has grown because of our increased demand.</p>
<p>The idea of farming shrimp on a small scale isn’t new. Southeast Asian villagers have raised shrimp in ponds for centuries. Shrimp hatch in the ocean, drift with the tides into mangrove forests for safety as they grow into juveniles, and then return to the open water. Taking advantage of the shrimp’s natural life cycle, the villagers catch the tides, holding the shrimp in ponds until harvest.</p>
<p>By the late 1970s, commercial shrimp farmers learned they could supercharge this process by adding more postlarval shrimp caught in the wild or raised in hatcheries. They turned to fish feed and chemicals, pumps and aerators, and other tools of factory farming. In Asia, especially, they boosted the production of shrimp, from the 4,000 shrimp per acre found in traditional ponds to upwards of 121,000 per acre in new intensive ponds.</p>
<p>The World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and other foreign aid programs from the United States and Europe promoted the new enterprise, loaning hundreds of millions of dollars in the 1970s and 1980s. Private investors also flocked to the industry, encouraged by governments eager to attract this new source of foreign revenue to their debt-burdened countries. Commercial shrimp ponds now provide 783,200 tons of shrimp per year, roughly 30 percent of all shrimp consumed.</p>
<p>This harvest is spread over more than 50 countries. The top producers are Thailand, Ecuador, Indonesia, China, India, and Vietnam, says Bob Rosenberry, publisher of the industry newsletter Shrimp News International. In Thailand, which became the world’s leading producer by 1993, “literally hundreds, if not thousands” of small farmers jumped from earning $2,000 with rice paddies or traditional fish ponds in one year to making $20,000 to $40,000 on shrimp the next.</p>
<p>Shrimp has become an economic mainstay for these countries. In Ecuador, which furnishes nearly 10 percent of the U.S. supply, shrimp is the third-leading export after oil and bananas. When the shrimp-farming boom hit Ecuador, between 1979 and 1983, shrimp exports rose from $31 million to $185 million. In 1994, the industry earned $539 million and employed 260,000 people at roughly 525 square miles of working ponds and more than 400 hatcheries, processing plants, and other facilities.</p>
<p>The Muisne River–its water the dull green of old Army surplus–flows along Ecuador’s northern coast. Mangrove trees fringe the muddy riverbanks. Standing on their tangled roots as if someone had yanked the trunks several feet up from the ground, the trees don’t hide the black, earthen banks of the huge shrimp ponds that now cover upwards of 90 percent of this estuary. Grim and functional, the shrimp farms resemble settling ponds at sewage treatment plants. Large pipes snake stiffly over embankments, pumping fresh water into the ponds. Small white houses for the guards stand along the dikes.</p>
<p>Initially, shrimp aquaculture seemed to be the wise alternative to the destruction of the wild catch, which peaked worldwide in 1993 at 4.4 billion pounds and declined by 200 million pounds in 1995 to 4.2 billion pounds. Shrimp trawlers are among the most wasteful fishing boats in the world–they produce less than 2 percent of the world’s seafood, but are responsible for a third of the wasted fish bycatch. They also drown up to 150,000 sea turtles per year.</p>
<p>Shrimp aquaculture, however, has merely traded the problems of modern fishing for those of modern farming. Shrimp farmers have clear-cut huge regions of invaluable mangrove trees and disrupted thousands of traditional fishing villages along tropical coastlines. Deepening the irony, the loss of those mangroves threatens the future of farmed shrimp: The mangrove ecosystem provides essential filtration that keeps the estuaries–and the ponds–clean.</p>
<p>Few Americans have heard of mangrove trees, let alone understand their ecological value. These gnarly, tangled giants grow throughout the tropics along estuary banks. The trees’ unique roots absorb both salt and fresh water and anchor one of nature’s most productive ecosystems. The roots, which look like crazy footstools propping up smaller trees, provide safe nurseries for thousands of species of fish, shrimp, and other marine life that may also inhabit nearby sea grass beds and coral reefs. For generations, coastal village communities have supported themselves thanks to the mangrove ecosystem, thriving on ample catches of fish, mollusks, and crabs, as well as by harvesting its lumber. The ecosystem has other benefits that are harder to count. These trees buffer the land against hurricanes, collect sediments and other pollutants from rivers, and sustain habitats for alligators, sea turtles, manatees, dolphins, and even monkeys.</p>
<p>Mangrove trees also are more efficient photosynthesizers than almost any other plant, creating a steady supply of nutrients for the tiny creatures at the bottom of the food chain. One study found that for every acre of mangroves lost, wild harvests of fish and shrimp drop by 676 pounds per year.</p>
<p>Yet mangroves are disappearing around the world. The Philippines, for example, had only 540 square miles of mangroves left by 1991, compared to about 1,700 square miles in the 1920s–a loss equivalent to the size of Rhode Island.</p>
<p>Thailand has lost more than half of its mangroves since 1960, almost 800 square miles, or an area twice the size of Los Angeles, much of it to shrimp farms.</p>
<p>Ecuador has lost 162 square miles out of 788 square miles of mangroves from 1969 to 1991. The clear-cutting has been so concentrated in a handful of estuaries that they have lost most of their trees. The tallest mangroves in the Americas, wearing long, flowing Rip Van Winkle beards of olive moss, stand across the road from miles of shrimp ponds, their shallow gray waters lifeless except for the few white egrets patiently stalking a free meal.</p>
<p>By 1985, says Acción Ecológica, a local environmental group, the Ecuadorean government recognized the spreading damage to the mangroves. Since the trees stood on intertidal zones, traditionally considered public land by governments around the world, the ecosystem could be protected by decree. Ecuador issued laws forbidding shrimp farmers from clearing any more trees without a government concession. But these efforts were paper-thin. According to Acción Ecológica, from 1987 to 1991, almost 85 more square miles of mangroves vanished to make room for shrimp ponds, despite appeals from village environmental groups to the government.</p>
<p>Last March, Acción Ecológica called upon consumers in the United States and Europe to stop eating Ecuador’s shrimp. But even activists in the group’s own country are not united in that call, some fearing a boycott will cause more, not less, environmental destruction, and might hurt the poorest people the most ( <a href="/news/feature/1996/03/nixon2.html" type="external">see sidebar</a>).</p>
<p />
<p>Coastal villagers in Malaysia, Bangladesh, Thailand, Honduras, Ecuador, and elsewhere have clashed with the shrimp industry, but the conflict has reached its hottest pitch in India. In 1993, villagers in Kurru, angered by poisoned wells, attacked a shrimp pond, uprooting pumps and breaching dikes. In January 1995, the police in Bhadrakh killed two farmers during a protest. And last May, in a case filed by the country’s top environmental lawyer, India’s supreme court issued a temporary ban on new shrimp farms in three coastal states. Alfredo Quarto of Earth Island Institute’s Mangrove Action Project, predicts, “India will be a precedent for a worldwide movement.”</p>
<p>The movement has been slow in coming. Few Americans know about the conflicts surrounding shrimp ponds. Even such groups as Greenpeace and the Environmental Defense Fund have only begun investigating shrimp aquaculture in the past year or two. They were led to it, says Matthew Gianni of Greenpeace International, by the calls for help from local Asian and South American environmental groups.</p>
<p>The solutions are as varied as the countries affected–in part due to the fragmentation of the industry itself. “Maybe there are 100 corporations involved and none of them controls more than 1 percent of the production,” Rosenberry says. In 1993, some 25 importers split 55 percent of the U.S. market, according to John Filose, vice president of sales and marketing for Ocean Garden Products, the country’s largest importer.</p>
<p>All that fragmentation makes it extremely complicated to pressure the industry to clean up its act. There’s no single corporation against which a government can apply economic pressure. If one shrimp farmer spends the money to grow shrimp more sustainably, then it’s likely that either his shrimp will be too expensive for the market or he won’t recoup enough of his investment to stay in business. And if one country imposes higher environmental standards, the industry is likely to move elsewhere. Moreover, once the shrimp moves into the export system, it all becomes part of a single supply stream. A consumer has no way to differentiate distribution of wild-caught shrimp from farmed shrimp, let alone to make finer distinctions among farming techniques.</p>
<p />
<p>More effective than any boycott, however, may be nature itself. Nature has retaliated against the intensive shrimp farms. Shrimp diseases and floods, formerly prevented in part by the natural filtration and buffering of the mangrove ecosystem, are rampant–making environmentally sustainable farms a better long-term economic investment.</p>
<p>After the first, glorious, get-rich-quick days, the industry has been plagued by the kind of spectacular crashes that tend to dog this intensive form of mono-culture. In his 1995 Shrimp News International annual report, Rosenberry’s account of the world shrimp industry reads like a disease almanac. Shrimp farmers in Western countries battled Taura Syndrome, and Asian ones fended off the yellowhead virus and the whitespot virus, which attacked India’s ponds just as the villagers were protesting. Last May, when Taura Syndrome, a virus from Ecuador, reached three big shrimp farms in Texas, it rapidly killed a $10 million crop. “This thing spread like a forest fire,” one farmer told the New York Times. “I just sat there and watched it, and in a matter of three days, my shrimp were gone. Dead.”</p>
<p>Blights like these have changed the shrimp industry. Shrimp production in the Philippines, for example, peaked in the late 1980s, but fell by half to 27,500 tons in 1993, brought low by typhoons, power outages, diseases, and unclean pond water. The industry in Taiwan, which led world production in 1987, plummeted by 80 percent by 1989, as a virus spread through Taiwan’s ponds.</p>
<p>“Combining the fear of a short-lived phenomenon with a too-good-to-miss attitude, shrimp farmers have been prompted to stock their ponds at extremely high densities,” writes C. Kwei Lin of the Asian Institute of Technology in the World Aquaculture Society’s book Swimming Through Troubled Water. “This typically results in either admirably high production and quick wealth, or miserable failure.”</p>
<p>The industry’s critics liken this “slash and trash” aquaculture to the destruction of the rainforest by cattle ranchers who overgraze an area then move onward after the soil loses its nutrients. Abandoned ponds can leave behind a “mud desert” where nothing green may grow for years.</p>
<p>In Ecuador, 42,000 acres of ponds now lie fallow, and illegal clear-cuts scar some estuaries for ponds that never got built. But the industry says it’s learning from experience. “A shrimp pond is like the canary in the coal mine. It needs a healthy estuary,” Rosenberry says.</p>
<p>To prosper over the long haul, the ponds need good clean water rich with nutrients, and they need mangroves to filter pollutants and nurse the wild shrimp postlarva that many farmers still stock in their ponds. Industry literature has grown thick with scientific papers that, in essence, blame the fast-buck ponds of the past for fouling waterways and causing the spread of shrimp diseases.</p>
<p>Smart farmers now install water filters, stock fewer shrimp, and even recycle their own water to become almost completely self-contained. In Thailand, some ponds clean and reuse their own water in order to avoid dipping into estuaries contaminated with viruses. In the United States, entrepreneurs hope to develop high-tech indoor ponds detached from the natural world. Unlike the critics, who contend that every commercial pond must someday crash, Rosenberry says the industry is outgrowing its rampaging youth. “All of aquaculture is plagued by diseases,” he notes. “It’s a management problem. It won’t close the industry.”</p>
<p>Others don’t share his optimism. In the 1980s, the World Bank strongly promoted shrimp ponds in China. The bank loaned China $300 million for projects along the entire coast, says Joseph Goldberg, chief of the bank’s China rural development division. By 1991, the country had developed into Asia’s largest producer. But the ponds crashed in June of 1993 when a disease spread over the course of a few nights. Goldberg believes such crashes are inevitable. “When we get project loan proposals now, I look for sea fish, crabs, turtles–anything but shrimp,” he says. “This industry is roulette, and we don’t finance roulette.”</p>
<p />
<p>The shrimp boom reached northern Ecuador’s Muisne estuary in the mid-1980s, led by farmers from the southern region where Ecuador’s shrimp industry began. Touring the river and side channels in a wooden launch with members of Fundecol, a local environmental group, I survey the empty landscape that is the boom’s legacy. At first, the farms showered the poor villagers of Muisne with cash, for better or for worse. (“Before, there was one whorehouse. Now there are four and the women are very cheap,” says Fundecol’s Lider Gongora, who wants to establish an AIDS education program.)</p>
<p>By the late 1980s, fear began to mount as the villagers sensed the fisheries, their source of food and livelihood, were collapsing along with the mangroves. Now, tensions run high, pitting the new entrepreneurs against the villagers who have watched their way of life vanish. Those who haven’t won jobs related to the new industry wonder how their families will survive.</p>
<p>“Ten years ago, 60 percent of the people [in Muisne] lived from the mangroves…. Today 20 percent use them,” says Bernardo Reuter, who helped start Fundecol in 1989. Reuter makes his living partly by repairing the bicycle rickshaw taxis that boys drive around the sandy and grassy streets in this island village, which has no cars. The tricycleros, he says, may be the only ones in their families with jobs.</p>
<p>“It was very easy 10 years ago,” agrees Fanny Mina, the head of a group of 23 concheras, women who collect shellfish. “In six or eight hours, we would catch 1,000. Now…we catch 100 to 150.”</p>
<p>The government has responded to this crisis by forbidding farmers from clearing any more mangroves without government permission. But the shrimp farmers simply took advantage of the country’s conflicting laws and agencies–which left the trees in a bureaucratic gray zone between the departments regulating forests, fisheries, tourism, and naval defense–and shopped around for the permits they needed.</p>
<p>“The law says that for each tree you cut, you go to prison for three to 30 days,” says Lourdes Proaño of Fundecol, as we tour the river. “But the government has not put the law into practice.”</p>
<p>“With this issue we have one of the highest sources of corruption in Ecuador,” agrees Teodoro Bustamante, executive director of Fundación Natura, the country’s largest conservation group. “This has destroyed our capacity to be good managers of our environment. We need to restore the capacity to have good administration of these resources.”</p>
<p>Ecuador’s shrimp farmers, recovering from a $200 million loss caused by an epidemic of the Taura Syndrome in 1992 and 1993, are beginning to agree. Chastened by this mysterious blight, which may be due to a virus or to water polluted by fungicides used on banana plantations upstream, the industry now preaches the value of healthy estuaries, including preserving the mangroves that help clean the water.</p>
<p>Joaquin Orentia owns 500 hectares of ponds and serves as a director of the industry’s trade association in Ecuador. He rails against the government for allowing renegade farmers to cut the mangrove trees. Eighty percent of the industry, he says, abides by the laws. But, he complains, “In this country we don’t have one single government armed guard to protect the mangroves.”</p>
<p>Fundecol now patrols the estuary, hunting for new illegal cutting. It duly reports it to the government–with few results. Fundecol president Nisvaldo Ortiz recently found a farmer destroying mangroves. When Ortiz challenged him, the farmer aimed a pistol at Ortiz’s chest, said he would “die like a dog,” and finally fired over his head. “Fundecol has denounced this gentleman 30 times in several years,” Ortiz says, adding that the government ultimately fined him “10 minimum salaries”–about $400. “It’s laughable,” he says.</p>
<p>At times, Fundecol members have even waded into the mangrove waters and directly blocked the cutting, but men with machetes simply return at night. It can take an hour for a man to hack through all the roots of a tree.</p>
<p>Yet Fundecol is having some success. We pull ashore at two hectares of mudflats, where the group has planted hundreds of mangrove seedlings in sticky ground pocked with tiny crab holes. The tallest saplings stand four feet high with kickstand roots firmly supporting their thin trunks. Reforesting mangroves is a new art in Ecuador. Ortiz explains that the group lost one crop to little red crabs that clipped the stems in their claws to bring down the tasty leaves. The group now plants seedlings sheathed in bamboo stalks or plastic bottles.</p>
<p>Next we visit Fundecol’s high platform dock, built like a balcony alongside the last big grove of mangroves in the estuary. The group has applied for government permission to manage this land, following the same procedures the shrimp farmers use. If Fundecol gets this right, it can finally enforce the laws itself, rather than simply denounce the illegal cutters to the government.</p>
<p>I travel farther north, across bays and along rivers, admiring an unbroken mangrove forest that rises from the wooden grillwork of roots. We pass an occasional tree laden with egrets, like a green chandelier with white candles. Standing in dugout canoes, fishermen use pole paddles to navigate along the fringe of the forest.</p>
<p>Finally, we dock at the tiny village of Santa Rosa. Its buildings stand entirely on stilts. Several times a year, the river floods the dirt streets, so people ride their dugout canoes to the doors of their wooden houses. Over 500 people live here, enduring the decline of the marine life in the mangrove ecosystem. Waving his hand over the small pile of silvery fish that reflects his morning’s work, one of the local fishermen tells me, “When we go out, we catch something, but it’s nothing like it used to be.”</p>
<p>Ironically, the women who collect shellfish have had to turn to aquaculture themselves. The concheras have planted a shellfish bed across the river, marked by stakes in the water. They hope it will work.</p>
<p>Will Nixon is a freelance writer based in New York City.</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | girasole fine italian restaurant manhattans upper east side antipasti dish gamberi e fagiolini arrives flourish dozen blushing white shrimp chilled nest baby green string beans topped vinegar dressing tender tart shrimp large hooked pinkies devour one last tail chef assures shrimp best market ecuador tell heard ecuadorean environmental group called worldwide boycott nations shrimp plate shrimp feasted end product international industry embroiled conflict virulent caused people kill one another third worlds shrimp raised ponds aquacultural enterprise past 20 years grown nothing 4 billion industry shrimp often described miracle export also spawned intense environmental economic political problems one worst environmental problems southeast asia latin america today also one least wellknown damage resulting expansion shrimp aquaculture coastal areas says peter riggs rockefeller brothers fund new york city spent 10 years working asian issues hopes somehow raise public alarm farmed shrimp way rainforest action network made pariah rainforest beef late 1980s twenty years ago midwesterners ate shrimp cans americans enjoyed expensive delicacy generally nibbled breaded shrimp cold shrimp cocktail today know forrest gump shrimp democratic luxury thanks tremendous growth global shrimp catch rapid rise shrimp aquaculture south america southeast asia us supply doubled past decade almost 1 billion pounds per year making shrimp secondfavorite seafood tuna fish new hunger shrimp timely combination increasing popularity asian cuisine seafood alternative red meat plummeting prices pound mediumsized shrimp cost upwards 14 decade ago today sells 599 words americans eat much shrimp tremendous growth shrimpfarming industry conversely new form intensive aquaculture grown increased demand idea farming shrimp small scale isnt new southeast asian villagers raised shrimp ponds centuries shrimp hatch ocean drift tides mangrove forests safety grow juveniles return open water taking advantage shrimps natural life cycle villagers catch tides holding shrimp ponds harvest late 1970s commercial shrimp farmers learned could supercharge process adding postlarval shrimp caught wild raised hatcheries turned fish feed chemicals pumps aerators tools factory farming asia especially boosted production shrimp 4000 shrimp per acre found traditional ponds upwards 121000 per acre new intensive ponds world bank asian development bank foreign aid programs united states europe promoted new enterprise loaning hundreds millions dollars 1970s 1980s private investors also flocked industry encouraged governments eager attract new source foreign revenue debtburdened countries commercial shrimp ponds provide 783200 tons shrimp per year roughly 30 percent shrimp consumed harvest spread 50 countries top producers thailand ecuador indonesia china india vietnam says bob rosenberry publisher industry newsletter shrimp news international thailand became worlds leading producer 1993 literally hundreds thousands small farmers jumped earning 2000 rice paddies traditional fish ponds one year making 20000 40000 shrimp next shrimp become economic mainstay countries ecuador furnishes nearly 10 percent us supply shrimp thirdleading export oil bananas shrimpfarming boom hit ecuador 1979 1983 shrimp exports rose 31 million 185 million 1994 industry earned 539 million employed 260000 people roughly 525 square miles working ponds 400 hatcheries processing plants facilities muisne riverits water dull green old army surplusflows along ecuadors northern coast mangrove trees fringe muddy riverbanks standing tangled roots someone yanked trunks several feet ground trees dont hide black earthen banks huge shrimp ponds cover upwards 90 percent estuary grim functional shrimp farms resemble settling ponds sewage treatment plants large pipes snake stiffly embankments pumping fresh water ponds small white houses guards stand along dikes initially shrimp aquaculture seemed wise alternative destruction wild catch peaked worldwide 1993 44 billion pounds declined 200 million pounds 1995 42 billion pounds shrimp trawlers among wasteful fishing boats worldthey produce less 2 percent worlds seafood responsible third wasted fish bycatch also drown 150000 sea turtles per year shrimp aquaculture however merely traded problems modern fishing modern farming shrimp farmers clearcut huge regions invaluable mangrove trees disrupted thousands traditional fishing villages along tropical coastlines deepening irony loss mangroves threatens future farmed shrimp mangrove ecosystem provides essential filtration keeps estuariesand pondsclean americans heard mangrove trees let alone understand ecological value gnarly tangled giants grow throughout tropics along estuary banks trees unique roots absorb salt fresh water anchor one natures productive ecosystems roots look like crazy footstools propping smaller trees provide safe nurseries thousands species fish shrimp marine life may also inhabit nearby sea grass beds coral reefs generations coastal village communities supported thanks mangrove ecosystem thriving ample catches fish mollusks crabs well harvesting lumber ecosystem benefits harder count trees buffer land hurricanes collect sediments pollutants rivers sustain habitats alligators sea turtles manatees dolphins even monkeys mangrove trees also efficient photosynthesizers almost plant creating steady supply nutrients tiny creatures bottom food chain one study found every acre mangroves lost wild harvests fish shrimp drop 676 pounds per year yet mangroves disappearing around world philippines example 540 square miles mangroves left 1991 compared 1700 square miles 1920sa loss equivalent size rhode island thailand lost half mangroves since 1960 almost 800 square miles area twice size los angeles much shrimp farms ecuador lost 162 square miles 788 square miles mangroves 1969 1991 clearcutting concentrated handful estuaries lost trees tallest mangroves americas wearing long flowing rip van winkle beards olive moss stand across road miles shrimp ponds shallow gray waters lifeless except white egrets patiently stalking free meal 1985 says acción ecológica local environmental group ecuadorean government recognized spreading damage mangroves since trees stood intertidal zones traditionally considered public land governments around world ecosystem could protected decree ecuador issued laws forbidding shrimp farmers clearing trees without government concession efforts paperthin according acción ecológica 1987 1991 almost 85 square miles mangroves vanished make room shrimp ponds despite appeals village environmental groups government last march acción ecológica called upon consumers united states europe stop eating ecuadors shrimp even activists groups country united call fearing boycott cause less environmental destruction might hurt poorest people see sidebar coastal villagers malaysia bangladesh thailand honduras ecuador elsewhere clashed shrimp industry conflict reached hottest pitch india 1993 villagers kurru angered poisoned wells attacked shrimp pond uprooting pumps breaching dikes january 1995 police bhadrakh killed two farmers protest last may case filed countrys top environmental lawyer indias supreme court issued temporary ban new shrimp farms three coastal states alfredo quarto earth island institutes mangrove action project predicts india precedent worldwide movement movement slow coming americans know conflicts surrounding shrimp ponds even groups greenpeace environmental defense fund begun investigating shrimp aquaculture past year two led says matthew gianni greenpeace international calls help local asian south american environmental groups solutions varied countries affectedin part due fragmentation industry maybe 100 corporations involved none controls 1 percent production rosenberry says 1993 25 importers split 55 percent us market according john filose vice president sales marketing ocean garden products countrys largest importer fragmentation makes extremely complicated pressure industry clean act theres single corporation government apply economic pressure one shrimp farmer spends money grow shrimp sustainably likely either shrimp expensive market wont recoup enough investment stay business one country imposes higher environmental standards industry likely move elsewhere moreover shrimp moves export system becomes part single supply stream consumer way differentiate distribution wildcaught shrimp farmed shrimp let alone make finer distinctions among farming techniques effective boycott however may nature nature retaliated intensive shrimp farms shrimp diseases floods formerly prevented part natural filtration buffering mangrove ecosystem rampantmaking environmentally sustainable farms better longterm economic investment first glorious getrichquick days industry plagued kind spectacular crashes tend dog intensive form monoculture 1995 shrimp news international annual report rosenberrys account world shrimp industry reads like disease almanac shrimp farmers western countries battled taura syndrome asian ones fended yellowhead virus whitespot virus attacked indias ponds villagers protesting last may taura syndrome virus ecuador reached three big shrimp farms texas rapidly killed 10 million crop thing spread like forest fire one farmer told new york times sat watched matter three days shrimp gone dead blights like changed shrimp industry shrimp production philippines example peaked late 1980s fell half 27500 tons 1993 brought low typhoons power outages diseases unclean pond water industry taiwan led world production 1987 plummeted 80 percent 1989 virus spread taiwans ponds combining fear shortlived phenomenon toogoodtomiss attitude shrimp farmers prompted stock ponds extremely high densities writes c kwei lin asian institute technology world aquaculture societys book swimming troubled water typically results either admirably high production quick wealth miserable failure industrys critics liken slash trash aquaculture destruction rainforest cattle ranchers overgraze area move onward soil loses nutrients abandoned ponds leave behind mud desert nothing green may grow years ecuador 42000 acres ponds lie fallow illegal clearcuts scar estuaries ponds never got built industry says learning experience shrimp pond like canary coal mine needs healthy estuary rosenberry says prosper long haul ponds need good clean water rich nutrients need mangroves filter pollutants nurse wild shrimp postlarva many farmers still stock ponds industry literature grown thick scientific papers essence blame fastbuck ponds past fouling waterways causing spread shrimp diseases smart farmers install water filters stock fewer shrimp even recycle water become almost completely selfcontained thailand ponds clean reuse water order avoid dipping estuaries contaminated viruses united states entrepreneurs hope develop hightech indoor ponds detached natural world unlike critics contend every commercial pond must someday crash rosenberry says industry outgrowing rampaging youth aquaculture plagued diseases notes management problem wont close industry others dont share optimism 1980s world bank strongly promoted shrimp ponds china bank loaned china 300 million projects along entire coast says joseph goldberg chief banks china rural development division 1991 country developed asias largest producer ponds crashed june 1993 disease spread course nights goldberg believes crashes inevitable get project loan proposals look sea fish crabs turtlesanything shrimp says industry roulette dont finance roulette shrimp boom reached northern ecuadors muisne estuary mid1980s led farmers southern region ecuadors shrimp industry began touring river side channels wooden launch members fundecol local environmental group survey empty landscape booms legacy first farms showered poor villagers muisne cash better worse one whorehouse four women cheap says fundecols lider gongora wants establish aids education program late 1980s fear began mount villagers sensed fisheries source food livelihood collapsing along mangroves tensions run high pitting new entrepreneurs villagers watched way life vanish havent jobs related new industry wonder families survive ten years ago 60 percent people muisne lived mangroves today 20 percent use says bernardo reuter helped start fundecol 1989 reuter makes living partly repairing bicycle rickshaw taxis boys drive around sandy grassy streets island village cars tricycleros says may ones families jobs easy 10 years ago agrees fanny mina head group 23 concheras women collect shellfish six eight hours would catch 1000 nowwe catch 100 150 government responded crisis forbidding farmers clearing mangroves without government permission shrimp farmers simply took advantage countrys conflicting laws agencieswhich left trees bureaucratic gray zone departments regulating forests fisheries tourism naval defenseand shopped around permits needed law says tree cut go prison three 30 days says lourdes proaño fundecol tour river government put law practice issue one highest sources corruption ecuador agrees teodoro bustamante executive director fundación natura countrys largest conservation group destroyed capacity good managers environment need restore capacity good administration resources ecuadors shrimp farmers recovering 200 million loss caused epidemic taura syndrome 1992 1993 beginning agree chastened mysterious blight may due virus water polluted fungicides used banana plantations upstream industry preaches value healthy estuaries including preserving mangroves help clean water joaquin orentia owns 500 hectares ponds serves director industrys trade association ecuador rails government allowing renegade farmers cut mangrove trees eighty percent industry says abides laws complains country dont one single government armed guard protect mangroves fundecol patrols estuary hunting new illegal cutting duly reports governmentwith results fundecol president nisvaldo ortiz recently found farmer destroying mangroves ortiz challenged farmer aimed pistol ortizs chest said would die like dog finally fired head fundecol denounced gentleman 30 times several years ortiz says adding government ultimately fined 10 minimum salariesabout 400 laughable says times fundecol members even waded mangrove waters directly blocked cutting men machetes simply return night take hour man hack roots tree yet fundecol success pull ashore two hectares mudflats group planted hundreds mangrove seedlings sticky ground pocked tiny crab holes tallest saplings stand four feet high kickstand roots firmly supporting thin trunks reforesting mangroves new art ecuador ortiz explains group lost one crop little red crabs clipped stems claws bring tasty leaves group plants seedlings sheathed bamboo stalks plastic bottles next visit fundecols high platform dock built like balcony alongside last big grove mangroves estuary group applied government permission manage land following procedures shrimp farmers use fundecol gets right finally enforce laws rather simply denounce illegal cutters government travel farther north across bays along rivers admiring unbroken mangrove forest rises wooden grillwork roots pass occasional tree laden egrets like green chandelier white candles standing dugout canoes fishermen use pole paddles navigate along fringe forest finally dock tiny village santa rosa buildings stand entirely stilts several times year river floods dirt streets people ride dugout canoes doors wooden houses 500 people live enduring decline marine life mangrove ecosystem waving hand small pile silvery fish reflects mornings work one local fishermen tells go catch something nothing like used ironically women collect shellfish turn aquaculture concheras planted shellfish bed across river marked stakes water hope work nixon freelance writer based new york city | 2,165 |
<p>In recent years, a public debate has been underway in the Western world, both in academic journals and in the mainstream press, between Samuel Huntington, Professor of Political Science at Harvard University, and Ulrich Beck, Professor of Sociology at Munich University, Germany. The topic is the historical relationship between Christian and Muslim civilizations. While they disagree on some components of this relationship — Huntington emphasizes the territoriality of the conflict, but Beck questions this aspect — they agree that there is a continuing conflict between the two civilizations. Huntington attributes this to a conflict of values and a desire for territorial and demographic expansion by both civilizations; Beck attributes it to the frequent humiliation of the Muslim countries caused by the Christian civilizations. This debate has achieved enormous visibility in the popular press.</p>
<p>The problem with Huntington’s and Beck’s interpretations is that both assume the two civilizations have been in conflict for the past 50 years. But this assumption is wrong. A historical and political analysis of Christian and Muslim civilizations and their interactions shows that political, intellectual, religious, and cultural leaders of both civilizations have collaborated extensively, forging an alliance of civilizations against a common enemy: lay progressive forces, whether socialists, communists, or Arab secular nationalists, that threaten the class interests of the alliance. Thus, the alliance between Christian and Muslim civilizations was actually an alliance among the dominant classes (of both civilizations) that were threatened by progressive movements.</p>
<p>The Alliance of Christian and Muslim Civilizations</p>
<p>An analysis of our recent past–the second half of the twentieth century–shows there has been no conflict, but rather an alliance, between Christian and Muslim civilizations. One indicator of this alliance is that the vast majority of radical Islamic fundamentalist organizations, now considered terrorists, were once actively supported by the leaders of Christian civilizations. While the mainstream Western media have failed to inform their readers about this, the empirical evidence for such support exists. In his book <a href="" type="internal">Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam,</a> Robert Dreyfus documents extensively how the U.S. and U.K. governments supported the majority of Muslim fundamentalist associations (again, now defined as terrorists), and in fact played a key role in establishing and developing these groups. Dreyfus shows, for example, how both governments actively supported the establishment of the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1950s. This extremely violent group was started in Egypt and, with the support of Saudi Arabia, expanded throughout the Arab world. In the 1980s, the Muslim Brotherhood helped to establish the Movement of Islamic Resistance, known as Hamas, the radical Muslim Palestinian group that today governs the Palestinian people. Again in the 1950s, the U.S. and U.K. governments also supported the Mullahs (fundamentalist Muslim clerics) in Iran, led by Khomeini, who later became the leaders of that country. And the U.S. and U.K. governments also actively supported (with the assistance of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan) the Taliban in Afghanistan.</p>
<p>In all these supportive efforts by the U.S. and U.K. governments, the religious and cultural values of Islamic fundamentalists were not seen as an obstacle; quite the contrary. Religious fundamentalism in both Christian and Muslim civilizations was crucial to the development of the alliance between civilizations. As stated by an official document of the U.S. State Department, “the attractiveness of such Muslim movements is their messianic character, similar to the born-again Christians of the South in the U.S. Moreover, they are profoundly anti-communist” (The World Situation, 1978). Thus there was no conflict but rather a religious and cultural affinity between the leaders of the Christian and Muslim civilizations. This affinity of values, however, was not enough to establish an alliance. Why would the leaders of Christian civilizations support Islamic fundamentalists clearly oriented toward the use of violence in pursuing their objectives? The question posed by Huntington and Beck should have been, not so much what divides, but what unites the two civilizations. The answer is clear: What united the leaders of the two civilizations was class interests. These interests determined their objectives, their alliances, and their enemies. This is the reality behind the erroneous slogan “a conflict of civilizations.” The alliance was forged on the basis of not just a commonality of religious values, but also — and above all — a commonality of class interests.</p>
<p>The alliance was established to defeat and eliminate progressive lay movements led by socialists, communists, or Arab nationalists who were successfully mobilizing the Muslim masses (working classes, peasantry, and sectors of the professional middle classes) against the dominant classes of the Muslim countries that were enjoying the support of the governments of the Christian civilizations. The alliance between the governing elites of the Christian and Muslim civilizations was based on threats to their common economic interests (primarily, but not exclusively, oil) by the burgeoning progressive forces. Given the extreme poverty of the vast majority of people in the midst of enormous wealth in many of the Muslim countries, an eruption was inevitable. In their own interests, the dominant classes of Christian and Muslim civilizations needed to channel the frustrations of the masses of people away from the progressive movements. The great challenge for the dominant classes was to eliminate the threat of a class mobilization against them, and the method at hand was to demobilize political impulses and replace them with a multi-class mobilization based on religious fervor. A multi-class religious fundamentalism could channel the energy of a mass mobilization, not against the dominant classes, but in support of a religious identity–a commonality of interests and identity among dominated and dominant classes. This strategy is not new. In Southern Europe, the dominant landowners and oligarchy, in collaboration with the Catholic Church, established the Christian Democratic Party in response to peasants’ and workers’ parties that were threatening their interests. Class struggle was replaced by social cohesion, with Christianity as the multi-class glue that would keep classes together–under, of course, the dominion and hegemony of the dominant classes. The intention of this project, based on a religious fundamentalism, was to channel the energy and frustration of the popular classes toward an external agent: to promote a defense of religion threatened by unchristian progressive forces. The same dynamics operated in the Muslim countries, with dominant classes promoting Islamic fundamentalism among the disenfranchised majorities. Let’s look at some historical details, case by case.</p>
<p>Support of Islamic Fundamentalism by the Governing Elites of the Christian Civilizations</p>
<p>The support given by the U.S. and U.K. governments (considered the defenders of Christian civilization) to the Muslim Brotherhood was a response of the dominant classes of Egypt (then the most important Arab country), the U.S., and the U.K. to the loss of power by King Farouk, forced to step down in 1952 under pressure from an Arab nationalist, socialist-oriented movement (allied to left-wing parties in the Arab world). The attractiveness of the Muslim Brotherhood to the dominant-class alliance was its religious fundamentalism (which could mobilize the Arab masses) and its profound anti-communism and anti-laicism. Secret documents prepared by the U.S. and U.K. Secret Services (cited by Dreyfus in his book) record the assistance provided to the Muslim Brotherhood by these governments.</p>
<p>President Nasser’s socialist program in Egypt threatened the dominant classes of the entire Arab world. Under the leadership of the House of Saud, the royal family of Saudi Arabia, an international association was established in 1962–the International Islamic League–that funded and supported Islamic fundamentalists worldwide. The League is still very active, supporting these fundamentalist groups in all parts of the world, including Europe. The League’s European hq is in Brussels. Its main objective is stated quite clearly in its main charter: to “eliminate and eradicate from the world the atheistic and lay forces well-represented in communism, which denies God’s existence and distances men from Islam.” By “communism” it means any force that challenges class power relations in the Muslim world. In response to this call, fundamentalist forces have killed left-wing leaders in all Muslim and Arab countries, including the general secretary of the socialist party of Morocco, leaders of the left in Lebanon (assassinated by the Muslim fundamentalist group Hezbollah), and a long list of other progressive figures.</p>
<p>A similar situation has occurred in Sudan, where the governing Islamic National Front (a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood) has killed leaders of the Sudanese left. And in Indonesia, the most brutal repression ever exercised in Asia against progressive forces (led in Indonesia by the world’s largest non-governing Communist Party) occurred in 1965, carried out by a military dictatorship, with the active support of Islamic fundamentalists. Nearly a million people were killed, with the blessing of the leaders of the Christian governments in the U.S. and the U.K. [and the active connivance and encouragement of the CIA. Editors.]</p>
<p>In Palestine, Saudi Arabia and the International Islamic League (and the U.S. and U.K. governments) at one time supported Hamas against the progressive Palestinian forces. In Iran, the enemy of the dominant classes (and the U.S. and U.K. governments) was Mossadegh’s government–supported by the Communist Party–whose reforms adversely affected dominant-class interests. Khomeini led the anti-Mossadegh movement that culminated with the coup of 1953. The much hated Shah’s dictatorship, established by the coup, proved very unstable (and later collapsed), which explains why the governments of the Christian civilizations supported the establishment of the Islamic Republic in Iran–as an alternative to a secular republic, a progressive republic, led by the Communist Party. And, again, something similar occurred in Afghanistan, where the Taliban and Al Qaeda were actively supported with funds and guns by the Christian leaders of the U.S. and U.K. governments to stop the reforms led by the Afghan Communist Party. Other supporters of the Taliban were Saudi Arabia, the Vatican of the Muslim world, and the Pakistan military regime, which in 1979 had killed the socialist President Bhutto, head of a democratically elected socialist government.</p>
<p>In all these cases, support by the political leaders of the Christian civilizations for Islamic fundamentalists has been explained and justified with geopolitical arguments–that is, by the need to oppose expansion of the Soviet Union, and presenting progressive forces anywhere as being mere puppets of the Soviet Union. This argument is easily dismissed: Christian leaders’ support for the Islamic fundamentalists continued after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Geopolitical arguments for the class alliance between Christian civilizations and Islamic fundamentalists simply do not hold up.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the only country where Islamic fundamentalists were not instruments of the dominant classes was Iraq. In that country, the dominant classes saw the collapse of the monarchy as a consequence of popular mobilizations led by the Iraqi Communist Party, allied to sectors of lay, anti-imperialist Arab nationalists in the Iraqi Army. Opposition to these progressive movements came from the Army itself, led by Saddam Hussein. Supported by the U.S. and U.K. governments, Saddam Hussein established an extremely repressive dictatorship, and this dictatorship continued to receive support from those governments, for most of its mandate, until its last few years.</p>
<p>Final Observations</p>
<p>All these documented facts show a reality that is not reported by the mainstream media: behind a supposed “conflict” between Christian and Muslim civilizations there has been a class alliance. An alliance of this type first existed in Spain in the 1930s. Muslim Moroccan troops fought with the Catholic-supported fascists in the military coup of 1936, led by General Franco, against a democratically elected progressive government–in what the Spanish Catholic Church defined as a Crusade. The Muslim troops supported a Crusade against the infidels who denied God. And just as the Spanish Civil War was a prologue for World War II, introducing the cast of characters that would take the stage in that war, so the Afghan War in the 1980s–with Christian troops supporting Muslim fundamentalists–prefigured World War III, which we are engaged in today. All the forces at war in this new conflict were already there, in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Progressive lay forces (led by a Communist Party), with the support of the Soviet Union, carried out a series of reforms in Afghanistan–introducing land reform, a secular public school system, and gender equality, with extensive participation of women in the schools and universities). All of these moves were opposed by the dominant classes of Afghanistan, which supported Islamic fundamentalist groups funded by Saudi Arabia (among the most oppressive regimes in the Arab world), the government of Pakistan, and the U.S. government (led by President Carter, who, paradoxically, presented himself as the great defender of human rights). It was at that time that the U.S. government supported Osama bin Laden in a holy war against communism, which in fact was a crude defense of the class interests of dominant groups whose privileges were threatened by social reforms. As it turned out, the Islamic fundamentalist forces, armed by the U.S. and other governments, developed a dynamic of their own that the U.S. government could not control. But the conflict that now exists between the U.S., U.K., and other governments and the Islamic fundamentalist terrorist groups should not obscure the origins of these terrorist movements and the class interests they have served and continue to serve.</p>
<p>VICENTE NAVARRO is Professor of Public Policy at the Johns Hopkins University, U.S.A., and of Political Sciences in the Pompeu Fabra University, Spain. His acclaimed essay on Salvador Dali and Franco’s Spain is included in <a href="http://www.easycartsecure.com/CounterPunch/CounterPunch_Books.html" type="external">Serpents in the Garden</a> edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair.</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | recent years public debate underway western world academic journals mainstream press samuel huntington professor political science harvard university ulrich beck professor sociology munich university germany topic historical relationship christian muslim civilizations disagree components relationship huntington emphasizes territoriality conflict beck questions aspect agree continuing conflict two civilizations huntington attributes conflict values desire territorial demographic expansion civilizations beck attributes frequent humiliation muslim countries caused christian civilizations debate achieved enormous visibility popular press problem huntingtons becks interpretations assume two civilizations conflict past 50 years assumption wrong historical political analysis christian muslim civilizations interactions shows political intellectual religious cultural leaders civilizations collaborated extensively forging alliance civilizations common enemy lay progressive forces whether socialists communists arab secular nationalists threaten class interests alliance thus alliance christian muslim civilizations actually alliance among dominant classes civilizations threatened progressive movements alliance christian muslim civilizations analysis recent pastthe second half twentieth centuryshows conflict rather alliance christian muslim civilizations one indicator alliance vast majority radical islamic fundamentalist organizations considered terrorists actively supported leaders christian civilizations mainstream western media failed inform readers empirical evidence support exists book devils game united states helped unleash fundamentalist islam robert dreyfus documents extensively us uk governments supported majority muslim fundamentalist associations defined terrorists fact played key role establishing developing groups dreyfus shows example governments actively supported establishment muslim brotherhood 1950s extremely violent group started egypt support saudi arabia expanded throughout arab world 1980s muslim brotherhood helped establish movement islamic resistance known hamas radical muslim palestinian group today governs palestinian people 1950s us uk governments also supported mullahs fundamentalist muslim clerics iran led khomeini later became leaders country us uk governments also actively supported assistance saudi arabia pakistan taliban afghanistan supportive efforts us uk governments religious cultural values islamic fundamentalists seen obstacle quite contrary religious fundamentalism christian muslim civilizations crucial development alliance civilizations stated official document us state department attractiveness muslim movements messianic character similar bornagain christians south us moreover profoundly anticommunist world situation 1978 thus conflict rather religious cultural affinity leaders christian muslim civilizations affinity values however enough establish alliance would leaders christian civilizations support islamic fundamentalists clearly oriented toward use violence pursuing objectives question posed huntington beck much divides unites two civilizations answer clear united leaders two civilizations class interests interests determined objectives alliances enemies reality behind erroneous slogan conflict civilizations alliance forged basis commonality religious values also commonality class interests alliance established defeat eliminate progressive lay movements led socialists communists arab nationalists successfully mobilizing muslim masses working classes peasantry sectors professional middle classes dominant classes muslim countries enjoying support governments christian civilizations alliance governing elites christian muslim civilizations based threats common economic interests primarily exclusively oil burgeoning progressive forces given extreme poverty vast majority people midst enormous wealth many muslim countries eruption inevitable interests dominant classes christian muslim civilizations needed channel frustrations masses people away progressive movements great challenge dominant classes eliminate threat class mobilization method hand demobilize political impulses replace multiclass mobilization based religious fervor multiclass religious fundamentalism could channel energy mass mobilization dominant classes support religious identitya commonality interests identity among dominated dominant classes strategy new southern europe dominant landowners oligarchy collaboration catholic church established christian democratic party response peasants workers parties threatening interests class struggle replaced social cohesion christianity multiclass glue would keep classes togetherunder course dominion hegemony dominant classes intention project based religious fundamentalism channel energy frustration popular classes toward external agent promote defense religion threatened unchristian progressive forces dynamics operated muslim countries dominant classes promoting islamic fundamentalism among disenfranchised majorities lets look historical details case case support islamic fundamentalism governing elites christian civilizations support given us uk governments considered defenders christian civilization muslim brotherhood response dominant classes egypt important arab country us uk loss power king farouk forced step 1952 pressure arab nationalist socialistoriented movement allied leftwing parties arab world attractiveness muslim brotherhood dominantclass alliance religious fundamentalism could mobilize arab masses profound anticommunism antilaicism secret documents prepared us uk secret services cited dreyfus book record assistance provided muslim brotherhood governments president nassers socialist program egypt threatened dominant classes entire arab world leadership house saud royal family saudi arabia international association established 1962the international islamic leaguethat funded supported islamic fundamentalists worldwide league still active supporting fundamentalist groups parts world including europe leagues european hq brussels main objective stated quite clearly main charter eliminate eradicate world atheistic lay forces wellrepresented communism denies gods existence distances men islam communism means force challenges class power relations muslim world response call fundamentalist forces killed leftwing leaders muslim arab countries including general secretary socialist party morocco leaders left lebanon assassinated muslim fundamentalist group hezbollah long list progressive figures similar situation occurred sudan governing islamic national front branch muslim brotherhood killed leaders sudanese left indonesia brutal repression ever exercised asia progressive forces led indonesia worlds largest nongoverning communist party occurred 1965 carried military dictatorship active support islamic fundamentalists nearly million people killed blessing leaders christian governments us uk active connivance encouragement cia editors palestine saudi arabia international islamic league us uk governments one time supported hamas progressive palestinian forces iran enemy dominant classes us uk governments mossadeghs governmentsupported communist partywhose reforms adversely affected dominantclass interests khomeini led antimossadegh movement culminated coup 1953 much hated shahs dictatorship established coup proved unstable later collapsed explains governments christian civilizations supported establishment islamic republic iranas alternative secular republic progressive republic led communist party something similar occurred afghanistan taliban al qaeda actively supported funds guns christian leaders us uk governments stop reforms led afghan communist party supporters taliban saudi arabia vatican muslim world pakistan military regime 1979 killed socialist president bhutto head democratically elected socialist government cases support political leaders christian civilizations islamic fundamentalists explained justified geopolitical argumentsthat need oppose expansion soviet union presenting progressive forces anywhere mere puppets soviet union argument easily dismissed christian leaders support islamic fundamentalists continued collapse soviet union geopolitical arguments class alliance christian civilizations islamic fundamentalists simply hold interestingly country islamic fundamentalists instruments dominant classes iraq country dominant classes saw collapse monarchy consequence popular mobilizations led iraqi communist party allied sectors lay antiimperialist arab nationalists iraqi army opposition progressive movements came army led saddam hussein supported us uk governments saddam hussein established extremely repressive dictatorship dictatorship continued receive support governments mandate last years final observations documented facts show reality reported mainstream media behind supposed conflict christian muslim civilizations class alliance alliance type first existed spain 1930s muslim moroccan troops fought catholicsupported fascists military coup 1936 led general franco democratically elected progressive governmentin spanish catholic church defined crusade muslim troops supported crusade infidels denied god spanish civil war prologue world war ii introducing cast characters would take stage war afghan war 1980swith christian troops supporting muslim fundamentalistsprefigured world war iii engaged today forces war new conflict already afghanistan 1980s progressive lay forces led communist party support soviet union carried series reforms afghanistanintroducing land reform secular public school system gender equality extensive participation women schools universities moves opposed dominant classes afghanistan supported islamic fundamentalist groups funded saudi arabia among oppressive regimes arab world government pakistan us government led president carter paradoxically presented great defender human rights time us government supported osama bin laden holy war communism fact crude defense class interests dominant groups whose privileges threatened social reforms turned islamic fundamentalist forces armed us governments developed dynamic us government could control conflict exists us uk governments islamic fundamentalist terrorist groups obscure origins terrorist movements class interests served continue serve vicente navarro professor public policy johns hopkins university usa political sciences pompeu fabra university spain acclaimed essay salvador dali francos spain included serpents garden edited alexander cockburn jeffrey st clair 160 | 1,242 |
<p>Defenders of “Hamilton” say that it is not meant as a work of history. My question then becomes: why do it about Alexander Hamilton at all? Why not do it about Lin-Manuel Miranda, who has an impressive and praiseworthy story in his own right? I think if you want to make a case about the value of 21st century immigration, using a figure who was objectively anti-immigrant, despite his own background, seems like a passing strange way to do it (let me note that I found it unwatchable, and stopped for that reason; but many of my friends adore it, and I wish them no ill will).</p>
<p>Let us begin with an important note: while Hamilton was clearly different than either Adams or Jefferson, inasmuch as he spent his formative years in the West Indies, to understand him as “an immigrant” in 21st century terms risks an ahistorical analysis. He spoke the language, extremely well (though recent research indicates fluency in French as well), was of British parentage and citizenship, though he did spend much of his life in the Danish West Indies (today’s US Virgin Islands) [I am indebted to the estimable Rev. J.D. Williams for this correction; he is, without a doubt, a deeply knowledgeable scholar of Alexander Hamilton]. At King’s College (Columbia), he mixed with “the best and the brightest” of 18th century middle-colonial society. Miranda’s own story is far more impressive it seems to me than the historical Alexander Hamilton’s.</p>
<p>Likewise, the assertion has been made by the fan-fiction school of history that maybe Hamilton was partly of African descent because he was described as being part Creole, risks serious misunderstanding. It seems to me to mistake the idiosyncratic US use of “creole” to mean a class of free people of color (gens de coleur) in Louisiana (Beyonce, e.g. has ancestors who are this kind of Creole); with the wider use in the Americas, which though elastic, has tended merely to mean “someone who was himself, or his ancestors were, born on this side of the Atlantic.” It is not, in the main, a racial category. Thus, during the rebellion of the republics of South America against the King of Spain, it was the criollo class of elites who led the Independence movement. Or historians talk about “the creolization” of South Carolina’s 18th century slave population, meaning that increasingly, these enslaved people are born in the Americas, not Africa. So applying our particular notions of what “creole” means to the 1770s does more to obscure, and less to illuminate the past. I chose this example because it is exactly the kind detail that gets lost with the aestheticization of history. Indeed, historian Modris Ecksteins has associated the aestheticization of politics with an authoritarian turn..</p>
<p>Ultimately, I don’t think aesthetics trump what actually happened, unless we’re going the full Derrida “there is no such thing as empirical reality” — which I will note is the stated ideology of Karl Rove; the postmodern idea that reality is just a bunch of texts assumed in the idea of the equal validity of fan-fictional and historical-scholarly accounts is not only fallacious on its own grounds, it has been used above all by the political right since the rise of post-modernism, e.g., Rove, in 2004, stating that reality was what his narrative/text said it was — IEDs and insurgents be damned! It troubles me to the extent that, if Miranda knows what he is doing, he is consciously putting forward the Big Money line; if he doesn’t, and just thinks it makes for a good show, then he is their unconscious dupe, which may be worse. Hamilton was against slavery the way a Prius-driving Californian with stocks in Exxon Mobil and Nestle is against global warming — notionally.</p>
<p>Look at a movie like 2008’s “Valkyrie,” starring Tom Cruise, in which credulous Hollywood liberals confused a plot against Hitler by right-wing Prussian colonels into something ethical in the need for a story. That does violence to the past! The Prussian junker class (military aristocracy) were entirely objectionable in their own way, even if they were anti-Nazi (see World War I). Likewise, just inventing a Hamilton you like out of whole cloth, however good the art, seems to me insupportable; portraying a conservative commercial oligarch with Caesarist tendencies and dreams of empire as a figure who was emancipatory is literally the same argument hard-right libertarians make when they argue that Rockefeller and the Robber Barons were agents of freedom. Why not just make a buddy movie about two Pinkerton Detectives who mow down all those alien labor radicals in 1920s West Virginia? What distinguishes that from “Hamilton”, beyond aesthetic quality?</p>
<p>If transformation is the goal, then the slipperiness of “Hamilton” is doubly important, for if anything limits the possibilities of liberation, it is our blindness to ourselves as historical actors, and the actual, not imagined, character of the historical actors who preceded us. These in turn have created the actual conditions from which liberation must be won; therefore understanding the origins of these conditions is of prime importance. I understand the importance of the aesthetic vantage point for the encouragement of dreaming, of not only bread, but flowers, as the Lawrence strikers put it one hundred years ago. But “Hamilton” goes beyond that. Like Oliver Stone’s “JFK”, another work of art that captured the zeitgeist of its time but was dangerous in its inaccuracy, it puts aesthetic values over fidelity to what actually happened. The aestheticization of the historical is a dangerous move, if you ask me, whether it’s Tea Partiers celebrating a past that never was or Miranda distorting one that did actually occur. If we actually wish to change the country Jefferson and Hamilton helped create, then we need to engage with what they actually did.</p>
<p>And I will say this: there is no way Hamilton becomes a hero in any other but an epoch dominated by finance, insurance, and real estate. The same Markt Uber Alles ideology that destroys public schools and then blames the teachers for it speaks, in turn, in dulcet tones through the amiable, and I believe entirely unintentional, propaganda* of Lin-Manuel Miranda.</p>
<p>But perhaps I just don’t get Fan-Fiction. What proponents of this fan-fictional version of history to argue then, is what is often asserted, though never really explicitly: that Fan-Fiction is a better way to achieve Liberation than Historical Inquiry with its — contingent and mediated — respect for facts. I don’t find that persuasive. I believe Liberation will come when: a) historical conditions require it to resolve their own contradictions, as when a 7th chord goes back to the 1; and b) through a careful and considered examination of the conditions that have led to the necessity of Liberation.</p>
<p>And then a new essay is required from all of us: What is Liberation?</p>
<p>Notes.</p>
<p>“Sous les paves, le plage.”**</p>
<p>* Yes, total misrepresentation of the past is a propaganda technique going back to the Aeneid — another great piece of art that served highly political purposes.</p>
<p>** Under the paving stones, the beach.” French graffito of May, 1968.</p>
<p>Ben Cronin holds a Ph.D. in History from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. His research focuses on ecology, politics, and economic life in Plymouth County, Massachusetts.</p> | true | 4 | defenders hamilton say meant work history question becomes alexander hamilton linmanuel miranda impressive praiseworthy story right think want make case value 21st century immigration using figure objectively antiimmigrant despite background seems like passing strange way let note found unwatchable stopped reason many friends adore wish ill let us begin important note hamilton clearly different either adams jefferson inasmuch spent formative years west indies understand immigrant 21st century terms risks ahistorical analysis spoke language extremely well though recent research indicates fluency french well british parentage citizenship though spend much life danish west indies todays us virgin islands indebted estimable rev jd williams correction without doubt deeply knowledgeable scholar alexander hamilton kings college columbia mixed best brightest 18th century middlecolonial society mirandas story far impressive seems historical alexander hamiltons likewise assertion made fanfiction school history maybe hamilton partly african descent described part creole risks serious misunderstanding seems mistake idiosyncratic us use creole mean class free people color gens de coleur louisiana beyonce eg ancestors kind creole wider use americas though elastic tended merely mean someone ancestors born side atlantic main racial category thus rebellion republics south america king spain criollo class elites led independence movement historians talk creolization south carolinas 18th century slave population meaning increasingly enslaved people born americas africa applying particular notions creole means 1770s obscure less illuminate past chose example exactly kind detail gets lost aestheticization history indeed historian modris ecksteins associated aestheticization politics authoritarian turn ultimately dont think aesthetics trump actually happened unless going full derrida thing empirical reality note stated ideology karl rove postmodern idea reality bunch texts assumed idea equal validity fanfictional historicalscholarly accounts fallacious grounds used political right since rise postmodernism eg rove 2004 stating reality narrativetext said ieds insurgents damned troubles extent miranda knows consciously putting forward big money line doesnt thinks makes good show unconscious dupe may worse hamilton slavery way priusdriving californian stocks exxon mobil nestle global warming notionally look movie like 2008s valkyrie starring tom cruise credulous hollywood liberals confused plot hitler rightwing prussian colonels something ethical need story violence past prussian junker class military aristocracy entirely objectionable way even antinazi see world war likewise inventing hamilton like whole cloth however good art seems insupportable portraying conservative commercial oligarch caesarist tendencies dreams empire figure emancipatory literally argument hardright libertarians make argue rockefeller robber barons agents freedom make buddy movie two pinkerton detectives mow alien labor radicals 1920s west virginia distinguishes hamilton beyond aesthetic quality transformation goal slipperiness hamilton doubly important anything limits possibilities liberation blindness historical actors actual imagined character historical actors preceded us turn created actual conditions liberation must therefore understanding origins conditions prime importance understand importance aesthetic vantage point encouragement dreaming bread flowers lawrence strikers put one hundred years ago hamilton goes beyond like oliver stones jfk another work art captured zeitgeist time dangerous inaccuracy puts aesthetic values fidelity actually happened aestheticization historical dangerous move ask whether tea partiers celebrating past never miranda distorting one actually occur actually wish change country jefferson hamilton helped create need engage actually say way hamilton becomes hero epoch dominated finance insurance real estate markt uber alles ideology destroys public schools blames teachers speaks turn dulcet tones amiable believe entirely unintentional propaganda linmanuel miranda perhaps dont get fanfiction proponents fanfictional version history argue often asserted though never really explicitly fanfiction better way achieve liberation historical inquiry contingent mediated respect facts dont find persuasive believe liberation come historical conditions require resolve contradictions 7th chord goes back 1 b careful considered examination conditions led necessity liberation new essay required us liberation notes sous les paves le plage yes total misrepresentation past propaganda technique going back aeneid another great piece art served highly political purposes paving stones beach french graffito may 1968 ben cronin holds phd history university michigan ann arbor research focuses ecology politics economic life plymouth county massachusetts | 633 |
<p />
<p>If you didn’t know who was speaking, President Bush’s <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/16/national/nationalspecial/16bush-text.html?pagewanted=all" type="external">speech</a> in New Orleans last Thursday, on post-Katrina reconstruction, might have sounded like that of a New Deal liberal. Discussing the “deep, persistent poverty” in New Orleans and elsewhere that had come into sharp focus during coverage of the hurricane’s aftermath, Bush declared, sounding for all the world like Lyndon Johnson, “We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action”—and went on to promise some $200 billion in federal money to rebuild the region. Writing in the New Republic, David Kusnet, a former speechwriter for Bill Clinton, <a href="http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w050912&amp;s=kusnet091605%20" type="external">noted</a> that the parts of Bush’s speech on poverty “could have been cribbed from the liberal sociologist William Julius Wilson.” Conservatives were no less alarmed: John Podhoretz, <a href="http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/52772.htm%20" type="external">wrote</a> in the New York Post that Bush’s speech “ignor[ed] the small-government sensitivities of conservatives in favor of a grand set of proposals that, had Bill Clinton delivered it, would be receiving hosannas today from The New York Times.”</p>
<p>Of course, a little context shows the speech for what it was: pure damage control. Spending will be driven towards political ends, rather than towards alleviating hardship among, say, the 30 percent of former New Orleans residents living below the poverty line. The day of Bush’s speech, the Washington Post <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/14/AR2005091402654.html" type="external">found</a> a shaken Republican leadership calculating that “the only way to regain public confidence after the stumbling early response to the disaster is to spend whatever it takes to rebuild the region.” Earlier in the week, an administration aide described the White House’s plan to regain its political footing to <a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,1103581,00.html" type="external">Time</a>: “Nothing can salve the wounds like money.” The Post had already <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/13/AR2005091300588.html" type="external">reported</a> that Bush’s top political strategist, Karl Rove was heading up the reconstruction effort to carry out a twofold goal: “[P]rovide a quick federal response that comports with Bush’s governing philosophy, and prevent Katrina from swamping his second-term ambitions on Social Security, taxes and Middle East democracy-building.”</p>
<p>On the merits, no one would mistake the administration’s relief plan for a second New Deal. Rove, reportedly, has been gathering ideas from conservative think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute. The list of right-wing schemes runs long: tax incentives for companies to invest in equipment and build structures (a rehash of Jack Kemp’s failed “empowerment zones” for urban areas); school vouchers for children displaced by the hurricane; “worker recovery accounts” for evacuees; opening up more federally protected coastal areas for oil-drilling; an urban homestead act; and exempting post-Katrina reconstruction workers from a federal law that guarantees a “prevailing wage.” In many ways, the Katrina effort will be a laboratory for half-baked and never-tested conservative ideas. Paid for, of course, by tax cuts—Heritage has already suggested suspending the estate tax for any millionaires killed by Katrina. Not to mention the fact that companies with White House ties are now <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/10/katrina.contracts.reut/" type="external">lining up</a> for reconstruction contracts.</p>
<p>The ideas being tossed about, meanwhile, pointedly do not include time-tested liberal anti-poverty measures as temporarily expanding Medicaid to cover those left uninsured by Katrina, suspending the recently-passed bankruptcy reform bill—a law which will make it tougher for those left bankrupt by Katrina to clear their debts—or expanding the Section 8 housing voucher program to help the newly homeless. (To tackle the housing problem, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is setting up trailer parks, the same sort of parks used after Hurricane Charley hit Florida in 2004, in which many evacuees <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/16/AR2005091601922.html" type="external">still live</a>.) In all likelihood, the Republican congressional leadership will craft a reconstruction passage with enough “poison pills” in it to draw Democratic opposition—as was the case with a union-busting provision slipped into the creation of the Department of Homeland Security in 2002—and use reconstruction as a wedge issue next election. Yes, in theory, some of the Bush administration’s grand experiments for tackling poverty could end up working; during the Great Depression, after all, Franklin Roosevelt’s approach was also to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. But it’s hard to believe that policies aimed at enriching friends and providing political cover would make any productive headway on poverty.</p>
<p>Indeed, while the president may have sounded like a liberal, his party’s “big-government” approach to Katrina will likely do very real damage to Great Society programs. On Saturday, Bush said of the program’s cost: “You bet it’s going to cost money. But I’m confident we can handle it. It’s going to mean that we’re going to have to cut unnecessary spending.” The problem is that, as with spending cuts in the past, that extra money will likely come out of other anti-poverty programs. Indeed, despite the fact that the Republican Party has increased federal spending dramatically over the past four years—including a 36 percent increase in non-defense, domestic spending since 2001—it’s worth noting that anti-poverty programs, which make up only a tiny share of the federal budget, have consistently suffered painful cuts. The congressional budget resolution passed in May, for instance, contained a <a href="http://www.cbpp.org/4-28-05bud.htm" type="external">$23 billion cut</a> in domestic discretionary programs for 2006, including likely cuts in housing assistance and food stamps. In dollar terms, this is a pittance, and certainly won’t reduce the projected $506 billion on-budget deficit in any meaningful way—especially since Congress later passed a $286.4 billion highway bill with a record <a href="http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8894520/" type="external">6,371</a> frivolous pork-barrel “special projects.” But cutting heating assistance and housing vouchers does have real effects on people’s lives. For all his inspiring talk, that’s something the president just doesn’t seem to get.</p>
<p>Bush’s approach holds another danger for liberalism, too. In all likelihood, the Katrina relief effort will very much resemble the failed reconstruction effort in Iraq, in which crony contractors have <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5763483/" type="external">siphoned off billions</a> of taxpayer dollars and still made little tangible progress. (Over the weekend, the New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/18/international/middleeast/18najaf.html?ex=1284696000&amp;en=001b79fa53d57a39&amp;ei=5090&amp;partner=rssuserland&amp;emc=rss" type="external">reported</a> that the effort to provide basic social services is faltering even in Najaf, one of the safest cities in Iraq.) Ultimately, a failed and corruption-ridden effort in New Orleans could undermine public trust in government, which could well be a mortal blow for liberalism. During the Clinton years, Democrats worked hard to dispel Ronald Reagan’s notion that “government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem.” According to a January Pew Press <a href="http://pewresearch.org/trends/" type="external">poll</a>, public trust in government actually rose during the Clinton administration, while an increasing number of Americans favored more aid for the needy. (Even the number of Republicans who thought “government is almost always wasteful and inefficient” dropped from 74 percent to 60 percent between 1994 and 2000.)</p>
<p>Since 9/11, however, that trend has slowed or even reversed: A recent CBS <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/14/opinion/polls/main846529.shtml" type="external">poll</a> found that “trust in government to do what’s right” had dropped from 40 percent in 2004 to 29 percent after Katrina. CBS noted that those numbers have not risen above 50 percent since the mid-1970s. During that period, of course, Richard Nixon—another relentlessly partisan president who managed to spend billions on ostensibly liberal big-government schemes in order to box out Democrats—managed to shred America’s faith in government, and in the process helped usher in a conservative revolution. Perhaps that was Bush’s idea all along.</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | didnt know speaking president bushs speech new orleans last thursday postkatrina reconstruction might sounded like new deal liberal discussing deep persistent poverty new orleans elsewhere come sharp focus coverage hurricanes aftermath bush declared sounding world like lyndon johnson duty confront poverty bold actionand went promise 200 billion federal money rebuild region writing new republic david kusnet former speechwriter bill clinton noted parts bushs speech poverty could cribbed liberal sociologist william julius wilson conservatives less alarmed john podhoretz wrote new york post bushs speech ignored smallgovernment sensitivities conservatives favor grand set proposals bill clinton delivered would receiving hosannas today new york times course little context shows speech pure damage control spending driven towards political ends rather towards alleviating hardship among say 30 percent former new orleans residents living poverty line day bushs speech washington post found shaken republican leadership calculating way regain public confidence stumbling early response disaster spend whatever takes rebuild region earlier week administration aide described white houses plan regain political footing time nothing salve wounds like money post already reported bushs top political strategist karl rove heading reconstruction effort carry twofold goal provide quick federal response comports bushs governing philosophy prevent katrina swamping secondterm ambitions social security taxes middle east democracybuilding merits one would mistake administrations relief plan second new deal rove reportedly gathering ideas conservative think tanks heritage foundation american enterprise institute list rightwing schemes runs long tax incentives companies invest equipment build structures rehash jack kemps failed empowerment zones urban areas school vouchers children displaced hurricane worker recovery accounts evacuees opening federally protected coastal areas oildrilling urban homestead act exempting postkatrina reconstruction workers federal law guarantees prevailing wage many ways katrina effort laboratory halfbaked nevertested conservative ideas paid course tax cutsheritage already suggested suspending estate tax millionaires killed katrina mention fact companies white house ties lining reconstruction contracts ideas tossed meanwhile pointedly include timetested liberal antipoverty measures temporarily expanding medicaid cover left uninsured katrina suspending recentlypassed bankruptcy reform billa law make tougher left bankrupt katrina clear debtsor expanding section 8 housing voucher program help newly homeless tackle housing problem federal emergency management agency fema setting trailer parks sort parks used hurricane charley hit florida 2004 many evacuees still live likelihood republican congressional leadership craft reconstruction passage enough poison pills draw democratic oppositionas case unionbusting provision slipped creation department homeland security 2002and use reconstruction wedge issue next election yes theory bush administrations grand experiments tackling poverty could end working great depression franklin roosevelts approach also throw everything wall see sticks hard believe policies aimed enriching friends providing political cover would make productive headway poverty indeed president may sounded like liberal partys biggovernment approach katrina likely real damage great society programs saturday bush said programs cost bet going cost money im confident handle going mean going cut unnecessary spending problem spending cuts past extra money likely come antipoverty programs indeed despite fact republican party increased federal spending dramatically past four yearsincluding 36 percent increase nondefense domestic spending since 2001its worth noting antipoverty programs make tiny share federal budget consistently suffered painful cuts congressional budget resolution passed may instance contained 23 billion cut domestic discretionary programs 2006 including likely cuts housing assistance food stamps dollar terms pittance certainly wont reduce projected 506 billion onbudget deficit meaningful wayespecially since congress later passed 2864 billion highway bill record 6371 frivolous porkbarrel special projects cutting heating assistance housing vouchers real effects peoples lives inspiring talk thats something president doesnt seem get bushs approach holds another danger liberalism likelihood katrina relief effort much resemble failed reconstruction effort iraq crony contractors siphoned billions taxpayer dollars still made little tangible progress weekend new york times reported effort provide basic social services faltering even najaf one safest cities iraq ultimately failed corruptionridden effort new orleans could undermine public trust government could well mortal blow liberalism clinton years democrats worked hard dispel ronald reagans notion government solution problem government problem according january pew press poll public trust government actually rose clinton administration increasing number americans favored aid needy even number republicans thought government almost always wasteful inefficient dropped 74 percent 60 percent 1994 2000 since 911 however trend slowed even reversed recent cbs poll found trust government whats right dropped 40 percent 2004 29 percent katrina cbs noted numbers risen 50 percent since mid1970s period course richard nixonanother relentlessly partisan president managed spend billions ostensibly liberal biggovernment schemes order box democratsmanaged shred americas faith government process helped usher conservative revolution perhaps bushs idea along | 737 |
<p>Mitt Romney addresses approximately 200 cadets at Virginia Military Institute on Oct. 8.VMI</p>
<p>When Mitt Romney <a href="" type="internal">addressed a crowd of cadets</a> at Virginia Military Institute on October 8, he was supposed to give a major foreign policy speech that steered clear of partisan politics. That’s because VMI personnel observe the US military’s tradition of political neutrality when in uniform. But <a href="" type="internal">internal emails obtained by Mother Jones</a> show that Romney’s campaign pushed to burnish his commander-in-chief credentials by maximizing military optics around the event. Members of Romney’s staff sought to use the VMI logo in their campaign materials, requested that uniformed cadets be let out of class early to attend Romney’s speech, and asked VMI “to select a few cadet veterans and give them a place of honor” standing behind Romney during his address.</p>
<p>As the campaign pushed for these requests, VMI officials pushed back, concerned that they were for partisan purposes. Each request was denied by <a href="http://www6.vmi.edu/uploadedFiles/VMI/Communications_Marketing/Media_Relations/fact_sheets/VMI_Fact_Sheet_092511.pdf" type="external">the state-run institution</a>, whose students serve in the US&#160;military’s Reserve Officers Training Corps, so that VMI would not be seen as endorsing Romney’s candidacy. The Romney campaign also pressured VMI to play host to “15 to 20” retired admirals and generals at the school who traveled there to endorse Romney; VMI eventually relented to that request.</p>
<p>The nearly 70 pages of <a href="" type="internal">email communications between VMI and Romney’s staff</a> were released to Mother Jones as part of a Virginia Freedom of Information Act request. They show that even as VMI officers agreed to host the speech and give their cadet corps what they saw as a once-in-a-lifetime educational opportunity, they were wary of the campaign’s intentions.</p>
<p>“I am very concerned about this,” Susan Rabern, a retired Navy captain who runs VMI’s ethics program, <a href="" type="internal">wrote in an email to senior staff</a> prior to Romney’s speech. “The Center for Leadership and ETHICS cannot engage in political ‘in kind’ campaign contributions,” she stated, adding that “this is a political event in a building that only is rented to outside entities for a fee. This is a campaign speech, arranged by a political campaign.” (Rabern declined to comment to Mother Jones&#160;about the email.)</p>
<p>That wasn’t the intent of the event as it was first described to the school by campaign staffers.&#160;“[The] Speech will be a sober foreign policy vision for a Romney Administration. It is not a stump or a rally,” Romney defense policy adviser (and VMI alumnus) John Noonan <a href="" type="internal">assured VMI’s chief of staff</a> in his initial email asking VMI to host the speech. Referring to a distinguished graduate of the school, who received a&#160;Nobel Peace Prize for championing&#160;US financial assistance to postwar Europe, Noonan added: “It is designed as Presidential event [sic]&#160;that invokes the legacy of George Marshall.”</p>
<p>But Romney is not the president—he’s a private citizen actively seeking office, and VMI officials expressed concern accordingly.&#160;“We are ensuring that this is not a VMI endorsed campaign stop,” the superintendent’s executive assistant <a href="" type="internal">wrote to the school’s board of visitors</a>. “No campaign literature will be passed out.”</p>
<p>Romney’s people pushed political requests, however. Noonan later <a href="" type="internal">asked&#160;VMI</a> to accommodate “no more than 20” retired senior military officers, who would endorse Romney while he was at the school for the speech. Calling this a “new twist” on the original request, VMI Chief of Staff Jeffrey Curtis seemed unenthusiastic. “This isn’t something where we’re going to roll out a red carpet for them,” he <a href="" type="internal">wrote to a coworker</a>. Nevertheless, the Institute found a place to host the officers, <a href="" type="internal">after setting ground rules</a> “that allow us to remain non-partisan, non-political.”</p>
<p>Later that day, Noonan emailed Curtis with another request:</p>
<p />
<p>Curtis replied:</p>
<p />
<p>Just a few days prior to the speech, Romney handler Craig Handzlik <a href="" type="internal">asked a VMI official</a> if there was “any way we might be able to let those cadets out of class” to attend the address. The official <a href="" type="internal">responded</a>: “We can’t require cadets to miss class for the event or professors to excuse cadets/cancel classes for the event.”</p>
<p>The following day, Romney staffer Jon Palmer <a href="" type="internal">asked the school’s public affairs director</a> “if you have a high-resolution copy of VMI’s logo that we can use?” The official rebuffed that request:</p>
<p />
<p>When Romney staffers learned that Virginia’s Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell would be introducing Romney for his speech, they seemed wary of their candidate losing a military photo opportunity with the school’s uniformed superintendent, retired Army General J.H. Binford Peay. Noonan emailed Institute officials:</p>
<p />
<p>McDonnell ended up handling the introduction. (Noonan declined to comment on his role in planning the event. “I’m a policy guy,” he told Mother Jones.)</p>
<p>In his speech, Romney thanked General Peay for “his invitation,” but the emails dispute that, and <a href="http://www.vmi.edu/Content.aspx?id=19847&amp;libID=19219" type="external">Colonel Stewart MacInnis</a>, VMI’s director of public relations,&#160;says that wasn’t how the event came to be. “We didn’t invite [Romney], the campaign approached us,” he says, adding that the Institute was excited to host such a high-profile speaker on international affairs, a favorite major for cadets. But he acknowledged that the school was walking a fine line: Romney’s speech was “certainly in keeping with the political message in a campaign year,” but “we did not want it to be perceived that we were endorsing this candidate or any other candidate.”</p>
<p>MacInnis says that after Romney called the Institute, officials at the school reached out to the White House to invite President Obama to address the cadet corps, too.</p>
<p>Sitting politicians customarily get a considerable amount of latitude in delivering policy speeches at public universities, from John F. Kennedy’s “Flexible Response” speech at West Point in 1962, to the delivery of the famed “Bush Doctrine” there by George W. Bush in 2002, to multiple appearances at military academies and state schools by President Obama and Vice President Biden.&#160;</p>
<p>While campaigning as a presidential candidate in spring 2007, Sen. John McCain delivered a&#160; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/cq/2007/04/11/cq_2545.html" type="external">hawkish national security speech</a>&#160;of his own at VMI. McCain, however, was (and still is) the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who had recently completed his fifth trip to Iraq and could be credibly seen as a powerful government voice on US policies abroad.</p>
<p>As a retired governor and active political candidate, however, Romney can claim no such bona fides. “There’s no doubt that this [was] a campaign event,” says Mike Breen, head of the left-leaning Truman National Security Project. “His only job is right now is running for president.”</p>
<p>UPDATE, Wednesday, October 17, 10:35 a.m. EDT: Virginia Military Institute released these public records to Mother Jones with personal contact information of Romney campaign staffers intact. We have redacted personal cellphone numbers as a courtesy to those staffers in accordance with a post-publication request from the campaign.</p>
<p>&lt;br /&gt; &lt;a href="http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/469802/vmi-emails-regarding-romneys-speech.pdf"&gt;VMI Emails Regarding Romney&amp;#8217;s Speech (PDF)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/469802/vmi-emails-regarding-romneys-speech.txt"&gt;VMI Emails Regarding Romney&amp;#8217;s Speech (Text)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;</p> | true | 4 | mitt romney addresses approximately 200 cadets virginia military institute oct 8vmi mitt romney addressed crowd cadets virginia military institute october 8 supposed give major foreign policy speech steered clear partisan politics thats vmi personnel observe us militarys tradition political neutrality uniform internal emails obtained mother jones show romneys campaign pushed burnish commanderinchief credentials maximizing military optics around event members romneys staff sought use vmi logo campaign materials requested uniformed cadets let class early attend romneys speech asked vmi select cadet veterans give place honor standing behind romney address campaign pushed requests vmi officials pushed back concerned partisan purposes request denied staterun institution whose students serve us160militarys reserve officers training corps vmi would seen endorsing romneys candidacy romney campaign also pressured vmi play host 15 20 retired admirals generals school traveled endorse romney vmi eventually relented request nearly 70 pages email communications vmi romneys staff released mother jones part virginia freedom information act request show even vmi officers agreed host speech give cadet corps saw onceinalifetime educational opportunity wary campaigns intentions concerned susan rabern retired navy captain runs vmis ethics program wrote email senior staff prior romneys speech center leadership ethics engage political kind campaign contributions stated adding political event building rented outside entities fee campaign speech arranged political campaign rabern declined comment mother jones160about email wasnt intent event first described school campaign staffers160the speech sober foreign policy vision romney administration stump rally romney defense policy adviser vmi alumnus john noonan assured vmis chief staff initial email asking vmi host speech referring distinguished graduate school received a160nobel peace prize championing160us financial assistance postwar europe noonan added designed presidential event sic160that invokes legacy george marshall romney presidenthes private citizen actively seeking office vmi officials expressed concern accordingly160we ensuring vmi endorsed campaign stop superintendents executive assistant wrote schools board visitors campaign literature passed romneys people pushed political requests however noonan later asked160vmi accommodate 20 retired senior military officers would endorse romney school speech calling new twist original request vmi chief staff jeffrey curtis seemed unenthusiastic isnt something going roll red carpet wrote coworker nevertheless institute found place host officers setting ground rules allow us remain nonpartisan nonpolitical later day noonan emailed curtis another request curtis replied days prior speech romney handler craig handzlik asked vmi official way might able let cadets class attend address official responded cant require cadets miss class event professors excuse cadetscancel classes event following day romney staffer jon palmer asked schools public affairs director highresolution copy vmis logo use official rebuffed request romney staffers learned virginias republican gov bob mcdonnell would introducing romney speech seemed wary candidate losing military photo opportunity schools uniformed superintendent retired army general jh binford peay noonan emailed institute officials mcdonnell ended handling introduction noonan declined comment role planning event im policy guy told mother jones speech romney thanked general peay invitation emails dispute colonel stewart macinnis vmis director public relations160says wasnt event came didnt invite romney campaign approached us says adding institute excited host highprofile speaker international affairs favorite major cadets acknowledged school walking fine line romneys speech certainly keeping political message campaign year want perceived endorsing candidate candidate macinnis says romney called institute officials school reached white house invite president obama address cadet corps sitting politicians customarily get considerable amount latitude delivering policy speeches public universities john f kennedys flexible response speech west point 1962 delivery famed bush doctrine george w bush 2002 multiple appearances military academies state schools president obama vice president biden160 campaigning presidential candidate spring 2007 sen john mccain delivered a160 hawkish national security speech160of vmi mccain however still ranking member senate armed services committee recently completed fifth trip iraq could credibly seen powerful government voice us policies abroad retired governor active political candidate however romney claim bona fides theres doubt campaign event says mike breen head leftleaning truman national security project job right running president update wednesday october 17 1035 edt virginia military institute released public records mother jones personal contact information romney campaign staffers intact redacted personal cellphone numbers courtesy staffers accordance postpublication request campaign ltbr gt lta hrefhttps3documentcloudorgdocuments469802vmiemailsregardingromneysspeechpdfgtvmi emails regarding romneyamp8217s speech pdfltagtltbr gt ltbr gtlta hrefhttps3documentcloudorgdocuments469802vmiemailsregardingromneysspeechtxtgtvmi emails regarding romneyamp8217s speech textltagtltbr gt | 686 |
<p>Photo Credit: Denis Makarenko / Shutterstock</p>
<p>Last Thursday,&#160;New York Times&#160;reporters Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey&#160; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-harassment-allegations.html" type="external">published</a>&#160;a gut-wrenchingly detailed and thorough article revealing decades of sexual harassment reports made against prominent film producer and serial sexual predator Harvey Weinstein.</p>
<p>The report led to&#160; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/06/us/harvey-weinstein-sexual-harassment.html" type="external">resignations</a>&#160;of Weinstein Company board members and legal advisers, a&#160; <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/10/5/16432006/harvey-weinstein-statement-sexual-harassment" type="external">bizarre and public non-apology</a>&#160;from Weinstein, Weinstein’s&#160; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/08/business/harvey-weinstein-fired.html" type="external">firing</a>&#160;from the company that bears his name, and statements from&#160; <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/weinstein-sexual-harassment-allegation_us_59d7ea3de4b046f5ad984211?4dk" type="external">more women</a>&#160;in the film industry who say they’ve experienced harassment or assault by Weinstein and other powerful men in Hollywood. A subsequently published&#160; <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/from-aggressive-overtures-to-sexual-assault-harvey-weinsteins-accusers-tell-their-stories?mbid=social_twitter" type="external">report</a>&#160;from NBC’s Ronan Farrow in&#160;The New Yorker&#160;detailed horrific new reports of rape and sexual assault committed by Weinstein, spanning decades and from multiple women, corroborated by many others who’ve encountered the producer. The&#160;Times&#160;has now&#160; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/10/us/gwyneth-paltrow-angelina-jolie-harvey-weinstein.html?_r=0" type="external">followed up</a>&#160;with further on-the-record reports of sexual harassment from more women.</p>
<p>Some of the women who spoke out did so anonymously,&#160; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/10/upshot/its-not-just-fox-why-women-dont-report-sexual-harassment.html" type="external">fearing retribution</a>&#160;from an extremely rich and powerful man with millions of dollars and high-profile connections at his disposal and a loudly and frequently discussed&#160; <a href="https://twitter.com/maxwelltani/status/917767769558601729" type="external">penchant for personally attacking women he’s already attempted to victimize</a>. Others, including well-known actresses Ashley Judd, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Angelina Jolie, have also spoken on the record about Weinstein’s harassment. It is likely, given the nature of these accounts and the prevailing culture of dismissing and demeaning survivors, that more will choose to speak out, and still others will choose not to.</p>
<p>The primary public conversation beginning to play out now is familiar: How has our culture -- in film, in politics, across all partisan divides -- allowed this violence to persist for so long? Why and how do our current systems work to keep women fearful and silent? Will any of it change? It remains to be seen if any of these questions will earn an answer, or whether they will, once again, fade back out of the spotlight, labeled as persistent, unsolvable issues. Nothing can be done to protect the vulnerable from the powerful, it seems.</p>
<p>A secondary conversation is also emerging, centered more squarely on the media: What is the responsibility of journalists -- tasked with reporting the facts and acting in the public interest -- when they encounter serial interpersonal violence that’s been allowed to persist without public knowledge?</p>
<p>The fact remains that journalists have a choice, every time: Do what can be done, following industry standards, to expose the truth and aide the powerless, or resort to becoming a tool for exploitation.</p>
<p>The Weinstein reports -- and before them the Bill O’Reilly reports, the Roger Ailes reports, the Bill Cosby reports, the Woody Allen reports, the Roman Polanski reports, the Donald Trump reports, on and on -- have showcased these options repeatedly.</p>
<p>The New York Times&#160; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/01/business/media/bill-oreilly-sexual-harassment-fox-news.html" type="external">doggedly reported</a>&#160;on multiple sexual harassment lawsuits against Fox News host Bill O’Reilly in April. Fox&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/04/20/firing-bill-o-reilly-what-gone-and-what-not/216106" type="external">fired</a>&#160;O’Reilly only when it was&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/07/07/fox-executives-will-only-protect-women-when-public-watching/217169" type="external">finally forced to do so</a>. The network paid him&#160; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/20/business/media/bill-oreilly-payout.html" type="external">$25 million</a>&#160;on the way out, then&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/09/26/o-reillys-appearance-hannity-reveals-what-fox-news-really-cares-about/218057" type="external">invited him back</a>&#160;onto&#160;Hannity&#160;months later because it was scared of Rachel Maddow and, besides, O’Reilly had a&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2017/10/05/bill-oreilly-credits-hannitys-radio-and-fox-news-show-his-book-sales/218151" type="external">new book</a>&#160;to promote. O’Reilly also appeared on NBC’s&#160;Today&#160;for an&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/09/18/today-show-set-welcome-reported-serial-sexual-predator-bill-oreilly/217966" type="external">uncomfortable and unnecessary interview</a>&#160;with Matt Lauer in which he&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2017/09/19/bill-oreilly-uses-today-show-appearance-attack-woman-who-reported-him-sexual-harassment/217970" type="external">attempted to publicly disparage a woman who had reported him</a>. He&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/09/18/hannity-goes-rogue-helping-oreilly-attack-women-who-reported-him-sexual-harassment-and-asking-him/217965" type="external">referred</a>&#160;to an article on the right-wing site Newsmax.com, cross-posted to O’Reilly’s personal website, that he touted as a redeeming investigation.</p>
<p>Earlier, Fox also pushed out Roger Ailes when it was finally forced to do so. It handed the former Fox News chairman and CEO&#160; <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/fox-roger-ailes-gretchen-carlson-payout_us_57cee12ce4b02c637c57d8b0" type="external">$40 million</a>&#160;as he left, and the&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/01/10/both-roger-ailes-replacements-have-now-been-accused-participating-fox-news-culture-sexual-harassment/214968" type="external">people who enabled his serial harassment</a>&#160;simply closed ranks.&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2017/04/06/sexual-harassment-fox-reported-press-throughout-years/215947" type="external">The culture didn’t change</a>. When Ailes died months later, he was fondly and emotionally eulogized on air, with no thoughtful discussion of his&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/05/18/how-remember-roger-ailes/216550" type="external">real legacy</a>&#160;of hurting and silencing women.</p>
<p>Like Weinstein’s behavior, Cosby’s violent misconduct was an “ <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/i-warned-you-about-bill-cosby-in-2007" type="external">open secret</a>” in their industry, allowed to persist in part because society has taught us not to listen to women when they do come forward, and in part because women have been silenced by the culture around them and terrified of retaliation should they speak out. According to&#160; <a href="https://www.thewrap.com/media-enablers-harvey-weinstein-new-york-times/" type="external">one account</a>, actors Matt Damon and Russell Crowe may have personally worked to quash a 2004&#160;New York Times&#160;article about Weinstein’s serial predatory misconduct. Weinstein also&#160; <a href="https://twitter.com/maxwelltani/status/917767769558601729" type="external">reportedly bragged</a>&#160;about placing negative articles about people who dared to speak out about him. Indeed, even as he issued his non-apology, Weinstein was&#160; <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-harvey-weinstein/harvey-weinstein-threatens-to-sue-new-york-times-over-harassment-story-idUSKBN1CA2JX" type="external">threatening to sue</a>&#160;the&#160;Times.</p>
<p>Just over a year ago,&#160;The Washington Post’s David Fahrenthold&#160; <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-recorded-having-extremely-lewd-conversation-about-women-in-2005/2016/10/07/3b9ce776-8cb4-11e6-bf8a-3d26847eeed4_story.html" type="external">published</a>&#160;audio of President Donald Trump bragging about sexually assaulting women. NBC, then-employer of TV host Billy Bush who was also featured in the tape,&#160; <a href="//money.cnn.com/2016/10/17/media/billy-bush-leaves-nbc/index.html" type="external">subsequently fired Bush</a>. Network executives reportedly&#160; <a href="//www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/10/trump-tape-nbc-news-access-hollywood-billy-bush-214344" type="external">knew about the tape</a>&#160;but&#160;hadn’t reported on it yet, instead beat to the story by a competitor. (This week, Ronan Farrow wrote of new sexual assault and rape reports against Weinstein in&#160;The New Yorker&#160;-- though he is an NBC employee.) And in the months prior to the release of the Trump recording, television news writ large&#160; <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2016/10/10/meet-jill-harth-one-trump-sexual-assault-accusers-his-media-surrogates-ignore/213719" type="external">remained virtually silent</a>&#160;on another report of sexual harassment and sexual assault committed by Trump.</p>
