THE QUEER ISSUE It's best to begin at the edge. Gay urban photography has a fleeting yet reliably revelatory home at those places where water laps up against land. On the East Coast, from 1975 through 1986, Alvin Baltrop explored the Hudson River side of Manhattan, capturing black-and-white visions of sex, murder, and architecture by cruising the piers as a peer rather than as an exploitative outsider. On the West Coast, during the '50s and '60s, Denny Denfield used Baker Beach and its nearby wooded areas to invent an Adam-only Eden best glimpsed solo through 3-D. And around the same time in Montreal, Alan B. Stone was hiding in a shed, looking through a shutter at the dock-working men and sunbathing boys who populated the city's port. In the zone known as the city's historical heart, his camera cautiously hinted at desires that could lead to prison time. Curated by David Deitcher, the SF Camerawork exhibition "Alan B.
Stone and the Senses of Place" proves Stone's photographic versatility ranged from a low-key form of William Klein–like typographic artistry to extremely subversive pastoral romanticism — in commissioned Boy Scout photos — to the candid portraiture of the beefcake genre. Such a showcase isn't Deitcher's intent, though — he's structured the show (and written about it, in an autobiographical essay) to foreground a specifically gay vision and experience of Montreal from a time when men were arrested and publicly vilified in newsprint for being homosexual.
Stone provides the nuanced vision; Deitcher identifies its facets and identifies with it. His analysis of Montreal through Stone's camera takes on special resonance when placed next to Douglas Crimp's look at post-Stonewall New York through Baltrop's camera in a February 2008 Artforum piece.
The difference between the liberated time of Baltrop and the closeted era of Stone is evident in their views of waterfront lazy sunbathers. Perhaps the brightest — in tone and in quality of light — of the Baltrop photos showcased in Artforum (also on view at www.baltrop.org) gazes from a few hundred feet away at a half-dozen naked men as they soak up the sun, converse, and dangle their feet off the edge of a pier. The gay-lib visibility inherent to the men's affectionate nudity is doubly emphasized by Baltrop's distanced yet full-frontal perspective. In contrast, Stone's 1954 photo Untitled (Lachine Canal) glimpses the back of a boy in a swimsuit seated at the Port of Montreal's shoreline — the identity of his solitary subject remains poignantly invisible to the photographer, who, as Deitcher notes, was stricken with arthritis at an early age.
There's a similar echo to a pair of photos — one by Stone, one by Baltrop — that depict men standing at the sunlit thresholds of waterfront warehouses. Stone's 1954 Untitled (Dock Workers, Port of Montreal) is a furtive from-behind vision of a shirtless, assumedly heterosexual dockworker. One image from Baltrop's "Pier Photographs, 1975-1986" glances at a shirtless man, also from ...
You have to work on yourself before you can really get anywhere. No one can do it for you. The magical codex and the dimensional escape hatch remain firmly out of reach for now. The flame will burn those who are unable to hold it safely in their hands. The universe insists, most adamantly, that we learn how to do it all by ourselves. Gnosis, spiritual attainment, esoteric wisdom. Whatever you want to call it. No cheating, no looking at your friend's paper, no plagiarising - you must do your own thing in your own way. Otherwise, we are compelled to repeat the same tests over and over again, through multiple lifetimes, until we finally figure it out. So you have to do the homework. Sharpen your blade. Keep moving. Fortunately, there is no time limit and everyone’s ascendant path is custom-built for their own unique growth pattern. Spiritually, it’s a win-win situation.
To help penetrate the all-pervading mists of the illusion, one must first acknowledge that consciousness is not the accidental and purposeless by-product of the human condition. The perceived world that we appear to be locked inside, like the silver ball in a pinball machine, is wholly a construct of consciousness. The pinball constructs the machine around itself. Whilst a testing notion for even the most elastic of modern philosophical minds, it has been known for aeons by the ancient mystical traditions and experienced directly by the indigenous shamanic cultures of every continent. Now, it is being evoked again as a progressive scientific theory in quantum physics. It is not new information we are bringing to mind, not by any means. It is better described as a remembrance.
Consciousness is a transcendental music with which we can attune, conduct and create. The spiritually synchronized mind instinctively discerns this. Consciousness flows through all things. It follows that consciousness itself does not originate in the brain of the individual. It is at root, a non-local force. The quantum and holographic traces of this have been unfolding for some time now, most intriguingly in the works of Gebser, Bohm, Pribram and Laszlo. The personal experience of consciousness is better conceived of as a tunnel, or an uplink, to the akashic field (aka the universal field, vacuum field, noosphere etc) which is dynamically connected to everything and everywhere. Perhaps the field is composed of the same subspace luminous filaments that Castaneda’s mythical figure of Don Juan spoke of so enigmatically; these being the fractal structures of consciousness itself, elaborately extending themselves across the multiverse, articulating every conceivable resolution. Our thoughts, feelings and articulations are unique expressions [configurations] of the field. Our imaginal thoughtforms sculpt its physical and psychic manifestations.
Subspace And Not-Thinking
Consciousness operates in a field which is not bound by the restrictions of third density conditions (time & space). Consequently, it may seamlessly reach into higher dimensions/fractal resolutions and potentially innumerable parallel universes, as indicated in superstring theory and m-theory. This is how telepathy, precognition, clairvoyance and similar extra sensory perception phenomena function, by jumping into the subspace field and observing any point along it, instantly and completely. Travel without movement. The coherence vector or signal quality is the difference between a faint intuition of something (I think my Aunty Barbara might call this evening) and a full-on vision (a 25ft meteorite will land in my back garden tomorrow at 9:45am and destroy the lawnmower). To maximize signal fidelity, to get the most accurate information, the mind must be trained to quieten the perpetual internal dialogue, the chatter of the brain.