<p>Responsible journalists recognize that serial sexual violence, particularly when perpetrated by society’s most powerful, is a difficult story to tell. Survivors are rightfully fearful of retribution, in keeping with the warped and disgusting power dynamic reaffirmed by the personal violence they’re already endured. They’re also often stymied by the culture of silence around sexual harassment and assault. The powerful people reported for misconduct -- frequently white, almost always men -- have the best lawyers their millions can buy. They have friends -- also frequently white, frequently men, always wealthy -- who will stand by them, defend them on TV, make movies with them, call newspapers to keep the story under wraps for another day.</p>
<p>Reporters have a responsibility to report the truth, particularly when it challenges the abuse of power, with all available tools and at any cost. They have a responsibility to work against those abuses of power, giving voice to the voiceless without compromising their safety and sparing no question. They have a responsibility to afford no comfort to powerful men who have not earned protection, but instead have used their outsized power to steal that of others. Kudos to those doing this hard and crucial -- in fact, morally imperative -- work; they should be examples to the rest.</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | photo credit denis makarenko shutterstock last thursday160new york times160reporters jodi kantor megan twohey160 published160a gutwrenchingly detailed thorough article revealing decades sexual harassment reports made prominent film producer serial sexual predator harvey weinstein report led to160 resignations160of weinstein company board members legal advisers a160 bizarre public nonapology160from weinstein weinsteins160 firing160from company bears name statements from160 women160in film industry say theyve experienced harassment assault weinstein powerful men hollywood subsequently published160 report160from nbcs ronan farrow in160the new yorker160detailed horrific new reports rape sexual assault committed weinstein spanning decades multiple women corroborated many others whove encountered producer the160times160has now160 followed up160with ontherecord reports sexual harassment women women spoke anonymously160 fearing retribution160from extremely rich powerful man millions dollars highprofile connections disposal loudly frequently discussed160 penchant personally attacking women hes already attempted victimize others including wellknown actresses ashley judd gwyneth paltrow angelina jolie also spoken record weinsteins harassment likely given nature accounts prevailing culture dismissing demeaning survivors choose speak still others choose primary public conversation beginning play familiar culture film politics across partisan divides allowed violence persist long current systems work keep women fearful silent change remains seen questions earn answer whether fade back spotlight labeled persistent unsolvable issues nothing done protect vulnerable powerful seems secondary conversation also emerging centered squarely media responsibility journalists tasked reporting facts acting public interest encounter serial interpersonal violence thats allowed persist without public knowledge fact remains journalists choice every time done following industry standards expose truth aide powerless resort becoming tool exploitation weinstein reports bill oreilly reports roger ailes reports bill cosby reports woody allen reports roman polanski reports donald trump reports showcased options repeatedly new york times160 doggedly reported160on multiple sexual harassment lawsuits fox news host bill oreilly april fox160 fired160oreilly was160 finally forced network paid him160 25 million160on way then160 invited back160onto160hannity160months later scared rachel maddow besides oreilly a160 new book160to promote oreilly also appeared nbcs160today160for an160 uncomfortable unnecessary interview160with matt lauer he160 attempted publicly disparage woman reported he160 referred160to article rightwing site newsmaxcom crossposted oreillys personal website touted redeeming investigation earlier fox also pushed roger ailes finally forced handed former fox news chairman ceo160 40 million160as left the160 people enabled serial harassment160simply closed ranks160 culture didnt change ailes died months later fondly emotionally eulogized air thoughtful discussion his160 real legacy160of hurting silencing women like weinsteins behavior cosbys violent misconduct open secret industry allowed persist part society taught us listen women come forward part women silenced culture around terrified retaliation speak according to160 one account actors matt damon russell crowe may personally worked quash 2004160new york times160article weinsteins serial predatory misconduct weinstein also160 reportedly bragged160about placing negative articles people dared speak indeed even issued nonapology weinstein was160 threatening sue160the160times year ago160the washington posts david fahrenthold160 published160audio president donald trump bragging sexually assaulting women nbc thenemployer tv host billy bush also featured tape160 subsequently fired bush network executives reportedly160 knew tape160but160hadnt reported yet instead beat story competitor week ronan farrow wrote new sexual assault rape reports weinstein in160the new yorker160 though nbc employee months prior release trump recording television news writ large160 remained virtually silent160on another report sexual harassment sexual assault committed trump responsible journalists recognize serial sexual violence particularly perpetrated societys powerful difficult story tell survivors rightfully fearful retribution keeping warped disgusting power dynamic reaffirmed personal violence theyre already endured theyre also often stymied culture silence around sexual harassment assault powerful people reported misconduct frequently white almost always men best lawyers millions buy friends also frequently white frequently men always wealthy stand defend tv make movies call newspapers keep story wraps another day reporters responsibility report truth particularly challenges abuse power available tools cost responsibility work abuses power giving voice voiceless without compromising safety sparing question responsibility afford comfort powerful men earned protection instead used outsized power steal others kudos hard crucial fact morally imperative work examples rest 160 | 631 |
<p>Image via thegirlwiththeblog.com</p>
<p>Usually, when conservatives fight Planned Parenthood, it’s over abortion – or at least that’s how it is framed. It’s (supposedly) a moral issue about the babies and life, tied into religion. But conservative libertarians supposedly care about individual liberties, so we’d be led to believe they’d be pro-choice – except they rarely ever are (cf, Ron Paul and Rand Paul). But Ayn Randians are nothing if not dedicated to the Free Market and against government. If they can find a reason to shut down a recipient of public funds plus make buddy-buddy with their Religious Right colleagues, all the better – whether or not the service is necessary for poor women and families. Randian Skyler Mann is only too happy to oblige with her article (later tweeted by the Koch-funded libertarian think tank Heritage Foundation)&#160;“ <a href="http://www.pocketfullofliberty.com/defunding-planned-parenthood" type="external">The Free Market Argument For Defunding Planned Parenthood</a>.”</p>
<p>Now, as mentioned before, political libertarians and their conservative counterparts don’t really understand government. They understand bottom line, but not actually how business operates in the real world. So when they bring business principals into government and nonprofit organizations like Planned Parenthood, they are concerned about how to make a buck without using taxes, not about what benefits all people nor the most poor. People are consumers in this line of thought and anything that is for public use – such as roads, parks, libraries, medical insurance, etc. – can and should be privatized (in this direction, they align with neoliberals) and turned into the Free Market.</p>
<p>In a free market setting, PPFA will need to keep those low prices for consumers in order to attract the same level of business. The demand for birth control, STD treatments, and abortions isn’t going away — and if PPFA is offering the lowest prices, they’ll keep their business.</p>
<p>And, heck, if you’re worried about access to abortion, making PPFA compete in the same manner as any other private or NPO clinic will force the organizations in question to up the quality and lower the prices as best they can. Eventually this leads to more accessibility across the board.</p>
<p />
<p>Mann seems to think Planned Parenthood is a cereal company, selling Sugar Bombs while resting on their laurels cuz the gubmint is giving them the welfares for abortions. While she doesn’t seem too interested in the abortion argument, she sees shutting down abortion clinics as a neutral good for her socially conservative compatriots. There are so many misconceptions that I’m not sure where to start. So let’s begin with a quick overview about Planned Parenthood and similar family planning services.</p>
<p>Elizabeth Miles is one of those people who <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/25/planned-parenthood-low-income-rural_n_840730.html" type="external">absolutely needed</a> the services of Planned Parenthood:</p>
<p>There aren’t any options for women that don’t have insurance, unless they want to pay $200 to $300 for their pap… I didn’t have insurance for the first four or five years that I went to Planned Parenthood. If it wouldn’t have been for them, I would not have been able to have a yearly checkup or be able to be on a birth control. I wouldn’t have been able to afford it.</p>
<p>Skyler Mann argues, however, that defunding Planned Parenthood will allow it to be more competitive. Her argument is based on wild speculation, not on the objectivity that Randians like to believe they are full of. Federal funding through Title X programs and Medicaid are what keep PP offices open in these economically depressed areas in urban and rural sites.&#160;If they close, many of those places would not be able to remain open. And there is nobody who would be able to step up. It’s not economically viable. The Free Market would decide which women are able to get treatment and which aren’t, of course.</p>
<p />
<p>But that would also mean that unwanted pregnancies and abortions would rise among poor people. According to <a href="https://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2009/02/23/index.html" type="external">a study by</a> the Guttmacher Institute:</p>
<p>Absent publicly funded family planning services, the U.S. abortion rate would be nearly two-thirds higher than it currently is, and nearly twice as high among poor women.</p>
<p>Additionally, according to the same study, US taxpayers are benefiting at a rate of four dollars for every one dollar that goes into the preventative use of family planning. Since an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, it’s estimated that we save four times as much money giving to groups like PP for preventative care. Unwanted, unplanned pregnancies are expensive and the US populace does not seem ready to take care of the cost or responsibilities.</p>
<p>Having children when parents are not ready, or having more children than parents can take care of is bad business as it removes productivity from the workforce and the economic engine. You would think business-minded people would grasp that?</p>
<p>And this is one of the main problems with libertarianism: it trusts businesses to take care of people when businesses are not wired to care about infrastructure nor prevention – let alone people who don’t have money. In fact, Martin argues that moving Planned Parenthood into her Free Market will allow abortion services to be more efficient, faster and cheaper. She seems to not know about how dangerous back alley abortions were and are. Or just doesn’t care, because her point is to make government small and ally with the Religious Right. So it’d be a win-win for her. Not for much of America, though.</p>
<p />
<p />
<p><a href="" type="internal">Jeb Bush Blatantly Lies About Planned Parenthood in Desperate Attempt to Save His Campaign</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Rand Paul Puckered Up and Kissed the Tea Party Right on Their Backsides During his CPAC Speech</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">What God Do Christian Libertarians Worship?</a></p>
<p>0 Facebook comments</p> | true | 4 | image via thegirlwiththeblogcom usually conservatives fight planned parenthood abortion least thats framed supposedly moral issue babies life tied religion conservative libertarians supposedly care individual liberties wed led believe theyd prochoice except rarely ever cf ron paul rand paul ayn randians nothing dedicated free market government find reason shut recipient public funds plus make buddybuddy religious right colleagues better whether service necessary poor women families randian skyler mann happy oblige article later tweeted kochfunded libertarian think tank heritage foundation160 free market argument defunding planned parenthood mentioned political libertarians conservative counterparts dont really understand government understand bottom line actually business operates real world bring business principals government nonprofit organizations like planned parenthood concerned make buck without using taxes benefits people poor people consumers line thought anything public use roads parks libraries medical insurance etc privatized direction align neoliberals turned free market free market setting ppfa need keep low prices consumers order attract level business demand birth control std treatments abortions isnt going away ppfa offering lowest prices theyll keep business heck youre worried access abortion making ppfa compete manner private npo clinic force organizations question quality lower prices best eventually leads accessibility across board mann seems think planned parenthood cereal company selling sugar bombs resting laurels cuz gubmint giving welfares abortions doesnt seem interested abortion argument sees shutting abortion clinics neutral good socially conservative compatriots many misconceptions im sure start lets begin quick overview planned parenthood similar family planning services elizabeth miles one people absolutely needed services planned parenthood arent options women dont insurance unless want pay 200 300 pap didnt insurance first four five years went planned parenthood wouldnt would able yearly checkup able birth control wouldnt able afford skyler mann argues however defunding planned parenthood allow competitive argument based wild speculation objectivity randians like believe full federal funding title x programs medicaid keep pp offices open economically depressed areas urban rural sites160if close many places would able remain open nobody would able step economically viable free market would decide women able get treatment arent course would also mean unwanted pregnancies abortions would rise among poor people according study guttmacher institute absent publicly funded family planning services us abortion rate would nearly twothirds higher currently nearly twice high among poor women additionally according study us taxpayers benefiting rate four dollars every one dollar goes preventative use family planning since ounce prevention worth pound cure estimated save four times much money giving groups like pp preventative care unwanted unplanned pregnancies expensive us populace seem ready take care cost responsibilities children parents ready children parents take care bad business removes productivity workforce economic engine would think businessminded people would grasp one main problems libertarianism trusts businesses take care people businesses wired care infrastructure prevention let alone people dont money fact martin argues moving planned parenthood free market allow abortion services efficient faster cheaper seems know dangerous back alley abortions doesnt care point make government small ally religious right itd winwin much america though jeb bush blatantly lies planned parenthood desperate attempt save campaign rand paul puckered kissed tea party right backsides cpac speech god christian libertarians worship 0 facebook comments | 517 |
<p>Roy MoorePhoto Credit: Screenshot / YouTube</p>
<p>In one of the strangest political developments of a strange political year,&#160; <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/democrats" type="external">Democrats</a>&#160;may have a shot at winning a Senate seat in Alabama, one of the most conservative states in the country.</p>
<p>Although Democrats had footholds in state and local government until recently, at the national level the Yellowhammer state has long been a Republican stronghold. It has supported one Democrat for president in 60 years and Richard Shelby, the last Alabama Democrat elected to the&#160; <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/us-senate" type="external">US Senate</a>, switched to become a Republican more than 20 years ago.</p>
<p>Now, Roy Moore’s&#160; <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/26/alabama-senate-primary-republican-roy-moore-luther-strange" type="external">win in the primary</a>&#160;for the Senate seat vacated by the US attorney general, Jeff Sessions, has given Democrats a sliver of hope that their nominee, Doug Jones, can pull off an upset in December.</p>
<p>In a turbulent career that has seen him twice removed as chief justice of the Alabama supreme court, Moore has made inflammatory and controversial statements. In the past year, he has&#160; <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/10/alabama-senate-race-roy-moore-vladimir-putin-russia" type="external">praised Vladimir Putin</a>&#160;in a Guardian interview and&#160; <a href="//www.cnn.com/2017/09/14/politics/kfile-roy-moore-9-11/index.html" type="external">suggested</a>&#160;that the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 were punishment for a country turning away from God.</p>
<p>He has&#160; <a href="//www.cnn.com/2017/09/21/politics/kfile-roy-moore-homosexuality-illegal/index.html" type="external">said</a>&#160;“homosexual conduct should be illegal” and his most recent removal as Alabama chief justice came after he ordered state courts to defy the US supreme court’s legalization of gay marriage. In prepared remarks during a primary debate, he condemned “sodomy”.</p>
<p>As Zac McCrary, a Democratic pollster based in Montgomery, put it to the Guardian, Jones is, despite all this, “an underdog”. But McCrary struck a number of optimistic notes. First, he noted that “Roy Moore is just a bad candidate” who finished below 20% in two primaries for governor and “limped across the finish line” in his 2012 race for state chief justice, lagging far behind the rest of the Republican ticket.</p>
<p>McCrary also emphasised Jones’s biography. From a blue-collar background, he rose to become a federal prosecutor, successfully&#160; <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/14/oliverburkeman" type="external">prosecuting</a>&#160;two Ku Klux Klan members for the&#160; <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/16/16th-street-baptist-church-birmingham-alabama-1963" type="external">16th Street Baptist Church bombing</a>&#160;in Birmingham in 1963, in which four African American girls were killed.</p>
<p>Jones is drawing national attention:&#160; <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/joebiden" type="external">Joe Biden</a>, the former vice-president, spoke at a rally this week in Birmingham. Moore’s campaign welcomed the visit and the prospect of others to follow. In its view, Biden actually boosted Moore, by nationalizing a race in such a deep red state.</p>
<p>“Chuck Schumer can come down here, Nancy Pelosi can come down here, even Obama,” said an adviser to Moore, Dean Young. “Evidently they are gearing up for a war in&#160; <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/alabama" type="external">Alabama</a>&#160;and if they gear up for a war, they’ll gear up to lose.”</p>
<p>Jones has also staked out a stance on abortion that may not play well in Alabama. In a recent interview with MSNBC’s Chuck Todd, he said he was “not in favor of anything that is going to infringe on a woman’s right and her freedom to choose. That’s just the position that I’ve had for many years. It’s a position I continue to have.”</p>
<p>One Republican strategist was pleasantly flabbergasted by this, saying: “Alabama is one of the most pro-life states in the union and he didn’t take a middle-of-the-road pro-choice position.”</p>
<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/republicans" type="external">Republicans</a>&#160;remain wary of Moore, who is not only likely to become a fundraising magnet for Democrats: in a divided party, he could become millstone around the necks of GOP candidates in more socially liberal areas.</p>
<p>In the primary, national Republicans duly spent heavily against Moore. A Super Pac affiliated with the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, spent more than $9m to support Luther Strange, who was appointed to the Senate after Sessions joined the Trump administration. Donald Trump was even coaxed into endorsing the incumbent.</p>
<p>In contrast, Moore was backed by the populist Trump wing of the party, including the former White House aide Steve Bannon, who stumped on Moore’s behalf.</p>
<p>One Washington Republican strategist said that if the race was competitive, “the ball [will be] in Bannon’s court”. As the strategist noted, Bannon “got his guy through the runoff and [it is] now incumbent on him to get his candidate through the general election.</p>
<p>“In past cycles, Bannonites and [the] Senate Conservative Funds of the world have gotten these bozo candidates through the primary and left them on the vine to die.”</p>
<p>Moore’s campaign returned the disdain toward the national Republican party. Young told the Guardian: “I don’t know much about Mitch McConnell except that he spent $30m lying about my friend Judge Moore. Don’t know how much he’ll help Judge Moore or be allowed to help Judge Moore.”</p>
<p>The problem is that Moore will need the help. He ran a barebones campaign in the primary and was boosted by deep distrust among Republican voters around the controversial circumstances under which Strange was appointed to the Senate. As McCrary argued: “Roy Moore’s policies and views aren’t just [in] sync with 1958 attitudes. Roy Moore is more inclined to run a campaign akin to 1958.”</p>
<p>On election eve, outside&#160; <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/26/steve-bannon-praise-honor-trump-rival-alabama-candidate" type="external">a rally held in a barn in southern Alabama</a>, Moore provided an opportunity for supporters to make phone calls on his behalf. There were only a handful of volunteers. They were simply given printed lists of numbers.</p>
<p>Yet for all of the Moore campaign’s challenges, he is still facing a reliably Republican electorate in a state Trump won by nearly 30 points. He will also have the support of most who until now have adamantly opposed him.</p>
<p>Asked who he would support in the general election, Senator Shelby said: “I’m a Republican. I’m going to support the nominee, who in this case happens to be Roy Moore.”</p>
<p>Asked if he thought the race would be competitive, the veteran politician said: “I don’t think so.</p>
<p>“But you never know. Anything could happen.”</p>
<p>Lauren Gambino contributed reporting</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | roy moorephoto credit screenshot youtube one strangest political developments strange political year160 democrats160may shot winning senate seat alabama one conservative states country although democrats footholds state local government recently national level yellowhammer state long republican stronghold supported one democrat president 60 years richard shelby last alabama democrat elected the160 us senate switched become republican 20 years ago roy moores160 win primary160for senate seat vacated us attorney general jeff sessions given democrats sliver hope nominee doug jones pull upset december turbulent career seen twice removed chief justice alabama supreme court moore made inflammatory controversial statements past year has160 praised vladimir putin160in guardian interview and160 suggested160that terrorist attacks 11 september 2001 punishment country turning away god has160 said160homosexual conduct illegal recent removal alabama chief justice came ordered state courts defy us supreme courts legalization gay marriage prepared remarks primary debate condemned sodomy zac mccrary democratic pollster based montgomery put guardian jones despite underdog mccrary struck number optimistic notes first noted roy moore bad candidate finished 20 two primaries governor limped across finish line 2012 race state chief justice lagging far behind rest republican ticket mccrary also emphasised joness biography bluecollar background rose become federal prosecutor successfully160 prosecuting160two ku klux klan members the160 16th street baptist church bombing160in birmingham 1963 four african american girls killed jones drawing national attention160 joe biden former vicepresident spoke rally week birmingham moores campaign welcomed visit prospect others follow view biden actually boosted moore nationalizing race deep red state chuck schumer come nancy pelosi come even obama said adviser moore dean young evidently gearing war in160 alabama160and gear war theyll gear lose jones also staked stance abortion may play well alabama recent interview msnbcs chuck todd said favor anything going infringe womans right freedom choose thats position ive many years position continue one republican strategist pleasantly flabbergasted saying alabama one prolife states union didnt take middleoftheroad prochoice position republicans160remain wary moore likely become fundraising magnet democrats divided party could become millstone around necks gop candidates socially liberal areas primary national republicans duly spent heavily moore super pac affiliated senate majority leader mitch mcconnell spent 9m support luther strange appointed senate sessions joined trump administration donald trump even coaxed endorsing incumbent contrast moore backed populist trump wing party including former white house aide steve bannon stumped moores behalf one washington republican strategist said race competitive ball bannons court strategist noted bannon got guy runoff incumbent get candidate general election past cycles bannonites senate conservative funds world gotten bozo candidates primary left vine die moores campaign returned disdain toward national republican party young told guardian dont know much mitch mcconnell except spent 30m lying friend judge moore dont know much hell help judge moore allowed help judge moore problem moore need help ran barebones campaign primary boosted deep distrust among republican voters around controversial circumstances strange appointed senate mccrary argued roy moores policies views arent sync 1958 attitudes roy moore inclined run campaign akin 1958 election eve outside160 rally held barn southern alabama moore provided opportunity supporters make phone calls behalf handful volunteers simply given printed lists numbers yet moore campaigns challenges still facing reliably republican electorate state trump nearly 30 points also support adamantly opposed asked would support general election senator shelby said im republican im going support nominee case happens roy moore asked thought race would competitive veteran politician said dont think never know anything could happen lauren gambino contributed reporting 160 | 564 |
<p>Darla Christensen and her son Royce at a candlelit vigil on October 3, 2017.Al Kamalizad/Mother Jones</p>
<p>When the bullets started flying on that October evening, some hit Las Vegas’ Route 91 concert stage so close to Royce Christenson that shards of aluminum landed in his hair. He saw a man go down, and the man “did not get back up.” He applied pressure to a bullet wound in a woman’s leg. Amid the chaos, he tried to keep people hidden behind tour buses, and keep them calm. When the shots finally stopped, Christensen exited through the field—“the killing zone,” he calls it—where “there was a body every five feet. Some of them were covered, some of them were not.” In an area where people had taken the injured, the gutters were covered in blood. He looked up and saw a truck weighed down with the wounded and the dead screech by, honking its horn. “I had never seen any video game, any movie, nothing that prepared me for the gruesome things I was seeing,” he recalls. “I didn’t know how to react, I guess, I just started laughing—that nervous laughter that you can’t believe it.”</p>
<p>More than a month has passed since the massacre in Las Vegas that claimed 58 lives and wounded hundreds more, but Christensen can’t shake the scenes from his head. Sometimes he’ll be at the sink washing his hands and find himself transported back to “that place,” he says—the screaming and running, the rapid-fire gunshots, the people sobbing over their loved ones—and he doesn’t snap out of it until the sink starts to overflow. His mother, Darla, who was also at the concert, instinctively takes cover behind cement walls when she’s near tall buildings, subconsciously seeking out barriers that would shield her from gunfire. Neither of them get much sleep these days, and they have a hard time going out.</p>
<p>Royce and Darla are members of a family of security guards who work for Contemporary Services Corporation, a crowd management company that provided security for the Route 91 Country music festival. Royce was positioned closest to the Mandalay Bay Hotel and Casino, and therefore, the shooter. My colleague Al Kamalizad and I <a href="" type="internal">covered their story</a> in the days after the massacre, when they spoke at a roadside candlelit vigil. The Mandalay Bay loomed golden in the background as a collection of survivors shared their stories. “Twenty-two thousand people were in attendance Sunday night,” said Samantha French, a Las Vegas native who spoke at the vigil. “That’s 22,000 people who experienced war.”</p>
<p />
<p />
<p>Now, after the initial shock has faded, survivors are confronted with how to deal with what may prove, in some cases, to be long-term trauma. “On average, about 20 percent of people who experience events that are tragic to this degree are susceptible to PTSD,” says Noelle Lefforge, the assistant director of clinical services and research at The Practice, UNLV’s community mental health clinic, which has been offering free services to those affected by the shooting.&#160;“We know that a significant number of people are going to have a really hard time returning to functioning after this.”</p>
<p>Lefforge says mental health workers are just beginning to see what the long-term impact might look like. Some survivors have been able to return to normal life, yet others remain overwhelmed. “This has really shattered their sense of safety in this world.” As with <a href="" type="internal">combat soldiers</a>, it’s not uncommon, she says, for survivors to experience a sense of hypervigilance: They’re quick to startle, they have nightmares and trouble sleeping, and they find it difficult to concentrate and connect with others. Some, like Royce, have panic attacks. “The stress on the nervous system this can cause can impact your immune functioning,” Lefforge adds. “You can literally be more susceptible to feeling sick.”</p>
<p>In 2015, my colleagues at Mother Jones published a <a href="" type="internal">breakthrough investigation</a>, in collaboration with the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation economist Ted Miller, on the annual cost of gun violence in America. The report found that the total financial impact exceeds $229 billion annually, including direct costs such as emergency care, medical expenses, and court and prison costs, and indirect ones related to declines in a person’s productivity and quality of life. The long-term <a href="" type="internal">cost to society of a single murder</a> is almost a half-million dollars, according to the report—a typical victim’s hospital expenses runs more than $10,000, and mental health treatment for the victim’s family in an average case exceeds $11,500.</p>
<p />
<p />
<p>There are gaps in what we know about the costs associated with mental trauma caused by gun violence. As my colleague Mark Follman wrote in the investigation, Miller had to rely on a study he co-authored back in 1998 to estimate current costs because no contemporary research existed. That study calculated the rate at which people sought counseling, and the corresponding costs. “Applying those numbers to current data on gun injuries and deaths gives an estimate of $410 million annually in direct mental-health costs,” Follman wrote. “But that sum would rise substantially if all gun victims and their families could afford to seek counseling. Miller hasn’t had resources to build on the data since, and Mother Jones could find no other firearm-related mental-health studies by government or private institutions.”</p>
<p>But it’s clear that survivors such as Royce and Darla suffer an array of consequences. Shortly after the shooting, unnerved by simply being in Las Vegas, Royce flew to Utah to spend time with his fiancé. He missed several weeks of work. The first day back on the job, he had a panic attack. “Being back in my uniform brought some bad memories,” he notes. Many of the events he provides security for have fireworks, which is problematic because, like so many at the Route 91 music festival, he first thought that was what the gunshots were. “If I don’t know about it,” he says, “it can catch me off guard and I duck for cover.”</p>
<p>Royce, who finds comfort in group therapy and who sees a counselor no less than once a week, has had several panic attacks since the Route 91 shootings, at work and elsewhere. He’s sometimes surprised by what triggers them. “Maybe the smell of pine dirt, like what was there in the back of the stage, or maybe the smell of blood—or somebody screams in an awkward way, or maybe for no reason at all—and I’ll have these flashbacks and start crying.”</p>
<p>The same thing has happened to Darla. “I went to go visit someone to give them a thank you gift, and where she lives she has a view of the strip,” she told me. “I looked down and instantly started crying.”</p>
<p>For the first week after the shooting, the Christensens wouldn’t leave the house for fear of what they might encounter. On sleepless nights, they would find each other pacing in the living room, trying to calm themselves down. Even now, says Darla, “I question how to keep my family safe.”</p>
<p>Their sense of insecurity was only exacerbated by news of the <a href="" type="internal">rampage</a> at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, one month after the Las Vegas massacre. “Hearing about that church shooting, it puts you right there,” says Darla. “You know what they went through, what they felt and what they heard and what they saw…People say, ‘You’re probably in the safest city in the world right now because this definitely won’t happen again.’ And then, when another mass shooting happens, suddenly you’re like, ‘Oh wait, this is pretty darn common.’”</p>
<p>“It scares me to think of all these shootings lately,” Royce says. “I feel so much for those people.” He adds: “Before the shooting, I thought it couldn’t happen to me. After, I feel like it could happen anywhere.”</p>
<p>Nevada’s mental health system is being stretched by the Las Vegas aftermath—perhaps beyond its capacity. Psychologist Michelle Paul, a <a href="https://www.unlv.edu/people/michelle-paul" type="external">professor at UNLV</a> who was <a href="http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=555266319" type="external">among a small army</a> of volunteer mental health professionals who mobilized after the shooting, <a href="" type="internal">told Mother Jones</a> that Nevada was already facing a mental health crisis. “We don’t have providers for the need, and that was before this happened. Are people going to be able to find a therapist without a long waiting list? Are they going to find somebody who takes their insurance?”</p>
<p>“We’re dedicated to doing everything we can,” says Lefforge, Paul’s colleague, “but it is pretty daunting to consider this on top of everything else we were already doing.”</p>
<p>Time will help, but survivors will face heartbreaking milestones that bring their horrific memories flooding back. “A month is one milestone,” says Lefforge. “But people have their own dates: If you’ve lost somebody, you’re going to have to struggle through their birthdays and anniversaries, and with the holidays coming up, they’re going to have a different experience this year.”</p>
<p>In terms of scope, the Vegas massacre was perhaps the most shocking event in a horrific year for <a href="" type="internal">mass shootings</a>. They began in January with a rampage at Fort Lauderdale airport. In the months to follow, there were mass shootings in downtown Fresno, California; at an Ohio nursing home; an awning manufacturer in Orlando, Florida; a Pennsylvania supermarket; a San Francisco UPS store; the Las Vegas strip; a Maryland business park, a Colorado Wal-Mart; a Baptist church in rural Texas; and in the rural town of Rancho Tehama, California. All told, there have been nearly 700 casualties—not including family members, friends, and bystanders left to navigate their newfound grief.</p>
<p>Until it happened to him, Royce says, “I wasn’t afraid of the world.”</p> | true | 4 | darla christensen son royce candlelit vigil october 3 2017al kamalizadmother jones bullets started flying october evening hit las vegas route 91 concert stage close royce christenson shards aluminum landed hair saw man go man get back applied pressure bullet wound womans leg amid chaos tried keep people hidden behind tour buses keep calm shots finally stopped christensen exited fieldthe killing zone calls itwhere body every five feet covered area people taken injured gutters covered blood looked saw truck weighed wounded dead screech honking horn never seen video game movie nothing prepared gruesome things seeing recalls didnt know react guess started laughingthat nervous laughter cant believe month passed since massacre las vegas claimed 58 lives wounded hundreds christensen cant shake scenes head sometimes hell sink washing hands find transported back place saysthe screaming running rapidfire gunshots people sobbing loved onesand doesnt snap sink starts overflow mother darla also concert instinctively takes cover behind cement walls shes near tall buildings subconsciously seeking barriers would shield gunfire neither get much sleep days hard time going royce darla members family security guards work contemporary services corporation crowd management company provided security route 91 country music festival royce positioned closest mandalay bay hotel casino therefore shooter colleague al kamalizad covered story days massacre spoke roadside candlelit vigil mandalay bay loomed golden background collection survivors shared stories twentytwo thousand people attendance sunday night said samantha french las vegas native spoke vigil thats 22000 people experienced war initial shock faded survivors confronted deal may prove cases longterm trauma average 20 percent people experience events tragic degree susceptible ptsd says noelle lefforge assistant director clinical services research practice unlvs community mental health clinic offering free services affected shooting160we know significant number people going really hard time returning functioning lefforge says mental health workers beginning see longterm impact might look like survivors able return normal life yet others remain overwhelmed really shattered sense safety world combat soldiers uncommon says survivors experience sense hypervigilance theyre quick startle nightmares trouble sleeping find difficult concentrate connect others like royce panic attacks stress nervous system cause impact immune functioning lefforge adds literally susceptible feeling sick 2015 colleagues mother jones published breakthrough investigation collaboration pacific institute research evaluation economist ted miller annual cost gun violence america report found total financial impact exceeds 229 billion annually including direct costs emergency care medical expenses court prison costs indirect ones related declines persons productivity quality life longterm cost society single murder almost halfmillion dollars according reporta typical victims hospital expenses runs 10000 mental health treatment victims family average case exceeds 11500 gaps know costs associated mental trauma caused gun violence colleague mark follman wrote investigation miller rely study coauthored back 1998 estimate current costs contemporary research existed study calculated rate people sought counseling corresponding costs applying numbers current data gun injuries deaths gives estimate 410 million annually direct mentalhealth costs follman wrote sum would rise substantially gun victims families could afford seek counseling miller hasnt resources build data since mother jones could find firearmrelated mentalhealth studies government private institutions clear survivors royce darla suffer array consequences shortly shooting unnerved simply las vegas royce flew utah spend time fiancé missed several weeks work first day back job panic attack back uniform brought bad memories notes many events provides security fireworks problematic like many route 91 music festival first thought gunshots dont know says catch guard duck cover royce finds comfort group therapy sees counselor less week several panic attacks since route 91 shootings work elsewhere hes sometimes surprised triggers maybe smell pine dirt like back stage maybe smell bloodor somebody screams awkward way maybe reason alland ill flashbacks start crying thing happened darla went go visit someone give thank gift lives view strip told looked instantly started crying first week shooting christensens wouldnt leave house fear might encounter sleepless nights would find pacing living room trying calm even says darla question keep family safe sense insecurity exacerbated news rampage first baptist church sutherland springs texas one month las vegas massacre hearing church shooting puts right says darla know went felt heard sawpeople say youre probably safest city world right definitely wont happen another mass shooting happens suddenly youre like oh wait pretty darn common scares think shootings lately royce says feel much people adds shooting thought couldnt happen feel like could happen anywhere nevadas mental health system stretched las vegas aftermathperhaps beyond capacity psychologist michelle paul professor unlv among small army volunteer mental health professionals mobilized shooting told mother jones nevada already facing mental health crisis dont providers need happened people going able find therapist without long waiting list going find somebody takes insurance dedicated everything says lefforge pauls colleague pretty daunting consider top everything else already time help survivors face heartbreaking milestones bring horrific memories flooding back month one milestone says lefforge people dates youve lost somebody youre going struggle birthdays anniversaries holidays coming theyre going different experience year terms scope vegas massacre perhaps shocking event horrific year mass shootings began january rampage fort lauderdale airport months follow mass shootings downtown fresno california ohio nursing home awning manufacturer orlando florida pennsylvania supermarket san francisco ups store las vegas strip maryland business park colorado walmart baptist church rural texas rural town rancho tehama california told nearly 700 casualtiesnot including family members friends bystanders left navigate newfound grief happened royce says wasnt afraid world | 885 |
<p>On separate occasions, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton has casually threatened war against Russia and Iran. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has casually threatened war against China and North Korea. That these threats are largely without provocation is another topic entirely.</p>
<p>While America has not known even momentary peace in 15 years, it can seem surreal to consider the realities of a third World War.</p>
<p>In 1915, Russian Socialist <a href="" type="internal">Leon Trotsky penned a letter planning the October Revolution</a> addressed to “Proletarians of Europe!” The world was one year into fighting The Great War and Trotsky warned against the ever-decreasing liberties of the people beyond massive loss of life and wealth — the appropriation of labor for the purpose of war.</p>
<p>“The burdens of war will consume the best energies of the peoples for decades, endanger the achievements of social reform, and hinder every step forward.” —&#160; <a href="" type="internal">Leon Trotsky</a></p>
<p>War consumes the best energies of the people</p>
<p>Less than one month after Pearl Harbor, President Franklin Roosevelt told Congress and the country:</p>
<p>“Powerful enemies must be out-fought and out-produced. It is not enough to turn out just a few more planes, a few more tanks, a few more guns, a few more ships than can be turned out by our enemies. We must out-produce them overwhelmingly, so that there can be no question of our ability to provide a crushing superiority of equipment in any theatre of the world war.”</p>
<p>And out-produce, we did.</p>
<p>When auto manufacturers transitioned from producing cars to producing weapons and tools of war, already efficient production ramped up to historic levels. <a href="http://www.apartments.com/axis-west-campus-austin-tx/lefv8gf/" type="external">PBS reported</a> 3 million cars were produced in 1941, yet only 139 more were produced during the entirety of the second World War:</p>
<p>“Instead, Chrysler made fuselages. General Motors made airplane engines, guns, trucks and tanks. Packard made Rolls-Royce engines for the British air force. And at its vast Willow Run plant in Ypsilanti, Michigan, the Ford Motor Company performed something like a miracle 24-hours a day. The average Ford car had some 15,000 parts. The B-24 Liberator long-range bomber had 1,550,000. One came off the line every 63 minutes.”</p>
<p>This massive scale in production was earned through widespread propaganda — from beloved Rosie the Riveter co-opting female empowerment for production’s sake to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_M._Nelson" type="external">more overt threats</a> — the “Japs” love when you call in sick. Everyone did their part.</p>
<p>In a farewell speech years after the end of World War II, President Dwight Eisenhower issued an ominous warning against the rise of war production:</p>
<p>“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.</p>
<p>Until the last of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of ploughshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions.”</p>
<p>Since the end of World War II, the U.S. has been in a near-permanent state of semi-war. We are currently engaged in no less than seven conflicts of war, several without proper war authorization. Today, the Department of Defense (DOD) (formerly more aptly called the ‘ <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_War" type="external">Department of War</a>’) is the nation’s largest employer with more than 2.4 million federal employees, hundreds of thousands more <a href="http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/for-profit-defense-contractors-need-war-to-keep-defense-spending-high" type="external">federal contractors</a>, 20,000 estimated CIA personnel, and more than 800,000 in the National Guard and Reserve forces.</p>
<p>Even in the private sector, arms sales can make up staggering percentages of total sales for corporations who, not coincidentally, lobby the government on matters of defense. For example, more than 78 percent of behemoth Lockheed Martin’s total sales of $46.5 billion are made up of arms sales. It is of note that public corporations are also legally required to provide returns for shareholders above all other factors — including public welfare or environmental concerns.</p>
<p>Even in times without world wars, military action of this sort frequently and very literally consumes the best energies of the people.</p>
<p>War endangers the achievements of social reform</p>
<p>Deliberate attacks on civil rights like The Patriot Act and its bigger, badder relative the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), NSA surveillance, and the infringement of the rights of journalists and whistleblowers have followed heightened security in the unsettling times post September 11.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, as the public loses power in the political arena to hold an expansive centralized government accountable, austerity measures often reduce spending on infrastructure like education and health care or in supporting social reforms to redirect seemingly endless moneys to war. In these times, we send a clear message to the hungry, poor, overworked masses that there is not enough money for programs people need, but there is never enough money for ‘defense.’</p>
<p>Despite American defense spending swallowing <a href="" type="internal">that of the next seven nations combined</a>, there is, in the eyes of war profiteers and budget wranglers alike, more money available for war in the future. That money will simply have to come from services the public relies on — for the greater good. When wars begin with manufactured consent (as we are teetering on under this exact premise with any one of three world powers — Russia, Iran, China), arguments to cut healthcare, social security and worker’s programs or to reduce commitments to transportation, energy, etc. can be made with seemingly sound mind. Of course, temporarily, the nation will need to squeeze the belt holding society together to pay for war, but the war is just! Support the troops!</p>
<p>Once we are at war, there is little use questioning the merit of the engagement itself, as we have seen plainly in the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan or even in the burgeoning conflict with Syria increasing tensions with Russia. Once we are at war, it is all we can do to argue against the crippling measures of austerity.</p>
<p>“The movement was provoked by lack of bread. This, of course, is not an accidental cause. In all the belligerent countries the lack of bread is the most immediate, the most acute reason for dissatisfaction and indignation among the masses. All the insanity of the war is revealed to them from this angle: it is impossible to produce necessities of life because one has to produce instruments of death.”</p>
<p>—&#160;Leon Trotsky</p>
<p>George Orwell wrote in “1984” that the act of war was destruction of the products of human labor, that, if allowed to be used by the masses, would make the populace too intelligent and comfortable to be controlled by their governments.</p>
<p>If one cannot comprehend war being for the destruction of human labor, certainly we can understand it as a result. Not only the destruction of labor, but the socialization of massive debt and cost for war among the people who cannot withstand another squeeze as it is.</p>
<p>Trotsky addressed this as well, in the context of the first World War:</p>
<p>“The American bourgeoisie has earned billions from the blood of the European worker; but what did the American housewife, the workingwoman, get? Her share is scarcity, and the tremendous cost of living. It is the same in all countries, whether the bourgeoisie of one or the other country wins or suffers defeat. For the workers, the toiling masses, the result is the same: exhaustion of food stocks, impoverishment, enhanced slavery and oppression, accidents, wounds, cripples — all this pours upon the popular masses.”</p>
<p>And in the context of the second World War, former President Eisenhower:</p>
<p>“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.”</p>
<p>It is arguably easy to wage ideological warfare when the real price is paid by others. One may call these ‘hard choices’ all they like, but they are made from leather office chairs nonetheless.</p>
<p>It is also easy to look back on the War in Iraq and claim the populace was duped into supporting military action while conveniently ignoring the vivid reality of the time in which the populace largely clamored for war and clung to justification of it.</p>
<p>As the <a href="" type="internal">pieces fall into place</a> for World War III, the words of the late American sociologist C. Wright Mills may be of use: “The immediate cause of World War III is the <a href="http://spectator.org/why-the-military-industrial-complex-loves-hillary/" type="external">military preparation of it</a>.”</p>
<p>When World War III comes, it will come with the support of the majority, as every world war to date has. It is likely that Hillary Clinton will be the next President of the United States. She has threatened overt military action against Russia in response to their unproven connection to leaks of communications within the Democratic National Committee. She has also repeated support for a no-fly zone over Syria, which, according to numerous experts, will result in war with Russia.</p>
<p>At which point, it’s probable even those who clamor for peace now will instead call for war when antagonized with a one-side portrayal of Russian villainy. How many of them will volunteer to join the civilian military? One could argue there should be a one-to-one ratio&#160;as one should not support war unless they are also willing to support it with their lives.</p>
<p>As long as the disconnect of ideological support for war ‘equals’ patriotism, the American public runs the risk of unwittingly bearing the heaviest burdens of war.</p>
<p>As an alternative, the toiling, oppressed and exhausted proletariat whose bodies are being factored into equations on collateral damage daily could choose to feel empowered by those who have historically rejected war, even under the often thin veil of ‘justice.’</p> | true | 4 | separate occasions democratic presidential nominee hillary clinton casually threatened war russia iran republican presidential nominee donald trump casually threatened war china north korea threats largely without provocation another topic entirely america known even momentary peace 15 years seem surreal consider realities third world war 1915 russian socialist leon trotsky penned letter planning october revolution addressed proletarians europe world one year fighting great war trotsky warned everdecreasing liberties people beyond massive loss life wealth appropriation labor purpose war burdens war consume best energies peoples decades endanger achievements social reform hinder every step forward 160 leon trotsky war consumes best energies people less one month pearl harbor president franklin roosevelt told congress country powerful enemies must outfought outproduced enough turn planes tanks guns ships turned enemies must outproduce overwhelmingly question ability provide crushing superiority equipment theatre world war outproduce auto manufacturers transitioned producing cars producing weapons tools war already efficient production ramped historic levels pbs reported 3 million cars produced 1941 yet 139 produced entirety second world war instead chrysler made fuselages general motors made airplane engines guns trucks tanks packard made rollsroyce engines british air force vast willow run plant ypsilanti michigan ford motor company performed something like miracle 24hours day average ford car 15000 parts b24 liberator longrange bomber 1550000 one came line every 63 minutes massive scale production earned widespread propaganda beloved rosie riveter coopting female empowerment productions sake overt threats japs love call sick everyone part farewell speech years end world war ii president dwight eisenhower issued ominous warning rise war production councils government must guard acquisition unwarranted influence whether sought unsought militaryindustrial complex potential disastrous rise misplaced power exists persist last world conflicts united states armaments industry american makers ploughshares could time required make swords well longer risk emergency improvisation national defense compelled create permanent armaments industry vast proportions since end world war ii us nearpermanent state semiwar currently engaged less seven conflicts war several without proper war authorization today department defense dod formerly aptly called department war nations largest employer 24 million federal employees hundreds thousands federal contractors 20000 estimated cia personnel 800000 national guard reserve forces even private sector arms sales make staggering percentages total sales corporations coincidentally lobby government matters defense example 78 percent behemoth lockheed martins total sales 465 billion made arms sales note public corporations also legally required provide returns shareholders factors including public welfare environmental concerns even times without world wars military action sort frequently literally consumes best energies people war endangers achievements social reform deliberate attacks civil rights like patriot act bigger badder relative national defense authorization act ndaa nsa surveillance infringement rights journalists whistleblowers followed heightened security unsettling times post september 11 meanwhile public loses power political arena hold expansive centralized government accountable austerity measures often reduce spending infrastructure like education health care supporting social reforms redirect seemingly endless moneys war times send clear message hungry poor overworked masses enough money programs people need never enough money defense despite american defense spending swallowing next seven nations combined eyes war profiteers budget wranglers alike money available war future money simply come services public relies greater good wars begin manufactured consent teetering exact premise one three world powers russia iran china arguments cut healthcare social security workers programs reduce commitments transportation energy etc made seemingly sound mind course temporarily nation need squeeze belt holding society together pay war war support troops war little use questioning merit engagement seen plainly wars iraq afghanistan even burgeoning conflict syria increasing tensions russia war argue crippling measures austerity movement provoked lack bread course accidental cause belligerent countries lack bread immediate acute reason dissatisfaction indignation among masses insanity war revealed angle impossible produce necessities life one produce instruments death 160leon trotsky george orwell wrote 1984 act war destruction products human labor allowed used masses would make populace intelligent comfortable controlled governments one comprehend war destruction human labor certainly understand result destruction labor socialization massive debt cost war among people withstand another squeeze trotsky addressed well context first world war american bourgeoisie earned billions blood european worker american housewife workingwoman get share scarcity tremendous cost living countries whether bourgeoisie one country wins suffers defeat workers toiling masses result exhaustion food stocks impoverishment enhanced slavery oppression accidents wounds cripples pours upon popular masses context second world war former president eisenhower every gun made every warship launched every rocket fired signifies final sense theft hunger fed cold clothed arguably easy wage ideological warfare real price paid others one may call hard choices like made leather office chairs nonetheless also easy look back war iraq claim populace duped supporting military action conveniently ignoring vivid reality time populace largely clamored war clung justification pieces fall place world war iii words late american sociologist c wright mills may use immediate cause world war iii military preparation world war iii comes come support majority every world war date likely hillary clinton next president united states threatened overt military action russia response unproven connection leaks communications within democratic national committee also repeated support nofly zone syria according numerous experts result war russia point probable even clamor peace instead call war antagonized oneside portrayal russian villainy many volunteer join civilian military one could argue onetoone ratio160as one support war unless also willing support lives long disconnect ideological support war equals patriotism american public runs risk unwittingly bearing heaviest burdens war alternative toiling oppressed exhausted proletariat whose bodies factored equations collateral damage daily could choose feel empowered historically rejected war even often thin veil justice | 909 |
<p>Photo: Getty Images</p>
<p />
<p><a href="/news/special_reports/2004/04/mojo100.html" type="external">MoJo 100</a> | <a href="/news/special_reports/2004/04/hm100.html" type="external">Hard Money 100</a> | <a href="/news/special_reports/2004/04/sm100.html" type="external">Soft Money 100</a></p>
<p>Meet the people of Indian Hill 45243.</p>
<p>They’re super-wealthy. They’re ultra-conservative. And, except for the swank residents of Manhattan’s Upper East Side, they have contributed more money to the campaign to reelect President Bush than the people of any other Zip code in the nation.</p>
<p>Unlike the New York elite, residents of Indian Hill, Ohio – the rich core of 45243 – aren’t the talk of the nation or the darlings of paparazzi. But they certainly have tongues wagging in the select, high-stakes world of campaign finance.</p>
<p>One of the Indian Hill 45243s, investor Mercer Reynolds III, is Bush’s chief fundraiser, the grand overseer of his already successful plan to amass a record-breaking $200 million. Another, financier and Cincinnati Reds owner Carl H. Lindner Jr. has donated more money — $2.6 million — to federal candidates, parties and political action committees in the past four years than any other American. A third, uniform company founder Richard T. Farmer, was the nation’s third-largest political donor during that period, having written checks for more than $1.9 million, according to Federal Election Commission records tabulated by the Center for Responsive Politics.</p>
<p>Altogether, the people of 45243 have shelled out $710,940 to the Bush-Cheney campaign, reports the center, a nonpartisan organization that monitors campaign money. That puts Indian Hill and neighboring Madeira slightly below the Upper East Side, which has showered Bush with $992,515 for the November election, but above Dallas, which has given its home-state president $651,970.</p>
<p>It didn’t happen by accident. All 459 residents of Indian Hill and Madeira who have contributed to Bush so far didn’t decide, independently and without consulting one another, to whip out their checkbooks and go GOP. No, the gathering of nearly three-quarters of a million dollars occurred systematically, through the Bush-Cheney campaign’s use of designated “Rangers” and “Pioneers,” who pledge to raise $200,000 and $100,000, respectively. A third group, “Mavericks,” include fundraisers under 40, who raise $50,000 each. Since the new campaign-finance law, pushed by Democrats but largely benefiting Republicans, took effect following the midterm election in 2002, donors can contribute up to $2,000 to a federal candidate for each campaign. That’s twice what they could give two years ago.</p>
<p>The flip side is that they no longer can write enormous checks for six or seven figures in “soft money” to political parties — the preferred method of giving for big-name contributors in both parties over the past decade. Like scores of other prominent Republicans, Lindner, Farmer, and Reynolds used massive soft money donations to work their way into the center of the GOP’s campaign finance machine. Now that those gifts are banned, Lindner, Farmer, and other top-flight Republican givers — including Ameriquest boss Roland Arnell, Univision’s Jerrold Perenchio, and developers Alex Spanos and Joseph Canizaro — needed to find a different approach. And Mercer Reynolds, the money man of Indian Hill, found the ideal way to accommodate them, while also ensuring that the Bush-Cheney campaign would attract more and more $2,000 check-writers.</p>
<p>Rather than reach out to potential donors willy-nilly, rather than waste time and energy casting a broad net, the Bush campaign has perfected a technique used by his predecessors, tapping a relative handful of powerful friends and business acquaintances for assistance “bundling” money. As of late March, 207 people nationwide had signed on to be Rangers and 267 to be Pioneers, according to Bush’s campaign Web site. These bundlers, the Rangers and Pioneers, in turn tap their own friends and associates. Their goal: entice as many as possible to donate the maximum $2,000, often at an event attended by an administration insider. As a result, the list of top Bush-Cheney fundraisers in 2004 reads very much like the list of top Republican donors from four years ago (see <a href="/news/special_reports/2004/04/fundraisers.html" type="external">The Top 25 Fundraisers</a>).</p>
<p>So important are these first-class fundraisers that Bush, Vice President Cheney and wife Lynne Cheney flew to Greensboro, Ga., at the start of April to fete them during a three-day “Appreciation Weekend.” The exclusive event took place at the Reynolds Plantation, an 8,000-acre, lakeside resort that boasts 81 holes of golf, 50 miles of shoreline and initiation fees of up to $60,000 — all owned by Mercer Reynolds’ family and his multi-million-dollar development company, American Real Estate. Reynolds also hosted a private reception for Bush at his Reynolds Plantation home.</p>
<p>So it was that on Sept. 30, Carl Lindner III, a Ranger, co-president of American Financial Corp. and son of the Reds owner, hosted Bush at his 16-room, 9,250-square-foot Indian Hill home, according to press reports. For $2,000 apiece, attendees munched artichoke truffles and drank from an open bar as they poured $1.7 million into the Bush campaign’s coffers. Reynolds, a former partner with Bush in the Texas Rangers, sponsored a fundraiser featuring First Lady Laura Bush last June that brought in $800,000 for the campaign. The Bush-Cheney campaign declined to comment for this article; Lindner did not return phone calls.</p>
<p>Still, the Upper East Side and Indian Hill are just two stops on the Bush-Cheney fundraising circuit. The residents of eight other wealthy neighborhoods – including Highland Park and University Park in Dallas, Clayton and Ladue outside St. Louis, and Belle Haven in Greenwich, Connecticut – have all sent more than $500,000 to the Bush campaign war chest. Over the past year, Bush has personally attended fundraisers in each of those locales.</p>
<p>The legal practice of bundling individual contributions enhances the influence of wealthy people with fat Rolodexes, says Larry Noble, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics. “What you have is a system that is very dependent on large fundraisers,” Noble says. “What they want in return is a seat at the table with a new administration. When there’s an energy policy, they want to be invited. When Congress sets a new tax policy, they want to be there.”</p>
<p>The Lindner family, whose holdings include insurance companies and Chiquita Brands International, contributed nearly $1.4 million to federal candidates and committees for the 2002 elections, with 90 percent of it going to Republicans, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.</p>
<p>“They know that being a Ranger, being a Pioneer will help get them in the door, get them access that other people don’t have,” Noble says of big fundraisers. “That’s not necessarily beneficial to the system.”</p>
<p>Sen. John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic nominee, has a similar, but significantly less productive system. The campaign has awarded 184 people with the honorary titles of National Finance Committee vice chairs and co-chairs for raising $100,000 and $50,000, respectively, says senior adviser Michael Meehan. While Bush received $2,000 contributions from 46,246 people by the beginning of March, Kerry took in such large donations from just 5,628 people, the Center for Responsive Politics reported.</p>
<p>Kerry has received only one donation — for $250 – from the 45243 Zip code, according to the center. And on the Upper East Side, the area where both candidates have raised the largest sums, Kerry took in just $417,350, less than half the amount Bush did by March 1.</p>
<p>Indian Hill is the perfect place for Bush to raise massive amounts of money. With 20 square miles of exclusivity on the outskirts of Cincinnati, the village boasts aging country estates that rise from the end of long, private driveways veiled by gates and greenery, of modern, massive mansions and even some middling ranch houses. Most homes sit on five acres of land. There is not one business in the entire community.</p>
<p>According to the Indian Hill Historical Society, “Indians roamed the tree-covered gently rolling hills” before an Army officer bought the area in 1787 for 66 cents an acre. A little more than two centuries later, the 1,753 families of Indian Hill had a median income of $179,356, according to the 2000 U.S. Census. The median house was valued at $738,800. And 95 percent of the 5,907 people there were white.</p>
<p>“Indian Hill has always been heavily Republican,” says Tim Burke, co-chair of Hamilton County Democratic Party, which includes the 45243 Zip code as well as Cincinnati. “The fact that there are personal connections between Bush and his baseball partners puts him in a different league.”</p>
<p>Among Bush’s top fundraisers in Indian Hill are Reynolds and his partner, William DeWitt, who together bought out Bush’s beleaguered oil company in 1984 and later helped make the future president co-owner of the Texas Rangers. DeWitt contributed $363,646 to campaigns and committees the past four years, all of it to Republicans. After Reynolds helped raise money for the 2000 campaign, Bush appointed him ambassador to Switzerland. Other Rangers from Indian Hill 45243 include Farmer, founder and chairman of the Cintas, the nation’s largest uniform rental service, and William O. Brisben, a real estate developer.</p>
<p>U.S. Rep. Rob Portman, a Republican who represents Indian Hill, is an adviser to Bush and powerbroker on Capitol Hill. He did not return phone calls requesting an interview for this story.</p>
<p>“A lot of people are stepping up to the plate,” Portman told the Associated Press outside the Lindner fundraiser in September. “A lot of my friends and neighbors who have never given a penny to a presidential candidate and give little or nothing to the rest of us feel the need to help this president.”</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | photo getty images mojo 100 hard money 100 soft money 100 meet people indian hill 45243 theyre superwealthy theyre ultraconservative except swank residents manhattans upper east side contributed money campaign reelect president bush people zip code nation unlike new york elite residents indian hill ohio rich core 45243 arent talk nation darlings paparazzi certainly tongues wagging select highstakes world campaign finance one indian hill 45243s investor mercer reynolds iii bushs chief fundraiser grand overseer already successful plan amass recordbreaking 200 million another financier cincinnati reds owner carl h lindner jr donated money 26 million federal candidates parties political action committees past four years american third uniform company founder richard farmer nations thirdlargest political donor period written checks 19 million according federal election commission records tabulated center responsive politics altogether people 45243 shelled 710940 bushcheney campaign reports center nonpartisan organization monitors campaign money puts indian hill neighboring madeira slightly upper east side showered bush 992515 november election dallas given homestate president 651970 didnt happen accident 459 residents indian hill madeira contributed bush far didnt decide independently without consulting one another whip checkbooks go gop gathering nearly threequarters million dollars occurred systematically bushcheney campaigns use designated rangers pioneers pledge raise 200000 100000 respectively third group mavericks include fundraisers 40 raise 50000 since new campaignfinance law pushed democrats largely benefiting republicans took effect following midterm election 2002 donors contribute 2000 federal candidate campaign thats twice could give two years ago flip side longer write enormous checks six seven figures soft money political parties preferred method giving bigname contributors parties past decade like scores prominent republicans lindner farmer reynolds used massive soft money donations work way center gops campaign finance machine gifts banned lindner farmer topflight republican givers including ameriquest boss roland arnell univisions jerrold perenchio developers alex spanos joseph canizaro needed find different approach mercer reynolds money man indian hill found ideal way accommodate also ensuring bushcheney campaign would attract 2000 checkwriters rather reach potential donors willynilly rather waste time energy casting broad net bush campaign perfected technique used predecessors tapping relative handful powerful friends business acquaintances assistance bundling money late march 207 people nationwide signed rangers 267 pioneers according bushs campaign web site bundlers rangers pioneers turn tap friends associates goal entice many possible donate maximum 2000 often event attended administration insider result list top bushcheney fundraisers 2004 reads much like list top republican donors four years ago see top 25 fundraisers important firstclass fundraisers bush vice president cheney wife lynne cheney flew greensboro ga start april fete threeday appreciation weekend exclusive event took place reynolds plantation 8000acre lakeside resort boasts 81 holes golf 50 miles shoreline initiation fees 60000 owned mercer reynolds family multimilliondollar development company american real estate reynolds also hosted private reception bush reynolds plantation home sept 30 carl lindner iii ranger copresident american financial corp son reds owner hosted bush 16room 9250squarefoot indian hill home according press reports 2000 apiece attendees munched artichoke truffles drank open bar poured 17 million bush campaigns coffers reynolds former partner bush texas rangers sponsored fundraiser featuring first lady laura bush last june brought 800000 campaign bushcheney campaign declined comment article lindner return phone calls still upper east side indian hill two stops bushcheney fundraising circuit residents eight wealthy neighborhoods including highland park university park dallas clayton ladue outside st louis belle greenwich connecticut sent 500000 bush campaign war chest past year bush personally attended fundraisers locales legal practice bundling individual contributions enhances influence wealthy people fat rolodexes says larry noble executive director center responsive politics system dependent large fundraisers noble says want return seat table new administration theres energy policy want invited congress sets new tax policy want lindner family whose holdings include insurance companies chiquita brands international contributed nearly 14 million federal candidates committees 2002 elections 90 percent going republicans according center responsive politics know ranger pioneer help get door get access people dont noble says big fundraisers thats necessarily beneficial system sen john kerry presumptive democratic nominee similar significantly less productive system campaign awarded 184 people honorary titles national finance committee vice chairs cochairs raising 100000 50000 respectively says senior adviser michael meehan bush received 2000 contributions 46246 people beginning march kerry took large donations 5628 people center responsive politics reported kerry received one donation 250 45243 zip code according center upper east side area candidates raised largest sums kerry took 417350 less half amount bush march 1 indian hill perfect place bush raise massive amounts money 20 square miles exclusivity outskirts cincinnati village boasts aging country estates rise end long private driveways veiled gates greenery modern massive mansions even middling ranch houses homes sit five acres land one business entire community according indian hill historical society indians roamed treecovered gently rolling hills army officer bought area 1787 66 cents acre little two centuries later 1753 families indian hill median income 179356 according 2000 us census median house valued 738800 95 percent 5907 people white indian hill always heavily republican says tim burke cochair hamilton county democratic party includes 45243 zip code well cincinnati fact personal connections bush baseball partners puts different league among bushs top fundraisers indian hill reynolds partner william dewitt together bought bushs beleaguered oil company 1984 later helped make future president coowner texas rangers dewitt contributed 363646 campaigns committees past four years republicans reynolds helped raise money 2000 campaign bush appointed ambassador switzerland rangers indian hill 45243 include farmer founder chairman cintas nations largest uniform rental service william brisben real estate developer us rep rob portman republican represents indian hill adviser bush powerbroker capitol hill return phone calls requesting interview story lot people stepping plate portman told associated press outside lindner fundraiser september lot friends neighbors never given penny presidential candidate give little nothing rest us feel need help president | 954 |
<p>The word “Ferguson” has become synonymous with racism and police brutality in the U.S. today, in the same way that the name “Rodney King” did in 1992. And yet there remains a persistent and reactionary response from some white Americans who vehemently view themselves as the victims and black Americans as “violent thugs” who deserve the treatment they receive from police and the criminal justice system. The doublethink of domination and victimhood is central to the pathology of white supremacy in the U.S. It is used to dupe and confuse us into believing that there is nuance in brutality and justice in murder.</p>
<p>But what we really need is to see things in black and white. Literally.</p>
<p>Here are 12 double standards that prove white supremacy is alive and well and hard at work in Ferguson:</p>
<p>1. Then-Officer Darren Wilson said he was afraid — but it is Michael Brown who is dead. The unarmed 6-foot-4-inch, 18-year-old Brown, who was walking on a street in Ferguson when he first encountered Wilson, is dead. The armed and ostensibly trained police officer Wilson, who is the same height as Brown, and sitting in a car, says he was frightened of Brown and that is why he shot him dead. In his testimony to the grand jury deciding whether or not to charge him, Wilson used the following words to describe Brown: “demon,” “Hulk Hogan,” “aggressive,” “angry,” “bulking” and “mad” — in other words, not human. And hence, deserving of death. Amazingly, right-wing media outlets have <a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/matthew-vadum/ferguson-lynch-mob-leaders-convene-at-the-white-house/" type="external">cast</a> Wilson as the one who is being “lynched.”</p>
<p />
<p>2. After warning endlessly against riots and violence in Ferguson, only one person died and he was a — wait for it — young black man. Twenty-year-old Deandre Joshua was <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/us/another-killing-in-ferguson-leaves-a-family-grappling-with-the-unknown.html?_r=0" type="external">mysteriously shot in the head and burned</a> while in a car during the protests that happened in the immediate wake of the grand jury decision. Joshua was friends with Brown’s surviving companion, Dorian Johnson, and he was killed in an area close to where Brown was shot. His family is reeling with grief, even as the Ferguson community grapples with the loss of yet another African-American youth. Joshua’s death has made only a small dent in media coverage of Ferguson.</p>
<p>3. The police warned against violent protests but activists say they just watched stores being looted and buildings burn. A Ferguson-based activist who goes by the name Bgyrl4Life and runs the website <a href="http://www.HandsUpDontShoot.com" type="external">HandsUpDontShoot.com</a> has been relentlessly marching and protesting since Brown’s death. She told me that on the night of the grand jury decision, “No attempt was made to put out fires. When I pulled up to the intersection of West Florissant at Chambers, a strip mall at the corner caught my attention. It and the AutoZone across the street were on fire. Police had everything under control, even controlling the flow of traffic. Police completely ignored the fire. It was surreal. There weren’t even any fire trucks on the scene.”</p>
<p>Others have confirmed Bgyrl’s testimony that Ferguson was allowed to fall prey to destructive forces. For example, Michelle Gross, president of Communities United Against Police Brutality, <a href="http://rt.com/shows/sophieco/209603-ferguson-anti-police-protester/" type="external">told RT.com</a> on Nov. 28 that “police basically abandoned the black side of town and … left that part of town to the criminal element to do the looting. … I even think that some of them might have well been encouraged to behave that way.” Meanwhile, papers the next day were filled with photos of burned buildings and smashed storefronts as if to confirm police predictions.</p>
<p>4. One of the buildings that burned was a black church whose pastor received death threats. Flood Christian Church, where Brown’s father, Michael Brown Sr., was baptized, was engulfed in flames in the days after the grand jury decision. A federal agency is now investigating the possibility of arson. Pastor Carlton Lee told The Washington Post that in the days before the fire, he received more than 70 “hateful messages and death threats … from Wilson supporters, from white supremacist groups and from Internet bigots.” Activists in Ferguson suspect that the Ku Klux Klan, which has a long history of burning and bombing black churches, may have been responsible. It is not lost on African-Americans that <a href="http://academic.udayton.edu/race/06hrights/waronterrorism/churchburn01a.htm" type="external">burning a black church</a> is a symbolic act of historical white supremacist hate.</p>
<p>Thandisizwe Chimurenga, a Los Angeles-based journalist and author of the book “ <a href="http://www.triplemurder.com" type="external">No Doubt: The Murder(s) of Oscar Grant</a>,” visited Ferguson this summer. In an <a href="http://youtu.be/-_OsI_doAEU" type="external">interview</a> Wednesday on “ <a href="http://www.uprisingwithsonali.com" type="external">Uprising</a>,” Chimurenga told me, “Black people are feared, and lies are told about our propensity for violence, that we want to burn everything down, we want to tear everything up, we want to shoot everybody but we don’t do it. But historically, who are the ones that do it? Groups like the Klan, groups like the Oath Keepers.”5. The KKK openly threatened to kill African-Americans, but Brown’s stepfather is being investigated for inciting a riot. The Klan’s involvement started out as just a <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2014/08/19/ku-klux-klan-ferguson-police-michael-brown/14275115/" type="external">fundraiser</a> for Wilson because he “did his job against the Negro criminal.” Then, when the hacktivist collective Anonymous published the name and personal information of Frank Ancona, a KKK leader, he responded by threatening to kill anyone wearing a Guy Fawkes mask. To Ancona, Anonymous members are “n***er lovers” who ought to be “strung up next to the chimps.” Meanwhile, Louis Head, Brown’s stepfather, is <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/02/justice/ferguson-protests-investigation/%20" type="external">being investigated</a> by St. Louis police on suspicion of sparking riots on the night of the decision to not charge his son’s killer. Head screamed “F*** the police,” a cry of rage that has <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/23/a-brief-history-of-the-phrase-f-ck-the-police.html" type="external">a poignant historical context</a> in a community that has suffered police oppression from the nation’s inception. Yet, members of the country’s most notorious white supremacist hate group who have promised lethal violence walk free. Bgyrl told me that Head “said what he said in the heat of the moment. The family is grieving; they respected the process but the process didn’t respect them.”</p>
<p>6. Police asked a mostly white group of armed “volunteers” to leave, while hundreds of mostly black protesters were simply arrested. Among the groups attracted to Ferguson since Brown’s death was the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/us/on-rooftops-of-ferguson-volunteers-with-guns.html" type="external">Oath Keepers</a>, an armed militia with libertarian leanings and brimming with self-described “patriotism” whose members were intent on protecting property from potential looting. The armed men provocatively positioned themselves on local rooftops. Ferguson police expressed their distaste for the free offer of help, threatening to arrest members of the Oath Keepers but not actually doing so. Meanwhile, hundreds of mostly black activists <a href="http://rt.com/usa/210459-occupy-wall-street-ferguson/" type="external">have been arrested</a> since August and face charges.</p>
<p>7. Wilson is free, but Dawon Gore could face years in prison … for hitting someone with a baton. Just months before Wilson shot Brown, Gore, one of the few African-Americans on the Ferguson police force, <a href="http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/st-louis-county-cop-charged-with-assaulting-man-with-baton/article_267e68a7-8496-5663-8c81-a951172a904f.html" type="external">got into an altercation</a> with a civilian while on duty. Gore, who is a 13-year veteran of the force, struck the man with his baton and was charged with second-degree assault. If convicted, he could face up to seven years in prison for a crime in which no one was killed.</p>
<p>No grand jury was convened to decide whether to charge Gore. In fact, Robert McCulloch, the very same prosecuting attorney overseeing Wilson’s grand jury, is prosecuting Gore. Bgyrl cast it as “definitely a double standard.” But she also put it in a bigger context, saying, “The larger issue with his case is: What message does that send? Shoot to kill, because if they live, you get charged. Dead people don’t testify.”</p>
<p>8. Wilson is free, but Jaleel Tariq Abdul-Jabbaar, who threatened to kill him (but didn’t actually kill him), has been arrested. An African-American man, likely angered by the grand jury decision, <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/03/man-arrested-threatening-darren-wilson/19818217/" type="external">threatened to kill Wilson</a> on his Facebook page. He never actually made it anywhere close to Wilson. And yet, when authorities want to, they can act with lightning speed to arrest and charge someone, as they have now done with Abdul-Jabbaar. But such threats are not a clear-cut crime, which is why the U.S. Supreme Court is right now <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-struggles-with-defining-prosecuting-threats-on-social-media/2014/12/01/26f756ac-7993-11e4-9a27-6fdbc612bff8_story.html" type="external">considering</a> whether threats made by a man on Facebook against his estranged wife actually constitute a criminal offense.</p>
<p>9. Wilson was not charged but, hey, at least he didn’t get severance pay! With great fanfare, Ferguson Mayor James Knowles <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/01/us-usa-missouri-shooting-idUSKCN0JE0VJ20141201" type="external">announced at a news conference</a> that Wilson would get no extension of benefits or severance pay after resigning from the force, as if that was supposed to be a consolation prize for a community reeling from what it sees as profound injustice.</p>
<p>Still, Wilson is apparently flush with cash. After drawing a paycheck for months while on administrative leave since August, there have been <a href="http://www.alternet.org/abc-reportedly-paid-darren-wilson-six-figure-fee-interview" type="external">reports</a> that he received a “six-figure” check from ABC News for giving it an exclusive interview after a bidding war broke out between networks. And a Facebook campaign in support of Wilson has apparently <a href="http://www.crowdfundinsider.com/2014/12/57852-anonymous-organizer-reveals-darren-wilsons-supporters-raised-nearly-500000/" type="external">raised half a million dollars</a> on his behalf.</p>
<p>10. Police officers have so much impunity to kill that now we don’t even bother trying them in court. It used to be that officers who killed unarmed people would be tried and then, in the end, <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/190937/why-its-impossible-indict-cop" type="external">almost always acquitted</a>. In such cases it has usually been the dead victims who are effectively put on trial both in the media and the courtroom, cast as “thugs,” drug users, criminals or gang members to justify their deaths. However, the officer who shot and killed 7-year-old Aiyana Stanley-Jones in 2010 while she slept in her Detroit home recently had all charges against him <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/03/joseph-weekley-manslaughter-dismissed-aiyana-stanley-jones_n_5927294.html" type="external">dismissed</a>, proving that the innocence of victims matters little. These days, we are lucky if law enforcement officers like Wilson are even charged when they kill. Even in the Staten Island case of Eric Garner, whose death by chokehold at the hands of a police officer was captured on video for the world to see, <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/nypd-officer-indicted-eric-garner-choke-hold-death/story?id=27341079" type="external">resulted in no charges</a> against Officer Daniel Pantaleo.</p>
<p>So confident is Wilson that the current system will protect him, he has <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/ferguson-officer-darren-wilson-confident-federal-probe-clear/story?id=27221133" type="external">proclaimed on national television</a> that he expects a federal investigation to also clear him of all wrongdoing.</p>
<p>11. Police officers are offended by the mere idea of holding them even slightly accountable for killing black people. A group of mostly white police officers in Cleveland are now pushing the bar of accountability even higher. The nine officers are so upset at having their work shifts restricted after killing two unarmed African-Americans that they are <a href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/cleveland-cops-who-killed-unarmed-black-men-claim-racial-discrimination-over-suspensions/" type="external">suing their department</a> for racial discrimination. There was no trial, not even a charge against them. All they had to do was claim that they thought the victims fired shots at them. But no weapons were ever found.</p>
<p>The same police department is now facing scrutiny over the killing of a 12-year-old African-American boy named Tamir Rice, who had been waving a toy gun at the time he was shot. Rice was killed by an officer who was reportedly found <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/03/officer-who-fatally-shot-tamir-rice-had-been-judged-unfit" type="external">“unfit for duty”</a> by a former employer two years ago. It is difficult to imagine where the trend of police impunity to kill African-Americans will take us as a nation.</p>
<p>12. The police don’t even like being told not to shoot those who are surrendering. The rallying cry of “Hands up, don’t shoot!” taken up by anti-police brutality activists all over the country in the wake of Ferguson is a plea for justice and their belief that Brown was surrendering when he was shot. In solidarity, some NFL players and even members of the Congressional Black Caucus publicly raised their hands. But even that was <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/01/us/ferguson-nfl-st-louis-rams/" type="external">offensive to police officers</a>, who said they were “profoundly disappointed,” as though communities do not have the right to be outraged, let alone disappointed, when their loved ones are killed with impunity. As Chimurenga told me, “Hands up, don’t shoot” reflects that people are “angry, hurt, frustrated. … They’re saying to police, ‘[Brown’s] hands were up. Our hands are up. Are you really going to kill us too?’&#160;“</p> | true | 4 | word ferguson become synonymous racism police brutality us today way name rodney king 1992 yet remains persistent reactionary response white americans vehemently view victims black americans violent thugs deserve treatment receive police criminal justice system doublethink domination victimhood central pathology white supremacy us used dupe confuse us believing nuance brutality justice murder really need see things black white literally 12 double standards prove white supremacy alive well hard work ferguson 1 thenofficer darren wilson said afraid michael brown dead unarmed 6foot4inch 18yearold brown walking street ferguson first encountered wilson dead armed ostensibly trained police officer wilson height brown sitting car says frightened brown shot dead testimony grand jury deciding whether charge wilson used following words describe brown demon hulk hogan aggressive angry bulking mad words human hence deserving death amazingly rightwing media outlets cast wilson one lynched 2 warning endlessly riots violence ferguson one person died wait young black man twentyyearold deandre joshua mysteriously shot head burned car protests happened immediate wake grand jury decision joshua friends browns surviving companion dorian johnson killed area close brown shot family reeling grief even ferguson community grapples loss yet another africanamerican youth joshuas death made small dent media coverage ferguson 3 police warned violent protests activists say watched stores looted buildings burn fergusonbased activist goes name bgyrl4life runs website handsupdontshootcom relentlessly marching protesting since browns death told night grand jury decision attempt made put fires pulled intersection west florissant chambers strip mall corner caught attention autozone across street fire police everything control even controlling flow traffic police completely ignored fire surreal werent even fire trucks scene others confirmed bgyrls testimony ferguson allowed fall prey destructive forces example michelle gross president communities united police brutality told rtcom nov 28 police basically abandoned black side town left part town criminal element looting even think might well encouraged behave way meanwhile papers next day filled photos burned buildings smashed storefronts confirm police predictions 4 one buildings burned black church whose pastor received death threats flood christian church browns father michael brown sr baptized engulfed flames days grand jury decision federal agency investigating possibility arson pastor carlton lee told washington post days fire received 70 hateful messages death threats wilson supporters white supremacist groups internet bigots activists ferguson suspect ku klux klan long history burning bombing black churches may responsible lost africanamericans burning black church symbolic act historical white supremacist hate thandisizwe chimurenga los angelesbased journalist author book doubt murders oscar grant visited ferguson summer interview wednesday uprising chimurenga told black people feared lies told propensity violence want burn everything want tear everything want shoot everybody dont historically ones groups like klan groups like oath keepers5 kkk openly threatened kill africanamericans browns stepfather investigated inciting riot klans involvement started fundraiser wilson job negro criminal hacktivist collective anonymous published name personal information frank ancona kkk leader responded threatening kill anyone wearing guy fawkes mask ancona anonymous members ner lovers ought strung next chimps meanwhile louis head browns stepfather investigated st louis police suspicion sparking riots night decision charge sons killer head screamed f police cry rage poignant historical context community suffered police oppression nations inception yet members countrys notorious white supremacist hate group promised lethal violence walk free bgyrl told head said said heat moment family grieving respected process process didnt respect 6 police asked mostly white group armed volunteers leave hundreds mostly black protesters simply arrested among groups attracted ferguson since browns death oath keepers armed militia libertarian leanings brimming selfdescribed patriotism whose members intent protecting property potential looting armed men provocatively positioned local rooftops ferguson police expressed distaste free offer help threatening arrest members oath keepers actually meanwhile hundreds mostly black activists arrested since august face charges 7 wilson free dawon gore could face years prison hitting someone baton months wilson shot brown gore one africanamericans ferguson police force got altercation civilian duty gore 13year veteran force struck man baton charged seconddegree assault convicted could face seven years prison crime one killed grand jury convened decide whether charge gore fact robert mcculloch prosecuting attorney overseeing wilsons grand jury prosecuting gore bgyrl cast definitely double standard also put bigger context saying larger issue case message send shoot kill live get charged dead people dont testify 8 wilson free jaleel tariq abduljabbaar threatened kill didnt actually kill arrested africanamerican man likely angered grand jury decision threatened kill wilson facebook page never actually made anywhere close wilson yet authorities want act lightning speed arrest charge someone done abduljabbaar threats clearcut crime us supreme court right considering whether threats made man facebook estranged wife actually constitute criminal offense 9 wilson charged hey least didnt get severance pay great fanfare ferguson mayor james knowles announced news conference wilson would get extension benefits severance pay resigning force supposed consolation prize community reeling sees profound injustice still wilson apparently flush cash drawing paycheck months administrative leave since august reports received sixfigure check abc news giving exclusive interview bidding war broke networks facebook campaign support wilson apparently raised half million dollars behalf 10 police officers much impunity kill dont even bother trying court used officers killed unarmed people would tried end almost always acquitted cases usually dead victims effectively put trial media courtroom cast thugs drug users criminals gang members justify deaths however officer shot killed 7yearold aiyana stanleyjones 2010 slept detroit home recently charges dismissed proving innocence victims matters little days lucky law enforcement officers like wilson even charged kill even staten island case eric garner whose death chokehold hands police officer captured video world see resulted charges officer daniel pantaleo confident wilson current system protect proclaimed national television expects federal investigation also clear wrongdoing 11 police officers offended mere idea holding even slightly accountable killing black people group mostly white police officers cleveland pushing bar accountability even higher nine officers upset work shifts restricted killing two unarmed africanamericans suing department racial discrimination trial even charge claim thought victims fired shots weapons ever found police department facing scrutiny killing 12yearold africanamerican boy named tamir rice waving toy gun time shot rice killed officer reportedly found unfit duty former employer two years ago difficult imagine trend police impunity kill africanamericans take us nation 12 police dont even like told shoot surrendering rallying cry hands dont shoot taken antipolice brutality activists country wake ferguson plea justice belief brown surrendering shot solidarity nfl players even members congressional black caucus publicly raised hands even offensive police officers said profoundly disappointed though communities right outraged let alone disappointed loved ones killed impunity chimurenga told hands dont shoot reflects people angry hurt frustrated theyre saying police browns hands hands really going kill us too160 | 1,095 |
<p>Photo by Diariocritico de Venezuela | <a href="" type="internal">CC BY 2.0</a></p>
<p>On October 22, 2014, a 32 year old Canadian man entered the Canadian Houses of Parliament armed with a rifle. Minutes before he had killed in cold blood Corporal Nathan Cirillo who was carrying out a ceremonial guard outside at the Canadian National War Memorial nearby. &#160;This armed intruder entered the Parliament building where Prime Minister Harper, his Cabinet, opposition party leaders and other Members were present. The Sergeant–at- Arms, Kevin Vickers, heroically shot the intruder, who was then shot again by soldiers. All in all they shot him 31 times, dying on the spot. This frightful and unheard of attack on Parliament Hill was classified as terrorism under the Canadian Criminal Code.</p>
<p>Parliament gave Vickers a standing ovation and a medal for his heroism. Canada was showered with congratulations from other countries for having overcome this act of terrorism. Although there was discussion about whether or not the shooter was acting as a terrorist or was just mentally ill, there was not one voice of dissent from organizations, political parties or citizens about those 31 shots, even though Canada has no death sentence.&#160; Nobody talked about abuse of the shooter’s human rights, nobody mentioned a massacre, nobody called the shooter a “rebel” although he apparently opposed Steven Harper’s Middle East policies.</p>
<p>Imagine if a former Canadian pilot gathering around himself a motley group, had stolen an Armed Forces helicopter, violently raided an army base to get hold of guns and explosives. Then, thus armed, from the air, dropped grenades at the Ministry of Justice where there was an event for dozens of journalists celebrating Journalism Day. Then, imagine if they flew over the Supreme Court of Canada and dropped grenades at the building where all the judges were present, and where there was nursery day care full of little children. Imagine that this terrorist then made extensive use of media and social media to brag about his attacks and these rants were extensively publicized. Imagine that the authorities managed to surround them outside the capital. And, following a negotiation, the shooter declared they were ready to give themselves up. When the senior detective comes forward to receive his rendition, he is gunned down in cold blood and another detective also killed. In the gunfight that ensued, the pilot and several of his men end up dead.</p>
<p>Do you think that if these events actually happened in Canada that there would be one single person who would laud these criminals as heroes, as freedom fighters, as rebels against an unfair government? Do you think there would be anyone in Canada who would accuse the authorities, let alone the Prime Minster himself, of abusing human rights, of assassination, of massacre?</p>
<p>Yet these very events DID happen exactly like that in Venezuela in June 2017, and the international press painted that ex-pilot as a brave “rebel” not a criminal terrorist. (For example, see <a href="" type="internal">NYT.</a>)</p>
<p>The media gleefully published his disparate rants against the legitimate and democratic government of Venezuela.&#160; It seems that Venezuela is not to be allowed even to defend itself from terrorists. It is clear that to the USA, Canada and their allies, Venezuelan judges are fair game and can have grenades lobbed at them, that journalists and even children’s daycares can be placed in peril, and policemen can be gunned down in cold blood, all of it justified if done by a “rebel” that wants regime change in Venezuela.</p>
<p>The Venezuelan opposition insists in painting that ex-pilot as some sort of hero or freedom fighter. The media they control does not mention the plans these criminals had to assassinate President Maduro, to bomb the Cuban embassy and to bomb the statue of Maria Lionza. This is a statue of a sort of goddess of the jungle that is venerated by some Venezuelan ethnic and popular groups; it is a large statue located in the middle of the most important highway in Caracas whose destruction would cause a great deal of damage. &#160;It is usually surrounded by flower offerings and is indeed the symbol of the indigenous population and of the diversity of popular religious practices. Its destruction would give a powerful symbolic message: those who should govern are the elite and not the&#160; “ignorant populace rabble”.</p>
<p>This very wealthy elitist, racist, opposition lobbied not only the USA and Canada but also EU, asking – and obtaining- sanctions on the country, sanctions that prevent Venezuela from buying, selling or getting loans.</p>
<p>These arrogant foreign countries believe that they can dictate to Latin America. They accuse Venezuela of not keeping the rule of law and violating human rights, and demand elections – as if they were not already planned. However, they TOTALLY ignore that the sanctions they are imposing are a violation of the fundamental principals of the Charter of Rights of the United Nations. These sanctions are a vulgar interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation.</p>
<p>An extraordinary visit to Venezuela was carried out by the UN recently. The first official UN rapporteur to visit the country since 1996, Professor Dr. Alfred M. de Zayas carried out an official mission in Venezuela from 26 November to 4 December 2017. The purpose of his visit was to explore how the Bolivarian Revolution had implemented human rights – especially in the economic, social and cultural domain. &#160;His comments are worthy of note:</p>
<p>&#160;… there is no “famine” in Venezuela, despite media reports and generalizations. There is, however, a shortage in several sectors, and some products are hard to get, but the population does not suffer from hunger as for example in many countries of Africa and Asia – or even in the favelas of São Paolo and other urban areas in Brazil and other Latin American countries. There are mainly problems in the timely distribution of imported products – but this is predominantly the responsibility of the private sector, which often enough deliberately boycotts the distribution, sometimes stocks products in large warehouses and then takes them to the black market instead of delivering them to supermarkets — just to make a higher profit…</p>
<p>(the opposition) &#160;wish to cancel the Chávez and Maduro years and return to a purely capitalistic model. But there are at least 8 million Chávistas, and they will not disappear. These voters are convinced of the government’s program. These people will not allow the social achievements to be swept away. If the economy does not collapse as a result of sabotage, smuggling and sanctions, the government is likely to be reelected in 2018. The administration and the army are on the side of the government. Certainly, the plan in Washington is to launch a military attack on Venezuela by making use of disinformation about the allegedly miserable situation in the country with hunger, infant mortality and an economically desolate conditions, and then to chase the government out of office. We know this proceeding from other countries, so for example from September 1973 when the government of Salvador Allende was overthrown by a coup and Allende died.”</p>
<p>(See: &#160; <a href="https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13614" type="external">https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13614</a>)</p>
<p>The real issue is that the control over Venezuela’s immense oil reserve has become of major importance to Big Oil who has marshaled its great power to press for these sanctions. The campaign against Venezuela has nothing to do with “restoring” democracy, in fact that is the very last thing the USA, Canada or the EU want. They deliberately ignore the three 2017 elections for governors, municipal government and representatives to the National Constitutional Assembly that saw a significant win for the government. These elections were carried out in excellent order, as witnessed by a multitude of independent international observers. Despite the outrageous accusations of the USA and allies of dictatorship, there can be no clearer manifestation of democracy than these three electoral processes and no clearer sign of the support for President Maduro and his government than this.</p>
<p>The USA, the puppet director of the OAS (Almagro), Canada and the EU have&#160; demanded that Venezuela&#160; hold presidential elections. This has been stated as if there had not been already elections scheduled for December 2018 or as if the government was somehow refusing to hold them. In a master move, last week the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA) decided to push forward presidential elections for April 2018. This would surely satisfy these international critics, no? No. Their outcry is now that these elections will be illegal and unfair because they were decreed by the NCA. The NCA is a legitimately elected body&#160; (elected following strictly the indications of the Constitution) and is even recognized by major opposition parties. Who is it now that is not recognizing Venezuela’s rule of law?</p>
<p>The call for presidential elections has caught the acrimoniously divided opposition off guard, as their several disparate parties can only agree on one thing: get rid of Maduro. There is no way that the opposition can match the popularity of the government, a government that has not ceased to try to protect the poorest from the economic crisis. By normal political standards, any government that has been in power during a critical economic crisis – out side of actual war- most assuredly looses its popularity. Not so the Venezuelan government, in fact, it may have even increased its support despite the terrible economic situation.&#160; How can the opposition have hoped to gain from the economic crisis when they have openly – shamelessly- lobbied for the boycott of Venezuela? They want foreign forces to give them the power they are unable to persuade the people to grant them through clean elections. And they are very willing to hand over all of the country’s petroleum to Big Oil so long as they are given political power.</p>
<p>The Venezuelan elites, having opposed even their great Liberator Simón Bolívar,&#160; have learned nothing of honor during two centuries. In the most critical historical moments of the country, they have shown themselves on the side of the oppressors, of foreign powers. The Venezuelan people, who have an acute sense of history, are not likely to forget.</p> | true | 4 | photo diariocritico de venezuela cc 20 october 22 2014 32 year old canadian man entered canadian houses parliament armed rifle minutes killed cold blood corporal nathan cirillo carrying ceremonial guard outside canadian national war memorial nearby 160this armed intruder entered parliament building prime minister harper cabinet opposition party leaders members present sergeantat arms kevin vickers heroically shot intruder shot soldiers shot 31 times dying spot frightful unheard attack parliament hill classified terrorism canadian criminal code parliament gave vickers standing ovation medal heroism canada showered congratulations countries overcome act terrorism although discussion whether shooter acting terrorist mentally ill one voice dissent organizations political parties citizens 31 shots even though canada death sentence160 nobody talked abuse shooters human rights nobody mentioned massacre nobody called shooter rebel although apparently opposed steven harpers middle east policies imagine former canadian pilot gathering around motley group stolen armed forces helicopter violently raided army base get hold guns explosives thus armed air dropped grenades ministry justice event dozens journalists celebrating journalism day imagine flew supreme court canada dropped grenades building judges present nursery day care full little children imagine terrorist made extensive use media social media brag attacks rants extensively publicized imagine authorities managed surround outside capital following negotiation shooter declared ready give senior detective comes forward receive rendition gunned cold blood another detective also killed gunfight ensued pilot several men end dead think events actually happened canada would one single person would laud criminals heroes freedom fighters rebels unfair government think would anyone canada would accuse authorities let alone prime minster abusing human rights assassination massacre yet events happen exactly like venezuela june 2017 international press painted expilot brave rebel criminal terrorist example see nyt media gleefully published disparate rants legitimate democratic government venezuela160 seems venezuela allowed even defend terrorists clear usa canada allies venezuelan judges fair game grenades lobbed journalists even childrens daycares placed peril policemen gunned cold blood justified done rebel wants regime change venezuela venezuelan opposition insists painting expilot sort hero freedom fighter media control mention plans criminals assassinate president maduro bomb cuban embassy bomb statue maria lionza statue sort goddess jungle venerated venezuelan ethnic popular groups large statue located middle important highway caracas whose destruction would cause great deal damage 160it usually surrounded flower offerings indeed symbol indigenous population diversity popular religious practices destruction would give powerful symbolic message govern elite the160 ignorant populace rabble wealthy elitist racist opposition lobbied usa canada also eu asking obtaining sanctions country sanctions prevent venezuela buying selling getting loans arrogant foreign countries believe dictate latin america accuse venezuela keeping rule law violating human rights demand elections already planned however totally ignore sanctions imposing violation fundamental principals charter rights united nations sanctions vulgar interference internal affairs sovereign nation extraordinary visit venezuela carried un recently first official un rapporteur visit country since 1996 professor dr alfred de zayas carried official mission venezuela 26 november 4 december 2017 purpose visit explore bolivarian revolution implemented human rights especially economic social cultural domain 160his comments worthy note 160 famine venezuela despite media reports generalizations however shortage several sectors products hard get population suffer hunger example many countries africa asia even favelas são paolo urban areas brazil latin american countries mainly problems timely distribution imported products predominantly responsibility private sector often enough deliberately boycotts distribution sometimes stocks products large warehouses takes black market instead delivering supermarkets make higher profit opposition 160wish cancel chávez maduro years return purely capitalistic model least 8 million chávistas disappear voters convinced governments program people allow social achievements swept away economy collapse result sabotage smuggling sanctions government likely reelected 2018 administration army side government certainly plan washington launch military attack venezuela making use disinformation allegedly miserable situation country hunger infant mortality economically desolate conditions chase government office know proceeding countries example september 1973 government salvador allende overthrown coup allende died see 160 httpsvenezuelanalysiscomanalysis13614 real issue control venezuelas immense oil reserve become major importance big oil marshaled great power press sanctions campaign venezuela nothing restoring democracy fact last thing usa canada eu want deliberately ignore three 2017 elections governors municipal government representatives national constitutional assembly saw significant win government elections carried excellent order witnessed multitude independent international observers despite outrageous accusations usa allies dictatorship clearer manifestation democracy three electoral processes clearer sign support president maduro government usa puppet director oas almagro canada eu have160 demanded venezuela160 hold presidential elections stated already elections scheduled december 2018 government somehow refusing hold master move last week national constitutional assembly nca decided push forward presidential elections april 2018 would surely satisfy international critics outcry elections illegal unfair decreed nca nca legitimately elected body160 elected following strictly indications constitution even recognized major opposition parties recognizing venezuelas rule law call presidential elections caught acrimoniously divided opposition guard several disparate parties agree one thing get rid maduro way opposition match popularity government government ceased try protect poorest economic crisis normal political standards government power critical economic crisis side actual war assuredly looses popularity venezuelan government fact may even increased support despite terrible economic situation160 opposition hoped gain economic crisis openly shamelessly lobbied boycott venezuela want foreign forces give power unable persuade people grant clean elections willing hand countrys petroleum big oil long given political power venezuelan elites opposed even great liberator simón bolívar160 learned nothing honor two centuries critical historical moments country shown side oppressors foreign powers venezuelan people acute sense history likely forget | 888 |
<p>Brazil, the world’s fifth-largest country in terms of population and Latin America’s most expansive state, is in political turmoil. The left-leaning Workers Party, PT (as it is known by its Portuguese acronym), is facing an existential crisis after 14 years in power. Accusations of corruption from opposition parties and the glare of a right-wing media empire could hand the reins of government to conservative forces. Mass street protests drawing tens of thousands of mostly white, upper-middle-class families with slick props and coordinated, simplistic messaging offer a convincing backdrop of popular political will for change. It is a familiar script in Latin America—one that has played out in Venezuela, Ecuador, Honduras and elsewhere. Will Brazil succumb to this new model of right-wing coups?</p>
<p>The PT swept into power on the wings of the once-beloved President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Lula—as he is still affectionately known—was succeeded by his onetime chief of staff, Dilma Rousseff. Both Lula and President Rousseff now face serious accusations stemming from their former affiliation with the Brazilian energy company Petrobras. Rousseff faces impeachment proceedings that have been brought against her by opposition officials with support from the judiciary.</p>
<p>Rousseff <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-35877230" type="external">has remained defiant</a>, saying, “I have committed no irregularity. I will never resign.” And thus far there has been no proof of wrongdoing on her part. Still, the calls for her resignation are relentless. There have also been no charges against Lula, despite a swirl of rumors and three hours of questioning during his recent detention by police that some characterized as a kidnapping. Lula has stated he will run for president again in 2018, which may be part of what the right fears.</p>
<p>Meleiza Figueroa, an American doctoral student at the University of California at Berkeley and an occasional Truthdig contributor, is currently living in Brazil and conducting research in the Amazon. <a href="http://www.risingupwithsonali.com/brazils-ruling-party-in-disarray-after-attempt-to-shield-lula/" type="external">In a Skype interview</a> from the municipality of Santarém in the state of Pará, she described what is unfolding in Brazil as “a naked power grab on the part of the right-wing elites.”</p>
<p />
<p>But among conservative or even mainstream media, one word is bandied about as a catchall to indict PT officials: corruption. For example, one author characterizes <a href="http://mironline.ca/?p=9872" type="external">the ubiquitous protest sign “Fora Dilma”</a> (which translates to “Out Dilma”) as “A People’s Quest to End Corruption.” But, as Figueroa noted, Brazil’s political system is based on low levels of corruption through local patronage systems that have existed for centuries, not just since the PT assumed power. The PT’s mistake was to not “overturn the old order … instead they tried to work within the existing system and allied themselves with some of the people that engaged in this type of political culture,” she explained. On the flip side, “The PT, more than any other government, has prosecuted officials for corruption.”</p>
<p>The Brazilian federal police have named their investigation into the allegations of government corruption “ <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-35725415" type="external">Operation Car Wash</a>.” But according to Figueroa, critics point out that “the people who are investigating Operation Car Wash are the people who are even more dirty.”</p>
<p>Manufactured political crises often require the prominent role of media in whipping up public indignation and frenzy. To that end, aiding Brazil’s right-wing opposition parties is the popular television network Globo, which has been airing wall-to-wall coverage of the mass anti-government mobilizations across the country. Speaking to teleSUR, media critic Sylvia Moretzsohn explained that Globo acts to “create the conditions for a coup. They want make it so the public is in favor of the ouster of Dilma, but always in the name of a noble cause: the fight against corruption.” Globo recently leaked intercepted calls between Lula and Rousseff discussing responses to their detractors—which generated a predictable level of public outrage.</p>
<p>Globo is covering the anti-PT mobilizations in a way it has never done for left-wing actions, said Figueroa. Footage of the protests shows largely white, well-dressed crowds, similar to the opposition seen in Venezuela. Figueroa cited an <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-35824122" type="external">image that went viral</a> because of the racial politics it represents: “a white couple going to a protest with their dog, and their black maid following them with a stroller carrying their two daughters.” The BBC wrote that the photo “became a symbol of how polarized Brazil is over the current protests,” and cited one individual’s online observation that “What the picture says, between the lines, is that you are asking for a better world for yourself as a white employer, and for your perfect family, while the black nanny continues to be a maid.”</p>
<p>Eerily echoing the sentiment of Donald Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” are Brazilian protesters who say they “want their country back,” a parallel thread to right-wing American anger. Sections of Brazil’s middle and upper classes are seething with resentment over the perceived notion that liberal government forces have coddled poor people and ruined class distinctions. Of course, impoverished classes in Brazil and the U.S. never receive government subsidies big enough to fully lift them out of poverty.Sadly, the PT is not helping its own cause. Over the past several years, the party has adopted austerity measures and environmentally disastrous policies that have alienated its base of working-class communities. Figueroa cited mass demonstrations in 2013 as an expression of anger that lower-middle-class Brazilians felt over the nation’s economic downtown. During that era of upheaval, she said, “There were two sides. There was a left wing that was demanding more services, more redistribution, more help for people.” But “[t]here was [also] a right wing which took this anti-corruption narrative and ran with it, aided by Globo.”</p>
<p>Conservatives were able to exploit public anger so well that the last congressional elections yielded huge wins for opposition parties. Among them was the “Ruralistas,” a bloc representing land-owning elites, which has directly targeted redistribution policies and the rights of indigenous communities.</p>
<p>PT supporters have taken to the streets in counterprotests to defend the party’s stated adherence to policies that benefit poor and working-class Brazilians. Despite the PT’s recent failures, there is an understanding that conservatives want to roll back the decade and a half of progressive reforms. One protester <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/police-fire-tear-gas-protests-against-brazils-president-023854502.html" type="external">defending Lula and Rousseff</a> told Agence France-Presse, “This is a coup by the right.”</p>
<p>Liberal parties like the PT face a conundrum in Latin American democracies—one that Venezuela’s Bolivarian revolution has had to navigate time and again—and that is that liberalism and its tolerance for political activity offer openings to right-wing parties that have no qualms about exploiting democratic expression (such as a free press, the right to assemble publicly, etc.) in order to quash democracy.</p>
<p>The stakes are high, especially in Brazil, where climate policies can have a global impact. Already, Figueroa is noticing that in the Brazilian Amazon, “As soon as this political crisis began, there was a push to run over all of the regulations and the governmental protections that have been put into place for the rain forest.” Indigenous groups and environmental activists had managed, among other things, to institutionalize curbs on deforestation through the PT. But in the past year, rates of deforestation, which had been declining, jumped back up.</p>
<p>The BBC <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-35831833" type="external">characterized the situation</a> with a headline that read, “Brazil tumbles like ‘House of Cards’ in crisis.” Figueroa does not think this is an overstatement. “What the right wing seeks is the complete destruction of the Workers Party, the real gains that the population has made, and the remaining barriers to unfettered capitalist development,” she said. Unless the PT and its supporters can stave off the attacks, Brazil may indeed go the way of Ecuador and Honduras.</p> | true | 4 | brazil worlds fifthlargest country terms population latin americas expansive state political turmoil leftleaning workers party pt known portuguese acronym facing existential crisis 14 years power accusations corruption opposition parties glare rightwing media empire could hand reins government conservative forces mass street protests drawing tens thousands mostly white uppermiddleclass families slick props coordinated simplistic messaging offer convincing backdrop popular political change familiar script latin americaone played venezuela ecuador honduras elsewhere brazil succumb new model rightwing coups pt swept power wings oncebeloved president luiz inácio lula da silva lulaas still affectionately knownwas succeeded onetime chief staff dilma rousseff lula president rousseff face serious accusations stemming former affiliation brazilian energy company petrobras rousseff faces impeachment proceedings brought opposition officials support judiciary rousseff remained defiant saying committed irregularity never resign thus far proof wrongdoing part still calls resignation relentless also charges lula despite swirl rumors three hours questioning recent detention police characterized kidnapping lula stated run president 2018 may part right fears meleiza figueroa american doctoral student university california berkeley occasional truthdig contributor currently living brazil conducting research amazon skype interview municipality santarém state pará described unfolding brazil naked power grab part rightwing elites among conservative even mainstream media one word bandied catchall indict pt officials corruption example one author characterizes ubiquitous protest sign fora dilma translates dilma peoples quest end corruption figueroa noted brazils political system based low levels corruption local patronage systems existed centuries since pt assumed power pts mistake overturn old order instead tried work within existing system allied people engaged type political culture explained flip side pt government prosecuted officials corruption brazilian federal police named investigation allegations government corruption operation car wash according figueroa critics point people investigating operation car wash people even dirty manufactured political crises often require prominent role media whipping public indignation frenzy end aiding brazils rightwing opposition parties popular television network globo airing walltowall coverage mass antigovernment mobilizations across country speaking telesur media critic sylvia moretzsohn explained globo acts create conditions coup want make public favor ouster dilma always name noble cause fight corruption globo recently leaked intercepted calls lula rousseff discussing responses detractorswhich generated predictable level public outrage globo covering antipt mobilizations way never done leftwing actions said figueroa footage protests shows largely white welldressed crowds similar opposition seen venezuela figueroa cited image went viral racial politics represents white couple going protest dog black maid following stroller carrying two daughters bbc wrote photo became symbol polarized brazil current protests cited one individuals online observation picture says lines asking better world white employer perfect family black nanny continues maid eerily echoing sentiment donald trumps slogan make america great brazilian protesters say want country back parallel thread rightwing american anger sections brazils middle upper classes seething resentment perceived notion liberal government forces coddled poor people ruined class distinctions course impoverished classes brazil us never receive government subsidies big enough fully lift povertysadly pt helping cause past several years party adopted austerity measures environmentally disastrous policies alienated base workingclass communities figueroa cited mass demonstrations 2013 expression anger lowermiddleclass brazilians felt nations economic downtown era upheaval said two sides left wing demanding services redistribution help people also right wing took anticorruption narrative ran aided globo conservatives able exploit public anger well last congressional elections yielded huge wins opposition parties among ruralistas bloc representing landowning elites directly targeted redistribution policies rights indigenous communities pt supporters taken streets counterprotests defend partys stated adherence policies benefit poor workingclass brazilians despite pts recent failures understanding conservatives want roll back decade half progressive reforms one protester defending lula rousseff told agence francepresse coup right liberal parties like pt face conundrum latin american democraciesone venezuelas bolivarian revolution navigate time againand liberalism tolerance political activity offer openings rightwing parties qualms exploiting democratic expression free press right assemble publicly etc order quash democracy stakes high especially brazil climate policies global impact already figueroa noticing brazilian amazon soon political crisis began push run regulations governmental protections put place rain forest indigenous groups environmental activists managed among things institutionalize curbs deforestation pt past year rates deforestation declining jumped back bbc characterized situation headline read brazil tumbles like house cards crisis figueroa think overstatement right wing seeks complete destruction workers party real gains population made remaining barriers unfettered capitalist development said unless pt supporters stave attacks brazil may indeed go way ecuador honduras | 713 |
<p />
<p>Women make&#160;80¢ on the male dollar, even accounting for time off to raise kids. If that factor is not accounted for, women make 56¢.</p>
<p>Over her career, the average working woman loses $1.2 million to wage inequity.</p>
<p>Since 1963, when the Equal Pay Act was signed, the wage gap has closed by less than half a cent per year.</p>
<p>In 1963, RFK withdrew his nomination to a club that had spurned a black official and formed a club that didn’t admit women.</p>
<p>3 board members of Catalyst—a workplace-equity advocacy group—belong to Augusta National Golf Club, which bans women.</p>
<p>One&#160;is the CEO of GE, which won a 2004 Catalyst Award, although the company has a below-average rate of female executives.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Companies with women in top jobs see 35% higher returns than those without.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>74% of female executives have a spouse who’s employed full time. 75% of male execs have a spouse who’s not employed.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>42% of female execs over 40 don’t have kids.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>For full-time working fathers, each child correlates to a 2.1% earnings increase. For working moms, it’s a 2.5% loss.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Every industrialized country except the U.S. and Australia has paid parental leave with a guaranteed job on return to work.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>86% of guests on Sunday-morning political talk shows are men. So are 80% of the guests on The Daily Show.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Only 5 of 20-odd “thought-leader” magazines have ever had a woman as editor-in-chief. Two of those jobs were held by Tina Brown.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Only 24% of recent works in The New Yorker, the Atlantic Monthly, Harper’s, Vanity Fair, and the New York Times Magazine were written by women, according to WomenTK.com.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>1/3 of those were articles on gender or family or were short stories or memoirs.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>41%&#160;of Mother Jones’ writers during the same period were women. This issue only 11% are.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p />
<p>Magazines that run lists of “best” firms for women to work for often accept pay-to-play advertising or use self-reported data. Working Mother lists firms facing class-action suits for sex harassment and pregnancy discrimination.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Working Mother&#160;recently found Allstate, American Express, and General Mills among the 8 best firms for women of color. At each, 30% of new hourly hires are women of color, but 0% of newly hired executives are.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Women over 65 are almost twice as likely to be poor as men.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Actresses over 40 account for 9% of movie roles. Actors over 40 account for 30%.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Anne Bancroft was 36 when she played Mrs. Robinson in The Graduate. Dustin Hoffman was 30.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Chances that a Best Actress winner portrayed a prostitute, a nun, or a mute: 1 in 8.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Since orchestras started requiring musicians to audition behind screens, the number of women hired has increased 20%.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>40% of married professional women feel their husbands do less work around the house than they create.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Each teenage girl increases a mom’s weekly housework by 1.5 hours, but leaves a dad’s unchanged. A teenage boy adds 3 hours to mom’s chores, and an hour to dad’s.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Heavyset women get fewer promotions and face more job discrimination. Heavyset men do not.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Models weigh 23% less than average women. In 1986 it was only 8% less.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>The above statistics were quoted in a press release for a Dove product whose adcampaign uses full-figured models but the use of which is claimed to reduce cellulite.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Asked to pick a partner for a relationship, college men tend to choose women in subordinate jobs. College women show no preference, nor, for a one-night stand, do men.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Men&#160;only&#160;earn 3/4 as many B.A.s as women. Some colleges now admit to practicing affirmative action for male applicants.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Only 1/3 of female Ph.D.s who get on the tenure track before having a baby ever do so.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>31.5% of Iraq’s parliament are women. Only 15% of the U.S. Congress are women.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>15 African nations have a higher percentage of female legislators than does the U.S.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p />
<p>69%&#160;of men&#160;believe America would be better off if women occupied more top political jobs. Only 61% of women agree.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Among Republicans, that split is 52% to 34%.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Under Bush , the Labor Dept. has eliminated 25 publications on pay inequity and child care.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>After&#160;a woman filed a sexual-harassment complaint against her Merrill Lynch superior, he circulated an article titled “Stop Whining,” which warned&#160;that “constant complaining can cost you your job.”</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p><a href="/news/exhibit/2006/01/sources.html" type="external">Sources</a></p>
<p /> | true | 4 | women make16080 male dollar even accounting time raise kids factor accounted women make 56 career average working woman loses 12 million wage inequity since 1963 equal pay act signed wage gap closed less half cent per year 1963 rfk withdrew nomination club spurned black official formed club didnt admit women 3 board members catalysta workplaceequity advocacy groupbelong augusta national golf club bans women one160is ceo ge 2004 catalyst award although company belowaverage rate female executives 160 160 companies women top jobs see 35 higher returns without 160 160 74 female executives spouse whos employed full time 75 male execs spouse whos employed 160 160 42 female execs 40 dont kids 160 160 fulltime working fathers child correlates 21 earnings increase working moms 25 loss 160 160 every industrialized country except us australia paid parental leave guaranteed job return work 160 160 86 guests sundaymorning political talk shows men 80 guests daily show 160 160 160 5 20odd thoughtleader magazines ever woman editorinchief two jobs held tina brown 160 160 24 recent works new yorker atlantic monthly harpers vanity fair new york times magazine written women according womentkcom 160 160 13 articles gender family short stories memoirs 160 160 41160of mother jones writers period women issue 11 160 160 160 magazines run lists best firms women work often accept paytoplay advertising use selfreported data working mother lists firms facing classaction suits sex harassment pregnancy discrimination 160 160 160 160 160 working mother160recently found allstate american express general mills among 8 best firms women color 30 new hourly hires women color 0 newly hired executives 160 women 65 almost twice likely poor men 160 160 actresses 40 account 9 movie roles actors 40 account 30 160 160 anne bancroft 36 played mrs robinson graduate dustin hoffman 30 160 160 chances best actress winner portrayed prostitute nun mute 1 8 160 160 since orchestras started requiring musicians audition behind screens number women hired increased 20 160 160 40 married professional women feel husbands less work around house create 160 160 teenage girl increases moms weekly housework 15 hours leaves dads unchanged teenage boy adds 3 hours moms chores hour dads 160 160 heavyset women get fewer promotions face job discrimination heavyset men 160 160 models weigh 23 less average women 1986 8 less 160 160 statistics quoted press release dove product whose adcampaign uses fullfigured models use claimed reduce cellulite 160 160 asked pick partner relationship college men tend choose women subordinate jobs college women show preference onenight stand men 160 men160only160earn 34 many bas women colleges admit practicing affirmative action male applicants 160 160 13 female phds get tenure track baby ever 160 160 315 iraqs parliament women 15 us congress women 160 160 15 african nations higher percentage female legislators us 160 160 69160of men160believe america would better women occupied top political jobs 61 women agree 160 160 among republicans split 52 34 160 160 bush labor dept eliminated 25 publications pay inequity child care 160 160 after160a woman filed sexualharassment complaint merrill lynch superior circulated article titled stop whining warned160that constant complaining cost job 160 160 160 160 sources | 519 |
<p>The rise of the Tea Party has generated a powerful nostalgia among liberals for a generation of “sane” and “reasonable” Republicans. Once upon a time, so the tale goes, this breed of moderates was&#160;willing to compromise, to accommodate many of the basic reforms of the New Deal.</p>
<p>This nostalgic narrative of moderate Republicanism venerates a political moment exemplified by the presidency of Dwight Eisenhower, who claimed in an <a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/08/not-like-ike/?_r=0" type="external">oft-quoted letter</a> to his right-wing brother Edgar that total electoral annihilation would greet any Republican who “attempt[ed] to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and eliminate labor laws and farm programs.”</p>
<p>Eisenhower’s begrudging accommodation of the welfare state represented a tactical concession to specific elements of the political order brought into existence by the reforms of the New Deal. But another set of Republicans, who first emerged in the 1930s and 1940s at the state and local level across the urban-industrial Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast — the places where working people had mobilized most effectively under the auspices of the New Deal — went further. They made much larger, strategic concessions, as self-identified “liberal Republicans.”</p>
<p>These concessions stemmed from an understanding that mass mobilizations of working people had created a world in which the New Deal would be a permanent part of the political landscape. These liberal Republicans actually looked to the rhetoric and institutions of the New Deal itself to forge a new conservative politics able to quell and contain the ascendant constellation of the labor and civil rights movements.</p>
<p>In many ways, it was the defensive entrenchment of New Deal politics by such Republicans — even more than its proactive embrace by their liberal Democratic counterparts — that cemented the hegemony of mid-century liberalism. Above all, it was the political and economic empowerment of rank-and-file workers actively “making a New Deal” which gave rise to that regime’s remarkable ability to transform the political landscape.</p>
<p>Though designed to prioritize capitalist economic recovery, and riddled with discriminatory exclusions, New Deal legislation like the Wagner, Social Security, and Fair Labor Standards acts nonetheless forced Republicans and Democrats alike to come to terms with a more capacious notion of “civil rights” — one extending from labor’s right to organize to racial and gender equality.</p>
<p>The upsurge in labor militancy, not to mention the great migrations into American cities, sharply divided the Republican Party between those representing heavily rural districts and deeply anxious about the pace of social change, and those urban politicians desperate to remain relevant and electorally viable amid what <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1987/08/21/obituaries/samuel-lubell-is-dead-at-76-predicted-election-outcomes.html" type="external">Samuel Lubell</a> called “the revolt of the city.”</p>
<p>A significant segment of the Republican Party effectively “New Dealized” itself in an effort to adapt to these insurgencies. New Dealized or liberal Republicans not only recognized the legitimacy of unions; they also bowed to organized pressure to identify poverty, segregation, and job discrimination as social problems requiring government intervention. Much like their Progressive forbearers, New Dealized Republicans acknowledged that a mass production and mass consumption society could only be governed by an expansive state.</p>
<p>To be clear, those liberal Republicans who first came to national prominence in the 1940s and 1950s — such as New York Gov.&#160;and two-time presidential candidate Thomas Dewey, California Gov.&#160;and Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren, former auto executive and Michigan Gov.&#160;George Romney, and robber-baron-heir-cum-New York Gov.&#160;Nelson Rockefeller — all fought tooth and nail against the social-democratic possibilities that the New Deal had conjured. But they each made a major strategic concession by assuming its permanence as a political reality.</p>
<p>Institutions like the National Labor Relations Board or the Social Security Administration provided a foundation for social stability, but they needed to be depoliticized and insulated from bottom-up pressure in order to maintain the deeply entrenched hierarchies of American society. Thus, New Dealized Republicanism embodied the clash between reformers striving to reshape American society and conservatives struggling to slow the social transformations wrought by the Great Depression, World War&#160;II, and the deeply unequal distribution of postwar affluence.</p>
<p>Differentiating liberal Republicans from their conservative “Old Guard” rivals like <a href="http://www.britannica.com/biography/Robert-A-Taft" type="external">Robert Taft</a> of Ohio requires distinguishing between the realms of electoral politics and policymaking. At the crucial moment in the late 1940s when postwar American social democracy remained a (waning) possibility, Taft was a politician with presidential aspirations, and above all a politician who needed to be reelected as a US senator. He cosponsored postwar public housing legislation with liberal lion Robert Wagner of New York, and after tremendous union mobilization against his <a href="http://www.britannica.com/topic/Taft-Hartley-Act" type="external">signature labor reform law</a>, he tempered his position on organized labor and sought the votes of working-class Ohioans in his 1950 reelection campaign.</p>
<p>Unlike the troglodytic, union-hating New Jersey conservative Rep. <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/1990-10-20/news/mn-2240_1_engineer-trainee" type="external">Fred Hartley Jr</a>, Taft needed the votes of a cross-section of statewide voters, not just those of one conservative district. As Corey Robin recently (and rightly) <a href="" type="internal">argued</a>, Taft the anticommunist, antiunion, anti–New Dealer cannot be rehabilitated today as an icon of moderation; understanding him as the leading right-wing Republican means acknowledging the piecemeal tactical concessions he had to make in the circumstances of a still-powerful labor movement. Like Eisenhower (and later Nixon), Taft’s tactical compromises only acknowledged the immediate power and popularity of the New Deal order, not its long-term legitimacy.</p>
<p>Truly liberal Republicans registered their greatest impact at the state level by assuming the durability of the New Deal as a political order. Although the 1936 elections are remembered as the beginning of a federal New Deal-Democratic regime, only two years later Republicans staged a comeback that gathered steam state by state over the next two decades. By the 1944 election, twenty-six states covering 70&#160;percent of the country’s population claimed a Republican governor. In states like California, Michigan, and New York, New Dealized Republicans first won office by seizing popular elements of New Deal reform while sharply criticizing its class politics.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/05/us/harold-e-stassen-who-sought-gop-nomination-for-president-9-times-dies-at-93.html?pagewanted=all" type="external">Harold Stassen</a> of Minnesota and Earl Warren each won major office by resolutely championing the virtues of “free” collective bargaining to minimize supposedly coercive and unbalanced government involvement in labor relations. Warren staunchly opposed antiunion right-to-work laws, and even convinced Southern California’s fiercely conservative aircraft firms to back off a 1944 ballot initiative banning the closed shop, arguing that such efforts actually energized the labor movement.</p>
<p>George Romney, <a href="http://www.press.uillinois.edu/books/catalog/58bxy8hc9780252066269.html" type="external">who denounced</a> Walter Reuther as “the most dangerous man in Detroit” during the 1945–46 strike wave, also struggled to make a depoliticized unionism acceptable to the business community, weary after decades of shop floor conflict. As president of American Motors, he strove to make bargaining routine and called for capping the membership of unions at ten thousand. These efforts contributed to the ghettoization of unions into a private labor relations regime that reaffirmed capital’s tremendous class power over workers.</p>
<p>The struggle against industrial labor militancy led New Dealized Republicans to forge alliances with the more elite segments of the American working class. While the shop floors of massive manufacturing corporations like General Motors became sites for the CIO’s proletarian “culture of unity,” the socially homogenous craft economies of skilled, white, and male workers, concentrated in the AFL unions, represented a world far less interested in the egalitarian potential of the New Deal.</p>
<p>The cultural and ideological gulf dividing diverse and deskilled mass production workers from the “labor aristocracy” of typically “old-stock,” native-born men created a constituency anxious to maintain their privileged place in a highly stratified labor market and eager to cut deals. (The fact that AFL-affiliated unions in the craft union bastions of trucking, service work, and the building trades grew twice as fast as those of the CIO from 1937–1945 only made the craft unions more attractive.)</p>
<p>New Dealized Republicans saw in the craft unions a working-class fraction able to counter the influence of the left-leaning CIO and fragment the labor base of the vaunted New Deal coalition. As governor of wartime California, Earl Warren counted the Teamsters (then engaged in a fierce jurisdiction dispute with the Communist-linked International Longshore and Warehouse Union) as an important political ally. In Minnesota, Gov. Harold Stassen and the Republicans who followed him in the 1940s and ’50s appointed craft unionists to administer the labor mediation bureaucracy established to cripple Minneapolis’s powerful Trotskyist-led Teamsters local.</p>
<p>The New Dealized Republican position on job discrimination, the signal civil-rights issue of the day, similarly grew from an effort to contain and quell dissent. Unlike labor-based civil rights activists who called for the creation of an institutionally muscular agency in the mold of the National Labor Relations Board able to confront systematic racial discrimination, Republicans favored non-binding fact-finding and public education commissions that left enforcement up to the courts on a case-by-case basis.</p>
<p>In New York, Thomas Dewey hoisted the banner of the Party of Lincoln under intense pressure from New York City’s Black Popular Front and enacted a statewide fair employment practices commission (FEPC) premised on what <a href="http://www.polisci.northwestern.edu/people/core-faculty/anthony-chen.html" type="external">sociologist Anthony Chen</a> describes as “a color-blind, individualized model of social regulation.” In Michigan throughout the late 1940s and early 1950s, a minority bloc of liberal Republicans, seeking to outmaneuver conservative rivals, built cautious and tenuous alliances with labor-liberal Democrats close to the United Auto Workers in order to pass (without success) FEPC legislation.</p>
<p>Ultimately, in the 1960s, George Romney presided over Michigan’s first statewide FEPC, but as with the model supported by Dewey, it lacked sufficient enforcement powers, remained chronically understaffed and underfunded, and workers reported that filing a claim proved more trouble than it was worth.</p>
<p>Gov. Earl Warren toyed with civil rights, too, but largely as a way to undermine what he saw as “communist” subversion among racial minorities. Indeed, Warren’s best-known opinion for the Supreme Court, in <a href="https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/brown-v-board/" type="external">Brown v. Board of Education</a>, which sanctioned a halting and piecemeal process of school desegregation, functionally emerged as a symbolic gesture not designed to topple the racial hierarchies of American society.</p>
<p>By the late 1960s, though, New Dealized Republicans found their brand of moderation without a mass constituency. The Civil Rights Movement had become increasingly militant, the war in Vietnam had discredited bipartisan foreign policy internationalism, and much of the labor movement had become entrapped by just the kind of narrowly structured collective bargaining for which liberal Republicans had long fought. This opened the door for an emboldened Republican right wing armed with a forceful free market, anti-union, and anti-government line to dispense with moderation and accommodation.</p>
<p>Barry Goldwater’s ill-fated 1964 campaign and the election of Richard Nixon four years later dashed the presidential aspirations of Romney and Rockefeller Republicans, demonstrating the electoral vulnerability of the New Dealized Republican position. The “law and order” bluster of the Nixon campaign, for instance, pushed Rockefeller to order New York state troopers to open fire into the Attica prison yard and pass draconian drug laws. Meanwhile, Nixon’s effort to build a working-class “New Majority” had deep roots in much earlier strategies among New Dealized Republicans to break apart the nascent New Deal coalition.</p>
<p>But the ravages of capital flight continued to eat away at the unionized political economy of the Northeast and Midwest, destabilizing the electoral base not just of Democratic labor-liberalism but also of a liberal Republicanism predicated on political détente with an organized working class. The economic and political opportunities offered by Sun Belt conservatism finally enticed the Republican Party to abandon its support for the taxes, regulations, and labor relations of the old industrial core in the midst of the crises of the 1970s.</p>
<p>The lessons are two-fold. First, even as they came to grips with the new consensus behind state-sponsored social reform, the New Dealized Republicans proposed doing so precisely to restrain those forces — a powerful amalgam of working-class and civil-rights activism — that had been empowered by the egalitarian policies and ideologies of the New Deal.</p>
<p>Second, and most importantly: if there is anything to wax nostalgic about in mid-century politics, it isn’t the loss of Republicans whose conservatism was tempered by a bit of reason and compassion. It is the remarkable fact that the working class, when organized, has the power to reshape even the most reactionary quarters of American politics.</p> | true | 4 | rise tea party generated powerful nostalgia among liberals generation sane reasonable republicans upon time tale goes breed moderates was160willing compromise accommodate many basic reforms new deal nostalgic narrative moderate republicanism venerates political moment exemplified presidency dwight eisenhower claimed oftquoted letter rightwing brother edgar total electoral annihilation would greet republican attempted abolish social security unemployment insurance eliminate labor laws farm programs eisenhowers begrudging accommodation welfare state represented tactical concession specific elements political order brought existence reforms new deal another set republicans first emerged 1930s 1940s state local level across urbanindustrial northeast midwest west coast places working people mobilized effectively auspices new deal went made much larger strategic concessions selfidentified liberal republicans concessions stemmed understanding mass mobilizations working people created world new deal would permanent part political landscape liberal republicans actually looked rhetoric institutions new deal forge new conservative politics able quell contain ascendant constellation labor civil rights movements many ways defensive entrenchment new deal politics republicans even proactive embrace liberal democratic counterparts cemented hegemony midcentury liberalism political economic empowerment rankandfile workers actively making new deal gave rise regimes remarkable ability transform political landscape though designed prioritize capitalist economic recovery riddled discriminatory exclusions new deal legislation like wagner social security fair labor standards acts nonetheless forced republicans democrats alike come terms capacious notion civil rights one extending labors right organize racial gender equality upsurge labor militancy mention great migrations american cities sharply divided republican party representing heavily rural districts deeply anxious pace social change urban politicians desperate remain relevant electorally viable amid samuel lubell called revolt city significant segment republican party effectively new dealized effort adapt insurgencies new dealized liberal republicans recognized legitimacy unions also bowed organized pressure identify poverty segregation job discrimination social problems requiring government intervention much like progressive forbearers new dealized republicans acknowledged mass production mass consumption society could governed expansive state clear liberal republicans first came national prominence 1940s 1950s new york gov160and twotime presidential candidate thomas dewey california gov160and supreme court chief justice earl warren former auto executive michigan gov160george romney robberbaronheircumnew york gov160nelson rockefeller fought tooth nail socialdemocratic possibilities new deal conjured made major strategic concession assuming permanence political reality institutions like national labor relations board social security administration provided foundation social stability needed depoliticized insulated bottomup pressure order maintain deeply entrenched hierarchies american society thus new dealized republicanism embodied clash reformers striving reshape american society conservatives struggling slow social transformations wrought great depression world war160ii deeply unequal distribution postwar affluence differentiating liberal republicans conservative old guard rivals like robert taft ohio requires distinguishing realms electoral politics policymaking crucial moment late 1940s postwar american social democracy remained waning possibility taft politician presidential aspirations politician needed reelected us senator cosponsored postwar public housing legislation liberal lion robert wagner new york tremendous union mobilization signature labor reform law tempered position organized labor sought votes workingclass ohioans 1950 reelection campaign unlike troglodytic unionhating new jersey conservative rep fred hartley jr taft needed votes crosssection statewide voters one conservative district corey robin recently rightly argued taft anticommunist antiunion antinew dealer rehabilitated today icon moderation understanding leading rightwing republican means acknowledging piecemeal tactical concessions make circumstances stillpowerful labor movement like eisenhower later nixon tafts tactical compromises acknowledged immediate power popularity new deal order longterm legitimacy truly liberal republicans registered greatest impact state level assuming durability new deal political order although 1936 elections remembered beginning federal new dealdemocratic regime two years later republicans staged comeback gathered steam state state next two decades 1944 election twentysix states covering 70160percent countrys population claimed republican governor states like california michigan new york new dealized republicans first office seizing popular elements new deal reform sharply criticizing class politics harold stassen minnesota earl warren major office resolutely championing virtues free collective bargaining minimize supposedly coercive unbalanced government involvement labor relations warren staunchly opposed antiunion righttowork laws even convinced southern californias fiercely conservative aircraft firms back 1944 ballot initiative banning closed shop arguing efforts actually energized labor movement george romney denounced walter reuther dangerous man detroit 194546 strike wave also struggled make depoliticized unionism acceptable business community weary decades shop floor conflict president american motors strove make bargaining routine called capping membership unions ten thousand efforts contributed ghettoization unions private labor relations regime reaffirmed capitals tremendous class power workers struggle industrial labor militancy led new dealized republicans forge alliances elite segments american working class shop floors massive manufacturing corporations like general motors became sites cios proletarian culture unity socially homogenous craft economies skilled white male workers concentrated afl unions represented world far less interested egalitarian potential new deal cultural ideological gulf dividing diverse deskilled mass production workers labor aristocracy typically oldstock nativeborn men created constituency anxious maintain privileged place highly stratified labor market eager cut deals fact aflaffiliated unions craft union bastions trucking service work building trades grew twice fast cio 19371945 made craft unions attractive new dealized republicans saw craft unions workingclass fraction able counter influence leftleaning cio fragment labor base vaunted new deal coalition governor wartime california earl warren counted teamsters engaged fierce jurisdiction dispute communistlinked international longshore warehouse union important political ally minnesota gov harold stassen republicans followed 1940s 50s appointed craft unionists administer labor mediation bureaucracy established cripple minneapoliss powerful trotskyistled teamsters local new dealized republican position job discrimination signal civilrights issue day similarly grew effort contain quell dissent unlike laborbased civil rights activists called creation institutionally muscular agency mold national labor relations board able confront systematic racial discrimination republicans favored nonbinding factfinding public education commissions left enforcement courts casebycase basis new york thomas dewey hoisted banner party lincoln intense pressure new york citys black popular front enacted statewide fair employment practices commission fepc premised sociologist anthony chen describes colorblind individualized model social regulation michigan throughout late 1940s early 1950s minority bloc liberal republicans seeking outmaneuver conservative rivals built cautious tenuous alliances laborliberal democrats close united auto workers order pass without success fepc legislation ultimately 1960s george romney presided michigans first statewide fepc model supported dewey lacked sufficient enforcement powers remained chronically understaffed underfunded workers reported filing claim proved trouble worth gov earl warren toyed civil rights largely way undermine saw communist subversion among racial minorities indeed warrens bestknown opinion supreme court brown v board education sanctioned halting piecemeal process school desegregation functionally emerged symbolic gesture designed topple racial hierarchies american society late 1960s though new dealized republicans found brand moderation without mass constituency civil rights movement become increasingly militant war vietnam discredited bipartisan foreign policy internationalism much labor movement become entrapped kind narrowly structured collective bargaining liberal republicans long fought opened door emboldened republican right wing armed forceful free market antiunion antigovernment line dispense moderation accommodation barry goldwaters illfated 1964 campaign election richard nixon four years later dashed presidential aspirations romney rockefeller republicans demonstrating electoral vulnerability new dealized republican position law order bluster nixon campaign instance pushed rockefeller order new york state troopers open fire attica prison yard pass draconian drug laws meanwhile nixons effort build workingclass new majority deep roots much earlier strategies among new dealized republicans break apart nascent new deal coalition ravages capital flight continued eat away unionized political economy northeast midwest destabilizing electoral base democratic laborliberalism also liberal republicanism predicated political détente organized working class economic political opportunities offered sun belt conservatism finally enticed republican party abandon support taxes regulations labor relations old industrial core midst crises 1970s lessons twofold first even came grips new consensus behind statesponsored social reform new dealized republicans proposed precisely restrain forces powerful amalgam workingclass civilrights activism empowered egalitarian policies ideologies new deal second importantly anything wax nostalgic midcentury politics isnt loss republicans whose conservatism tempered bit reason compassion remarkable fact working class organized power reshape even reactionary quarters american politics | 1,267 |
<p>When my life overwhelms me - which, as an introverted entrepreneur and mother, is often - I try to escape to the one place that I know no one will speak to me, The Korean Day Spa. I spend the entire day there, soaking, steaming, sweating, and watching the glorious variety of women move through this sacred space as the holy bodies that they are. Everyone is naked, as mandated by the spa itself. They come in all shapes, sizes, colors, styles, and when surrounded by them I truly feel as if I am part of something, some magic thing that needs no words or creed. The mere fact of our nipples and wrinkles and bulges, and the fact that we all look ridiculously bad in the little shower caps the spa makes us wear, is enough to refill my soul. If I were the platitude sort, some part of me would probably start singing, "I am woman, hear me roar," but the rest of me would be all like "shut up, bitch," and I would return to the silence that I so crave.</p>
<p>The silence is the point. Specifically, the silent people watching. There is one woman that I can't take my eyes off of, though as manners dictate, I try - not least because eye-contact might look like an invitation to speak, and I do not want to speak to anyone. She is so old that any trace of race has all but disappeared, though she appears faded in a way that implies something other than Irish. Her thick, white hair is just shy of unruly and the wrinkles around her eyes create a deep dark well that you can't help but peer into in the hopes of discovering a private truth. If I am well past "a certain age," this woman is ancient.&#160; And she is mind-bogglingly beautiful. I envy her far more than I do the handful of young women whose tits still point upwards, as if to remind them "the sky's the limit." (Mine, on the other hand, point down now, as if to remind me, "that's where the babies came out.")</p>
<p>I am in the hot tub, alone with the ancient woman. We make eye contact. I avoid the urge to run. She speaks. I avoid the urge to shut down completely, and instead I say "of course," sweetly, when she asks if she can ask me a question.</p>
<p>"Why do women remove their pubic hair?"</p>
<p>This is such a loaded question these days. And admittedly, as a woman in my 40's, I am older than most of the people who seemed to have embraced the Brazilian. In recent months, prominent sex-scholars have gone so far as to say that removing all of your pubic hair promotes pedophilia, infantilizes women and that the men who prefer it do so because they either like little girls or want women to be powerless.&#160; Such talk - and it is rampant - infuriates me. Besides being completely wrong, it assumes that women are somehow powerless to make these choices for themselves.</p>
<p>I don't know what to say to her. So I just tell her the simple truth.&#160; "I do it because I want to."</p>
<p>"Oh, dear, I assumed that, but I am wondering why you want to." There is not a hint of judgment in her voice.</p>
<p>I will not have to explain to her that pedophilia is a serious mental disorder, an actual pathology, not something that can be caught when the winds of social trends blow across you, like a cold. I don't think I have to explain to her that a woman can do whatever she wants with her body. My decision to remove the pubic hair on my body is not a statement that pubic hair is wrong, bad, dirty or gross in general, just that I don't like it. Which has no deeper meaning, or impact on anyone else. If you like pubic hair, you should have it and celebrate it. If you don't, get rid of it. It's as simple as that.</p>
<p>Still trying to keep it simple, I say, "It feels better to me." And with the innocence that belongs only to the young and the elderly, she asks, "What feels better?"</p>
<p>"Sex. Sex feels better to me when I have no pubic hair." She smiles. I imagine that she is running through years of memory-movies, of great sex she had when she was younger.</p>
<p>She asked how and why. I told her. I started, as I always do, with a simple analogy. Imagine someone kissing you on the top of your head. Now imagine them kissing you on your lips. Which one feels better?&#160; She smiled. I believe she really was imagining it. She utters a confirming "Oh, yes."</p>
<p>That is most of why I do it. Your vulva has a bajillion nerve endings, right there, under the hair. And they feel really good when touched. (Or breathed on, or licked, or spanked or?..) As we have learned more about genital anatomy, we have learned that the clitoris is not just a little button, but rather a sort of butterfly shaped collection of nerves spreading out from what is like a little penis, shaft and all. That button is just the tip of the ice berg. I am greedy, I want to feel as much as I can feel. I want to feel not just the pressure, but the tingling of breath, the subtle evaporation as kisses dry. I want to feel it all. Hair just gets in the way, in my book.</p>
<p>There is, for me, an aesthetic component too. I never liked the hair. I was sad when it grew in, but I never knew I could shave it. It just wasn't done, then. Just a few years ago, when my daughter and I were doing the mother-daughter sex-ed class sponsored by the local Children's Hospital, the instructor cheerfully told girls that they could shave their legs and the hair that comes out from your bathing suit, but that "you don't" shave any more than that.&#160; My daughter looked at me and raised an eyebrow as if to say, "Are you going to correct her?" I did.</p>
<p>I was well into my 30's before I shaved off all of my pubic hair. I did it as a surprise for my then-husband, who had asked me to several times, but I kept thinking it was "wrong" somehow. But when I did, it became the best gift I ever gave myself. It was the first time in my adult life that I actually saw all of my vulva, my clitoris, every fleshy fold. I loved how it looked. I loved how connected I felt to my own body. And oh sweet mother-of-all-that-tingles, I loved how it felt.&#160;&#160; I haven't had hair there since.</p>
<p>I lasered it off. Done. Gone. Ain't coming back.</p>
<p>I told her all of this.&#160; She smiled. Perhaps I'm a bit touchy, I was waiting to get lectured about how I was betraying women, or something.&#160; But, no. She just looked at me, widened the pools of her eyes to show me even more generosity and wisdom than I had seen before, and said, "Well, I'm going to have to try that."</p>
<p>I want to be her when I grow up.</p>
<p>This piece was originally published at <a href="https://goodvibesblog.com/the-bare-truth-why-i-dont-have-pubic-hair/" type="external">GoodVibesBlog.com</a>.</p> | true | 4 | life overwhelms introverted entrepreneur mother often try escape one place know one speak korean day spa spend entire day soaking steaming sweating watching glorious variety women move sacred space holy bodies everyone naked mandated spa come shapes sizes colors styles surrounded truly feel part something magic thing needs words creed mere fact nipples wrinkles bulges fact look ridiculously bad little shower caps spa makes us wear enough refill soul platitude sort part would probably start singing woman hear roar rest would like shut bitch would return silence crave silence point specifically silent people watching one woman cant take eyes though manners dictate try least eyecontact might look like invitation speak want speak anyone old trace race disappeared though appears faded way implies something irish thick white hair shy unruly wrinkles around eyes create deep dark well cant help peer hopes discovering private truth well past certain age woman ancient160 mindbogglingly beautiful envy far handful young women whose tits still point upwards remind skys limit mine hand point remind thats babies came hot tub alone ancient woman make eye contact avoid urge run speaks avoid urge shut completely instead say course sweetly asks ask question women remove pubic hair loaded question days admittedly woman 40s older people seemed embraced brazilian recent months prominent sexscholars gone far say removing pubic hair promotes pedophilia infantilizes women men prefer either like little girls want women powerless160 talk rampant infuriates besides completely wrong assumes women somehow powerless make choices dont know say tell simple truth160 want oh dear assumed wondering want hint judgment voice explain pedophilia serious mental disorder actual pathology something caught winds social trends blow across like cold dont think explain woman whatever wants body decision remove pubic hair body statement pubic hair wrong bad dirty gross general dont like deeper meaning impact anyone else like pubic hair celebrate dont get rid simple still trying keep simple say feels better innocence belongs young elderly asks feels better sex sex feels better pubic hair smiles imagine running years memorymovies great sex younger asked told started always simple analogy imagine someone kissing top head imagine kissing lips one feels better160 smiled believe really imagining utters confirming oh yes vulva bajillion nerve endings right hair feel really good touched breathed licked spanked learned genital anatomy learned clitoris little button rather sort butterfly shaped collection nerves spreading like little penis shaft button tip ice berg greedy want feel much feel want feel pressure tingling breath subtle evaporation kisses dry want feel hair gets way book aesthetic component never liked hair sad grew never knew could shave wasnt done years ago daughter motherdaughter sexed class sponsored local childrens hospital instructor cheerfully told girls could shave legs hair comes bathing suit dont shave that160 daughter looked raised eyebrow say going correct well 30s shaved pubic hair surprise thenhusband asked several times kept thinking wrong somehow became best gift ever gave first time adult life actually saw vulva clitoris every fleshy fold loved looked loved connected felt body oh sweet motherofallthattingles loved felt160160 havent hair since lasered done gone aint coming back told this160 smiled perhaps im bit touchy waiting get lectured betraying women something160 looked widened pools eyes show even generosity wisdom seen said well im going try want grow piece originally published goodvibesblogcom | 545 |
<p>Like some other CounterPunchers I am not at all shocked by Pat Robertson’s call for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. I’m merely intrigued to find that the reverend butthead’s contumely has reached such proportions that he actually believes he can sermonize such fascist shit without taking any consequences. His initial response to the outcry, issued from the 700 Club pulpit, was to depict himself as a victim. He blamed AP for misrepresenting his comments (“But that happens all the time”) and insisted that his fatwa to “take out” the twice-elected Chavez could mean mere kidnapping. Presumably this would be the more Christian option. But his initial unambiguous statement was rebroadcast endlessly. “If he thinks we’re trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it.” Confronted with the proof, he had to retract, although in a written statement to the press, not in a homily to his flock.</p>
<p>I agree with those who find in this episode excellent exposure of the murderous mentality pervading the power elite, historically complicit in the offings of Lumumba, Diem, Allende, and many other foreign leaders. (This elite includes the clerical component sprinkling holy water on homicide.) Some good may come out of it, including perhaps a questioning of Robertson’s judgment within his own congregation, which must include some who take the sixth commandment seriously.</p>
<p>I’m intrigued, too, by the specific rationale Mullah Pat presents for taking out the populist Venezuelan leader: “He has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and he’s going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent.” The grammar is odd, and if the sentence is interpreted literally suggests that the destruction of the Venezuelan economy somehow abets the two (highly contradictory) processes of communist and Muslim advances in South America. That’s just stupid on the face of it. For one thing, the Venezuela GDP grew by 17% in 2004, as oil revenues were used to improve the lot of the nation’s poor. But facts don’t matter to Robertson and his political allies. The point is to link several discrete phenomena either opposed to corporate America or frightening to Bush’s fundamentalist base in order to build a case for an attack on yet another country. Chavez = threats to the U.S. oil supply = communist “infiltration” = Muslim extremism.</p>
<p>Administration officials (John Bolton conspicuous among them) have been red-baiting Chavez for a long time, noting validly enough that he has a close relationship with Fidel Castro and has traded cheap oil for the nefarious commodity of cheap medical care provided by Cuban or Cuban-trained physicians to Venezuela’s poor. (Wasn’t it Bolton who insisted in May 2002 that Cuba’s advanced biotech- and genetic-engineering programs, which provide medicines and vaccines at small cost to many Third World countries, are threatening to the U.S. because of their “dual-use” potential for “offensive biological warfare”?) It’s not surprising that Robertson would damn Chavez for his links to Cuba, a country that Washington officially defines as “terrorist,” or raise the specter of an angry caudillo denying Americans the oil God buried in those Venezuelan oilfields for Yankee use. It’s the “Muslim extremism” part that just slightly raises my eyebrows.</p>
<p>Venezuela, 96% Catholic, 2% Protestant, has few Muslims to speak of. But since late 2003, the mainstream press has been reporting that U.S. intelligence has been investigating links between Caracas and “Islamic terrorist networks” including “al-Qaeda suicide bombers.” It appears that the key journalist in such reportage is Martin Arostegui, a free-lance writer, author of the poorly-reviewed book <a href="" type="internal">Twilight Warriors: Inside the World’s Special Forces</a>, and contributor to the National Review, Washington Times and its weekly Insight Magazine. Some of his pieces have been reprinted in the Economist and the Sunday Telegraph. Even among his conservative colleagues, he has a reputation of playing fast and loose with the facts, whether they concern Cuba’s alleged bioweapons program, the La Penca bombing in Nicaragua in 1984, or a meeting between Mohammed Atta and Cuban undercover agents in the U.S. in 2001. He’s plainly a writer on a mission, with a clear project: to link both Venezuela and Cuba to 9-11 and Islamist terrorism and thereby augment traditional hostility to the Latin American left with post-9-11 fear of Arabs.</p>
<p>Google-searching “Martin Arostegui,” I find an exciting Insight piece dated November 9, 2001: “Fidel May Be Part of Terror Campaign.” Following the arrest of Defense Intelligence Agency employee Ana Belen Montes on the charge of spying for Cuba, the author reports that it “raises serious questions about a possible Cuban connection with the international terrorist conspiracy targeting the United States.” He refers to “high-level officials of Cuba’s biological-warfare program who allegedly spoke with Atta at a Miami motel.” (Alleged by whom?) “Exchanges between bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network and Cuban intelligence also could involve the provision of weaponized biological strains produced by Cuba’s extensive chemical/biological warfare facilities <a href="" type="internal">exposed by Insight three years ago</a>.”</p>
<p>Exposed by whom? <a href="http://www.nocastro.com/Terrorism/castro_bio.htm" type="external">Why, Arostegui!</a></p>
<p>In several articles he has tried to present “evidence pointing to Castro’s involvement with the introduction of West Nile virus into the U.S. via migratory birds.” In a <a href="" type="internal">September 2002</a> piece accusing Castro of using biochemical weapons in Angola, he also alludes facily to Cuba’s “possible involvement in the Sept. 11 attacks.”</p>
<p>In what looks like a piece of pure disinformation, a UPI “analysis” by Arostegui published Sept. 1, 2003 noted that Venezuelan citizen Hakim Mamad Al Diab Fatah was deported from the U.S. “on suspicion of involvement in the 9-11 attacks” having attended the same New Jersey flight school as the attackers. The U.S. legal attaché in Caracas asked the Venezuelan government to question Fatah upon his arrival, but Caracas says it has no record of the man reentering the country. Arostegui reports that a military officer involved in plotting against Chavez has alleged that the security forces met Fatah and took him to a safe house, and concludes that “the Fatah mystery appears to fall into a developing pattern of Venezuelan state involvement with terrorism.”</p>
<p>In February 2003, according to Arostegui, Arab-Venezuelan Rahaman Hazil Mohammed Alan was arrested at London’s Gatwick Airport having smuggled aboard a hand grenade with a serial number that “corresponds to weapons stocks of the Caracas based 3rd army Division.”</p>
<p>In May 2005 a British court convicted Alan of possession of a high explosive hand grenade with intent to endanger life under the Explosives Act and the Aviation Act. He will be deported back to Venezuela after serving his sentence. The <a href="" type="internal">judge determined</a>that Alan was not acting as a terrorist, but his case and that of Fatah seem to be the best that those inclined to posit evidence for “state involvement with terrorism” can do.</p>
<p>In the UPI “analysis,” Arostegui warns that, “Hundreds and possibly thousands of agents from rogue Arab nations are working hard to help President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela take control of South America’s largest oil industry and create al-Qaeda-friendly terrorist bases just two hours’ flying time from Miami.” He suggests that the “half-million strong Venezuelan Arab community” in Venezuela harbors terrorists whom the Chavez regime consciously protects.</p>
<p>Now, this is a curious figure. The total population of Venezuela as of July 2005 was, according to the CIA Factbook, about 25,375,000. The same source specifies that 98% of Venezuelans are Catholic or Protestant Christians, leaving 2% “other.” Other sources give a Jewish population of 35,000, a Buddhist population of 25,000. This leaves half a million who are neither Christians, Jews, nor Buddhists. But the most substantial listing of Venezuelan religious population I’ve found doesn’t give <a href="http://www.nationmaster.com/country/ve/Religion" type="external">any information on Islam</a> at all, and a Muslim site gives the figure of only <a href="http://www.answers.com/topic/islam-by-country" type="external">126,876 believers</a> in Venezuela. I suppose there might be a large community of Arab Christian immigrants, but looks to me like Arostegui has simply done some math, found that the missing two percent amount to 507,000, and finds therein that “half-million strong” and threatening “Venezuelan Arab community” providing (in his fevered imagination) haven to the Muslim rogue-state agents.</p>
<p>Such shoddy, fear-mongering “journalism,” vented first through the right-wing press, acquires a home in UPI, and then official reports (abetted, I’ll suggest, by some neocon interventions). Thus the Fatah story was mentioned in a 2003 Stratfor report, “ <a href="" type="internal">Latin America: A Safe Haven for Militants?</a>” with only the UPI article for documentation. John Bolton in his relentless campaign against Venezuela has clearly drawn upon Arotegui’s writings, and the Voice of America has validated him as an “expert” on terrorism. <a href="" type="internal">Interviewed by VOA</a> after the March 2004 terrorist attacks in Madrid and the decision by the newly elected Spanish government to withdraw Spain’s troops from Iraq, he declared the latter “an extraordinary coup for al-Qaida and an extraordinary victory for terrorism in general.”</p>
<p>In another Washington Times article (June 2005) Arostegui blames Chavez for encouraging Bolivia’s Movement to Socialism Party, to which he attributes “an extremist anti-American agenda.” I’d just bet you he’s Pat Robertson’s prime source for information on Venezuela. I’d further bet that the Christian fascist leader actually has faith in the disinfo he peddles. In Bolton’s case, I’d bet he knows that it’s all lies, but the neocons believe in peddling “noble lies” to attain heroic ends.</p>
<p>The neocons (generally irreligious Machiavellians who fancy themselves “the wise”) in accordance with Leo Strauss’s political philosophy make use of “gentlemen” to obtain their ends. The latter, as Strauss scholar and critic Shadia Drury puts it “are lovers of honor and glory. They are the most ingratiating towards the conventions of their society ­ that is, the illusions of the cave [in Plato’s Republic]. They are true believers in God, honor, and moral imperatives.”</p>
<p>The “wise” have systematically disseminated lies. They’ve planned things out carefully. Their philosophy should be very clear by now. If the CIA and DIA aren’t telling you the “facts” you need to take action, you sideline them, disparage them, create an alternative source of information (the Office of Special Plans, which Congress still won’t investigate). In the case of Iraq, you feed that Office with useful lies obtained through Ahmad Chalabi and his cronies, delivered to the gullible public through friendly press operatives like Judith Miller. Midway between yourselves, and the masses for whom you feel only contempt, are “gentlemen” like the idiot-president whose vanity and fundamentalist religiosity you methodically exploit and Rev. Robertson whose televangelism wins over the wonderfully ignorant impressionable heartland.</p>
<p>It makes good sense to use a “journalist” like Arostegui to vilify Venezuela, and to have Robertson test the waters on this issue of assassinating Chavez. Good sense, that is, if you’re on board the program, and want to bring down an elected government and re-secure U.S. hegemony throughout an increasingly anti-imperialist Latin America. Robertson’s being depicted as a kook, even by some equally crazy pro-war Bushite commentators, because he specifically advocated assassination in violation of U.S. law. But he’s not the author of the accusations he airs to his parishioners, in support of his homicidal fatwa. Those pressing for action on Venezuela are those who pressed for action against Iraq, and who want to attack Iran—especially in the Defense Department, and the Vice President’s Office. While distancing themselves slightly (conveying no sense of real moral opprobrium) from the bloodthirsty preacherman, they must rejoice that even as the people turn against Bush and his wars, some powerful and trusted opinion-makers still evince support for the full gamut of dark arts options to deal with America’s (hence God’s) enemies.</p>
<p>GARY LEUPP is Professor of History at Tufts University, and Adjunct Professor of Comparative Religion. He is the author of <a href="" type="internal">Servants, Shophands and Laborers in in the Cities of Tokugawa Japan</a>; <a href="" type="internal">Male Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan</a>; and <a href="" type="internal">Interracial Intimacy in Japan: Western Men and Japanese Women, 1543-1900</a>. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch’s merciless chronicle of the wars on Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, <a href="http://www.easycarts.net/ecarts/CounterPunch/CP_Books.html" type="external">Imperial Crusades</a>.</p>
<p>He can be reached at: <a href="mailto:gleupp@granite.tufts.edu" type="external">gleupp@granite.tufts.edu</a></p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | like counterpunchers shocked pat robertsons call assassination venezuelan president hugo chavez im merely intrigued find reverend buttheads contumely reached proportions actually believes sermonize fascist shit without taking consequences initial response outcry issued 700 club pulpit depict victim blamed ap misrepresenting comments happens time insisted fatwa take twiceelected chavez could mean mere kidnapping presumably would christian option initial unambiguous statement rebroadcast endlessly thinks trying assassinate think really ought go ahead confronted proof retract although written statement press homily flock agree find episode excellent exposure murderous mentality pervading power elite historically complicit offings lumumba diem allende many foreign leaders elite includes clerical component sprinkling holy water homicide good may come including perhaps questioning robertsons judgment within congregation must include take sixth commandment seriously im intrigued specific rationale mullah pat presents taking populist venezuelan leader destroyed venezuelan economy hes going make launching pad communist infiltration muslim extremism continent grammar odd sentence interpreted literally suggests destruction venezuelan economy somehow abets two highly contradictory processes communist muslim advances south america thats stupid face one thing venezuela gdp grew 17 2004 oil revenues used improve lot nations poor facts dont matter robertson political allies point link several discrete phenomena either opposed corporate america frightening bushs fundamentalist base order build case attack yet another country chavez threats us oil supply communist infiltration muslim extremism administration officials john bolton conspicuous among redbaiting chavez long time noting validly enough close relationship fidel castro traded cheap oil nefarious commodity cheap medical care provided cuban cubantrained physicians venezuelas poor wasnt bolton insisted may 2002 cubas advanced biotech geneticengineering programs provide medicines vaccines small cost many third world countries threatening us dualuse potential offensive biological warfare surprising robertson would damn chavez links cuba country washington officially defines terrorist raise specter angry caudillo denying americans oil god buried venezuelan oilfields yankee use muslim extremism part slightly raises eyebrows venezuela 96 catholic 2 protestant muslims speak since late 2003 mainstream press reporting us intelligence investigating links caracas islamic terrorist networks including alqaeda suicide bombers appears key journalist reportage martin arostegui freelance writer author poorlyreviewed book twilight warriors inside worlds special forces contributor national review washington times weekly insight magazine pieces reprinted economist sunday telegraph even among conservative colleagues reputation playing fast loose facts whether concern cubas alleged bioweapons program la penca bombing nicaragua 1984 meeting mohammed atta cuban undercover agents us 2001 hes plainly writer mission clear project link venezuela cuba 911 islamist terrorism thereby augment traditional hostility latin american left post911 fear arabs googlesearching martin arostegui find exciting insight piece dated november 9 2001 fidel may part terror campaign following arrest defense intelligence agency employee ana belen montes charge spying cuba author reports raises serious questions possible cuban connection international terrorist conspiracy targeting united states refers highlevel officials cubas biologicalwarfare program allegedly spoke atta miami motel alleged exchanges bin ladens alqaeda network cuban intelligence also could involve provision weaponized biological strains produced cubas extensive chemicalbiological warfare facilities exposed insight three years ago exposed arostegui several articles tried present evidence pointing castros involvement introduction west nile virus us via migratory birds september 2002 piece accusing castro using biochemical weapons angola also alludes facily cubas possible involvement sept 11 attacks looks like piece pure disinformation upi analysis arostegui published sept 1 2003 noted venezuelan citizen hakim mamad al diab fatah deported us suspicion involvement 911 attacks attended new jersey flight school attackers us legal attaché caracas asked venezuelan government question fatah upon arrival caracas says record man reentering country arostegui reports military officer involved plotting chavez alleged security forces met fatah took safe house concludes fatah mystery appears fall developing pattern venezuelan state involvement terrorism february 2003 according arostegui arabvenezuelan rahaman hazil mohammed alan arrested londons gatwick airport smuggled aboard hand grenade serial number corresponds weapons stocks caracas based 3rd army division may 2005 british court convicted alan possession high explosive hand grenade intent endanger life explosives act aviation act deported back venezuela serving sentence judge determinedthat alan acting terrorist case fatah seem best inclined posit evidence state involvement terrorism upi analysis arostegui warns hundreds possibly thousands agents rogue arab nations working hard help president hugo chavez venezuela take control south americas largest oil industry create alqaedafriendly terrorist bases two hours flying time miami suggests halfmillion strong venezuelan arab community venezuela harbors terrorists chavez regime consciously protects curious figure total population venezuela july 2005 according cia factbook 25375000 source specifies 98 venezuelans catholic protestant christians leaving 2 sources give jewish population 35000 buddhist population 25000 leaves half million neither christians jews buddhists substantial listing venezuelan religious population ive found doesnt give information islam muslim site gives figure 126876 believers venezuela suppose might large community arab christian immigrants looks like arostegui simply done math found missing two percent amount 507000 finds therein halfmillion strong threatening venezuelan arab community providing fevered imagination muslim roguestate agents shoddy fearmongering journalism vented first rightwing press acquires home upi official reports abetted ill suggest neocon interventions thus fatah story mentioned 2003 stratfor report latin america safe militants upi article documentation john bolton relentless campaign venezuela clearly drawn upon aroteguis writings voice america validated expert terrorism interviewed voa march 2004 terrorist attacks madrid decision newly elected spanish government withdraw spains troops iraq declared latter extraordinary coup alqaida extraordinary victory terrorism general another washington times article june 2005 arostegui blames chavez encouraging bolivias movement socialism party attributes extremist antiamerican agenda id bet hes pat robertsons prime source information venezuela id bet christian fascist leader actually faith disinfo peddles boltons case id bet knows lies neocons believe peddling noble lies attain heroic ends neocons generally irreligious machiavellians fancy wise accordance leo strausss political philosophy make use gentlemen obtain ends latter strauss scholar critic shadia drury puts lovers honor glory ingratiating towards conventions society illusions cave platos republic true believers god honor moral imperatives wise systematically disseminated lies theyve planned things carefully philosophy clear cia dia arent telling facts need take action sideline disparage create alternative source information office special plans congress still wont investigate case iraq feed office useful lies obtained ahmad chalabi cronies delivered gullible public friendly press operatives like judith miller midway masses feel contempt gentlemen like idiotpresident whose vanity fundamentalist religiosity methodically exploit rev robertson whose televangelism wins wonderfully ignorant impressionable heartland makes good sense use journalist like arostegui vilify venezuela robertson test waters issue assassinating chavez good sense youre board program want bring elected government resecure us hegemony throughout increasingly antiimperialist latin america robertsons depicted kook even equally crazy prowar bushite commentators specifically advocated assassination violation us law hes author accusations airs parishioners support homicidal fatwa pressing action venezuela pressed action iraq want attack iranespecially defense department vice presidents office distancing slightly conveying sense real moral opprobrium bloodthirsty preacherman must rejoice even people turn bush wars powerful trusted opinionmakers still evince support full gamut dark arts options deal americas hence gods enemies gary leupp professor history tufts university adjunct professor comparative religion author servants shophands laborers cities tokugawa japan male colors construction homosexuality tokugawa japan interracial intimacy japan western men japanese women 15431900 also contributor counterpunchs merciless chronicle wars iraq afghanistan yugoslavia imperial crusades reached gleuppgranitetuftsedu 160 160 | 1,178 |
<p>For the last 50 years, the state of South Carolina has flown the Confederate flag above the grounds of the state capitol in Columbia, a noxious emblem of the state government’s unremitting animus toward civil rights laws and desegregation.</p>
<p>The flag was hoisted in 1962 as a show of defiance against the Supreme Court and the Civil Rights movement. It soon became a war banner for the segregationist minions marshaled behind Strom Thurmond’s Southern Manifesto. The flag has remained a shameful glorification of the ante-bellum, slave-holding South and a daily blight for South Carolina’s black population ever since.</p>
<p>Recall that South Carolina was not only the ignition point for the Civil War, but the Wal-Mart of the slave trade. Many of the black Africans brought to South Carolina as slaves for the plantation owners were sent into the swampy rice fields, which proved to be malarial death camps, where people perished in nearly unimaginable numbers. Nearly two-thirds of the black children in the rice plantations perished before reaching the age of sixteen.</p>
<p>Black Africans who weren’t forced into the rice and cotton fields of South Carolina (the Carolina planters exhibited a peculiar preference for blacks from Senegambia and present-day Ghana) were sold in Charleston’s slave market to plantation owners from across the South. These brokers of human beings ended up making millions and enjoying seats as legislators in the statehouse, where they drafted laws to protect their “property.” When people talk about the flag as a proud symbol of the state’s heritage that’s the inescapable and horrific background.</p>
<p>For the past couple of years, the NAACP and local civic rights organizers, including CounterPunch writer Kevin Alexander Gray ( <a href="scflag.html" type="external">click here to read Gray’s bracing history of the battle over the flag</a>), have led a campaign to get the flag removed from atop the capitol building and entombed in a display case in a nearby museum, which houses artifacts from what is quaintly referred to in Carolina as “the war between the states”.</p>
<p>When first broached, the demand was met with derision by state leaders and threats of violence from local yahoos. Then the civil rights groups launched a nationwide tourism boycott of the South Carolina. This was no minor threat. Since the NAFTA-driven collapse of the garment industry, tourism (which consists largely of the ceaseless promotion of the Southern plantation lifestyle) has become the mainstay of the state’s frail economy. Soon millions were being lost and businesses (which once not so long ago proudly catered only to whites by law and now do so largely based on pricing) started carping to legislators about what could be done to deal with the noisome boycott.</p>
<p>Ultimately, a so-called compromise plan was brokered by Democrats in the state legislature and the flag migrated from atop the capitol dome to a prominent flagpole on the statehouse grounds, where it flies above statues of Confederate soldiers and generals and other monuments to slavery and the enforcers of racial segregation. Naturally, this satisfied few in the civil rights community and the NAACP boycott remains in place.</p>
<p>Last week, black activist and brick mason Emmett Rufus Eddy decided that he had had enough of this ongoing insult and did something about it. Eddy had tried to pull the flag down on three previous occasions. Even though a restraining order barred him from stepping foot on the grounds of the Statehouse, this time Eddy would succeed.</p>
<p>Assuming the guise of his nom de guerre, the Reverend E. Slave, Eddy donned a black Santa suit, carried a ladder bearing the names black rights organizers to the South Carolina State House, set it up next to the flagpole, climbed to the top of the flagpole, cut down the Confederate flag, shouted “this is for the children,” and lit it on fire, as state police heckled him from below and tried to douse him with pepper spray.</p>
<p>Apparently, the study of physics and Newton’s law of gravity are not requirements at the police academy in Columbia and the cops were duly surprised when the pepper spray failed to incapacitate the Reverend Slave and instead blew back into the eyes of the police officers. The officers later filed injury claims.</p>
<p>Eddy clung to the pole, telling his pursuers: “Anybody down there can promise me that this flag will not go back up until my trial?” Eddy asked. “Anybody can make that promise? Make that promise and I’ll come down.”</p>
<p>In South Carolina, old times are not forgotten. The local paper reported the comments of a passing motorist as police tried to pull Eddy down: “String him up right there.” [For the record, there were at least 145 lynchings of blacks by white mobs (ie, homegrown terrorism) in South Carolina from 1882 to 1930, according to the excellent <a href="" type="internal">A Festival of Violence: An Analysis of Southern Lynchings</a> by Stewart E. Tolnay and E.M. Beck.]</p>
<p>Eventually, Eddy was arrested, roughed up a little by the embarrassed cops, shackled and hauled off to jail, to taunts and jeers from a crowd of more than 100 (mostly white) onlookers who had gathered at the site. Within the hour, the Statehouse’s grounds crew secured another Confederate flag (value: $30) and hoisted the infamous banner once again.</p>
<p>The flag may only cost $30 to replace, but the State of South Carolina is determined to impose a much more severe sanction on Eddy. For this modest act of civil disobedience (which some might call a beautification project), Eddy faces a $5,000 fine and three years in prison.</p>
<p>The Reverend Slave was bailed out, but a few days later he was arrested again, supposedly for trespassing on the statehouse grounds, although he was across the street at the time. He peacefully resisted by lying down on the sidewalk and going limp, as the cops hauled him back to jail.</p>
<p>Eddy needs our help and, god knows, the people of South Carolina need his. Fortunately, Eddy’s got two good lawyers Milton Kimpson and CounterPunch contributor and civil rights attorney Tom Turnipseed.</p>
<p>Please send what you can to Eddy’s legal defense fund at:</p>
<p>E. Slave Defense Fund, P.O. Box 4681 Columbia, SC 29240.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | last 50 years state south carolina flown confederate flag grounds state capitol columbia noxious emblem state governments unremitting animus toward civil rights laws desegregation flag hoisted 1962 show defiance supreme court civil rights movement soon became war banner segregationist minions marshaled behind strom thurmonds southern manifesto flag remained shameful glorification antebellum slaveholding south daily blight south carolinas black population ever since recall south carolina ignition point civil war walmart slave trade many black africans brought south carolina slaves plantation owners sent swampy rice fields proved malarial death camps people perished nearly unimaginable numbers nearly twothirds black children rice plantations perished reaching age sixteen black africans werent forced rice cotton fields south carolina carolina planters exhibited peculiar preference blacks senegambia presentday ghana sold charlestons slave market plantation owners across south brokers human beings ended making millions enjoying seats legislators statehouse drafted laws protect property people talk flag proud symbol states heritage thats inescapable horrific background past couple years naacp local civic rights organizers including counterpunch writer kevin alexander gray click read grays bracing history battle flag led campaign get flag removed atop capitol building entombed display case nearby museum houses artifacts quaintly referred carolina war states first broached demand met derision state leaders threats violence local yahoos civil rights groups launched nationwide tourism boycott south carolina minor threat since naftadriven collapse garment industry tourism consists largely ceaseless promotion southern plantation lifestyle become mainstay states frail economy soon millions lost businesses long ago proudly catered whites law largely based pricing started carping legislators could done deal noisome boycott ultimately socalled compromise plan brokered democrats state legislature flag migrated atop capitol dome prominent flagpole statehouse grounds flies statues confederate soldiers generals monuments slavery enforcers racial segregation naturally satisfied civil rights community naacp boycott remains place last week black activist brick mason emmett rufus eddy decided enough ongoing insult something eddy tried pull flag three previous occasions even though restraining order barred stepping foot grounds statehouse time eddy would succeed assuming guise nom de guerre reverend e slave eddy donned black santa suit carried ladder bearing names black rights organizers south carolina state house set next flagpole climbed top flagpole cut confederate flag shouted children lit fire state police heckled tried douse pepper spray apparently study physics newtons law gravity requirements police academy columbia cops duly surprised pepper spray failed incapacitate reverend slave instead blew back eyes police officers officers later filed injury claims eddy clung pole telling pursuers anybody promise flag go back trial eddy asked anybody make promise make promise ill come south carolina old times forgotten local paper reported comments passing motorist police tried pull eddy string right record least 145 lynchings blacks white mobs ie homegrown terrorism south carolina 1882 1930 according excellent festival violence analysis southern lynchings stewart e tolnay em beck eventually eddy arrested roughed little embarrassed cops shackled hauled jail taunts jeers crowd 100 mostly white onlookers gathered site within hour statehouses grounds crew secured another confederate flag value 30 hoisted infamous banner flag may cost 30 replace state south carolina determined impose much severe sanction eddy modest act civil disobedience might call beautification project eddy faces 5000 fine three years prison reverend slave bailed days later arrested supposedly trespassing statehouse grounds although across street time peacefully resisted lying sidewalk going limp cops hauled back jail eddy needs help god knows people south carolina need fortunately eddys got two good lawyers milton kimpson counterpunch contributor civil rights attorney tom turnipseed please send eddys legal defense fund e slave defense fund po box 4681 columbia sc 29240 160 160 160 | 592 |
<p>Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has refused to sign AB 1147, “The California Industrial Hemp Farming Act,” which earlier this year passed the Senate (by 26 to 13) and Assembly (44 to 29). The bill would have allowed California farmers to grow hemp -the cannabis plant that has been bred for fiber and/or seeds. “Industrial hemp” contains only trace amounts of THC -.3 percent or less, as defined by AB 1147.</p>
<p>Cannabis is a versatile plant, bred for thousands of years to be useful (which is one definition of “sativa”). Hemp fabric can be like canvas or linen. Hempseed oil is uniquely nutiritious. When hemp fell victim to the marijuana prohibition, canaries all over America stopped singing. Nowadays Americans spend an estimated $270 million annually on products imported or made from hemp grown in Europe, Canada, and China. Seven states have legalized hemp cultivation, but the federal prohibition prevents farmers from growing it.</p>
<p>Schwarzenegger cited federal law as the basis for his veto:</p>
<p>“Under current federal statutes there is no definition of ‘industrial hemp’ nor is there a distinction between cannabis plants based on Tetrahydrocannabinols (THC) content as delineated in AB 1147. In fact, under federal law, all cannabis plants, regardless of variety or THC content, are simply considered to be ‘marihuana,’ which is a federally regulated schedule I controlled substance. Any person in the United States that wishes to grow cannabis plants for any purpose, including industrial purposes, must first obtain permission and register with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Failure to do so would be a violation of federal law and could subject an individual to criminal penalties.</p>
<p>“…It would be improper to approve a measure that directly conflicts with current federal statutes and court decisions. This only serves to cause confusion and reduce public confidence in our government system.</p>
<p>“Finally, California law enforcement has expressed concerns that implementation of this measure could place a drain on their resources and cause significant problems with drug enforcement activities. This is troubling given the needs in this state for the eradication and prevention of drug production.”</p>
<p>Schwarzenegger claims to be “for” medical marijuana, but by the logic of his veto message he would have vetoed Prop 215 had it been enacted by the legislature instead of the voters. (Laws created by initiative take effect immediately and don’t require the governor’s signature.) Former Gov. Pete Wilson -who is now a Schwarzenegger advisor, vetoed medical marijuana bills passed by the legislature in 1994 and 1995, citing federal law as his rationale.</p>
<p>Schwarzenegger vetoed the hemp bill in deference to law enforcement, according to Patrick Goggin, an attorney employed by the Hemp Industries Association and a Virginia-based lobbying group called Vote Hemp. “At the 11th hour John Lovell, representing the California Narcotics Officers Association and a number of other police groups, sent out a memo expressing extreme opposition,” says Goggin. “It was clearly meant to influence the governor. The bill was already heading back to the Assembly for concurrence. His main point was that legal hemp would make it impossible for law enforcement to find illicit marijuana -even though the bill gave them the right to test and to confiscate any plants in excess of .3 percent THC.”</p>
<p>Both Goggin and an aide to Assemblyman Mark Leno used the term “political calculus” in describing Schwarzenegger’s decision. “He gave the environmentalists a win on greenhouse emissions,” explains Goggin. “He’s got them; he doesn’t need to woo them by supporting hemp.”</p>
<p>Supporters of the hemp bill took great pains to distinguish themselves from the medical marijuana industry/movement. The Drug Policy Alliance reportedly offered to provide expert testimony on how different hemp is from marijuana, but the hemp-bill strategists nixed the idea. Their ideal witness was a Republican farmer. “The way you have to approach this is by separating the issue from medical cannabis,” says Goggin.</p>
<p>Perhaps “separating the issue” made sense when they were seeking votes from Republican legislators, but once the bill went to the governor for signing -the stage that savvy John Lovell knew was make-or-break- it made no sense at all. Most Californians -including quite a few Republican farmers- know that marijuana is safe and effective medicine and that the federal prohibition is absurd and costly. The Vote Hemp campaign separated the issues, never demanding that Schwarzenegger stand up to the feds re Prohibition. They emphasized the environmental benefits of hemp, economic benefits to California farmers, how easy it would be for law enforcers to tell the difference between good hemp and that bad marijuana Schwarzenegger sensed weakness -political and intellectual- and gave them the big “Nicht.”</p>
<p>Our snappy slogan, “Struggle Against Singleissuism!” continues to be ignored. The trend is in the other direction -activists are dividing up the single issues.</p>
<p>NOTE TO PHIL ANGELIDES</p>
<p>Are you tired of being a 150-pound weakling getting sand kicked in your face by a musclebound bully? Why not throw a bale of hemp at the Governor in your upcoming debate? Here’s how to put it to him: “Governor, your logic in vetoing the hemp bill would have led you to veto our medical marijuana law if it had been enacted by the legislature instead of the voters. Don’t you think California ought to stand up to the federal government when we have the science on our side?” You might have an aide pull up Pete Wilson’s veto of the medical marijuana bills passed by the legislature in ’94 and ’95 -the supremacy of federal law was his rationale, too.</p>
<p>FRED GARDNER is the editor of <a href="http://www.ccrmg.org/journal/" type="external">O’Shaughnessy’s</a> Journal of the California Cannabis Research Medical Group. He can be reached at: <a href="mailto:fred@plebesite.com" type="external">fred@plebesite.com</a></p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | gov arnold schwarzenegger refused sign ab 1147 california industrial hemp farming act earlier year passed senate 26 13 assembly 44 29 bill would allowed california farmers grow hemp cannabis plant bred fiber andor seeds industrial hemp contains trace amounts thc 3 percent less defined ab 1147 cannabis versatile plant bred thousands years useful one definition sativa hemp fabric like canvas linen hempseed oil uniquely nutiritious hemp fell victim marijuana prohibition canaries america stopped singing nowadays americans spend estimated 270 million annually products imported made hemp grown europe canada china seven states legalized hemp cultivation federal prohibition prevents farmers growing schwarzenegger cited federal law basis veto current federal statutes definition industrial hemp distinction cannabis plants based tetrahydrocannabinols thc content delineated ab 1147 fact federal law cannabis plants regardless variety thc content simply considered marihuana federally regulated schedule controlled substance person united states wishes grow cannabis plants purpose including industrial purposes must first obtain permission register us drug enforcement administration dea failure would violation federal law could subject individual criminal penalties would improper approve measure directly conflicts current federal statutes court decisions serves cause confusion reduce public confidence government system finally california law enforcement expressed concerns implementation measure could place drain resources cause significant problems drug enforcement activities troubling given needs state eradication prevention drug production schwarzenegger claims medical marijuana logic veto message would vetoed prop 215 enacted legislature instead voters laws created initiative take effect immediately dont require governors signature former gov pete wilson schwarzenegger advisor vetoed medical marijuana bills passed legislature 1994 1995 citing federal law rationale schwarzenegger vetoed hemp bill deference law enforcement according patrick goggin attorney employed hemp industries association virginiabased lobbying group called vote hemp 11th hour john lovell representing california narcotics officers association number police groups sent memo expressing extreme opposition says goggin clearly meant influence governor bill already heading back assembly concurrence main point legal hemp would make impossible law enforcement find illicit marijuana even though bill gave right test confiscate plants excess 3 percent thc goggin aide assemblyman mark leno used term political calculus describing schwarzeneggers decision gave environmentalists win greenhouse emissions explains goggin hes got doesnt need woo supporting hemp supporters hemp bill took great pains distinguish medical marijuana industrymovement drug policy alliance reportedly offered provide expert testimony different hemp marijuana hempbill strategists nixed idea ideal witness republican farmer way approach separating issue medical cannabis says goggin perhaps separating issue made sense seeking votes republican legislators bill went governor signing stage savvy john lovell knew makeorbreak made sense californians including quite republican farmers know marijuana safe effective medicine federal prohibition absurd costly vote hemp campaign separated issues never demanding schwarzenegger stand feds prohibition emphasized environmental benefits hemp economic benefits california farmers easy would law enforcers tell difference good hemp bad marijuana schwarzenegger sensed weakness political intellectual gave big nicht snappy slogan struggle singleissuism continues ignored trend direction activists dividing single issues note phil angelides tired 150pound weakling getting sand kicked face musclebound bully throw bale hemp governor upcoming debate heres put governor logic vetoing hemp bill would led veto medical marijuana law enacted legislature instead voters dont think california ought stand federal government science side might aide pull pete wilsons veto medical marijuana bills passed legislature 94 95 supremacy federal law rationale fred gardner editor oshaughnessys journal california cannabis research medical group reached fredplebesitecom 160 160 | 553 |
<p>When Occupy Wall Street suddenly appeared in lower Manhattan in September 2011, many commentators began searching for a genealogy of the movement: Seattle in 1999, European anti-austerity protests, the Arab Spring. But perhaps we should reach farther back — to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and the&#160;social movements that rose up to challenge the emerging capitalist world order.</p>