Thinking is brain churn. Knowing is field connection. Whilst deductive reasoning is practical for information processing, it can stand in the way of the coherent field connection necessary to attain wisdom. Many deep mystical experiences encountered in different planes of consciousness are so state specific that they cannot easily be brought back into the third density for adequate expression using the modern linguistic symbol set. Articulation is not always necessary for total comprehension. Standard ‘remote viewing’ technique (the psychic ability to gather information about a distant or unseen target) teaches the student not to think. The collective consciousness within the field knows everything already. It can communicate any information about anything right into your head at supraluminal speeds. So why are some able to remote view and others not? Impulsive brain chatter obscures the incoming data, like static on a TV screen. We need to learn to step out of the way. Meditation brings insight into the thinking process, helping to smooth it out and sometimes stop it altogether, allowing deeper perceptions to be received. Toltec shamanism teaches the apprentice the procedure of ‘stopping the world’ as a means of placing false egoic thinking aside in order to perceive the world shamanically, or if you prefer, to establish a stable uplink to the field.
Interfacing with reality is more instructive than purely theorizing about it. We have long since reached the saturation point of the narrow scientific method with its reliance on separation, measurement and reductionism. Such materialist inferences, no matter how scrupulous, are at odds with the holistic multidisciplinary attitude required for actual conscious evolution. They only obstruct efforts to perceive beyond the particulate cloak of Maya. The primacy of felt experience is consistently more edifying and meaningful than the smug abstractions of ‘scientism’ (the belief that scientific principles are essential to all other disciplines, including philosophical, mystical, spiritual and humanist interpretations of life). The Control System sponsors scientism by overexposing various trenchant physicists, atheists and parapsychologists who all exhibit some form of spiritual devolution. As smart and kooky as some of them are, they lack the psychic integrity and spiritual humility that is so palpable in those who truly walk the path.
Small Is Beautiful
Far from being the exotic anthropological oddity it was once depicted as, shamanism is the original spiritual experience of all indigenous peoples. Present in the savannas of Africa, the jungles of the Amazon, the plains of America, the mountains of Asia and the forests of Europe, shamanism was an integral mystical practice of deep esoteric and spiritual importance to both individuals and communities. Thus it remained, organically ascendant, up until a few thousand years ago when the personal, sovereign right to a spiritual connection with the divine was removed from daily life. This was achieved by hijacking and co-opting all systems of transcendence into the dark canopy of organized religion. The fake priesthood. They took what they liked, pruned the liberating and inspiring bits and threw the rest away. Anyone who sought to practice their own mysticism or dared to resurrect the old ways was executed. Many such religious crusades were prosecuted against ancient spiritual and shamanic practices, campaigns that today would fall under the technical terminology of genocide.
If you trace the origins of the major monotheistic organized religions back far enough, it becomes clear that they were never designed to help the individual grow and develop. They were there to control land, dictate moral and social norms and separate the common man from his divine heritage. Higher consciousness, personal freedom and spiritual communion, far from being the core elements of their basic mystical teachings, were concepts firmly discouraged by the various priest castes. In their place, the disempowering qualities of submission, victimhood, repression and guilt became the preferred tenets of worshipful compliance.
Most who walk the path have long since discarded the unnecessary restraints of organized religion. There are many good people who still operate within the conventions and structures of Christianity, in particular, and that is of course, their prerogative. However, it doesn’t take much research into alternative history and the ancient indigenous chronicles to discover that the sacred texts that form the backbone of today’s megareligions are merely distorted versions of much earlier and authentic methods of spiritual practice. Despite the artful stage-managed resurgence of religious fundamentalism in both the east and west, the crude pious repressions of the Control System are beginning to lose their grip. People are realizing that they can anoint themselves as their own special representative on earth (who else could they be?) and their own personal channel to the holy spirit.
Fractal Dreams
In ‘The Art Of Dreaming’, Carlos Castaneda wrote, "Don Juan contended that our world, which we believe to be unique and absolute, is only one in a cluster of consecutive worlds, arranged like the layers of an onion. He asserted that even though we have been energetically conditioned to perceive solely our world, we still have the capability of entering into those other realms, which are as real, unique, absolute and engulfing as our own world is. Believing that our energetic conditioning is correctable, don Juan stated that sorcerers of ancient times developed a set of practices designed to recondition our energetic capabilities to perceive. They called this set of practices the art of dreaming." When I first read that in 1994, two things sprang to mind. (i) How don Juan was absolutely spot on, and (ii) rather fittingly, how the process of unfolding the onion layers of reality can indeed bring tears to your eyes.
The ‘cluster of consecutive worlds’ is a fractal model. The essential pattern of creation is encoded into everything, all the way down the line, from galaxies to cauliflowers. It helps to examine fractal formations in nature to properly appreciate their properties. I have collated some useful illustrations of fractal geometry in the attached picture (click for large version).
The geometry and mathematics of fractal forms has been studied since the 17th century (in modern history that is) but their complexity and infinite recursive depth made progress slow. The arrival of computers in the 1970’s made things much simpler. Rapid processing, sophisticated graphics and software modelling enabled researchers to explore the depth of fractals to a level never seen before. Researchers categorize fractal generation into three different classes: (1) Escape-time Fractals; Mandelbrot set, Julia set, Nova fractal, (2) Iterated Function Systems; Cantor set, Koch snowflake, Sierpinski carpet and (3) Random Fractals. In random fractals, we see dendritic fractals demonstrate the fundamental natural property of diffusion-limited aggregation (DLA). DLA is best illustrated in the physical manifestations of fern growth, ice crystals, tree branch growth and electrical discharges. See the aforementioned montage image for examples.
Observing the nautilus shell, we encounter the living embodiment of the Fibonacci sequence of numbers 0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 2584 4181 6765. So important to sacred geometry, Egyptology and the ancient mystery cults. For those who may have discarded their high school mathematics (understandably in most cases), the Fibonacci sequence establishes the first number as 0 and the second number as 1. Each subsequent number is equal to the sum of the previous two numbers.
The sequence presents itself in nature in the branching of trees, the structure of pineapples, artichoke flowering, uncurling ferns, the arrangement of pine cones and the spiralling florets in the head of a sunflower (see image). Stunningly beautiful.