<p>In this context, Ben Wheatley’s latest film, A Field in England, is&#160;an intriguing cinematic experience. Set in 1648, it follows a cowardly alchemist’s assistant named Whitehead who flees an English Civil War skirmish along with some other deserters. They encounter the cruel O’Neill in the middle of a nondescript field, who through threat of force and the administration of hallucinogenic mushrooms conscripts them into finding the treasure he believes to be buried there. Long shots in black-and-white linger on the field and the motley group within it, illustrating this ordinary field’s transformation into an arena for elaborate mind games.</p>
<p>But cannon and musket fire periodically intrude. Reverberations of battle are&#160;the soundtrack to developments in England at the time, where King Charles&#160;I would be executed the following year and his kingdom transformed into a commonwealth. During the course of the film, the educated and principled Whitehead is forced into labor together with the alcoholic Jacob and the simpleton Friend by O’Neill, a rogue Irishman seeking self-enrichment.</p>
<p>The abuses suffered by these Englishmen under O’Neill seem to allude to the actions of Sir Felim O’Neill, an Irish noblemen responsible for massacres of English and Scottish colonists during the Irish Rebellion of 1641. Occult references abound, from a fairy circle within the field to O’Neill’s scrying mirror he uses to divine the truth; this period <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/0/21548716" type="external">coincides with the peak of witch hunting in England</a>. And from their independent streak and the disdain they hold toward noblemen and the rich, one could easily imagine that Jacob and Friend would make fine <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/civil_war_revolution/benn_levellers_01.shtml" type="external">Levellers or Diggers</a>. Not just England was in turmoil at this time — much of Europe and the growing number of territories it ruled across the globe experienced extraordinary upheaval during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.</p>
<p>Though the “General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century” thesis originally developed by Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm has since been challenged and amended, a number of broad themes can still be distilled. Religious dissent and political radicalism challenged the authority of both the Catholic Church and monarchs who ruled by the grace of God. Conflicts like the Thirty Years War descended into endless nihilistic pillage and slaughter before lending themselves to the creation of the modern state system. The ruthless quest for precious metals and profits fueled the conquest of Native American peoples and the establishment of the Atlantic slave trade.</p>
<p>Perhaps one of the most powerful conceptualizations of this period can be found in Peter Linebaugh and Marcus Rediker’s book The Many-Headed Hydra: The Hidden History of the Revolutionary Atlantic. According to Linebaugh and Rediker, the ruling classes imagined themselves to be the latter-day incarnation of Hercules, laboring to bring order to a chaotic world. The embodiment of their enemy was the mythological Hydra, whose many heads represented its multifarious elements: religious dissenters, radical commoners, rebellious African slaves, fiercely independent Native Americans, and freethinking women.</p>
<p>In the Americas and on the Atlantic, “the plebian commonism of the Old [World]” encountered “the primitive communism of the New World” and formed a hybrid, alternative vision that set itself against the emergent order of modernity. Late in A Field in England, a hallucinating Whitehead declares, “I am my own master”; this realization is precisely what the ruling classes feared most in the Hydra.</p>
<p>Despite its multitudes, the Hydra was ultimately unsuccessful at challenging the emerging capitalist, colonialist order of modernity. In the centuries since, it would be difficult to imagine a group that parallels the Hydra in its diversity, utopianism, and in the threat it poses to the ruling classes — that is, until today. The emergence of the 99% as a social grouping that has come to be dreaded and despised by members of the 1% reproduces the dynamics and the discourse of that era.</p>
<p>While a new era of globalization erodes the economic security of the vast majority of the US, the 1% and their political supporters insist that <a href="http://www.salon.com/2014/02/07/billionaire_sam_zell_defends_another_billionaire_on_a_network_owned_by_a_billionaire/" type="external">they work harder</a> than the rest of us and thus <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jan/20/oxfam-85-richest-people-half-of-the-world" type="external">their ownership of nearly half of the world’s wealth</a> is for the greater good. Recently, we have been treated to numerous declarations from members of the 1% <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/27/opinion/krugman-paranoia-of-the-plutocrats.html" type="external">suggesting that they are under threat from the 99%</a>.</p>
<p>These shrill cries about impending repression — <a href="http://www.thebaffler.com/blog/2014/03/nazi_name_calling_and_non_apologies" type="external">invoking Nazism seems popular</a> — reveal the degree to which the 1% identify with one another and fear the masses. Like the Hydra, the 99% is a rhetorical construction rather than a social formation with clear class consciousness. Its very diversity constitutes its greatest weakness. The repeated spread, defeat, and resurrection of movements like Occupy Wall Street and Spain’s indignados resemble the scattered but persistent revolts of the Hydra. Today’s Occupy activists should recall that a revolutionary conspiracy by a group of New York City laborers — black and white, slave and free — emerged in 1741 out of a waterfront tavern just blocks from today’s Zuccotti Park. With goals that are simultaneously utopian and practical, these movements appeal to both the basic needs and the deepest desires of common people around the globe.</p>
<p>So given our culture’s love of historical allegory in film, where past drama informs our present day, why are films on the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries so rarely tapping these themes? Critics praised Julie Taymor’s 2010 adaptation of The Tempest for its ambition and casting of Helen Mirren as a female Prospero. But a truly ambitious filmmaker could look to the play’s inspiration in the British colonization of the Americas, in particular <a href="http://www.shakespeareinamericanlife.org/identity/shipwreck/seaventure.cfm" type="external">the stranding of the crew of the Sea Venture in Bermuda in 1609</a>, or adapt Aimé Césaire’s version set in colonial Haiti.</p>
<p>Similarly, Terrence Malick’s The New World flirts with the radical vision depicted in The Many-Headed Hydra, where a rebellious John Smith becomes entranced by an Edenic Virginia. Even worse are TV miniseries like The Tudors or The Borgias, which seem to embody Jane Austen’s pithy remark of history as “the quarrels of popes and kings, with wars and pestilences in every page; the men all so good for nothing, and hardly any women at all.”</p>
<p>If contemporary TV and film prefer a shallow view, older films have often not done much better. The Last Valley captured the horrors and chaos of the Thirty Years War and featured character dynamics similar to A Field in England — a meek teacher (Omar Sharif) pleads for restraint and compassion from a ruthless mercenary captain (Michael Caine) while he occupies an idyllic German village — but was a massive commercial failure.</p>
<p>In Europe, the social history of this period is better known, but recent films offer only a superficial examination. The Russian epic 1612 anachronistically depicts the Time of Troubles as a period of Russian patriotism among commoners — embodied by the protagonist Andrey and his wisecracking Tatar sidekick — and sets them against evil, greedy Poles and their Catholic mercenary army.</p>
<p>One model might come from East Germany, of all places, where in 1956 Martin Hellberg directed the film Thomas Müntzer. Inspired by <a href="http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1850/peasant-war-germany/" type="external">Friedrich Engels’ book The Peasant War in Germany</a>, Hellberg’s film focuses on the life of Thomas Müntzer, a German priest who took part in the Protestant Reformation. Played with intensity and charisma by Wolfgang Stumpf, we see Müntzer’s growing radicalism as he parts ways with Luther and comes into conflict with the princes of Germany, Catholic and newly Protestant alike.</p>
<p>Müntzer rallies the peasantry around his vision of realizing the Kingdom of Heaven here on Earth, using religious language to undergird this social revolution. This rebellion culminates in the 1525 Battle of Frankenhausen, in which Müntzer’s followers are slaughtered by the mercenary armies of the princes and he is captured, tortured, and executed.</p>
<p>To a contemporary audience, some elements of Thomas Müntzer might seem a bit unsophisticated, with depictions of upright peasants, scheming noblemen, and declarations by Müntzer like “So I think that a law that is against the people, is no law!” But the film does capture the radical elements of the Protestant Reformation that sought social revolution along with religious reform; in light of Lutheranism and Calvinism’s eventual success, these have been largely forgotten since their adherents were massacred or expelled from Europe.</p>
<p>Dismissed by the West German press at its release and still to this day unrestored and lacking English subtitles, this is a film that deserves reconsideration. Yes, Thomas Müntzer was produced under a Stalinist regime; but in unabashedly depicting the struggle for rights and dignity by common people, it is an epic about the sixteenth century rather unlike Sergei Eisenstein’s Ivan the Terrible.</p>
<p>Alain Badiou <a href="http://www.radicalphilosophy.com/article/our-contemporary-impotence" type="external">sees</a> “the invariant features of every real mass movement: egalitarianism, mass democracy, the invention of slogans, bravery, the speed of reactions” embodied in both Thomas Müntzer’s movement of the 1500s and in Tahrir Square of the 2010s. As disparate groups occupy public spaces from Cairo to Madrid to New York, asserting their rights and presenting an alternative vision of their societies, we should not forget the members of the Hydra who fought against the exploitation of the ruling classes in favor of another world during the early modern period.</p>
<p>Some&#160;will argue that our present time is too distant to draw many practical lessons from this period. But that does not mean we cannot look to its events, personages, and symbols for inspiration. By coincidence, the rainbow flag used by today’s LGBT and peace activists bears a striking resemblance to the rainbow flag Thomas Müntzer once used to rally the German peasantry — a fitting symbol in any period for uniting a diverse coalition and insisting that another world is possible.</p> | true | 4 | occupy wall street suddenly appeared lower manhattan september 2011 many commentators began searching genealogy movement seattle 1999 european antiausterity protests arab spring perhaps reach farther back sixteenth seventeenth centuries the160social movements rose challenge emerging capitalist world order context ben wheatleys latest film field england is160an intriguing cinematic experience set 1648 follows cowardly alchemists assistant named whitehead flees english civil war skirmish along deserters encounter cruel oneill middle nondescript field threat force administration hallucinogenic mushrooms conscripts finding treasure believes buried long shots blackandwhite linger field motley group within illustrating ordinary fields transformation arena elaborate mind games cannon musket fire periodically intrude reverberations battle are160the soundtrack developments england time king charles160i would executed following year kingdom transformed commonwealth course film educated principled whitehead forced labor together alcoholic jacob simpleton friend oneill rogue irishman seeking selfenrichment abuses suffered englishmen oneill seem allude actions sir felim oneill irish noblemen responsible massacres english scottish colonists irish rebellion 1641 occult references abound fairy circle within field oneills scrying mirror uses divine truth period coincides peak witch hunting england independent streak disdain hold toward noblemen rich one could easily imagine jacob friend would make fine levellers diggers england turmoil time much europe growing number territories ruled across globe experienced extraordinary upheaval sixteenth seventeenth centuries though general crisis seventeenth century thesis originally developed marxist historian eric hobsbawm since challenged amended number broad themes still distilled religious dissent political radicalism challenged authority catholic church monarchs ruled grace god conflicts like thirty years war descended endless nihilistic pillage slaughter lending creation modern state system ruthless quest precious metals profits fueled conquest native american peoples establishment atlantic slave trade perhaps one powerful conceptualizations period found peter linebaugh marcus redikers book manyheaded hydra hidden history revolutionary atlantic according linebaugh rediker ruling classes imagined latterday incarnation hercules laboring bring order chaotic world embodiment enemy mythological hydra whose many heads represented multifarious elements religious dissenters radical commoners rebellious african slaves fiercely independent native americans freethinking women americas atlantic plebian commonism old world encountered primitive communism new world formed hybrid alternative vision set emergent order modernity late field england hallucinating whitehead declares master realization precisely ruling classes feared hydra despite multitudes hydra ultimately unsuccessful challenging emerging capitalist colonialist order modernity centuries since would difficult imagine group parallels hydra diversity utopianism threat poses ruling classes today emergence 99 social grouping come dreaded despised members 1 reproduces dynamics discourse era new era globalization erodes economic security vast majority us 1 political supporters insist work harder rest us thus ownership nearly half worlds wealth greater good recently treated numerous declarations members 1 suggesting threat 99 shrill cries impending repression invoking nazism seems popular reveal degree 1 identify one another fear masses like hydra 99 rhetorical construction rather social formation clear class consciousness diversity constitutes greatest weakness repeated spread defeat resurrection movements like occupy wall street spains indignados resemble scattered persistent revolts hydra todays occupy activists recall revolutionary conspiracy group new york city laborers black white slave free emerged 1741 waterfront tavern blocks todays zuccotti park goals simultaneously utopian practical movements appeal basic needs deepest desires common people around globe given cultures love historical allegory film past drama informs present day films sixteenth seventeenth centuries rarely tapping themes critics praised julie taymors 2010 adaptation tempest ambition casting helen mirren female prospero truly ambitious filmmaker could look plays inspiration british colonization americas particular stranding crew sea venture bermuda 1609 adapt aimé césaires version set colonial haiti similarly terrence malicks new world flirts radical vision depicted manyheaded hydra rebellious john smith becomes entranced edenic virginia even worse tv miniseries like tudors borgias seem embody jane austens pithy remark history quarrels popes kings wars pestilences every page men good nothing hardly women contemporary tv film prefer shallow view older films often done much better last valley captured horrors chaos thirty years war featured character dynamics similar field england meek teacher omar sharif pleads restraint compassion ruthless mercenary captain michael caine occupies idyllic german village massive commercial failure europe social history period better known recent films offer superficial examination russian epic 1612 anachronistically depicts time troubles period russian patriotism among commoners embodied protagonist andrey wisecracking tatar sidekick sets evil greedy poles catholic mercenary army one model might come east germany places 1956 martin hellberg directed film thomas müntzer inspired friedrich engels book peasant war germany hellbergs film focuses life thomas müntzer german priest took part protestant reformation played intensity charisma wolfgang stumpf see müntzers growing radicalism parts ways luther comes conflict princes germany catholic newly protestant alike müntzer rallies peasantry around vision realizing kingdom heaven earth using religious language undergird social revolution rebellion culminates 1525 battle frankenhausen müntzers followers slaughtered mercenary armies princes captured tortured executed contemporary audience elements thomas müntzer might seem bit unsophisticated depictions upright peasants scheming noblemen declarations müntzer like think law people law film capture radical elements protestant reformation sought social revolution along religious reform light lutheranism calvinisms eventual success largely forgotten since adherents massacred expelled europe dismissed west german press release still day unrestored lacking english subtitles film deserves reconsideration yes thomas müntzer produced stalinist regime unabashedly depicting struggle rights dignity common people epic sixteenth century rather unlike sergei eisensteins ivan terrible alain badiou sees invariant features every real mass movement egalitarianism mass democracy invention slogans bravery speed reactions embodied thomas müntzers movement 1500s tahrir square 2010s disparate groups occupy public spaces cairo madrid new york asserting rights presenting alternative vision societies forget members hydra fought exploitation ruling classes favor another world early modern period some160will argue present time distant draw many practical lessons period mean look events personages symbols inspiration coincidence rainbow flag used todays lgbt peace activists bears striking resemblance rainbow flag thomas müntzer used rally german peasantry fitting symbol period uniting diverse coalition insisting another world possible | 952 |
<p>Photo by Michael Dunn | <a href="" type="internal">CC BY 2.0</a></p>
<p>A tug-of-war is taking shape that is destabilizing the two-party system. &#160;As globalization restructures American society, the political establishment seems to have few meaningful solutions to redress the deepening personal crises people are experiencing.&#160; The Republican and Democratic Parties control the American political apparatus, real state power, and are being pulled at their radical extremes.</p>
<p>Social tensions are deepening, instability is intensifying and insurgency is spreading. Today, it’s a natural catastrophe, immigrant youth and Russia-gate; yesterday, it was a statue, abortion, transgender bathrooms, wage stagnation and lawless police killings.</p>
<p>The 2016 presidential campaign reflected the redrawing of the American political landscape, the first contest of battles yet to come. Donald Trump ran as a radical Republican, easily defeating his more conventional opponents; ironically, he was long identified with New York’s up-market social and political – i.e., Democratic — scene. &#160;Hillary Clinton was the Democratic candidate, but was outfoxed by Trump and unable of address the challenges raised by Bernie Sanders, an Independent.</p>
<p>Trump was elected president as a closet “populist”;&#160;Sanders ran as a democratic socialist, a 21st&#160;century “progressive”. &#160;Their political labels have become the common nomenclature, the ideological shorthand, used by the media and others to characterizes the current generation of non-centrist politicians, be they of the right or left, whether at the national or local level.</p>
<p>What role did the original populist&#160;and progressive&#160;movements play in the formation of America’s current, postmodern political culture?&#160; And does the current usage of these terms only serve to confuse today’s political climate?</p>
<p>***</p>
<p>The populists were largely drawn from small farmers from the South and West producing cotton, wheat and corn.&#160; Rapid post-Civil War industrialization fostered economic destabilization, depressing the value of their products and forcing many into ruinous debt with seed and other vendors, banks and mortgage companies.&#160;&#160;The war and rapid development gave birth to the “robber barons,” moguls like Cornelius Vanderbilt,&#160;Jay Gould, John D. Rockefeller, Sr., and J.&#160;P. Morgan.&#160; The achieved wealth and power by crushing competitors, rigging markets and buying political figures.&#160; In response,&#160;grass-roots organizing led to the formation of the People’s Party and the movement fielded third-party challengers to Republicans and Democrats in many states in 1892, 1894 and 1896.</p>
<p>Their principal demands included: (i) the government print paper money and monetize silver, (ii) the government run and subsidized systems of commodity credit, (ii) it should provide product storage facilities and (iii) aggressively regulate, perhaps nationalize, the railroad and telegraph networks.&#160; In addition, populists called for the direct election of Senators and a national income tax.</p>
<p>The fierceness of their rhetoric is suggested by an <a href="https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/" type="external">1895 manifesto</a>:</p>
<p>As early as 1865–66 a conspiracy was entered into between the gold gamblers of Europe and America.&#160;.&#160;.&#160;. For nearly thirty years these conspirators have kept the people quarreling over less important matters while they have pursued with unrelenting zeal their one central purpose.&#160;.&#160;.&#160;. Every device of treachery, every resource of statecraft, and every artifice known to the secret cabals of the international gold ring are being used to deal a blow to the prosperity of the people and the financial and commercial independence of the country.</p>
<p>The historian Adrienne Petty points out, “It’s important to remember the Farmers’ Alliance not because it preceded the Populist Party, but because it also makes so clear how the grievances that moved people to populism then, as now, are not the exclusive provenance of white men.”</p>
<p>She adds, “Black men and women played a vital role in the Farmers’ Alliance, and the early part of the populist movement: they founded the Colored Farmers’ Alliance – whose members numbered 1.2 million in 1891 – to promote self-help, mutual aid and improved farming techniques. They organised a cotton-picker’s strike to protest working conditions and push for more pay.”</p>
<p>There were both left-wing and right-wing populists, both speaking for “the people” against “the establishment”.&#160;&#160;As <a href="" type="internal">Bloomberg</a> noted, “In other words, these original Populists saw large-scale government intervention as the solution to their economic problems.”&#160;&#160;However, despite its ostensible anti-elitism, right-wing populism was driven by a quasi-nationalism targeting those identified as threats to the better days of yesteryear, including African-Americans and Jews.</p>
<p>The progressive movement flourished between 1900 to 1914, reflecting the ethos not of small farmers, but an emerging – and influential – middleclass.&#160;&#160;During the 19th&#160;century, the nation’s moral values profound shifted.&#160; For much of early American history, poor people were pitied; however, in the decades following the Civil War, they were vilified, accused of causing their own suffering through laziness.&#160; Industrialization, urbanization and immigration took their toll.</p>
<p>Progressives were social reformers who believed in moral uplift.&#160; They invoked a mythic form of American life based on alleged free and fair competition among relative equals.&#160; However, during the Gilded Age, corrupt party bosses and business moguls ruled, and many small producers were crushed spawning the populists.&#160;&#160;Progressives were rooted mostly in the cities and were concerned with the betterment of urban life, whether involving regulations of the 10-hours workday for a women and children or the temperance movement effort to eliminate alcohol consumption.</p>
<p>The&#160;Nation&#160;offers a list of 50 of the “ <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/fifty-most-influential-progressives-twentieth-century/" type="external">most influential</a>” progressives from Eugene Debs to Michael Moore.&#160; While many came long after the movement’s eclipse, their collective practice and thought helped fashion 20th&#160;century American life.</p>
<p>Richard Hofstadter notes in his influential 1955 study,&#160; <a href="" type="internal">The Age of Reform: From Bryan to FDR</a>:</p>
<p>One of the primary tests of the mood of a society at any given time is whether it’s comfortable people tend to identify, psychologically, with the power and achievements of the very successful or with the needs and sufferings of the underprivileged. In a large and striking measure, the Progressive agitations turned the human sympathies of the people downward rather than upward in the social scale.</p>
<p>The progressives transformed government by replacing the old-boys network of payoff and kickbacks with the normalization of the modern bureaucracy and civil service.</p>
<p>***</p>
<p>Trump is not the first plutocrat to run for public office, but the only one to win the presidency.&#160; Among the others who ran were: Mitt Romney, 2012; Steve Forbes, 1996 and 2000; and&#160;Ross Perot, 1992.&#160; Often forgotten, Henry Ford ran for the senate in 1918 from Michigan as a Democrat supporting Woodrow Wilson.&#160; Believing his status would carry him to office, he did not actively campaign and lost in a Republican sweep.</p>
<p>Trump appears to have never made an explicit reference to&#160;the small-farmers’ revolt of the 1890s from which the populist movement got its name.&#160; Yet, he ran – and won! — as an insurgent promoting a grass-roots call to arms.&#160; He positioned himself as someone who could address one of the great laments of U.S. history: ordinary Americans are getting screwed and need a strong, independent leader to contest power.</p>
<p>Now, some eight months after he took office, Trump’s populist invocations are being tested by the tough reality of inside-the-Beltway politics.&#160; In innumerable whistle-stops, including most recently Miami and Arlington, to invokes his showman’s wizardry, showing his die-hard supports that he remains the fierce champion of the average guy (and gal).</p>
<p>For many dwelling in heartland America, Trump is his old self.&#160; Strutting on stage, he reclaims the erotic prowess of the never-ending stump.&#160; Before an adoring crowd and cheers ringing in his ears, he lambasts the establishment insiders and rails against the “national security threat” of the moment.</p>
<p>Returning to the reality of Washington&#160;realpolitik, Trump morphs into his other self, the cut-the-deal huckster.&#160; He is the master of 21st&#160;century business — any deal is better than no deal because good PR can turn shit into gold.&#160; Like an old-time Mississippi River boat card-shark, one day he snuggled up to the Republican leadership, the next day dances with the Democrats.&#160; A telling power struggle has recast his Cabinet, with the ideological “populists” (e.g., Bannon) being driven out by hardcore establishment figures representing the military-financial complex (e.g., Mattis, Tillerson and&#160;Mnuchin).</p>
<p>Bernie Sanders ran as a democratic socialist within the Democratic Party, giving voice to a growing insurgency taking numerous forms.&#160; Concurrent with Sanders’ introduction of&#160;single-payer&#160;legislation in the Senate, a “ <a href="" type="internal">Medicare-for-all</a>”&#160;bill, the Intercept identified 24 “progressive” groups backing his campaign and might help push the bill up the legislative hill.</p>
<p>A more insightful analysis of the growing progressive movement is offered by Juan González in his recent study,&#160; <a href="" type="internal">Reclaiming&#160;Gotham: Bill de Blasio and the Movement to End America’s Tale of Two Cities</a>.&#160; González, a former&#160;New York Daily News&#160;reporter and regular co-host of&#160;Democracy Now, champions de Blasio as&#160;mayor of the “most left-leaning government in the history of America’s greatest city.”</p>
<p>He claims&#160;de Blasio presided over the transfer of&#160;some $21 billions “of income and economic benefits” to the city’s poorer people in the form of “universal free pre-kindergarten and after school programs, long overdue wage increases for municipal workers, paid sick leave for all, and a virtual freezing of tenant rents.”</p>
<p>In addition to New York, González reviews campaigns championed by progressives in eight other cities,&#160;Richmond, VA; San Francisco, CA; Seattle, WA; Chicago, IL; Newark, NJ; Philadelphia, PA; Austin, TX; and Jackson, MS.&#160; His study, while championing the gains promoted by local officials, reveals the inherent confrontations progressives face as they shift from local activists to governing the whole city, especially confronting the entrenched interests of the real-estate and finance sectors.</p>
<p>A century ago, populists and progressives sought to reshape the American political landscape – and, in important ways, they did.&#160; But today, a century-plus later, the U.S. is once again marked by mounting public restiveness, a deepening sense that something profound is remaking the nation’s social order and ordinary people’s lives are deeply insecure.</p>
<p>Pick your poison, nearly every social issue can become a political contest pitting blustering politicians in sound-bite stand-offs.&#160; Sadly, bubbling below this political stage-show, ideological tensions are getting more intense, a sign of mounting social dislocation. It is a critical important moment for social change; people are apprehensive, worried as to the state of the nation and their personal lives within it.&#160; Whether the changes taking place move the U.S. to a more humane, secular society or regresses to a more repressive, disciplined one is to be determined.</p> | true | 4 | photo michael dunn cc 20 tugofwar taking shape destabilizing twoparty system 160as globalization restructures american society political establishment seems meaningful solutions redress deepening personal crises people experiencing160 republican democratic parties control american political apparatus real state power pulled radical extremes social tensions deepening instability intensifying insurgency spreading today natural catastrophe immigrant youth russiagate yesterday statue abortion transgender bathrooms wage stagnation lawless police killings 2016 presidential campaign reflected redrawing american political landscape first contest battles yet come donald trump ran radical republican easily defeating conventional opponents ironically long identified new yorks upmarket social political ie democratic scene 160hillary clinton democratic candidate outfoxed trump unable address challenges raised bernie sanders independent trump elected president closet populist160sanders ran democratic socialist 21st160century progressive 160their political labels become common nomenclature ideological shorthand used media others characterizes current generation noncentrist politicians right left whether national local level role original populist160and progressive160movements play formation americas current postmodern political culture160 current usage terms serve confuse todays political climate populists largely drawn small farmers south west producing cotton wheat corn160 rapid postcivil war industrialization fostered economic destabilization depressing value products forcing many ruinous debt seed vendors banks mortgage companies160160the war rapid development gave birth robber barons moguls like cornelius vanderbilt160jay gould john rockefeller sr j160p morgan160 achieved wealth power crushing competitors rigging markets buying political figures160 response160grassroots organizing led formation peoples party movement fielded thirdparty challengers republicans democrats many states 1892 1894 1896 principal demands included government print paper money monetize silver ii government run subsidized systems commodity credit ii provide product storage facilities iii aggressively regulate perhaps nationalize railroad telegraph networks160 addition populists called direct election senators national income tax fierceness rhetoric suggested 1895 manifesto early 186566 conspiracy entered gold gamblers europe america160160160 nearly thirty years conspirators kept people quarreling less important matters pursued unrelenting zeal one central purpose160160160 every device treachery every resource statecraft every artifice known secret cabals international gold ring used deal blow prosperity people financial commercial independence country historian adrienne petty points important remember farmers alliance preceded populist party also makes clear grievances moved people populism exclusive provenance white men adds black men women played vital role farmers alliance early part populist movement founded colored farmers alliance whose members numbered 12 million 1891 promote selfhelp mutual aid improved farming techniques organised cottonpickers strike protest working conditions push pay leftwing rightwing populists speaking people establishment160160as bloomberg noted words original populists saw largescale government intervention solution economic problems160160however despite ostensible antielitism rightwing populism driven quasinationalism targeting identified threats better days yesteryear including africanamericans jews progressive movement flourished 1900 1914 reflecting ethos small farmers emerging influential middleclass160160during 19th160century nations moral values profound shifted160 much early american history poor people pitied however decades following civil war vilified accused causing suffering laziness160 industrialization urbanization immigration took toll progressives social reformers believed moral uplift160 invoked mythic form american life based alleged free fair competition among relative equals160 however gilded age corrupt party bosses business moguls ruled many small producers crushed spawning populists160160progressives rooted mostly cities concerned betterment urban life whether involving regulations 10hours workday women children temperance movement effort eliminate alcohol consumption the160nation160offers list 50 influential progressives eugene debs michael moore160 many came long movements eclipse collective practice thought helped fashion 20th160century american life richard hofstadter notes influential 1955 study160 age reform bryan fdr one primary tests mood society given time whether comfortable people tend identify psychologically power achievements successful needs sufferings underprivileged large striking measure progressive agitations turned human sympathies people downward rather upward social scale progressives transformed government replacing oldboys network payoff kickbacks normalization modern bureaucracy civil service trump first plutocrat run public office one win presidency160 among others ran mitt romney 2012 steve forbes 1996 2000 and160ross perot 1992160 often forgotten henry ford ran senate 1918 michigan democrat supporting woodrow wilson160 believing status would carry office actively campaign lost republican sweep trump appears never made explicit reference to160the smallfarmers revolt 1890s populist movement got name160 yet ran insurgent promoting grassroots call arms160 positioned someone could address one great laments us history ordinary americans getting screwed need strong independent leader contest power eight months took office trumps populist invocations tested tough reality insidethebeltway politics160 innumerable whistlestops including recently miami arlington invokes showmans wizardry showing diehard supports remains fierce champion average guy gal many dwelling heartland america trump old self160 strutting stage reclaims erotic prowess neverending stump160 adoring crowd cheers ringing ears lambasts establishment insiders rails national security threat moment returning reality washington160realpolitik trump morphs self cutthedeal huckster160 master 21st160century business deal better deal good pr turn shit gold160 like oldtime mississippi river boat cardshark one day snuggled republican leadership next day dances democrats160 telling power struggle recast cabinet ideological populists eg bannon driven hardcore establishment figures representing militaryfinancial complex eg mattis tillerson and160mnuchin bernie sanders ran democratic socialist within democratic party giving voice growing insurgency taking numerous forms160 concurrent sanders introduction of160singlepayer160legislation senate medicareforall160bill intercept identified 24 progressive groups backing campaign might help push bill legislative hill insightful analysis growing progressive movement offered juan gonzález recent study160 reclaiming160gotham bill de blasio movement end americas tale two cities160 gonzález former160new york daily news160reporter regular cohost of160democracy champions de blasio as160mayor leftleaning government history americas greatest city claims160de blasio presided transfer of160some 21 billions income economic benefits citys poorer people form universal free prekindergarten school programs long overdue wage increases municipal workers paid sick leave virtual freezing tenant rents addition new york gonzález reviews campaigns championed progressives eight cities160richmond va san francisco ca seattle wa chicago il newark nj philadelphia pa austin tx jackson ms160 study championing gains promoted local officials reveals inherent confrontations progressives face shift local activists governing whole city especially confronting entrenched interests realestate finance sectors century ago populists progressives sought reshape american political landscape important ways did160 today centuryplus later us marked mounting public restiveness deepening sense something profound remaking nations social order ordinary peoples lives deeply insecure pick poison nearly every social issue become political contest pitting blustering politicians soundbite standoffs160 sadly bubbling political stageshow ideological tensions getting intense sign mounting social dislocation critical important moment social change people apprehensive worried state nation personal lives within it160 whether changes taking place move us humane secular society regresses repressive disciplined one determined | 1,026 |
<p>It seems like just yesterday that we were raging over the fact that we still didn’t know who killed Rosie Larsen. Since the controversial end of the first season of AMC’s once-hit drama The Killing, a lot has happened. The show was canceled by AMC and rescued by Netflix, for instance, and the streaming giant released the series’ fourth and final season this past Friday.</p>
<p>The show’s swan song has a lot to talk about: a brand new murder mystery, more <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/louispeitzman/the-killing-comes-to-a-close-with-a-colossal-mistake" type="external">fan outrage</a>, and, most of all, a brilliant supporting turn by a thrilling new cast member: Oscar nominee Joan Allen.</p>
<p>Joan Allen, you’ll remember, crushed the ’90s.</p>
<p>Allen was to that decade what Amy Adams is to the current one, the go-to thesp for Hollywood’s top directors searching to cast their films’ most complex, crucial female roles. There was Pat Nixon in Nixon (Oscar nom), Elizabeth Proctor in The Crucible (Oscar nom), Dr. Eve Archer in Face/Off, Betty Parker in Pleasantvillle, and Laine Hanson in Contender (Oscar nom).</p>
<p>Her work has been equally as transfixing, if a bit more sporadic, post-2000, with memorable turns in The Notebook and the Jason Bourne franchise leading way to what’s ultimately been a fruitful transition to television. She starred in HBO’s acclaimed Georgia O’Keefe biopic as the famous painter, and was excellent in the network’s doomed horseracing drama Luck, which only lasted one season.</p>
<p>Now, she’s embracing the industry’s new frontier, taking on a plum supporting role in Netflix’s revival of The Killing, the crime drama that was canceled by AMC after three seasons before being resuscitated by the streaming service. In the six-episode final season, Allen plays Colonel Margaret Rayne, a headmaster at an all-boys military school with a maternal affinity for one cadet in particular, Kyle. Those feelings are complicated when Kyle is suspected of murdering his entire family and Col. Rayne’s own personal family secrets begin coming out.</p>
<p>Now that enough time has passed for The Killing fans to watch, digest, and maybe fume a little bit about the show’s last season, we chatted with Allen about her character’s wild arc; her transition from film to TV; that one big, huge, crazy twist; and the polarizing reaction to the show’s ending.</p>
<p>There’s a big “spoiler alert” being splashed at the top of this article so we have free rein to discuss everything.</p>
<p>Oh good!</p>
<p>So let’s start then with that twist. How much did you know about your arc and all its twists before shooting? At one point did you find out that Col. Rayne was Kyle’s mother? I’d imagine that would affect how you played certain scenes throughout the season.</p>
<p>Veena Sud [the show’s creator] parsed it out a little bit. I hadn’t done much television so I’m not that familiar with the form. People often don’t know what’s going to happen next. I’m used to doing film and theatre where you know everything that’s going on and your amp your performance up based on the information that you have. So it was a unique experience. But I did know from the beginning that Kyle was my son.</p>
<p>So you knew!</p>
<p>Start and finish your day with the top stories from The Daily Beast.</p>
<p>A speedy, smart summary of all the news you need to know (and nothing you don't).</p>
<p>She did share that with me, but I didn’t really know—she said she was involved with the murders with the family. She said it all in a vague way, that it was a hazing incident gone awry. I didn’t know super specifically, but I knew that Kyle was involved somehow. But I wasn’t really sure what happened and that he had actually pulled the trigger. So it was a little vague! But I did feel that it was important to ask Veena a lot of questions when I got the scripts about what I know and what I don’t know. So she fed me some information to help me, because I wanted to know what it was I was covering up. So I did know from the beginning that Kyle was actually my son. But he didn’t know!</p>
<p>Oh, he didn’t know! That’s a good twist!</p>
<p>He didn’t know! She gave different information to different people.</p>
<p>What was Tyler Ross’ [who plays Kyle] reaction when he found out?</p>
<p>We were on set together. He’s so sweet. We did talk about it a little bit. He was kind of surprised. There were discussions, like, when I was in the hair and makeup trailer. The hair woman would say, “I think I figured it out! I think she could be his mother!” And I would just sit in the hair chair and say, “Really? You think so?”</p>
<p>So you didn’t spoil it for anyone?</p>
<p>I didn’t want to ruin it for anybody. So I would say, “Yeah, I think that may be because she lost a son. You lost somebody very dear to her once…” So it was kind of fun being on the set with people knowing different things at different times.</p>
<p>The scene I was most curious to find out if you knew ahead of time if she was Kyle’s mother was when she invites him to the residence to have dinner together. It’s such a touching scene.</p>
<p>It’s really sweet. It’s a big thing that she did, to walk away from her child. It’s a very sweet scene, but she doesn’t really want to let him know. She doesn’t know how he’ll take it.</p>
<p>What goes through her mind in a scene like that, where she so clearly is feeling maternal towards him, but has to remain guarded about all of that to protect him?</p>
<p>It’s a tricky situation because she also is sort of protecting a family legacy. This school, her grandfather started it, her father was part of it, and now she’s part of it. Times have changed and attendance is down. People are sending kids more to military school because it’s a boarding school and their kids are struggling. So she also feels like she has a big reputation to uphold in the community. Plus, based on having abandoned him, she really would do everything in her power trying to protect him. I think I said in the last scene, “Don’t tell him, because he’ll never understand.” He’ll think that I didn’t want him, when it was the opposite. I wanted him so much. It’s treading around all that stuff, showing that she’s there to care for him without coming on too strong.</p>
<p>Let’s talk about that monologue, where she’s pleading for Linden not to tell him.</p>
<p>She’s been pushed to such an extreme now. The other boys had gone rogue. She’s at a place now—me and Veena talked about this a lot—where she obviously got to the point that she could kill these boys. It was to protect her son. She has a sense of having failed him. There is some reference to that she would go to his piano concerts and would watch him as he was growing up. I think she felt that, at that point, she just had to say how she really felt and the lengths that she would go to protect him and recognize the really strong motherly love that she did have for him.</p>
<p>Does she surprise herself by pulling the trigger on those two cadets?</p>
<p>You know, I think she’s just in such protective mode that at that point things are going awry and she’s so worried about him and worried that they’ve harmed him that she’s almost in the zone. I will do anything to protect my son. It’s not very logical. I mean, she’s going to go to prison, right? She just reached that point based on things going awry that she feels she’s capable of doing anything to protect him. I didn’t know until the week before that I killed these boys. I was like, “Oh. OK!” (Laughs) We got the scripts about a week before we would shoot them.</p>
<p>Did that change your opinion of her?</p>
<p>Yeah. I thought that she’s kind of undone there. It’s a pretty extreme act. Very extreme act. What else can you say? I was maybe more sad for her than anything, that it got to that point. She couldn’t have had him in her life. It’s pretty sad that she killed these other two boys, and it just made me feel that she’s—I don’t know—maybe a little pathetic. It’s a shame. It’s kind of tragic that it would get to that extreme.</p>
<p>Let’s go back to the beginning. How did this all come to you, being on the show?</p>
<p>They approached me! I guess it was maybe three months before they were starting to shoot. I talked to Veena, but I wasn’t able to even read the first episode. But I knew of the show and had watched it some, and they sent me links to watch other episodes. I knew it was a very well regarded, respected, kind of edgy series. And I had never played a military person before. That process was…interesting. [Laughs] And then about a month or a little more than that before shooting Veena called me and said, “Oh we decided to make her a ballroom dancer.”</p>
<p>You literally dance on screen the first time we see you.</p>
<p>Yeah! You really don’t know anything about her. That’s really the first time. Then cut to the fact that she’s a military person.</p>
<p>It really was a surprise to see, after that dancing scene, that she was the rigid headmaster of a military school.</p>
<p>It was really interesting when they would do the big group scenes with all these kids. I sat and talked to some of them and a lot of them knew me from—I did a voice over for a video game called Skyrim. I played this character Delphine. It was really funny because a lot of the boys would shout, “You’re Delphine!”</p>
<p>It’s a riot how different demographics recognize you from such wildly different projects, isn’t it?</p>
<p>Oh yeah. It just tickled me. That’s where most of them knew me from. It’s so funny.</p>
<p>So you mentioned that you were familiar with The Killing and had watched a little bit before joining this season. How much of that first season did you watch? Were you part of that chorus of outrage when fans didn’t find out who actually killed Rosie Larsen?</p>
<p>I wasn’t! I’m not a big television person. I’m a big public radio person, I listen to it all the time. But my sister and her husband have very specific series that they really watch religiously. That was one of them. So I was with them for the first four or five episodes and then came back to New York and went back to public radio. But I knew there was an issue with audience members. I have a niece who said, “We were so disappointed that we didn’t know at the end of the first season what actually happened!”</p>
<p>Oh, she’s not the only one.</p>
<p>But I think maybe—I don’t know the trajectory of how they made their decision—but perhaps the first season was so successful that they decided to carry it on for a second season. Because I believe the original Scandinavian series it was based on was originally meant to be just one season. So maybe it became so successful here that they decided to extend it. I’m just guessing.</p>
<p>Outside of your character’s storyline this season, I’m curious what you thought of Holder and Linden’s arc. Because they get a little happily ever after that seems to have polarized fans, too.</p>
<p>One of my closest friends was very avid. Last Friday night when it came out on Netflix she watched all the episodes between 6 p.m. and 1 a.m. All of them. She said she was very glad they got together and it made her cry, because she really wanted them to get together. But I could see that it could be polarizing. I’m sure you’re hearing feedback from stuff out there. I’m not a big social media person, so I don’t know how much buzz there is going around about it.</p>
<p>There seems to be two camps. Some are like your friend and are happy that Holder and Linden got some sunshine in the end, but others feel like the show was always bleak and that it would be more fitting for their ending to be bleak, too.</p>
<p>Well, it is bleak for a while! They have a few years of bleakness before they reunite. [Laughs]</p>
<p>A lot of times actors who are known for their film work, when they make the transition to TV talk about making the move because the roles being offered to them in movies are nowhere near as rich or juicy as the ones on television. Was any of that behind your decision to join The Killing?</p>
<p>I completely agree. I just got The Hollywood Reporter the other day and there was the American Horror Story For Your Consideration ad. Jessica Lange and Kathy Bates and Sarah Paulson and Frances Conroy. Particularly Jessica and Kathy have been around a while and done a tremendous amount of, primarily, film work. I just think there seems to much more interesting material on television, with the explosion of cable and streaming and original series. I just think that there are better roles. I watched last night for the first time an episode of Orange Is the New Black.</p>
<p>It’s soooo good!</p>
<p>I just thought, “Look at all these women getting really great roles! It’s fantastic!” You know? It’s so great. I think men struggle, too, with interesting roles but it’s probably still harder for film. I felt so good. Like, look: There’s only one man in this. And look at all these women who are playing really unique, specific, deep kinds of roles. It was really refreshing. I’m just really glad that this breakdown has happened. Starting to work in film in the ’80s and ’90s, I remember feeling this sense of “don’t do television.” There was this real divide. I love that that’s getting blurred and broken down.</p>
<p>It about how hard it is to get indie films and adult dramas made.</p>
<p>It’s hard. Really hard. The era of doing an independent film and having it for a theatrical release and letting it build up in time, those days are sort of gone. It’s much, much harder. I want to see Boyhood and aim to see it very soon. And I live in New York and even New Yorkers just don’t go to films as much, or they’ll say that unless it’s a big action extravaganza they’re going to wait to watch it at home. So it’s harder. It’s harder to finance those films. And the theatrical releases have diminished dramatically. But I think these other viewing options aren’t a bad thing, because a lot of times more people will end up seeing things.</p>
<p>So now that this season of The Killing is out there, are there other shows you’d be up for joining the cast of?</p>
<p>I couldn’t name them specifically, but I certainly would keep my eye open. My agent, I know, is looking. I actually was offered a couple of months ago a role on Homeland. I haven’t watched it much—only a couple of episodes—but I have friends that are completely devoted. But unfortunately it’s shooting in South Africa, which at a certain time of my life might have been OK but my daughter is starting at USC in August. And the actor had to go to six months to Cape Town. And I just couldn’t be that far away from my daughter her first year of college. As it is I’m going to be across the country from her, but I can’t be on the other side of the world. So I certainly will consider television roles as they come along, absolutely.</p> | true | 4 | seems like yesterday raging fact still didnt know killed rosie larsen since controversial end first season amcs oncehit drama killing lot happened show canceled amc rescued netflix instance streaming giant released series fourth final season past friday shows swan song lot talk brand new murder mystery fan outrage brilliant supporting turn thrilling new cast member oscar nominee joan allen joan allen youll remember crushed 90s allen decade amy adams current one goto thesp hollywoods top directors searching cast films complex crucial female roles pat nixon nixon oscar nom elizabeth proctor crucible oscar nom dr eve archer faceoff betty parker pleasantvillle laine hanson contender oscar nom work equally transfixing bit sporadic post2000 memorable turns notebook jason bourne franchise leading way whats ultimately fruitful transition television starred hbos acclaimed georgia okeefe biopic famous painter excellent networks doomed horseracing drama luck lasted one season shes embracing industrys new frontier taking plum supporting role netflixs revival killing crime drama canceled amc three seasons resuscitated streaming service sixepisode final season allen plays colonel margaret rayne headmaster allboys military school maternal affinity one cadet particular kyle feelings complicated kyle suspected murdering entire family col raynes personal family secrets begin coming enough time passed killing fans watch digest maybe fume little bit shows last season chatted allen characters wild arc transition film tv one big huge crazy twist polarizing reaction shows ending theres big spoiler alert splashed top article free rein discuss everything oh good lets start twist much know arc twists shooting one point find col rayne kyles mother id imagine would affect played certain scenes throughout season veena sud shows creator parsed little bit hadnt done much television im familiar form people often dont know whats going happen next im used film theatre know everything thats going amp performance based information unique experience know beginning kyle son knew start finish day top stories daily beast speedy smart summary news need know nothing dont share didnt really knowshe said involved murders family said vague way hazing incident gone awry didnt know super specifically knew kyle involved somehow wasnt really sure happened actually pulled trigger little vague feel important ask veena lot questions got scripts know dont know fed information help wanted know covering know beginning kyle actually son didnt know oh didnt know thats good twist didnt know gave different information different people tyler ross plays kyle reaction found set together hes sweet talk little bit kind surprised discussions like hair makeup trailer hair woman would say think figured think could mother would sit hair chair say really think didnt spoil anyone didnt want ruin anybody would say yeah think may lost son lost somebody dear kind fun set people knowing different things different times scene curious find knew ahead time kyles mother invites residence dinner together touching scene really sweet big thing walk away child sweet scene doesnt really want let know doesnt know hell take goes mind scene like clearly feeling maternal towards remain guarded protect tricky situation also sort protecting family legacy school grandfather started father part shes part times changed attendance people sending kids military school boarding school kids struggling also feels like big reputation uphold community plus based abandoned really would everything power trying protect think said last scene dont tell hell never understand hell think didnt want opposite wanted much treading around stuff showing shes care without coming strong lets talk monologue shes pleading linden tell shes pushed extreme boys gone rogue shes place nowme veena talked lotwhere obviously got point could kill boys protect son sense failed reference would go piano concerts would watch growing think felt point say really felt lengths would go protect recognize really strong motherly love surprise pulling trigger two cadets know think shes protective mode point things going awry shes worried worried theyve harmed shes almost zone anything protect son logical mean shes going go prison right reached point based things going awry feels shes capable anything protect didnt know week killed boys like oh ok laughs got scripts week would shoot change opinion yeah thought shes kind undone pretty extreme act extreme act else say maybe sad anything got point couldnt life pretty sad killed two boys made feel shesi dont knowmaybe little pathetic shame kind tragic would get extreme lets go back beginning come show approached guess maybe three months starting shoot talked veena wasnt able even read first episode knew show watched sent links watch episodes knew well regarded respected kind edgy series never played military person process wasinteresting laughs month little shooting veena called said oh decided make ballroom dancer literally dance screen first time see yeah really dont know anything thats really first time cut fact shes military person really surprise see dancing scene rigid headmaster military school really interesting would big group scenes kids sat talked lot knew fromi voice video game called skyrim played character delphine really funny lot boys would shout youre delphine riot different demographics recognize wildly different projects isnt oh yeah tickled thats knew funny mentioned familiar killing watched little bit joining season much first season watch part chorus outrage fans didnt find actually killed rosie larsen wasnt im big television person im big public radio person listen time sister husband specific series really watch religiously one first four five episodes came back new york went back public radio knew issue audience members niece said disappointed didnt know end first season actually happened oh shes one think maybei dont know trajectory made decisionbut perhaps first season successful decided carry second season believe original scandinavian series based originally meant one season maybe became successful decided extend im guessing outside characters storyline season im curious thought holder lindens arc get little happily ever seems polarized fans one closest friends avid last friday night came netflix watched episodes 6 pm 1 said glad got together made cry really wanted get together could see could polarizing im sure youre hearing feedback stuff im big social media person dont know much buzz going around seems two camps like friend happy holder linden got sunshine end others feel like show always bleak would fitting ending bleak well bleak years bleakness reunite laughs lot times actors known film work make transition tv talk making move roles offered movies nowhere near rich juicy ones television behind decision join killing completely agree got hollywood reporter day american horror story consideration ad jessica lange kathy bates sarah paulson frances conroy particularly jessica kathy around done tremendous amount primarily film work think seems much interesting material television explosion cable streaming original series think better roles watched last night first time episode orange new black soooo good thought look women getting really great roles fantastic know great think men struggle interesting roles probably still harder film felt good like look theres one man look women playing really unique specific deep kinds roles really refreshing im really glad breakdown happened starting work film 80s 90s remember feeling sense dont television real divide love thats getting blurred broken hard get indie films adult dramas made hard really hard era independent film theatrical release letting build time days sort gone much much harder want see boyhood aim see soon live new york even new yorkers dont go films much theyll say unless big action extravaganza theyre going wait watch home harder harder finance films theatrical releases diminished dramatically think viewing options arent bad thing lot times people end seeing things season killing shows youd joining cast couldnt name specifically certainly would keep eye open agent know looking actually offered couple months ago role homeland havent watched muchonly couple episodesbut friends completely devoted unfortunately shooting south africa certain time life might ok daughter starting usc august actor go six months cape town couldnt far away daughter first year college im going across country cant side world certainly consider television roles come along absolutely | 1,303 |
<p />
<p>The email sent out last month by Laurie Zoloth, director of Jewish Studies at San Francisco State University, was chilling on its face.</p>
<p>“I cannot fully express what it feels like to have to walk across campus daily, past maps of the Middle East that do not include Israel, past posters of cans of soup with labels on them of drops of blood and dead babies, labeled ‘canned Palestinian children meat, slaughtered according to Jewish rites under American license,’ past poster after poster calling out Zionism=racism, and Jews=Nazis,” she wrote — and the details only became more shattering from then on.</p>
<p>I read Zoloth’s words with horror but not, alas, complete amazement, Eleven years ago, during the Gulf War, across San Francisco Bay, the head of a student splinter group at Berkeley addressed a room full of faculty and students opposed to the war, spitting out venomously, “You Jews, I know your names, I know where you live.”</p>
<p>The faculty and students in attendance sat stiffly and said nothing. Embarrassed? Frightened? Or worse — thinking that it wasn’t time to tackle this issue, that it was off the agenda, an inconvenience.</p>
<p>Far more recently, two students of mine at NYU wondered aloud whether it was actually true, as they had heard, that 4,000 Jews didn’t show up for work at the World Trade Center on September 11. They clearly thought this astoundingly crazy charge was plausible enough to warrant careful investigation, but it didn’t occur to them to look at the names of the dead.</p>
<p>Wicked anti-Semitism is back. The worst crackpot notions that circulate through the violent Middle East are also roaming around America, and if that wasn’t bad enough, students are spreading the gibberish. Students! As if the bloc to which we have long looked for intelligent dissent has decided to junk any pretense of standards.</p>
<p>A student movement is not just a student movement. It’s a student movement. Students, whether they are progressive or not, have the responsibility of knowing things, of thinking and discerning, of studying. A student movement should maintain the highest of standards, not ape the formulas of its elders or outdo them in virulence.</p>
<p>It should therefore trouble progressives everywhere that the students at San Francisco State are neither curious nor revolted by the anti-Semitic drivel they are regurgitating. The simple fact that a student movement — even a small one — has been reduced to reflecting the hatred spewed by others should profoundly trouble anyone whose moral principles aim higher than simple nationalism — as should be the case for anyone on the left.</p>
<p>It isn’t hard to discover the sources of the drivel being parroted by the students at San Francisco State. In the blood-soaked Middle East of Yasser Arafat and Ariel Sharon, in the increasingly polarized Europe of Jean-Marie le Pen raw anti-Semitism has increasingly taken the place of intelligent criticism of Israel and its policies.</p>
<p>Even as Laurie Zoloth’s message flew around the world, even as several prominent European papers published scathing but warranted attacks on Israel’s stonewalling of an inquiry into the Jenin fighting, the great Portuguese novelist Jose Saramago was describing Israel’s invasion of Ramallah as “a crime comparable to Auschwitz.”</p>
<p>In one of his long, lapping sentences, Saramago wrote in Madrid’s El Pais (as translated by Paul Berman in <a href="http://www.forward.com/" type="external">The Forward</a>, May 24):</p>
<p>“Intoxicated mentally by the messianic dream of a Greater Israel which will finally achieve the expansionist dreams of the most radical Zionism; contaminated by the monstrous and rooted ‘certitude’ that in this catastrophic and absurd world there exists a people chosen by God and that, consequently, all the actions of an obsessive, psychological and pathologically exclusivist racism are justified; educated and trained in the idea that any suffering that has been inflicted, or is being inflicted, or will be inflicted on everyone else, especially the Palestinians, will always be inferior to that which they themselves suffered in the Holocaust, the Jews endlessly scratch their own wound to keep it bleeding, to make it incurable, and they show it to the world as if it were a banner.”</p>
<p>Note well: the deliciously deferred subject of this sentence is: “the Jews.” Not the right-wing Jews, the militarist Israelis, but “the Jews.” Suddenly the Jews are reduced to a single stick-figure (or shall we say hook-nosed?) caricature and we are plunged into the brainless, ruinous, abysmal iconography that should make every last reasonable person shudder.</p>
<p>The German socialist August Bebel once said that anti-Semitism was “the socialism of fools.” What we witness now is the progressivism of fools. It is a recrudescence of everything that costs the left its moral edge. And, appallingly, it is this contemptible message the anti-Semitic students at San Francisco State chose to parrot.</p>
<p>We are not on the brink of “another Auschwitz,” and to think so, in fact, falsifies the danger. The danger is clear and present, though not apocalyptic. It’s no remote nightmare that synagogues are bombed, including the one on the Tunisian island of Djerba, famous for tolerance, an apparent al-Qaeda truck bomb attack. This happened. It is no remote nightmare that hundreds of Palestinian civilians died during Israeli incursions into the West Bank. This, too, happened. The nightmare is that the second is being allowed to excuse and justify the first.</p>
<p>Laurie Zoloth wrote: “Let me remind you that ours is arguably one of the Jewish Studies programs in the country most devoted to peace, justice and diversity since our inception.”</p>
<p>But anti-Semitism doesn’t care. Like every other lunacy that diminished human brains are capable of, anti-Semitism already knows what it hates.</p>
<p>This is no incidental issue, no negligible distraction. A Left that cares for the rights of humanity cannot cavalierly tolerate the systematic abuse of any people — whatever you think of Israel’s or any other country’s foreign policy. Any student movement worthy of the name must face the ugly history that long made anti-Semitism the acceptable racism, face it and break from it.</p>
<p>If fighting it unremittingly is not a “progressive” cause, then what kind of progress does progressivism have in mind?</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | email sent last month laurie zoloth director jewish studies san francisco state university chilling face fully express feels like walk across campus daily past maps middle east include israel past posters cans soup labels drops blood dead babies labeled canned palestinian children meat slaughtered according jewish rites american license past poster poster calling zionismracism jewsnazis wrote details became shattering read zoloths words horror alas complete amazement eleven years ago gulf war across san francisco bay head student splinter group berkeley addressed room full faculty students opposed war spitting venomously jews know names know live faculty students attendance sat stiffly said nothing embarrassed frightened worse thinking wasnt time tackle issue agenda inconvenience far recently two students mine nyu wondered aloud whether actually true heard 4000 jews didnt show work world trade center september 11 clearly thought astoundingly crazy charge plausible enough warrant careful investigation didnt occur look names dead wicked antisemitism back worst crackpot notions circulate violent middle east also roaming around america wasnt bad enough students spreading gibberish students bloc long looked intelligent dissent decided junk pretense standards student movement student movement student movement students whether progressive responsibility knowing things thinking discerning studying student movement maintain highest standards ape formulas elders outdo virulence therefore trouble progressives everywhere students san francisco state neither curious revolted antisemitic drivel regurgitating simple fact student movement even small one reduced reflecting hatred spewed others profoundly trouble anyone whose moral principles aim higher simple nationalism case anyone left isnt hard discover sources drivel parroted students san francisco state bloodsoaked middle east yasser arafat ariel sharon increasingly polarized europe jeanmarie le pen raw antisemitism increasingly taken place intelligent criticism israel policies even laurie zoloths message flew around world even several prominent european papers published scathing warranted attacks israels stonewalling inquiry jenin fighting great portuguese novelist jose saramago describing israels invasion ramallah crime comparable auschwitz one long lapping sentences saramago wrote madrids el pais translated paul berman forward may 24 intoxicated mentally messianic dream greater israel finally achieve expansionist dreams radical zionism contaminated monstrous rooted certitude catastrophic absurd world exists people chosen god consequently actions obsessive psychological pathologically exclusivist racism justified educated trained idea suffering inflicted inflicted inflicted everyone else especially palestinians always inferior suffered holocaust jews endlessly scratch wound keep bleeding make incurable show world banner note well deliciously deferred subject sentence jews rightwing jews militarist israelis jews suddenly jews reduced single stickfigure shall say hooknosed caricature plunged brainless ruinous abysmal iconography make every last reasonable person shudder german socialist august bebel said antisemitism socialism fools witness progressivism fools recrudescence everything costs left moral edge appallingly contemptible message antisemitic students san francisco state chose parrot brink another auschwitz think fact falsifies danger danger clear present though apocalyptic remote nightmare synagogues bombed including one tunisian island djerba famous tolerance apparent alqaeda truck bomb attack happened remote nightmare hundreds palestinian civilians died israeli incursions west bank happened nightmare second allowed excuse justify first laurie zoloth wrote let remind arguably one jewish studies programs country devoted peace justice diversity since inception antisemitism doesnt care like every lunacy diminished human brains capable antisemitism already knows hates incidental issue negligible distraction left cares rights humanity cavalierly tolerate systematic abuse people whatever think israels countrys foreign policy student movement worthy name must face ugly history long made antisemitism acceptable racism face break fighting unremittingly progressive cause kind progress progressivism mind | 557 |
<p>When the attacks were launched against the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon two years ago today, who had ever heard of Fallujah or Hillah? When the Lebanese hijacker flew his plane into the ground in Pennsylvania, who would ever have believed that President George Bush would be announcing a “new front line in the war on terror” as his troops embarked on a hopeless campaign against the guerrillas of Iraq?</p>
<p>Who could ever have conceived of an American president calling the world to arms against “terrorism” in “Afghanistan, Iraq and Gaza”? Gaza? What do the miserable, crushed, cruelly imprisoned Palestinians of Gaza have to do with the international crimes against humanity in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania?</p>
<p>Nothing, of course. Neither does Iraq have anything to do with 11 September. Nor were there any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, any al-Qa’ida links with Iraq, any 45-minute timeline for the deployment of chemical weapons nor was there any “liberation”.</p>
<p>No, the attacks on 11 September have nothing to do with Iraq. Neither did 11 September change the world. President Bush cruelly manipulated the grief of the American people–and the sympathy of the rest of the world–to introduce a “world order” dreamed up by a clutch of fantasists advising the Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld.</p>
<p>The Iraqi “regime change”, as we now know, was planned as part of a Perle-Wolfowitz campaign document to the would-be Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu years before Bush came to power. It beggars belief that Tony Blair should have signed up to this nonsense without realising that it was no more nor less than a project invented by a group of pro-Israeli American neo-conservatives and right-wing Christian fundamentalists.</p>
<p>But even now, we are fed more fantasy. Afghanistan–its American-paid warlords raping and murdering their enemies, its women still shrouded for the most part in their burqas, its opium production now back as the world’s number one export market, and its people being killed at up to a hundred a week (five American troops were shot dead two weekends ago) is a “success”, something which Messrs Bush and Rumsfeld still boast about. Iraq–a midden of guerrilla hatred and popular resentment–is also a “success”. Yes, Bush wants $87bn to keep Iraq running, he wants to go back to the same United Nations he condemned as a “talking shop” last year, he wants scores of foreign armies to go to Iraq to share the burdens of occupation–though not, of course, the decision-making, which must remain Washington’s exclusive imperial preserve.</p>
<p>What’s more, the world is supposed to accept the insane notion that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict–the planet’s last colonial war, although all mention of the illegal Jewish colonies in the West Bank and Gaza have been erased from the Middle East narrative in the American press–is part of the “war on terror”, the cosmic clash of religious will that President Bush invented after 11 September. Could Israel’s interests be better served by so infantile a gesture from Bush?</p>
<p>The vicious Palestinian suicide bombers and the grotesque implantation of Jews and Jews only in the colonies has now been set into this colossal struggle of “good” against “evil”, in which even Ariel Sharon–named as “personally” responsible for the 1982 Sabra and Chatila massacre by Israel’s own commission of inquiry–is “a man of peace”, according to Mr Bush.</p>
<p>And new precedents are set without discussion. Washington kills the leadership of its enemies with impunity: it tries to kill Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar and does kill Uday and Qusay Hussein and boasts of its prowess in “liquidating” the al-Qa’ida leadership from rocket-firing “drones”. It tries to kill Saddam in Baghdad and slaughters 16 civilians and admits that the operation was “not risk-free”. In Afghanistan, three men have now been murdered in the US interrogation centre at Bagram. We still don’t know what really goes on in Guantanamo.</p>
<p>What do these precedents mean? I have a dark suspicion. From now on, our leaders, our politicians, our statesmen will be fair game too. If we go for the jugular, why shouldn’t they? The killing of the UN’s Sergio Vieira de Mello, was not, I think, a chance murder. Hamas’s most recent statements–and since they’ve been added to the Bush circus of evil, we should take them seriously–are now, more than ever, personally threatening Mr Sharon. Why should we expect any other leader to be safe? If Yasser Arafat is driven into exile yet again, will there be any restraints left?</p>
<p>Of course, America’s enemies were a grisly bunch. Saddam soiled his country with the mass graves of the innocents, Mullah Omar allowed his misogynist legions to terrify an entire society in Afghanistan. But in their absence, we have created banditry, rape, kidnapping, guerrilla war and anarchy. And all in the name of the dead of 11 September. The future of the Middle East–which is what 11 September was partly about, though we are not allowed to say so–has never looked bleaker or more bloody. The United States and Britain are trapped in a war of their own making, responsible for their own appalling predicament but responsible, too, for the lives of thousands of innocent human beings–cut to pieces by American bombs in Afghanistan and Iraq, shot down in the streets of Iraq by trigger-happy GIs.</p>
<p>As for “terror”, our enemies are closing in on our armies in Iraq and our supposed allies in Baghdad and Afghanistan–even in Pakistan. We have done all this in the name of the dead of 11 September. Not since the Second World War have we seen folly on this scale. And it has scarcely begun.</p>
<p>ROBERT FISK is a reporter for The Independent and author of <a href="" type="internal">Pity the Nation</a>. He is also a contributor to Cockburn and St. Clair’s forthcoming book, <a href="" type="internal">The Politics of Anti-Semitism</a>.</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | attacks launched world trade centre pentagon two years ago today ever heard fallujah hillah lebanese hijacker flew plane ground pennsylvania would ever believed president george bush would announcing new front line war terror troops embarked hopeless campaign guerrillas iraq could ever conceived american president calling world arms terrorism afghanistan iraq gaza gaza miserable crushed cruelly imprisoned palestinians gaza international crimes humanity new york washington pennsylvania nothing course neither iraq anything 11 september weapons mass destruction iraq alqaida links iraq 45minute timeline deployment chemical weapons liberation attacks 11 september nothing iraq neither 11 september change world president bush cruelly manipulated grief american peopleand sympathy rest worldto introduce world order dreamed clutch fantasists advising secretary defence donald rumsfeld iraqi regime change know planned part perlewolfowitz campaign document wouldbe israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu years bush came power beggars belief tony blair signed nonsense without realising less project invented group proisraeli american neoconservatives rightwing christian fundamentalists even fed fantasy afghanistanits americanpaid warlords raping murdering enemies women still shrouded part burqas opium production back worlds number one export market people killed hundred week five american troops shot dead two weekends ago success something messrs bush rumsfeld still boast iraqa midden guerrilla hatred popular resentmentis also success yes bush wants 87bn keep iraq running wants go back united nations condemned talking shop last year wants scores foreign armies go iraq share burdens occupationthough course decisionmaking must remain washingtons exclusive imperial preserve whats world supposed accept insane notion israelipalestinian conflictthe planets last colonial war although mention illegal jewish colonies west bank gaza erased middle east narrative american pressis part war terror cosmic clash religious president bush invented 11 september could israels interests better served infantile gesture bush vicious palestinian suicide bombers grotesque implantation jews jews colonies set colossal struggle good evil even ariel sharonnamed personally responsible 1982 sabra chatila massacre israels commission inquiryis man peace according mr bush new precedents set without discussion washington kills leadership enemies impunity tries kill osama bin laden mullah omar kill uday qusay hussein boasts prowess liquidating alqaida leadership rocketfiring drones tries kill saddam baghdad slaughters 16 civilians admits operation riskfree afghanistan three men murdered us interrogation centre bagram still dont know really goes guantanamo precedents mean dark suspicion leaders politicians statesmen fair game go jugular shouldnt killing uns sergio vieira de mello think chance murder hamass recent statementsand since theyve added bush circus evil take seriouslyare ever personally threatening mr sharon expect leader safe yasser arafat driven exile yet restraints left course americas enemies grisly bunch saddam soiled country mass graves innocents mullah omar allowed misogynist legions terrify entire society afghanistan absence created banditry rape kidnapping guerrilla war anarchy name dead 11 september future middle eastwhich 11 september partly though allowed say sohas never looked bleaker bloody united states britain trapped war making responsible appalling predicament responsible lives thousands innocent human beingscut pieces american bombs afghanistan iraq shot streets iraq triggerhappy gis terror enemies closing armies iraq supposed allies baghdad afghanistaneven pakistan done name dead 11 september since second world war seen folly scale scarcely begun robert fisk reporter independent author pity nation also contributor cockburn st clairs forthcoming book politics antisemitism 160 | 523 |
<p>The Fed’s Beige Book, which was released on Wednesday, provides a sobering look at an economy that is sputtering-along on empty. Nearly all the districts reported slower activity amid “widespread signs of deceleration”. The stimulus-fueled rebound which powered GDP above 5% two quarters earlier, has progressively dissipated slashing growth to an anemic 1.6%. As underemployment has soared to 16.5% and deflation has continued to tighten its grip, all talk of a “recovery” has ceased and policymakers have grown more tentative, unwilling to do anything that might cost them votes in the upcoming midterm elections.</p>
<p>Housing prices–which had been holding steady for nearly a year–have started to lose ground following the expiration of the homebuyer tax credit at the end of June. According to economist Joseph Stiglitz, “The foreclosure rate is increasing. Two million Americans lost their homes in 2008, and 2.8 million more in 2009, but the numbers are expected to be even higher in 2010.” Residential construction activity has slowed to a crawl across the country as housing appears set for another leg down.</p>
<p>Not one sector of the economy is thriving. Everywhere demand is weak; from retail to real estate, from car sales to electronics, from manufacturing to exports. It’s a wasteland.</p>
<p>The Obama administration has given up on stimulus and settled on an aggressive new campaign strategy. They’ve jettisoned “Recovery Summer” and shifted into full attack-mode. On Wednesday in Ohio, Obama delivered a blistering speech that rallied the Party faithful and left the GOP reeling in surprise. Here’s an excerpt:</p>
<p>“I ran for President because for much of the last decade, a very specific governing philosophy had reigned about how America should work: Cut taxes, especially for millionaires and billionaires. Cut regulations for special interests. Cut trade deals even if they didn’t benefit our workers. Cut back on investments in our people and our future – in education and clean energy; in research and technology. The idea was that if we had blind faith in the market; if we let corporations play by their own rules; if we left everyone else to fend for themselves, America would grow and prosper.</p>
<p>For a time, this idea gave us the illusion of prosperity. We saw financial firms and CEOs take in record profits and record bonuses. We saw a housing boom that led to new homeowners and new jobs in construction. Consumers bought more condos and bigger cars and better televisions.</p>
<p>But while all this was happening, the broader economy was becoming weaker. Job growth between 2000 and 2008 was slower than it had been in any economic expansion since World War II – even slower than it’s been over the past year. The wages and incomes of middle-class families kept falling while the cost of everything from tuition to health care kept rising. Folks were forced to put more debt on their credit cards and borrow against homes that many couldn’t afford in the first place. Meanwhile, a failure to pay for two wars and two tax cuts for the wealthy helped turn a record surplus into a record deficit.”</p>
<p>Notice how skillfully Obama absolves himself and his party of any blame in the crushing of the middle class and wrecking the economy. Many believe that both parties are equally culpable. And why the sudden transformation from president milquetoast to Jake LaMotta? Is Obama genuinely upset or is it just more political theater? Maybe Obama thinks he can avoid a GOP landslide by castigating the Republicans in public rather than pushing another stimulus bill through congress or closing down Guantanamo? In any event, a spirited bout of political mud-wrestling is bound to be more entertaining than two months of grandiose oratory and visions of the Elysian Fields.</p>
<p>Obama’s speech sent up howls from the usual quarters. The Wall Street Journal took issue with Obama’s “combative” style and dismissed the speech as “red meat” for disillusioned Democrats. The WSJ’s editorial page, which serves as the stomping-grounds for the nation’s far right ideologues, denounced the speech as “low rent rhetoric”. And, while the president did provide some details of a $50 billion infrastructure upgrade and $200 billion in new tax breaks for small business, there’s no mistake that the speech was meant to kick off the 2010 campaign season in grand style with a broadside aimed at the GOP leadership.</p>
<p>Obama must know by now that his abysmal performance has left downcast Dems with no reason to drag themselves to the voting booths in November. In the last few weeks the administration has been frantically trying to link together mini-events to create the impression that Obama is still serious about “change”. The appearance of Mahmoud Abbas and Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House was a particularly cynical attempt to show that Obama is involved in an issue that is of vital importance to many of his supporters. The so called “summit” was nothing more than a photo op intended to establish Obama’s bone fides as a peacemaker. But Obama was unable to get any concessions from Israel, so the public relations scheme fizzled without any real sign of improvement.</p>
<p>Perhaps developments in the Middle East don’t matter–except of course to the small group of “professional leftists” that Obama has publicly repudiated already. What matters to most voters is the economy, and clearly, the outcome of the midterms will be decided on the condition of the economy and, more specifically, on jobs. On that front, there’s both good and bad news. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently released a report confirming that the American Recovery Act (aka–Obama’s fiscal stimulus) did exactly what it was designed to do. It lowered unemployment by about 1.5%, provided jobs for roughly 2.5 to 3 million people, and increased GDP between 1.7 percent and 4.2 percent. Also, former Fed governor Alan Blinder and economist Mark Zandi released a report which showed that–without the emergency actions of the Fed and Obama administration–GDP would have plunged 12% rather than 4%, and unemployment would have skyrocketed to 16.5%. (rather than 9.6%) The two conservative economists concluded that, absent the monetary and fiscal stimulus, the budget deficits would have exceeded $2,600 billion in fiscal year 2011, nearly twice present projections. Bottom line: The stimulus and bank recapitalization programs worked. (although the TARP clearly rewarded crooked bankers who triggered the financial crisis)</p>
<p>Obama can also boast that (according to economist Robert Shapiro) of the 8.5 million jobs that were lost in the downturn, 7,800,000 of those jobs or 92 percent were lost either on Bush’s watch or the first 6 months of the Obama administration. (before his policies were enacted) In other words, Obama can only be held accountable for about 41,000 lost jobs, while the Republicans are responsible for roughly 8 million jobs.</p>
<p>Even so, there’s no indication that the job’s situation is turning around anytime soon. Last Friday, the Labor Department reported that 67,000 new private sector jobs were created in August, a notable improvement. Unfortunately, at least 125,000 are needed to keep up with the growth of the potential work force. That means the economy will have to grow at a 2 to 2.5% GDP before we see a real decline in the jobless figures. And, now that the Fed and the administration are focused on “belt tightening”, it is unlikely that the government will provide the necessary resources to dig out of the hole the country finds itself in. Gluskin Scheff’s David Rosenberg summed it up like this,</p>
<p>“We are currently experiencing the recession with the slowest job creation in history. And based on our prior estimates, the recession will last around 85 months before we regain the unemployment rate seen at the onset in December 2007.”</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the social safety net continues to get more and more frayed as the slump persists. Homeless shelters and food banks are stretched to the max while the Department of Agriculture’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (aka–the food stamps program) reports that 41 million people–more than one in eight people–now need government assistance to feed themselves and their families. That’s up 10% from last year.</p>
<p>Ordinary working people are hurting bigtime, still waiting for the prophet Obama to lead them to the promised land. But Obama has abandoned “Big Government” as the answer, whether it be a second round of stimulus, government jobs programs, or expanded welfare assistance. He’ll have none of it. Sure, he’ll playfully joust with his GOP rivals, but he’ll never seriously diverge from the path cleared by his ideological twin, Ronald Reagan.</p> | true | 4 | feds beige book released wednesday provides sobering look economy sputteringalong empty nearly districts reported slower activity amid widespread signs deceleration stimulusfueled rebound powered gdp 5 two quarters earlier progressively dissipated slashing growth anemic 16 underemployment soared 165 deflation continued tighten grip talk recovery ceased policymakers grown tentative unwilling anything might cost votes upcoming midterm elections housing priceswhich holding steady nearly yearhave started lose ground following expiration homebuyer tax credit end june according economist joseph stiglitz foreclosure rate increasing two million americans lost homes 2008 28 million 2009 numbers expected even higher 2010 residential construction activity slowed crawl across country housing appears set another leg one sector economy thriving everywhere demand weak retail real estate car sales electronics manufacturing exports wasteland obama administration given stimulus settled aggressive new campaign strategy theyve jettisoned recovery summer shifted full attackmode wednesday ohio obama delivered blistering speech rallied party faithful left gop reeling surprise heres excerpt ran president much last decade specific governing philosophy reigned america work cut taxes especially millionaires billionaires cut regulations special interests cut trade deals even didnt benefit workers cut back investments people future education clean energy research technology idea blind faith market let corporations play rules left everyone else fend america would grow prosper time idea gave us illusion prosperity saw financial firms ceos take record profits record bonuses saw housing boom led new homeowners new jobs construction consumers bought condos bigger cars better televisions happening broader economy becoming weaker job growth 2000 2008 slower economic expansion since world war ii even slower past year wages incomes middleclass families kept falling cost everything tuition health care kept rising folks forced put debt credit cards borrow homes many couldnt afford first place meanwhile failure pay two wars two tax cuts wealthy helped turn record surplus record deficit notice skillfully obama absolves party blame crushing middle class wrecking economy many believe parties equally culpable sudden transformation president milquetoast jake lamotta obama genuinely upset political theater maybe obama thinks avoid gop landslide castigating republicans public rather pushing another stimulus bill congress closing guantanamo event spirited bout political mudwrestling bound entertaining two months grandiose oratory visions elysian fields obamas speech sent howls usual quarters wall street journal took issue obamas combative style dismissed speech red meat disillusioned democrats wsjs editorial page serves stompinggrounds nations far right ideologues denounced speech low rent rhetoric president provide details 50 billion infrastructure upgrade 200 billion new tax breaks small business theres mistake speech meant kick 2010 campaign season grand style broadside aimed gop leadership obama must know abysmal performance left downcast dems reason drag voting booths november last weeks administration frantically trying link together minievents create impression obama still serious change appearance mahmoud abbas benjamin netanyahu white house particularly cynical attempt show obama involved issue vital importance many supporters called summit nothing photo op intended establish obamas bone fides peacemaker obama unable get concessions israel public relations scheme fizzled without real sign improvement perhaps developments middle east dont matterexcept course small group professional leftists obama publicly repudiated already matters voters economy clearly outcome midterms decided condition economy specifically jobs front theres good bad news nonpartisan congressional budget office cbo recently released report confirming american recovery act akaobamas fiscal stimulus exactly designed lowered unemployment 15 provided jobs roughly 25 3 million people increased gdp 17 percent 42 percent also former fed governor alan blinder economist mark zandi released report showed thatwithout emergency actions fed obama administrationgdp would plunged 12 rather 4 unemployment would skyrocketed 165 rather 96 two conservative economists concluded absent monetary fiscal stimulus budget deficits would exceeded 2600 billion fiscal year 2011 nearly twice present projections bottom line stimulus bank recapitalization programs worked although tarp clearly rewarded crooked bankers triggered financial crisis obama also boast according economist robert shapiro 85 million jobs lost downturn 7800000 jobs 92 percent lost either bushs watch first 6 months obama administration policies enacted words obama held accountable 41000 lost jobs republicans responsible roughly 8 million jobs even theres indication jobs situation turning around anytime soon last friday labor department reported 67000 new private sector jobs created august notable improvement unfortunately least 125000 needed keep growth potential work force means economy grow 2 25 gdp see real decline jobless figures fed administration focused belt tightening unlikely government provide necessary resources dig hole country finds gluskin scheffs david rosenberg summed like currently experiencing recession slowest job creation history based prior estimates recession last around 85 months regain unemployment rate seen onset december 2007 meanwhile social safety net continues get frayed slump persists homeless shelters food banks stretched max department agricultures supplemental nutrition assistance program akathe food stamps program reports 41 million peoplemore one eight peoplenow need government assistance feed families thats 10 last year ordinary working people hurting bigtime still waiting prophet obama lead promised land obama abandoned big government answer whether second round stimulus government jobs programs expanded welfare assistance hell none sure hell playfully joust gop rivals hell never seriously diverge path cleared ideological twin ronald reagan | 826 |
<p>Lillie Mae WashingtonPhoto: James Seymour</p>
<p />
<p>There is a term of art that was often used during the mortgage boom: “I’ll be gone, you’ll be gone,” or “IBGYBG.” In the mortgage business, it meant that however bad or risky or outright fraudulent a mortgage was, the person who originated it didn’t have to worry—he’d have sold it and moved on long before the borrower was the wiser. The people to whom broker sold the mortgage wouldn’t be held responsible, either—after all, they weren’t responsible for the fraud.</p>
<p>Lillie Mae Washington, who is 96 and lives in West Los Angeles, knows all too much about IBGYBG. Since September 2008, when Washington first sued her mortgage servicer, lender, escrow agent, and others for mortgage fraud, she has been trapped in a legal hell. She has represented herself, been represented pro bono, and now pays a lawyer to handle her case. The suit has been handled by at least seven judges, and the docket runs 104 documents long in federal court alone.</p>
<p>In all that time, no one that Washington has sued has argued that her mortgage was entirely by-the-book. It’s just that no one cares that it probably wasn’t.</p>
<p>That includes Ocwen, Washington’s mortgage servicer, which she says has been trying for over a year to evict her from the home where she has lived for nearly four decades. Washington paid Ocwen—a giant company that services hundreds of thousands of mortgages in all 50 states, often on behalf of big Wall&#160;Street banks that hold the mortgages—as long as she could afford to, but the payments were more than three times higher than what she expected when she signed the mortgage documents. A judge’s mediation order temporarily stopped Washington from being kicked out late last month, but her lawyer is far from confident that she won’t be asked to leave again.</p>
<p>Many of the original defendants in Washington’s case are now either insolvent or out of business—in short, they’re gone. But the documents in Washington’s case make it clear that the defendants believe they can’t be held responsible for fraud at mortgage origination. Mitch Abdallah, Washington’s latest lawyer, doesn’t see it that way. “Once you’re responsible for a bad act,” he says, “you can’t wash your hands of the taint by simply signing the dirty document to someone else.”</p>
<p>“At this stage in life we’re not supposed to have this happening,” Washington told me by phone last Friday. “At this stage in life there should not be all this going on.”</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Washington’s story starts the way many similar tales of alleged mortgage fraud do: with a call from a salesman.</p>
<p>In October 2006, a representative from a company called Home Loans Direct called Washington’s home and arranged an appointment to visit. Washington’s son Hobert, who was a co-owner of the house, had already signed the mortgage separately, without Lillie Mae’s knowledge. Hobert Washington was suffering from&#160;Alzheimer’s, and his “cognitive impairment would have been immediately visible and obvious to anyone who spoke and interacted with him,” according to court documents. Hobert had incontinence problems, an eye that bulged out of its socket, and fell frequently, says his brother, Bobby Washington.</p>
<p>Hobert “invited the lenders into her home,” Abdallah says. “The son suffered from Alzheimer’s, so he wasn’t in the best of shape to be giving advice or counseling his mother. They sat down and offered her a loan that she probably shouldn’t have taken and was filled with representations that aren’t accurate.”</p>
<p>According to court filings, the salesman came to Washington’s house and promised that she could get a fixed-rate loan at “about 6 percent,” pay “no more than $700 a month,” and even get $80,000 for repairs. He said the payments would not start for six months. Washington signed on the dotted line.</p>
<p>According to legal documents, the loan agent had Washington sign a standard mortgage form without even showing her key documents that outlined information on how much she was borrowing, how much interest she’d be paying, and how much her payments would be.</p>
<p>Perhaps Washington was foolish to rely on the salesman’s verbal representations, but <a href="http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6500-1600.html" type="external">federal law is clear</a>. It requires that disclosures about mortgage terms be made “clearly and conspicuously,” “grouped together,” “in writing,” and “in a form the consumer may keep,” all “before consummation of the transaction.” Washington alleges that the disclosures made to her failed to meet many of those conditions.</p>
<p>Home Loans Direct, the company that allegedly sold Washington the mortgage, no longer has a real estate license. It <a href="http://www2.dre.ca.gov/PublicASP/pplinfo.asp?License_id=01759530" type="external">surrendered the license in 2008</a> during a state investigation, according to records from the California Department of Real Estate. In addition, one of the company’s officers, Jorge Ricardo&#160;Cruz, had his license <a href="http://www2.dre.ca.gov/publicasp/pplinfo.asp?License_id=00774298" type="external">suspended and later revoked</a>. A&#160;California Department of Real Estate document [ <a href="/wp-content/uploads/home-loans-direct.pdf" type="external">PDF</a>] obtained by Mother Jones explains that Home Loans Direct surrendered its license after deciding not to contest allegations that it:</p>
<p>knowingly advertised, printed, displayed, published, distributed, or caused or permitted to be advertised, printed, displayed, published, distributed, statements or representations with regard to the rates, terms, or conditions for making, purchasing, or negotiating loans on real property which were false, misleading, or deceptive.</p>
<p>The Home Loans Direct salesman promised to send copies of the mortgage documents to Washington after she signed. But when Washington’s son Bobby called the firm to follow up, he got two unsigned notes in the mail, promising that the Washingtons would be able to “recast the loan to a more comfortable payment” in six months and that “everything will be alright.”</p>
<p>Needless to say, the loan wasn’t what Lillie Mae thought it was. That November, Lillie Mae and Bobby were celebrating Thanksgiving with family upstate when a call came in from Hobert’s ex-wife, who was caring for him. “She said, ‘Sit down,'” Bobby recalled. “‘Your payment is due next month and it’s $2,582.29.’ It ruined the whole weekend.”</p>
<p>When the Washingtons finally received copies of the loan paperwork in late November, they realized they’d been screwed. The interest rate was actually over 9 percent, and the loan was adjustable—later, the rate would could climb to nearly 12 percent. The Washingtons would get $95,909.25 in cash out, significantly more than the $80,000 they had been promised. The final loan documents also included a form from a notary attesting that Hobert and his mother had appeared before her together. Washington says she never saw a notary and has never been to Hacienda Heights, where the notary was registered. (Attempts to locate the notary were unsuccessful.)</p>
<p>“They came and took advantage,” Bobby says. “They played this game of lies.”</p>
<p>Most of the defense lawyers involved with the case didn’t return calls and emails asking for their clients’ side of the story. Brent Kramer, who represents Ocwen and several other defendants, referred me to the documents available in the case and otherwise declined comment.</p>
<p>Selling mortgages to low-income borrowers based on a misleading monthly payment was a common practice during the mortgage boom, says Prentiss Cox, a law professor at the University of Minnesota who is an expert in mortgage fraud. “Sales tactics were highly aggressive and the terms of the loans were complex and confusing,” Cox says. “It was almost always someone coming to them, promising them lower monthly payments, and then giving them a mortgage that had hard-to-understand back-end costs. The monthly payment didn’t reflect the true long-term cost of the loan.”</p>
<p>The Washingtons, panicked and confused about their rights, searched high and low for a way out. Bobby, who worked in a nonlegal capacity at a big law firm in Los Angeles, asked his colleagues for help. Lillie Mae sent a letter to the mortgage company disputing the terms of the loan. In the meantime, the Washingtons decided to use the cash out to pay their mortgage bills.</p>
<p>Bobby’s coworkers told him he and Lillie Mae had at least 10 different federal and state causes of action. They passed his case on to another big downtown law firm, which took the case pro bono but didn’t actually file suit until September 2008. Meanwhile, things were only getting worse for the Washingtons. Ocwen denied a request to cancel the loan based on fraud at origination. The Washingtons continued to drain the cash-out money to pay their bills. In October 2009, the Washingtons ran out of money, and they stopped paying the loan. A month later, Hobert Washington was dead, and Lillie Mae was on the hook for the entire loan.</p>
<p>Lillie Mae and Bobby Washington want to stay in their home. “It’s not modern but it’s home,” she says. “You’ve got a roof over your head at least, got a yard you can go out in. I’m just trying to keep everything under control.”</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | lillie mae washingtonphoto james seymour term art often used mortgage boom ill gone youll gone ibgybg mortgage business meant however bad risky outright fraudulent mortgage person originated didnt worryhed sold moved long borrower wiser people broker sold mortgage wouldnt held responsible eitherafter werent responsible fraud lillie mae washington 96 lives west los angeles knows much ibgybg since september 2008 washington first sued mortgage servicer lender escrow agent others mortgage fraud trapped legal hell represented represented pro bono pays lawyer handle case suit handled least seven judges docket runs 104 documents long federal court alone time one washington sued argued mortgage entirely bythebook one cares probably wasnt includes ocwen washingtons mortgage servicer says trying year evict home lived nearly four decades washington paid ocwena giant company services hundreds thousands mortgages 50 states often behalf big wall160street banks hold mortgagesas long could afford payments three times higher expected signed mortgage documents judges mediation order temporarily stopped washington kicked late last month lawyer far confident wont asked leave many original defendants washingtons case either insolvent businessin short theyre gone documents washingtons case make clear defendants believe cant held responsible fraud mortgage origination mitch abdallah washingtons latest lawyer doesnt see way youre responsible bad act says cant wash hands taint simply signing dirty document someone else stage life supposed happening washington told phone last friday stage life going 160 washingtons story starts way many similar tales alleged mortgage fraud call salesman october 2006 representative company called home loans direct called washingtons home arranged appointment visit washingtons son hobert coowner house already signed mortgage separately without lillie maes knowledge hobert washington suffering from160alzheimers cognitive impairment would immediately visible obvious anyone spoke interacted according court documents hobert incontinence problems eye bulged socket fell frequently says brother bobby washington hobert invited lenders home abdallah says son suffered alzheimers wasnt best shape giving advice counseling mother sat offered loan probably shouldnt taken filled representations arent accurate according court filings salesman came washingtons house promised could get fixedrate loan 6 percent pay 700 month even get 80000 repairs said payments would start six months washington signed dotted line according legal documents loan agent washington sign standard mortgage form without even showing key documents outlined information much borrowing much interest shed paying much payments would perhaps washington foolish rely salesmans verbal representations federal law clear requires disclosures mortgage terms made clearly conspicuously grouped together writing form consumer may keep consummation transaction washington alleges disclosures made failed meet many conditions home loans direct company allegedly sold washington mortgage longer real estate license surrendered license 2008 state investigation according records california department real estate addition one companys officers jorge ricardo160cruz license suspended later revoked a160california department real estate document pdf obtained mother jones explains home loans direct surrendered license deciding contest allegations knowingly advertised printed displayed published distributed caused permitted advertised printed displayed published distributed statements representations regard rates terms conditions making purchasing negotiating loans real property false misleading deceptive home loans direct salesman promised send copies mortgage documents washington signed washingtons son bobby called firm follow got two unsigned notes mail promising washingtons would able recast loan comfortable payment six months everything alright needless say loan wasnt lillie mae thought november lillie mae bobby celebrating thanksgiving family upstate call came hoberts exwife caring said sit bobby recalled payment due next month 258229 ruined whole weekend washingtons finally received copies loan paperwork late november realized theyd screwed interest rate actually 9 percent loan adjustablelater rate would could climb nearly 12 percent washingtons would get 9590925 cash significantly 80000 promised final loan documents also included form notary attesting hobert mother appeared together washington says never saw notary never hacienda heights notary registered attempts locate notary unsuccessful came took advantage bobby says played game lies defense lawyers involved case didnt return calls emails asking clients side story brent kramer represents ocwen several defendants referred documents available case otherwise declined comment selling mortgages lowincome borrowers based misleading monthly payment common practice mortgage boom says prentiss cox law professor university minnesota expert mortgage fraud sales tactics highly aggressive terms loans complex confusing cox says almost always someone coming promising lower monthly payments giving mortgage hardtounderstand backend costs monthly payment didnt reflect true longterm cost loan washingtons panicked confused rights searched high low way bobby worked nonlegal capacity big law firm los angeles asked colleagues help lillie mae sent letter mortgage company disputing terms loan meantime washingtons decided use cash pay mortgage bills bobbys coworkers told lillie mae least 10 different federal state causes action passed case another big downtown law firm took case pro bono didnt actually file suit september 2008 meanwhile things getting worse washingtons ocwen denied request cancel loan based fraud origination washingtons continued drain cashout money pay bills october 2009 washingtons ran money stopped paying loan month later hobert washington dead lillie mae hook entire loan lillie mae bobby washington want stay home modern home says youve got roof head least got yard go im trying keep everything control | 826 |
<p>The neocon plan to transform the Middle East and Central Asia into a pliant client of the US empire and its only-democracy-in-the-Middle-East is now facing a very different playing field. Not only are the wars against the Palestinians, Afghans and Iraqis floundering, but they have set in motion unforeseen moves by all the regional players.</p>
<p>The empire faces a resurgent Turkey, heir to the Ottomans, who governed a largely peaceful Middle East for half a millennium. As part of a dynamic diplomatic outreach under the Justice and Development Party (AKP), Turkey re-established the Caliphate visa-free tradition with Albania, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya and Syria last year. In February Turkish Culture and Tourism Minister Ertugrul Gunay offered to do likewise with Egypt. There is “a great new plan of creating a Middle East Union as a regional equivalent of the European Union” with Turkey, fresh from a resounding constitutional referendum win by the AKP, writes Israel Shamir.</p>
<p>Turkey also established a strategic partnership with Russia during the past two years, with a visa-free regime and ambitious trade and investment plans (denominated in rubles and lira), including the construction of new pipelines and nuclear energy facilities.</p>
<p>Just as Turkey is heir to the Ottomans, Russia is heir to the Byzantines, who ruled a largely peaceful Middle East for close to a millennium before the Turks. Together, Russia and Turkey have far more justification as Middle Eastern “hegemons” than the British-American 20th century usurpers, and they are doing something about it.</p>
<p>In a delicious irony, invasions by the US and Israel in the Middle East and Eurasia have not cowed the countries affected, but emboldened them to work together, creating the basis for a new alignment of forces, including Russia, Turkey, Syria and Iran.</p>
<p>Syria, Turkey and Iran are united not only by tradition, faith, resistance to US-Israeli plans, but by their common need to fight Kurdish separatists, who have been supported by both the US and Israel. Their economic cooperation is growing by leaps and bounds. Adding Russia to the mix constitutes a like-minded, strong regional force encompassing the full socio-political spectrum, from Sunni and Shia Muslim, Christian, even Jewish, to secular traditions.</p>
<p>This is the natural regional geopolitical logic, not the artificial one imposed over the past 150 years by the British and now US empires. Just as the Crusaders came to wreak havoc a millennium ago, forcing locals to unite to expel the invaders, so today’s Crusaders have set in motion the forces of their own demise.</p>
<p>Turkey’s bold move with Brazil to defuse the West’s stand-off with Iran caught the world’s imagination in May. Its defiance of Israel after the Israeli attack on the Peace Flotilla trying to break the siege of Gaza in June made it the darling of the Arab world.</p>
<p>Russia has its own, less spectacular contributions to these, the most burning issues in the Middle East today. There are problems for Russia. Its crippled economy and weakened military give it pause in anything that might provoke the world superpower. Its elites are divided on how far to pursuit accommodation with the US. The tragedies of Afghanistan and Chechnya and fears arising from the impasse in most of the “stans” continue to plague Russia’s relations with the Muslim Middle East.</p>
<p>Since the departure of Soviet forces from Egypt in 1972, Russia has not officially had a strong presence in the Middle East. Since the mid- 1980s, it saw a million-odd Russians emigrate to Israel, who like immigrants anywhere, are anxious to prove their devotion and are on the whole unwilling to give up land in any two-state solution for Palestine. As Anatol Sharansky quipped to Bill Clinton after he emigrated, “I come from one of the biggest countries in the world to one of the smallest. You want me to cut it in half. No, thank you.” Russia now has its very own well-funded Israel Lobby; many Russians are dual Israeli citizens, enjoying a visa-free regime with Israel.</p>
<p>Then there is Russia’s equivocal stance on the stand-off between the West and Iran. Russia cooperates with Iran on nuclear energy, but has concerns about Iran’s nuclear intentions, supporting Security Council sanctions and cancelling the S-300 missile deal it signed with Iran in 2005. It is also increasing its support for US efforts in Afghanistan. Many commentators conclude that these are signs that the Russian leadership under President Dmitri Medvedev is caving in to Washington, backtracking on the more anti-imperial policy of Putin. “They showed that they are not reliable,” criticised Iranian Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi.</p>
<p>Russia is fence-sitting on this tricky dilemma. It is also siding, so far, with the US and the EU in refusing to include Turkey and Brazil in the negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme. “The Non-Aligned countries in general, and Iran in particular, have interpreted the Russian vote as the will on the part of a great power to prevent emerging powers from attaining the energy independence they need for their economic development. And it will be difficult to make them forget this Russian faux pas,” argues Thierry Meyssan at voltairenet.org.</p>
<p>Whatever the truth is there, the cooperation with Iran and now Turkey, Syria and Egypt on developing peaceful nuclear power, and the recent agreement to sell Syria advanced P-800 cruise missiles show Russia is hardly the plaything of the US and Israel in Middle East issues. Israel is furious over the missile sale to Syria, and last week threatened to sell “strategic, tie-breaking weapons” to “areas of strategic importance” to Russia in revenge. On both Iran and Syria, Russia’s moves suggest it is trying to calm volatile situations that could explode.</p>
<p>There are other reasons to see Russia as a possible Middle East powerbroker. The millions of Russian Jews who moved to Israel are not necessarily a Lieberman-like Achilles Heel for Russia. A third of them are scornfully dismissed as not sufficiently kosher and could be a serious problem for a state that is founded solely on racial purity. Many have returned to Russia or managed to move on to greener pastures. Already, such prominent rightwing politicians as Moshe Arens, political patron of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, are considering a one-state solution. Perhaps these Russian immigrants will produce a Frederik de Klerk to re-enact the dismantling of South African apartheid.</p>
<p>Russia holds another intriguing key to peace in the Middle East. Zionism from the start was a secular socialist movement, with religious conservative Jews strongly opposed, a situation that continues even today, despite the defection of many under blandishments from the likes of Ben Gurion and Netanyahu. Like the Palestinians, True Torah Jews don’t recognise the “Jewish state”.</p>
<p>But wait! There is a legitimate Jewish state, a secular one set up in 1928 in Birobidjan Russia, in accordance with Soviet secular nationalities policies. There is nothing stopping the entire population of Israeli Jews, orthodox and secular alike, from decamping to this Jewish homeland, blessed with abundant raw materials, Golda Meir’s “a land without a people for a people without a land”. It has taken on a new lease on life since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Russian President Dmitri Medvedev made an unprecedented visit this summer, the first ever of a Russian (or Soviet) leader and pointed out the strong Russian state support it has as a Jewish homeland where Yiddish, the secular language of European Jews (not sacred Hebrew), is the state language.</p>
<p>There has been no magic hand guiding Turkey and Russia as they form the axis of a new political formation. Rather it is the resilience of Islam in the face of Western onslaught, plus — surprisingly — a page from the history of Soviet secular national self-determination. Turkey, once the “sick man of Europe”, is now “the only healthy man of Europe”, Turkish President Abdullah Gul was told at the UN Millennium Goals Summit last week, positioning it along with the Russian, and friends Iranian and Syrian to clean up the mess created by the British empire and its “democratic” offspring, the US and Israel.</p>
<p>While US and Israeli strategists continue to pore over mad schemes to invade Iran, Russian and Turkish leaders plan to increase trade and development in the Middle East, including nuclear power. From a Middle Eastern point of view, Russia’s eagerness to build power stations in Iran, Turkey, Syria and Egypt shows a desire to help accelerate the economic development that Westerners have long denied the Middle East — other than Israel — for so long. This includes Lebanon where Stroitransgaz and Gazprom will transit Syrian gas until Beirut can overcome Israeli-imposed obstacles to the exploitation of its large reserves offshore.</p>
<p>Russia in its own way, like its ally Turkey, has placed itself as a go-between in the most urgent problems facing the Middle East — Palestine and Iran. “Peace in the Middle East holds the key to a peaceful and stable future in the world,” Gul told the UN Millennium Goals Summit — in English. The world now watches to see if their efforts will bear fruit.</p>
<p>ERIC WALBERG writes for <a href="http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/" type="external">Al-Ahram Weekly</a>. You can reach him at <a href="http://ericwalberg.com/" type="external">http://ericwalberg.com/</a></p> | true | 4 | neocon plan transform middle east central asia pliant client us empire onlydemocracyinthemiddleeast facing different playing field wars palestinians afghans iraqis floundering set motion unforeseen moves regional players empire faces resurgent turkey heir ottomans governed largely peaceful middle east half millennium part dynamic diplomatic outreach justice development party akp turkey reestablished caliphate visafree tradition albania jordan lebanon libya syria last year february turkish culture tourism minister ertugrul gunay offered likewise egypt great new plan creating middle east union regional equivalent european union turkey fresh resounding constitutional referendum win akp writes israel shamir turkey also established strategic partnership russia past two years visafree regime ambitious trade investment plans denominated rubles lira including construction new pipelines nuclear energy facilities turkey heir ottomans russia heir byzantines ruled largely peaceful middle east close millennium turks together russia turkey far justification middle eastern hegemons britishamerican 20th century usurpers something delicious irony invasions us israel middle east eurasia cowed countries affected emboldened work together creating basis new alignment forces including russia turkey syria iran syria turkey iran united tradition faith resistance usisraeli plans common need fight kurdish separatists supported us israel economic cooperation growing leaps bounds adding russia mix constitutes likeminded strong regional force encompassing full sociopolitical spectrum sunni shia muslim christian even jewish secular traditions natural regional geopolitical logic artificial one imposed past 150 years british us empires crusaders came wreak havoc millennium ago forcing locals unite expel invaders todays crusaders set motion forces demise turkeys bold move brazil defuse wests standoff iran caught worlds imagination may defiance israel israeli attack peace flotilla trying break siege gaza june made darling arab world russia less spectacular contributions burning issues middle east today problems russia crippled economy weakened military give pause anything might provoke world superpower elites divided far pursuit accommodation us tragedies afghanistan chechnya fears arising impasse stans continue plague russias relations muslim middle east since departure soviet forces egypt 1972 russia officially strong presence middle east since mid 1980s saw millionodd russians emigrate israel like immigrants anywhere anxious prove devotion whole unwilling give land twostate solution palestine anatol sharansky quipped bill clinton emigrated come one biggest countries world one smallest want cut half thank russia wellfunded israel lobby many russians dual israeli citizens enjoying visafree regime israel russias equivocal stance standoff west iran russia cooperates iran nuclear energy concerns irans nuclear intentions supporting security council sanctions cancelling s300 missile deal signed iran 2005 also increasing support us efforts afghanistan many commentators conclude signs russian leadership president dmitri medvedev caving washington backtracking antiimperial policy putin showed reliable criticised iranian defence minister ahmad vahidi russia fencesitting tricky dilemma also siding far us eu refusing include turkey brazil negotiations irans nuclear programme nonaligned countries general iran particular interpreted russian vote part great power prevent emerging powers attaining energy independence need economic development difficult make forget russian faux pas argues thierry meyssan voltairenetorg whatever truth cooperation iran turkey syria egypt developing peaceful nuclear power recent agreement sell syria advanced p800 cruise missiles show russia hardly plaything us israel middle east issues israel furious missile sale syria last week threatened sell strategic tiebreaking weapons areas strategic importance russia revenge iran syria russias moves suggest trying calm volatile situations could explode reasons see russia possible middle east powerbroker millions russian jews moved israel necessarily liebermanlike achilles heel russia third scornfully dismissed sufficiently kosher could serious problem state founded solely racial purity many returned russia managed move greener pastures already prominent rightwing politicians moshe arens political patron israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu considering onestate solution perhaps russian immigrants produce frederik de klerk reenact dismantling south african apartheid russia holds another intriguing key peace middle east zionism start secular socialist movement religious conservative jews strongly opposed situation continues even today despite defection many blandishments likes ben gurion netanyahu like palestinians true torah jews dont recognise jewish state wait legitimate jewish state secular one set 1928 birobidjan russia accordance soviet secular nationalities policies nothing stopping entire population israeli jews orthodox secular alike decamping jewish homeland blessed abundant raw materials golda meirs land without people people without land taken new lease life since collapse soviet union russian president dmitri medvedev made unprecedented visit summer first ever russian soviet leader pointed strong russian state support jewish homeland yiddish secular language european jews sacred hebrew state language magic hand guiding turkey russia form axis new political formation rather resilience islam face western onslaught plus surprisingly page history soviet secular national selfdetermination turkey sick man europe healthy man europe turkish president abdullah gul told un millennium goals summit last week positioning along russian friends iranian syrian clean mess created british empire democratic offspring us israel us israeli strategists continue pore mad schemes invade iran russian turkish leaders plan increase trade development middle east including nuclear power middle eastern point view russias eagerness build power stations iran turkey syria egypt shows desire help accelerate economic development westerners long denied middle east israel long includes lebanon stroitransgaz gazprom transit syrian gas beirut overcome israeliimposed obstacles exploitation large reserves offshore russia way like ally turkey placed gobetween urgent problems facing middle east palestine iran peace middle east holds key peaceful stable future world gul told un millennium goals summit english world watches see efforts bear fruit eric walberg writes alahram weekly reach httpericwalbergcom | 871 |
<p>If legendary comedian Mort Sahl felled his one-millionth diseased tree of cultural lethargy and political disingenuousness in the vast and ever-expanding forest of American megalomania and Wikipedia wasn’t there to acknowledge it, would anybody know to give a crap?</p>
<p>Doubtful.</p>
<p>To quote Ambrose Bierce, an inventor is “a person who makes an ingenious arrangement of wheels, levers and springs, and believes it civilization.”</p>
<p>So then what does it mean to our concept of civilization when our primary source of information gathering, the Internet, informs us through its preeminent encyclopedia, Wikipedia, that Mort Sahl deserves an entry that is roughly the same size as those for Miracle Whip and Joe Piscopo and only half the size of the entries for flatulence and hard-boiled eggs?</p>
<p />
<p>This, after all, is Mort Sahl, the Hugh Hefner of political satire and social commentary. If journalism is the first draft of history, he has proven with his public eviscerations of the national news for 50 years (and counting) to be one of history’s most invaluable and dedicated proofreaders. It means that civilization is more or less anything we do and the monkeys don’t. In other words, if evolution were really the process of our retaining only those characteristics most useful to the betterment of the species and the disregarding of all that is useless and nonsensical, then there would never have been the emergence of the Atomic Age, “Godfather III,” a Caucasian Jesus, breech-loading weaponry, compassionate conservatism or the pubic toupee.</p>
<p>In fact, it has been argued that any conclusion we make about the world comes to us at the moment when we get tired of thinking.</p>
<p>Tired of thinking several Tuesdays ago, I sought out the company of somebody who I knew would be willing to do some thinking for me; somebody who had previously, both in person and on LP, taken hold of the other end of the piano, so to speak, and helped me move it into a brighter room. A real honestagoodness player whose music drifting out my window made me considerably more beautiful to the world.</p>
<p>Sitting at Fabrocini’s Italian restaurant in Bel Air, I try to wipe what turns out to be an existential fog from my glasses with the hem of my T-shirt while ordering a spinach salad and a triple espresso from a beleaguered waiter. Sitting across from me is Mort Sahl, whose eyes are as bright as freshly sharpened pencils and whose eyebrows are perpetually knitted as if life were an impossibly itchy sweater that needed to be unraveled and turned back into yarn and returned to the sheep. He drinks water and glances through the New York Times.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: I was listening to your 1960 recording “Mort Sahl at the Hungry i” on my way over here and I was stuck by how, when you were talking about the FBI infiltrating protests at college campuses and posing as students in order to disrupt what might otherwise be orderly gatherings, the audience seemed shocked and unsure as to whether or not you were joking.</p>
<p>Mort Sahl: Sure, I remember.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: It was fascinating because nowadays, with agencies like the NSA, everybody automatically assumes that they’re being spied on, that we don’t even have to leave our homes anymore to be infiltrated by the FBI. The shock today might be that the government isn’t listening in on you.</p>
<p>Sahl: You know, [General Michael] Hayden used to be NSA, now he runs the CIA — he was going to be on Larry King and all week long they ran promos during the day (impersonating Larry King), “Michael Hayden and your phones!” (Laughs) I bet, I’m sure.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: See, that’s what I mean — that’s such a great joke, a good inadvertent joke. Where is satire today? How does a satirist get work when all you have to do to create satire is report the news with a straight face?</p>
<p>Sahl: You have to see it as a joke, that should be the first thing — you have to recognize the humor of the situation, plus you need to perceive the irony of why it’s funny. Liberals see the irony, but they’re too self-righteous to laugh about it. They’d rather remain serious about it because they prefer tragedy to humor.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: Because tragedy has political application, while humor can’t be used as a hot potato to throw in the other guy’s lap. Both sides do it.</p>
<p>Sahl: That’s right. But the Democrats have to start doing something other than just to repeat over and over that they’re not Republicans. They feel powerful now because they think the Republicans have painted themselves into a corner and [the Democrats] are the only ones we can vote for.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: Are you at all frustrated by [Barack] Obama’s recent public displays of toughness, his willingness to bomb Pakistan and Iran, etc.?</p>
<p>Sahl: Obama is a black guy made in the lab by white guys. Again, it’s about [Democratic] virtue, “We’re going to nominate a black man.” Look who they pick — they didn’t exactly pick Paul Robeson or Malcolm X. Or it’s like with Hillary Clinton. She says, “Believe me, I won’t let the war go on!” What reason is there to believe her? She’s running on the entitlement ticket. It isn’t enough that we had [Bill Clinton], now we have to have her? Has everybody forgotten that he went into Kosovo and that he bombed civilians in Yugoslavia? I mean, his presidency wasn’t exactly a high time in America — maybe for the stock market. But getting back to Obama, Bill Bradley just the other day referred to him as a rock star. What kind of an appraisal is that? It’s not even a good parallel — how often do rocks stars have anything to do with music, not the music industry, but music? It’s vaudeville.Mr. Fish: Maybe [Bradley] was exactly right, then, that Obama is good vaudeville. I mean, isn’t there such a thing as the profession of “celebrity?”</p>
<p>Sahl: Remember Ambrose Bierce? He said in his book of definitions that a celebrity is a person who’s famous for being well known. And that’s the extent of their influence — celebrity trial lawyers, celebrity charity givers. Do we really want a celebrity president?</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: There’s another point to be made about spying, getting back to that for a second. When the FBI infiltrates the left, it’s doing so because the power elite doesn’t understand the language of dissent — dissent that is born out of victimization, right? And if that’s the case, aren’t we all suspect when the power elite views everybody they subjugate with suspicion for fear of revolution? It’s like a butterfly collector who infiltrates a meeting of stamp collectors to understand why they prefer stamp collecting to butterfly collecting — absolutely nothing can be learned by such an exercise.</p>
<p>Sahl: Intelligence agencies do log a lot of overtime in the area of suspicion and it does encourage them to find a lot of pigeons. But, you know, Hoover and McCarthy were never after communists. They were after nonconformists who might want to resist the fascist tendencies of big government. If you look at that whole blacklisting period, Judith Copeland was acquitted, Alger Hiss was convicted of perjury, not spying. Most of the government cases fell apart when they got to court. They were never looking for communists — they never found any. Sure, the country is in real danger of losing its soul, but it’s not because of a group of dedicated nonconformists.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: Right — it’s conformity that is the backbone of totalitarianism, not nonconformity.</p>
<p>Sahl: And who are the nonconformists today? Who do they consider the leftists now? Arianna Huffington? She’s on all those cable shows talking about fighting the system — it’s been pretty good to her. (Laughs)</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: Well, since you were at the center of all that blacklisting stuff in the 1950s, maybe you can tell me: What exactly was so wrong with communism? I mean, forget about what the government was saying about it, it seems that a lot of intellectuals condemned it, too. If you look at the definition of communism in the dictionary — .</p>
<p>Sahl: Sounds like Jesus, doesn’t it?</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: Yeah, I even wrote it down in my notebook because I wanted to ask you about it. It’s defined as: a theory advocating elimination of private property and a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed.</p>
<p>Sahl: When they couldn’t sell that as a threat to capitalism, they started calling it Godless communism.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: Which is also amazing to me — it seems that if you’re looking for some hardcore evidence for what might be a political philosophy that ruins people’s lives and devastates the environment, probably irrevocably, you’ll find it more with capitalism than communism.</p>
<p>Sahl: Capitalism needs a war always to bail it out because it can never pay for itself, I agree. You have to wonder about all that philosophically. With all the privilege of the [American political elite], the Dulles brothers, the Bushes, Sullivan and Cromwell, Brown Brothers Harriman, all that Ivy League pedigree — Fidel led the life he wanted. He did for 50 years. These other guys are like ferrets trying to keep the bank open any way they can.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: And why is this not part of our public discourse? Wasn’t that part of the promise made by you and the counterculture, that serious discussion about what we are as a species and what we might become should happen much more freely?</p>
<p>Sahl: People refuse to connect the dots. Nobody will look seriously at how violent the CIA has been — they killed Lumumba, they killed General Rene Schneider in Chile, they killed Allende, 600 attempts on Fidel. What about the kidnapping of Chavez? Why has the violent side of the agency never come up in a serious way?</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: People, I think, will only be interested in seeking the truth if they feel they can apply their findings. But getting back to the thing about capitalism — it’s a system that’s incompatible with the human equation; both are based on completely different value systems. Capitalism is based on an accumulative value system where the more capital you have, the more value you have and human beings are supposed to be a constant value system that doesn’t fluctuate, everybody’s right to exist being equal. But with the value of capital and accumulated wealth being what it is, it will always be able to supercede the value of a human being and, therefore, humanity itself, which is why extinction of the species is possible, because it might make sense on paper.</p>
<p>Sahl: Yeah, no question.Mr. Fish: Well, where’s that conversation? There are a lot of conversations about different non-economic ideologies and what their pros and cons are, but there never seems to be any conversation about economic theory and the viability of a system of government based solely on a tyranny of ascending and descending numbers.</p>
<p>Sahl: I know what you mean. Look at clubs today — just compare the ambiance of the Hungry i with the Laugh Factory. A comedian today is anybody who can stand up and talk about nothing endlessly.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: Who’s to blame there, the artist or the audience? Is the artist unable to do good work or is the audience ill-equipped to recognize good work when they see it?</p>
<p>Sahl: I think the artist is only that good. I don’t think it’s a broker’s decision to even try to meet the audience’s needs. A comedian nowadays is there to accommodate the audience’s materialism. They don’t have anything on their minds. [A comedian] will get up there and talk for an hour about women like they’re aliens, and that’s his act. I was in New York and I saw Judy Gold and she was complaining that CNN runs that line of headlines at the bottom of the screen — is that really what’s wrong? I just don’t think there’s any cultural depth perception anymore. Even the guys at “The Daily Show” aren’t making fun of the worst of [political wrongdoing]. Maybe they should just do more of what the real news doesn’t do. Those guys at CBS really ended [the Vietnam War] — Rather, Morley Safer and John Hart — by showing us what was going on. Everyday we hear that a bunch of American soldiers got killed, but we don’t see anything. You will on Al-Jazeera.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: What is it that Amy Goodman says?: CNN shows us where the missiles are launched and Al-Jazeera shows us where they land.</p>
<p>Sahl: She’s good, very impressive, although you have to wonder about Pacifica [Radio]. They play her twice a day but they got rid of Marc Cooper, who was pretty good.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: So, getting back to what we were talking about: What will it take for people to demand authenticity from their existence? Do people need role models to emulate — role models that are genuine and honest and not afraid to dissent and challenge the government? I started doing cartoons because I wanted to be John Lennon, or Norman Mailer, or Kurt Vonnegut. Who is there to emulate today? I feel like I’m stuck in your past. (Laughs)</p>
<p>Sahl: Role models, right. Well, the culture now mostly just asks people to settle for second or third best. The people who voted for Kennedy would never vote for Hillary Clinton. They wouldn’t even let her into the convention. They knew they did something wrong when they denied Dean and embraced Kerry; they knew that wasn’t truthful. And when their kids get drugged out and play ersatz black music on their iPods and act like gangbangers when they live in Bel Air, they all know that’s a lie. There’s not much resistance to these bourgeois notions. People don’t fight it very hard.</p>
<p>Mr. Fish: Do they need the fight demonstrated for them to pick it up or can they teach themselves? Isn’t it a kind of heroism if nobody’s doing it? If it is heroism, then it has to be demonstrated by somebody to be emulated by everyone, right?</p>
<p>Sahl: What they do to deter heroism in this country is they keep you on the defensive. It’s a strategy. They try to tie you up, get you defending yourself all the time, [where you’re] trying to prove you’re not crazy. People just have to remember what we’re all here for: to find our way home and to search for justice and romance along the way. Heroism is just learning how to listen to your better angels.</p> | true | 4 | legendary comedian mort sahl felled onemillionth diseased tree cultural lethargy political disingenuousness vast everexpanding forest american megalomania wikipedia wasnt acknowledge would anybody know give crap doubtful quote ambrose bierce inventor person makes ingenious arrangement wheels levers springs believes civilization mean concept civilization primary source information gathering internet informs us preeminent encyclopedia wikipedia mort sahl deserves entry roughly size miracle whip joe piscopo half size entries flatulence hardboiled eggs mort sahl hugh hefner political satire social commentary journalism first draft history proven public eviscerations national news 50 years counting one historys invaluable dedicated proofreaders means civilization less anything monkeys dont words evolution really process retaining characteristics useful betterment species disregarding useless nonsensical would never emergence atomic age godfather iii caucasian jesus breechloading weaponry compassionate conservatism pubic toupee fact argued conclusion make world comes us moment get tired thinking tired thinking several tuesdays ago sought company somebody knew would willing thinking somebody previously person lp taken hold end piano speak helped move brighter room real honestagoodness player whose music drifting window made considerably beautiful world sitting fabrocinis italian restaurant bel air try wipe turns existential fog glasses hem tshirt ordering spinach salad triple espresso beleaguered waiter sitting across mort sahl whose eyes bright freshly sharpened pencils whose eyebrows perpetually knitted life impossibly itchy sweater needed unraveled turned back yarn returned sheep drinks water glances new york times mr fish listening 1960 recording mort sahl hungry way stuck talking fbi infiltrating protests college campuses posing students order disrupt might otherwise orderly gatherings audience seemed shocked unsure whether joking mort sahl sure remember mr fish fascinating nowadays agencies like nsa everybody automatically assumes theyre spied dont even leave homes anymore infiltrated fbi shock today might government isnt listening sahl know general michael hayden used nsa runs cia going larry king week long ran promos day impersonating larry king michael hayden phones laughs bet im sure mr fish see thats mean thats great joke good inadvertent joke satire today satirist get work create satire report news straight face sahl see joke first thing recognize humor situation plus need perceive irony funny liberals see irony theyre selfrighteous laugh theyd rather remain serious prefer tragedy humor mr fish tragedy political application humor cant used hot potato throw guys lap sides sahl thats right democrats start something repeat theyre republicans feel powerful think republicans painted corner democrats ones vote mr fish frustrated barack obamas recent public displays toughness willingness bomb pakistan iran etc sahl obama black guy made lab white guys democratic virtue going nominate black man look pick didnt exactly pick paul robeson malcolm x like hillary clinton says believe wont let war go reason believe shes running entitlement ticket isnt enough bill clinton everybody forgotten went kosovo bombed civilians yugoslavia mean presidency wasnt exactly high time america maybe stock market getting back obama bill bradley day referred rock star kind appraisal even good parallel often rocks stars anything music music industry music vaudevillemr fish maybe bradley exactly right obama good vaudeville mean isnt thing profession celebrity sahl remember ambrose bierce said book definitions celebrity person whos famous well known thats extent influence celebrity trial lawyers celebrity charity givers really want celebrity president mr fish theres another point made spying getting back second fbi infiltrates left power elite doesnt understand language dissent dissent born victimization right thats case arent suspect power elite views everybody subjugate suspicion fear revolution like butterfly collector infiltrates meeting stamp collectors understand prefer stamp collecting butterfly collecting absolutely nothing learned exercise sahl intelligence agencies log lot overtime area suspicion encourage find lot pigeons know hoover mccarthy never communists nonconformists might want resist fascist tendencies big government look whole blacklisting period judith copeland acquitted alger hiss convicted perjury spying government cases fell apart got court never looking communists never found sure country real danger losing soul group dedicated nonconformists mr fish right conformity backbone totalitarianism nonconformity sahl nonconformists today consider leftists arianna huffington shes cable shows talking fighting system pretty good laughs mr fish well since center blacklisting stuff 1950s maybe tell exactly wrong communism mean forget government saying seems lot intellectuals condemned look definition communism dictionary sahl sounds like jesus doesnt mr fish yeah even wrote notebook wanted ask defined theory advocating elimination private property system goods owned common available needed sahl couldnt sell threat capitalism started calling godless communism mr fish also amazing seems youre looking hardcore evidence might political philosophy ruins peoples lives devastates environment probably irrevocably youll find capitalism communism sahl capitalism needs war always bail never pay agree wonder philosophically privilege american political elite dulles brothers bushes sullivan cromwell brown brothers harriman ivy league pedigree fidel led life wanted 50 years guys like ferrets trying keep bank open way mr fish part public discourse wasnt part promise made counterculture serious discussion species might become happen much freely sahl people refuse connect dots nobody look seriously violent cia killed lumumba killed general rene schneider chile killed allende 600 attempts fidel kidnapping chavez violent side agency never come serious way mr fish people think interested seeking truth feel apply findings getting back thing capitalism system thats incompatible human equation based completely different value systems capitalism based accumulative value system capital value human beings supposed constant value system doesnt fluctuate everybodys right exist equal value capital accumulated wealth always able supercede value human therefore humanity extinction species possible might make sense paper sahl yeah questionmr fish well wheres conversation lot conversations different noneconomic ideologies pros cons never seems conversation economic theory viability system government based solely tyranny ascending descending numbers sahl know mean look clubs today compare ambiance hungry laugh factory comedian today anybody stand talk nothing endlessly mr fish whos blame artist audience artist unable good work audience illequipped recognize good work see sahl think artist good dont think brokers decision even try meet audiences needs comedian nowadays accommodate audiences materialism dont anything minds comedian get talk hour women like theyre aliens thats act new york saw judy gold complaining cnn runs line headlines bottom screen really whats wrong dont think theres cultural depth perception anymore even guys daily show arent making fun worst political wrongdoing maybe real news doesnt guys cbs really ended vietnam war rather morley safer john hart showing us going everyday hear bunch american soldiers got killed dont see anything aljazeera mr fish amy goodman says cnn shows us missiles launched aljazeera shows us land sahl shes good impressive although wonder pacifica radio play twice day got rid marc cooper pretty good mr fish getting back talking take people demand authenticity existence people need role models emulate role models genuine honest afraid dissent challenge government started cartoons wanted john lennon norman mailer kurt vonnegut emulate today feel like im stuck past laughs sahl role models right well culture mostly asks people settle second third best people voted kennedy would never vote hillary clinton wouldnt even let convention knew something wrong denied dean embraced kerry knew wasnt truthful kids get drugged play ersatz black music ipods act like gangbangers live bel air know thats lie theres much resistance bourgeois notions people dont fight hard mr fish need fight demonstrated pick teach isnt kind heroism nobodys heroism demonstrated somebody emulated everyone right sahl deter heroism country keep defensive strategy try tie get defending time youre trying prove youre crazy people remember find way home search justice romance along way heroism learning listen better angels | 1,225 |
<p>The U.S. Department of Labor claims we have an unemployment rate of 4.9% [1]. According to “the Economist, however, the true unemployment rate in the U.S. is over 8%, or 12.6 million Americans [2]. The difference is due to the fact that the U.S. Government doesn,t count people as unemployed after six months without a job [3].</p>
<p>I recently joined the ranks of our many unemployed citizens. The termination of my employment as a Vice President at Pfizer was subject to intense media interest [4], partly due to the fact that Pfizer notified the press before they informed me.</p>
<p>Contrary to press reports, however, I have received no severance payments and for the first time in my life I am eligible for unemployment benefits; $13,078 [5]. At this annual income level my family of four would actually fall below the federal poverty level [6]; quite a difference from a year ago when my salary was over half a million [7].</p>
<p>I,m also uninsured for the first time in my life and I have to pay the full price for drugs, just like 67 million other uninsured Americans [8]. Contrary to many others, however, I do have a choice. In accordance with federal COBRA law, I was offered the opportunity to continue my health care coverage for 18 months. There was only one hitch; I had to pay $15,269 per year to receive this benefit [9]. I decided that with an income of $13,078 that didn,t make sense.</p>
<p>Clearly the system we have today isn,t just broke. The system is utterly and completely sick and our weakest citizens are paying the price, every day. And while I have belatedly been forced to share some of the experiences of our poor, uninsured, and unemployed, my situation doesn,t even start to compare with people with no resources, no voice, nowhere to go and no one who listens to them. For those citizens we have something that,s called the Government; a government that is supposed to look out for the people who can,t look out for themselves, but instead focuses on “pay to play money.</p>
<p>Today,s system is built on greed. Greed is defined as an excessive desire to acquire or possess more than someone needs or deserves. Greed is not a corporate executive who builds an organization such as Microsoft, creates a lot of jobs, and happens to get rich. Greed is to become CEO for a drug company such as Pfizer, be responsible for a stock price drop of 40% over his five year tenure, twice as much as the AMEX Pharmaceutical Index [10], secure a $100 million retirement package [11] while firing 16,385 Pharmacia and Pfizer employees [12], and get a 72% pay increase to $16.6 million as his reward [13].</p>
<p>According to the New York Times average worker pay has remained flat since 1990 at around $27,000, after adjusting for inflation, while CEO compensation has quadrupled, from $2.82 million to $11.8 million [14]. Our CEO,s are in a position in which they can basically use public companies as personal piggy banks. And this is perfectly legal as long as they get someone else to sign their check. Meanwhile, the federal minimum wage has remained at $5.15 an hour since September 1, 1997. In fact, after adjusting for inflation, the value of the minimum wage is at its second lowest level since 1955 [15].</p>
<p>At the same time, the pharmaceutical industry spends over $100 million on lobbying activities to stop lower drug prices, according to the Center for Public Integrity. There are 1,274 registered pharmaceutical lobbyists in Washington, D.C. and during the 2004 election cycle, the drug industry contributed $1 million to President Bush [16]. For an industry that makes $500 billion on a global basis [17], spending one million on a president or $100 million on lobbying is pocket change.</p>
<p>This money was well spent. It stopped legalized import of cheaper drugs and instead we got a new Medicare drug program. This $720 billion law includes $139 billion in profits to drug manufactures and $46 billion in subsidies to HMOs and private insurance plans [18]. The program has been such a disaster for our poor that at least twenty-four states have enacted emergency measures to ensure access to medications in the last couple of weeks [19]. That,s what a million dollars buys in Washington.</p>
<p>So how could this happen? The answer is simple. The American democracy has been stolen by our new class of Robber Barons”the CEO,s of our big corporations. A political system dependent on charity from rich men in hand-tailored suits with $100 million retirement packages is no democracy. It is a kleptocracy [20]. It is not what our founding fathers envisioned.</p>
<p>But we have the power to change this; to free our corporations from sticky-fingered CEO,s, to free our elected representatives from “pay to play money and to free our people from all these tyrants. We have the power to be free, at last.</p>
<p>PETER ROST, M.D., is a former Vice President for the drug company Pfizer. He first became well known in 2004 when he started to speak out in favor of reimportation of drugs and lower drug price. His e-mail is <a href="mailto:rostpeter@hotmail.com" type="external">rostpeter@hotmail.com</a>.</p>
<p>Notes</p>
<p>1. <a href="http://www.dol.gov/" type="external">http://www.dol.gov/</a></p>
<p>2. <a href="http://www.economist.com/finance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4223595" type="external">http://www.economist.com/finance/</a></p>
<p>3. <a href="http://www.thinkandask.com/news/jobs.html" type="external">http://www.thinkandask.com/news/jobs.html</a></p>
<p>4. <a href="" type="internal">http://www.google.com/</a></p>
<p>5. NJ Department of Labor Notice to Claimant of Benefit Determination BC-3C (R-10-99)</p>
<p>6. <a href="" type="internal">http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/06poverty.shtml</a></p>
<p>7. <a href="http://scooter.gnn.tv/headlines/3297/At_Pfizer_the_Isolation_Increases_for_a_Whistle_Blower" type="external">http://scooter.gnn.tv/headlines/3297/</a></p>
<p>8. <a href="http://help.senate.gov/testimony/t194_tes.html" type="external">http://help.senate.gov/testimony/t194_tes.html</a></p>
<p>9. Cobra Fact Sheet, January 6, 2006</p>
<p>10. <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=PFE&amp;t=5y&amp;l=on&amp;z=m&amp;q=l&amp;c=%5EDRG" type="external">http://finance.yahoo.com/</a></p>
<p>11. <a href="" type="internal">http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/olin_center/</a></p>
<p>12. <a href="" type="internal">http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/</a></p>
<p>13. <a href="" type="internal">http://www.forbes.com/2005/03/10/0310autofacescan06.html</a></p>
<p>14. <a href="" type="internal">http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/18/business/18pay.html</a></p>
<p>15. <a href="" type="internal">http://www.cbpp.org/9-1-05mw.htm</a></p>
<p>16. <a href="" type="internal">http://www.usatoday.com/money/</a></p>
<p>17. <a href="" type="internal">http://open.imshealth.com/IMSinclude/i_article_20040929.asp</a></p>
<p>18. <a href="http://www.house.gov/stupak/issues_prescription.shtml" type="external">http://www.house.gov/stupak/issues_prescription.shtml</a></p>
<p>19. <a href="" type="internal">http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/21/politics/21drug.html</a></p>
<p>20. <a href="http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=gd&amp;hl=en&amp;oe=UTF-8&amp;q=define%3Akleptocracy&amp;sa=N&amp;tab=xw" type="external">http://www.google.com/</a></p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | us department labor claims unemployment rate 49 1 according economist however true unemployment rate us 8 126 million americans 2 difference due fact us government doesnt count people unemployed six months without job 3 recently joined ranks many unemployed citizens termination employment vice president pfizer subject intense media interest 4 partly due fact pfizer notified press informed contrary press reports however received severance payments first time life eligible unemployment benefits 13078 5 annual income level family four would actually fall federal poverty level 6 quite difference year ago salary half million 7 im also uninsured first time life pay full price drugs like 67 million uninsured americans 8 contrary many others however choice accordance federal cobra law offered opportunity continue health care coverage 18 months one hitch pay 15269 per year receive benefit 9 decided income 13078 didnt make sense clearly system today isnt broke system utterly completely sick weakest citizens paying price every day belatedly forced share experiences poor uninsured unemployed situation doesnt even start compare people resources voice nowhere go one listens citizens something thats called government government supposed look people cant look instead focuses pay play money todays system built greed greed defined excessive desire acquire possess someone needs deserves greed corporate executive builds organization microsoft creates lot jobs happens get rich greed become ceo drug company pfizer responsible stock price drop 40 five year tenure twice much amex pharmaceutical index 10 secure 100 million retirement package 11 firing 16385 pharmacia pfizer employees 12 get 72 pay increase 166 million reward 13 according new york times average worker pay remained flat since 1990 around 27000 adjusting inflation ceo compensation quadrupled 282 million 118 million 14 ceos position basically use public companies personal piggy banks perfectly legal long get someone else sign check meanwhile federal minimum wage remained 515 hour since september 1 1997 fact adjusting inflation value minimum wage second lowest level since 1955 15 time pharmaceutical industry spends 100 million lobbying activities stop lower drug prices according center public integrity 1274 registered pharmaceutical lobbyists washington dc 2004 election cycle drug industry contributed 1 million president bush 16 industry makes 500 billion global basis 17 spending one million president 100 million lobbying pocket change money well spent stopped legalized import cheaper drugs instead got new medicare drug program 720 billion law includes 139 billion profits drug manufactures 46 billion subsidies hmos private insurance plans 18 program disaster poor least twentyfour states enacted emergency measures ensure access medications last couple weeks 19 thats million dollars buys washington could happen answer simple american democracy stolen new class robber baronsthe ceos big corporations political system dependent charity rich men handtailored suits 100 million retirement packages democracy kleptocracy 20 founding fathers envisioned power change free corporations stickyfingered ceos free elected representatives pay play money free people tyrants power free last peter rost md former vice president drug company pfizer first became well known 2004 started speak favor reimportation drugs lower drug price email rostpeterhotmailcom notes 1 httpwwwdolgov 2 httpwwweconomistcomfinance 3 httpwwwthinkandaskcomnewsjobshtml 4 httpwwwgooglecom 5 nj department labor notice claimant benefit determination bc3c r1099 6 httpaspehhsgovpoverty06povertyshtml 7 httpscootergnntvheadlines3297 8 httphelpsenategovtestimonyt194_teshtml 9 cobra fact sheet january 6 2006 10 httpfinanceyahoocom 11 httpwwwlawharvardeduprogramsolin_center 12 httpwwwsecgovarchivesedgardata 13 httpwwwforbescom200503100310autofacescan06html 14 httpwwwnytimescom20060118business18payhtml 15 httpwwwcbpporg9105mwhtm 16 httpwwwusatodaycommoney 17 httpopenimshealthcomimsincludei_article_20040929asp 18 httpwwwhousegovstupakissues_prescriptionshtml 19 httpwwwnytimescom20060121politics21drughtml 20 httpwwwgooglecom 160 160 160 160 160 160 | 553 |
<p>Front page image: JetCafe / &lt;a href="http://www.jetcafe.org/bruce/portfolio/Ads_for_TV-01/images/Bud_Bowl-11.jpg"&gt;Boss Films&lt;/a&gt;</p>
<p />
<p>This <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175200/tomgram%3A_robert_lipsyte%2C_the_commercials_are_the_super_bowl/" type="external">story</a> first appeared on the <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/" type="external">TomDispatch</a> website.</p>
<p>In 1987, an evangelical Christian missionary in the Philippines, Pam Tebow, sick and near term, ignored doctors’ advice to abort her fifth child. How could they know he would grow up to win a Heisman Trophy and lead the University of Florida to two national titles?</p>
<p>Twenty-three years later, before he even turned pro, Tim Tebow made himself the player to beat in Sunday’s Super Bowl XLIV by starring in a 30-second commercial for Focus on the Family, a Christian group that opposes abortion and same-sex marriage. That the ad would run represented a reversal of CBS’s long-time policy against advocacy ads. At this late date, it is still not certain if Tim’s creation myth will be included in the commercial, or even if the ad will be aired at all.</p>
<p>Whatever happens, the controversy put the game’s spotlight back where it belongs—on the advertising.</p>
<p>Super Bowl Sunday is America’s holiest day, our all-inclusive campfire, and with 100 million viewers, almost half of them women, about as close as we get, without a presidential election, to taking the national pulse. The ads tell us who we are and where we are going. They are also Madison Avenue’s best chance—at a reported $3 million or more a minute—to create a buzz. In fact, in a world in which TiVo-ing is spreading like wildfire, they may be Madison Avenue’s last chance to actually get watched on TV.</p>
<p>These days, when it comes to Super Bowl ads, the buzz never dies as YouTube, best/worst commercial contests, chat rooms, and vigorous follow-up ad campaigns carom around the precincts of popular culture. Sacred, profane, gross, on-the-mark or clueless, the ads are cultural signifiers. If Tebow gets to pitch on Sunday, his ad will share the air with the basic football consumer groups: cars, tech, beer, soda, and chips. And, of course, he’ll be right there along with the stuff everyone is waiting to see—like those three nerds leering at a naked Danica Patrick, the auto racer, for a website company, or that office jerk farting for an employment service.</p>
<p>I am a Super Bowl ad fan. I’d rather go to the bathroom during a third-down play than miss a commercial.</p>
<p>You’ll want to know my all-time favorites.</p>
<p>“You Should Be So Lucky”</p>
<p>For sheer prescience when it came to American foreign policy, nothing has beaten <a href="http://adland.tv/commercials/just-feet-kenya-mission-1999-030-usa" type="external">“Kenyan Runner,”</a> a Super Bowl commercial that ran just before Team W led us to eight losing seasons in Afghanistan, Iraq, and at home.</p>
<p>Imagine a black African runner in a singlet, loping barefoot across an arid plain. White men in a Humvee are hunting him down as if he were wild game. They drug him and, after he collapses, jam running shoes on his feet. When he wakes up, he lurches around screaming, trying to kick off the shoes.</p>
<p>This was 1999, two years before the 9/11 attacks and the invasions that followed. The sponsor was Just For Feet, a retailer with 140 shoe and sportswear super stores that blamed its advertising agency for the spot—before it collapsed in an accounting fraud and disappeared.</p>
<p>Colonialism anyone? Racism? Forcing our values on developing countries? Mission accomplished.</p>
<p>Then there was prescience on the domestic front in another Super Bowl ad, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0_tfoTTGOQ" type="external">“Money Out the Whazoo”</a>:&#160;imagine a middle-aged man wheeled into an emergency room. Doctors and nurses turn him over and someone says, “He has money coming out the whazoo.” A hospital administrator officiously asks his distraught wife if they have insurance. A doctor calls out, “Money out the whazoo!” The administrator says, “Take him to a private room.”</p>
<p>The tag line was: “You should be so lucky.” This was 2000. The sponsor was E*Trade, the online stock gambling outfit. How did they know that the economy was going to tank just when the health-care system would go up for grabs?</p>
<p>If you’d been paying attention to the ads instead of the game, you, too, could have sold America short.</p>
<p>My Super Bowl favorites, you might have guessed by now, are not consensus picks. Most fans seem to prefer the 1979 Coke commercial in which <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xffOCZYX6F8" type="external">Mean Joe Greene</a>, the Pittsburgh Steelers Hall of Fame defensive tackle, limps off the field past a young boy who offers him his Coke. Greene sucks it down and, as the kid turns away, says, “Hey, kid, catch,” throwing him his jersey. While this ad is usually number one or two in best Super Bowls lists, it actually first aired several months before the game.</p>
<p>Oh, what a better time that was, when we truly loved our sports heroes and felt for them when they were beaten. The remake of that ad, in 2009, showed how much we’ve lost in 30 years. As <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjII6F-nJBQ" type="external">Troy Polamalu</a>, the Pittsburgh strong safety, limps off the field, a kid offers him his Coca-Cola Zero. Before he can take it, two Coke brand managers grab it and run off. Polamalu tackles them, grabs the bottle, drains it, then rips off one of the manager’s shirts and tosses it to the kid.</p>
<p>That snarky (post-irony?) parody of the iconic Mean Joe Greene commercial may be obvious enough, but that’s no reason not to pile on the subtexts: Labor and management in the National Football League are now gearing up for serious confrontations. The Supreme Court is hearing one of them—a challenge to the league’s anti-trust exemption which will have an impact on, among many other things, the sale of jerseys. No wonder Troy ripped the shirt off management’s back.</p>
<p>Root for Big Easy</p>
<p>The other main candidate for top Super Bowl ad in most of those lists is the 1984 commercial in which <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8" type="external">a woman runner</a>, pursued by Orwellian storm troopers, runs past hundreds of gray people listening to Big Brother to smash the establishment (read IBM) with her sledgehammer. That Apple Revolution really freed us, right? In the quarter-century to follow, thanks to iPod, iPhone, and iPad, a generation without empathy, head down, shuffles into textiness. And Apple still doesn’t even have a majority market share.</p>
<p>(Non-Commercial interruption: Should you find yourself actually watching the game, root for New Orleans. Saints quarterback Drew Brees is a member of the executive committee of the NFL Players Association. In a recent Washington Post op-ed column he <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/07/AR2010010702947.html" type="external">wrote</a>: “[I]f the Supreme Court agrees with the NFL’s argument that the teams act as a single entity rather than as 32 separate, vigorously competitive and extremely profitable entities, the absence of antitrust scrutiny would enable the owners to exert total control over this multibillion-dollar business.” &#160;A final decision on what originally was a suit brought by a jilted gear supplier is expected this summer.)</p>
<p>The modern Mad Men and Women who call the signals for Super Bowl commercials are not always given as much credit as they deserve for grasping the American mood. Their most interesting ads can’t be taken at face value. For example, who could forget—although Holiday Inn seems to have tried—the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxdYCiPgWgo" type="external">1997 class-reunion ad</a> in which a hot babe struts through the party, chest out, her blond hair swinging, as a voice-over ticks off the part-by-part cost of her cosmetic surgery make-over? The message: her make-over involves mere thousands of dollars, compared to the millions Holiday Inn has spent on renovations. You must remember the tagline:&#160; she’s finally recognized by a former classmate who sputters, “Bob… Bob Johnson?”</p>
<p>So what were the Mads telling us here? If pricey renovations were acceptable for corporations, they were also acceptable for ordinary people? That Holiday Inn going upscale was no different from transitioning genders? Or, by extension, that anything a corporation can do, you can, too? In other words, corporate privilege equals personal agency.</p>
<p>And this was 13 years before the Supreme Court decided to extend individual freedom of expression to corporations. (Extraneous note: “freedom of expression” is now a tagline for a Botox treatment.)</p>
<p>The Snickers Smack</p>
<p>In 2007, when a General Motors ad showed a <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3NGN4t4hm4" type="external">robot committing suicide</a> after making an assembly-line mistake, the message seemed unclear (unless this was a Philip K. Dick dream). Shouldn’t it be the car-maker, in traditional Japanese fashion, who commits hara-kiri after years of colossal mistakes? But now we understand: it was an early warning – the American worker was at the end of the line; no handouts, pal, you’re on your own.</p>
<p>That was the same year when two men, simultaneously <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjuXbYW6KmE" type="external">eating a Snickers bar</a>, first touched lips during a Super Bowl game. When I initially saw it, I thought: if anything can conquer homophobia, it’s chocolate. But then they did the I’m-not-gay double take and began tearing off chest hair in a “manly” display.</p>
<p>The Mads had struck again, brilliantly reinforcing my own impression as a sportswriter that the NFL is the most homophobic, yet homoerotic, of team sports. With all that touching and hugging in public (and all that naked horseplay in the locker-room), no wonder some players have reacted with such hostility to the few who have come out after retirement. That Super Bowl ad will be at least an hour’s lecture in someone’s Queer Studies course.</p>
<p>Because of their insecure young male demographic, ads tend to be so aggressively and cartoonishly hetero that 1) there is no orientation issue, and 2) there is no threat of actually having to perform. You can watch sexy women the same way you watch football players—from a superior remove.</p>
<p>For example, in last year’s <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjGsJNQKRfw" type="external">commercial for GoDaddy.com</a>, the domain-name company, three nerds found they could control events from their laptop. Not only did they make Danica Patrick, an Indy driver, take a shower for them, but they added “that German woman from the dean’s office.”</p>
<p>This year, Danica gets to flashdance and dress up like Marilyn Monroe. GoDaddy is known for ads, run relentlessly on the Internet, that are too risqué and provocative for the networks.</p>
<p>In this Sunday’s <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvRQ_9J_GDg" type="external">CareerBuilder spot</a>, a cubicle clown ostentatiously farts, annoying a prim female co-worker. When the boss walks up, she thinks the jerk is cooked. But the boss lends the jerk his lighter to ignite the fumes. He wants the lighter back, he says; one imagines him farting, too.</p>
<p>Hey, boys will be boys. If she can’t take the heat let her go back to the kitchen. After all, this is 2010!</p>
<p>If it wasn’t in such company, I would be more concerned about Tim Tebow’s Focus on the Family commercial. I’d angst away: What does it really mean? What are the Mads telling us about the future? That the country is turning back toward the right? That the networks, in their twilight, need every buck they can get and don’t care where it comes from? That Tebow, who has always seen football as his pulpit to spread evangelical Christianity, is presaging a new era of star athletes standing for causes?</p>
<p>None of the above. It’s a hopeful message. Obama centrism will prevail, stabilize the country, and prepare it for progressive reform, because even football fans will understand that Super Bowl sideshows—be they about voyeuristic horndogs, flatulent slackers, star quarterbacks, or God knows how many holy day trippers jamming down food-like products and loser liquids—can be taken seriously only on Sunday. (Now, that may be the Philip K. Dick dream.)</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | front page image jetcafe lta hrefhttpwwwjetcafeorgbruceportfolioads_for_tv01imagesbud_bowl11jpggtboss filmsltagt story first appeared tomdispatch website 1987 evangelical christian missionary philippines pam tebow sick near term ignored doctors advice abort fifth child could know would grow win heisman trophy lead university florida two national titles twentythree years later even turned pro tim tebow made player beat sundays super bowl xliv starring 30second commercial focus family christian group opposes abortion samesex marriage ad would run represented reversal cbss longtime policy advocacy ads late date still certain tims creation myth included commercial even ad aired whatever happens controversy put games spotlight back belongson advertising super bowl sunday americas holiest day allinclusive campfire 100 million viewers almost half women close get without presidential election taking national pulse ads tell us going also madison avenues best chanceat reported 3 million minuteto create buzz fact world tivoing spreading like wildfire may madison avenues last chance actually get watched tv days comes super bowl ads buzz never dies youtube bestworst commercial contests chat rooms vigorous followup ad campaigns carom around precincts popular culture sacred profane gross onthemark clueless ads cultural signifiers tebow gets pitch sunday ad share air basic football consumer groups cars tech beer soda chips course hell right along stuff everyone waiting seelike three nerds leering naked danica patrick auto racer website company office jerk farting employment service super bowl ad fan id rather go bathroom thirddown play miss commercial youll want know alltime favorites lucky sheer prescience came american foreign policy nothing beaten kenyan runner super bowl commercial ran team w led us eight losing seasons afghanistan iraq home imagine black african runner singlet loping barefoot across arid plain white men humvee hunting wild game drug collapses jam running shoes feet wakes lurches around screaming trying kick shoes 1999 two years 911 attacks invasions followed sponsor feet retailer 140 shoe sportswear super stores blamed advertising agency spotbefore collapsed accounting fraud disappeared colonialism anyone racism forcing values developing countries mission accomplished prescience domestic front another super bowl ad money whazoo160imagine middleaged man wheeled emergency room doctors nurses turn someone says money coming whazoo hospital administrator officiously asks distraught wife insurance doctor calls money whazoo administrator says take private room tag line lucky 2000 sponsor etrade online stock gambling outfit know economy going tank healthcare system would go grabs youd paying attention ads instead game could sold america short super bowl favorites might guessed consensus picks fans seem prefer 1979 coke commercial mean joe greene pittsburgh steelers hall fame defensive tackle limps field past young boy offers coke greene sucks kid turns away says hey kid catch throwing jersey ad usually number one two best super bowls lists actually first aired several months game oh better time truly loved sports heroes felt beaten remake ad 2009 showed much weve lost 30 years troy polamalu pittsburgh strong safety limps field kid offers cocacola zero take two coke brand managers grab run polamalu tackles grabs bottle drains rips one managers shirts tosses kid snarky postirony parody iconic mean joe greene commercial may obvious enough thats reason pile subtexts labor management national football league gearing serious confrontations supreme court hearing one thema challenge leagues antitrust exemption impact among many things sale jerseys wonder troy ripped shirt managements back root big easy main candidate top super bowl ad lists 1984 commercial woman runner pursued orwellian storm troopers runs past hundreds gray people listening big brother smash establishment read ibm sledgehammer apple revolution really freed us right quartercentury follow thanks ipod iphone ipad generation without empathy head shuffles textiness apple still doesnt even majority market share noncommercial interruption find actually watching game root new orleans saints quarterback drew brees member executive committee nfl players association recent washington post oped column wrote supreme court agrees nfls argument teams act single entity rather 32 separate vigorously competitive extremely profitable entities absence antitrust scrutiny would enable owners exert total control multibilliondollar business 160a final decision originally suit brought jilted gear supplier expected summer modern mad men women call signals super bowl commercials always given much credit deserve grasping american mood interesting ads cant taken face value example could forgetalthough holiday inn seems triedthe 1997 classreunion ad hot babe struts party chest blond hair swinging voiceover ticks partbypart cost cosmetic surgery makeover message makeover involves mere thousands dollars compared millions holiday inn spent renovations must remember tagline160 shes finally recognized former classmate sputters bob bob johnson mads telling us pricey renovations acceptable corporations also acceptable ordinary people holiday inn going upscale different transitioning genders extension anything corporation words corporate privilege equals personal agency 13 years supreme court decided extend individual freedom expression corporations extraneous note freedom expression tagline botox treatment snickers smack 2007 general motors ad showed robot committing suicide making assemblyline mistake message seemed unclear unless philip k dick dream shouldnt carmaker traditional japanese fashion commits harakiri years colossal mistakes understand early warning american worker end line handouts pal youre year two men simultaneously eating snickers bar first touched lips super bowl game initially saw thought anything conquer homophobia chocolate imnotgay double take began tearing chest hair manly display mads struck brilliantly reinforcing impression sportswriter nfl homophobic yet homoerotic team sports touching hugging public naked horseplay lockerroom wonder players reacted hostility come retirement super bowl ad least hours lecture someones queer studies course insecure young male demographic ads tend aggressively cartoonishly hetero 1 orientation issue 2 threat actually perform watch sexy women way watch football playersfrom superior remove example last years commercial godaddycom domainname company three nerds found could control events laptop make danica patrick indy driver take shower added german woman deans office year danica gets flashdance dress like marilyn monroe godaddy known ads run relentlessly internet risqué provocative networks sundays careerbuilder spot cubicle clown ostentatiously farts annoying prim female coworker boss walks thinks jerk cooked boss lends jerk lighter ignite fumes wants lighter back says one imagines farting hey boys boys cant take heat let go back kitchen 2010 wasnt company would concerned tim tebows focus family commercial id angst away really mean mads telling us future country turning back toward right networks twilight need every buck get dont care comes tebow always seen football pulpit spread evangelical christianity presaging new era star athletes standing causes none hopeful message obama centrism prevail stabilize country prepare progressive reform even football fans understand super bowl sideshowsbe voyeuristic horndogs flatulent slackers star quarterbacks god knows many holy day trippers jamming foodlike products loser liquidscan taken seriously sunday may philip k dick dream | 1,074 |
<p>Charles Dharapak/AP</p>
<p />
<p>With Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama set to face his Senate colleagues in confirmation hearings after being tapped by Donald Trump as attorney general, many comparisons are being made to the last time he sought confirmation, in 1986, when his nomination to a federal judgeship was derailed by numerous <a href="" type="internal">allegations that he had made racist remarks</a>. But another instructive precedent on Sessions’ views on race comes from a much more recent set of confirmation hearings, when Sessions challenged the Supreme Court nomination of Sonia Sotomayor.</p>
<p>Republicans pushed back on President Barack Obama’s 2009 nomination of Sotomayor by zeroing in on comments she had made about her Latina heritage. They raised fears about reverse discrimination, suggesting that as a justice, she would give unfair preference to minorities. Among her most vocal critics was Sessions.</p>
<p>Like Sotomayor, Sessions will have to be confirmed by the Senate, a process that starts in the Judiciary Committee that Sessions has sat on for two decades. From that perch in 2009, he spent his entire 30 minutes of questions with Sotomayor trying to determine whether she would be biased against white people. It’s a revealing line of questioning as Sessions seeks a job with significant influence over the civil rights of all Americans.</p>
<p>In addition to his <a href="" type="internal">hardline opposition to immigration</a> and the allegations of racism, Sessions is known for unsuccessfully prosecuting <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/61363/closed-sessions" type="external">three civil rights activists for voter fraud</a>. The Trump team <a href="" type="internal">seems to be trying to tamp down questions about Sessions’ racial views</a> to ease his confirmation. But it’s clear from his own questioning of Sotomayor that Sessions thinks the issue of racial bias is worth serious interrogation during confirmation hearings.</p>
<p>In that questioning, Sessions focused on two specific incidents in Sotomayor’s 17-year record as a judge. The first was a speech Sotomayor gave at the University of California-Berkeley School of Law, where she said she hoped “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male.” The second was a case in which, as a judge on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, she sided with the city of New Haven, Connecticut, which had thrown out a promotion test for firefighters because few minorities did well on it. Sotomayor was in the majority on this case and sided with the lower-court ruling, but the Supreme Court overturned both courts’ rulings shortly before Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings. Sessions wasn’t the only Republican fixated on these questions; in opposing her nomination, several of his colleagues <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/id/31778283/ns/politics-supreme_court/t/critics-turn-heat-sotomayor/#.WDMoK6IrIb0" type="external">suggested</a> Sotomayor might show a preference for minorities in her decisions.</p>
<p>“We had a more honest discussion of some of the complexities and sensitivities of the race question in this hearing than in the 12 years I have been in the Senate,” Sessions <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jul/19/nation/na-sotomayor19" type="external">said</a> after the hearings had concluded. But some supporters of Sotomayor disagreed. “This was an all-white judiciary committee asking condescending questions,” Sherrilyn Ifill, a law professor at the University of Maryland who in 2012 became president of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, said at the time. “And it was an unequal power situation. She was not in a position to honestly engage with them, because she needed their votes.”</p>
<p>Sessions had 30 minutes to question Sotomayor directly as the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, and he dedicated almost the entire time to the “wise Latina” comment and similar remarks, as well as the New Haven firefighters case. Here are some key passages from <a href="https://epic.org/privacy/sotomayor/sotomoyor_transcript.pdf" type="external">the hearing</a>. You can watch Sessions’ full line of questioning <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gquMYK6_xHE" type="external">here</a>.</p>
<p>First, Sessions asked about Sotomayor’s “wise Latina” comment:</p>
<p>Sessions: [Y]ou’ve repeatedly made this statement: Quote, I “accept the proposition”—I “accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench, and that my experiences affect the facts I choose to see as a judge.” First, that’s troubling to me as a lawyer. When I present evidence, I expect the judge to hear and see all the evidence that gets presented. How is it appropriate for a judge ever to say that they will choose to see some facts and not others?</p>
<p>Sotomayor: It’s not a question of choosing to see some facts or another, Senator. I didn’t intend to suggest that. And in the wider context, what I believe I was—the point I was making was that our life experiences do permit us to see some facts and understand them more easily than others. But in the end, you’re absolutely right. That’s why we have appellate judges that are more than one judge because each of us, from our life experiences, will more easily see different perspectives argued by parties. But judges do consider all of the arguments of litigants. I have. Most of my opinions, if not all of them, explain to parties by the law requires what it does.</p>
<p>Sessions: Do you stand by your statement that my experiences affect the facts I choose to see?</p>
<p>Sotomayor: No, sir. I don’t stand by the understanding of that statement that I will ignore other facts or other experiences because I haven’t had them. I do believe that life experiences are important to the process of judging—They help you to understand and listen—but that the law requires a result. And it would command you to the facts that are relevant to the disposition of the case.</p>
<p>Sessions: Well, I will just note you made that statement in individual speeches about seven times over a number of years span…</p>
<p>On the firefighter case:</p>
<p>Sessions: So you stated that your background affects the facts that you choose to see. Was the fact that the New Haven firefighters had been subject to discrimination one of the facts you chose not to see in this case?</p>
<p>Sotomayor: No, sir. The panel was composed of me and two other judges.</p>
<p>Sessions was disturbed by the length of <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/ricci-secondcircuit-2007.pdf" type="external">the decision</a> in this case, believing it was too short.</p>
<p>Sessions: But do you think that Frank Ricci and the other firefighters whose claims you dismissed felt that their arguments and concerns were appropriately understood and acknowledged by such a short opinion from the court?</p>
<p>Sotomayor: We were very sympathetic and expressed your sympathy to the firefighters who challenged the city’s decision, Mr. Ricci, and the others. We stood the efforts that they had made in taking the test. We said as much.</p>
<p>They did have before them a 78-page thorough opinion by the district court. They, obviously, disagreed with the law as it stood under 2nd Circuit precedent. That’s why they were pursuing their claims and did pursue them further.</p>
<p>Sotomayor’s confirmation hearings lasted three days, and senators questioned not only the nominee but many other witnesses. In one notable exchange with a witness, Sessions seemed to question whether Hispanics were overrepresented among judges. The question went nowhere because the witness, conservative activist Linda Chavez, who <a href="https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/chavez_testimony_07_16_09.pdf" type="external">urged</a> senators to vote down Sotomayor’s nomination, disputed Sessions’ premise that having a large number of Latino judges was problematic.</p>
<p>Sessions: Ms. Chavez, I noticed one thing. According to the ABA statistics, only 3.5 percent of lawyers in America in 2000 were Hispanic, yet they—Hispanics make up 5 percent of the federal district court judges and 6 percent of circuit court judges. Would you comment on that?</p>
<p>Chavez: …I reject all of that. That doesn’t bother me in the least that they are overrepresented. I think we should not be making ethnicity and race or gender a qualification for sitting on the bench or being a firefighter or being a captain or lieutenant on a firefighting team. I think we ought to take race, ethnicity, and gender out of the equation.</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | charles dharapakap sen jeff sessions alabama set face senate colleagues confirmation hearings tapped donald trump attorney general many comparisons made last time sought confirmation 1986 nomination federal judgeship derailed numerous allegations made racist remarks another instructive precedent sessions views race comes much recent set confirmation hearings sessions challenged supreme court nomination sonia sotomayor republicans pushed back president barack obamas 2009 nomination sotomayor zeroing comments made latina heritage raised fears reverse discrimination suggesting justice would give unfair preference minorities among vocal critics sessions like sotomayor sessions confirmed senate process starts judiciary committee sessions sat two decades perch 2009 spent entire 30 minutes questions sotomayor trying determine whether would biased white people revealing line questioning sessions seeks job significant influence civil rights americans addition hardline opposition immigration allegations racism sessions known unsuccessfully prosecuting three civil rights activists voter fraud trump team seems trying tamp questions sessions racial views ease confirmation clear questioning sotomayor sessions thinks issue racial bias worth serious interrogation confirmation hearings questioning sessions focused two specific incidents sotomayors 17year record judge first speech sotomayor gave university californiaberkeley school law said hoped wise latina woman richness experiences would often reach better conclusion white male second case judge 2nd circuit court appeals sided city new connecticut thrown promotion test firefighters minorities well sotomayor majority case sided lowercourt ruling supreme court overturned courts rulings shortly sotomayors confirmation hearings sessions wasnt republican fixated questions opposing nomination several colleagues suggested sotomayor might show preference minorities decisions honest discussion complexities sensitivities race question hearing 12 years senate sessions said hearings concluded supporters sotomayor disagreed allwhite judiciary committee asking condescending questions sherrilyn ifill law professor university maryland 2012 became president naacp legal defense fund said time unequal power situation position honestly engage needed votes sessions 30 minutes question sotomayor directly ranking republican judiciary committee dedicated almost entire time wise latina comment similar remarks well new firefighters case key passages hearing watch sessions full line questioning first sessions asked sotomayors wise latina comment sessions youve repeatedly made statement quote accept propositioni accept proposition difference presence women people color bench experiences affect facts choose see judge first thats troubling lawyer present evidence expect judge hear see evidence gets presented appropriate judge ever say choose see facts others sotomayor question choosing see facts another senator didnt intend suggest wider context believe wasthe point making life experiences permit us see facts understand easily others end youre absolutely right thats appellate judges one judge us life experiences easily see different perspectives argued parties judges consider arguments litigants opinions explain parties law requires sessions stand statement experiences affect facts choose see sotomayor sir dont stand understanding statement ignore facts experiences havent believe life experiences important process judgingthey help understand listenbut law requires result would command facts relevant disposition case sessions well note made statement individual speeches seven times number years span firefighter case sessions stated background affects facts choose see fact new firefighters subject discrimination one facts chose see case sotomayor sir panel composed two judges sessions disturbed length decision case believing short sessions think frank ricci firefighters whose claims dismissed felt arguments concerns appropriately understood acknowledged short opinion court sotomayor sympathetic expressed sympathy firefighters challenged citys decision mr ricci others stood efforts made taking test said much 78page thorough opinion district court obviously disagreed law stood 2nd circuit precedent thats pursuing claims pursue sotomayors confirmation hearings lasted three days senators questioned nominee many witnesses one notable exchange witness sessions seemed question whether hispanics overrepresented among judges question went nowhere witness conservative activist linda chavez urged senators vote sotomayors nomination disputed sessions premise large number latino judges problematic sessions ms chavez noticed one thing according aba statistics 35 percent lawyers america 2000 hispanic yet theyhispanics make 5 percent federal district court judges 6 percent circuit court judges would comment chavez reject doesnt bother least overrepresented think making ethnicity race gender qualification sitting bench firefighter captain lieutenant firefighting team think ought take race ethnicity gender equation | 652 |
<p>The events of September 2001 disproved the assumption that only a state could make war on another state. Now Hezbollah’s confrontation with Israel has provided further education about how the world is changing. Hezbollah’s campaign is a clear sign of how the democratization of missile technology — cruise missile technology, in particular — is reshaping global realities.</p>
<p>Assumptions about the Israeli Defense Force’s military superiority have enjoyed axiomatic status, especially among laypeople. In fact, the IDF were — and perhaps still are — a good citizen-soldier militia, with a small number of units of excellent professional soldiers, and a highly capable general staff. According to a famous, and probably apocryphal story, when asked the secret of Israel’s military successes, an Israeli commander succinctly summarized the IDF’s method: “Always fight Arab armies.”</p>
<p>However, as Hezbollah’s leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrullah, has explained: “We are not a regular army and we do not use the way of a regular army.” Hezbollah has displayed a combination of a guerrilla force’s decentralized flexibility and a national military’s sophistication, fielding weapons like the C-802 Noor radar-guided anti-ship missile (an Iranian-made knockoff of the Chinese “Silkworm” C-802) that struck an Israeli warship on July 14. In sum, Hezbullah’s arsenal includes the following missiles:</p>
<p>122mm Katyushas: range 13 miles, warhead 6 kg,:</p>
<p>122mm improved Katyushas: range 19 miles, warhead, 6 kg;</p>
<p>220mm Syrian rockets: range 43 miles, warhead 40 kg;</p>
<p>240mm rockets: range 6 miles, warhead 18kg;</p>
<p>240mm Iranian Fajr 3: range 26 miles, warhead 50 kg;</p>
<p>333mm Iranian Fajr 5: range 46 miles, warhead 90 kg;</p>
<p>302mm Iranian Khaibar-1: range 100 miles, warhead 100 kg;</p>
<p>610mm Iranian ZelZal-2: range 130 miles, warhead 400 kg.</p>
<p>Significantly, according to claims by both Hezbollah and Israel, Hezbollah has held in reserve all of its 200-odd Zelzal-2 missiles, which have a range of up to 200 kilometers — capable of reaching Tel Aviv. The Zelzal missiles are road-mobile, solid-propellant systems, about which little is known. They are most likely unguided or use a rudimentary inertial system; when properly launched, such rockets would be accurate to within several kilometers of their target, enough to hit a city like Tel Aviv.</p>
<p>Given all that, it’s a reasonable supposition that Sheikh Nasrullah and Hezbollah were ordered by their Iranian backers to keep in reserve the Zelzals, as well as a significant number of the Iranian Fajr-5 missiles (of which the Khaibar-1 is believed by many analysts to be a modified variant).</p>
<p>Hezbollah’s Katyushas are the furthest thing from the latest designs. Predating venerable weapon systems such as the AK-47 assault rifle and B-52 bomber, these generic short-range rockets were given their name by the Soviet troops who first fired them at German forces during World War II.</p>
<p>For all the Katyusha’s vintage provenance, however, it has defeated futuristic attempts at missile defense like the Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL), a U.S.-Israeli attempt to create a high-energy chemical laser that could detonate the missiles in midflight. In fact, it’s indicative of the difficulties of short-range missile defense that the THEL prototype was approximately the size of six city buses; according to Subrata Ghoshroy, a military analyst at MIT who studied the project in 1996, not only would the system have been “a sitting duck” on a battlefield, but also any fractures of its fuel tanks would have released potentially deadly gas over its crew and bystanders. Although in 2000 the THEL was able to shoot down two Katyushas simultaneously during tests when no cloud cover impeded it, Katyusha rockets were designed to be fired from truck-mounted launchers in barrages of up to 50. Given the THEL’s general impracticality, the U.S. Army ceased funding it in late 2004.</p>
<p>What are the possibilities for missile defense against the longer-range, Iranian-built rockets, such as the Fajr-3 and Fajr-5, with which Hezbollah hit Israel’s third-largest city, Haifa, and as far south as Hadera in central Israel?</p>
<p>Since the 1950s, when Time magazine printed artists’ depictions of the majestic umbrella-shaped shields that would be created by the Pentagon’s anti-missile missiles as they intercepted Soviet ICBMs over American cities, the U.S. military has kept promising that whatever ABM (anti-ballistic missile) system was then under development, was just a step or two from being perfected. Simultaneously, it has allowed fudged tests in order to get favorable results, and ignored the fact that, even if the technology worked perfectly when deployed, such systems would be vulnerable to countermeasures that would be cheap and easy for attackers to employ.</p>
<p>In 2006, the best hope for tactical missile defense remains the latest iterations of the Patriot interceptor. First deployed in the first Gulf War, the U.S. military initially claimed that this surface-to-air missile had shot down more than 40 of Saddam Hussein’s Scuds. In 1992, however, the Government Operations Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives concluded that the Army had no proof that any Patriot had shot down any Scuds. The latest Patriot versions seem to be more effective, with at least eight independently confirmed tactical missile hits in the 2003 Iraq War.</p>
<p>Israel, with the United States, has spent billions on a two-tier ABM system that combines Patriots with Arrow rockets, a homegrown Israeli system. Nevertheless, although Patriot batteries have been set up around Haifa, Israel launched none in the recent conflict with Hezbollah. That’s because Patriots cost $1 to $3 million, the Arrow interceptors are similarly expensive, and the supply of both, whether or not they hit incoming Hezbollah rockets, would soon run out — as with the THEL system, both economics and physics favor the attacker’s rockets.</p>
<p>On the ground, Hezbollah has been able to move its rocket launchers rapidly. Indeed, Hezbollah’s battlefield agility and flexibility is one of the most striking features of the recent conflict. Objections that Hezbollah has accomplished a “victory” only in that its obdurate resistance has vast propaganda value within the Arab world miss the point that a militia of some 3,000 fighters impeded the advance of what was supposedly one of the world’s best armies beyond a few kilometers inside Lebanon. In the process, more than 20 Israeli Merkava tanks — again, reputedly the world’s best — were damaged by anti-tank weapons, including the Russian-made RPG-29, which have a tandem warhead so that the first explosion blows away a tank’s protective shield and the second penetrates it.</p>
<p>Overall, Hezbollah’s decentralized, flexible network of small units exhibited the essential aspects of a warfighting style that some military thinkers have predicted would predominate in 21st-century warfare, and which has been described as netwar or fourth-generation warfare. It’s a style of warfare that armies of nation-states, with their massive levels of force, are ill-equipped to fight.</p>
<p>One proponent of this school of thought, John Arquilla, a professor at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, has argued: “What happens if you take your large hammer to a ball of quicksilver? That’s what these networks are.” He continues: “We are trying to wage war as if it still mattered that our forces are comprised of ‘the few and the large’ — a few large heavy divisions, a few large aircraft carrier battle groups — when in fact war is migrating into the hands of the many and the small — little distributed units. We live in an era when technology has expanded the destructive power of a small group and the individual beyond our imaginations.”</p>
<p>These lessons of combat — now exemplified by Hezbollah’s resistance to the IDF — are not being lost elsewhere in the Arab world. According to a UPI story, “Anti-tank Rockets Menace Israelis,” appearing on August 14, the day of the cease-fire, a reporter from the Israeli paper Ha’aretz recently interviewed a member of Fatah’s al-Aksa brigades in Bethlehem, who said: “The brothers…are no longer interested in games with Kalashnikov rifles; they want anti-tank rockets….When this technology arrives, how difficult would it be for one of the fighters to sit on the Palestinian side of the wall at Abu Dis and fire a rocket at the King David Hotel? With less effort than a suicide bombing or shooting one can fire a missile and get the same results.”</p>
<p>But not only this level of missile technology is being democratized. As the instance of the Iranian-made, radar-guided, anti-ship missile that hit the Israeli corvette illustrates, more sophisticated missile technology is also spreading. Pakistan, China, North Korea, and Iran, among others, now possess cruise missiles. The United States and its allies are now urging a U.N. resolution that will call for international sanctions against Iran.</p>
<p>To enforce such sanctions would require control of Iran’s offshore waters and particularly of the Straits of Hormuz, through which much of the world’s oil moves and where Iran can potentially destroy all shipping. It’s not inconceivable to many analysts that Iran, with the missile technology it now possesses, could ‘take down’ that foremost example of U.S. military power, the aircraft carrier battle group. In a world of proliferating cruise-missile technology, one Pentagon consultant told me: “We have a navy full of ships that will burn to the waterline when hit.”</p>
<p>This article originally appeared in Technology Review.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | events september 2001 disproved assumption state could make war another state hezbollahs confrontation israel provided education world changing hezbollahs campaign clear sign democratization missile technology cruise missile technology particular reshaping global realities assumptions israeli defense forces military superiority enjoyed axiomatic status especially among laypeople fact idf perhaps still good citizensoldier militia small number units excellent professional soldiers highly capable general staff according famous probably apocryphal story asked secret israels military successes israeli commander succinctly summarized idfs method always fight arab armies however hezbollahs leader sheikh hassan nasrullah explained regular army use way regular army hezbollah displayed combination guerrilla forces decentralized flexibility national militarys sophistication fielding weapons like c802 noor radarguided antiship missile iranianmade knockoff chinese silkworm c802 struck israeli warship july 14 sum hezbullahs arsenal includes following missiles 122mm katyushas range 13 miles warhead 6 kg 122mm improved katyushas range 19 miles warhead 6 kg 220mm syrian rockets range 43 miles warhead 40 kg 240mm rockets range 6 miles warhead 18kg 240mm iranian fajr 3 range 26 miles warhead 50 kg 333mm iranian fajr 5 range 46 miles warhead 90 kg 302mm iranian khaibar1 range 100 miles warhead 100 kg 610mm iranian zelzal2 range 130 miles warhead 400 kg significantly according claims hezbollah israel hezbollah held reserve 200odd zelzal2 missiles range 200 kilometers capable reaching tel aviv zelzal missiles roadmobile solidpropellant systems little known likely unguided use rudimentary inertial system properly launched rockets would accurate within several kilometers target enough hit city like tel aviv given reasonable supposition sheikh nasrullah hezbollah ordered iranian backers keep reserve zelzals well significant number iranian fajr5 missiles khaibar1 believed many analysts modified variant hezbollahs katyushas furthest thing latest designs predating venerable weapon systems ak47 assault rifle b52 bomber generic shortrange rockets given name soviet troops first fired german forces world war ii katyushas vintage provenance however defeated futuristic attempts missile defense like tactical high energy laser thel usisraeli attempt create highenergy chemical laser could detonate missiles midflight fact indicative difficulties shortrange missile defense thel prototype approximately size six city buses according subrata ghoshroy military analyst mit studied project 1996 would system sitting duck battlefield also fractures fuel tanks would released potentially deadly gas crew bystanders although 2000 thel able shoot two katyushas simultaneously tests cloud cover impeded katyusha rockets designed fired truckmounted launchers barrages 50 given thels general impracticality us army ceased funding late 2004 possibilities missile defense longerrange iranianbuilt rockets fajr3 fajr5 hezbollah hit israels thirdlargest city haifa far south hadera central israel since 1950s time magazine printed artists depictions majestic umbrellashaped shields would created pentagons antimissile missiles intercepted soviet icbms american cities us military kept promising whatever abm antiballistic missile system development step two perfected simultaneously allowed fudged tests order get favorable results ignored fact even technology worked perfectly deployed systems would vulnerable countermeasures would cheap easy attackers employ 2006 best hope tactical missile defense remains latest iterations patriot interceptor first deployed first gulf war us military initially claimed surfacetoair missile shot 40 saddam husseins scuds 1992 however government operations committee us house representatives concluded army proof patriot shot scuds latest patriot versions seem effective least eight independently confirmed tactical missile hits 2003 iraq war israel united states spent billions twotier abm system combines patriots arrow rockets homegrown israeli system nevertheless although patriot batteries set around haifa israel launched none recent conflict hezbollah thats patriots cost 1 3 million arrow interceptors similarly expensive supply whether hit incoming hezbollah rockets would soon run thel system economics physics favor attackers rockets ground hezbollah able move rocket launchers rapidly indeed hezbollahs battlefield agility flexibility one striking features recent conflict objections hezbollah accomplished victory obdurate resistance vast propaganda value within arab world miss point militia 3000 fighters impeded advance supposedly one worlds best armies beyond kilometers inside lebanon process 20 israeli merkava tanks reputedly worlds best damaged antitank weapons including russianmade rpg29 tandem warhead first explosion blows away tanks protective shield second penetrates overall hezbollahs decentralized flexible network small units exhibited essential aspects warfighting style military thinkers predicted would predominate 21stcentury warfare described netwar fourthgeneration warfare style warfare armies nationstates massive levels force illequipped fight one proponent school thought john arquilla professor us naval postgraduate school argued happens take large hammer ball quicksilver thats networks continues trying wage war still mattered forces comprised large large heavy divisions large aircraft carrier battle groups fact war migrating hands many small little distributed units live era technology expanded destructive power small group individual beyond imaginations lessons combat exemplified hezbollahs resistance idf lost elsewhere arab world according upi story antitank rockets menace israelis appearing august 14 day ceasefire reporter israeli paper haaretz recently interviewed member fatahs alaksa brigades bethlehem said brothersare longer interested games kalashnikov rifles want antitank rocketswhen technology arrives difficult would one fighters sit palestinian side wall abu dis fire rocket king david hotel less effort suicide bombing shooting one fire missile get results level missile technology democratized instance iranianmade radarguided antiship missile hit israeli corvette illustrates sophisticated missile technology also spreading pakistan china north korea iran among others possess cruise missiles united states allies urging un resolution call international sanctions iran enforce sanctions would require control irans offshore waters particularly straits hormuz much worlds oil moves iran potentially destroy shipping inconceivable many analysts iran missile technology possesses could take foremost example us military power aircraft carrier battle group world proliferating cruisemissile technology one pentagon consultant told navy full ships burn waterline hit article originally appeared technology review 160 160 | 902 |
<p />
<p>&#160; &#160; Lawyer and journalist Glenn Greenwald. (Rick Bowmer / AP)</p>
<p>Every week the Truthdig editorial staff selects a Truthdigger of the Week, a group or person worthy of recognition for speaking truth to power, breaking the story or blowing the whistle. It is not a lifetime achievement award. Rather, we’re looking for newsmakers whose actions in a given week are worth celebrating.</p>
<p>There is no shortage of opportunities to celebrate Glenn Greenwald’s journalism—hell, we’ve named him Truthdigger of the Week three times before. From <a href="" type="internal">standing up for</a> WikiLeaks’ whistleblower <a href="" type="internal">Chelsea Manning</a> and founder Julian Assange to publishing the now famous NSA surveillance exposé based on the Edward Snowden leaks, Greenwald has made a name for himself as a courageous writer who’s willing to go to great lengths in protecting free speech. This week we decided he deserved to be named Truthdigger once more, for his indictment of Sen. Dianne Feinstein and her billionaire husband for their shameless attempt to blackmail the University of California (UC) into punishing students for speech and activism critical of Israel.</p>
<p />
<p>Greenwald’s piece, published at The Intercept and titled “ <a href="https://theintercept.com/2015/09/25/dianne-feinstein-husband-threaten-univ-calif-demanding-ban-excessive-israel-criticism/" type="external">The Greatest Threat to Campus Free Speech is Coming From Dianne Feinstein and her Military-Contractor Husband</a>,” revealed that two weeks ago, Feinstein’s husband, Richard Blum, made the following comments at a UC regents meeting in a debate over whether to severely discipline students who speak out against Israel:</p>
<p>I should add that over the weekend my wife, your senior Senator, and I talked about this issue at length. She wants to stay out of the conversation publicly but if we do not do the right thing she will engage publicly and is prepared to be critical of this university if we don’t have the kind of not only statement but penalties for those who commit what you can call them crimes, call them whatever you want. Students that do the things that have been cited here today probably ought to have a dismissal or a suspension from school. I don’t know how many of you feel strongly that way but my wife does and so do I.</p>
<p>Greenwald noted that the University of California has been considering adopting the State Department’s 2010 definition of anti-Semitism, which includes a section on the subject as it relates to Israel, and suspending or in some cases expelling students who express their opinions in a manner that falls under this <a href="http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/fs/2010/122352.htm" type="external">definition</a>:</p>
<p>What is Anti-Semitism Relative to Israel?</p>
<p>EXAMPLES of the ways in which anti-Semitism manifests itself with regard to the state of Israel, taking into account the overall context could include:</p>
<p>DEMONIZE ISRAEL:</p>
<p>• Using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism to characterize Israel or Israelis</p>
<p>• Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis</p>
<p>• Blaming Israel for all inter-religious or political tensions</p>
<p>DOUBLE STANDARD FOR ISRAEL:</p>
<p>• Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation</p>
<p>• Multilateral organizations focusing on Israel only for peace or human rights investigations</p>
<p>DELEGITIMIZE ISRAEL:</p>
<p>• Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist</p>
<p>However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.</p>
<p>Greenwald eloquently explained why employing this definition, adopted under then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in an academic setting is not only counterintuitive but also “patently unconstitutional”:</p>
<p>The ironies of this definition are overwhelming. First, it warns against advocating a “double standard for Israel”—at exactly the same time that it promulgates a standard that applies only to Israel. Would the State Department ever formally condemn what it regards as excessive or one-sided criticism of any other government, such as Russia or Iran? Why isn’t the State Department also accusing people of bigotry who create “double standards” for Iran by obsessing over the anti-gay behavior of Iran while ignoring the same or worse abuses in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Uganda? The State Department is purporting to regulate the discourse surrounding just one country—Israel—while at the same time condemning “double standards.”</p>
<p>Worse, this State Department definition explicitly equates certain forms of criticism of Israel or activism against Israeli government policies with “anti-Semitism.” In other words, the State Department embraces the twisted premise that a defining attribute of “Jews” everywhere is the actions of the Israeli government, which is itself a long-standing anti-Semitic trope.</p>
<p>But most important of all, whatever you think of this State Department definition, it has no place whatsoever regulating which ideas can and cannot be expressed in an academic institution, particularly one that is run by the state (such as the University of California). Adoption of this “anti-Semitism” definition clearly would function to prohibit the advocacy of, say, a one-state solution for the Israel-Palestine conflict, or even the questioning of a state’s right to exist as a non-secular entity. How can anyone think it’s appropriate to declare such ideas off limits in academic classrooms or outlaw them as part of campus activism?</p>
<p>To ban the expression of any political ideas in such a setting would not only be wildly anti-intellectual but also patently unconstitutional.</p>
<p>Such acts and threats, Greenwald pointed out, are part of a concerted effort by the “Israeli government and its most devoted advocates around the world [who] are petrified at the growing strength of the movement to boycott Israeli goods in protest of the almost five-decade occupation [of Palestinian lands].”</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.bdsmovement.net/" type="external">boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement</a>, Guy Laron <a href="http://www.juancole.com/2015/06/boycotting-backfire-netanyahus.html" type="external">wrote</a> for the Informed Comment website, “seeks through grass-root activity in North America and Europe to bring about a consumer boycott of Israeli products, sports and cultural events as well as divestment of banks, pension funds and corporations from Israeli enterprises.” The movement has been gaining traction around the world, and U.S. university campuses are no exception. Greenwald wrote that the fear of the BDS movement lies in the fact that it is “predicated on the truth that they are most eager to suppress: the similarities between what Israel is doing to the Palestinians and the apartheid policies of South Africa.”</p>