The recursive, self-iterative nature of fractals, clearly visible in the Mandelbrot and Koch snowflake, begin to speak to the higher consciousness and express some of the underlying structures of reality. The fractal holography of the universe imprints the design of itself into each individual component, each creative lego brick. All elements are coded with the entire universal design project. The ancient druidic respect for the oak tree and the acorn were symbols of this core understanding. As then, so now, such meditations lead to a fuller comprehension of the sacred mysteries of creation. Our art is to project into higher and deeper resolutions of the fractal spiral, gathering gnosis and wisdom as spiritual gravitation compels the ascendant homeward journey.
Our life is the journey. We illustrate it with our unique and miraculous stories. Our learning helps to improve the coherence and the elegance of the fractal. Our capacity for consciousness determines how deep we can go. I sense that each lifetime, each self, each frequency of being, emanates fractally from a larger, grander structure, from where our higher self guides us and loves us. Perhaps even these ultra conscious entities are expressions of an even more sublime intelligence. Gazing at the head of the sunflower, it certainly feels that way.
by Humberto Márquez
... U.S. economist Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the 2001 Nobel Prize for economics, wrote earlier this month that "Only new patterns of consumption and production -- a new economic model -- can address that most fundamental resource problem.
"Two factors set off today's crisis: the Iraq war contributed to the run up in oil prices, including through increased instability in the Middle East, the low cost provider of oil, while biofuels have meant that food and energy markets are increasingly integrated," he added.
"America’s subsidies for corn-based ethanol contribute more to the coffers of ethanol producers than they do to curtailing global warming," he complained, after arguing that "rich countries must reduce, if not eliminate, distortional agriculture and energy policies, and help those in the poorest countries improve their capacity to produce food."
For poor countries, the steady rise in oil prices has taken on nightmare proportions. At the start of the Jeddah meeting, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah suggested that OPEC create a one billion dollar fund to compensate poor countries for the rising price of oil.
The situation in Latin America was illustrated by Dominican Finance Minister Vicente Bengoa, who said that "in 2004, the oil bill was covered by the remittances sent home from Dominicans abroad, with 560 million dollars left over, while this year remittances are expected to run to 1.9 billion dollars, compared to an oil bill of 4.5 billion."
The big oil companies, in the meantime, are raking in tens of billions of dollars each. With these profits, said Poleo, global capital is financing its positioning with regard to the shifts occurring in the global energy scenario.
The price bubble continues to swell, to the benefit of these interests, although analysts like Alexander Green, investment director at the Oxford Club, a private, international network of investors, say oil prices will inevitably come down.
"Yes, speculative fever has gripped the oil market. This bull is likely to end up just like those in the ring in Mexico City. Current oil prices are simply unsustainable," Green wrote recently.
By Laura CarlsenIt's rare for the junior partners of NAFTA—Mexico and Canada—to have a chance to sit down and discuss regional integration without the dominating influence of the United States. Even when they do, of course, the U.S. is the elephant in the room.The University of the Americas in Puebla, Mexico hosted a conference recently on the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) from the Canadian and Mexican perspective. Although most of the presentations were from academics, businessmen or government officials, our panel on civil society participation set me to reflecting on the long personal and political history of the nearly 15-year-old NAFTA and its offspring, the SPP.When negotiations on the free trade agreement with Mexico began in 1991, we had little idea of how a North American Free Trade Agreement would affect the country. But Canada had already been through it all. The U.S.-Mexico agreement sought to extend many of the terms of the 1989 U.S.-Canada agreement and patch them into a regional agreement.In the early nineties, it was clear that NAFTA represented a huge step forward in locking in the kinds of structural adjustment programs from the IMF and World Bank that had devastated sectors of the economy, and that it formed part of President Carlos Salinas de Gortari's project to extend the neoliberal economic model of trade liberalization and export-orientation, privatization, and withdrawal of the state from social programs and economic regulation. But we didn't know the specifics of what to expect and the whole process was being carried out in backrooms hermetically sealed to citizen participation.I felt like kind of a double agent at the time. I was working as a journalist and editor at Business Mexico, the magazine of the American Chamber of Commerce in Mexico, and had also been working with a Mexican non-governmental organization in communications and women's projects. The dual perspective was fascinating, to say the least. The mood in the Chamber of Commerce was one of euphoria, while the citizen movements felt a sense of impending doom. I had trouble reconciling the opposite scenarios being presented until I realized that it wasn't so much that one was right and one was wrong, but that the gap between the winners and losers in Mexico's economy was about to get much, much wider.At the magazine I began to specialize in stories about sectors that would suffer under the agreement, mainly smallscale agriculture and micro-industry oriented toward the domestic market. There was no real argument from promoters about the lack of "competitiveness" of these sectors—the argument was that these workers would be re-employed in new export-oriented, internationally financed industries. In the face of predictions of massive job loss, they blithely assumed that the market and high growth rates would work it all out. For U.S. businesses in Mexico, the greater mobility of capital and investor incentives in NAFTA presented a bright new day with nary a cloud in sight.Meanwhile, small farmers organizations couldn't believe they were being asked to compete with subsidized products from the world's largest exporter. Independent unions thought the trade-off between more maquiladora jobs, and downward pressure on wages and job security due to international competition between workers was sure to be a bum deal in the long term.Mexican trade activists decided on a two-part strategy: 1) demand information on the negotiations and 2) call the Canadians. Canadian citizen groups had developed excellent critiques of the FTA from labor and agriculture perspectives and analyzed the way the agreement could affect the social safety net. Although the two countries had very different political and economic contexts, these studies and the experience helped Mexicans to begin to project outcomes. Later, U.S. groups joined the networks as well. There was very little chance of influencing the negotiations, but the groups did manage to get more public information released.This was the birth of trinational networks that, with ups and downs, have continued to work together to oppose aspects of NAFTA and the SPP to this day. It hasn't been an easy process and mistakes have been made. Canadian and U.S. labor unions at first viewed Mexican workers not as allies but as unfair competition as their factories moved South. It wasn't until they began to see the conditions of the Mexican workers and analyze corporate strategies of pitting workers against workers that real solidarity and understanding set in.Mexican farmers thought U.S. and Canadian