<p>And it’s not just Dianne Feinstein and Richard Blum who are behind this effort to quash protected free speech. The very secretary of state and now Democratic front-runner for the presidential nomination who allowed this definition to become the United States government’s official interpretation of anti-Semitism has herself condemned the BDS movement in a letter to Israeli-American billionaire Haim Saban. <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/07/hillary-clinton-anti-israel-boycott-bds-movement" type="external">The Guardian</a> quotes from a July 2 letter that Clinton sent to Saban. The article says Clinton wrote, in part:</p>
<p>“… the BDS campaign is counterproductive to the pursuit of peace and harmful to Israelis and Palestinians alike” and [that she] pledged to mount a bipartisan effort “to fight back against further attempts to isolate and delegitimize Israel”.</p>
<p>As Stephen Zunes pointed out in <a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/07/13/the-troubling-implications-of-hillary-clintons-anti-bds-letter/" type="external">Counterpunch</a>, “this letter raises very troubling questions regarding the kind of president Hillary Clinton would be, not just in regard to Israel and Palestine, but in relation to human rights and international law overall and her reaction to those who support such principles.”</p>
<p>Indeed, it should worry us all that powerful, wealthy politicians such as Feinstein and Clinton would go so far as to threaten public institutions and undermine international law in order to support a government that has not only unlawfully occupied Palestinian territories but has committed heinous war crimes time and again, flouting the United Nations and other international organizations and governments. The massacre, as Greenwald calls it, that Israel <a href="" type="internal">inflicted on Gaza</a> last summer should alone be enough cause to withdraw U.S. support of the right-wing Israeli government. And yet our elected officials have chosen instead to quiet those who speak about these crimes against humanity, to institutionalize a definition of anti-Semitism that blurs the line between Jews and the oppressive Israeli government and, most dangerously of all, to undermine the Constitution in order to exert power over public discourse. Perhaps, as Truthdig columnist Chris Hedges points out in his piece “ <a href="" type="internal">Why I Support the BDS Movement Against Israel</a>,” it is to be expected that “when we stand with the oppressed we will be treated like the oppressed.”</p>
<p>Greenwald finished his strong Intercept piece with an important warning we should all heed:</p>
<p>The obvious goal with this UC battle is to institutionalize the notion on American college campuses that activism against the Israeli government is not merely wrong but is actually “hate speech” that should subject its student advocates (or professors) to severe punishment. If this menacing censorship is allowed to take hold in an academic system as large and influential as the University of California, then it’s much easier for the censors to point to it in the future as a model, in order to infect other academic institutions in the U.S. and around the world. That’s all the more reason to vehemently oppose it in this instance. If defenders of Israel are determined to defeat the boycott movement, they’ll have to find other ways to do it besides rendering its advocacy illegal and, in the process, destroying the long-cherished precept of free speech in academia.</p>
<p>For standing up once again for activism protected by the Constitution and for facing up to politicians willing to destroy free speech, Glenn Greenwald is — once again — our Truthdigger of the Week.</p> | true | 4 | 160 160 lawyer journalist glenn greenwald rick bowmer ap every week truthdig editorial staff selects truthdigger week group person worthy recognition speaking truth power breaking story blowing whistle lifetime achievement award rather looking newsmakers whose actions given week worth celebrating shortage opportunities celebrate glenn greenwalds journalismhell weve named truthdigger week three times standing wikileaks whistleblower chelsea manning founder julian assange publishing famous nsa surveillance exposé based edward snowden leaks greenwald made name courageous writer whos willing go great lengths protecting free speech week decided deserved named truthdigger indictment sen dianne feinstein billionaire husband shameless attempt blackmail university california uc punishing students speech activism critical israel greenwalds piece published intercept titled greatest threat campus free speech coming dianne feinstein militarycontractor husband revealed two weeks ago feinsteins husband richard blum made following comments uc regents meeting debate whether severely discipline students speak israel add weekend wife senior senator talked issue length wants stay conversation publicly right thing engage publicly prepared critical university dont kind statement penalties commit call crimes call whatever want students things cited today probably ought dismissal suspension school dont know many feel strongly way wife greenwald noted university california considering adopting state departments 2010 definition antisemitism includes section subject relates israel suspending cases expelling students express opinions manner falls definition antisemitism relative israel examples ways antisemitism manifests regard state israel taking account overall context could include demonize israel using symbols images associated classic antisemitism characterize israel israelis drawing comparisons contemporary israeli policy nazis blaming israel interreligious political tensions double standard israel applying double standards requiring behavior expected demanded democratic nation multilateral organizations focusing israel peace human rights investigations delegitimize israel denying jewish people right selfdetermination denying israel right exist however criticism israel similar leveled country regarded antisemitic greenwald eloquently explained employing definition adopted thensecretary state hillary clinton academic setting counterintuitive also patently unconstitutional ironies definition overwhelming first warns advocating double standard israelat exactly time promulgates standard applies israel would state department ever formally condemn regards excessive onesided criticism government russia iran isnt state department also accusing people bigotry create double standards iran obsessing antigay behavior iran ignoring worse abuses saudi arabia egypt uganda state department purporting regulate discourse surrounding one countryisraelwhile time condemning double standards worse state department definition explicitly equates certain forms criticism israel activism israeli government policies antisemitism words state department embraces twisted premise defining attribute jews everywhere actions israeli government longstanding antisemitic trope important whatever think state department definition place whatsoever regulating ideas expressed academic institution particularly one run state university california adoption antisemitism definition clearly would function prohibit advocacy say onestate solution israelpalestine conflict even questioning states right exist nonsecular entity anyone think appropriate declare ideas limits academic classrooms outlaw part campus activism ban expression political ideas setting would wildly antiintellectual also patently unconstitutional acts threats greenwald pointed part concerted effort israeli government devoted advocates around world petrified growing strength movement boycott israeli goods protest almost fivedecade occupation palestinian lands boycott divestment sanctions bds movement guy laron wrote informed comment website seeks grassroot activity north america europe bring consumer boycott israeli products sports cultural events well divestment banks pension funds corporations israeli enterprises movement gaining traction around world us university campuses exception greenwald wrote fear bds movement lies fact predicated truth eager suppress similarities israel palestinians apartheid policies south africa dianne feinstein richard blum behind effort quash protected free speech secretary state democratic frontrunner presidential nomination allowed definition become united states governments official interpretation antisemitism condemned bds movement letter israeliamerican billionaire haim saban guardian quotes july 2 letter clinton sent saban article says clinton wrote part bds campaign counterproductive pursuit peace harmful israelis palestinians alike pledged mount bipartisan effort fight back attempts isolate delegitimize israel stephen zunes pointed counterpunch letter raises troubling questions regarding kind president hillary clinton would regard israel palestine relation human rights international law overall reaction support principles indeed worry us powerful wealthy politicians feinstein clinton would go far threaten public institutions undermine international law order support government unlawfully occupied palestinian territories committed heinous war crimes time flouting united nations international organizations governments massacre greenwald calls israel inflicted gaza last summer alone enough cause withdraw us support rightwing israeli government yet elected officials chosen instead quiet speak crimes humanity institutionalize definition antisemitism blurs line jews oppressive israeli government dangerously undermine constitution order exert power public discourse perhaps truthdig columnist chris hedges points piece support bds movement israel expected stand oppressed treated like oppressed greenwald finished strong intercept piece important warning heed obvious goal uc battle institutionalize notion american college campuses activism israeli government merely wrong actually hate speech subject student advocates professors severe punishment menacing censorship allowed take hold academic system large influential university california much easier censors point future model order infect academic institutions us around world thats reason vehemently oppose instance defenders israel determined defeat boycott movement theyll find ways besides rendering advocacy illegal process destroying longcherished precept free speech academia standing activism protected constitution facing politicians willing destroy free speech glenn greenwald truthdigger week | 825 |
<p>By Bill McKibbenEditor’s note: The introduction below, by Tom Engelhardt, and the essay by Bill McKibben were originally published on <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174930" type="external">TomDispatch.com</a>.</p>
<p>Already climate change — in the form of a changing pattern of global rainfall — seems to be affecting the planet in significant ways. Take the massive, almost decade-long drought in Australia’s wheat-growing heartland, which has been a significant factor in <a href="http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/world/view/20080506-134846/Skyrocketing-food-prices-hit-Asians-like-a-tsunami" type="external">sending flour prices</a>, and so bread prices, soaring globally, leading to desperation and food riots across the planet.</p>
<p>A report from the Bureau of Meteorology in Australia <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSSYA00364020080505" type="external">makes clear</a> that, despite recent heavy rains in the eastern Australian breadbasket, years of above normal rainfall would be needed “to remove the very long-term [water] deficits” in the region. The report then adds this ominous note: “The combination of record heat and widespread drought during the past five to 10 years over large parts of southern and eastern Australia is without historical precedent and is, at least partly, a result of climate change.”</p>
<p>Think a bit about that phrase — “without historical precedent.” Except when it comes to technological invention, it hasn’t been much part of our lives these last many centuries. Without historical precedent. Brace yourselves, it’s about to become a commonplace in our vocabulary. The southeastern United States, for instance, was, for the last couple of years, <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174863/as_the_world_burns" type="external">locked</a> in a drought — <a href="http://www.environmental-expert.com/resultEachPressRelease.aspx?cid=4791&amp;codi=30624&amp;idproducttype=8&amp;level=0" type="external">which</a> is finally <a href="http://drought.unl.edu/dm/monitor.html" type="external">easing</a> — “without historical precedent.” In other words, there was nothing (repeat, nothing) in the historical record that provided a guide to what might happen next.</p>
<p />
<p>Now, it’s true that the industrial revolution, which led to the release of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere at historically unprecedented rates, was also, in a sense, “without historical precedent”; but most natural events — unlike, say, the present staggering <a href="http://www.homerdixon.com/articles/20070424-nytimes-aswiftlymeltingplanet.html" type="external">ice melt</a> in the Arctic — have been precedented (if I can manufacture such a word). They have been part of the historical record. That era — the era of history — is now, however, threatening to give way to a period capable of outrunning history itself, of outrunning us.</p>
<p>The planet in its long existence may have experienced the extremes to come, but we haven’t. The planet, unlike <a href="http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&amp;click_id=31&amp;art_id=nw20080507090054381C113063" type="external">much life</a> on it, may not — given millions or tens of millions of years to recover — be in danger, but we are.</p>
<p>When you really think about it, history is humanity. It’s common enough to talk about some historical figure or failed experiment being swept into the “dustbin of history,” but what if all history and that dustbin, too, go… well, where? What are we, really, without our records? Once we pass beyond them, beyond all the experience we’ve collected, written down, and archived since those first scratches went on clay tablets in the lands of the Tigris and Euphrates — now being <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/4710/chalmers_johnson_on_robbing_the_cradle_of_civilization" type="external">stripped</a> of their cultural patrimony — at least two unanswerable questions arise. Once history has been left in the dust, where are we? — and, who are we?</p>
<p>Let the indefatigable <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/167460/mckibben_the_real_news_about_global_warming" type="external">environmentalist</a> Bill McKibben, who has a powerful urge to stop us just short of the cliff of the post-historical era, take it from here. Tom</p>
<p>A Last Chance for Civilization By Bill McKibben</p>
<p>Even for Americans, constitutionally convinced that there will always be a second act, and a third, and a do-over after that, and, if necessary, a little public repentance and forgiveness and a Brand New Start — even for us, the world looks a little Terminal right now.</p>
<p>It’s not just the economy. We’ve gone through swoons before. It’s that gas at $4 a gallon means we’re running out, at least of the <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174829" type="external">cheap stuff</a> that built our sprawling society. It’s that when we try to turn corn into gas, it sends the price of a loaf of bread shooting upwards and starts food riots on three continents. It’s that everything is so inextricably tied together. It’s that, all of a sudden, those grim <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_of_Rome" type="external">Club of Rome</a> types who, way back in the 1970s, went on and on about the “limits to growth” suddenly seem… how best to put it, right.</p>
<p>All of a sudden it isn’t morning in America, it’s dusk on planet Earth.</p>
<p>There’s a number — a new number — that makes this point most powerfully. It may now be the most important number on Earth: 350. As in parts per million (ppm) of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.</p>
<p>A few weeks ago, our foremost climatologist, NASA’s Jim Hansen, submitted a paper to Science magazine with several co-authors. The abstract attached to it argued — and I have never read stronger language in a <a href="http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/007978.html" type="external">scientific paper</a> — “if humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm.” Hansen cites six irreversible tipping points — massive sea level rise and huge changes in rainfall patterns, among them — that we’ll pass if we don’t get back down to 350 soon; and the first of them, judging by last summer’s insane melt of Arctic ice, may already be behind us.</p>
<p>So it’s a tough diagnosis. It’s like the doctor telling you that your cholesterol is way too high and, if you don’t bring it down right away, you’re going to have a stroke. So you take the pill, you swear off the cheese, and, if you’re lucky, you get back into the safety zone before the coronary. It’s like watching the tachometer edge into the red zone and knowing that you need to take your foot off the gas before you hear that clunk up front.</p>
<p>In this case, though, it’s worse than that because we’re not taking the pill and we are stomping on the gas — hard. Instead of slowing down, we’re pouring on the coal, quite literally. Two weeks ago came <a href="http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0423-ghg.html" type="external">the news</a> that atmospheric carbon dioxide had jumped 2.4 parts per million last year — two decades ago, it was going up barely half that fast.</p>
<p>And suddenly, the news arrives that the amount of methane, another potent greenhouse gas, accumulating in the atmosphere, has unexpectedly begun to soar as well. Apparently, we’ve managed to warm the far north enough to start melting huge patches of permafrost and massive quantities of methane trapped beneath it have begun to bubble forth.</p>
<p>And don’t forget: China is building more power plants; India is pioneering the <a href="http://blog.wired.com/cars/2007/12/details-emerge.html" type="external">$2,500 car</a>, and Americans are converting to <a href="http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/raskin/6813" type="external">TVs</a> the size of windshields which suck juice ever faster.</p>
<p>Here’s the thing. Hansen didn’t just say that, if we didn’t act, there was trouble coming; or, if we didn’t yet know what was best for us, we’d certainly be better off below 350 ppm of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. His phrase was: “…if we wish to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed.” A planet with billions of people living near those oh-so-floodable coastlines. A planet with ever more vulnerable forests. (A beetle, encouraged by warmer temperatures, has already <a href="http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Beetles_may_doom_Canadas_carbon_reduction_target_study_999.html" type="external">managed</a> to kill 10 times more trees than in any previous infestation across the northern reaches of Canada this year. This means far more carbon heading for the atmosphere and apparently dooms Canada’s efforts to comply with the Kyoto Protocol, already in doubt because of its decision to start producing oil for the U.S. from Alberta’s tar sands.)</p>
<p>We’re the ones who kicked the warming off; now, the planet is starting to take over the job. Melt all that Arctic ice, for instance, and suddenly the nice white shield that reflected 80% of incoming solar radiation back into space has turned to blue water that absorbs 80% of the sun’s heat. Such feedbacks are beyond history, though not in the sense that <a href="http://www.amazon.com/End-History-Last-Man/dp/0380720027" type="external">Francis Fukuyama</a> had in mind.</p>
<p>And we have, at best, a few years to short-circuit them — to reverse course. <a href="http://climateprogress.org/2007/11/17/must-read-ipcc-synthesis-report-debate-over-delay-fatal-action-not-costly/" type="external">Here’s</a> the Indian scientist and economist Rajendra Pachauri, who accepted the Nobel Prize on behalf of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change last year (and, by the way, got his job when the Bush administration, at the behest of Exxon Mobil, forced out his predecessor): “If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.”</p>
<p>In the next two or three years, the nations of the world are supposed to be negotiating a successor treaty to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol" type="external">Kyoto Accord</a>. When December 2009 rolls around, heads of state are supposed to converge on Copenhagen to sign a treaty — a treaty that would go into effect at the last plausible moment to heed the most basic and crucial of limits on atmospheric CO2.</p>
<p>If we did everything right, says Hansen, we could see carbon emissions start to fall fairly rapidly and the oceans begin to pull some of that CO2 out of the atmosphere. Before the century was out we might even be on track back to 350. We might <a href="http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/dlashof/danger_zone.html" type="external">stop</a> just short of some of those tipping points, like the Road Runner screeching to a halt at the very edge of the cliff.</p>
<p>More likely, though, we’re the Coyote — because “doing everything right” means that political systems around the world would have to take enormous and painful steps right away. It means no more new coal-fired power plants anywhere, and plans to quickly close the ones already in operation. (Coal-fired power plants operating the way they’re supposed to are, in global warming terms, as dangerous as nuclear plants melting down.) It means making car factories turn out efficient hybrids next year, just the way we made them turn out tanks in six months at the start of World War II. It means making trains an absolute priority and planes a taboo.</p>
<p>It means making every decision wisely because we have so little time and so little money, at least relative to the task at hand. And hardest of all, it means the rich countries of the world sharing resources and technology freely with the poorest ones, so that they can develop dignified lives without burning their cheap coal.</p>
<p>That’s possible — we launched a Marshall Plan once, and we could do it again, this time in relation to carbon. But in a month when the President has, once more, urged us to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, that seems unlikely. In a month when the alluring phrase “gas tax holiday” has danced into our vocabulary, it’s hard to see (though it was encouraging to see that Clinton’s gambit didn’t sway many voters). And if it’s hard to imagine sacrifice here, imagine China, where people produce a quarter as much carbon apiece as we do.</p>
<p>Still, as long as it’s not impossible, we’ve got a duty to try. In fact, it’s about the most obvious duty humans have ever faced.</p>
<p>A few of us have just launched a new campaign, <a href="http://www.350.org/4/" type="external">350.org</a>. Its only goal is to spread this number around the world in the next 18 months, via art and music and ruckuses of all kinds, in the hope that it will push those post-Kyoto negotiations in the direction of reality.</p>
<p>After all, those talks are our last chance; you just can’t do this one light bulb at a time. And if this 350.org campaign is a Hail Mary pass, well, sometimes those passes get caught.</p>
<p>We do have one thing going for us: This new tool, the Web which, at least, allows you to imagine something like a grassroots global effort. If the Internet was built for anything, it was built for sharing this number, for making people understand that “350” stands for a kind of safety, a kind of possibility, a kind of future.</p>
<p>Hansen’s words were well-chosen: “a planet similar to that on which civilization developed.” People will doubtless survive on a non-350 planet, but those who do will be so preoccupied, coping with the endless unintended consequences of an overheated planet that civilization may not.</p>
<p>Civilization is what grows up in the margins of leisure and security provided by a workable relationship with the natural world. That margin won’t exist, at least not for long, this side of 350. That’s the limit we face.</p>
<p>Bill McKibben is a scholar-in-residence at Middlebury College and co-founder of <a href="http://www.350.org/4" type="external">350.org</a>. His most recent book is <a href="http://www.amazon.com/dp/0805076271/ref=nosim/?tag=nationbooks08-20" type="external">The Bill McKibben Reader</a>.</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | bill mckibbeneditors note introduction tom engelhardt essay bill mckibben originally published tomdispatchcom already climate change form changing pattern global rainfall seems affecting planet significant ways take massive almost decadelong drought australias wheatgrowing heartland significant factor sending flour prices bread prices soaring globally leading desperation food riots across planet report bureau meteorology australia makes clear despite recent heavy rains eastern australian breadbasket years normal rainfall would needed remove longterm water deficits region report adds ominous note combination record heat widespread drought past five 10 years large parts southern eastern australia without historical precedent least partly result climate change think bit phrase without historical precedent except comes technological invention hasnt much part lives last many centuries without historical precedent brace become commonplace vocabulary southeastern united states instance last couple years locked drought finally easing without historical precedent words nothing repeat nothing historical record provided guide might happen next true industrial revolution led release greenhouse gasses atmosphere historically unprecedented rates also sense without historical precedent natural events unlike say present staggering ice melt arctic precedented manufacture word part historical record era era history however threatening give way period capable outrunning history outrunning us planet long existence may experienced extremes come havent planet unlike much life may given millions tens millions years recover danger really think history humanity common enough talk historical figure failed experiment swept dustbin history history dustbin go well really without records pass beyond beyond experience weve collected written archived since first scratches went clay tablets lands tigris euphrates stripped cultural patrimony least two unanswerable questions arise history left dust let indefatigable environmentalist bill mckibben powerful urge stop us short cliff posthistorical era take tom last chance civilization bill mckibben even americans constitutionally convinced always second act third doover necessary little public repentance forgiveness brand new start even us world looks little terminal right economy weve gone swoons gas 4 gallon means running least cheap stuff built sprawling society try turn corn gas sends price loaf bread shooting upwards starts food riots three continents everything inextricably tied together sudden grim club rome types way back 1970s went limits growth suddenly seem best put right sudden isnt morning america dusk planet earth theres number new number makes point powerfully may important number earth 350 parts per million ppm carbon dioxide atmosphere weeks ago foremost climatologist nasas jim hansen submitted paper science magazine several coauthors abstract attached argued never read stronger language scientific paper humanity wishes preserve planet similar civilization developed life earth adapted paleoclimate evidence ongoing climate change suggest co2 need reduced current 385 ppm 350 ppm hansen cites six irreversible tipping points massive sea level rise huge changes rainfall patterns among well pass dont get back 350 soon first judging last summers insane melt arctic ice may already behind us tough diagnosis like doctor telling cholesterol way high dont bring right away youre going stroke take pill swear cheese youre lucky get back safety zone coronary like watching tachometer edge red zone knowing need take foot gas hear clunk front case though worse taking pill stomping gas hard instead slowing pouring coal quite literally two weeks ago came news atmospheric carbon dioxide jumped 24 parts per million last year two decades ago going barely half fast suddenly news arrives amount methane another potent greenhouse gas accumulating atmosphere unexpectedly begun soar well apparently weve managed warm far north enough start melting huge patches permafrost massive quantities methane trapped beneath begun bubble forth dont forget china building power plants india pioneering 2500 car americans converting tvs size windshields suck juice ever faster heres thing hansen didnt say didnt act trouble coming didnt yet know best us wed certainly better 350 ppm carbon dioxide atmosphere phrase wish preserve planet similar civilization developed planet billions people living near ohsofloodable coastlines planet ever vulnerable forests beetle encouraged warmer temperatures already managed kill 10 times trees previous infestation across northern reaches canada year means far carbon heading atmosphere apparently dooms canadas efforts comply kyoto protocol already doubt decision start producing oil us albertas tar sands ones kicked warming planet starting take job melt arctic ice instance suddenly nice white shield reflected 80 incoming solar radiation back space turned blue water absorbs 80 suns heat feedbacks beyond history though sense francis fukuyama mind best years shortcircuit reverse course heres indian scientist economist rajendra pachauri accepted nobel prize behalf intergovernmental panel climate change last year way got job bush administration behest exxon mobil forced predecessor theres action 2012 thats late next two three years determine future defining moment next two three years nations world supposed negotiating successor treaty kyoto accord december 2009 rolls around heads state supposed converge copenhagen sign treaty treaty would go effect last plausible moment heed basic crucial limits atmospheric co2 everything right says hansen could see carbon emissions start fall fairly rapidly oceans begin pull co2 atmosphere century might even track back 350 might stop short tipping points like road runner screeching halt edge cliff likely though coyote everything right means political systems around world would take enormous painful steps right away means new coalfired power plants anywhere plans quickly close ones already operation coalfired power plants operating way theyre supposed global warming terms dangerous nuclear plants melting means making car factories turn efficient hybrids next year way made turn tanks six months start world war ii means making trains absolute priority planes taboo means making every decision wisely little time little money least relative task hand hardest means rich countries world sharing resources technology freely poorest ones develop dignified lives without burning cheap coal thats possible launched marshall plan could time relation carbon month president urged us drill arctic national wildlife refuge seems unlikely month alluring phrase gas tax holiday danced vocabulary hard see though encouraging see clintons gambit didnt sway many voters hard imagine sacrifice imagine china people produce quarter much carbon apiece still long impossible weve got duty try fact obvious duty humans ever faced us launched new campaign 350org goal spread number around world next 18 months via art music ruckuses kinds hope push postkyoto negotiations direction reality talks last chance cant one light bulb time 350org campaign hail mary pass well sometimes passes get caught one thing going us new tool web least allows imagine something like grassroots global effort internet built anything built sharing number making people understand 350 stands kind safety kind possibility kind future hansens words wellchosen planet similar civilization developed people doubtless survive non350 planet preoccupied coping endless unintended consequences overheated planet civilization may civilization grows margins leisure security provided workable relationship natural world margin wont exist least long side 350 thats limit face bill mckibben scholarinresidence middlebury college cofounder 350org recent book bill mckibben reader | 1,110 |
<p>Dennis Van Tine/Geisler-Fotopres/DPA/ZUMA Press</p>
<p />
<p>While politicians around the world are focused on ISIS and the threat of Syrian-based terrorism, the fight between the government of Bashar al-Assad and Syria’s rebel groups has continued apace, killing thousands of civilians and drawing major powers further into the fight. But despite the high cost of the civil war, it’s been two years since the two sides last negotiated—and the latest attempt at brokering a peace deal could potentially collapse before it even starts.</p>
<p>Talks mediated by the United Nation’s Syria envoy, Staffan de Mistura, are due to begin between the Syrian government and opposition on Friday in Geneva, but the opposition’s High Negotiations Committee, composed of dissident politicians and rebel leaders, still hasn’t confirmed that it will attend. The Syrian government must stop starving civilians, using barrel bombs, and committing other human rights violations before negotiations start, <a href="http://bigstory.ap.org/article/bcebbd67dc44439099bec46b930468f5/syrian-opposition-sets-new-conditions-geneva-peace-talks" type="external">the HNC says</a>. They argue their conditions are backed by <a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/12/20/un-security-council-resolution-2254-actual-full-text/" type="external">a UN Security Council resolution</a>, passed in December, which “demands that all parties immediately cease any attacks against civilians and civilian objects as such, including attacks against medical facilities and personnel, and any indiscriminate use of weapons.”</p>
<p>But starvation tactics and indiscriminate bombings by both Syrian and Russian aircraft haven’t ceased in the weeks since the resolution was passed. And without that halt, says Kenan Rahmani, a Syrian-American law student and activist who recently returned from a visit to Syria <a href="#correction" type="external">*</a>, holding the talks is pointless. “The consensus among the activists is that President Obama has set up peace talks in order to give the illusion that this administration is seeking a resolution in Syria,” Rahmani says. “But the reality is that the conditions aren’t being met in order to have successful talks.” While the Obama administration has pushed for the Assad government to step down, many activists believe the United States hasn’t done nearly enough to offer military support to rebels or pressure the Syrian government and its allies to end the war.</p>
<p>Rahmani believes the opposition’s negotiating team feels the same way he does. “There’s a majority of them who are saying if the very basic confidence-building measures which were built into the UN resolution…can’t even be met then there’s really nothing to gain by going,” Rahmani says. “There actually could be something to lose, which would be their credibility in front of the Syrian people.”</p>
<p>Even if both sides come to the tables—tables plural, since neither side will yet agree to even sit in the same room with the other, meaning the talks would start with de Mistura <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/27/world/middleeast/un-invites-syrian-parties-to-peace-talks-and-presents-demands.html" type="external">shuttling messages</a> between the government and opposition teams—there seems to be little prospect that they can agree on basic issues. The opposition says the Assad regime must give up power as part of any peace settlement, but the Syrian government and its backers, Russia and Iran, still reject that condition. And because the regime has made major military gains since Russia intervened in the war in September, there appears to be no reason they’ll relent anytime soon.</p>
<p>“Momentum has flipped from the opposition side to the regime side, so of course that’s going to strengthen the negotiating hand of the regime and its backers,” says Noah Bonsey, a senior Syria analyst for International Crisis Group, a conflict monitoring organization. “They’re obviously not going to be in any hurry to negotiate seriously, let alone push the regime to make very difficult concessions.”</p>
<p>But Bonsey says there are still glimmers of progress. During the last round of peace talks, held almost exactly two years ago, the Western-backed political opposition had little standing or support from the actual groups on the ground fighting the Assad regime. This time, the High Negotiating Council has the backing of mainstream Syrian rebel units, which created the body <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/syrian-opposition-groups-hold-talks-in-riyadh-1449683546" type="external">during a conference in Saudi Arabia</a> in December. “If there’s ever going to be a political process that goes anywhere, the mainstream non-jihadi armed groups, including major Islamist groups, are going to have to be involved in those negotiations,” Bonsey says. “It’s a positive step that a body exists that can begin to fill that role.”</p>
<p>And there is always the possibility, however unlikely, that negotiators can forge an innovative compromise. All the outside players in the conflict, including Russia and Iran, have signed onto <a href="http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/Syria/FinalCommuniqueActionGroupforSyria.pdf" type="external">the 2012 Geneva Communiqué</a> that says the war must be ended with a firm timetable leading to a “new constitutional order” that is open and representative. But the communiqué does not say whether the Assads would be barred from participating in any transition process or new government. That means there could still be options that would theoretically satisfy everyone. “Negotiations could configure and install a transitional governing body—created on the basis of mutual consent, exercising full executive power, and excluding regime (family and entourage) figures for the sake of peace and national unity—while permitting Assad to retain, until national elections, the presidential title and all immunities (perhaps extended indefinitely on an emeritus basis) pertaining thereto,” suggested Fred C. Hof, a former special adviser for transition in Syria at the State Department, in an opinion piece for the Huffington Post this week.</p>
<p>But for now, Kenan Rahmani, the Syrian activist, holds out little hope that anything will be achieved either in Geneva or until President Barack Obama leaves office. “Syrians are anxiously awaiting January 2017,” he says, “and they are wondering if a future president would actually be able to end their suffering—or if it’s just that no one at all cares.”</p>
<p>Correction: An earlier version of this article said that Kenan Rahmani is the current executive director of the Syrian-American Council, a pro-opposition grassroots group. Rahmani no longer holds that position, and the reference has been removed.</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | dennis van tinegeislerfotopresdpazuma press politicians around world focused isis threat syrianbased terrorism fight government bashar alassad syrias rebel groups continued apace killing thousands civilians drawing major powers fight despite high cost civil war two years since two sides last negotiatedand latest attempt brokering peace deal could potentially collapse even starts talks mediated united nations syria envoy staffan de mistura due begin syrian government opposition friday geneva oppositions high negotiations committee composed dissident politicians rebel leaders still hasnt confirmed attend syrian government must stop starving civilians using barrel bombs committing human rights violations negotiations start hnc says argue conditions backed un security council resolution passed december demands parties immediately cease attacks civilians civilian objects including attacks medical facilities personnel indiscriminate use weapons starvation tactics indiscriminate bombings syrian russian aircraft havent ceased weeks since resolution passed without halt says kenan rahmani syrianamerican law student activist recently returned visit syria holding talks pointless consensus among activists president obama set peace talks order give illusion administration seeking resolution syria rahmani says reality conditions arent met order successful talks obama administration pushed assad government step many activists believe united states hasnt done nearly enough offer military support rebels pressure syrian government allies end war rahmani believes oppositions negotiating team feels way theres majority saying basic confidencebuilding measures built un resolutioncant even met theres really nothing gain going rahmani says actually could something lose would credibility front syrian people even sides come tablestables plural since neither side yet agree even sit room meaning talks would start de mistura shuttling messages government opposition teamsthere seems little prospect agree basic issues opposition says assad regime must give power part peace settlement syrian government backers russia iran still reject condition regime made major military gains since russia intervened war september appears reason theyll relent anytime soon momentum flipped opposition side regime side course thats going strengthen negotiating hand regime backers says noah bonsey senior syria analyst international crisis group conflict monitoring organization theyre obviously going hurry negotiate seriously let alone push regime make difficult concessions bonsey says still glimmers progress last round peace talks held almost exactly two years ago westernbacked political opposition little standing support actual groups ground fighting assad regime time high negotiating council backing mainstream syrian rebel units created body conference saudi arabia december theres ever going political process goes anywhere mainstream nonjihadi armed groups including major islamist groups going involved negotiations bonsey says positive step body exists begin fill role always possibility however unlikely negotiators forge innovative compromise outside players conflict including russia iran signed onto 2012 geneva communiqué says war must ended firm timetable leading new constitutional order open representative communiqué say whether assads would barred participating transition process new government means could still options would theoretically satisfy everyone negotiations could configure install transitional governing bodycreated basis mutual consent exercising full executive power excluding regime family entourage figures sake peace national unitywhile permitting assad retain national elections presidential title immunities perhaps extended indefinitely emeritus basis pertaining thereto suggested fred c hof former special adviser transition syria state department opinion piece huffington post week kenan rahmani syrian activist holds little hope anything achieved either geneva president barack obama leaves office syrians anxiously awaiting january 2017 says wondering future president would actually able end sufferingor one cares correction earlier version article said kenan rahmani current executive director syrianamerican council proopposition grassroots group rahmani longer holds position reference removed | 562 |
<p>WASHINGTON (AP) — After years of setbacks, a nearly $100 billion-a-year compromise farm bill cleared the House on Wednesday despite strong opposition from conservatives who sought a bigger cut in food stamps.</p>
<p>The five-year bill, which preserves generous crop subsidies, heads to the Senate, where approval seems certain. The White House said President Barack Obama would sign it.</p>
<p>The measure, which the House approved 251-166, had backing from the Republican leadership team, even though it makes smaller cuts to food stamps than they would have liked. After wavering for several years, the GOP leaders were seeking to put the long-stalled bill behind them and build on the success of a bipartisan budget passed earlier this month. Leaders in both parties also were hoping to bolster rural candidates in this year’s midterm elections.</p>
<p>House Speaker John Boehner did not cast a vote on the bill, a commonplace practice for a speaker, but he had issued a statement Monday saying it was “worthy of the House’s support.” Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., voted for the bill despite concerns from some in her caucus that the bill cut too much from the food stamp program.</p>
<p>The bill ultimately would cut about $800 million a year from the $80 billion-a-year food stamp program, or around 1 percent. The House had sought a 5 percent cut.</p>
<p>The legislation also would continue to heavily subsidize major crops for the nation’s farmers while eliminating some subsidies and shifting them toward more politically defensible insurance programs.</p>
<p>House Agriculture Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., called the compromise a “miracle” after trying to get the bill passed for almost three years. An early version of the legislation was defeated on the House floor last June after conservatives said the food stamp cuts were too modest and liberal Democrats said they were too deep.</p>
<p>The House later passed a bill with a higher, $4 billion cut, arguing at the time that the program had spiraled out of control after costs doubled in the last five years. But cuts that high were ultimately not possible after the Senate balked and the White House threatened a veto. The Senate had sought a cut of $400 million annually.</p>
<p>Many House conservatives still voted against the bill — 63 Republicans opposed it, one more than in June.</p>
<p>One of those conservative opponents was Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind. “It spends money we simply don’t have,” he said.</p>
<p>But 89 Democrats supported it, bolstered by the lower cut in food stamps. The top Democrat on the agriculture panel, Minnesota Rep. Collin Peterson, said he also enticed some of his colleagues with more money for fruit, vegetable and organic programs.</p>
<p>The final savings in the food stamp program would come from cracking down on some states that seek to boost individual food stamp benefits by giving people small amounts of federal heating assistance that they don’t need. That heating assistance, sometimes as low as $1 per person, triggers higher benefits, and some critics see that practice as circumventing the law. The compromise bill would require states to give individual recipients at least $20 in heating assistance before a higher food stamp benefit could kick in.</p>
<p>Some Democrats said the food stamp cut still is too high.</p>
<p>Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, one of the states that have boosted benefits through heating assistance, said the cut will be harmful on top of automatic food stamp cuts that went into place in November.</p>
<p>“I don’t know where they are going to make that up,” McGovern said.</p>
<p>To pass the bill, Lucas and his Senate counterpart, Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, found ways to bring many potential naysayers on board. They spent more than two years crafting the bill to appeal to members from all regions of the country. They included a boost in money for crop insurance popular in the Midwest; higher rice and peanut subsidies for Southern farmers; and renewal of federal land payments for Western states.</p>
<p>They also backed away from repealing a catfish program — a move that would have angered Mississippi lawmakers — and dropped House language that would have thwarted a California law requiring all eggs sold in the state to come from hens living in larger cages. Striking out that provision was a priority for California lawmakers who did not want to see the state law changed.</p>
<p>For those seeking reform of farm programs, the legislation would eliminate a $4.5 billion-a-year farm subsidy called direct payments, which are paid to farmers whether they farm or not. But the bill nonetheless would continue to heavily subsidize major crops — corn, soybeans, wheat, rice and cotton — while shifting many of those subsidies toward more politically defensible insurance programs. That means farmers would have to incur losses before they could get a payout.</p>
<p>The almost $100 billion-a-year bill would save around $1.65 billion annually overall, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The amount was less than the $2.3 billion annual savings the agriculture committees originally projected for the bill.</p>
<p>An aide to Lucas said the difference was due to how the CBO calculated budget savings from recent automatic across-the-board spending cuts, known as sequestration.</p>
<p>___</p>
<p>Associated Press writer Darlene Superville contributed to this report.</p>
<p>Copyright 2014 The Associated Press</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Contact author</a></p>
<p>&#160;&#160; <a href="" type="internal">farm bill</a>, <a href="" type="internal">farm bill news</a>, <a href="" type="internal">food stamp news</a>, <a href="" type="internal">SNAP</a></p> | true | 4 | washington ap years setbacks nearly 100 billionayear compromise farm bill cleared house wednesday despite strong opposition conservatives sought bigger cut food stamps fiveyear bill preserves generous crop subsidies heads senate approval seems certain white house said president barack obama would sign measure house approved 251166 backing republican leadership team even though makes smaller cuts food stamps would liked wavering several years gop leaders seeking put longstalled bill behind build success bipartisan budget passed earlier month leaders parties also hoping bolster rural candidates years midterm elections house speaker john boehner cast vote bill commonplace practice speaker issued statement monday saying worthy houses support minority leader nancy pelosi dcalif voted bill despite concerns caucus bill cut much food stamp program bill ultimately would cut 800 million year 80 billionayear food stamp program around 1 percent house sought 5 percent cut legislation also would continue heavily subsidize major crops nations farmers eliminating subsidies shifting toward politically defensible insurance programs house agriculture chairman frank lucas rokla called compromise miracle trying get bill passed almost three years early version legislation defeated house floor last june conservatives said food stamp cuts modest liberal democrats said deep house later passed bill higher 4 billion cut arguing time program spiraled control costs doubled last five years cuts high ultimately possible senate balked white house threatened veto senate sought cut 400 million annually many house conservatives still voted bill 63 republicans opposed one june one conservative opponents rep marlin stutzman rind spends money simply dont said 89 democrats supported bolstered lower cut food stamps top democrat agriculture panel minnesota rep collin peterson said also enticed colleagues money fruit vegetable organic programs final savings food stamp program would come cracking states seek boost individual food stamp benefits giving people small amounts federal heating assistance dont need heating assistance sometimes low 1 per person triggers higher benefits critics see practice circumventing law compromise bill would require states give individual recipients least 20 heating assistance higher food stamp benefit could kick democrats said food stamp cut still high rep jim mcgovern massachusetts one states boosted benefits heating assistance said cut harmful top automatic food stamp cuts went place november dont know going make mcgovern said pass bill lucas senate counterpart democratic sen debbie stabenow michigan found ways bring many potential naysayers board spent two years crafting bill appeal members regions country included boost money crop insurance popular midwest higher rice peanut subsidies southern farmers renewal federal land payments western states also backed away repealing catfish program move would angered mississippi lawmakers dropped house language would thwarted california law requiring eggs sold state come hens living larger cages striking provision priority california lawmakers want see state law changed seeking reform farm programs legislation would eliminate 45 billionayear farm subsidy called direct payments paid farmers whether farm bill nonetheless would continue heavily subsidize major crops corn soybeans wheat rice cotton shifting many subsidies toward politically defensible insurance programs means farmers would incur losses could get payout almost 100 billionayear bill would save around 165 billion annually overall according congressional budget office amount less 23 billion annual savings agriculture committees originally projected bill aide lucas said difference due cbo calculated budget savings recent automatic acrosstheboard spending cuts known sequestration ___ associated press writer darlene superville contributed report copyright 2014 associated press 160 contact author 160160 farm bill farm bill news food stamp news snap | 559 |
<p>Workers are tantalized by the proximity of a ‘dream job,’ keeping their noses pressed against the glass in the belief that the sheer force of their longing will shatter it.</p>
<p>“Do what you love” is not a new mantra. Since at least the 1980s, when individualistic ambition was elevated to a national virtue, Americans have taken for granted that good work should reward the soul. It sounds so obvious, so optimistic: How better to escape work, that dull scourge of existence, than by finding a way to turn it into its opposite—leisure, pleasure, creativity, joy?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.powells.com/partner/36495/biblio/9781941393475?p_ti" type="external">Do What You Love: And Other Lies about Success &amp; Happiness</a>, Miya Tokumitsu’s short, sharp and timely new book based on her hit Jacobin essay “ <a href="https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/01/in-the-name-of-love/" type="external">In the Name of Love</a>,” stabs plenty of pins into this heart-shaped balloon. In today’s increasingly freelance economy, DWYL has become a convenient way for corporations to pay fewer people less money for more work. If work is what you love, after all, why do anything else? We’ve come a long way, Tokumitsu argues, from the traditional Protestant work ethic, which held that laboring to make money was virtuous precisely because it wasn’t enjoyable. Drudgery was dignity, and the reward lay in heaven, or at least retirement. We no longer live in self-denying times. “Today, ideal work is the combined pursuit of pleasure and capital,” Tokumitsu writes. Just ask the beaming CEO giving the commencement address.</p>
<p>Tokumitsu sees the mantra leveraged on three levels, correlating to the executive, middling and entry-level “rungs” of employment (though they no longer form a ladder one can predictably climb). At the top, “passion” rules. Workers who have achieved the fantasy trifecta of wealth, status and power must continue to prove their commitment by staying later at the office than anyone else, and remaining visibly connected (via social media and email) to their professional worlds even off the clock. As Tokumitsu notes wryly, “ideal love is nothing if not constant”—even though studies show that people who work “heroic” hours are unproductive, miserable and liable to get sick.</p>
<p>The pressure to perform is exerted by competitive office cultures and job insecurity, and affirmed by popular culture— Tokumitsu cites two television shows, Enlightened and The Good Wife, each of which romanticizes the workaholism of a woman in a white-collar job. In the first, a sales executive (Laura Dern) loses her professional status and, as a consequence, her sense of identity. In the second, a lawyer (Julianna Margulies) finds personal gratification by returning to her job after years out of the workforce raising her children. The Good Wife pushes work-as-fantasy so far that viewers can even buy furniture from the on-screen office for home use. In real life, however, a woman returning to the workforce after a hiatus, even a senior executive, is far more likely to see her career plummet than soar, making The Good Wife a particularly fraudulent form of professional wish-fulfillment.&#160;</p>
<p>For lower-level, white-collar and corporate workers, the DWYL drumbeat is somewhat muted—though Tokumitsu still discerns its effect in pressure to exhibit attitudes of “insistent happiness” at work. Tokumitsu also notes that the rise of DWYL correlates with the glut of micromanagement such as employee surveillance and relentless performance assessments, which seem to exist only to justify middle-management positions. As skilled workers lose their autonomy and give up authority to omnipresent managers, DWYL may be most appealingly rephrased as do what you like—it’s a fantasy of what work could be without stifling oversight.&#160;</p>
<p>In all these different arenas, the DWYL fairy tale motivates by decoupling work and money, insisting that workers should be fulfilled by work itself, regardless of salary. It therefore excludes those who may be working the longest (and least lovable) hours of all: the minimum-wage workers who brew the morning coffee for the stressed executives and empty the wastebaskets after dark at the starchitect’s gleaming offices. There’s no reason a worker might not enjoy and appreciate this work, if it paid decently and offered benefits and security. But the mantra insists workers should love work for itself, rather than as a means to an end. More sinisterly, because it also pretends that “work and class float free from each other,” DWYL implicitly assumes that everyone has the same options to follow their heart, and denigrates the worker who “chooses” not to.&#160;</p>
<p>Tokumitsu argues that DWYL targets women with particular force. Work that is traditionally gendered female “is often assumed to be done out of love”; it’s women’s supposedly innate nurturing instincts that draw them to nursing, teaching and care work, not a desire for high pay or high status—perhaps one reason why teachers and nurses who strike or protest for better pay are often vilified. But in white-collar offices, too, DWYL culture pressures workers to exhibit joy and gratitude for the privilege of doing their jobs—attitudes that female employees are already especially rewarded for displaying and punished for lacking. In a world of disgracefully inadequate childcare provisions for workers, women often end up in the “flexible” freelance workforce, where the DWYL ethos reigns supreme.</p>
<p>The logical endpoint of such thinking is “hope labor,” a term Tokumitsu borrows to describe the combination of self-delusion and systemic abuse that keeps a steady stream of unpaid interns (77 percent of whom are female) flocking to donate their labor to government agencies, nonprofits and private companies alike. Hope also keeps adjunct professors and minor-league baseball players in their downtrodden place, doing work that is basically identical to that of their full-time, highly visible colleagues but for which they receive just a fraction of the pay and not a crumb of the respect. All these workers are tantalized by the proximity of a “dream job,” keeping their noses pressed against the glass in the belief that the sheer force of their longing will shatter it. Tokumitsu crisply contrasts this “timorous longing” with the concrete optimism that comes from livable wages, salary increases, long-term contracts and healthcare—not to mention slashing the student debt burden. But fighting together for better working conditions entails admitting that we are workers, not freewheeling, independent “creatives.”&#160;</p>
<p>But for how long? Tokumitsu is not alone in pointing out that work as we know it is changing, even disappearing. Over the past half-century, the capitalist dogma of relentless economic growth has had devastating effects on the planet, while technology has advanced to the point at which millions of jobs in manufacturing, transportation and telecommunications are (or may soon be) obsolete. Together, these circumstances force us to reconsider what worthwhile and necessary employment looks like. DWYL may yet become a radical slogan, if it pushes us—all of us—to find meaning and joy in our lives beyond the capitalist imperative. But as career advice, it’s a disaster.</p>
<p>Joanna Scutts is a freelance writer based in Queens, NY, and a board member of the National Book Critics Circle. Her book reviews and essays have appeared in the Washington Post, the New Yorker Online, The Nation, the Wall Street Journal and several other publications. You can follow her on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/JC_Scutts" type="external">@JC_Scuttsr</a>.</p> | true | 4 | workers tantalized proximity dream job keeping noses pressed glass belief sheer force longing shatter love new mantra since least 1980s individualistic ambition elevated national virtue americans taken granted good work reward soul sounds obvious optimistic better escape work dull scourge existence finding way turn oppositeleisure pleasure creativity joy love lies success amp happiness miya tokumitsus short sharp timely new book based hit jacobin essay name love stabs plenty pins heartshaped balloon todays increasingly freelance economy dwyl become convenient way corporations pay fewer people less money work work love anything else weve come long way tokumitsu argues traditional protestant work ethic held laboring make money virtuous precisely wasnt enjoyable drudgery dignity reward lay heaven least retirement longer live selfdenying times today ideal work combined pursuit pleasure capital tokumitsu writes ask beaming ceo giving commencement address tokumitsu sees mantra leveraged three levels correlating executive middling entrylevel rungs employment though longer form ladder one predictably climb top passion rules workers achieved fantasy trifecta wealth status power must continue prove commitment staying later office anyone else remaining visibly connected via social media email professional worlds even clock tokumitsu notes wryly ideal love nothing constanteven though studies show people work heroic hours unproductive miserable liable get sick pressure perform exerted competitive office cultures job insecurity affirmed popular culture tokumitsu cites two television shows enlightened good wife romanticizes workaholism woman whitecollar job first sales executive laura dern loses professional status consequence sense identity second lawyer julianna margulies finds personal gratification returning job years workforce raising children good wife pushes workasfantasy far viewers even buy furniture onscreen office home use real life however woman returning workforce hiatus even senior executive far likely see career plummet soar making good wife particularly fraudulent form professional wishfulfillment160 lowerlevel whitecollar corporate workers dwyl drumbeat somewhat mutedthough tokumitsu still discerns effect pressure exhibit attitudes insistent happiness work tokumitsu also notes rise dwyl correlates glut micromanagement employee surveillance relentless performance assessments seem exist justify middlemanagement positions skilled workers lose autonomy give authority omnipresent managers dwyl may appealingly rephrased likeits fantasy work could without stifling oversight160 different arenas dwyl fairy tale motivates decoupling work money insisting workers fulfilled work regardless salary therefore excludes may working longest least lovable hours minimumwage workers brew morning coffee stressed executives empty wastebaskets dark starchitects gleaming offices theres reason worker might enjoy appreciate work paid decently offered benefits security mantra insists workers love work rather means end sinisterly also pretends work class float free dwyl implicitly assumes everyone options follow heart denigrates worker chooses to160 tokumitsu argues dwyl targets women particular force work traditionally gendered female often assumed done love womens supposedly innate nurturing instincts draw nursing teaching care work desire high pay high statusperhaps one reason teachers nurses strike protest better pay often vilified whitecollar offices dwyl culture pressures workers exhibit joy gratitude privilege jobsattitudes female employees already especially rewarded displaying punished lacking world disgracefully inadequate childcare provisions workers women often end flexible freelance workforce dwyl ethos reigns supreme logical endpoint thinking hope labor term tokumitsu borrows describe combination selfdelusion systemic abuse keeps steady stream unpaid interns 77 percent female flocking donate labor government agencies nonprofits private companies alike hope also keeps adjunct professors minorleague baseball players downtrodden place work basically identical fulltime highly visible colleagues receive fraction pay crumb respect workers tantalized proximity dream job keeping noses pressed glass belief sheer force longing shatter tokumitsu crisply contrasts timorous longing concrete optimism comes livable wages salary increases longterm contracts healthcarenot mention slashing student debt burden fighting together better working conditions entails admitting workers freewheeling independent creatives160 long tokumitsu alone pointing work know changing even disappearing past halfcentury capitalist dogma relentless economic growth devastating effects planet technology advanced point millions jobs manufacturing transportation telecommunications may soon obsolete together circumstances force us reconsider worthwhile necessary employment looks like dwyl may yet become radical slogan pushes usall usto find meaning joy lives beyond capitalist imperative career advice disaster joanna scutts freelance writer based queens ny board member national book critics circle book reviews essays appeared washington post new yorker online nation wall street journal several publications follow twitter jc_scuttsr | 678 |
<p>Two recent headlines can perhaps help answer that question, when it comes to identifying the real nature of the Democratic Party USA.</p>
<p>First, the headline from a Vox report (June 20): Why Jon Ossoff’s loss is bad news for Democrats’ 2018 hopes. The other headline is from the Business Insider (June 21): The US is ‘flatlining’ in social progress compared to countries like Canada and Germany.</p>
<p>First, Ossoff’s loss. Naturally the Democratic Party leaders would point to the historically Republican roots of the seat Ossoff was running for. However, as the Vox article points out, “A basic fact of the race … is that this was a district that looked prepared to revolt against President Trump.” The article mentions that although Hillary Clinton lost the district in the 2016 presidential election, she did so by only one point. Considering what a week candidate Clinton was, it was therefore not impossible to flip the district.</p>
<p>Even as Trump’s overall approval ratings have been sinking steadily, Trump’s vocal and active support for Ossoff’s opponent did not translate into more votes for Ossoff, as Democratic Party leaders had expected. Proof positive that you can’t just be against Trump; you really do have to produce a positive platform that attracts enough voters.</p>
<p>People are not stupid; we are overly busy trying to make a living, shopping for necessities, running errands, cleaning, commuting to work and back, working ten hour days, supporting a family, keeping our kids fed and in school, thinking of ways to save more, making sure to have enough to pay our rents or mortgages (which is basically paying rent to a bank) on time, and keeping the tank full of gas so we can get to work or school, or the grocery store or the hospital. So, if as a political organization, your barrage of political ads sound like the same old same old, people just tune you out.</p>
<p>Ever since the rise of Trump as the presidential nominee back in 2016, and even more so now that Trump is the president, despite all manner of facts telling them to go for a radical left economic platform in order to get back a congressional majority, the Democrats’ strategy has become one of moving further to the right in order to woo ‘disaffected’ opulent Republican voters, while emphasizing to their traditional constituents that they, Democrats, are the only ones who care about women’s issues, LGBTQ issues, minority issues, and so on.</p>
<p>Class-economic issues, though, are stubbornly off Democrat’s campaign promises and platforms. As pointed out by Waleed Shahid elsewhere, Ossoff “declared opposition to raising taxes on millionaires and billionaires and declined to support healthcare as a right for all Americans,” (see, The “Panera strategy” didn’t work for Ossoff; It won’t work for Dems nationally).</p>
<p>The Real Political Obstacle</p>
<p>Could it be that the Democrats are just not paying attention to the things they should be paying attention to so as to learn how to become more popular? Their opposition looks as outrageously diabolical as it could possibly get, starting from the surface features and running all the way down to the most fundamentals of their ideology. And still, the Democrats can’t get a handle on this?</p>
<p>Democratic Party leaders have seen Corbyn’s success in England, thanks to his radical platform of anti-austerity, taxing the rich, increasing funding for the healthcare system and public services, re-nationalization of major infrastructure, an end to privatization drives, and free higher education. Did Democrats such as Ossoff take a leaf out of that victory and put forward a radical agenda boldly proposing to raise the tax rates of the rich and the corporations? Of course not. They know who pays for their campaigns and that’s all they care to know.</p>
<p>Sanders is, at this point, willfully draining millions of hours worth of youthful energy and creativity down the political gutter called Democratic Party USA. The real political function of Democrats has been, and continues to be, diverting the genuine opposition and choking it. Any function they may have once preformed legislating policies beneficial to the working people is long gone.</p>
<p>The Democratic Party presents the biggest organizational quandary for the American left today. The current state of the Democrat’s standing with the voters would not be a problem for the left in general if the likes of Sen. Sanders did not spend all their political energy spreading the illusion that the party can be re-oriented. A lot of honest progressives inside the Democratic Party work with sincere intent that’s channeling the energies of millions of the youth mesmerized by radical-sounding rhetoric. But the enthusiastic youth must pay attention to the Democrat’s history. As generations of radical American leftists have observed and lamented, the Democratic Party is the biggest obstacle to the creation of a nationwide political party of the left.</p>
<p>Consider one economic factor that involves the lives of the people of all colors, religions and genders who have to work to make a living: federal minimum wage. People’s most fundamental interests include basic living wages, and people need that right now. Not tiny, incremental increases by nickels and dimes per every six months until the minimum wage reaches $15 an hour in 2024, based on Democrats’ best available latest proposals. By then $15/h will be mostly nullified by inflation, and another round of struggles for living wages will have to be launched again. The fight for $15/h minimum wage, remember, started some years back, and back then, the initiators of the movement certainly hoped to have reached their goal by now.</p>
<p>From just that one example, it can be seen how, even when they finally get moving on an issue of import to tens of millions of wage earners, the Democrats are fighting a rear guard fight aimed at lowering people’s expectations and dampening their militancy, while their Republican brethren launch openly frontal attacks on the poor and working people.</p>
<p>Some still insist that Democrats are just a bunch of useless idiots who simply cannot learn. But is that really what they are?</p>
<p>The Three Pressure Points</p>
<p>I have always found great explanatory value in Immanuel Wallerstein’s observation that there are three secular trends putting pressure on the world capitalist system causing the current crisis stage of the system. The three pressures are: 1) worldwide rise in wages, 2) diminishing possibilities for externalizing costs, and 3) increased taxation (see, The Decline of American Power, 2003; see particularly Chapter 3).</p>
<p>The flip side to the above observation by Wallerstein is the push by the radical right to counter those three pressure points by an offensive of their own. On the wage front, since the dawn of neo-liberalism, launched by the Reagan-Thatcher duo, capital’s right wing has successfully driven down the real wages of the working people. A telling figure comes from a January 2017 report by the Pew Research Center: “Adjusted for inflation, the federal minimum wage peaked in 1968&#160;at $8.68 (in 2016 dollars).” From the same report, here is another telling figure: “Since it was last raised in 2009, to the current $7.25&#160;per&#160;hour, the federal minimum has lost about 9.6% of its purchasing power to inflation.” That’s about a ten percent loss in purchasing power in eight years. Is that a standard rate of erosion of purchasing power? If so, what does that mean for the ‘Fight for 15’ activists?</p>
<p>Here is another way of looking at the war on working people’s incomes: according to a Zero Hedge report back in 2013, “Using the inflation calculator that the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides, $1.60 [which was the minimum wage in 1968] is equivalent to $10.74 [in 2013].” The same CPI (consumer price index) inflation calculator shows $1.60 in 1968 to be equal to $11.48 now, in 2017. In other words, 1968 minimum wage would buy you way more goods and services than the minimum wage now.</p>
<p>On the other two fronts, taxation and externalization of costs, the right wing has been busy there, too. It is clear that any reforms requiring the implementation of environmental and workplace safety regulations, for the capitalists, translate into higher costs of production, which cut into profit margins. So, one of the planks of the rightwing platform has consistently and ceaselessly targeted those regulations. Currently we are witnessing in Trump’s administration the climax of a forty-year counter-regulatory list of achievements by the right wing (for Trump’s list of regulations to kill, see, Inside Trump’s war on regulations, Politico, 5/28/2017).</p>
<p>As for taxation, for the past fifty years the tax burden of the top earners and corporations has steadily declined, while the taxes paid by the rest of us has stayed pretty steady. So, proportionately, we the regular taxpayers pay an increasingly heavier share of the total taxes and receive the fewest benefits from the system, while the rich and corporations pay the lease amount of taxes and receive the hugest share of the wealth created in the U.S.</p>
<p>The Deteriorating Social Conditions</p>
<p>That brings us to the second article mentioned in the introduction, which lists some of the ways in which the US is declining in social progress compared to a lot of other rich countries. But of course, we must have expected that. When the people who can afford it most pay the least amount of taxes, increasingly more social services will have to be cut, and the services that get cut are those that affect the poor the most.</p>
<p>On all three key fronts of class battles for the last forty years, the Democrats have fought to advance the interests of capital. On the question of taxation, they have been somewhat better than the Republicans, of course, but they have never exhibited a wholehearted effort to roll back tax cuts for the rich implemented by the Republicans, nor have they ever proposed substantially raising taxes of higher income earners or corporations. Even when the Democrats have had the legislative majority and power to implement serious tax increases on the rich, they have not done so. The only exception in recent history is the tax increases they implemented to fund some of the benefits of the Affordable Care Act.</p>
<p>On the question of attacking people’s real incomes and wages, Bill Clinton’s signing of the welfare reform act attacked the most vulnerable in our society. That may not be a direct attack on people’s incomes at first glimpse. However, taking away money and benefits from the most needy is not only a cruel testament to the depravity of ruling priorities, but more importantly when you attack the most vulnerable, you lower the floor for everybody. Together with the welfare reform, the NAFTA trade deal, which Clinton signed into law in December 1993, further eroded the standard of living of the American (and Mexican) workers.</p>
<p>On the question of regulations, the Democrats may not have been as rabid as the Republicans in destroying regulations protecting safe drinking water or clean air, nor as militant at starving such regulations of funds, but their crown achievement was to work with the Republics keen on deregulating the key industry of interest to the top 1%: the financial industry.</p>
<p>By helping to destroy Glass-Steagall, Democrats helped to bring about the biggest financial disaster in many a generation, the largest total destruction of wealth among the lower classes since the Great Depression. As a result of the 2008 financial meltdown, millions of people lost their jobs, millions lost homes as their only source of wealth, and many millions are still reeling from that financial attack on the poor. Again, when you kick the most downtrodden, you lower the floor for everybody.</p>
<p>The structural problems that negatively affect millions of ordinary citizens still persist. The only way to get to a better place is to focus our energies on those three areas that are key to the survival of late, morbid capitalism, as it exists today, and to push aggressively for higher wages, more regulations and a radically different system of taxation. On none of these three fronts have the Democrats placed themselves on the left. So, let us once and for all stop deluding ourselves about the possibilities of reawakening some social justice neural network among the Democratic Party leaders.</p>
<p>The first and most urgent task for the American left is to create a nationwide political party of the socialist left, independent of the Democrats. Call it the Party of Reform of Regulations, Wages &amp; Taxes (or something less cumbersome to pronounce). Such a political party can come about organically out of the further development of the current social movements in our society. Organically, however, doesn’t mean it will happen all by itself; the creation of such an organization will require conscious and consistent effort of tens of thousands of people, in order to bring all the current social justice movements together to create a pluralistic organizational body, nationwide, with a platform that represents the demands of all those movements.</p>
<p>Let’s not allow the Democrats to dictate the limits of audacity and political imagination; a state of affairs that designates the Democrats as the outer limits of the possible is a situation of political suicide for the masses. Look to Corbyn’s victory in England for a lesson. Look at Ossoff’s defeat in Georgia for a lesson.</p>
<p>Neo-liberalism is dying. What will replace it is either something more vicious or something more egalitarian. The choice is clear.</p> | true | 4 | two recent headlines perhaps help answer question comes identifying real nature democratic party usa first headline vox report june 20 jon ossoffs loss bad news democrats 2018 hopes headline business insider june 21 us flatlining social progress compared countries like canada germany first ossoffs loss naturally democratic party leaders would point historically republican roots seat ossoff running however vox article points basic fact race district looked prepared revolt president trump article mentions although hillary clinton lost district 2016 presidential election one point considering week candidate clinton therefore impossible flip district even trumps overall approval ratings sinking steadily trumps vocal active support ossoffs opponent translate votes ossoff democratic party leaders expected proof positive cant trump really produce positive platform attracts enough voters people stupid overly busy trying make living shopping necessities running errands cleaning commuting work back working ten hour days supporting family keeping kids fed school thinking ways save making sure enough pay rents mortgages basically paying rent bank time keeping tank full gas get work school grocery store hospital political organization barrage political ads sound like old old people tune ever since rise trump presidential nominee back 2016 even trump president despite manner facts telling go radical left economic platform order get back congressional majority democrats strategy become one moving right order woo disaffected opulent republican voters emphasizing traditional constituents democrats ones care womens issues lgbtq issues minority issues classeconomic issues though stubbornly democrats campaign promises platforms pointed waleed shahid elsewhere ossoff declared opposition raising taxes millionaires billionaires declined support healthcare right americans see panera strategy didnt work ossoff wont work dems nationally real political obstacle could democrats paying attention things paying attention learn become popular opposition looks outrageously diabolical could possibly get starting surface features running way fundamentals ideology still democrats cant get handle democratic party leaders seen corbyns success england thanks radical platform antiausterity taxing rich increasing funding healthcare system public services renationalization major infrastructure end privatization drives free higher education democrats ossoff take leaf victory put forward radical agenda boldly proposing raise tax rates rich corporations course know pays campaigns thats care know sanders point willfully draining millions hours worth youthful energy creativity political gutter called democratic party usa real political function democrats continues diverting genuine opposition choking function may preformed legislating policies beneficial working people long gone democratic party presents biggest organizational quandary american left today current state democrats standing voters would problem left general likes sen sanders spend political energy spreading illusion party reoriented lot honest progressives inside democratic party work sincere intent thats channeling energies millions youth mesmerized radicalsounding rhetoric enthusiastic youth must pay attention democrats history generations radical american leftists observed lamented democratic party biggest obstacle creation nationwide political party left consider one economic factor involves lives people colors religions genders work make living federal minimum wage peoples fundamental interests include basic living wages people need right tiny incremental increases nickels dimes per every six months minimum wage reaches 15 hour 2024 based democrats best available latest proposals 15h mostly nullified inflation another round struggles living wages launched fight 15h minimum wage remember started years back back initiators movement certainly hoped reached goal one example seen even finally get moving issue import tens millions wage earners democrats fighting rear guard fight aimed lowering peoples expectations dampening militancy republican brethren launch openly frontal attacks poor working people still insist democrats bunch useless idiots simply learn really three pressure points always found great explanatory value immanuel wallersteins observation three secular trends putting pressure world capitalist system causing current crisis stage system three pressures 1 worldwide rise wages 2 diminishing possibilities externalizing costs 3 increased taxation see decline american power 2003 see particularly chapter 3 flip side observation wallerstein push radical right counter three pressure points offensive wage front since dawn neoliberalism launched reaganthatcher duo capitals right wing successfully driven real wages working people telling figure comes january 2017 report pew research center adjusted inflation federal minimum wage peaked 1968160at 868 2016 dollars report another telling figure since last raised 2009 current 725160per160hour federal minimum lost 96 purchasing power inflation thats ten percent loss purchasing power eight years standard rate erosion purchasing power mean fight 15 activists another way looking war working peoples incomes according zero hedge report back 2013 using inflation calculator bureau labor statistics provides 160 minimum wage 1968 equivalent 1074 2013 cpi consumer price index inflation calculator shows 160 1968 equal 1148 2017 words 1968 minimum wage would buy way goods services minimum wage two fronts taxation externalization costs right wing busy clear reforms requiring implementation environmental workplace safety regulations capitalists translate higher costs production cut profit margins one planks rightwing platform consistently ceaselessly targeted regulations currently witnessing trumps administration climax fortyyear counterregulatory list achievements right wing trumps list regulations kill see inside trumps war regulations politico 5282017 taxation past fifty years tax burden top earners corporations steadily declined taxes paid rest us stayed pretty steady proportionately regular taxpayers pay increasingly heavier share total taxes receive fewest benefits system rich corporations pay lease amount taxes receive hugest share wealth created us deteriorating social conditions brings us second article mentioned introduction lists ways us declining social progress compared lot rich countries course must expected people afford pay least amount taxes increasingly social services cut services get cut affect poor three key fronts class battles last forty years democrats fought advance interests capital question taxation somewhat better republicans course never exhibited wholehearted effort roll back tax cuts rich implemented republicans ever proposed substantially raising taxes higher income earners corporations even democrats legislative majority power implement serious tax increases rich done exception recent history tax increases implemented fund benefits affordable care act question attacking peoples real incomes wages bill clintons signing welfare reform act attacked vulnerable society may direct attack peoples incomes first glimpse however taking away money benefits needy cruel testament depravity ruling priorities importantly attack vulnerable lower floor everybody together welfare reform nafta trade deal clinton signed law december 1993 eroded standard living american mexican workers question regulations democrats may rabid republicans destroying regulations protecting safe drinking water clean air militant starving regulations funds crown achievement work republics keen deregulating key industry interest top 1 financial industry helping destroy glasssteagall democrats helped bring biggest financial disaster many generation largest total destruction wealth among lower classes since great depression result 2008 financial meltdown millions people lost jobs millions lost homes source wealth many millions still reeling financial attack poor kick downtrodden lower floor everybody structural problems negatively affect millions ordinary citizens still persist way get better place focus energies three areas key survival late morbid capitalism exists today push aggressively higher wages regulations radically different system taxation none three fronts democrats placed left let us stop deluding possibilities reawakening social justice neural network among democratic party leaders first urgent task american left create nationwide political party socialist left independent democrats call party reform regulations wages amp taxes something less cumbersome pronounce political party come organically development current social movements society organically however doesnt mean happen creation organization require conscious consistent effort tens thousands people order bring current social justice movements together create pluralistic organizational body nationwide platform represents demands movements lets allow democrats dictate limits audacity political imagination state affairs designates democrats outer limits possible situation political suicide masses look corbyns victory england lesson look ossoffs defeat georgia lesson neoliberalism dying replace either something vicious something egalitarian choice clear | 1,225 |
<p>Belén, Venezuela.</p>
<p>At a cockfight at the end of February somewhere in the northern Venezuelan state of Carabobo, a rooster from Tampa, Florida was defeated by a rooster from Cuba. My friend Amelia and I were notified of the defeat by Freddy, the manager of Posada Don Manuel in the town of Belén on the eastern edge of Carabobo. We had included the town in our tour of Venezuela based on the fact that it shared my name and boasted a Barrio Adentro clinic, one in a string of free health care facilities we had visited in search of assorted medical procedures.</p>
<p>Freddy was a diminutive 70-year old who maintained that he was 59 until Amelia and I presented him with mathematical contradictions stemming from the age of his oldest child. He denied that the triumph of the Cuban rooster was indicative of broader regional trends—despite the recent triumph of a constitutional amendment authorizing Venezuelan officials to run for indefinite reelection—and surmised that the Cuban rooster simply controlled the media.</p>
<p>As for social programs involving Cuban doctors, Freddy claimed that Hugo Chávez’ Misión Barrio Adentro was an attempt at foreign infiltration of Venezuela under humanitarian guise, as well as a means of perpetuating the cycle of discrimination against the non-poor. Amelia and I pointed out that:</p>
<p>the Barrio Adentro staff in Belén was convinced that our request for free ultrasounds of various parts of our bodies was a maneuver concocted by the CIA. this did not prevent them from attending to us, thus perpetuating a cycle of discrimination in which medical supplies were denied to Cuba by the US such that they could be used on Amelia and me by Cuban doctors in Venezuela.</p>
<p>Posada Don Manuel, Belén’s sole option for accommodations, consisted of approximately a dozen rooms and a parking lot, all contained within a high wall with a white sliding gate. Over vodka and insects in the parking lot on our first night in town, Freddy lamented the number of rooms that were still only half-finished after a decade of work, and attributed the delay to the fact that construction of the posada had overlapped with construction of the Bolivarian state. I had heard similar complaints from my father’s relatives in Cuba, who claimed to have been attempting to repaint their bathroom for the past 50 years; lack of access to paint did not seem to be an issue at the posada in Belén, where the inside of the surrounding wall had been divided into colorful panels devoted to a variety of subjects.</p>
<p>Two of the panels featured Simón Bolívar looking off into the distance with accompanying quotes. Others advertised the town’s claims to fame (handmade cheese and cockfighting), its official religion (Catholic), and its primary tourist attractions (Posada Don Manuel). The specification of religious orientations was justified by Freddy:</p>
<p>FREDDY: Chávez no es cristiano.</p>
<p>The cockfighting panel, meanwhile, was substantiated by the arrival to the posada of a gallero whose T-shirt, hat, belt buckle, and keychain depicted roosters in various poses. He was toting a live rooster in a carrying case that also depicted a rooster, and informed us that there would be a cockfight the following day,&#160; March 1, at a nearby arena. Freddy attempted to resume his position at the center of the conversation by announcing once again that he was 59.</p>
<p>When Amelia and I arrived to the arena the next morning, we were immediately ushered through a crowd of beer drinkers into a corner where two men were attaching artificial spurs to a rooster’s legs with adhesive tape. A single poster of Chávez holding a Palm Sunday cross hung on the wall, and most of the red baseball caps present featured cockfighting slogans rather than slogans of the Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela.</p>
<p>Once the rooster had been prepared for the fight, Amelia and I were ushered back through the beer drinkers to the fighting ring and advised to refrain from placing bets based on which rooster we thought was prettier. We were otherwise incorporated into the action when Amelia got to draw a numbered beer cap out of a sack in order to determine the order of battle, and when we had a bloodied rooster thrust in front of our faces so that we could observe how one of his artificial spurs had fallen off.</p>
<p>The man doing the thrusting explained that a lost spur eliminated the possibility of victory. Amelia and I asked if the rooster from Tampa had also lost a spur during his confrontation with the Cuban rooster; the man was unsure of the details, but did know that Chávez had lost a spur during his confrontation with the global financial crisis. We recalled other applications of animal terminology to the president of Venezuela by segments of the opposition, and suggested adopting the classification of him as a black monkey as a possible jumping off point for negotiations with Barack Obama, who might sympathize with fellow victims of primate jokes.</p>
<p>Amelia and I lasted for 2.5 fights out of a scheduled 16 and returned to Posada Don Manuel to find Freddy sitting in a chair in front of the wall panel featuring the painting of Posada Don Manuel. When we informed him we had just been at the cockfighting arena, Freddy announced that the poster of the Palm Sunday cross was further evidence of Chávez masquerading as a man of religion—as was the fact that he had read a passage from the Bible during the 20th-anniversary commemoration of the Caracazo uprising on 27 February.</p>
<p>The Caracazo had come about in reaction to policies of President Carlos Andrés Pérez, who had confronted his own economic crisis by donating his spurs to the IMF, and had resulted in the killing and disappearing of untold numbers of citizens by the national armed forces. During his commemoration of the event, Chávez confirmed that the Venezuelan administration at the time had not been based at the Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas but rather at the White House.</p>
<p>Freddy contended that the current Venezuelan administration was based not at the Miraflores presidential palace but rather in a sickbed in Havana, and that governing regimes founded on national diets of rice and beans were destructive to the human body. The dangers of the new pecking order were reinforced a few days later, when Chávez announced from Miraflores the expropriation of a rice plant belonging to a Minnesota-based multinational that had been evading price controls on unmodified food items by modifying them.</p>
<p>BELÉN FERNÁNDEZ is currently completing a book entitled Coffee with Hezbollah, which chronicles the 2-month hitchhiking journey through Lebanon that she and Amelia Opaliska conducted in the aftermath of the July 2006 war. She can be reached at <a href="mailto:belengarciabernal@gmail.com" type="external">belengarciabernal@gmail.com</a></p> | true | 4 | belén venezuela cockfight end february somewhere northern venezuelan state carabobo rooster tampa florida defeated rooster cuba friend amelia notified defeat freddy manager posada manuel town belén eastern edge carabobo included town tour venezuela based fact shared name boasted barrio adentro clinic one string free health care facilities visited search assorted medical procedures freddy diminutive 70year old maintained 59 amelia presented mathematical contradictions stemming age oldest child denied triumph cuban rooster indicative broader regional trendsdespite recent triumph constitutional amendment authorizing venezuelan officials run indefinite reelectionand surmised cuban rooster simply controlled media social programs involving cuban doctors freddy claimed hugo chávez misión barrio adentro attempt foreign infiltration venezuela humanitarian guise well means perpetuating cycle discrimination nonpoor amelia pointed barrio adentro staff belén convinced request free ultrasounds various parts bodies maneuver concocted cia prevent attending us thus perpetuating cycle discrimination medical supplies denied cuba us could used amelia cuban doctors venezuela posada manuel beléns sole option accommodations consisted approximately dozen rooms parking lot contained within high wall white sliding gate vodka insects parking lot first night town freddy lamented number rooms still halffinished decade work attributed delay fact construction posada overlapped construction bolivarian state heard similar complaints fathers relatives cuba claimed attempting repaint bathroom past 50 years lack access paint seem issue posada belén inside surrounding wall divided colorful panels devoted variety subjects two panels featured simón bolívar looking distance accompanying quotes others advertised towns claims fame handmade cheese cockfighting official religion catholic primary tourist attractions posada manuel specification religious orientations justified freddy freddy chávez es cristiano cockfighting panel meanwhile substantiated arrival posada gallero whose tshirt hat belt buckle keychain depicted roosters various poses toting live rooster carrying case also depicted rooster informed us would cockfight following day160 march 1 nearby arena freddy attempted resume position center conversation announcing 59 amelia arrived arena next morning immediately ushered crowd beer drinkers corner two men attaching artificial spurs roosters legs adhesive tape single poster chávez holding palm sunday cross hung wall red baseball caps present featured cockfighting slogans rather slogans partido socialista unido de venezuela rooster prepared fight amelia ushered back beer drinkers fighting ring advised refrain placing bets based rooster thought prettier otherwise incorporated action amelia got draw numbered beer cap sack order determine order battle bloodied rooster thrust front faces could observe one artificial spurs fallen man thrusting explained lost spur eliminated possibility victory amelia asked rooster tampa also lost spur confrontation cuban rooster man unsure details know chávez lost spur confrontation global financial crisis recalled applications animal terminology president venezuela segments opposition suggested adopting classification black monkey possible jumping point negotiations barack obama might sympathize fellow victims primate jokes amelia lasted 25 fights scheduled 16 returned posada manuel find freddy sitting chair front wall panel featuring painting posada manuel informed cockfighting arena freddy announced poster palm sunday cross evidence chávez masquerading man religionas fact read passage bible 20thanniversary commemoration caracazo uprising 27 february caracazo come reaction policies president carlos andrés pérez confronted economic crisis donating spurs imf resulted killing disappearing untold numbers citizens national armed forces commemoration event chávez confirmed venezuelan administration time based miraflores presidential palace caracas rather white house freddy contended current venezuelan administration based miraflores presidential palace rather sickbed havana governing regimes founded national diets rice beans destructive human body dangers new pecking order reinforced days later chávez announced miraflores expropriation rice plant belonging minnesotabased multinational evading price controls unmodified food items modifying belÉn fernÁndez currently completing book entitled coffee hezbollah chronicles 2month hitchhiking journey lebanon amelia opaliska conducted aftermath july 2006 war reached belengarciabernalgmailcom | 586 |
<p>&lt;a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-142624894/stock-vector-open-letter-at-symbol-seen-with-magnifying-glass-on-bright-striped-background-degraded.html?src=_YlftXWQ7KoRjMArAaEKKA-1-19"&gt;Paula A Gomez Granada&lt;/a&gt;Shutterstock</p>
<p />
<p>Since last June, when Edward Snowden tore the veil off the National Security Agency’s vast data dragnet, Americans have been flocking to ultrasecure email services in the hopes of keeping the government out of their private business. Use of the most popular email encryption software, PGP, <a href="http://www.dailydot.com/news/pgp-encryption-snowden-prism-nsa/" type="external">tripled between June and July</a>, while revenue for the data-encryption company Silent Circle has <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2013/07/15/corporate-customers-flock-to-anti-snooping-app-silent-circle/" type="external">shot up 400 percent</a>.</p>
<p>But even these services may not be able to protect your email from government prying. That fact came into stark relief last Thursday, when Lavabit, the secure email service used by Snowden, <a href="http://lavabit.com/" type="external">abruptly shut down</a>. Lavabit’s 32-year-old founder, Ladar Levison, issued a statement saying he pulled the plug because he didn’t want to be “complicit in crimes against the American people.” He has since given up using email entirely, and he urges others to consider doing the same. “I would strongly recommend against entrusting your privacy to a company with physical ties to the United States,” he told Mother Jones. “I honestly don’t think it’s possible to provide a secure service in this country.”</p>
<p>Levison, who is reportedly under federal gag order, declined to elaborate (though he opined, based on his experience, that we’re a “whisper’s breath away” from becoming a society where all electronic communications are recorded and scrutinized by the government). But according to other industry insiders and cybersecurity experts, there’s good reason to be wary of transmitting sensitive information via email—even if your provider claims to have iron-clad safeguards.</p>
<p>Tech giants, such as the Microsoft subsidiary Hotmail, regularly hand over data to the government. In fact, in the last eight months of 2012 (the most recent period for which data is available), Hotmail, Google, Facebook, and Twitter provided law enforcement authorities with information on <a href="" type="internal">more than 64,000 users</a>. And that doesn’t include responses to secret national security letters ordered by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court, or FISA.</p>
<p>Secure emails services, such as Lavabit, are supposed to guard against this kind of snooping (as well as hackers and phishers) by encrypting email messages—turning them into gibberish that can only be read by people who have a password, or “key.” Theoretically, in most cases, the email provider can’t even decipher the contents, much less government agencies. But even the most secure email systems don’t completely encrypt “metadata,” the bits of identifying information that accompany messages, such as the sender’s name and IP address; the subject line; and the date and time the message was sent. <a href="http://spar.isi.jhu.edu/~mgreen/" type="external">Matthew Green</a>, an encryption expert at Johns Hopkins University, says the government can tell a lot about a person from these details. “If you can map out who someone has talked to, that’s almost as useful as knowing what they were talking about,” he explained, “especially if you’re trying to map out a criminal conspiracy or find out who leaked information from reporters.”</p>
<p>What’s more, encrypted emails may actually attract NSA scrutiny. Under most circumstances, the NSA is supposed to destroy intercepted email data from US citizens. But, <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/use-of-tor-and-e-mail-crypto-could-increase-chances-that-nsa-keeps-your-data/" type="external">according to an internal NSA document</a> that was leaked to the Guardian in June, this rule doesn’t apply to “enciphered” communications—meaning the NSA can stockpile data from encrypted accounts and comb through it at will.</p>
<p>The federal government also has been known to press tech companies to put “back doors” in their software so it can monitor users’ activity and, in some cases, read encrypted messages. According to Green, this is easy to do, technologically. “The company simply puts out a software update. You download it. Suddenly, what you thought was a secure end-to-end email system is now being read by the government.”</p>
<p>Under the black letter of the law, tech companies aren’t required to comply with such requests (although <a href="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/06/the_problems_wi_3.html" type="external">the FBI is pushing to change that</a> by amending the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act to allow the government to monitor internet communications in the same way it taps phone calls). But several software firms— <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57593339-38/nsa-docs-boast-now-we-can-wiretap-skype-video-calls/" type="external">including the Microsoft subsidiary Skype</a>—have done so. And NSA may be able to demand backdoor access to users’ data through the FISA court, which has its own secret body of law.</p>
<p>While Levison of Lavabit could not discuss the specifics of his case, he suggested that the government was trying to compel him to give access to vast quantities of user data. He explained that he was not opposed to fulfilling law enforcement requests that were “specific in nature” and “approved by a judge after showing probable cause,” and noted that he had responded to some two dozen subpoenas during his decade in business. “What I’m against, at least on a philosophical level,” he added, “is the bulk collection of information, or the violation of the privacy of an entire user base just to conduct the investigation into a handful of individuals.”</p>
<p>Other tech companies seem to share Levison’s concerns about mass surveillance. On Friday, the data-encryption firm Silent Circle followed Lavabit’s lead and shuttered its secure email service. Silent Circle cofounder Philip Zimmermann—who also developed PGP encryption software—told&#160;Mother Jones that he believes all “highly principled” secure email services will do the same. The secure-networking company Cryptocloud struck a similar note <a href="https://www.cryptocloud.org/viewtopic.php?f=9&amp;t=2954&amp;p=3920%23p3920" type="external">in a missive posted to its website</a> on Friday, which urged tech companies to take a “seppuku,” or ritual-suicide, pledge. “In the context of privacy issues, ‘corporate seppuku’ means shutting down a company rather than agreeing to become an extension of the massive, ever-expanding, secretive global surveillance network organized by the U.S. National Security Agency,” the message read. “You can’t force a company to do something if there’s no company there to do it.” Several companies have since joined Cryptocloud in signing onto the pledge.</p>
<p>Levison applauds these efforts. But he notes that not every tech company is in a position to be so uncompromising. “Can you imagine what would happen if Google shut down their email service? Or Hotmail? Or Yahoo?” he said. “If all three of those shut down, the economy would stop. They don’t have the luxury of being able to take a moral stand.”</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | lta hrefhttpwwwshutterstockcompic142624894stockvectoropenletteratsymbolseenwithmagnifyingglassonbrightstripedbackgrounddegradedhtmlsrc_ylftxwq7korjmaraaekka119gtpaula gomez granadaltagtshutterstock since last june edward snowden tore veil national security agencys vast data dragnet americans flocking ultrasecure email services hopes keeping government private business use popular email encryption software pgp tripled june july revenue dataencryption company silent circle shot 400 percent even services may able protect email government prying fact came stark relief last thursday lavabit secure email service used snowden abruptly shut lavabits 32yearold founder ladar levison issued statement saying pulled plug didnt want complicit crimes american people since given using email entirely urges others consider would strongly recommend entrusting privacy company physical ties united states told mother jones honestly dont think possible provide secure service country levison reportedly federal gag order declined elaborate though opined based experience whispers breath away becoming society electronic communications recorded scrutinized government according industry insiders cybersecurity experts theres good reason wary transmitting sensitive information via emaileven provider claims ironclad safeguards tech giants microsoft subsidiary hotmail regularly hand data government fact last eight months 2012 recent period data available hotmail google facebook twitter provided law enforcement authorities information 64000 users doesnt include responses secret national security letters ordered foreign intelligence surveillance act court fisa secure emails services lavabit supposed guard kind snooping well hackers phishers encrypting email messagesturning gibberish read people password key theoretically cases email provider cant even decipher contents much less government agencies even secure email systems dont completely encrypt metadata bits identifying information accompany messages senders name ip address subject line date time message sent matthew green encryption expert johns hopkins university says government tell lot person details map someone talked thats almost useful knowing talking explained especially youre trying map criminal conspiracy find leaked information reporters whats encrypted emails may actually attract nsa scrutiny circumstances nsa supposed destroy intercepted email data us citizens according internal nsa document leaked guardian june rule doesnt apply enciphered communicationsmeaning nsa stockpile data encrypted accounts comb federal government also known press tech companies put back doors software monitor users activity cases read encrypted messages according green easy technologically company simply puts software update download suddenly thought secure endtoend email system read government black letter law tech companies arent required comply requests although fbi pushing change amending communications assistance law enforcement act allow government monitor internet communications way taps phone calls several software firms including microsoft subsidiary skypehave done nsa may able demand backdoor access users data fisa court secret body law levison lavabit could discuss specifics case suggested government trying compel give access vast quantities user data explained opposed fulfilling law enforcement requests specific nature approved judge showing probable cause noted responded two dozen subpoenas decade business im least philosophical level added bulk collection information violation privacy entire user base conduct investigation handful individuals tech companies seem share levisons concerns mass surveillance friday dataencryption firm silent circle followed lavabits lead shuttered secure email service silent circle cofounder philip zimmermannwho also developed pgp encryption softwaretold160mother jones believes highly principled secure email services securenetworking company cryptocloud struck similar note missive posted website friday urged tech companies take seppuku ritualsuicide pledge context privacy issues corporate seppuku means shutting company rather agreeing become extension massive everexpanding secretive global surveillance network organized us national security agency message read cant force company something theres company several companies since joined cryptocloud signing onto pledge levison applauds efforts notes every tech company position uncompromising imagine would happen google shut email service hotmail yahoo said three shut economy would stop dont luxury able take moral stand | 575 |