family farmers were closer to wealthy hacienda owners than to them, with their large expanses of land and fancy equipment. It wasn't until they heard the stories about the thousands of families going bankrupt and losing their farms and the control of agribusiness over all aspects of agriculture that they understood that they shared a struggle against an international system stacked against them.It was, as always, the human contact that broke the barriers. NAFTA set into motion a series of trinational meetings. If at first, the networks were joined by their victimhood, and they later began to share a vision of changing their respective economies in ways that supported rather than marginalized them.Over the past year the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy and other organizations have sponsored a couple of major meetings to take a look at what we've learned from NAFTA and the fight against corporate-led globalization. It gives me no great satisfaction to report that some of the most pessimistic predictions we made—the displacement of small farmers, lower than expected growth rates, the growing divide between the rich and the poor—have come true. And although many of us did not believe NAFTA would solve the immigration problem as its promoters predicted, few imagined the huge increase that occurred.We've also seen that despite advances, the challenges to our networks today are greater than ever. The extension of NAFTA into security issues under the SPP—in the logic of the Bush National Security Strategy—poses unprecedented dangers to Canadian and Mexican sovereignty. There is no better example of that than the recent Merida Initiative that fundamentally changes the nature of the U.S.-Mexico relationship. The focus on geopolitical goals over human security, and the imposition of U.S. foreign policy objectives on Mexico will have lasting and likely destabilizing effects as Mexico takes on the militarized vision of confronting public security challenges.The hegemonic policies of the U.S. government have made it easier in some ways for Canadians and Mexicans to talk about regional integration than U.S. citizens. Both feel threatened in many of the same ways, particularly by the pressure coming from the U.S. government within SPP and other channels over access to natural resources in their territories. U.S. groups face more difficult obstacles explaining and organizing on their turf, due to misinformation and the climate of fear manipulated to support government actions.Nonetheless, there is no question that we've come a long way. Polls in Canada and the United States show a majority believes NAFTA has not benefited their country. U.S. democratic presidential candidates demanded review and possible renegotiation of the agreement, and 200,000 Mexican farmers marched in the streets demanding renegotiation of the agricultural chapter. The relationships and networks built early on have grown as the trade agreement has filtered into the general public and generated widespread criticism of its effects on society in all three nations.Reflecting on these meetings, I think perhaps the biggest challenge now to our networks is not to centralize the struggle and the critique but to understand our differences. We have a pretty good understanding of the architecture built by NAFTA and added onto in the SPP. We need to continue to work together to analyze its foundations and mainstays.But we, the peoples of three nations, find ourselves in different rooms. Each must decide on priorities and national strategies to reform policies, relieve suffering and build alternative structures. It will be the confluence of these strategies from citizens of sovereign nations that enable us to join together and stop the way the SPP and its handful of corporate executives have imposed regional integration from the top down.Laura Carlsen (lcarlsen(a)ciponline.org) is Director of the Americas Policy Program at www.americaspolicy.org in Mexico City.
Sección 22, the radical Oaxacan section of the Latin American education workers' union Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores en la Educación (SNTE), has finally signed deals with both the SNTE hierarchy and Oaxacan local government. However, the strike will continue until this weekend.
The strike (previously reported on Libcom here and here), a contrast of almost blanket support from union members and almost blanket condemnation from the rest of the state, will however continue until this Sunday, five days longer than originally planned, and today, another regional section took over the maintenance of the plantón (encampment) in Ciudad de Oaxaca's main plaza.
The SNTE executive bowed to the Oaxacan local's demands of new union elections within the state this coming September, a core demand of the strike in the context of the national union leadership's breaking of the 2006 strike in Oaxaca in the midst of a statewide revolt. In order to undermine the authority of Sección 22, the SNTE went as far as to form a rival local in Oaxaca, Sección 59. The hierarchy also agreed to hitherto return to them 90% of their dues
While the local government acceeded to the majority of their demands, the most immediately impressive of which being the (supposed) release of "all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience in Oaxaca and the cancellation of all arrest orders on movement members". The government claims this has been enacted in the form of their discontinued interest in some 250 individuals, but even a cursory glance at the track record of law enforcement agencies within the state creates doubts about their sincerity.
Also within the agreement is an undertaking by the local government to do the following:
-$500 million pesos' (around £24.5 million) investment in infrastructure and equipment for Oaxacan schools, including new kitchens and provisions to provide school breakfasts (school starts and finishes early in Mexico), new uniforms, shoes, amongst other things
-the return to Sección 22 of 108 schools "occupied" by Sección 59 (or rather, "a committee to oversee the regularisation of services in schools affected by conflict")
-an increase in the annual compensation of teachers for their personal contributions to the maintenance of school supplies
-an increase in the number of state scholarships for sons of education workers
-an increase in funding for programmes for homeless children and orphans
-more investment in medical centres in rural areas
-more availability of loans and accommodation for education workers (government programmes often offer both to young state workers in order to keep public services [nearly] afloat)
-the recognition of Sección 22 as the sole representation of Oaxacan state education workers (as opposed to Sección 59)
Most of the budget increases will be at a lower rate than the strikers demanded, according to the common practice of barter in industrial disputes. The local's demands of the removal of Ulises Ruíz Ortíz, the incredibly unpopular state governor, and the shelving of the ISSSTE law (which intends to break up state pensions provisions) were also unsurprisingly successful.
However, the striking workers have won a great many gains in their workplace, and have once again demonstrated to their critics - who claim that their annual strike damages the education of their pupils - that industrial action is the only way to improve their working conditions. Moreover, the fractured Sección 59, whose leader today was forced to deny that its members have struck at all, now sound somewhat irrelevant in their pious proclamations about "being concerned with the children's quality of education".
Now talk moves onto the future of this unstable, poor and desperately unhappy region, and a propaganda campaign has started in earnest against Sección 22 in the wake of their forcing of the local authority's hands. One prominent local government minister told journalists that the agreement demonstrates that Sección 22 "will never have to strike again", in an attempt to jettison the almost 30 year old tradition of a yearly work stoppage.
Meanwhile the local itself is accused of corruption, with the disappearance of $5 million pesos (around £245,000) of money set aside by the union for reconstruction work in the main plaza of Ciudad de Oaxaca following the unrest of 2006.
This is a scalable context timeline. It contains events related to the event Early 1976: US Intelligence Finds Pakistan Has ‘Crash Program’ to Build Nuclear Bomb. You can narrow or broaden the context of this timeline by adjusting the zoom level. The lower the scale, the more relevant the items on average will be, while the higher the scale, the less relevant the items, on average, will be.
Although Mexico’s contribution to social-movement murals is well documented, much less is known about Mexico’s activist graphic arts history. Leopoldo Méndez (1902-1969) was a printmaker and activist in numerous political and artistic groups, but he reached his incandescent peak as founding member and de-facto leader of the Taller de Gráfica Popular (variously translated as Popular Graphic Arts Workshop or People’s Graphic Art Workshop, TGP). It is a resounding tragedy that the TGP, one of the most significant loci of mid-20th century social movement printmaking, is virtually unknown in the United States. This is only partly explained by the usual disability of Anglocentrism; the deeper roots have to do with academia’s discomfort with political activism and with the general lack of scholarship in this country about political printmaking. Deborah Caplow’s excellent book goes a long way toward informing us about the explosive combination of art, artists, politics, and printmaking in Mexico during the mid-1900s. More than any previous work, Caplow’s book explains Méndez in the context of his time, analyzed through the organizations in which he participated and the other artists with whom he collaborated.
By Lincoln Cushing, Art Historian
Review of a book by:
Deborah Caplow, Leopoldo Méndez: Revolutionary Art and the Mexican Print. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2007.
Although Mexico’s contribution to social-movement murals is well documented, much less is known about Mexico’s activist graphic arts history. Leopoldo Méndez (1902-1969) was a printmaker and activist in numerous political and artistic groups, but he reached his incandescent peak as founding member and de-facto leader of the Taller de Gráfica Popular (variously translated as Popular Graphic Arts Workshop or People’s Graphic Art Workshop, TGP). It is a resounding tragedy that the TGP, one of the most significant loci of mid-20th century social movement printmaking, is virtually unknown in the United States. This is only partly explained by the usual disability of Anglocentrism; the deeper roots have to do with academia’s discomfort with political activism and with the general lack of scholarship in this country about political printmaking. Deborah Caplow’s excellent book goes a long way toward informing us about the explosive combination of art, artists, politics, and printmaking in Mexico during the mid-1900s. More than any previous work, Caplow’s book explains Méndez in the context of his time, analyzed through the organizations in which he participated and the other artists with whom he collaborated.
Mexico has a long history of printmaking in the service of social change, largely credited to the seminal work of José Guadalupe Posada (1852-1913), who was a printmaker and social critic during the Mexican Revolution. The TGP was founded in late 1937 after the collapse of the four-year-old Liga de Escritores y Artistas Revolucionarios (LEAR, Revolutionary Writers’ and Artists’ League). It brought together a dedicated cadre of political activists who happened to express themselves as printmakers. They worked collaboratively, issued editions as both fine-art prints for raising funds and free or cheap street posters for propaganda, and engaged in strategic acts of support for progressive candidates and issues. Although they occasionally generated lithographs, screenprints, and other media, their trademark expression was through linocuts –one or two color relief prints created from hand cut linoleum mounted on blocks. Prints were generally single sheet items, although some works are quite large for this medium (35 x 90 cm) and some were printed as two sheets and pasted together into one large poster.
The California Highway Patrol arrested six anti-war activists at a demonstration opposing the war in Iraq today about 12:15 p.m. at the State Capitol near Governor Schwarzenegger's office.
VERY URGENT NEWS ADVISORY Thursday, June 26, 2008 Contact: Paulette Cuilla 916/956-8678 or Maggie Coulter 916/456-1420 **NOTE: Video of arrests available via an independent videographer** SIX ARRESTED in front of SCHWARZENEGGER'S OFFICE DURING ANTI-WAR PROTEST TODAY SACRAMENTO – Six people were arrested at a demonstration opposing the war in Iraq TODAY/THURSDAY about 12:15 p.m. at the State Capitol near Gov. Schwarzenegger's office. The California Highway Patrol charged the activists with several misdemeanors, including allegedly demonstrating without a permit and illegally entering the Capitol, and released them. The demonstrators have a July 23 court date. The arrests took place following a "Freeze-In for Peace," where about two dozen people participated in a demonstration that required them to freeze in place for five minutes. Similar "freeze-in" actions for peace are popping up all over the country. "This is absolutely linked the budget deficit mess in California. Our share of the war in Iraq is $67 billion," said Maggie Coulter, one of those arrested. "In fact, just spending the money for these officers to arrest peaceful demonstrators doing little more than what happens in a legislative hearing is also a waste of taxpayers' money," she added.