<p>Why is Afghanistan at the nexus of a regional crisis that threatens the security of the United States and the very existence of Pakistan?</p>
<p>Because Afghanistan is awash with money, arms, and foreigners. The Obama administration should think twice before assuming that injecting more money, arms, and foreigners into Afghanistan is going to solve the problem.</p>
<p>When you’ve got a hammer, you look for a nail. The United States has money, military power, and considerable hands-on experience in applying them to counterinsurgencies.</p>
<p>So it’s not a surprise that the U.S. wants to apply these skills to the mess in Afghanistan and Pakistan.</p>
<p>And, since counterinsurgency is a step up intellectually over the Bush administration’s simplistic invasion = liberation formula, it’s not surprising that the Obama administration is willing to consider that an intelligent, broad spectrum application of American military, ideological, financial, and intellectual power will enable us to gain the upper hand over the Taliban.</p>
<p>However, a case can be made that injecting more money and more arms, even with the noblest purpose and finest Ph.D.s, is part of the problem and not the solution.</p>
<p>First, an anecdote, then a bit of information, and finally some analysis.</p>
<p>The anecdote comes from Gary Schroen’s book <a href="" type="internal">First In</a> (New York: Ballantine Books, 2005).</p>
<p>Schroen, as the title states, was the first CIA officer inserted into Afghanistan after 9/11 and tasked with establishing contact with the Northern Alliance. His book, which was intensively vetted by the CIA, offers a remarkably prosaic picture of the Afghan war.</p>
<p>Schroen and his team flew into northern Afghanistan with several cardboard boxes filled with millions of dollars in US greenbacks. For the duration of the book, Schroen is hunkered down in the Panjishir Valley, dispensing cash, writing long-winded memos to Langley, and mapping the GPS coordinates of Taliban positions for bombing raids that, at least while he’s there, never came. The big event: the arrival of 100 pounds of Starbucks coffee that allows Schroen to drink a decent brew while composing his cables.</p>
<p>Schroen’s book is enlivened by descriptions of actual combat experienced by others. In this passage, a C.I.A. operative, “Craig” is with a ragtag force of 60 Afghans organized by Hamid Karzai facing a Taliban position 600 yards away across a valley:</p>
<p>There was movement on the hilltop, and Craig could make out the figures of two, now three men dressed in black clothing…each holding an AK-47…Then the three men stepped forward and began to move down the slope toward them…The three men reached the level ground of the valley floor and, without breaking stride, picked up their pace until they were jogging…What were these three guys up to? They were moving effortlessly, running about three to four feet apart, maintaining a line…</p>
<p>Then, from down the line, one of the Afghans watching the three men steadily cross the open ground shouted, “Chechnya! Chechnya!” A wave of panic and fear, so intense that Craig could feel it physically, swept through the line of men on the hilltop.</p>
<p>[The Chechens] were reported to be fanatical, fierce fighters, well trained and experts with their weapons. After one particularly tough engagement…a number of the dead…had been found to have been killed by a single shot to the head. This was incredible to the Afghans, none of whom actually aimed their weapons but rather trusted Allah to guide their bullets. They thought that such accurate fire had to be the work of the Chechens.</p>
<p>Craig turned in wonder to look up and down the line of Afghans. He could see panic setting in. Sixty men, all armed, frightened by three men running toward them. He grabbed Sergeant Haidar and shouted, “Tell the men to shoot. Shoot!”</p>
<p>…</p>
<p>[The Karzai troops] began to fire long bursts, guns bucking skyward against the prolonged-recoil, panic firing. After a few seconds the firing reached a peak, and Craig watched in amazement as the three men continued to jog forward through the hail of lead slamming the earth around them. ..The three men did not alter their pace or break formation but jogged on…</p>
<p>[The Karzai troops exhaust their 30-round magazines, reload, and empty their magazines again.]</p>
<p>But again the three fighters ran on untouched.</p>
<p>There were now nearing the base of the hill, and as silence fell along the line of men at the top of the hill they could hear the three men shouting, “Allahu Akbar!” over and over as they ran on. It was too much for the Afghans…As if on signal, the entire group of sixty men turned and began to run from their positions.</p>
<p>[T]he three Chechens…were now casually going through the items left by the fleeing Afghans…Craig watched the three men, who now were shouting what had to be obscenities at them. One of the men stood spread-legged and grabbed his crotch with both hands, making hip movements to emphasize his statement. Another turned and pointed his butt at them, shaking it, then turned and pointed toward them, laughing.</p>
<p>Craig and his CIA mate could have killed the three men as they worked their way up the hill, sho’ nuff. But in order not to further humiliate the Karzai troops, Craig calls down an airstrike from a circling B-52 instead. The three Chechens are disintegrated by a 2000-pound bomb just as one of them is giving Craig the finger. Everybody gives a big cheer.</p>
<p>The item of information comes from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime’s Afghanistan Opium Survey 2007:</p>
<p>First, opium cultivation in Afghanistan is no longer associated with poverty – quite the opposite. Hilmand, Kandahar and three other opium-producing provinces in the south are the richest and most fertile, in the past the breadbasket of the nation and a main source of earnings. They have now opted for illicit opium on an unprecedented scale (5,744tons), while the much poorer northern region is abandoning the poppy crops.</p>
<p>Second, opium cultivation in Afghanistan is now closely linked to insurgency. The Taliban today control vast swathes of land in Hilmand, Kandahar and along the Pakistani border. By preventing national authorities and international agencies from working, insurgents have allowed greed and corruption to turn orchards, wheat and vegetable fields into poppy fields.</p>
<p>Third, the Taliban are again using opium to suit their interests. Between 1996 and 2000, in Taliban-controlled areas 15,000 tons of opium were produced and exported – the regime’s sole source of foreign exchange at that time. In July 2000, the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, argued that opium was against Islam and banned its cultivation (but not its export). In recent months, the Taliban have reversed their position once again and started to extract from the drug economy resources for arms, logistics and militia pay.</p>
<p>The UN press release, entitled Opium Amounts to Half of Afghanistan’s GDP in 2007, drives the point home:</p>
<p>In its final Afghan Opium Survey for 2007 issued today, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) shows that opium is now equivalent to more than half (53%) of the country’s licit GDP. … the total export value of opiates produced in and trafficked from Afghanistan in 2007 is about $4 billion, a 29 per cent increase over 2006.</p>
<p>Approximately one quarter of this amount ($1 billion) is earned by opium farmers. District officials take a percentage through a tax on crops (known as “ushr”). Insurgents and warlords control the business of producing and distributing the drugs. The rest is made by drug traffickers.</p>
<p>In 2008, opium production dropped because of a combination of bad weather and good policies in government-controlled provinces. However, the Taliban, traffickers, and corrupt officials still extracted $70 to $80 million in taxes on farmers’ output and over $200 million in processing and trafficking revenues from the opium industry.</p>
<p>And a new problem emerged:</p>
<p>Opium poppy eradication has become more risky</p>
<p>Eradication activities in 2008 were severely affected by resistance from insurgents. Since most of the poppy cultivation remains confined to the south and south-west region dominated by strong insurgency, eradication operations may in the future become even more challenging.</p>
<p>Security incidents associated with eradication activities in Hilmand, Kandahar, Hirat, Nimroz, Kapisa, Kabul and Nangarhar provinces included shooting and mine explosions resulting in the death of at least 78 people, most of whom were policemen. This is an increase of about 75% if compared to the 19 deaths in 2007. The major incidents were in Nanarhar and Nimroz provinces.</p>
<p>One of the most serious incidents happened in Khogyani district of Nangarhar, where 20 policemen were killed together with Fazal Ahmad, a MCN/UNODC surveyor whose job was to collect the data that feed into this report. Other incidents happened in Khashrod district of Nimroz, where 29 people died along with the district police chief. Both attacks were carried out by suicide bombers. The Poppy Eradication Force (PEF) faced a large number of rocket attacks while carrying out eradication in Hilmand province.</p>
<p>The nature of the attacks changed between 2007 and 2008. In 2007, police deaths were the result of violence by farmers whereas deaths in 2008 were the result of insurgent actions, including suicide attacks.</p>
<p>Now, the analysis.</p>
<p>Left to its own devices, Afghanistan is not a threat to the safety of the world.</p>
<p>Even with the support of the ISI, the Taliban was little more than an obnoxious gang of bumpkin theocrats unable to project its power beyond the Pashtun areas of Afghanistan.</p>
<p>In 1997, when the Taliban tried to stake its claim as ruler of all Afghanistan by conquering the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif, bad things happened, as Steve Coll writes in <a href="" type="internal">Ghost Wars</a> [New York: Penguin Press, 2004]:</p>
<p>Mazar became a Taliban death trap. Within days…the city’s Uzbek and Shia populations revolted against their Pashtun occupiers. They massacred three hundred Taliban soldiers. They took another thousand prisoner and sent the militia reeling back down the Salang Highway…</p>
<p>What allowed the Taliban to slip the ISI leash and become a dominant factor inside Afghanistan was its alliance with al Qaeda, an alliance that turned into an intensely symbiotic relationship after 9/11.</p>
<p>Al-Qaeda fighters provided the hard core for the Taliban army, as Schroen’s account illustrates, turning the Taliban into a superior fighting force instead of just another warring faction.</p>
<p>Al-Qaeda also extended the Taliban’s reach through assassination and terror squads. Most famously, al Qaeda operatives assassinated Ahmad Shah Masood, the leader of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, on the eve of 9/11.</p>
<p>Illicit drugs, the mother’s milk of successful modern insurgencies, are keeping the Taliban-al Qaeda axis alive, and giving it the capacity to entrench itself in Afghanistan and Pakistan, even as it became the target of an intensive military and intelligence effort.</p>
<p>Foreign fighters and local opium have extended the reach of the Taliban and turned it into a regional threat.</p>
<p>There’s one other factor.</p>
<p>Paradoxically, the United States forced the Taliban to become the Taliban on steroids, or the neo-Taliban, as it’s sometimes called.</p>
<p>Confronted with an existential threat from the biggest, richest, and most experienced counterinsurgency force on the planet, the Taliban had to elevate its game far above the usual level of cruelty, greed, and venality that is in the skill set of every Central Asian warlord.</p>
<p>Nowadays, the Taliban isn’t just surviving.</p>
<p>It’s flourishing.</p>
<p>It’s pushing aside overmatched government security forces in its areas of operation.</p>
<p>Not only in Afghanistan, where it has a major presence in over half the country. Also in Pakistan, where the Pakistan Taliban dominates the tribal areas (FATA), is pushing into the settled region of the NWFP, and extending its reach by way of cells and terrorism into Pakistan’s heartland.</p>
<p>And it’s not flourishing because it represents jihadist, Islamist, Afghan, or Pashtun aspirations.</p>
<p>The Taliban is flourishing because it is so well-armed, well-funded, well-trained that it attracts the allegiance of commanders and compels the obedience of the local civilian population, and because it’s engaged in the fight of its life against the U.S., NATO, Afghanistan, and Pakistan at the same time and has learned to exploit its resources to the nth degree.</p>
<p>In other words, it’s doing well because it’s biggest, meanest, most paranoid, and scariest guy on the block.</p>
<p>It’s also hooked on opium revenues and dependent on a cadre of professional foreign and domestic fighters to intimidate governments and ordinary citizens.</p>
<p>Think of the Taliban like the Mafia of Sicily and Naples, which are perhaps its closest analogues.</p>
<p>It can’t coexist with pluralistic pro-Western governments, even in the unlikely event that the West agrees to allow the Taliban to participate in coalition rule in Kabul. A bulked-up organization that possesses more money and power than the central government is an unacceptable threat to public safety.</p>
<p>At the same time, the Taliban can’t downsize and become the “good” Taliban because it can’t risk giving up the protection that it gains from drug running and maintaining an extra-legal cadre of assassins and terrorists.</p>
<p>In a head-to-head match-up with the Taliban, which side has the money, weapons, ruthlessness, and desperation to project power into Afghan homes, mosques, and government institutions?</p>
<p>The good news is that the United States and NATO have more money. The bad news is, in an impoverished, tribal society, having a lot of money doesn’t do a lot of good. If the Taliban is able to extract $100+ million from the opium trade, it doesn’t need a lot of foreign sources of revenue like repurposed zakat (Islamic tithes) or contributions from rich armchair jihadists in Saudi Arabia.</p>
<p>The good news is that the United States and NATO have more weapons. The bad news is, there’s more than enough weapons in Afghanistan for everyone.</p>
<p>The bad news is, the Taliban is fighting for its life with every weapon at its disposal. The other bad news is, U.S. and NATO are fighting for…well, a modern Afghan democracy is off the table, so basically we’re fighting the Taliban because they’re fighting us.</p>
<p>The bottom line is that the U.S. is facing an extremely ruthless and capable group with the trappings of a criminal organization that uses money, violence, and intimidation to operate among a dispersed population in a rugged region where the borders leak like sieves and law enforcement is virtually non-existent.</p>
<p>It’s not an environment conducive to the conventional counter-insurgency doctrine of using military and economic measures to secure an ever-growing zone of loyal and grateful citizens.</p>
<p>In its current configuration, the Taliban has enough money, reach, and motivation to challenge the security measures of the U.S., NATO, and the Kabul government throughout contested Pashtun areas.</p>
<p>Perhaps the Taliban should be considered an organized crime problem instead of a counterinsurgency problem.</p>
<p>Leave aside the counterinsurgency tropes about winning the hearts and minds of the people by providing them with security because a) we probably have the hearts and minds of many of the unfortunates living under Taliban rule already b) we can’t provide the sustained security that turns hearts-and-mind affection into active resistance to the Taliban and c) the Taliban is self-sufficient in money, arms, and supplies thanks to its position at the nexus of the cross-border trades in drugs, contraband, and necessities and doesn’t need the support of the people in the way of a traditional guerilla force.</p>
<p>Instead of turning a blind eye toward local opium trafficking by anti-Taliban governors and warlords in the hope that extending the official reach of the Afghan government into those areas will yield security gains, the main security effort should be devoted to denying to the Taliban the fruits of the opium industry—not only the revenue, but the illicit cross-border financial channels and the avalanche of contraband across hundreds of unofficial border crossings it engenders.</p>
<p>Buy it, burn it, eradicate it…do whatever it takes to crimp the financial self-sufficiency of the Taliban.</p>
<p>The U.N. has made the point concerning opium with desperate urgency:</p>
<p>“Since drugs are funding the insurgency, NATO has a self-interest in supporting Afghan forces in destroying drug labs, markets and convoys. Destroy the drug trade and you cut off the Taliban’s main funding source”, said the UN’s drug chief [Antonio Maria Cost]. … Drug metastases have spread throughout Afghanistan, providing capital for investments, foreign exchange for expensive imports, revenue to underpaid officials as well as funding for weddings, burials and pilgrimages. Corruption has facilitated the general profiteering. The government’s benign tolerance of corruption is undermining the future: no country has ever built prosperity on crime.</p>
<p>…</p>
<p>NATO to help taking on opium labs, markets and traffickers. The opium economy of Afghanistan can be bankrupted by blocking the two-way flow of (i) imported chemicals, and (ii) exported drugs. In both instances several thousand tons of materials are being moved across the southern border and nobody seems to take notice.</p>
<p>Since drug trafficking and insurgency live off of each other, the foreign military forces operating in Afghanistan have a vested interest in supporting counter-narcotics operations: destroying heroin labs, closing opium markets, seizing opium convoys and bringing traffickers to justice. This will generate a double benefit. First, the destruction of the drug trade will win popular support (only 1 out of 10 Afghan farming families cultivate opium, earning a disproportionately large share of the national income). Second, lower opium demand by traders will reduce its price and make alternative economic activity more attractive.</p>
<p>It’s a lot easier to destroy opium than the Taliban. Opium doesn’t run away.</p>
<p>But it still isn’t easy.</p>
<p>Contra the U.N.’s optimistic assertion that destroying the opium trade will win hearts and minds, the opposite will probably be true in the first stage.</p>
<p>Opium is the backbone of whatever prosperity there is in southern Afghanistan today, and not just for a minority of farmers. Virtually all of the funds in the halawa system of traditional finance in Kandahar and the other major cities in the Taliban area are opium-derived. The graft that fattens the local officials comes from opium. Opium pays for weddings, cars, and tractors and injects money into the economy. If the opium boom goes bust, there are going to be a lot of poorer and pissed-off people.</p>
<p>A second point is that an opium war will take years not months. According to the U.N., Afghanistan is over-producing opium at such a furious rate that it is exceeding annual global demand by several thousand tons. That opium—actually, the heroin it was refined into–is sitting somewhere against that rainy day when the West finally decides to get serious about the Afghan opium industry.</p>
<p>In fact, in 2008 the U.N. hypothesized that the Taliban might be anticipating a campaign against its opium revenue base, holding back heroin stocks from the market and ready to engage in sophisticated price manipulation to undercut the eradication campaign:</p>
<p>A wild card in the hands of insurgents. If the Taliban are holding major drug stockpiles, they may welcome lower opium cultivation. The resulting price increase would revalue their stocks and improve war financing. Indeed, news picked up by UNODC surveyors in a number of eastern and southern provinces confirm that the Taliban are taking a passive stance at this time of opium planting, as against past efforts to promote it. If opium prices are allowed to increase because of a moratorium on cultivation supported by the Taliban, the resulting market manipulation would spell disaster in the north-east of Afghanistan where so many provinces have abandoned opium cultivation voluntarily, enticed by expectation of development assistance and good revenues from wheat. If wheat/opium terms of trade change again in favour of the latter, this would spell trouble for Afghan counter-narcotic policy.</p>
<p>The second point is much more counter-intuitive and calls into question America’s self-appointed mission as hammer of Islamic terrorism and the savior of Afghanistan.</p>
<p>More is less.</p>
<p>The threat posed by U.S. and NATO forces is a key element in Taliban unity and effectiveness. Not everybody wants to fight the Great Satan, but those who do fight smarter and harder. The alien presence also sucks in foreign jihadis, increases Taliban reliance on hardened fighters like the ones who routed the Karzai forces in Schroen’s account, and emphasizes the necessity of maintaining and deepening the Taliban-al Qaeda relationship.</p>
<p>Surging more U.S. troops will cause greater Taliban casualties; but an expansion of military operations will probably increase violence and civilian casualties, and will feed general weariness and disillusionment with the U.S. intervention.</p>
<p>U.S. gains may also be unable to remove the well-founded concern that the U.S. is not in it for the long haul and can’t guarantee that transitory security gains achieved under its aegis can be made permanent or even sustained.</p>
<p>My recipe for success:</p>
<p>The Taliban has entrenched itself in the rugged terrain of eastern Afghanistan and western Pakistan to resist counterinsurgency campaigns originating out of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Its program of terror, intimidation, and propaganda has succeeded in cowing and deterring Afghan and Pakistan forces. Instead of taking the Taliban on head-on where it’s strongest, in the mountain bastion it has prepared so well in anticipation of this battle, fight a war for the relatively open and agrarian opium-growing areas in the southwest.</p>
<p>Stop contending with the Taliban for control of populations in Taliban-dominated areas.. Instead of fighting for territory, fight to deny the Taliban access to opium resources and obstruct its major source of funding.</p>
<p>Throw the main NATO resources into the opium war with the full understanding that it will a) hurt the economy and b) alienate a lot of people. But rely on the fact that more people understand and accept the immorality of opium than accept the U.S. intervention or acknowledge the merit of an extensive and violent counterinsurgency campaign that yields a lot of civilian casualties. Bank on the expectation that there are only a limited number of people willing to die to protect the opium industry.</p>
<p>Reduce the Taliban’s opium revenue to and try to force it to operate more like a true guerilla force sustaining itself off the local population, instead of riding a wave of general, if relative, prosperity.</p>
<p>My prediction: people will be pissed off at the U.S., NATO, and Karzai. But, as the Taliban tries to squeeze money out of a depressed economy to maintain a force of bigoted theocrats and foreign fighters, people will get pissed off at the Taliban, too. And local fighters and commanders will drift away from the Taliban.</p>
<p>Then, as the Taliban faces competition for scarce resources and is deprived of the unifying factor of an direct and immediate existential threat, perhaps it will be further weakened by internal divisions, Taliban allies of convenience will defect and, at last, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar or somebody like him will finally take the fight to the Taliban/al-Qaeda core.</p>
<p>Who is Gulbuddin Hekmatyar?</p>
<p>Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is the only major insurgent commander in the field in Afghanistan who is independent of the Taliban and not beholden to al Qaeda.</p>
<p>He is an experienced and brutal son of a bitch with a rich history.</p>
<p>Hekmatyar was the mujahideen commander who received the bulk of U.S. and Saudi funding–$600 million or so—during the anti-Soviet jihad. He was the preferred client of Pakistan’s ISI intelligence service until he was unable to establish a stable regime in Kabul after the Soviets withdrew and Islamabad made the disastrous decision to back the Taliban instead. He adheres to a modernizing strain of Islamic fundamentalism along the lines of the Muslim Brotherhood that is far removed from the obscurantist indoctrination the Taliban leadership received in the Deobandi madrassas of western Pakistan.</p>
<p>After the Taliban took over most of Afghanistan in the 1990s, Hekmatyar fled to Iran, was expelled and had his bank accounts confiscated by Tehran, and survived a CIA assassination attempt using a Hellfire missile fired from a Predator drone. He returned to Afghanistan and somehow (insert suspicion of ISI funding here) managed to draw commanders and troops away from the Taliban and re-establish a fighting force in eastern Pakistan.</p>
<p>Despite the fact that he is credited with one of the bloodiest anti-ISAF actions of the Afghan war—an ambush that claimed the lives of 10 French soldiers last year—Hekmatyar is being cultivated by every anti-Taliban force to an extent that is almost ludicrous.</p>
<p>The Karzai government has consistently wooed Hekmatyar with offers of a role in the Kabul government. A rump faction of Hekmatyar’s Hezb-i-Islami party was allowed to contest Afghanistan’s parliamentary elections in 2005 after it made an unconvincing formal break with its founder—it won 34 seats. When Saudi Arabia invited the Taliban and the Karzai regime for peace talks in Riyadh in July 2008, Hekmatyar’s representative was included as separate, third party. At the end of 2008, Hekmatyar’s son-in-law was transferred to Afghan custody (Pakistan had arrested him at American insistence), where he was released, ushered into the Presidential Palace for discussions with Karzai, and given a hero’s welcome in Kabul.</p>
<p>Then Pakistan released Hekmatyar’s brother from custody in January of this year.</p>
<p>China, which provided the lion’s share of Hekmatyar’s arms as the CIA-funded quartermaster of the anti-Soviet war, recently invited Hekmatyar’s designated link to the ISI and Pakistan government, the Pakistan Islamic political party, Jamaat-i-Islami, to Beijing for talks.</p>
<p>Beyond Hekmatyar’s traditional fan club of Karzai, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and China, the United States is aware of his potential as an anti-Taliban asset.</p>
<p>In a November 2008 article entitled Afghan Rebel Positioned for Key Role, the Washington Post provided an insight into U.S. thinking:</p>
<p>[W]ith casualties among foreign forces at record highs, and domestic and international confidence in Karzai’s government at an all-time low, U.S. and Afghan officials may have little choice but to grant Hekmatyar a choice seat at the bargaining table.</p>
<p>Top U.S. military officials have indicated in recent weeks a willingness to cut deals with rebel commanders like Hekmatyar to take insurgents off the battlefield.</p>
<p>However, Hekmatyar has made it clear that he will never enter the field as part of any U.S. or NATO anti-insurgency force.</p>
<p>He has reiterated this stance too many times for there to be any ambiguity about it. As an example, the Jamestown Foundation quotes Hekmatyar on the issue:</p>
<p>“We want all foreign forces to leave immediately without any condition. This is the demand of the entire Afghan nation.”</p>
<p>Doubtless Hekmatyar distances himself from the United States in order to maintain his credibility as an Afghan fighter.</p>
<p>But maybe he also understands that, even if he enjoys the covert backing of the ISI, he will have little chance against a Taliban united and energized by the U.S.-led counterinsurgency operation in Afghanistan and swollen by opium profits.</p>
<p>In the end, Hekmatyar, who was notorious for killing more Afghani rivals than Soviet invaders during the jihad, might have the magic formula for cutting the Taliban down to size that the West is looking for.</p>
<p>In 2002, Time Magazine quoted him as saying:</p>
<p>“We prefer involvement in internal war rather than occupation by foreigners and foreign troops”.</p>
<p>Hekmatyar would probably enjoy his “internal war” even more if he got effective backing from the ISI (and profits from his own drug business; Hekmatyar pioneered the refining of heroin inside Afghanistan, instead of just taxing opium) while the Taliban’s opium revenues withered.</p>
<p>A bitter, ugly, underfunded, and depleting civil war devoid of theological, religious, ethnic, or international implications, between two diminished and destructive gangsters unable to project their power beyond the Pashtun heartland.</p>
<p>Maybe this is the best we can hope for in Afghanistan and Pakistan for the time being.</p>
<p>PETER LEE is a business man who has spent thirty years observing, analyzing, and writing on Asian affairs. Lee can be reached at <a href="" type="internal">peterrlee-2000@yahoo</a>.</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | afghanistan nexus regional crisis threatens security united states existence pakistan afghanistan awash money arms foreigners obama administration think twice assuming injecting money arms foreigners afghanistan going solve problem youve got hammer look nail united states money military power considerable handson experience applying counterinsurgencies surprise us wants apply skills mess afghanistan pakistan since counterinsurgency step intellectually bush administrations simplistic invasion liberation formula surprising obama administration willing consider intelligent broad spectrum application american military ideological financial intellectual power enable us gain upper hand taliban however case made injecting money arms even noblest purpose finest phds part problem solution first anecdote bit information finally analysis anecdote comes gary schroens book first new york ballantine books 2005 schroen title states first cia officer inserted afghanistan 911 tasked establishing contact northern alliance book intensively vetted cia offers remarkably prosaic picture afghan war schroen team flew northern afghanistan several cardboard boxes filled millions dollars us greenbacks duration book schroen hunkered panjishir valley dispensing cash writing longwinded memos langley mapping gps coordinates taliban positions bombing raids least hes never came big event arrival 100 pounds starbucks coffee allows schroen drink decent brew composing cables schroens book enlivened descriptions actual combat experienced others passage cia operative craig ragtag force 60 afghans organized hamid karzai facing taliban position 600 yards away across valley movement hilltop craig could make figures two three men dressed black clothingeach holding ak47then three men stepped forward began move slope toward themthe three men reached level ground valley floor without breaking stride picked pace joggingwhat three guys moving effortlessly running three four feet apart maintaining line line one afghans watching three men steadily cross open ground shouted chechnya chechnya wave panic fear intense craig could feel physically swept line men hilltop chechens reported fanatical fierce fighters well trained experts weapons one particularly tough engagementa number deadhad found killed single shot head incredible afghans none actually aimed weapons rather trusted allah guide bullets thought accurate fire work chechens craig turned wonder look line afghans could see panic setting sixty men armed frightened three men running toward grabbed sergeant haidar shouted tell men shoot shoot karzai troops began fire long bursts guns bucking skyward prolongedrecoil panic firing seconds firing reached peak craig watched amazement three men continued jog forward hail lead slamming earth around three men alter pace break formation jogged karzai troops exhaust 30round magazines reload empty magazines three fighters ran untouched nearing base hill silence fell along line men top hill could hear three men shouting allahu akbar ran much afghansas signal entire group sixty men turned began run positions three chechenswere casually going items left fleeing afghanscraig watched three men shouting obscenities one men stood spreadlegged grabbed crotch hands making hip movements emphasize statement another turned pointed butt shaking turned pointed toward laughing craig cia mate could killed three men worked way hill sho nuff order humiliate karzai troops craig calls airstrike circling b52 instead three chechens disintegrated 2000pound bomb one giving craig finger everybody gives big cheer item information comes united nations office drugs crimes afghanistan opium survey 2007 first opium cultivation afghanistan longer associated poverty quite opposite hilmand kandahar three opiumproducing provinces south richest fertile past breadbasket nation main source earnings opted illicit opium unprecedented scale 5744tons much poorer northern region abandoning poppy crops second opium cultivation afghanistan closely linked insurgency taliban today control vast swathes land hilmand kandahar along pakistani border preventing national authorities international agencies working insurgents allowed greed corruption turn orchards wheat vegetable fields poppy fields third taliban using opium suit interests 1996 2000 talibancontrolled areas 15000 tons opium produced exported regimes sole source foreign exchange time july 2000 taliban leader mullah omar argued opium islam banned cultivation export recent months taliban reversed position started extract drug economy resources arms logistics militia pay un press release entitled opium amounts half afghanistans gdp 2007 drives point home final afghan opium survey 2007 issued today united nations office drugs crime unodc shows opium equivalent half 53 countrys licit gdp total export value opiates produced trafficked afghanistan 2007 4 billion 29 per cent increase 2006 approximately one quarter amount 1 billion earned opium farmers district officials take percentage tax crops known ushr insurgents warlords control business producing distributing drugs rest made drug traffickers 2008 opium production dropped combination bad weather good policies governmentcontrolled provinces however taliban traffickers corrupt officials still extracted 70 80 million taxes farmers output 200 million processing trafficking revenues opium industry new problem emerged opium poppy eradication become risky eradication activities 2008 severely affected resistance insurgents since poppy cultivation remains confined south southwest region dominated strong insurgency eradication operations may future become even challenging security incidents associated eradication activities hilmand kandahar hirat nimroz kapisa kabul nangarhar provinces included shooting mine explosions resulting death least 78 people policemen increase 75 compared 19 deaths 2007 major incidents nanarhar nimroz provinces one serious incidents happened khogyani district nangarhar 20 policemen killed together fazal ahmad mcnunodc surveyor whose job collect data feed report incidents happened khashrod district nimroz 29 people died along district police chief attacks carried suicide bombers poppy eradication force pef faced large number rocket attacks carrying eradication hilmand province nature attacks changed 2007 2008 2007 police deaths result violence farmers whereas deaths 2008 result insurgent actions including suicide attacks analysis left devices afghanistan threat safety world even support isi taliban little obnoxious gang bumpkin theocrats unable project power beyond pashtun areas afghanistan 1997 taliban tried stake claim ruler afghanistan conquering northern city mazarisharif bad things happened steve coll writes ghost wars new york penguin press 2004 mazar became taliban death trap within daysthe citys uzbek shia populations revolted pashtun occupiers massacred three hundred taliban soldiers took another thousand prisoner sent militia reeling back salang highway allowed taliban slip isi leash become dominant factor inside afghanistan alliance al qaeda alliance turned intensely symbiotic relationship 911 alqaeda fighters provided hard core taliban army schroens account illustrates turning taliban superior fighting force instead another warring faction alqaeda also extended talibans reach assassination terror squads famously al qaeda operatives assassinated ahmad shah masood leader antitaliban northern alliance eve 911 illicit drugs mothers milk successful modern insurgencies keeping talibanal qaeda axis alive giving capacity entrench afghanistan pakistan even became target intensive military intelligence effort foreign fighters local opium extended reach taliban turned regional threat theres one factor paradoxically united states forced taliban become taliban steroids neotaliban sometimes called confronted existential threat biggest richest experienced counterinsurgency force planet taliban elevate game far usual level cruelty greed venality skill set every central asian warlord nowadays taliban isnt surviving flourishing pushing aside overmatched government security forces areas operation afghanistan major presence half country also pakistan pakistan taliban dominates tribal areas fata pushing settled region nwfp extending reach way cells terrorism pakistans heartland flourishing represents jihadist islamist afghan pashtun aspirations taliban flourishing wellarmed wellfunded welltrained attracts allegiance commanders compels obedience local civilian population engaged fight life us nato afghanistan pakistan time learned exploit resources nth degree words well biggest meanest paranoid scariest guy block also hooked opium revenues dependent cadre professional foreign domestic fighters intimidate governments ordinary citizens think taliban like mafia sicily naples perhaps closest analogues cant coexist pluralistic prowestern governments even unlikely event west agrees allow taliban participate coalition rule kabul bulkedup organization possesses money power central government unacceptable threat public safety time taliban cant downsize become good taliban cant risk giving protection gains drug running maintaining extralegal cadre assassins terrorists headtohead matchup taliban side money weapons ruthlessness desperation project power afghan homes mosques government institutions good news united states nato money bad news impoverished tribal society lot money doesnt lot good taliban able extract 100 million opium trade doesnt need lot foreign sources revenue like repurposed zakat islamic tithes contributions rich armchair jihadists saudi arabia good news united states nato weapons bad news theres enough weapons afghanistan everyone bad news taliban fighting life every weapon disposal bad news us nato fighting forwell modern afghan democracy table basically fighting taliban theyre fighting us bottom line us facing extremely ruthless capable group trappings criminal organization uses money violence intimidation operate among dispersed population rugged region borders leak like sieves law enforcement virtually nonexistent environment conducive conventional counterinsurgency doctrine using military economic measures secure evergrowing zone loyal grateful citizens current configuration taliban enough money reach motivation challenge security measures us nato kabul government throughout contested pashtun areas perhaps taliban considered organized crime problem instead counterinsurgency problem leave aside counterinsurgency tropes winning hearts minds people providing security probably hearts minds many unfortunates living taliban rule already b cant provide sustained security turns heartsandmind affection active resistance taliban c taliban selfsufficient money arms supplies thanks position nexus crossborder trades drugs contraband necessities doesnt need support people way traditional guerilla force instead turning blind eye toward local opium trafficking antitaliban governors warlords hope extending official reach afghan government areas yield security gains main security effort devoted denying taliban fruits opium industrynot revenue illicit crossborder financial channels avalanche contraband across hundreds unofficial border crossings engenders buy burn eradicate itdo whatever takes crimp financial selfsufficiency taliban un made point concerning opium desperate urgency since drugs funding insurgency nato selfinterest supporting afghan forces destroying drug labs markets convoys destroy drug trade cut talibans main funding source said uns drug chief antonio maria cost drug metastases spread throughout afghanistan providing capital investments foreign exchange expensive imports revenue underpaid officials well funding weddings burials pilgrimages corruption facilitated general profiteering governments benign tolerance corruption undermining future country ever built prosperity crime nato help taking opium labs markets traffickers opium economy afghanistan bankrupted blocking twoway flow imported chemicals ii exported drugs instances several thousand tons materials moved across southern border nobody seems take notice since drug trafficking insurgency live foreign military forces operating afghanistan vested interest supporting counternarcotics operations destroying heroin labs closing opium markets seizing opium convoys bringing traffickers justice generate double benefit first destruction drug trade win popular support 1 10 afghan farming families cultivate opium earning disproportionately large share national income second lower opium demand traders reduce price make alternative economic activity attractive lot easier destroy opium taliban opium doesnt run away still isnt easy contra uns optimistic assertion destroying opium trade win hearts minds opposite probably true first stage opium backbone whatever prosperity southern afghanistan today minority farmers virtually funds halawa system traditional finance kandahar major cities taliban area opiumderived graft fattens local officials comes opium opium pays weddings cars tractors injects money economy opium boom goes bust going lot poorer pissedoff people second point opium war take years months according un afghanistan overproducing opium furious rate exceeding annual global demand several thousand tons opiumactually heroin refined intois sitting somewhere rainy day west finally decides get serious afghan opium industry fact 2008 un hypothesized taliban might anticipating campaign opium revenue base holding back heroin stocks market ready engage sophisticated price manipulation undercut eradication campaign wild card hands insurgents taliban holding major drug stockpiles may welcome lower opium cultivation resulting price increase would revalue stocks improve war financing indeed news picked unodc surveyors number eastern southern provinces confirm taliban taking passive stance time opium planting past efforts promote opium prices allowed increase moratorium cultivation supported taliban resulting market manipulation would spell disaster northeast afghanistan many provinces abandoned opium cultivation voluntarily enticed expectation development assistance good revenues wheat wheatopium terms trade change favour latter would spell trouble afghan counternarcotic policy second point much counterintuitive calls question americas selfappointed mission hammer islamic terrorism savior afghanistan less threat posed us nato forces key element taliban unity effectiveness everybody wants fight great satan fight smarter harder alien presence also sucks foreign jihadis increases taliban reliance hardened fighters like ones routed karzai forces schroens account emphasizes necessity maintaining deepening talibanal qaeda relationship surging us troops cause greater taliban casualties expansion military operations probably increase violence civilian casualties feed general weariness disillusionment us intervention us gains may also unable remove wellfounded concern us long haul cant guarantee transitory security gains achieved aegis made permanent even sustained recipe success taliban entrenched rugged terrain eastern afghanistan western pakistan resist counterinsurgency campaigns originating afghanistan pakistan program terror intimidation propaganda succeeded cowing deterring afghan pakistan forces instead taking taliban headon strongest mountain bastion prepared well anticipation battle fight war relatively open agrarian opiumgrowing areas southwest stop contending taliban control populations talibandominated areas instead fighting territory fight deny taliban access opium resources obstruct major source funding throw main nato resources opium war full understanding hurt economy b alienate lot people rely fact people understand accept immorality opium accept us intervention acknowledge merit extensive violent counterinsurgency campaign yields lot civilian casualties bank expectation limited number people willing die protect opium industry reduce talibans opium revenue try force operate like true guerilla force sustaining local population instead riding wave general relative prosperity prediction people pissed us nato karzai taliban tries squeeze money depressed economy maintain force bigoted theocrats foreign fighters people get pissed taliban local fighters commanders drift away taliban taliban faces competition scarce resources deprived unifying factor direct immediate existential threat perhaps weakened internal divisions taliban allies convenience defect last gulbuddin hekmatyar somebody like finally take fight talibanalqaeda core gulbuddin hekmatyar gulbuddin hekmatyar major insurgent commander field afghanistan independent taliban beholden al qaeda experienced brutal son bitch rich history hekmatyar mujahideen commander received bulk us saudi funding600 million soduring antisoviet jihad preferred client pakistans isi intelligence service unable establish stable regime kabul soviets withdrew islamabad made disastrous decision back taliban instead adheres modernizing strain islamic fundamentalism along lines muslim brotherhood far removed obscurantist indoctrination taliban leadership received deobandi madrassas western pakistan taliban took afghanistan 1990s hekmatyar fled iran expelled bank accounts confiscated tehran survived cia assassination attempt using hellfire missile fired predator drone returned afghanistan somehow insert suspicion isi funding managed draw commanders troops away taliban reestablish fighting force eastern pakistan despite fact credited one bloodiest antiisaf actions afghan waran ambush claimed lives 10 french soldiers last yearhekmatyar cultivated every antitaliban force extent almost ludicrous karzai government consistently wooed hekmatyar offers role kabul government rump faction hekmatyars hezbiislami party allowed contest afghanistans parliamentary elections 2005 made unconvincing formal break founderit 34 seats saudi arabia invited taliban karzai regime peace talks riyadh july 2008 hekmatyars representative included separate third party end 2008 hekmatyars soninlaw transferred afghan custody pakistan arrested american insistence released ushered presidential palace discussions karzai given heros welcome kabul pakistan released hekmatyars brother custody january year china provided lions share hekmatyars arms ciafunded quartermaster antisoviet war recently invited hekmatyars designated link isi pakistan government pakistan islamic political party jamaatiislami beijing talks beyond hekmatyars traditional fan club karzai pakistan saudi arabia china united states aware potential antitaliban asset november 2008 article entitled afghan rebel positioned key role washington post provided insight us thinking casualties among foreign forces record highs domestic international confidence karzais government alltime low us afghan officials may little choice grant hekmatyar choice seat bargaining table top us military officials indicated recent weeks willingness cut deals rebel commanders like hekmatyar take insurgents battlefield however hekmatyar made clear never enter field part us nato antiinsurgency force reiterated stance many times ambiguity example jamestown foundation quotes hekmatyar issue want foreign forces leave immediately without condition demand entire afghan nation doubtless hekmatyar distances united states order maintain credibility afghan fighter maybe also understands even enjoys covert backing isi little chance taliban united energized usled counterinsurgency operation afghanistan swollen opium profits end hekmatyar notorious killing afghani rivals soviet invaders jihad might magic formula cutting taliban size west looking 2002 time magazine quoted saying prefer involvement internal war rather occupation foreigners foreign troops hekmatyar would probably enjoy internal war even got effective backing isi profits drug business hekmatyar pioneered refining heroin inside afghanistan instead taxing opium talibans opium revenues withered bitter ugly underfunded depleting civil war devoid theological religious ethnic international implications two diminished destructive gangsters unable project power beyond pashtun heartland maybe best hope afghanistan pakistan time peter lee business man spent thirty years observing analyzing writing asian affairs lee reached peterrlee2000yahoo 160 | 2,633 |
<p>The U.S. military lives by the rule: “Leave no soldier behind.” The Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) seems to have operated according to a different principle: “Out of sight, out of mind.”</p>
<p>It is unconscionable for a government to send soldiers to fight, die, and suffer life-changing wounds without assuring them first-class medical care and rehabilitation should they require it because of their service. Government should also provide injured soldiers with the financial resources for a decent standard of living, consistent with the severity of wounds suffered. The recent media revelations of the medical care at Walter Reed, particularly for returning soldiers billeted in outlying buildings, demonstrate that the U.S. government has broken this social compact.</p>
<p>This is not a question of malice aforethought, either by the government or the hospital. The sins of Walter Reed were those of omission, not commission. But sins they remain, and the U.S. government must do more than just fire a few people and rehab a few buildings. Lack of Care</p>
<p>The description of the squalor in which some wounded veterans lived ­ notably in the now infamous Building 18 ­ was a surefire journalistic hook to draw the reader into the full story. This is not a criticism but an observation about the power of solid reporting of indisputable facts. The Washington Post reporters exposed not only the living conditions ­ easy to fix if the responsible authorities put their minds to it ­ but also the more serious implications for the physical and mental recovery of those who become part of the WRAMC “family.”</p>
<p>The medical side of the care provided in the main hospital is not in question. But other parts of the total patient experience failed. Patients not in the main hospital building simply fell out of the administrative loop.</p>
<p>When a soldier is in the multi-story main hospital building as an in-patient, most of the medical and medical-support actions are either automatically done or readily accessible to patients. Doctors come onto wards; nursing staff is available and checking on patients around the clock; chaplains make daily rounds; a mobile library can be encountered in the hallways moving from room to room; physical therapists administer post-injury rehabilitation; and volunteers visit those unable to get out of bed.</p>
<p>What seems to have happened to those not in the main building is as understandable as it is inexcusable. This in-patient support structure ­ or at least some critical parts of it ­ didn’t exist or was wholly inadequate. It didn’t provide services for those in the disconnected housing facilities on the WRAMC grounds or ­ as in the case of Building 18 ­ in the facilities outside the gates and across a multi-lane transportation artery running into downtown Washington.</p>
<p>The situation worsened as the number of casualties from Iraq and Afghanistan mounted. And this number increased much faster in these wars because improved medical procedures meant that more troops survived their wounds. In addition, because of the privatization of many positions, the number of federal employees fell from 600 to 60. As a result, a certain triage took place in which patients in the main building were treated as “in-patients” while everyone else, including those in different WRAMC buildings and those living outside of Washington, became “out-patients.” Once soldiers entered this latter population, they received less monitoring and less care.</p>
<p>From that point on, it was all down hill for the wounded troops. Down hill, that is, until the conditions were exposed to the public and the Congress. Public Outcry</p>
<p>But then, inexplicably, the Army goes and shoots itself in the foot. Commanders exhibit inexcusable indifference or blame shifting, troops reportedly are muzzled and threatened with reprisals. Then it becomes apparent that senior noncommissioned officers, officers, and even commanding generals had known about the shortcomings in staffing, in the level of services provided to the patients assigned to their care, and in the conditions in which some of the wounded lived and functioned.</p>
<p>At this point, for whatever combination of reasons, it was evident that the chain-of-command had failed its fundamental challenge: leadership. Accountability dictated that heads would roll. To date, one Secretary of the Army is gone; one general officer ­ ironically the only senior army official to apologize publicly ­ has been relieved; one company grade officer has also lost his position; a sergeant-major and a number of platoon sergeants have been “moved”; and a 120-person medical support unit has been assigned to Walter Reed to straighten out the place.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, many returned wounded veterans are struggling with the same conditions in under-funded and under-staffed army and veterans’ hospitals elsewhere in the country.</p>
<p>The “bricks and mortar” side will be repaired first because it is the easiest to do. Unfortunately, as the most visible, it is also potentially the most deceptive measurement of progress made in rectifying the shortcomings not only at WRAMC but in all Defense Department hospitals and clinics.</p>
<p>Moreover, Congress must look at the Veterans Administration (VA) health care system. This system is under tremendous strain as it tries to cope with the 5.5 million veterans seeking medical attention every year in one of the 1,050 VA hospitals, medical centers, and clinics. It is true that the VA budget has increased significantly under President Bush, but those increases are projected to end after 2008, falling back in 2009 and 2010, and then holding steady ­ precisely when its resources will be in greatest demand by returning service members. The Bush Legacy</p>
<p>Already, more than 1.5 million men and women have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and more will go. But they will not be this administration’s problem. President Bush has already told the public that when he leaves office in January 2009, he fully expects to bequeath his successor two ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He will also dump on his successor and future generations of Americans the long and costly obligation to care for and help heal lives destroyed by these wars.</p>
<p>Reading between the lines of recent Pentagon testimony before Congress on future budgets seems to confirm what the “old hands” have alleged for years: that there never was any serious thought given to a Plan B for Iraq in case Plan A failed. Well, it is also now very apparent that the administration never had a Plan A ­ let alone a Plan B ­ for the medical systems of either the Defense Department or the VA.</p>
<p>Thus, a medical care system established to treat and care for those who return from war physically or mentally injured by the experience is under-staffed, under-trained, under-resourced, and unprepared. In fact, the military-veterans medical treatment system, highly bureaucratic in its origin, has become so convoluted that patients get lost in the system, especially when an individual moves from active to veteran status. Why? Because the VA and DOD computers with individual medical records are unable to routinely access medical treatment histories or transfer data from the other department’s computers.</p>
<p>War is hell, no doubt. As the Walter Read case reveals, however, the aftermath of war also has its own horrors. And many of these horrors last a lifetime.</p>
<p>Col. DAN SMITH is a military affairs analyst for <a href="http://www.fpif.org/" type="external">Foreign Policy In Focus</a> , a retired U.S. Army colonel, and a senior fellow on military affairs at the Friends Committee on National Legislation. Email at <a href="mailto:dan@fcnl.org" type="external">dan@fcnl.org</a>.</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | us military lives rule leave soldier behind walter reed army medical center wramc seems operated according different principle sight mind unconscionable government send soldiers fight die suffer lifechanging wounds without assuring firstclass medical care rehabilitation require service government also provide injured soldiers financial resources decent standard living consistent severity wounds suffered recent media revelations medical care walter reed particularly returning soldiers billeted outlying buildings demonstrate us government broken social compact question malice aforethought either government hospital sins walter reed omission commission sins remain us government must fire people rehab buildings lack care description squalor wounded veterans lived notably infamous building 18 surefire journalistic hook draw reader full story criticism observation power solid reporting indisputable facts washington post reporters exposed living conditions easy fix responsible authorities put minds also serious implications physical mental recovery become part wramc family medical side care provided main hospital question parts total patient experience failed patients main hospital building simply fell administrative loop soldier multistory main hospital building inpatient medical medicalsupport actions either automatically done readily accessible patients doctors come onto wards nursing staff available checking patients around clock chaplains make daily rounds mobile library encountered hallways moving room room physical therapists administer postinjury rehabilitation volunteers visit unable get bed seems happened main building understandable inexcusable inpatient support structure least critical parts didnt exist wholly inadequate didnt provide services disconnected housing facilities wramc grounds case building 18 facilities outside gates across multilane transportation artery running downtown washington situation worsened number casualties iraq afghanistan mounted number increased much faster wars improved medical procedures meant troops survived wounds addition privatization many positions number federal employees fell 600 60 result certain triage took place patients main building treated inpatients everyone else including different wramc buildings living outside washington became outpatients soldiers entered latter population received less monitoring less care point hill wounded troops hill conditions exposed public congress public outcry inexplicably army goes shoots foot commanders exhibit inexcusable indifference blame shifting troops reportedly muzzled threatened reprisals becomes apparent senior noncommissioned officers officers even commanding generals known shortcomings staffing level services provided patients assigned care conditions wounded lived functioned point whatever combination reasons evident chainofcommand failed fundamental challenge leadership accountability dictated heads would roll date one secretary army gone one general officer ironically senior army official apologize publicly relieved one company grade officer also lost position sergeantmajor number platoon sergeants moved 120person medical support unit assigned walter reed straighten place unfortunately many returned wounded veterans struggling conditions underfunded understaffed army veterans hospitals elsewhere country bricks mortar side repaired first easiest unfortunately visible also potentially deceptive measurement progress made rectifying shortcomings wramc defense department hospitals clinics moreover congress must look veterans administration va health care system system tremendous strain tries cope 55 million veterans seeking medical attention every year one 1050 va hospitals medical centers clinics true va budget increased significantly president bush increases projected end 2008 falling back 2009 2010 holding steady precisely resources greatest demand returning service members bush legacy already 15 million men women served iraq afghanistan go administrations problem president bush already told public leaves office january 2009 fully expects bequeath successor two ongoing wars afghanistan iraq also dump successor future generations americans long costly obligation care help heal lives destroyed wars reading lines recent pentagon testimony congress future budgets seems confirm old hands alleged years never serious thought given plan b iraq case plan failed well also apparent administration never plan let alone plan b medical systems either defense department va thus medical care system established treat care return war physically mentally injured experience understaffed undertrained underresourced unprepared fact militaryveterans medical treatment system highly bureaucratic origin become convoluted patients get lost system especially individual moves active veteran status va dod computers individual medical records unable routinely access medical treatment histories transfer data departments computers war hell doubt walter read case reveals however aftermath war also horrors many horrors last lifetime col dan smith military affairs analyst foreign policy focus retired us army colonel senior fellow military affairs friends committee national legislation email danfcnlorg 160 | 668 |
<p>When the argument descends to specific cases, Bruckner goes from irksomely smug to actively offensive.</p>
<p>Four years ago, a leading French intellectual produced a wide-ranging study of wealth inequality that cleared away much of the confusion surrounding the steady financialization of the Western political economy. Thomas Piketty’s <a href="http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674430006" type="external">Capital in the Twenty-First Century</a> laid bare the deep structural forces that have made our brave new neoliberal economic order so dangerously topheavy and unstable.</p>
<p>Now, another renowned French intellectual has stepped forward to publish a confounding, evidence-challenged account of economic life designed to calm the fears stirred up by any clear-eyed look at our jittery, unsettled globalized political economy. Pascal Bruckner, an all-purpose Parisian public intellectual in the vein of Alain de Botton, has produced a string of bestselling booklength essays on subjects such as “democratic melancholia” and the unattainability of happiness. Now, he professes to lay out <a href="http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674972278" type="external">The Wisdom of Money</a>.</p>
<p>He means it, too. “It isn’t money that produces narcissism, the will to power, religious or political proselytizing, class inequalities or self-interested motives,” Bruckner pronounces. “The market enters our lives with our complicity, it&#160;doesn’t conquer our souls; they welcome it as a liberator.” Small wonder, then, that “it is wise to have money, and wise to reflect critically on it.”</p>
<p>If you’re thinking this is clearly not the sort of writer who’s ever found himself on the short end of a market transaction, you’re right. “I was spared the injury of poverty,” he says in his introduction. As he found his intellectual vocation, “I didn’t worry about money, certain that luck would always be generous to me.” And it seems luck did provide, in the form of book royalties.</p>
<p>As The Wisdom of Money goes on to traverse all spheres of human endeavor, from international relations to marriage and sex, Bruckner stoutly breaks down every question along these same basic structural lines: Economic thinkers and humorless ideologues may insist that money represents X-bad thing (social injustice, economic precarity, organized pillage of the public sphere), but from my wiser, more Olympian remove, I can confidently report it is but a passive vessel for all pre-existing features of the human experience, and in nearly every contentious sphere of debate, a positive virtue.</p>
<p>Bruckner lays out his case in a series of chapters taking aim at straw man indictments of the cash-nexus, e.g., “Money, the Ruler of the World?” “Has Sordid Calculation Killed Sublime Love?” and the mock-heroic “Getting Rich Is Not a Crime (and Falling Into Poverty Is Not a Virtue).” But when the argument descends to specific cases, Bruckner goes from irksomely smug to actively offensive.</p>
<p>In assessing the role of money in heterosexual intimate relations, for example, Bruckner, in the tradition of all-too-many French intellectuals, is dumbfoundingly sexist. “For a majority of women,” he maintains, citing zero evidence, “it is still men who have to pay the bill, even after ‘liberation,’ whereas many men consider it degrading when a woman pays.” Prenups for the alpha-male overclass are not a means of raw economic predation that benefits the richer contracting partner; no, they’re just yet another financial contrivance that “avoids confusions.”&#160;</p>
<p>For all this ghastly faux-realism around matters of sex, Bruckner shows an eager deference to our plutocratic betters that’s downright sentimental. He cites with admiration Andrew Carnegie’s storied career as a philanthropist without mentioning his murderous breaking of the 1892 <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh//amex/carnegie/peopleevents/pande04.html" type="external">Homestead Steel Works strike</a>. (Indeed, Bruckner barely mentions labor actions or labor organizing at all, only pausing to note that dissatisfied service workers, thanks to the market’s thoughtful ministrations, “can always leave.”)</p>
<p>Those who deride the character of the wealthy have simply forgotten their historic role: “In every age, the rich have incarnated and borne an exemplary art of living.” If they appropriate an outsize share of the world’s bounty, why that’s merely in line with their outsize virtue: “What does it matter that the rich are getting richer—it’s normal that those who take risks should be well remunerated—provided that others do better as well.”</p>
<p>That last rushed disclaimer, like virtually every claim in The Wisdom of Money, is acutely bereft of empiricism: Throughout the capitalist West, real wages have been <a href="http://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/" type="external">stagnant for the middle class and in decline for the poor</a> since the mid-1970s, while return on investment has widely outpaced more generalized economic growth—a crucial point decisively demonstrated in, yes, Capital in the Twenty-First Century.</p>
<p>Then again, Bruckner’s genre of morale-boosting capitalist agitprop doesn’t intend to mount credible empirical claims or spur us to serious reflection of any kind. No, the idea in The Wisdom of Money, as in its countless counterparts in the American marketplace of ideas, is to instill in its readers a soothing state of metaphysical complacency, wherein unencumbered avarice is nothing less than the fulfillment of a cosmic mission. And anyone who says otherwise is fomenting a “militant neopauperism” founded on “the prohibition on living better.” So yes: If Bruckner’s book can teach us anything, it’s that, as fathomlessly wise as our market may be, it will always make more room for unadulterated bullshit.</p>
<p>Chris Lehmann, a contributing editor of In These Times, is editor-in-chief at Baffler and the author of <a href="http://www.mhpbooks.com/books/the-money-cult/" type="external">The Money Cult: Capitalism, Christianity, and the Unmaking of the American Dream</a> (Melville House, 2016).</p> | true | 4 | argument descends specific cases bruckner goes irksomely smug actively offensive four years ago leading french intellectual produced wideranging study wealth inequality cleared away much confusion surrounding steady financialization western political economy thomas pikettys capital twentyfirst century laid bare deep structural forces made brave new neoliberal economic order dangerously topheavy unstable another renowned french intellectual stepped forward publish confounding evidencechallenged account economic life designed calm fears stirred cleareyed look jittery unsettled globalized political economy pascal bruckner allpurpose parisian public intellectual vein alain de botton produced string bestselling booklength essays subjects democratic melancholia unattainability happiness professes lay wisdom money means isnt money produces narcissism power religious political proselytizing class inequalities selfinterested motives bruckner pronounces market enters lives complicity it160doesnt conquer souls welcome liberator small wonder wise money wise reflect critically youre thinking clearly sort writer whos ever found short end market transaction youre right spared injury poverty says introduction found intellectual vocation didnt worry money certain luck would always generous seems luck provide form book royalties wisdom money goes traverse spheres human endeavor international relations marriage sex bruckner stoutly breaks every question along basic structural lines economic thinkers humorless ideologues may insist money represents xbad thing social injustice economic precarity organized pillage public sphere wiser olympian remove confidently report passive vessel preexisting features human experience nearly every contentious sphere debate positive virtue bruckner lays case series chapters taking aim straw man indictments cashnexus eg money ruler world sordid calculation killed sublime love mockheroic getting rich crime falling poverty virtue argument descends specific cases bruckner goes irksomely smug actively offensive assessing role money heterosexual intimate relations example bruckner tradition alltoomany french intellectuals dumbfoundingly sexist majority women maintains citing zero evidence still men pay bill even liberation whereas many men consider degrading woman pays prenups alphamale overclass means raw economic predation benefits richer contracting partner theyre yet another financial contrivance avoids confusions160 ghastly fauxrealism around matters sex bruckner shows eager deference plutocratic betters thats downright sentimental cites admiration andrew carnegies storied career philanthropist without mentioning murderous breaking 1892 homestead steel works strike indeed bruckner barely mentions labor actions labor organizing pausing note dissatisfied service workers thanks markets thoughtful ministrations always leave deride character wealthy simply forgotten historic role every age rich incarnated borne exemplary art living appropriate outsize share worlds bounty thats merely line outsize virtue matter rich getting richerits normal take risks well remuneratedprovided others better well last rushed disclaimer like virtually every claim wisdom money acutely bereft empiricism throughout capitalist west real wages stagnant middle class decline poor since mid1970s return investment widely outpaced generalized economic growtha crucial point decisively demonstrated yes capital twentyfirst century bruckners genre moraleboosting capitalist agitprop doesnt intend mount credible empirical claims spur us serious reflection kind idea wisdom money countless counterparts american marketplace ideas instill readers soothing state metaphysical complacency wherein unencumbered avarice nothing less fulfillment cosmic mission anyone says otherwise fomenting militant neopauperism founded prohibition living better yes bruckners book teach us anything fathomlessly wise market may always make room unadulterated bullshit chris lehmann contributing editor times editorinchief baffler author money cult capitalism christianity unmaking american dream melville house 2016 | 514 |
<p />
<p>FOR MOST OF THIS nation’s history, domestic violence was considered a private matter, not warranting, or even permitting, a public response. The same ideology that refuses to grant a woman the privacy to make her own decisions about reproduction granted a zone of privacy in which a husband could beat his wife. To some extent, and despite the very great gains in recent years in confronting domestic violence, vestiges of that attitude remain: In Castle Rock v. Gonzales, a case recently decided* by the U.S. Supreme Court, the Justice Department argued, successfully, that “private parties”—in this instance women who have taken out restraining orders—may not enjoy an “entitlement to enforcement.”</p>
<p>That reasoning is heresy to those who work with domestic violence cases, who know that the battering of one woman produces multiple victims, and that among those victims is society at large. “The longer I do this,” advocate Patricia Prickett told reporter Sara Catania ( <a href="/news/feature/2005/07/the_counselor.html" type="external">“The Counselor”</a>), “the more I’m reminded that domestic violence is everybody’s problem.”</p>
<p>I can’t read Prickett’s words without recalling my sojourn last year in Tacoma, Washington. I’d come to report a simple travel piece about Tacoma’s artistic and civic renaissance, but couldn’t even skim the touristy surface of the place without stumbling into a barely submerged agony. Asked about the future of a Tacoma museum, a docent confided, “Our board’s been in upheaval since the Brame tragedy.” Asked if the city’s light-rail system would be expanded, a civic leader mourned that the political will for large projects had collapsed “since the Brame tragedy.” The new head of the opera, when I inquired if she’d been greeted by cultural ambassadors eager to discuss how her institution fit into the city’s rebirth, told me no. Initiatives of that sort might have happened once, she said, “but that would be before the Brame tragedy.”</p>
<p>The event that had left the city so stunned was by then a year old. In April 2003, David Brame accosted his estranged wife, Crystal, in a shopping center parking lot, shot her in the head with a .45, then killed himself, all while their two young children watched. Crystal lingered a week. The crime was horrifying enough in its details to provoke a national response. Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) invoked the Brame case when presenting the Paul and Sheila Wellstone Do-mestic Violence Prevention Amendment to Congress in March 2004. The tragedy’s effects locally were all the more devastating because of who David Brame was—Tacoma’s chief of police—and because of the slow-breaking revelation that many civic leaders had tolerated or covered up his violence and misogyny for years. Cleansing the good-old-boy infrastructure that had coddled David Brame required deep soul-searching on the part of the community, and eventually some hard action. Public officials (including the city manager) and police brass were fired or resigned, and the rosters of civic and business associations vetted. Tacoma, momentarily tarnished, was permanently transformed.</p>
<p>The nation could use some of the same housecleaning. Complicity in violence takes many forms. President Bush’s recent budgets underfunded Violence Against Women Act programs by $40 million a year, a Center for Disease Control rape-prevention program by $36 million a year, and grants for battered women shelters by $49 million a year below their authorizations. When the Violence Against Women Act comes up for renewal this fall, its funding may again be cut. And Senator Murray’s 2004 amendment went down to defeat, opposed by anti-abortionists who felt that the measure, in addressing the abuse of women, deflected attention from what Rep. George Nethercutt (R-Wash.) called “the ultimate victims of domestic violence,” fetuses. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce likewise opposed the amendment, on the grounds that businesses might find some of its common-sense provisions expensive. Among those were proposals to extend job protection and family-leave privileges to women forced to take refuge in shelters or called to testify in court, thus interrupting the vicious cycle in which batterers force women to lose their jobs, trapping them further in financial dependence on their tormentors. Murray countered the Chamber’s claims with data showing the cost to business of domestic abuse. That cost accrues to almost 8 million lost workdays and $3 to $5 billion in health care annually, not to mention the price of extra security, since 75 percent of abused women are harassed at their workplaces and 20 percent of workplace homicides are committed by intimate partners.</p>
<p>As the citizens of Tacoma know, the accounting on domestic violence goes deeper than dollars and cents. The injury inflicted on women who are battered is the grim epicenter of wider circles of damage—to children, to extended families, to an economy blessed by women’s labor, and to a society grotesquely disfigured by the inability of women to rely on that minimum prerequisite of a free and useful life: safety in one’s everyday dealings. A woman’s safety is the least sparrow of healthy civic life; anytime she cannot come to work because of a black eye, must pull her children out of school to take refuge in a shelter, or is made to tremble at the turning of a doorknob or a step on the stair, society weeps. Or should. The nation would do well to learn the lesson of Tacoma and to seize this political season as an opportunity to further remove domestic violence from the hidden realm of the private, to make the task of solving it, once and for all, the problem of every American.</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | nations history domestic violence considered private matter warranting even permitting public response ideology refuses grant woman privacy make decisions reproduction granted zone privacy husband could beat wife extent despite great gains recent years confronting domestic violence vestiges attitude remain castle rock v gonzales case recently decided us supreme court justice department argued successfully private partiesin instance women taken restraining ordersmay enjoy entitlement enforcement reasoning heresy work domestic violence cases know battering one woman produces multiple victims among victims society large longer advocate patricia prickett told reporter sara catania counselor im reminded domestic violence everybodys problem cant read pricketts words without recalling sojourn last year tacoma washington id come report simple travel piece tacomas artistic civic renaissance couldnt even skim touristy surface place without stumbling barely submerged agony asked future tacoma museum docent confided boards upheaval since brame tragedy asked citys lightrail system would expanded civic leader mourned political large projects collapsed since brame tragedy new head opera inquired shed greeted cultural ambassadors eager discuss institution fit citys rebirth told initiatives sort might happened said would brame tragedy event left city stunned year old april 2003 david brame accosted estranged wife crystal shopping center parking lot shot head 45 killed two young children watched crystal lingered week crime horrifying enough details provoke national response senator patty murray dwash invoked brame case presenting paul sheila wellstone domestic violence prevention amendment congress march 2004 tragedys effects locally devastating david brame wastacomas chief policeand slowbreaking revelation many civic leaders tolerated covered violence misogyny years cleansing goodoldboy infrastructure coddled david brame required deep soulsearching part community eventually hard action public officials including city manager police brass fired resigned rosters civic business associations vetted tacoma momentarily tarnished permanently transformed nation could use housecleaning complicity violence takes many forms president bushs recent budgets underfunded violence women act programs 40 million year center disease control rapeprevention program 36 million year grants battered women shelters 49 million year authorizations violence women act comes renewal fall funding may cut senator murrays 2004 amendment went defeat opposed antiabortionists felt measure addressing abuse women deflected attention rep george nethercutt rwash called ultimate victims domestic violence fetuses us chamber commerce likewise opposed amendment grounds businesses might find commonsense provisions expensive among proposals extend job protection familyleave privileges women forced take refuge shelters called testify court thus interrupting vicious cycle batterers force women lose jobs trapping financial dependence tormentors murray countered chambers claims data showing cost business domestic abuse cost accrues almost 8 million lost workdays 3 5 billion health care annually mention price extra security since 75 percent abused women harassed workplaces 20 percent workplace homicides committed intimate partners citizens tacoma know accounting domestic violence goes deeper dollars cents injury inflicted women battered grim epicenter wider circles damageto children extended families economy blessed womens labor society grotesquely disfigured inability women rely minimum prerequisite free useful life safety ones everyday dealings womans safety least sparrow healthy civic life anytime come work black eye must pull children school take refuge shelter made tremble turning doorknob step stair society weeps nation would well learn lesson tacoma seize political season opportunity remove domestic violence hidden realm private make task solving problem every american | 526 |
<p />
<p>This week the United Nations Development Programme launched a <a type="external" href="">new report</a> on human development in the Arab world. The report, which doesn’t make happy reading, found a big “knowledge gap” between Arabs and the rest of the world. It also points out that the <a href="http://www.ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=20714" type="external">U.S. war on terror</a> is making that gap even harder to bridge.</p>
<p>The report, titled “Arab Human Development Report 2003: Building a Knowledge Society,” was published by the UNDP and co-sponsored by the Arab Fund for Social Development and was released in a ceremony attended by leading Arab intellectuals and opinion leaders and hosted by Jordan. It’s the second of a series of four reports on Arab development. <a type="external" href="">The first,</a> released last year, found the region of 270 million inhabitants held back by three chief factors: a lack of freedom, a dearth of opportunities for women, and poor access to education and knowledge.</p>
<p>The new report focuses primarily on the third issue, knowledge; specifically, the current state of learning and intellectual inquiry in the Arab world. Among its <a type="external" href="">bleak findings:</a> only 53 newspapers are sold per 1,000 people in the Arab countries, compared with 285 in developed countries; only 1.6 percent of the Arab population has Internet access; and there are just 18 computers per 1,000 people compared with global average of 78.3; Just 4.4 translated books per 1 million people were published between 1980 and 1985. The corresponding rate for Hungary was 519 books per 1 million people, and in Spain, 920 books; The number of scientists and engineers working in research and development is 371 per 1 million people, compared with the global rate of 979.</p>
<p>And the consequences are far-reaching. “Knowledge increasingly defines the line between wealth and poverty, between capability and powerlessness and between human fulfilment and frustration,” said Dr. Rima Khalaf, U.N. Assistant Secretary-General and Director of the Regional Bureau for Arab States in UNDP. One of the most telling stats pointing to stagnation in the Arab world is that the combined G.D.P. of the 22 Arab states is less than that of a single country — Spain.</p>
<p>The authors of the report say the <a type="external" href="">lessons of the U.N.’s first look at Arab development</a> last year haven’t yet been heeded:</p>
<p>“AHDR 2002 challenged the Arab world to overcome three cardinal obstacles to human development posed by widening gaps in freedom, women’s empowerment and knowledge across the region. “Despite the presence of significant human capital in the region, AHDR 2003 concludes that disabling constraints hamper the acquisition, diffusion and production of knowledge in Arab societies. This human capital, under more promising conditions, could offer a substantial base for an Arab knowledge renaissance.”</p>
<p>Jordanian Foreign Minister Marwan Muasher said Arab countries <a type="external" href="">should not respond defensively</a> to the report’s findings. “We have to work courageously and with commitment to put right what is clearly wrong and build on our positive achievements,” he said.</p>
<p>It wasn’t always like this. In the Middle Ages, Arabs were at the forefront of intellectual discovery. One of the most widely cited reasons for the decline in knowledge is that the rigid structure of government in many Arab countries stifles independent thought and innovation. <a type="external" href="">Thomas Friedman</a> of the New York Times has this to say:</p>
<p>“[The report’s authors] are convinced that Islam has a long history of absorbing knowledge. But in the modern era an unholy alliance between repressive Arab regimes and certain conservative Muslim scholars has led to the domination of certain interpretations of Islam that serve the governments but are hostile to human development-particularly freedom of thought, women’s empowerment and the accountability of governments to their people.”</p>
<p>Some critics say the report is too timid in assigning blame for the state of Arab development. <a type="external" href="">Chibli Mallat</a>, professor of international law at St. Joseph University in Beirut says rulers deserve more criticism:</p>
<p>“Like the first report, it lacks the courage to question individual rulers and their apparatus of repression. The greatest change in the region, the collapse of Saddam Hussein, is not addressed even though it represents the first governmental change [in the Arab world] in 20 years.”</p>
<p>There have been some <a type="external" href="">improvements</a>showing that Arab countries are catching up with the modern era, at least as far as economic and political reforms are concerned. Lately Bahrain held its first elections in 30 years, while Saudi Arabia has made strides in divorcing its educational agenda from government and has just announced it will hold <a href="/news/dailymojo/2003/42/we_591_05a.html" type="external">municipal elections for the first time.</a></p>
<p>But there’s more than enough blame to go around beyond the region. Part of the problem is that the Arab world needs to “connect” with other nations that are more socially and politically developed. The U.S. clampdown on visas to Arabs after 9/11 has prevented many Arabs from studying in U.S. universities. The report shows that the number of Arab students in the U.S. dropped by 30 percent between 1999 and 2002. In an interview with CNN, Thomas Friedman touches on this:</p>
<p>“Well, there’s no question that since 9-11 the United States has adopted a very Draconian approach to visas. If you’re a young Arab male, age 21, and your name is Mohammad, and you want to come study at the American University in Washington or UCLA in Los Angeles, you’re going to have a very hard time. You’re going to be very closely scrutinized.”</p>
<p>Not that all Arabs necessarilywant to be associated with the U.S. and other Western cultures. <a type="external" href="">Dr. Rima Khalaf</a>, who co-authored the report, suggests that the U.S. occupation of Iraq has only furthered Arab isolation from clusters of knowledge, because it has fostered rejection of the West.</p>
<p>So much for what’s wrong with the Arab world. What about constructive suggestions? The Christian Science Monitor says the report is “long on criticism but <a type="external" href="">short on ideas</a> to solve the woes besetting the Arab world.”</p>
<p>What the report’s authors do offer the region are five strategic steps, dubbed the “five pillars”:</p>
<p>1) Guaranteeing the key freedoms of opinion, speech and assembly through democratic governance, supported by a legal framework</p>
<p>2) Universal access to high quality education</p>
<p>3) Making science an integral part of Arab societies, encouraging research and development and joining the information revolution</p>
<p>4) Shifting rapidly towards knowledge-based and value-added production</p>
<p>5)Developing an authentic, broadminded and enlightened Arab knowledge model</p>
<p>This is Daily way too <a type="external" href="">vague for some</a>, as for this editorialist at Lebanon’s Daily Star:</p>
<p>“The foundation has been set for considerable progress on a wide variety of problems, but that work can only begin when the aforementioned analysis is accompanied by concrete suggestions on how to remedy the weaknesses it identifies. Those who know the Arab world know that the report is a faithful depiction of the situation in many areas…But such people also know that the documentÕs contents are nothing new: Generations of Arabs have complained about the same problems. The report and its predecessor have been abundantly helpful by quantifying a series of anecdotes, but the next step remains to be taken.”</p>
<p>And despite claims that U.S. forces in Iraq are “freeing” the Iraqi people, its not at all clear that American foreign policy is conducive to the kind of changes called for in the report. <a type="external" href="">Friedman</a>writes, “those who worked on this report do not believe in the Iraq-war model of political change. They prefer evolution from within.” The U.S. way, may not necessary be the best way to provoke change, writes Friedman:</p>
<p>“What should America’s response to all this be? We should stop talking about “terrorism” and W.M.D. and make clear that we’re in Iraq for one reason: to help Iraqis implement the Arab Human Development Reports, so the war of ideas can be fought from within. Then we should get out of the way.”</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | week united nations development programme launched new report human development arab world report doesnt make happy reading found big knowledge gap arabs rest world also points us war terror making gap even harder bridge report titled arab human development report 2003 building knowledge society published undp cosponsored arab fund social development released ceremony attended leading arab intellectuals opinion leaders hosted jordan second series four reports arab development first released last year found region 270 million inhabitants held back three chief factors lack freedom dearth opportunities women poor access education knowledge new report focuses primarily third issue knowledge specifically current state learning intellectual inquiry arab world among bleak findings 53 newspapers sold per 1000 people arab countries compared 285 developed countries 16 percent arab population internet access 18 computers per 1000 people compared global average 783 44 translated books per 1 million people published 1980 1985 corresponding rate hungary 519 books per 1 million people spain 920 books number scientists engineers working research development 371 per 1 million people compared global rate 979 consequences farreaching knowledge increasingly defines line wealth poverty capability powerlessness human fulfilment frustration said dr rima khalaf un assistant secretarygeneral director regional bureau arab states undp one telling stats pointing stagnation arab world combined gdp 22 arab states less single country spain authors report say lessons uns first look arab development last year havent yet heeded ahdr 2002 challenged arab world overcome three cardinal obstacles human development posed widening gaps freedom womens empowerment knowledge across region despite presence significant human capital region ahdr 2003 concludes disabling constraints hamper acquisition diffusion production knowledge arab societies human capital promising conditions could offer substantial base arab knowledge renaissance jordanian foreign minister marwan muasher said arab countries respond defensively reports findings work courageously commitment put right clearly wrong build positive achievements said wasnt always like middle ages arabs forefront intellectual discovery one widely cited reasons decline knowledge rigid structure government many arab countries stifles independent thought innovation thomas friedman new york times say reports authors convinced islam long history absorbing knowledge modern era unholy alliance repressive arab regimes certain conservative muslim scholars led domination certain interpretations islam serve governments hostile human developmentparticularly freedom thought womens empowerment accountability governments people critics say report timid assigning blame state arab development chibli mallat professor international law st joseph university beirut says rulers deserve criticism like first report lacks courage question individual rulers apparatus repression greatest change region collapse saddam hussein addressed even though represents first governmental change arab world 20 years improvementsshowing arab countries catching modern era least far economic political reforms concerned lately bahrain held first elections 30 years saudi arabia made strides divorcing educational agenda government announced hold municipal elections first time theres enough blame go around beyond region part problem arab world needs connect nations socially politically developed us clampdown visas arabs 911 prevented many arabs studying us universities report shows number arab students us dropped 30 percent 1999 2002 interview cnn thomas friedman touches well theres question since 911 united states adopted draconian approach visas youre young arab male age 21 name mohammad want come study american university washington ucla los angeles youre going hard time youre going closely scrutinized arabs necessarilywant associated us western cultures dr rima khalaf coauthored report suggests us occupation iraq furthered arab isolation clusters knowledge fostered rejection west much whats wrong arab world constructive suggestions christian science monitor says report long criticism short ideas solve woes besetting arab world reports authors offer region five strategic steps dubbed five pillars 1 guaranteeing key freedoms opinion speech assembly democratic governance supported legal framework 2 universal access high quality education 3 making science integral part arab societies encouraging research development joining information revolution 4 shifting rapidly towards knowledgebased valueadded production 5developing authentic broadminded enlightened arab knowledge model daily way vague editorialist lebanons daily star foundation set considerable progress wide variety problems work begin aforementioned analysis accompanied concrete suggestions remedy weaknesses identifies know arab world know report faithful depiction situation many areasbut people also know documentÕs contents nothing new generations arabs complained problems report predecessor abundantly helpful quantifying series anecdotes next step remains taken despite claims us forces iraq freeing iraqi people clear american foreign policy conducive kind changes called report friedmanwrites worked report believe iraqwar model political change prefer evolution within us way may necessary best way provoke change writes friedman americas response stop talking terrorism wmd make clear iraq one reason help iraqis implement arab human development reports war ideas fought within get way | 746 |
<p>By William Astore, TomDispatchThis piece originally appeared at <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175493/tomgram%3A_william_astore%2C_confessions_of_a_recovering_weapons_addict/#more" type="external">TomDispatch</a>.</p>
<p>Perhaps you’ve heard of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CW5GRilRyE" type="external">“Makin’ Thunderbirds,”</a> a hard-bitten rock &amp; roll song by Bob Seger that I listened to 30 years ago while in college. It’s about auto workers back in 1955 who were “young and proud” to be making Ford Thunderbirds. But in the early 1980s, Seger sings, “the plants have changed and you’re lucky if you work.” Seger caught the reality of an American manufacturing infrastructure that was seriously eroding as skilled and good-paying union jobs were cut or sent overseas, rarely to be seen again in these parts.</p>
<p>If the U.S. auto industry has recently shown sparks of new life (though we’re not making T-Birds or Mercuries or Oldsmobiles or Pontiacs or Saturns anymore), there is one form of manufacturing in which America is still dominant. When it comes to weaponry, to paraphrase Seger, we’re still young and proud and makin’ Predators and Reapers (as in unmanned aerial vehicles, or <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175489/" type="external">drones</a>) and Eagles and Fighting Falcons (as in F-15 and F-16 combat jets), and outfitting them with the deadliest of weapons. In this market niche, we’re still the envy of the world.</p>
<p>Yes, we’re the world’s foremost “merchants of death,” the title of a best-selling exposé of the international arms trade published to acclaim in the U.S. in 1934. Back then, most Americans saw themselves as war-avoiders rather than as war-profiteers. The evil war-profiteers were mainly European arms makers like Germany’s Krupp, France’s Schneider, or Britain’s Vickers.</p>
<p />
<p>Not that America didn’t have its own arms merchants. As the authors of Merchants of Death noted, early on our country demonstrated a “Yankee propensity for extracting novel death-dealing knickknacks from [our] peddler’s pack.” Amazingly, the <a href="http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/merchants_of_death.htm" type="external">Nye Committee in the U.S. Senate</a> devoted 93 hearings from 1934 to 1936 to exposing America’s own “greedy munitions interests.” Even in those desperate depression days, a desire for profit and jobs was balanced by a strong sense of unease at this deadly trade, an unease reinforced by the horrors of and <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175387/tomgram%3A_adam_hochschild,_war_redux" type="external">hecatombs of dead</a> from the First World War.</p>
<p>We are uneasy no more. Today we take great pride (or at least have no shame) in being by far the world’s number one arms-exporting nation. A few statistics bear this out. From 2006 to 2010, the U.S. accounted for <a href="http://www.sipri.org/googlemaps/at_top_20_exp_map.html" type="external">nearly one-third</a> of the world’s arms exports, easily surpassing a resurgent Russia in the “Lords of War” race. Despite a decline in global arms sales in 2010 due to recessionary pressures, the U.S. increased its market share, accounting for <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/24/world/global-arms-sales-dropped-sharply-in-2010-study-finds.html?_r=1" type="external">a whopping 53%</a> of the trade that year. Last year saw the U.S. on pace to deliver <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-11/u-s-projects-over-46-billion-in-foreign-arms-sales-in-2011.html" type="external">more than $46 billion</a> in foreign arms sales. Who says America isn’t number one anymore?</p>
<p>For a shopping list of our arms trades, try searching the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute <a href="http://armstrade.sipri.org/armstrade/page/trade_register.php" type="external">database for arms exports and imports</a>. It reveals that, in 2010, the U.S. exported “major conventional weapons” to 62 countries, from Afghanistan to Yemen, and weapons platforms ranging from F-15, F-16, and F-18 combat jets to M1 Abrams main battle tanks to Cobra attack helicopters (sent to our Pakistani comrades) to guided missiles in all flavors, colors, and sizes: AAMs, PGMs, SAMs, TOWs — a veritable alphabet soup of missile acronyms. Never mind their specific meaning: they’re all designed to blow things up; they’re all designed to kill.</p>
<p>Rarely debated in Congress or in U.S. media outlets is the wisdom or morality of these arms deals. During the quiet last days of December 2011, in separate announcements whose timing could not have been accidental, the Obama Administration expressed its intent to sell <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/29/world/middleeast/us-military-sales-to-iraq-raise-concerns.html" type="external">nearly $11 billion in arms</a> to Iraq, including Abrams tanks and F-16 fighter-bombers, and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/30/world/middleeast/with-30-billion-arms-deal-united-states-bolsters-ties-to-saudi-arabia.html" type="external">nearly $30 billion in F-15 fighter jets</a> to Saudi Arabia, part of a larger, $60 billion arms package for the Saudis. Few in Congress oppose such arms deals since defense contractors provide jobs in their districts — and <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/1818/chalmers_johnson_the_military-industrial_man" type="external">ready donations</a> to Congressional campaigns.</p>
<p>Let’s pause to consider what such a weapons deal implies for Iraq. Firstly, Iraq only “needs” advanced tanks and fighter jets because we destroyed their previous generation of the same, whether in 1991 during Desert Shield/Storm or in 2003 during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Secondly, Iraq “needs” such powerful conventional weaponry ostensibly to deter an invasion by Iran, yet the current government in Baghdad is closely aligned with Iran, courtesy of our invasion in 2003 and the botched occupation that followed. Thirdly, despite its “needs,” the Iraqi military is nowhere near ready to field and maintain such advanced weaponry, at least without sustained training and logistical support provided by the U.S. military.As <a href="http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/article.asp?id=44" type="external">one U.S. Air Force officer</a> who served as an advisor to the fledging Iraqi Air Force, or IqAF, recently worried:</p>
<p>“Will the IqAF be able to refuel its own aircraft? Can the Iraqi military offer adequate force protection and security for its bases? Can the IqAF provide airfield management services at its bases as they return to Iraqi control after eight years under US direction? Can the IqAF ensure simple power generation to keep facilities operating? Will the IqAF be able to develop and retain its airmen?… Only time will tell if we left [Iraq] too early; nevertheless, even without a renewed security agreement, the USAF can continue to stand alongside the IqAF.”</p>
<p>Put bluntly: We doubt the Iraqis are ready to field and fly American-built F-16s, but we’re going to sell them to them anyway. And if past history is a guide, if the Iraqis ever turn these planes against us, we’ll blow them up or shoot them down — and then (hopefully) sell them some more.</p>
<p>Our Best Arms Customer</p>
<p>Let’s face it: the weapons we sell to others pale in comparison to the weapons we sell to ourselves. In the market for deadly weapons, we are our own best customer. Americans have a love affair with them, the more high-tech and expensive, the better. I should know. After all, I’m a recovering weapons addict.</p>
<p>Well into my teen years, I was fascinated by military hardware. I built models of what were then the latest U.S. warplanes: the A-10, the F-4, the F-14, -15, and -16, the B-1, and many others. I read Aviation Week and Space Technology at my local library to keep track of the newest developments in military technology. Not surprisingly, perhaps, I went on to major in mechanical engineering in college and entered the Air Force as a developmental engineer.</p>
<p>Enamored as I was by roaring afterburners and sleek weaponry, I also began to read books like <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Fallows" type="external">James Fallows’s</a> National Defense (1981) among other early critiques of the Carter and Reagan defense buildup, as well as the slyly subversive and always insightful Augustine’s Laws (1986) by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Ralph_Augustine" type="external">Norman Augustine</a>, later the CEO of Martin Marietta and Lockheed Martin. That and my own experience in the Air Force alerted me to the billions of dollars we were devoting to high-tech weaponry with ever-ballooning price tags but questionable utility.</p>
<p>Perhaps the best example of the persistence of this phenomenon is the <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/m/military_aircraft/f35_airplane/index.html" type="external">F-35 Lightning II</a>. Produced by Lockheed Martin, the F-35 was intended to be an “affordable” fighter-bomber (at roughly $50 million per copy), a perfect complement to the much more expensive F-22 “air superiority” Raptor. But the usual delays, cost overruns, technical glitches, and changes in requirements have driven the price tag of the F-35 up to $160 million per plane, assuming the U.S. military persists in its plans to buy 2,400 of them. (If the Pentagon decides to buy fewer, the cost-per-plane will soar into the F-22 range.) By recent estimates the F-35 will now cost U.S. taxpayers (you and me, that is) <a href="http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/10/26/3476421/pentagon-takes-a-harder-line-with.html" type="external">at least $382 billion</a> for its development and production run. Such a sum for a single weapons system is vast enough to be hard to fathom. It would, for instance, easily fund all <a href="http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/index.html" type="external">federal government spending on education</a> for the next five years.</p>
<p>The escalating cost of the F-35 recalls the most famous of Norman Augustine’s irreverent laws: “In the year 2054,” he wrote back in the early 1980s, “the entire defense budget will [suffice to] purchase just one aircraft.” But the deeper question is whether our military even needs the F-35, a question that’s rarely asked and never seriously entertained, at least by Congress, whose philosophy on weaponry is much like King Lear’s: “O, reason not the need.”</p>
<p>But let’s reason the need in purely military terms. These days, the Air Force is turning increasingly to <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175489/tomgram%3A_nick_turse%2C_drone_disasters_/" type="external">unmanned drones</a>. Meanwhile, plenty of perfectly good and serviceable “platforms” remain for attack and close air support missions, from F-16s and F-18s in the Air Force and Navy to Apache helicopters in the Army. And while many of our existing combat jets may be nearing the limits of airframe integrity, there’s nothing stopping the U.S. military from producing updated versions of the same. Heck, this is precisely what we’re hawking to the Saudis — updated versions of the F-15, developed in the 1970s.Because of sheer cost, it’s likely we’ll buy fewer F-35s than our military wants but many more than we actually need. We’ll do so because Weapons ‘R’ Us. Because building ultra-expensive combat jets is one of the few high-tech industries we haven’t exported (due to national security and secrecy concerns), and thus one of the few industries in the U.S. that still supports high-paying manufacturing jobs with decent employee benefits. And who can argue with that?</p>
<p>The Ultimate Cost of Our Merchandise of Death</p>