Bolivian region rejects US anti-drug aid in favor of Venezuelan aid - June 25thCoca growers in Bolivia's Chapare province said Wednesday that they will suspend projects financed by the U.S. government aid agency and instead seek funding from Venezuela's socialist President Hugo Chavez.Leaders in the key coca-growing region accused the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, of using its aid to undermine leftist President Evo Morales, who rose to prominence as leader of the coca growers union."We want USAID to go. If USAID leaves, we will have aid from Venezuela, which is unconditioned and in solidarity," Chapare coca leader Julio Salazar told The Associated Press by telephone. Venezuela already is a major financial backer of Bolivia.USAID gave US$87 million in aid to Bolivia in 2007, including US$11.9 million to Chapare, mostly for road building and projects to help farmers to grow alternatives to coca.Asterio Romero, vice president of Chapare's main coca-growing group, said growers on Tuesday agreed to cancel the USAID's operations in the region and gave it until Thursday to leave.A U.S. Embassy official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to reporters, said the embassy would not comment because it has not yet been officially informed by the coca growers.Coca leaves are the main ingredient in cocaine, but they also have traditional, medicinal and religious uses among South America's Andean people.Morales has accused the aid agency of financing his opponents, including groups promoting regional autonomy from his government.Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca said Tuesday he wasn't familiar with the coca-growers' decision but said his government wants to make U.S. aid to Bolivia more "transparent."***Bolivia denies expulsion of USAID revenge tactiche Bolivian government denied Thursday that Bolivian coca growers' decision to expel the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is a revenge tactic, news reaching here said.The coca growers in Chapare Province of Bolivia's Cochabamba province said Wednesday they will expel USAID from Bolivian territory.Bolivian Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca told the press that USAID is not the first institution that were asked to leave the country and there is no need to worry about."I haven't got precise information on the work USAID is performing in Chapare. It is said they were helping groups that are against the changing process, but that will be clarified later," Choquehuanca said.He said this is an independent decision made by the coca growers and it does not represent the foreign policy of the Bolivian government."The coca growing companions have their reasons for taking the action. There is no need for too much worry. This is not a serious issue that could affect the ties between the U.S. and Bolivia," Choquehuanca said.He admitted, however, that these kind of incidents "don't help constructive ties" with the U.S.Choquehuanca said many other agreements singed with the U.S. will be implemented to the end despite the coca growers' decision.More than 85 million U.S. dollars were channeled into Bolivia in 2007 through USAID programs which began providing aid from the U.S. government in 1960. It has programs in 31 cities of Cochabamba, encouraging the growing of banana, palmetto, pineapple and papaya, alternatives to coca, which is the principal ingredient for cocaine.Source:Xinhua***Bolivia's autonomy-seeking province declares 78.8-percent approvalThe Provincial Electoral Court (CDE) of Tarija in southern Bolivia said Thursday that 78.8 percent of the electors voted in favor of autonomy for the province in Sunday's referendum. According to the CDE, there were 79,424 "yes" votes against 21,396 "no" ones, with a turnout of 62 percent, news from La Paz, the administrative capital of Bolivia, reported. The gas-rich Tarija is seeking autonomy from the central government of President Evo Morales, along with the provinces of Pando, Beni and Santa Cruz governed by the opposition, moves considered by the central government as separative. In Santa Cruz, the first province to launch an autonomous referendum, 85.6 percent of voters supported its autonomy bid, while Beni registered 79.5-percent approval and Pando 81.9 percent. Bolivians will also vote on Aug. 10 to decide whether President Evo Morales, Vice President Alvaro Garcia and nine regional governors will remain in their posts.
HITTING BERKELEY JULY 15, 2008:
WORLD CAN'T WAIT youth activists Rock the Boat!
World Can't Wait youth organizers are heading to Berkeley, CA to make this a summer of resistance by creating such an intense orange uprising that it will reverberate across the nation! Working collectively with other young people committed to repudiating the Bush program, they will contribute to reshaping the political landscape by focusing on making breakthroughs in stopping the military recruiters and working to fire, disbar and prosecute John Yoo, infamous author of the "torture memos". These summer plans are a crucial part of forging a new generation of leaders that refuse to be bound by "the politics of the possible" and mobilizing others to bring to a halt the whole Bush program that is still setting the terms for official politics today. More on the project
This summer, with your financial support, World Can't Wait youth activists will work on making clear: the Bush Regime or any other administration has no right to recruit, invade and occupy. They are wrong to torture, justify it, and lie about it.
Several youth are ready to go make history. Your generous contribution today will make it happen!
Jamilah Hoffman has lived in Texas her entire life though she now considers herself to be a citizen of the world. It was Hurricane Katrina and the Bush regime's criminal actions which caused her to question the role of government in the lives of its people. Jamilah asked herself at the time, "What's the point of having a government if they can't rescue people from their roofs?" After hearing an ad on Air America Radio about World Can't Wait and mobilizing for November 2, 2005, Jamilah has been active with the Houston chapter of World Can't Wait and focusing on the youth of her community.
Whether it's sleeping in the median of a street in a New Orleans housing project, fighting dehydration at the Coachella Valley Music Festival, or walking the dusty streets of Jackson, Mississippi, Jamilah wants to be active in the struggle to rid the world of the disaster of the Bush regime. She'll be attending The University of Houston this fall where she will be working on a double major in Spanish and Journalism.
Meet some others of the youth activists up for adoption!
When you adopt an activist you will receive personal updates and photos from the youth organizers.
Debra Sweet, Director, The World Can't Wait - Drive Out the Bush Regime
Here's some simple ways you can help create a summer of resistance:
Adopt-an-Activist donations:
$50 sponsors a youth organizer in Berkeley, CA for one week
$100 provides outreach materials for one youth activist
$250 allows the youth to rent space for movie showings and meetings for six weeks
$500 covers round trip airfare to send one person to Berkeley.
$750 provides 20,000 full-color postcards for the fire, disbar, and prosecute John Yoo campaign
$1,000 covers the cost of a passenger van to take youth to the DNC
or donate your frequent flier miles or Amtrak rewards
or extend your hospitality by allowing activists to stay with you in Berkeley or Denver, whether at your primary residence or a second home e-mail
or send gift cards (major credit cards or national food chains) directly to these courageous activist to defray the cost of food and gas.
Senator Ted Kennedy is putting forward a brave face following his recent surgery but the sad reality remains. Even with successful surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy treatment, gliomas – a highly aggressive form of brain cancer that strikes approximately 10,000 Americans annually – tragically claim the lives of 75 percent of its victims within two years and virtually all within five years.
But what if there was an alternative treatment for gliomas that could selectively target the cancer while leaving healthy cells intact? And what if federal bureaucrats were aware of this treatment, but deliberately withheld this information from the public?
Sadly, the questions posed above are not entirely hypothetical. Let me explain.
In 2007, I reviewed over 150 published preclinical and clinical studies assessing the therapeutic potential of marijuana and several of its active compounds, known as cannabinoids. I summarized these numerous studies in a book, now in its third edition, entitled Emerging Clinical Applications for Cannabis and Cannabinoids: A Review of the Scientific Literature. (NORML Foundation, 2008) One chapter in this book, which summarized the findings of more than 30 separate trials and literature reviews, was dedicated to the use of cannabinoids as potential anti-cancer agents, particularly in the treatment of gliomas.
Not familiar with this scientific research? Your government is.
In fact, the first experiment documenting pot's potent anti-cancer effects took place in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia at the behest federal bureaucrats. The results of that study, reported in an Aug. 18, 1974, Washington Post newspaper feature, were that marijuana's primary psychoactive component, THC, "slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in laboratory mice, and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."
Despite these favorable preliminary findings (eventually published the following year in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute), U.S. government officials refused to authorize any follow-up research until conducting a similar – though secret – preclinical trial in the mid-1990s. That study, conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program to the tune of $2 million, concluded that mice and rats administered high doses of THC over long periods had greater protection against malignant tumors than untreated controls.
However, rather than publicize their findings, the U.S. government shelved the results, which only became public after a draft copy of its findings were leaked to the medical journal AIDS Treatment News, which in turn forwarded the story to the national media.
In the years since the completion of the National Toxicology trial, the U.S. government has yet to authorize a single additional study examining the drug's potential anti-cancer properties. (Federal permission is necessary in order to conduct clinical research on marijuana because of its illegal status as a schedule I controlled substance.)
Fortunately, in the past 10 years scientists overseas have generously picked up where U.S. researchers so abruptly left off, reporting that cannabinoids can halt the spread of numerous cancer cells – including prostate cancer, breast cancer, lung cancer, pancreatic cancer, and brain cancer. (An excellent paper summarizing much of this research, "Cannabinoids for Cancer Treatment: Progress and Promise," appears in the January 2008 edition of the journal Cancer Research.) A 2006 patient trial published in the British Journal of Cancer even reported that the intracranial administration of THC was associated with reduced tumor cell proliferation in humans with advanced glioblastoma.
Writing earlier this year in the scientific journal Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, Italian researchers reiterated, "(C)annabinoids have displayed a great potency in reducing glioma tumor growth. (They) appear to be selective antitumoral agents as they kill glioma cells without affecting the viability of nontransformed counterparts." Not one mainstream media outlet reported their findings. Perhaps now they'll pay better attention.
What possible advancements in the treatment of cancer may have been achieved over the past 34 years had U.S. government officials chosen to advance – rather than suppress – clinical research into the anti-cancer effects of cannabis? It's a shame we have to speculate; it's even more tragic that the families of Senator Kennedy and thousands of others must suffer while we do.
You may recall that Leonard suffers from diabetes. To date, his diabetes has been managed by diet but this is difficult to do when the prison won't give Leonard a test kit by which to monitor his blood glucose level. Two weeks ago, I wrote to the warden at Lewisburg asking that Leonard be given a diabetes test kit. I even offered to purchase an approved kit if the prison cannot provide one. I haven't received a response from the warden.Leonard Peltier Update June 26th, 2008 - MEDICAL ALERT !!! Thu, 26 Jun 2008 contact@whoisleonardpeltier.infohttp://www.whoisleonardpeltier.info Urgent! Leonard needs a diabetes test kit now!
George Orwell's famous 1938 account of the Spanish Revolution and Civil War, from his point of view as a volunteer in the POUM militia.
Though the POUM were socialists, he wrote "as far as my purely personal preferences went I would have liked to join the Anarchists."
His vivid descriptions of classless anarchist Barcelona following the revolution and terrorised Stalinist Barcelona after the counter-revolution are a timeless reminder that a 'revolutionary state' is a contradiction in terms.
Chapter 01Chapter 02Chapter 03Chapter 04Chapter 05Chapter 06Chapter 07Chapter 08Chapter 09Chapter 10Chapter 11Chapter 12Chapter 13Chapter 14
The finishing touches on several contingency plans for attacking Iran
Global Research Editor's note
We bring to the attention of our readers David DeBatto's scenario as to what might occur if one of the several contingency plans to attack Iran, with the participation of Israel and NATO, were to be carried out. While one may disagree with certain elements of detail of the author's text, the thrust of this analysis must be taken seriously.
"Israel has said a strike on Iran will be "unavoidable" if the Islamic regime continues to press ahead with alleged plans for building an atom-bomb." (London Daily Telegraph, 6/11/2008)
"Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany joined President Bush on Wednesday in calling for further sanctions against Iran if it does not suspend its uranium enrichment program." Mr. Bush stressed again that "all options are on the table," which would include military force. (New York Times, 6/11/2008)
We are fast approaching the final six months of the Bush administration. The quagmire in Iraq is in its sixth painful year with no real end in sight and the forgotten war in Afghanistan is well into its seventh year. The "dead enders" and other armed factions are still alive and well in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan again controls most of that country. Gas prices have now reached an average of $4.00 a gallon nationally and several analysts predict the price will rise to $5.00-$6.00 dollars per gallon at the pump by Labor Day. This, despite assurances by some major supporters of the decision to invade Iraq that the Iraq war "will pay for itself" (Paul Wolfowitz) or that we will see "$20.00 per barrel" oil prices if we invade Iraq (Rupert Murdoch).
One thing the Pentagon routinely does (and does very well) is conduct war games. Top brass there are constantly developing strategies for conducting any number of theoretical missions based on real or perceived threats to our national security or vital interests. This was also done prior to the invasion of Iraq, but the Bush administration chose not to listen to the dire warnings about that mission given to him by Pentagon leaders, or for that matter, by his own senior intelligence officials. Nevertheless, war gaming is in full swing again right now with the bullseye just to the right of our current mess – Iran.
It’s no secret that the U.S. is currently putting the finishing touches on several contingency plans for attacking Iranian nuclear and military facilities. With our ground forces stretched to the breaking point in Iraq and Afghanistan, none of the most likely scenarios involve a ground invasion. Not that this administration wouldn’t prefer to march into the seat of Shiite Islam behind a solid, moving line of M1 Abrams tanks and proclaim the country for democracy. The fact is that even the President knows we can’t pull that off any more so he and the neo-cons will have to settle for Shock and Awe Lite.