<p>Clearly, the U.S. has grabbed the brass ring of the global arms trade. When it comes to investing in militaries and weaponry, no country can match us. We are supreme. And despite talk of modest cuts to the Pentagon budget over the next decade, it will, <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/01/05/remarks-president-defense-strategic-review" type="external">according to</a> President Obama, continue to grow, which means that in weapons terms the future remains bright. After all, Pentagon spending on research and development stands at $81.4 billion, accounting for an <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/us/a-hidden-cost-of-military-cuts-could-be-invention-and-its-industries.html" type="external">astonishing 55%</a> of all federal spending on R&amp;D and leaving plenty of opportunity to develop our next generation of <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175155" type="external">wonder weapons</a>.</p>
<p>But at what cost to ourselves and the rest of the world? We’ve become the suppliers of weaponry to the planet’s hotspots. And those weapons deliveries (and the training and support missions that go with them) tend to make those spots hotter still — as in hot lead.</p>
<p>As a country, we seem to have a teenager’s fascination with military hardware, an addiction that’s driving us to bust our own national budgetary allowance. At the same time, we sell weapons the way teenage punks sell fireworks to younger kids: for profit and with little regard for how they might be used.</p>
<p>Sixty years ago, it <a href="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Charles_Erwin_Wilson" type="external">was said</a> that what’s good for General Motors is good for America. In 1955, as Bob Seger sang, we were young and strong and makin’ Thunderbirds. But today we’re playing a new tune with new lyrics: what’s good for Lockheed Martin or Boeing or [insert major-defense-contractor-of-your-choice here] is good for America.</p>
<p>How far we’ve come since the 1950s!</p>
<p>William J. Astore, a retired lieutenant colonel (USAF), is a <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/archive/175477/william_astore_fighting_1%25_wars" type="external">TomDispatch regular</a>. To listen to Timothy MacBain’s latest Tomcast audio interview in which Astore discusses the thrill of weaponry in pop culture and how it faded for him, click <a href="http://tomdispatch.blogspot.com/2012/01/weapons-r-us.html" type="external">here</a>, or download it to your iPod <a href="http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/tomcast-from-tomdispatch-com/id357095817" type="external">here</a>.</p>
<p>Follow TomDispatch on Twitter @TomDispatch and join us on <a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/TomDispatchcom/140974045945945?ref=ts" type="external">Facebook</a>.</p> | true | 4 | william astore tomdispatchthis piece originally appeared tomdispatch perhaps youve heard makin thunderbirds hardbitten rock amp roll song bob seger listened 30 years ago college auto workers back 1955 young proud making ford thunderbirds early 1980s seger sings plants changed youre lucky work seger caught reality american manufacturing infrastructure seriously eroding skilled goodpaying union jobs cut sent overseas rarely seen parts us auto industry recently shown sparks new life though making tbirds mercuries oldsmobiles pontiacs saturns anymore one form manufacturing america still dominant comes weaponry paraphrase seger still young proud makin predators reapers unmanned aerial vehicles drones eagles fighting falcons f15 f16 combat jets outfitting deadliest weapons market niche still envy world yes worlds foremost merchants death title bestselling exposé international arms trade published acclaim us 1934 back americans saw waravoiders rather warprofiteers evil warprofiteers mainly european arms makers like germanys krupp frances schneider britains vickers america didnt arms merchants authors merchants death noted early country demonstrated yankee propensity extracting novel deathdealing knickknacks peddlers pack amazingly nye committee us senate devoted 93 hearings 1934 1936 exposing americas greedy munitions interests even desperate depression days desire profit jobs balanced strong sense unease deadly trade unease reinforced horrors hecatombs dead first world war uneasy today take great pride least shame far worlds number one armsexporting nation statistics bear 2006 2010 us accounted nearly onethird worlds arms exports easily surpassing resurgent russia lords war race despite decline global arms sales 2010 due recessionary pressures us increased market share accounting whopping 53 trade year last year saw us pace deliver 46 billion foreign arms sales says america isnt number one anymore shopping list arms trades try searching stockholm international peace research institute database arms exports imports reveals 2010 us exported major conventional weapons 62 countries afghanistan yemen weapons platforms ranging f15 f16 f18 combat jets m1 abrams main battle tanks cobra attack helicopters sent pakistani comrades guided missiles flavors colors sizes aams pgms sams tows veritable alphabet soup missile acronyms never mind specific meaning theyre designed blow things theyre designed kill rarely debated congress us media outlets wisdom morality arms deals quiet last days december 2011 separate announcements whose timing could accidental obama administration expressed intent sell nearly 11 billion arms iraq including abrams tanks f16 fighterbombers nearly 30 billion f15 fighter jets saudi arabia part larger 60 billion arms package saudis congress oppose arms deals since defense contractors provide jobs districts ready donations congressional campaigns lets pause consider weapons deal implies iraq firstly iraq needs advanced tanks fighter jets destroyed previous generation whether 1991 desert shieldstorm 2003 operation iraqi freedom secondly iraq needs powerful conventional weaponry ostensibly deter invasion iran yet current government baghdad closely aligned iran courtesy invasion 2003 botched occupation followed thirdly despite needs iraqi military nowhere near ready field maintain advanced weaponry least without sustained training logistical support provided us militaryas one us air force officer served advisor fledging iraqi air force iqaf recently worried iqaf able refuel aircraft iraqi military offer adequate force protection security bases iqaf provide airfield management services bases return iraqi control eight years us direction iqaf ensure simple power generation keep facilities operating iqaf able develop retain airmen time tell left iraq early nevertheless even without renewed security agreement usaf continue stand alongside iqaf put bluntly doubt iraqis ready field fly americanbuilt f16s going sell anyway past history guide iraqis ever turn planes us well blow shoot hopefully sell best arms customer lets face weapons sell others pale comparison weapons sell market deadly weapons best customer americans love affair hightech expensive better know im recovering weapons addict well teen years fascinated military hardware built models latest us warplanes a10 f4 f14 15 16 b1 many others read aviation week space technology local library keep track newest developments military technology surprisingly perhaps went major mechanical engineering college entered air force developmental engineer enamored roaring afterburners sleek weaponry also began read books like james fallowss national defense 1981 among early critiques carter reagan defense buildup well slyly subversive always insightful augustines laws 1986 norman augustine later ceo martin marietta lockheed martin experience air force alerted billions dollars devoting hightech weaponry everballooning price tags questionable utility perhaps best example persistence phenomenon f35 lightning ii produced lockheed martin f35 intended affordable fighterbomber roughly 50 million per copy perfect complement much expensive f22 air superiority raptor usual delays cost overruns technical glitches changes requirements driven price tag f35 160 million per plane assuming us military persists plans buy 2400 pentagon decides buy fewer costperplane soar f22 range recent estimates f35 cost us taxpayers least 382 billion development production run sum single weapons system vast enough hard fathom would instance easily fund federal government spending education next five years escalating cost f35 recalls famous norman augustines irreverent laws year 2054 wrote back early 1980s entire defense budget suffice purchase one aircraft deeper question whether military even needs f35 question thats rarely asked never seriously entertained least congress whose philosophy weaponry much like king lears reason need lets reason need purely military terms days air force turning increasingly unmanned drones meanwhile plenty perfectly good serviceable platforms remain attack close air support missions f16s f18s air force navy apache helicopters army many existing combat jets may nearing limits airframe integrity theres nothing stopping us military producing updated versions heck precisely hawking saudis updated versions f15 developed 1970sbecause sheer cost likely well buy fewer f35s military wants many actually need well weapons r us building ultraexpensive combat jets one hightech industries havent exported due national security secrecy concerns thus one industries us still supports highpaying manufacturing jobs decent employee benefits argue ultimate cost merchandise death clearly us grabbed brass ring global arms trade comes investing militaries weaponry country match us supreme despite talk modest cuts pentagon budget next decade according president obama continue grow means weapons terms future remains bright pentagon spending research development stands 814 billion accounting astonishing 55 federal spending rampd leaving plenty opportunity develop next generation wonder weapons cost rest world weve become suppliers weaponry planets hotspots weapons deliveries training support missions go tend make spots hotter still hot lead country seem teenagers fascination military hardware addiction thats driving us bust national budgetary allowance time sell weapons way teenage punks sell fireworks younger kids profit little regard might used sixty years ago said whats good general motors good america 1955 bob seger sang young strong makin thunderbirds today playing new tune new lyrics whats good lockheed martin boeing insert majordefensecontractorofyourchoice good america far weve come since 1950s william j astore retired lieutenant colonel usaf tomdispatch regular listen timothy macbains latest tomcast audio interview astore discusses thrill weaponry pop culture faded click download ipod follow tomdispatch twitter tomdispatch join us facebook | 1,108 |
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p>It would be an understatement to say that the tactics of gun rights activists have been backfiring of late. The showdown has taken place foremost in Texas, where in recent months groups such as Open Carry Texas have conducted provocative demonstrations in which armed men exercise their right under state law to carry semi-automatic rifles in public. No fewer than five national food and beverage chains have now told them to get rid of their guns or get lost, including Starbucks, Wendy’s, Applebees, Jack in the Box, and <a href="" type="internal">Chipotle</a>.</p>
<p>And now Chili’s Grill &amp; Bar and Sonic have effectively joined the list: Two videos posted on YouTube on May 19 by the San Antonio chapter of Open Carry Texas—since removed from public view but obtained by Mother Jones—show its armed members being refused service at both restaurants. The two companies have not made official statements on open carry but have since indicated that they are reviewing their policies.&#160;[See <a href="#sonic" type="external">updates below</a>.] From the nervous and angry reactions of some patrons to comments from some of the gun activists themselves, it’s not difficult to see why these spectacles haven’t been winning many people over.</p>
<p>When a young woman approaches the group in Chili’s and expresses her dismay, a guy with an assault rifle strapped across his back offers her a flyer. “Um actually, there’s children here,” she replies, “and you’re a dumbass.” As she walks away one member of the group comments mockingly, “Yes, I’m a dumbass,” and then says of her, “must be Moms Demand Action,” referring to the national gun reform group.</p>
<p>Open Carry Texas’ hostility toward <a href="" type="internal">Moms Demand Action</a>, which has pressured corporations over the demonstrations using social-media campaigns, has been displayed in more disturbing ways. As I detailed in a recent investigation, members of Open Carry Texas have been involved in <a href="" type="internal">harassment, bullying, and degradation of women</a>.</p>
<p>In the Sonic video, as the thwarted gun group lingers in an adjacent parking lot, one member says: “I just wish I had my kids in there when that one dumb chick come up and started rattin’ her mouth.”</p>
<p>Though probably few if any patrons regularly worry about their personal safety as they order Bacon Ranch Quesadillas or double cheeseburgers and shakes, gun activists in both videos comment about the apparent danger of not allowing open carrying on the premises. One says he told his daughter, “It’s not safe to be here—we gotta go,” while another comments, “This Chili’s is no longer the safest Chili’s to eat at.”</p>
<p />
<p />
<p>Open Carry Texas and other gun groups, whose common goal is legalizing the open carrying of handguns in their state, evidently have concluded that none of this is helping their cause. On Friday, four of the groups <a href="http://opencarrytexas.wordpress.com/2014/05/23/joint-statement-on-oc-of-long-arms/" type="external">released a joint statement</a> asking supporters to retreat from such tactics. “We have decided the prudent path, to further our goals, is to immediately cease taking long guns into corporate businesses unless invited,” the statement said.</p>
<p>For open carrying going forward, their new “unified protocol and&#160;general policy” advises supporters to avoid corporate businesses altogether, and not to post pictures if they do get permission and decide to go in. “If at all possible,” it says, “keep to local small businesses that are 2A friendly.”</p>
<p>It remains to be seen whether the rank and file will stand down. As one Texas commentator focused on open carry noted about the move: “As expected there are those who object to this new policy because they feel it is a form of surrender.”</p>
<p>Update May 27, 2014, 6:15 p.m. EDT: Patric Lenow, VP of media relations at Sonic, told Mother Jones: “There is no [gun] policy at this point; we’ve traditionally relied on local and state laws. We see the situation has changed and there’s new tactics being employed and businesses are being pulled into this debate. That’s really what prompts the need to consider it.” Lenow did not say specifically when the company would reach a decision on a gun policy, but said that it would be “in the month of June, certainly.”</p>
<p>Update 2, May 28, 2014, 1:45 p.m. EDT: A spokesperson for <a href="http://www.brinker.com/company/restaurantbrand.asp" type="external">Brinker International</a>, the corporate parent of Chili’s, told Mother Jones: “Given the recent attention to open carry laws, we continue to evaluate [our] policy to ensure we provide a safe environment for our guests and team members.” Moreover, the activists who brought their weapons into Chili’s were pushing the boundaries of state law and putting the restaurant in jeopardy: “Long guns are not permitted in our restaurants based on regulation from the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission,” the spokesperson said, “which prohibits a business that is licensed to sell or serve alcoholic beverages from allowing shotguns or rifles into the building.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.tabc.state.tx.us/home/press_releases/2013/20130906.asp" type="external">According to the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission</a>: “If an individual does choose to carry a rifle or shotgun into a TABC-licensed business, the individual is placing the business owner’s TABC license at risk….a business owner may ask a patron to leave the premises. If the patron refuses, that individual may be subject to criminal trespassing charges under <a href="http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.30.htm#30.05" type="external">Texas Penal Code Section 30.05</a>.”</p>
<p>Update 3, May 30, 2014, 4:15 p.m. EDT: Both Sonic and Brinker International/Chili’s have now announced official positions on the issue: A Sonic spokesperson said the company is “asking that customers refrain from bringing guns onto our patios or into our indoor dining areas.” A Brinker International/Chili’s spokesperson said, “We recognize that the open carry of firearms in restaurants creates an uncomfortable atmosphere and is not permitted under many local liquor laws. So, we kindly ask that guests refrain from openly carrying firearms into our restaurants and we will continue to follow state and local laws on this issue.”</p>
<p>Additional reporting contributed by <a href="" type="internal">Julia Lurie</a>.</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | would understatement say tactics gun rights activists backfiring late showdown taken place foremost texas recent months groups open carry texas conducted provocative demonstrations armed men exercise right state law carry semiautomatic rifles public fewer five national food beverage chains told get rid guns get lost including starbucks wendys applebees jack box chipotle chilis grill amp bar sonic effectively joined list two videos posted youtube may 19 san antonio chapter open carry texassince removed public view obtained mother jonesshow armed members refused service restaurants two companies made official statements open carry since indicated reviewing policies160see updates nervous angry reactions patrons comments gun activists difficult see spectacles havent winning many people young woman approaches group chilis expresses dismay guy assault rifle strapped across back offers flyer um actually theres children replies youre dumbass walks away one member group comments mockingly yes im dumbass says must moms demand action referring national gun reform group open carry texas hostility toward moms demand action pressured corporations demonstrations using socialmedia campaigns displayed disturbing ways detailed recent investigation members open carry texas involved harassment bullying degradation women sonic video thwarted gun group lingers adjacent parking lot one member says wish kids one dumb chick come started rattin mouth though probably patrons regularly worry personal safety order bacon ranch quesadillas double cheeseburgers shakes gun activists videos comment apparent danger allowing open carrying premises one says told daughter safe herewe got ta go another comments chilis longer safest chilis eat open carry texas gun groups whose common goal legalizing open carrying handguns state evidently concluded none helping cause friday four groups released joint statement asking supporters retreat tactics decided prudent path goals immediately cease taking long guns corporate businesses unless invited statement said open carrying going forward new unified protocol and160general policy advises supporters avoid corporate businesses altogether post pictures get permission decide go possible says keep local small businesses 2a friendly remains seen whether rank file stand one texas commentator focused open carry noted move expected object new policy feel form surrender update may 27 2014 615 pm edt patric lenow vp media relations sonic told mother jones gun policy point weve traditionally relied local state laws see situation changed theres new tactics employed businesses pulled debate thats really prompts need consider lenow say specifically company would reach decision gun policy said would month june certainly update 2 may 28 2014 145 pm edt spokesperson brinker international corporate parent chilis told mother jones given recent attention open carry laws continue evaluate policy ensure provide safe environment guests team members moreover activists brought weapons chilis pushing boundaries state law putting restaurant jeopardy long guns permitted restaurants based regulation texas alcoholic beverage commission spokesperson said prohibits business licensed sell serve alcoholic beverages allowing shotguns rifles building according texas alcoholic beverage commission individual choose carry rifle shotgun tabclicensed business individual placing business owners tabc license riska business owner may ask patron leave premises patron refuses individual may subject criminal trespassing charges texas penal code section 3005 update 3 may 30 2014 415 pm edt sonic brinker internationalchilis announced official positions issue sonic spokesperson said company asking customers refrain bringing guns onto patios indoor dining areas brinker internationalchilis spokesperson said recognize open carry firearms restaurants creates uncomfortable atmosphere permitted many local liquor laws kindly ask guests refrain openly carrying firearms restaurants continue follow state local laws issue additional reporting contributed julia lurie | 560 |
<p>The past week has been a wild roller-coaster ride in and out of Southern African ruling-party politics, down the troughs of world capitalism, and up the peaks of radical social activism. Glancing around the region and world from those peaks, we can see quite a way further than usual.</p>
<p>Looking first to South Africa, Saturday’s dumping of president Thabo Mbeki by Jacob Zuma – president of the African National Congress – and his temporary replacement (until next April’s election) by ANC deputy president Kgalema Motlanthe, was an excellent reflection of ruling elite fragility in neoliberal regimes. Some of Mbeki’s main supporters, including Mbhazima Shilowa, the former trade union leader and now provincial government leader in the economic heartland of Johannesburg – are apparently considering the launch of a competing party.</p>
<p>Likewise, the inability to cement a working power-sharing deal across the river in Zimbabwe confirms how hard elite factions will fight over the crumbs of even a quick-shrinking state. These are interconnected problems, and should make world elites rather nervous.</p>
<p>Their favorite Zimbabwean, Morgan Tsvangirai, may feel the need to follow their austerity instructions. But to get the billions of dollars promised in coming months from Western powers and Pretoria, Tsvangirai must tighten the belts of his already starving compatriots, a task requiring far more control of the Zimbabwe state than the patronage-addicted cronies of Robert Mugabe will allow.</p>
<p>On Friday, negotiations over the new cabinet’s composition broke down because Mugabe’s Zanu(PF) colleagues were dissatisfied over getting only 15 of the 31 seats in a deal done the prior week with Mbeki acting as facilitator. Mugabe’s men are, without question, the most exploitative, parasitical force in Harare today, but imperialism (London mining houses) and South African subimperialism (Johannesburg mining, banking, retail, transport, tourism) look on greedily – in part for platinum reserves as rich as any outside South Africa.</p>
<p>The outsiders have hoped that Zimbabwe’s ongoing economic implosion – a 20 million+ percent inflation rate and persistent shortages of nearly all basics (hence last week requiring permission for many shops to trade in dollars and rands instead of the debased Zim currency) – compels Mugabe to give up power, though Mbeki’s aim has all along been to shoe-horn Tsvangirai into a junior partnership, which he agreed to in spite of widespread dissent that the concessions were too great.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, against this lot, Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change party and its progressive allies in the trade unions and social movements simply could not generate a “Plan B” – popular insurgency or active civil disobedience – in the face of Mugabe’s repressive police, army and paramilitaries.</p>
<p>So all Tsvangirai has left for countervailing power is his moral claim to a March electoral victory (he withdrew from a June run-off when 100 supporters were killed by Mugabe’s thugs) – worth nearly nothing in Harare power politics – and the hope he can attract a vast reconstruction fund from London, Washington and Brussels.</p>
<p>Such funds will be much harder to mobilize now, after Monday’s stock market crash in New York and the crashes of investment banks, mortgage guarantors, insurance companies and in coming days, money market funds and commercial banks, for whom bail-outs will require upwards of a trillion US$ before all is said and done.</p>
<p>Fourteen years ago, these same New York financiers put extreme pressure on Nelson Mandela’s new government, when I worked in his reconstruction and development program ministry and saw first hand the defeatist philosophies of ‘Freedom next Time’ and ‘Shock Doctrine’, that John Pilger and Naomi Klein later described so accurately in their books.</p>
<p>At the time, deputy president Mbeki ordered state officials to ‘Send the signals to the markets’. Rising unemployment and inequality were the logical result, as Mbeki’s team made SA much more vulnerable to international finance than ever in its history. (The most aggressive neoliberal amongst them, finance minister Trevor Manue – whose first job in 1996 was imposition of structural adjustment program and who in 2000 chaired board of the World Bank and IMF – was asked to stay on for another term by Zuma and apparently has agreed.)</p>
<p>In the same spirit, just under a year ago, Merrill Lynch held what amounted to a job interview for Zuma, as Mbeki’s apparent successor gave a speech “aimed at reassuring them that there was no need for the market to be ‘jittery’” according to a Zuma aide.</p>
<p>Mbeki was fired by the ANC national executive committee in the wake of a high court judgment a week earlier. That ruling temporarily threw out corruption charges against Zuma, in part because the judge disapproved of Mbeki’s conspiratorial handling of his competitor’s career, starting in 2001. (Zuma was SA deputy president from 1999 until 2005, when his financial manager Shabir Shaik’s bribe-taking attracted a jail sentence – but Mbeki’s mistake was to hope Zuma would fade away, especially after a rape accusation later that year.)</p>
<p>Inept procedure was the technical problem that dislodged Mbeki and freed Zuma, although the National Prosecuting Authority said it would appeal the corruption case. More importantly, the coalition of forces – led by SA trade unionists and the Communist Party – which have backed the allegedly corrupt and sometimes feudal Zuma, did so for explicitly political reasons.</p>
<p>As a Machiavellian back-stabber, Mbeki simply made too many enemies – including trade union leader Zwelinzima Vavi, Communist Party secretary Blade Nzimande, ANC youth league president Julius Malema, and businessmen Tokyo Sexwale, Cyril Ramaphosa and Matthews Phosa. But as a hardcore neoliberal economist, he was doomed in any case. Treatment Action Campaign leader Zackie Achmat accused Mbeki of murderous AIDS policies and also celebrated his departure.</p>
<p>And ironically, simultaneous to Mbeki’s downfall, the economic altar on which so many South Africans were sacrificed – appeasing the financial markets – has also tumbled. Gambling in real estate, the arrogant czars of Merrill Lynch lost 82 per cent of the firm’s share value since early 2007, before last week’s $50 billion desperation rescue by the Bank of America.</p>
<p>Look north-west now to Nigeria for more insights into world chaos. Thanks to US fossil fuel addiction, the leading NGO Environmental Rights Action (ERA) in Port Harcourt worries about the revival of a war harking back more than 15 years, when Ken Saro-Wiwa’s Ogoni survival movement intensified its non-violent efforts to rid the Niger Delta of the super-exploitive Shell Oil.</p>
<p>Saro-Wiwa faced a repressive state whose army was called in by Shell to execute him on a frame-up charge in 1995, in spite of appeals by Mandela.</p>
<p>Last week, the powerful guerrilla-based Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta forced Shell to evacuate 100 employees from an installation and demanded that all foreign firms leave the area.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, ERA director Nimmo Bassey spent the week with dozens of African environmentalists here in Durban. The OilWatch activists were hosted by the Pietermaritzburg NGO groundWork, ERA’s partner in the Friends of the Earth network.</p>
<p>Bassey’s strategy is to “keep the oil in the soil”. To pay for needed development and environmental clean-up, ERA demands ecological debt repayment by the north to the south, much as Accion Ecologica has insisted on in Ecuador, even moving Rafael Correa’s government to endorse the concept.</p>
<p>The OilWatch network ventured on Durban’s famous Toxic Tour by the South Durban Community and Environmental Alliance, which stops in on leaky refineries and other pollution hot spots that give the area its world-leading leukemia and asthma rates. That alliance will soon file an environmental impact assessment complaint to halt the parastatal firm Transnet’s proposed $7 billion pipeline, aimed to soon double petrol flows to Johannesburg.</p>
<p>Aside from environmental racism (the pipeline takes a 200km southerly detour to avoid white-dominated areas) several other reasons have emerged to rethink the pipeline: climate change, refining problems, Johannesburg auto congestion and the lack so far of political will to build an alternative mass public transport system.</p>
<p>South Durban activists reckon it would be better to blow up the Johannesburg petrol pipeline before it is built, through legal, nonviolent means, than to contend with Niger Delta-type disasters such as the series of major tank fires at installations in South Durban that began exactly a year ago. Then and now, municipal officials failed south Durban residents, by keeping secret the evacuation plan.</p>
<p>If we look a bit further south, to the famous Wild Coast on the Transkei coast a few hours drive from Durban, we find a similar confrontation between communities and an unresponsive, crony-capitalist state. And again, bottom-up struggle has generated a formidable backlash against Mbeki’s minerals minister and the multinational corporation she has been wooing.</p>
<p>After receiving a stern lecture by community and indigenous leaders in the Xolobeni community last Friday, minister Buyelwa Sonjica conceded that a multibillion-rand titanium sands project suffered from flawed consultation. Activists insisted she withdraw a license to mine the sand dunes, which she had secretly granted Australia’s Mineral Resource Commodities a few weeks ago.</p>
<p>Sonjica confessed, “I am disappointed because most of the things said here today, I did not know”. Like so many officials, she had not listened to civil society, especially the Amadiba Crisis Committee and Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa. The community group’s superb lawyer, Richard Spoor (ridiculed by Sonjica two weeks’ earlier), must now painstakingly undo the damage she has done.</p>
<p>To return where we began, in wretched Zimbabwe, what can progressive forces do to regroup in this context of national, regional and global chaos? Pretoria power-brokers are vanishing, New York financiers are buckling, Washington/London king-makers are scrambling for cash, mining houses are putting investment plans on hold, and orthodox World Bank and United Nations Development Program strategies are not going to satisfy the Zimbabwean masses.</p>
<p>The organizations that best represent those masses had demanded a neutral transitional authority and socio-economic interventions, which Mbeki ignored, even though the National People’s Convention made these demands clearly in February.</p>
<p>As Zimbabwean activist Elinor Sisulu put it last week, “If I was sitting in Mbeki’s powerful position, I know that I would have conducted myself very differently. I would never ever have pulled out all stops and used my power and influence to keep a ruthless and ageing dictator in power. I would never have turned a blind eye to the violence meted out to citizens in Zimbabwe. I would never have sat on a report by my own generals, not only failing to act on that report, but doing everything in my power to stave off pressure on the perpetrators.”</p>
<p>Zimbabwean elites are getting this advice from Johannesburg, specifically from Investec’s Roelof Horne: “austerity from within”. South Africa’s powerful Independent newspaper group editorialized that Mugabe/Tsvangirai government should ” introduce drastic policies, including slashing government spending and freeing up price, currency and other controls” as “conditions for receiving foreign aid.”</p>
<p>Mbeki just canceled his trip to the United Nations, but Mugabe will try to claim legitimacy as Zimbabwe’s head of state. To counteract their nonsense, a Zimbabwean-born South African who will also be there on Tuesday night, at the Brecht Forum, performing “Marx in Soweto”, Howard Zinn’s play ( <a href="" type="internal">http://brechtforum.org/node/2033</a>). No one knows more than Dennis Brutus, the 83 year-old poet and anti-apartheid activist, about Southern African resistance to elite oppression. Go see Dennis if you are in NYC.</p>
<p>In Brutus’ footsteps, Tinashe Chimedza, a great Zimbabwean student activist, last week penned this about Zimbabwe, an appropriate note to close on when thinking of world financial and regional political celebrations gone sour:</p>
<p>pass me the cognac</p>
<p>the elites scramble for power and profit the poor become footnotes we write epitaphs ‘rest in peace Cde Tonde’ the bubbly flows pass me the Borboun am tired of the imported Cognac more drivers, another motorcade four more motorcades another charade dish me my share of toil ‘ndakadashurwa’ – any questions' the rubble will eat tomorrow who wants to jump with them anyway, the commoners, teach them culture first am waiting for my OBE they are fodder, my cdes remind me lets dance ball room tonite on the bellies of the filth</p>
<p>PATRICK BOND is the director of the UKZN Centre for Civil Society: <a href="http://www.ukzn.ac.za/ccs" type="external">http://www.ukzn.ac.za/ccs</a>.&#160; He can be reached at <a href="mailto:pbond@mail.ngo.za" type="external">pbond@mail.ngo.za</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Your Ad Here</a></p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | past week wild rollercoaster ride southern african rulingparty politics troughs world capitalism peaks radical social activism glancing around region world peaks see quite way usual looking first south africa saturdays dumping president thabo mbeki jacob zuma president african national congress temporary replacement next aprils election anc deputy president kgalema motlanthe excellent reflection ruling elite fragility neoliberal regimes mbekis main supporters including mbhazima shilowa former trade union leader provincial government leader economic heartland johannesburg apparently considering launch competing party likewise inability cement working powersharing deal across river zimbabwe confirms hard elite factions fight crumbs even quickshrinking state interconnected problems make world elites rather nervous favorite zimbabwean morgan tsvangirai may feel need follow austerity instructions get billions dollars promised coming months western powers pretoria tsvangirai must tighten belts already starving compatriots task requiring far control zimbabwe state patronageaddicted cronies robert mugabe allow friday negotiations new cabinets composition broke mugabes zanupf colleagues dissatisfied getting 15 31 seats deal done prior week mbeki acting facilitator mugabes men without question exploitative parasitical force harare today imperialism london mining houses south african subimperialism johannesburg mining banking retail transport tourism look greedily part platinum reserves rich outside south africa outsiders hoped zimbabwes ongoing economic implosion 20 million percent inflation rate persistent shortages nearly basics hence last week requiring permission many shops trade dollars rands instead debased zim currency compels mugabe give power though mbekis aim along shoehorn tsvangirai junior partnership agreed spite widespread dissent concessions great unfortunately lot tsvangirais movement democratic change party progressive allies trade unions social movements simply could generate plan b popular insurgency active civil disobedience face mugabes repressive police army paramilitaries tsvangirai left countervailing power moral claim march electoral victory withdrew june runoff 100 supporters killed mugabes thugs worth nearly nothing harare power politics hope attract vast reconstruction fund london washington brussels funds much harder mobilize mondays stock market crash new york crashes investment banks mortgage guarantors insurance companies coming days money market funds commercial banks bailouts require upwards trillion us said done fourteen years ago new york financiers put extreme pressure nelson mandelas new government worked reconstruction development program ministry saw first hand defeatist philosophies freedom next time shock doctrine john pilger naomi klein later described accurately books time deputy president mbeki ordered state officials send signals markets rising unemployment inequality logical result mbekis team made sa much vulnerable international finance ever history aggressive neoliberal amongst finance minister trevor manue whose first job 1996 imposition structural adjustment program 2000 chaired board world bank imf asked stay another term zuma apparently agreed spirit year ago merrill lynch held amounted job interview zuma mbekis apparent successor gave speech aimed reassuring need market jittery according zuma aide mbeki fired anc national executive committee wake high court judgment week earlier ruling temporarily threw corruption charges zuma part judge disapproved mbekis conspiratorial handling competitors career starting 2001 zuma sa deputy president 1999 2005 financial manager shabir shaiks bribetaking attracted jail sentence mbekis mistake hope zuma would fade away especially rape accusation later year inept procedure technical problem dislodged mbeki freed zuma although national prosecuting authority said would appeal corruption case importantly coalition forces led sa trade unionists communist party backed allegedly corrupt sometimes feudal zuma explicitly political reasons machiavellian backstabber mbeki simply made many enemies including trade union leader zwelinzima vavi communist party secretary blade nzimande anc youth league president julius malema businessmen tokyo sexwale cyril ramaphosa matthews phosa hardcore neoliberal economist doomed case treatment action campaign leader zackie achmat accused mbeki murderous aids policies also celebrated departure ironically simultaneous mbekis downfall economic altar many south africans sacrificed appeasing financial markets also tumbled gambling real estate arrogant czars merrill lynch lost 82 per cent firms share value since early 2007 last weeks 50 billion desperation rescue bank america look northwest nigeria insights world chaos thanks us fossil fuel addiction leading ngo environmental rights action era port harcourt worries revival war harking back 15 years ken sarowiwas ogoni survival movement intensified nonviolent efforts rid niger delta superexploitive shell oil sarowiwa faced repressive state whose army called shell execute frameup charge 1995 spite appeals mandela last week powerful guerrillabased movement emancipation niger delta forced shell evacuate 100 employees installation demanded foreign firms leave area meanwhile era director nimmo bassey spent week dozens african environmentalists durban oilwatch activists hosted pietermaritzburg ngo groundwork eras partner friends earth network basseys strategy keep oil soil pay needed development environmental cleanup era demands ecological debt repayment north south much accion ecologica insisted ecuador even moving rafael correas government endorse concept oilwatch network ventured durbans famous toxic tour south durban community environmental alliance stops leaky refineries pollution hot spots give area worldleading leukemia asthma rates alliance soon file environmental impact assessment complaint halt parastatal firm transnets proposed 7 billion pipeline aimed soon double petrol flows johannesburg aside environmental racism pipeline takes 200km southerly detour avoid whitedominated areas several reasons emerged rethink pipeline climate change refining problems johannesburg auto congestion lack far political build alternative mass public transport system south durban activists reckon would better blow johannesburg petrol pipeline built legal nonviolent means contend niger deltatype disasters series major tank fires installations south durban began exactly year ago municipal officials failed south durban residents keeping secret evacuation plan look bit south famous wild coast transkei coast hours drive durban find similar confrontation communities unresponsive cronycapitalist state bottomup struggle generated formidable backlash mbekis minerals minister multinational corporation wooing receiving stern lecture community indigenous leaders xolobeni community last friday minister buyelwa sonjica conceded multibillionrand titanium sands project suffered flawed consultation activists insisted withdraw license mine sand dunes secretly granted australias mineral resource commodities weeks ago sonjica confessed disappointed things said today know like many officials listened civil society especially amadiba crisis committee wildlife environment society south africa community groups superb lawyer richard spoor ridiculed sonjica two weeks earlier must painstakingly undo damage done return began wretched zimbabwe progressive forces regroup context national regional global chaos pretoria powerbrokers vanishing new york financiers buckling washingtonlondon kingmakers scrambling cash mining houses putting investment plans hold orthodox world bank united nations development program strategies going satisfy zimbabwean masses organizations best represent masses demanded neutral transitional authority socioeconomic interventions mbeki ignored even though national peoples convention made demands clearly february zimbabwean activist elinor sisulu put last week sitting mbekis powerful position know would conducted differently would never ever pulled stops used power influence keep ruthless ageing dictator power would never turned blind eye violence meted citizens zimbabwe would never sat report generals failing act report everything power stave pressure perpetrators zimbabwean elites getting advice johannesburg specifically investecs roelof horne austerity within south africas powerful independent newspaper group editorialized mugabetsvangirai government introduce drastic policies including slashing government spending freeing price currency controls conditions receiving foreign aid mbeki canceled trip united nations mugabe try claim legitimacy zimbabwes head state counteract nonsense zimbabweanborn south african also tuesday night brecht forum performing marx soweto howard zinns play httpbrechtforumorgnode2033 one knows dennis brutus 83 yearold poet antiapartheid activist southern african resistance elite oppression go see dennis nyc brutus footsteps tinashe chimedza great zimbabwean student activist last week penned zimbabwe appropriate note close thinking world financial regional political celebrations gone sour pass cognac elites scramble power profit poor become footnotes write epitaphs rest peace cde tonde bubbly flows pass borboun tired imported cognac drivers another motorcade four motorcades another charade dish share toil ndakadashurwa questions rubble eat tomorrow wants jump anyway commoners teach culture first waiting obe fodder cdes remind lets dance ball room tonite bellies filth patrick bond director ukzn centre civil society httpwwwukznaczaccs160 reached pbondmailngoza ad 160 160 160 160 160 | 1,254 |
<p>October 31, 2017 will be the 500-year anniversary of Luther’s nailing his 99 theses to the door of the Cathedral at Wittenberg. Perhaps it was the date that gave Danish author and public intellectual Peter Tudvad the idea for his latest book, Manteuffel. “Manteuffel” is an actual German surname that literally means “man-devil.” There could not be a more appropriate name for the protagonist of Tudvad’s <a href="https://politikenbooks.dk/ebog/manteuffel_peter-tudvad/" type="external">novel</a> about a fictional, villainous contemporary and friend of Martin Luther, Friedrich von Manteuffel.</p>
<p>If it wasn’t the date of the anniversary of the birth of Protestantism that inspired Tudvad to write Manteuffel, then it was probably what he learned about Luther while doing the research for his earlier book <a href="https://www.saxo.com/dk/stadier-paa-antisemitismens-vej_peter-tudvad_haeftet_9788763815383" type="external">Stadier på antisemitismens vej</a> (stages on the way of anti-Semitism). Denmark, which still has a state church, The Danish Lutheran Church, tends to downplay Luther’s moral failings such as his anti-Semitism. Virulent anti-Semitism wasn’t Luther’s only moral failing, however. Tudvad goes into detail in Manteuffel concerning Luther’s approval of a horrifically brutal and bloody suppression of a peasant revolt led by his own fellow protestant reformer, the unfortunate <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_M%C3%BCntzer" type="external">Thomas Müntzer</a>, who was tortured and executed because of his role in the revolt.</p>
<p>Tudvad, who has spent a great deal of time in archives while working on <a href="https://www.saxo.com/dk/forfatter/peter-tudvad_4357273" type="external">his earlier non-fiction works</a>, begins the novel with a description of how the narrator purportedly discovered Manteuffel’s long-lost correspondence while working in a German archive.</p>
<p>Anyone who has ever researched the history of his family, country, or hero is familiar with the exalted stillness and hushed piety of an archive. It’s not like a library where students hold noisy study-group meetings, or a church, where parents allow their children to yell and scream. Despite all our democratic pretensions, archives have escaped the profanation that has transformed other cultural institutions into transit halls with flat video screens, loudspeakers and lines of people waiting for their number to be called. Here there is no librarian who paternalistically doles out the discipline of fines to those who return books late, and no priest who with maternal solicitude explains when you should rise from the pew and then sit down again.</p>
<p>Instead, there is an archivist who, like a sibyl is initiated into the mysteries, both large and small, of the archive. You explain your project to the archivist as well as you can, because you don’t know yourself in which of the archives the answer to your question is found. You try, though, and the archivist succeeds miraculously in finding, behind the armored door that protects the hidden treasure of the archive, precisely the document that satisfies your thirst. You sit there at the little table, where the soft light from the single small lamp falls generously on the document whose secret shall now be revealed, like a monk in his cell. It occasionally happens that your expectations are immediately disappointed, not over the content, but over your own limited abilities as you struggle to read ancient handwriting or decipher a stenographer’s shorthand. You return to the archivist, who is able not only to locate documents, but also to decipher them, and hence in the best sense reminds one more of a priest than a librarian.</p>
<p>When, after some time, you’ve persevered through the trials of the novice and learned to use an archive properly, entering it is like crossing the threshold to another world. You become one with the archive and all its other users who are like so many limbs on a single body. What these others are searching for is a mystery. You know only that their research is part of the eternal tidal movement of the archive itself. Documents begin to pile up on the table until you have disappeared behind a mountain of the past, while outside the present waits to become ripe enough for archiving. You learn to balance like a stylite on the precise geometrical point where the future slices into the past for the future is the family history, dissertation, or biography on which you are working, and the past is everything that is worth writing about.</p>
<p>Hours pass. You lose all sense of what time it is, fail to notice your own hunger, or how long you’ve sat there without eating or drinking. You remain faithful to your work, despite time wasted on unhelpful documents, like a Catholic praying the Rosary. The work brings with it its own rewards, for while the visible world was dissected and analyzed long ago, measured and counted in its depth and breadth so that it is now no longer possible to learn anything new about it, it is otherwise with the hidden world of an archive. Here you place again your requisition form in the basket on the counter, thank the archivist deferentially when he reappears at the counter with your fulfilled wish, don the white cotton gloves required of those who desire to dig down into the virginal past. And then it happens that you find what you had sought –– or find something entirely different from what you’d sought.</p>
<p>Count Manteuffel had a consuming interest in theological questions and hence conducted an extended correspondence with Luther, as well as with other actual historical figures such as the notorious serial killer <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_B%C3%A1thory" type="external">Elizabeth Báthory</a>. What, you may wonder, does the famous protestant reformer have in common with a serial killer? All becomes clear in this meticulously researched historical novel.</p>
<p>Manteuffel, it turns out, is a vampire, so there is lots of blood and gore in the book. What distinguishes it, however, from the standard vampire thriller is the richness of meticulously researched historical detail, the depth of analysis of philosophical, theological, and social-political issues, and some genuinely beautiful writing, such as in the passage above.</p>
<p>Luther emerges as, to put it euphemistically, somewhat unsympathetic, not simply because of his association with Manteuffel, who happens to be a particularly gruesome and bloodthirsty vampire, but because of what Tudvad reveals he actually said (or wrote) and did.</p>
<p><a href="https://politikenbooks.dk/ebog/manteuffel_peter-tudvad/" type="external">Manteuffel</a> is, among other things, a serious indictment of the father of the Protestant Reformation and hence promises to do for Protestantism (or at least Lutheranism) what The DaVinci Code did for, or perhaps it would be better to say “to” Catholicism. It’s an erudite page-turner that would be a blockbuster were it dramatized for the BBC.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the book has yet to be translated into English. Fortunately, there is no more opportune time for an English-language publisher to seize upon it. Increasing attention is going to be deservedly focused on Luther this fall and some of the revelations to which that attention will give rise, including the social-political ramifications of Luther’s alliance with feudal authority against peasants, will guarantee continued interest in Luther for a long time to come.</p>
<p>Plus, it’s a book about a vampire. What’s not to like?</p> | true | 4 | october 31 2017 500year anniversary luthers nailing 99 theses door cathedral wittenberg perhaps date gave danish author public intellectual peter tudvad idea latest book manteuffel manteuffel actual german surname literally means mandevil could appropriate name protagonist tudvads novel fictional villainous contemporary friend martin luther friedrich von manteuffel wasnt date anniversary birth protestantism inspired tudvad write manteuffel probably learned luther research earlier book stadier på antisemitismens vej stages way antisemitism denmark still state church danish lutheran church tends downplay luthers moral failings antisemitism virulent antisemitism wasnt luthers moral failing however tudvad goes detail manteuffel concerning luthers approval horrifically brutal bloody suppression peasant revolt led fellow protestant reformer unfortunate thomas müntzer tortured executed role revolt tudvad spent great deal time archives working earlier nonfiction works begins novel description narrator purportedly discovered manteuffels longlost correspondence working german archive anyone ever researched history family country hero familiar exalted stillness hushed piety archive like library students hold noisy studygroup meetings church parents allow children yell scream despite democratic pretensions archives escaped profanation transformed cultural institutions transit halls flat video screens loudspeakers lines people waiting number called librarian paternalistically doles discipline fines return books late priest maternal solicitude explains rise pew sit instead archivist like sibyl initiated mysteries large small archive explain project archivist well dont know archives answer question found try though archivist succeeds miraculously finding behind armored door protects hidden treasure archive precisely document satisfies thirst sit little table soft light single small lamp falls generously document whose secret shall revealed like monk cell occasionally happens expectations immediately disappointed content limited abilities struggle read ancient handwriting decipher stenographers shorthand return archivist able locate documents also decipher hence best sense reminds one priest librarian time youve persevered trials novice learned use archive properly entering like crossing threshold another world become one archive users like many limbs single body others searching mystery know research part eternal tidal movement archive documents begin pile table disappeared behind mountain past outside present waits become ripe enough archiving learn balance like stylite precise geometrical point future slices past future family history dissertation biography working past everything worth writing hours pass lose sense time fail notice hunger long youve sat without eating drinking remain faithful work despite time wasted unhelpful documents like catholic praying rosary work brings rewards visible world dissected analyzed long ago measured counted depth breadth longer possible learn anything new otherwise hidden world archive place requisition form basket counter thank archivist deferentially reappears counter fulfilled wish white cotton gloves required desire dig virginal past happens find sought find something entirely different youd sought count manteuffel consuming interest theological questions hence conducted extended correspondence luther well actual historical figures notorious serial killer elizabeth báthory may wonder famous protestant reformer common serial killer becomes clear meticulously researched historical novel manteuffel turns vampire lots blood gore book distinguishes however standard vampire thriller richness meticulously researched historical detail depth analysis philosophical theological socialpolitical issues genuinely beautiful writing passage luther emerges put euphemistically somewhat unsympathetic simply association manteuffel happens particularly gruesome bloodthirsty vampire tudvad reveals actually said wrote manteuffel among things serious indictment father protestant reformation hence promises protestantism least lutheranism davinci code perhaps would better say catholicism erudite pageturner would blockbuster dramatized bbc unfortunately book yet translated english fortunately opportune time englishlanguage publisher seize upon increasing attention going deservedly focused luther fall revelations attention give rise including socialpolitical ramifications luthers alliance feudal authority peasants guarantee continued interest luther long time come plus book vampire whats like | 574 |
<p>Somewhere on this planet an American commando is carrying out a mission. Now, say that 70 times and you’re done… for the day. Without the knowledge of the American public, a secret force within the U.S. military is undertaking operations in a majority of the world’s countries. This new Pentagon power elite is waging a global war whose size and scope has never been revealed, until now.</p>
<p>After a U.S. Navy SEAL put a bullet in Osama bin Laden’s chest and another in his head, one of the most secretive black-ops units in the American military suddenly found its mission in the public spotlight. It was atypical. While it’s well known that U.S. Special Operations forces are deployed in the war zones of Afghanistan and Iraq, and it’s increasingly apparent that such units operate in murkier conflict zones like Yemen and Somalia, the full extent of their worldwide war has remained deeply in the shadows.</p>
<p>Last year, Karen DeYoung and Greg Jaffe of the Washington Post reported that U.S. Special Operations forces were deployed in 75 countries, up from 60 at the end of the Bush presidency. By the end of this year, U.S. Special Operations Command spokesman Colonel Tim Nye told me, that number will likely reach 120. “We do a lot of traveling — a lot more than Afghanistan or Iraq,” he said recently. This global presence — in about 60% of the world’s nations and far larger than previously acknowledged — provides striking new evidence of a rising clandestine Pentagon power elite waging a secret war in all corners of the world.</p>
<p>The Rise of the Military’s Secret Military</p>
<p>Born of a failed 1980 raid to rescue American hostages in Iran, in which eight U.S. service members died, U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) was established in 1987. Having spent the post-Vietnam years distrusted and starved for money by the regular military, special operations forces suddenly had a single home, a stable budget, and a four-star commander as their advocate. Since then, SOCOM has grown into a combined force of startling proportions. Made up of units from all the service branches, including the Army’s “Green Berets” and Rangers, Navy SEALs, Air Force Air Commandos, and Marine Corps Special Operations teams, in addition to specialized helicopter crews, boat teams, civil affairs personnel, para-rescuemen, and even battlefield air-traffic controllers and special operations weathermen, SOCOM carries out the United States’ most specialized and secret missions. These include assassinations, counterterrorist raids, long-range reconnaissance, intelligence analysis, foreign troop training, and weapons of mass destruction counter-proliferation operations. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1844674517/counterpunchmaga" type="external" /> One of its key components is the Joint Special Operations Command, or JSOC, a clandestine sub-command whose primary mission is tracking and killing suspected terrorists. Reporting to the president and acting under his authority, JSOC maintains a global hit list that includes American citizens. It has been operating an extra-legal “kill/capture” campaign that John Nagl, a past counterinsurgency adviser to four-star general and soon-to-be CIA Director David Petraeus, calls “an almost industrial-scale counterterrorism killing machine.”</p>
<p>This assassination program has been carried out by commando units like the Navy SEALs and the Army’s Delta Force as well as via drone strikes as part of covert wars in which the CIA is also involved in countries like Somalia, Pakistan, and Yemen. In addition, the command operates a network of secret prisons, perhaps as many as 20 black sites in Afghanistan alone, used for interrogating high-value targets.</p>
<p>Growth Industry</p>
<p>From a force of about 37,000 in the early 1990s, Special Operations Command personnel have grown to almost 60,000, about a third of whom are career members of SOCOM; the rest have other military occupational specialties, but periodically cycle through the command. Growth has been exponential since September 11, 2001, as SOCOM’s baseline budget almost tripled from $2.3 billion to $6.3 billion. If you add in funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it has actually more than quadrupled to $9.8 billion in these years. Not surprisingly, the number of its personnel deployed abroad has also jumped four-fold. Further increases, and expanded operations, are on the horizon.</p>
<p>Lieutenant General Dennis Hejlik, the former head of the Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command — the last of the service branches to be incorporated into SOCOM in 2006 — indicated, for instance, that he foresees a doubling of his former unit of 2,600. “I see them as a force someday of about 5,000, like equivalent to the number of SEALs that we have on the battlefield. Between [5,000] and 6,000,” he said at a June breakfast with defense reporters in Washington. Long-term plans already call for the force to increase by 1,000.</p>
<p>During his recent Senate confirmation hearings, Navy Vice Admiral William McRaven, the incoming SOCOM chief and outgoing head of JSOC (which he commanded during the bin Laden raid) endorsed a steady manpower growth rate of 3% to 5% a year, while also making a pitch for even more resources, including additional drones and the construction of new special operations facilities.</p>
<p>A former SEAL who still sometimes accompanies troops into the field, McRaven expressed a belief that, as conventional forces are drawn down in Afghanistan, special ops troops will take on an ever greater role. Iraq, he added, would benefit if elite U.S forces continued to conduct missions there past the December 2011 deadline for a total American troop withdrawal. He also assured the Senate Armed Services Committee that “as a former JSOC commander, I can tell you we were looking very hard at Yemen and at Somalia.”</p>
<p>During a speech at the National Defense Industrial Association’s annual Special Operations and Low-intensity Conflict Symposium earlier this year, Navy Admiral Eric Olson, the outgoing chief of Special Operations Command, pointed to a composite satellite image of the world at night. Before September 11, 2001, the lit portions of the planet — mostly the industrialized nations of the global north — were considered the key areas. “But the world changed over the last decade,” he said. “Our strategic focus has shifted largely to the south… certainly within the special operations community, as we deal with the emerging threats from the places where the lights aren’t.”</p>
<p>To that end, Olson launched “Project Lawrence,” an effort to increase cultural proficiencies — like advanced language training and better knowledge of local history and customs — for overseas operations. The program is, of course, named after the British officer, Thomas Edward Lawrence (better known as “Lawrence of Arabia”), who teamed up with Arab fighters to wage a guerrilla war in the Middle East during World War I. Mentioning Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mali, and Indonesia, Olson added that SOCOM now needed “Lawrences of Wherever.”</p>
<p>While Olson made reference to only 51 countries of top concern to SOCOM, Col. Nye told me that on any given day, Special Operations forces are deployed in approximately 70 nations around the world. All of them, he hastened to add, at the request of the host government. According to testimony by Olson before the House Armed Services Committee earlier this year, approximately 85% of special operations troops deployed overseas are in 20 countries in the CENTCOM area of operations in the Greater Middle East: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, and Yemen. The others are scattered across the globe from South America to Southeast Asia, some in small numbers, others as larger contingents.</p>
<p>Special Operations Command won’t disclose exactly which countries its forces operate in. “We’re obviously going to have some places where it’s not advantageous for us to list where we’re at,” says Nye. “Not all host nations want it known, for whatever reasons they have — it may be internal, it may be regional.”</p>
<p>But it’s no secret (or at least a poorly kept one) that so-called black special operations troops, like the SEALs and Delta Force, are conducting kill/capture missions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen, while “white” forces like the Green Berets and Rangers are training indigenous partners as part of a worldwide secret war against al-Qaeda and other militant groups. In the Philippines, for instance, the U.S. spends $50 million a year on a 600-person contingent of Army Special Operations forces, Navy Seals, Air Force special operators, and others that carries out counterterrorist operations with Filipino allies against insurgent groups like Jemaah Islamiyah and Abu Sayyaf.</p>
<p>Last year, as an analysis of SOCOM documents, open-source Pentagon information, and a database of Special Operations missions compiled by investigative journalist Tara McKelvey (for the Medill School of Journalism’s National Security Journalism Initiative) reveals, America’s most elite troops carried out joint-training exercises in Belize, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Germany, Indonesia, Mali, Norway, Panama, and Poland. So far in 2011, similar training missions have been conducted in the Dominican Republic, Jordan, Romania, Senegal, South Korea, and Thailand, among other nations. In reality, Nye told me, training actually went on in almost every nation where Special Operations forces are deployed. “Of the 120 countries we visit by the end of the year, I would say the vast majority are training exercises in one fashion or another. They would be classified as training exercises.”</p>
<p>The Pentagon’s Power Elite</p>
<p>Once the neglected stepchildren of the military establishment, Special Operations forces have been growing exponentially not just in size and budget, but also in power and influence. Since 2002, SOCOM has been authorized to create its own Joint Task Forces — like Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines — a prerogative normally limited to larger combatant commands like CENTCOM. This year, without much fanfare, SOCOM also established its own Joint Acquisition Task Force, a cadre of equipment designers and acquisition specialists.</p>
<p>With control over budgeting, training, and equipping its force, powers usually reserved for departments (like the Department of the Army or the Department of the Navy), dedicated dollars in every Defense Department budget, and influential advocates in Congress, SOCOM is by now an exceptionally powerful player at the Pentagon. With real clout, it can win bureaucratic battles, purchase cutting-edge technology, and pursue fringe research like electronically beaming messages into people’s heads or developing stealth-like cloaking technologies for ground troops. Since 2001, SOCOM’s prime contracts awarded to small businesses — those that generally produce specialty equipment and weapons — have jumped six-fold.</p>
<p>Headquartered at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, but operating out of theater commands spread out around the globe, including Hawaii, Germany, and South Korea, and active in the majority of countries on the planet, Special Operations Command is now a force unto itself. As outgoing SOCOM chief Olson put it earlier this year, SOCOM “is a microcosm of the Department of Defense, with ground, air, and maritime components, a global presence, and authorities and responsibilities that mirror the Military Departments, Military Services, and Defense Agencies.”</p>
<p>Tasked to coordinate all Pentagon planning against global terrorism networks and, as a result, closely connected to other government agencies, foreign militaries, and intelligence services, and armed with a vast inventory of stealthy helicopters, manned fixed-wing aircraft, heavily-armed drones, high-tech guns-a-go-go speedboats, specialized Humvees and Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles, or MRAPs, as well as other state-of-the-art gear (with more on the way), SOCOM represents something new in the military. Whereas the late scholar of militarism Chalmers Johnson used to refer to the CIA as “the president’s private army,” today JSOC performs that role, acting as the chief executive’s private assassination squad, and its parent, SOCOM, functions as a new Pentagon power-elite, a secret military within the military possessing domestic power and global reach.</p>
<p>In 120 countries across the globe, troops from Special Operations Command carry out their secret war of high-profile assassinations, low-level targeted killings, capture/kidnap operations, kick-down-the-door night raids, joint operations with foreign forces, and training missions with indigenous partners as part of a shadowy conflict unknown to most Americans. Once “special” for being small, lean, outsider outfits, today they are special for their power, access, influence, and aura.</p>
<p>That aura now benefits from a well-honed public relations campaign which helps them project a superhuman image at home and abroad, even while many of their actual activities remain in the ever-widening shadows. Typical of the vision they are pushing was this statement from Admiral Olson: “I am convinced that the forces… are the most culturally attuned partners, the most lethal hunter-killers, and most responsive, agile, innovative, and efficiently effective advisors, trainers, problem-solvers, and warriors that any nation has to offer.”</p>
<p>Recently at the Aspen Institute’s Security Forum, Olson offered up similarly gilded comments and some misleading information, too, claiming that U.S. Special Operations forces were operating in just 65 countries and engaged in combat in only two of them. When asked about drone strikes in Pakistan, he reportedly replied, “Are you talking about unattributed explosions?”</p>
<p>What he did let slip, however, was telling. He noted, for instance, that black operations like the bin Laden mission, with commandos conducting heliborne night raids, were now exceptionally common. A dozen or so are conducted every night, he said. Perhaps most illuminating, however, was an offhand remark about the size of SOCOM. Right now, he emphasized, U.S. Special Operations forces were approximately as large as Canada’s entire active duty military. In fact, the force is larger than the active duty militaries of many of the nations where America’s elite troops now operate each year, and it’s only set to grow larger.</p>
<p>Americans have yet to grapple with what it means to have a “special” force this large, this active, and this secret — and they are unlikely to begin to do so until more information is available. It just won’t be coming from Olson or his troops. “Our access [to foreign countries] depends on our ability to not talk about it,” he said in response to questions about SOCOM’s secrecy. When missions are subject to scrutiny like the bin Laden raid, he said, the elite troops object. The military’s secret military, said Olson, wants “to get back into the shadows and do what they came in to do.”</p>
<p>Nick Turse is the associate editor of <a href="http://www.tomdispatch.com/" type="external">TomDispatch.com</a>, where this article originally appeared. His latest book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1844674517/counterpunchmaga" type="external">The Case for Withdrawal from Afghanistan</a> (Verso Books), which brings together leading analysts from across the political spectrum, has just gone into its second printing. Turse is currently a fellow at Harvard University’s Radcliffe Institute. His website is <a href="http://NickTurse.com" type="external">NickTurse.com</a>.</p> | true | 4 | somewhere planet american commando carrying mission say 70 times youre done day without knowledge american public secret force within us military undertaking operations majority worlds countries new pentagon power elite waging global war whose size scope never revealed us navy seal put bullet osama bin ladens chest another head one secretive blackops units american military suddenly found mission public spotlight atypical well known us special operations forces deployed war zones afghanistan iraq increasingly apparent units operate murkier conflict zones like yemen somalia full extent worldwide war remained deeply shadows last year karen deyoung greg jaffe washington post reported us special operations forces deployed 75 countries 60 end bush presidency end year us special operations command spokesman colonel tim nye told number likely reach 120 lot traveling lot afghanistan iraq said recently global presence 60 worlds nations far larger previously acknowledged provides striking new evidence rising clandestine pentagon power elite waging secret war corners world rise militarys secret military born failed 1980 raid rescue american hostages iran eight us service members died us special operations command socom established 1987 spent postvietnam years distrusted starved money regular military special operations forces suddenly single home stable budget fourstar commander advocate since socom grown combined force startling proportions made units service branches including armys green berets rangers navy seals air force air commandos marine corps special operations teams addition specialized helicopter crews boat teams civil affairs personnel pararescuemen even battlefield airtraffic controllers special operations weathermen socom carries united states specialized secret missions include assassinations counterterrorist raids longrange reconnaissance intelligence analysis foreign troop training weapons mass destruction counterproliferation operations one key components joint special operations command jsoc clandestine subcommand whose primary mission tracking killing suspected terrorists reporting president acting authority jsoc maintains global hit list includes american citizens operating extralegal killcapture campaign john nagl past counterinsurgency adviser fourstar general soontobe cia director david petraeus calls almost industrialscale counterterrorism killing machine assassination program carried commando units like navy seals armys delta force well via drone strikes part covert wars cia also involved countries like somalia pakistan yemen addition command operates network secret prisons perhaps many 20 black sites afghanistan alone used interrogating highvalue targets growth industry force 37000 early 1990s special operations command personnel grown almost 60000 third career members socom rest military occupational specialties periodically cycle command growth exponential since september 11 2001 socoms baseline budget almost tripled 23 billion 63 billion add funding wars iraq afghanistan actually quadrupled 98 billion years surprisingly number personnel deployed abroad also jumped fourfold increases expanded operations horizon lieutenant general dennis hejlik former head marine corps forces special operations command last service branches incorporated socom 2006 indicated instance foresees doubling former unit 2600 see force someday 5000 like equivalent number seals battlefield 5000 6000 said june breakfast defense reporters washington longterm plans already call force increase 1000 recent senate confirmation hearings navy vice admiral william mcraven incoming socom chief outgoing head jsoc commanded bin laden raid endorsed steady manpower growth rate 3 5 year also making pitch even resources including additional drones construction new special operations facilities former seal still sometimes accompanies troops field mcraven expressed belief conventional forces drawn afghanistan special ops troops take ever greater role iraq added would benefit elite us forces continued conduct missions past december 2011 deadline total american troop withdrawal also assured senate armed services committee former jsoc commander tell looking hard yemen somalia speech national defense industrial associations annual special operations lowintensity conflict symposium earlier year navy admiral eric olson outgoing chief special operations command pointed composite satellite image world night september 11 2001 lit portions planet mostly industrialized nations global north considered key areas world changed last decade said strategic focus shifted largely south certainly within special operations community deal emerging threats places lights arent end olson launched project lawrence effort increase cultural proficiencies like advanced language training better knowledge local history customs overseas operations program course named british officer thomas edward lawrence better known lawrence arabia teamed arab fighters wage guerrilla war middle east world war mentioning afghanistan pakistan mali indonesia olson added socom needed lawrences wherever olson made reference 51 countries top concern socom col nye told given day special operations forces deployed approximately 70 nations around world hastened add request host government according testimony olson house armed services committee earlier year approximately 85 special operations troops deployed overseas 20 countries centcom area operations greater middle east afghanistan bahrain egypt iran iraq jordan kazakhstan kuwait kyrgyzstan lebanon oman pakistan qatar saudi arabia syria tajikistan turkmenistan united arab emirates uzbekistan yemen others scattered across globe south america southeast asia small numbers others larger contingents special operations command wont disclose exactly countries forces operate obviously going places advantageous us list says nye host nations want known whatever reasons may internal may regional secret least poorly kept one socalled black special operations troops like seals delta force conducting killcapture missions afghanistan iraq pakistan yemen white forces like green berets rangers training indigenous partners part worldwide secret war alqaeda militant groups philippines instance us spends 50 million year 600person contingent army special operations forces navy seals air force special operators others carries counterterrorist operations filipino allies insurgent groups like jemaah islamiyah abu sayyaf last year analysis socom documents opensource pentagon information database special operations missions compiled investigative journalist tara mckelvey medill school journalisms national security journalism initiative reveals americas elite troops carried jointtraining exercises belize brazil bulgaria burkina faso germany indonesia mali norway panama poland far 2011 similar training missions conducted dominican republic jordan romania senegal south korea thailand among nations reality nye told training actually went almost every nation special operations forces deployed 120 countries visit end year would say vast majority training exercises one fashion another would classified training exercises pentagons power elite neglected stepchildren military establishment special operations forces growing exponentially size budget also power influence since 2002 socom authorized create joint task forces like joint special operations task forcephilippines prerogative normally limited larger combatant commands like centcom year without much fanfare socom also established joint acquisition task force cadre equipment designers acquisition specialists control budgeting training equipping force powers usually reserved departments like department army department navy dedicated dollars every defense department budget influential advocates congress socom exceptionally powerful player pentagon real clout win bureaucratic battles purchase cuttingedge technology pursue fringe research like electronically beaming messages peoples heads developing stealthlike cloaking technologies ground troops since 2001 socoms prime contracts awarded small businesses generally produce specialty equipment weapons jumped sixfold headquartered macdill air force base florida operating theater commands spread around globe including hawaii germany south korea active majority countries planet special operations command force unto outgoing socom chief olson put earlier year socom microcosm department defense ground air maritime components global presence authorities responsibilities mirror military departments military services defense agencies tasked coordinate pentagon planning global terrorism networks result closely connected government agencies foreign militaries intelligence services armed vast inventory stealthy helicopters manned fixedwing aircraft heavilyarmed drones hightech gunsagogo speedboats specialized humvees mine resistant ambush protected vehicles mraps well stateoftheart gear way socom represents something new military whereas late scholar militarism chalmers johnson used refer cia presidents private army today jsoc performs role acting chief executives private assassination squad parent socom functions new pentagon powerelite secret military within military possessing domestic power global reach 120 countries across globe troops special operations command carry secret war highprofile assassinations lowlevel targeted killings capturekidnap operations kickdownthedoor night raids joint operations foreign forces training missions indigenous partners part shadowy conflict unknown americans special small lean outsider outfits today special power access influence aura aura benefits wellhoned public relations campaign helps project superhuman image home abroad even many actual activities remain everwidening shadows typical vision pushing statement admiral olson convinced forces culturally attuned partners lethal hunterkillers responsive agile innovative efficiently effective advisors trainers problemsolvers warriors nation offer recently aspen institutes security forum olson offered similarly gilded comments misleading information claiming us special operations forces operating 65 countries engaged combat two asked drone strikes pakistan reportedly replied talking unattributed explosions let slip however telling noted instance black operations like bin laden mission commandos conducting heliborne night raids exceptionally common dozen conducted every night said perhaps illuminating however offhand remark size socom right emphasized us special operations forces approximately large canadas entire active duty military fact force larger active duty militaries many nations americas elite troops operate year set grow larger americans yet grapple means special force large active secret unlikely begin information available wont coming olson troops access foreign countries depends ability talk said response questions socoms secrecy missions subject scrutiny like bin laden raid said elite troops object militarys secret military said olson wants get back shadows came nick turse associate editor tomdispatchcom article originally appeared latest book case withdrawal afghanistan verso books brings together leading analysts across political spectrum gone second printing turse currently fellow harvard universitys radcliffe institute website nicktursecom | 1,468 |
<p>&lt;a href="http://jellowrestle.com/gallery/brianvan082706/slides/_DSC2284.html"&gt;Brian Van/jellowrestle.com&lt;/a&gt;</p>
<p />
<p>I hear about the race riot at Daddy’s Money almost as soon as I arrive on Grand Isle, Louisiana. My friend and I are going to the bar tonight to catch the “female oil wrestling” oil-spill cleanup workers have been packing in to see on Saturday nights. When we stop by the office of the island’s biggest seafood distributor, he tells us that two days ago a bunch of black guys and a bunch of white guys got into a big fight at the bar. It spilled out all over the street and had to be broken up by a ton of cops.</p>
<p>According to the Census, 1,541 people live in this slow Southern resort town. An estimated 3 percent of them are black. That was before the spill. The seafood guy gestures in the direction of the floating barracks being built on barges in the bay to house the lower-skilled cleanup workers, and says that people think the barracks will keep those workers—who are mostly black—from “jumping off” onto dry land and causing trouble.</p>
<p>That night, dozens of men in race-segregated packs crowd around to watch strippers dance around and then tussle inside the bouncy inflatable ring set up inside Daddy’s Money. Female oil wrestlers need, obviously, to be oiled. Plastic cups full of baby oil are being auctioned off, along with the right to rub their contents all over one of the thong-bikinied gals. “I hope there’s no dispersant in that oil!” someone quips. The bidding before the first match starts at $10; it ends pretty quickly when some kid offers $100.</p>
<p>“He outbid me!” the guy next to me yells. His name is Cortez. He bid $80. He has dollar bills tucked all the way around under the brim of his hat, and piles of them in his fist. He has spent $200 of his $1,000 paycheck already tonight. “I am coming here every Saturday from now on,” he says. He gestures expansively at the scene—writhing women; hollering, money-throwing men. “Sponsored by BP!” he yells, laughing, then throws his arms around me and grabs my ass.</p>
<p>Upstairs, on the open-air deck, the supervisors and professional contractors drink. One comes over to talk; he calls me a Yankee when I don’t get that when he says “animals” he means black guys. Another tells us about the crime-prone “monkeys.” I have already stopped counting how many times I’ve heard the n-word on Grand Isle today.</p>
<p>Back downstairs, the testosterone is still spewing. It’s not just the men screaming at the now-topless girls rolling around trying to pin each other to the floor. An ex-Army Ranger so drunk he can hardly stand asks me if I have a boyfriend. When I lie and say that I do and he’s right over there somewhere, the Ranger scowls and pushes me. I move to the other side of the ring, where some guy wraps a tight grip around my waist.</p>
<p>“You can have some of BP’s money too if you let me make love to you,” he says.</p>
<p>“I’m not a prostitute,” I inform him, backing up to create some space between our pelvises, but he presses an insistent forearm harder into the small of my back.</p>
<p>“I’m not trying to play you like a prostitute,” he says. “I’m just saying: Whatever it takes.”</p>
<p>I extract myself with a firm fist to his chest. Two Grand Isle girls who are the only other non-strippers in the bar are trying to inch away from a teetering drunk who won’t take his hands off them and is encouraging them to get in the ring. I turn around to see if an Interior Department firefighter I talked to earlier, who seems like a nice guy in that he offered to buy me dinner rather than offering money to have sex with him, is still behind me. Just in case. Because he’s a hero he steps in and tells the teetering guy to back off.</p>
<p>“That’s my wife,” he says, towering over the drunk and pointing at one of the girls.</p>
<p>“I don’t care,” the teetering guy says. That’s where it ends. The fireman has a thick four-inch-long scar behind his ear where he was once hit with a bottle; he doesn’t start bar fights anymore. Which is a lucky thing for his coworkers, because he’s a very buff Pawnee, and he’s sick of them calling him “Tonto,” “Chief,” and “Indian Joe.”</p>
<p>The near-desperate levels of racial and sexual aggression in this horde aren’t what you usually get at a strip show in a bar. It feels more like a strip show in a prison yard. My friend says he’s leaving because he can’t bear to be here with all the stupidity and “stale testosterone” anymore. He returns from the bar across the street within 10 minutes. He walked in and walked right back out; it was the same scene. Last week, someone was stabbed there.</p>
<p>Upstairs, one of the cleanup supervisors announces that a nearby Canadian engineer hasn’t had any pussy in 10 days, and could die. The guys say there’s an old Vietnamese lady with a notebook full of available hookers’ ages and races who wanders the cleanup workers’ haunts, but she’s not here right now. Anyway, the workers are forbidden from bringing hookers into the houses and hotel rooms their employers are putting them up in, under threat of being fired.</p>
<p>“How long are you going to be here?” I ask the contractor who’s worried about the sexless Canadian.</p>
<p>“We aren’t leaving till this is all clean,” he answers, “we” being M-I SWACO, a cleanup contractor that just built a giant <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100720/bs_yblog_upshot/can-a-massive-sand-cleaning-machine-save-grand-isle" type="external">orange-pipe-jumble sand-washing machine</a> on the beach (and which is not to be confused with the contractors who are doing only “window dressing” operations, as one of the other supervisors at the bar describes his job). M-I SWACO is not just going to polish the destruction off the surface. They’re going to have oiled sand from all over the island brought in by the truckload, then dig out the contaminated layers, wash it, and put it back, at least 40 tons of sand an hour. They’re going to save this place.&#160;</p>
<p>“We’ll be here as long as oil keeps washing up,” the contractor says.</p>
<p>“So…” I laugh sort of helplessly. “A year?”</p>
<p>“Three years…” he says. “Five years…”</p>
<p>“Hopefully forever,” the guy next to him says. “I need this job if I can’t work offshore anymore.” Last week, the emcee that accompanies the oil wrestlers yelled into the microphone, “Let that oil gush! Let that money flow!”&#160;The workers—part of the new Grand Isle scenery of helicopters, Hummers, and National Guardsmen, serious people in uniforms and coveralls and work boots—the workers around the wrestling ring, drunk and blowing cash from jobs that might kill them, cheered.</p>
<p /> | true | 4 | lta hrefhttpjellowrestlecomgallerybrianvan082706slides_dsc2284htmlgtbrian vanjellowrestlecomltagt hear race riot daddys money almost soon arrive grand isle louisiana friend going bar tonight catch female oil wrestling oilspill cleanup workers packing see saturday nights stop office islands biggest seafood distributor tells us two days ago bunch black guys bunch white guys got big fight bar spilled street broken ton cops according census 1541 people live slow southern resort town estimated 3 percent black spill seafood guy gestures direction floating barracks built barges bay house lowerskilled cleanup workers says people think barracks keep workerswho mostly blackfrom jumping onto dry land causing trouble night dozens men racesegregated packs crowd around watch strippers dance around tussle inside bouncy inflatable ring set inside daddys money female oil wrestlers need obviously oiled plastic cups full baby oil auctioned along right rub contents one thongbikinied gals hope theres dispersant oil someone quips bidding first match starts 10 ends pretty quickly kid offers 100 outbid guy next yells name cortez bid 80 dollar bills tucked way around brim hat piles fist spent 200 1000 paycheck already tonight coming every saturday says gestures expansively scenewrithing women hollering moneythrowing men sponsored bp yells laughing throws arms around grabs ass upstairs openair deck supervisors professional contractors drink one comes talk calls yankee dont get says animals means black guys another tells us crimeprone monkeys already stopped counting many times ive heard nword grand isle today back downstairs testosterone still spewing men screaming nowtopless girls rolling around trying pin floor exarmy ranger drunk hardly stand asks boyfriend lie say hes right somewhere ranger scowls pushes move side ring guy wraps tight grip around waist bps money let make love says im prostitute inform backing create space pelvises presses insistent forearm harder small back im trying play like prostitute says im saying whatever takes extract firm fist chest two grand isle girls nonstrippers bar trying inch away teetering drunk wont take hands encouraging get ring turn around see interior department firefighter talked earlier seems like nice guy offered buy dinner rather offering money sex still behind case hes hero steps tells teetering guy back thats wife says towering drunk pointing one girls dont care teetering guy says thats ends fireman thick fourinchlong scar behind ear hit bottle doesnt start bar fights anymore lucky thing coworkers hes buff pawnee hes sick calling tonto chief indian joe neardesperate levels racial sexual aggression horde arent usually get strip show bar feels like strip show prison yard friend says hes leaving cant bear stupidity stale testosterone anymore returns bar across street within 10 minutes walked walked right back scene last week someone stabbed upstairs one cleanup supervisors announces nearby canadian engineer hasnt pussy 10 days could die guys say theres old vietnamese lady notebook full available hookers ages races wanders cleanup workers haunts shes right anyway workers forbidden bringing hookers houses hotel rooms employers putting threat fired long going ask contractor whos worried sexless canadian arent leaving till clean answers mi swaco cleanup contractor built giant orangepipejumble sandwashing machine beach confused contractors window dressing operations one supervisors bar describes job mi swaco going polish destruction surface theyre going oiled sand island brought truckload dig contaminated layers wash put back least 40 tons sand hour theyre going save place160 well long oil keeps washing contractor says laugh sort helplessly year three years says five years hopefully forever guy next says need job cant work offshore anymore last week emcee accompanies oil wrestlers yelled microphone let oil gush let money flow160the workerspart new grand isle scenery helicopters hummers national guardsmen serious people uniforms coveralls work bootsthe workers around wrestling ring drunk blowing cash jobs might kill cheered | 604 |
<p>Note: A couple of years ago Senator Ted Stevens fever-dream of opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was dashed at the last moment, prompting the titan of Anchorage to descry: “this is the worst day of my life.” Here is an excerpt from my new book <a href="http://www.easycartsecure.com/CounterPunch/CounterPunch_Books.html" type="external">Born Under a Bad Sky</a> recounting that tragic episode from the career the nation’s longest serving Republican senator. Now Senator Stevens might want to amend that lament. This week came news that Senator Stevens had been indicted by a federal grand jury on seven counts of lying about rather modest inducements from a defense contractor. It’s a relatively trivial charge given Stevens’ plump resumé of political larceny over the past 40 years. But perhaps a fitting way for his career to end. Stevens has hired Oliver North’s former attorney Brendan “I’m Not a Potted Plant” Sullivan to represent him. Sullivan says he wants a quick trial. Of course, he does. Stevens wants a verdict, any kind of verdict, before Bush vacates the Oval Office and the prospects of a pardon fade into the long tundra night. –JSC</p>
<p>Before George Bush boarded his helicopter for evacuation into the Maryland hill country for Christmas at Camp David, the president-in-Lycra made the inexplicable observation that “it’s been a great year for Americans.” He probably wasn’t speaking for the families of the 735 US troops who had been killed in Iraq in 2005, although increasingly, the military death-toll there is claiming the lives of recent Mexican immigrants, who Bush may not consider fully “American.” Also Bush likely wasn’t talking about the 300,000 people still displaced by Hurricane Katrina, perhaps because the First Mother has assured him that those who were dropped off in Texas have never had it so good. And he certainly wasn’t referring to Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, once the most powerful man on the Hill, who whined in a threnody worthy of a passage from Aeschylus, that the close of this year’s congressional session had been the worst day of his life.</p>
<p>What tragedy could have cast such a gloomy pall across the mighty man from Anchorage, who, as chairman of the Senate appropriations committee, commands the flow of trillions of dollars from the federal treasury? The final days of congress are usually a joyous time for Stevens. This is the season when he gets to play Santa, by implanting billions of dollars of pork-barrel projects into the final budget bills of the states of senators who have shown him the proper obeisance over the previous year, and by stripping out cherished projects from those few who dared defy him.</p>
<p>But this year, it was Stevens who was rudely jolted by a last second reversal of fortune, when his brethren and sistren in the senate blocked his stealthy maneuver to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration.</p>
<p>Surely, the Porcupine caribou herd raised their heads at Stevens’ long-distance howl and snorted in celebration at the news that their calving grounds on the Arctic plain had been spared for yet another year from intrusion by oil derricks and pipelines and that their nemesis for the last thirty years had received a rare rebuke.</p>
<p>Stevens’ agony must be all the more acute because he was so tantalizingly close to achieving what he has said is his last major objective as a senator. Indeed, earlier this year, after the senator had slipped the ANWR drilling measure into the budget reconciliation bill in an effort to evade the senate filibusters that had frustrated his efforts in the past, Stevens told his hometown paper, the Anchorage Daily News, that his work in the senate was done and he could now retire a contented man.</p>
<p>Stevens wasn’t counting on the Republican-controlled House of Representatives throwing a monkeywrench into his devious plans. But that’s exactly what happened this fall when twenty-five Republicans, staring at polar-bear friendly poll numbers and not wanting to risk aligning themselves with the oil company executives who had gloated about making record profits in the wake of Katrina, demanded that the ANWR provision be stripped from the budget bill. The defeat of ANWR in what Stevens contemptuously calls the “other body” may also reflect the collapse of House discipline now that Tom DeLay has been forced to stand aside as leader following his indictment in Texas.</p>
<p>While the Sierra Club feted itself over a rare environmental victory in the GOP-ruled House, Stevens went back to his laboratory and brewed up another recipe from his book of legislative alchemy. The senator covertly affixed the ANWR measure to the Defense Appropriation Bill, hoping that Democrats and anti-drilling Republicans wouldn’t have the guts to launch a last minute filibuster that might be seen as denying weapons, body armor, food, and Humvees to the troops in Iraq. The senate also linked Katrina relief money to the ANWR measure. “There’ll be no Katrina money without ANWR drilling,” Stevens brayed. But Stevens’ gambit failed, when he fell four votes shy of overcoming a filibuster.</p>
<p>It is a sweet irony that, within a matter of months, both houses had approved opening ANWR to drilling, and then they both rejected it. In a mournful editorial, the Wall Street Journal called the turn of events “surreal.” And for once they were right.</p>
<p>Of course, next spring, with the regularity of migrating warblers, the ANWR drilling forces will press their case once more, with Ted Stevens leading the charge. But the window of vulnerability is closing for ANWR. Stevens is in his twilight. He seems a frail and diminished figure these days, ranting in the well of the Senate, a Republican version of Bobby Byrd, who also once ruled the appropriations game and steered federal wealth to the carved hills of West Virginia.</p>
<p>Stevens must feel that the oil cartel has let him down, first by the orgy of profiteering in the wake of the hurricanes, then with the brazen performance of the oil executives during the congressional show hearings into their record profits, where the CEOs refused to even feign the slightest blush of contrition.</p>
<p>The final blow, though, was the distinct lack of vigor shown by oil industry lobbyists in the battle for ANWR. For Stevens this must seem like a kind of heresy. He is a crusader now, for whom the conquest of ANWR has assumed a religious fervor. Stevens wants to drill a well through the heart not only of ANWR, but the idea of ANWR, the paganistic precedent of a swath of public land in his state that is off-limits to industrial exploitation.</p>
<p>“It’s an empty, ugly place,” Stevens snarled. “It’s almost treasonous that environmentalists are sacrificing our national security for such a place.” The mad senator raged that he planned to visit the states of each senator who voted against him to inform the citizens of his or her treachery.</p>
<p>But for the oil companies it’s always been about maximizing profits and there’s mounting evidence that without generous federal subsidies or a major spike in global oil prices, there might not be enough oil lurking under the permafrost of ANWR to justify the legislative fight and the years of protracted litigation.</p>
<p>No one really knows how much oil lies under ANWR. There’s only been a single test hole drilled in the area, and that was on native lands and the results have been kept a closely guarded secret for years. The geology of ANWR is suggestive of an oil field holding between 5 billion and 10 billion barrels. But if the price of oil stays below $100 a barrel, fully 30 percent of that total won’t be economically recoverable. That leaves somewhere between 3.5 billion and 7 billion barrels—a big find, but not huge. At peak production, ANWR oil, sluiced down the Alaska pipeline, might satiate about 5 percent of US oil demand. But only for about three years. Then production would begin a steady decline until the reserves are exhausted in twenty years or so. Add to this prospectus, the expense and risk of transporting the crude from the Arctic to US refineries in southern California, assuming the crude isn’t shipped across the Pacific to refineries in China and South Korea.</p>
<p>From the oil cartel’s vantage, there are easier pickings to be had in the Alaskan National Petroleum Reserve just west of Prudhoe Bay, in the Canadian Yukon or in the Gulf of Mexico. If Stevens can deliver them ANWR gift-wrapped with production subsidies as his senatorial swan song, so much the better. If not, there’s no reason to sweat it. As Exxon and its brethren proved this year, oil shortages—real or engineered—yield eye-popping profits with little costs. And when the price gets high enough, every last drop of crude will once again be within their clutches.</p>
<p>As for the environmental movement, ANWR has functioned as their own private cash reserve since the 1980s when James Watt put a bull’s eye on that austere stretch of Arctic coastline. There’s been no more lucrative fundraiser for the Sierra Club than the annual threat of oil wells being drilled in the home of the polar bear and musk oxen. To the political cynic, it might appear that the environmental movement profits from having ANWR under perpetual threat.</p>
<p>But with Stevens weakened and the oil industry distracted, it’s time for the green cabal in Washington to push hard for permanent protection of America’s Serengeti by demanding that the entire wildlife refuge to be designated a federal wilderness area forever immune from attack by the oil and gas companies, a stratagem they inexplicably chose not to pursue during Clintontime.</p>
<p>A successful wilderness campaign might mean a diminished flow of revenues in the future. But these green groups are supposed to be non-profits, aren’t they?</p>
<p>JEFFREY ST. CLAIR is the author of <a href="http://www.easycartsecure.com/CounterPunch/CounterPunch_Books.html" type="external">Been Brown So Long It Looked Like Green to Me: the Politics of Nature</a> and <a href="" type="internal">Grand Theft Pentagon</a>. His newest book, <a href="http://www.easycartsecure.com/CounterPunch/CounterPunch_Books.html" type="external">Born Under a Bad Sky</a>, is just out from AK Press / CounterPunch books. He can be reached at: <a href="mailto:sitka@comcast.net" type="external">sitka@comcast.net</a>.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p />
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;</p> | true | 4 | note couple years ago senator ted stevens feverdream opening arctic national wildlife refuge dashed last moment prompting titan anchorage descry worst day life excerpt new book born bad sky recounting tragic episode career nations longest serving republican senator senator stevens might want amend lament week came news senator stevens indicted federal grand jury seven counts lying rather modest inducements defense contractor relatively trivial charge given stevens plump resumé political larceny past 40 years perhaps fitting way career end stevens hired oliver norths former attorney brendan im potted plant sullivan represent sullivan says wants quick trial course stevens wants verdict kind verdict bush vacates oval office prospects pardon fade long tundra night jsc george bush boarded helicopter evacuation maryland hill country christmas camp david presidentinlycra made inexplicable observation great year americans probably wasnt speaking families 735 us troops killed iraq 2005 although increasingly military deathtoll claiming lives recent mexican immigrants bush may consider fully american also bush likely wasnt talking 300000 people still displaced hurricane katrina perhaps first mother assured dropped texas never good certainly wasnt referring senator ted stevens alaska powerful man hill whined threnody worthy passage aeschylus close years congressional session worst day life tragedy could cast gloomy pall across mighty man anchorage chairman senate appropriations committee commands flow trillions dollars federal treasury final days congress usually joyous time stevens season gets play santa implanting billions dollars porkbarrel projects final budget bills states senators shown proper obeisance previous year stripping cherished projects dared defy year stevens rudely jolted last second reversal fortune brethren sistren senate blocked stealthy maneuver open arctic national wildlife refuge oil exploration surely porcupine caribou herd raised heads stevens longdistance howl snorted celebration news calving grounds arctic plain spared yet another year intrusion oil derricks pipelines nemesis last thirty years received rare rebuke stevens agony must acute tantalizingly close achieving said last major objective senator indeed earlier year senator slipped anwr drilling measure budget reconciliation bill effort evade senate filibusters frustrated efforts past stevens told hometown paper anchorage daily news work senate done could retire contented man stevens wasnt counting republicancontrolled house representatives throwing monkeywrench devious plans thats exactly happened fall twentyfive republicans staring polarbear friendly poll numbers wanting risk aligning oil company executives gloated making record profits wake katrina demanded anwr provision stripped budget bill defeat anwr stevens contemptuously calls body may also reflect collapse house discipline tom delay forced stand aside leader following indictment texas sierra club feted rare environmental victory gopruled house stevens went back laboratory brewed another recipe book legislative alchemy senator covertly affixed anwr measure defense appropriation bill hoping democrats antidrilling republicans wouldnt guts launch last minute filibuster might seen denying weapons body armor food humvees troops iraq senate also linked katrina relief money anwr measure therell katrina money without anwr drilling stevens brayed stevens gambit failed fell four votes shy overcoming filibuster sweet irony within matter months houses approved opening anwr drilling rejected mournful editorial wall street journal called turn events surreal right course next spring regularity migrating warblers anwr drilling forces press case ted stevens leading charge window vulnerability closing anwr stevens twilight seems frail diminished figure days ranting well senate republican version bobby byrd also ruled appropriations game steered federal wealth carved hills west virginia stevens must feel oil cartel let first orgy profiteering wake hurricanes brazen performance oil executives congressional show hearings record profits ceos refused even feign slightest blush contrition final blow though distinct lack vigor shown oil industry lobbyists battle anwr stevens must seem like kind heresy crusader conquest anwr assumed religious fervor stevens wants drill well heart anwr idea anwr paganistic precedent swath public land state offlimits industrial exploitation empty ugly place stevens snarled almost treasonous environmentalists sacrificing national security place mad senator raged planned visit states senator voted inform citizens treachery oil companies always maximizing profits theres mounting evidence without generous federal subsidies major spike global oil prices might enough oil lurking permafrost anwr justify legislative fight years protracted litigation one really knows much oil lies anwr theres single test hole drilled area native lands results kept closely guarded secret years geology anwr suggestive oil field holding 5 billion 10 billion barrels price oil stays 100 barrel fully 30 percent total wont economically recoverable leaves somewhere 35 billion 7 billion barrelsa big find huge peak production anwr oil sluiced alaska pipeline might satiate 5 percent us oil demand three years production would begin steady decline reserves exhausted twenty years add prospectus expense risk transporting crude arctic us refineries southern california assuming crude isnt shipped across pacific refineries china south korea oil cartels vantage easier pickings alaskan national petroleum reserve west prudhoe bay canadian yukon gulf mexico stevens deliver anwr giftwrapped production subsidies senatorial swan song much better theres reason sweat exxon brethren proved year oil shortagesreal engineeredyield eyepopping profits little costs price gets high enough every last drop crude within clutches environmental movement anwr functioned private cash reserve since 1980s james watt put bulls eye austere stretch arctic coastline theres lucrative fundraiser sierra club annual threat oil wells drilled home polar bear musk oxen political cynic might appear environmental movement profits anwr perpetual threat stevens weakened oil industry distracted time green cabal washington push hard permanent protection americas serengeti demanding entire wildlife refuge designated federal wilderness area forever immune attack oil gas companies stratagem inexplicably chose pursue clintontime successful wilderness campaign might mean diminished flow revenues future green groups supposed nonprofits arent jeffrey st clair author brown long looked like green politics nature grand theft pentagon newest book born bad sky ak press counterpunch books reached sitkacomcastnet 160 160 160 160 | 928 |
Subsets and Splits