If we invade Iran this year it will be done using hundreds of sorties by carrier based aircraft already stationed in the Persian Gulf and from land based aircraft located in Iraq and Qatar. They will strike the known nuclear facilities located in and around Tehran and the rest of the country as well as bases containing major units of the Iranian military, anti-aircraft installations and units of the Revolutionary Guard (a separate and potent Iranian para-military organization).
Will this military action stop Iran’s efforts to develop nuclear weapons? Probably not. It will probably not even destroy all of their nuclear research facilities, the most sensitive of which are known to be underground, protected by tons of earth and reinforced concrete and steel designed to survive almost all attacks using conventional munitions. The Iranian military and Revolutionary Guard will most likely survive as well, although they will suffer significant casualties and major bases and command centers will undoubtedly be destroyed. However, since Iran has both a functioning Air Force, Navy (including submarines) and modern anti-aircraft capabilities, U.S. fighter-bombers will suffer casualties as well. This will not be a "Cake Walk" as with the U.S. led invasion of Iraq in 2003 when the Iraqi Army simply melted away and the Iraqi Air Force never even launched a single aircraft.
Not even close.
If the United States attacks Iran either this summer or this fall, the American people had better be prepared for a shock that may perhaps be even greater to the national psyche (and economy) than 9/11. First of all, there will be significant U.S. casualties in the initial invasion. American jets will be shot down and the American pilots who are not killed will be taken prisoner - including female pilots. Iranian Yakhonts 26, Sunburn 22 and Exocet missiles will seek out and strike U.S. naval battle groups bottled up in the narrow waters of the Persian Gulf with very deadly results. American sailors will be killed and U.S. ships will be badly damaged and perhaps sunk. We may even witness the first attack on an American Aircraft carrier since World War II.
That’s just the opening act.
Israel (who had thus far stayed out of the fray by letting the U.S. military do the heavy lifting) is attacked by Hezbollah in a coordinated and large scale effort. Widespread and grisly casualties effectively paralyze the nation, a notion once thought impossible. Iran’s newest ally in the region, Syria, then unleashes a barrage of over 200 Scud B, C and D missiles at Israel, each armed with VX gas. Since all of Israel is within range of these Russian built weapons, Haifa, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and virtually all major civilian centers and several military bases are struck, often with a result of massive casualties.
The Israeli Air Force orders all three squadrons of their F-16I Sufa fighter/bombers into the air with orders to bomb Tehran and as many military and nuclear bases as they can before they are either shot down or run out of fuel. It is a one way trip for some of these pilots. Their ancient homeland lies in ruins. Many have family that is already dead or dying. They do not wait for permission from Washington, DC or U.S. regional military commanders. The Israeli aircraft are carrying the majority of their country’s nuclear arsenal under their wings.
Just after the first waves of U.S. bombers cross into Iranian airspace, the Iranian Navy, using shore based missiles and small, fast attack craft sinks several oil tankers in the Straits of Hormuz, sealing off the Persian Gulf and all its oil from the rest of the world. They then mine the area, making it difficult and even deadly for American minesweepers to clear the straits. Whatever is left of the Iranian Navy and Air Force harasses our Navy as it attempts minesweeping operations. More U.S casualties.
The day after the invasion Wall Street (and to a lesser extent, Tokyo, London and Frankfurt) acts as it always does in an international crisis – irrational speculative and spot buying reaches fever pitch and sends the cost of oil skyrocketing. In the immediate aftermath of the U.S. invasion of Iran, the price of oil goes to $200.00 - $300.00 dollars a barrel on the open market. If the war is not resolved in a few weeks, that price could rise even higher. This will send the price of gasoline at the pump in this country to $8.00-$10.00 per gallon immediately and subsequently to even higher unthinkable levels.
If that happens, this country shuts down. Most Americans are not be able to afford gas to go to work. Truckers pull their big rigs to the side of the road and simply walk away. Food, medicine and other critical products are not be brought to stores. Gas and electricity (what is left of the short supply) are too expensive for most people to afford. Children, the sick and elderly die from lack of air-conditioned homes and hospitals in the summer. Children, the sick and elderly die in the winter for lack of heat. There are food riots across the country. A barter system takes the place of currency and credit as the economy dissolves and banks close or limit withdrawals. Civil unrest builds.
The police are unable to contain the violence and are themselves victims of the same crisis as the rest of the population. Civilian rule dissolves and Martial Law is declared under provisions approved under the Patriot Act. Regular U.S. Army and Marine troops patrol the streets. The federal government apparatus is moved to an unknown but secure location. The United States descends into chaos and becomes a third world country. Its time as the lone superpower is over.
It doesn’t get any worse than this.
Then the first Israeli bomber drops its nuclear payload on Tehran.
David DeBatto is a former U.S. Army Counterintelligence Special Agent, Iraqi war veteran and co-author the "CI" series from Warner Books and the upcoming "Counter to Intelligence" from Praeger Security International.
Global Research Articles by David DeBatto
Posted by Anthony Gregory at June 22, 2008 07:49 PM
I distinctly remembered that Bush said something back during his first presidential campaign about leaving medical marijuana laws up to the states. After Clinton's horrendous crackdowns in California, I recall thinking Bush's stance on this, along with his "humble" foreign policy promises, was a reason I quietly rooted for him against Gore. I imagined on civil liberties and war, as well as economics, he'd be slightly less bad. And here it is,in Washington Post article from 1999: "Campaigning in Seattle on Saturday, Bush answered questions about medical marijuana laws by saying, 'I believe each state can choose that decision as they so choose.'"
Of course, we know President Bush has raided marijuana dispensaries in violation of the 10th Amendment. While I do believe federalism is an improvement, and the correct Constitutional position on these issues, I must admit I am somewhat more skeptical of "states rights" conservatives than I used to be – they almost always end up favoring centralizing power in the end, whether we're talking about some of the anti-Union hypocrites who sought federal protection of slavery and then centralism within the Confederacy, or today's politicians who never seem to apply federalism consistently, especially once they have federal power.
(I do still believe anarchism and libertarianism generally imply decentralism, however, but libertarian decentralists tend to be much sounder all around, including on federalism, than conservative decentralists.)
For Immediate Release:June 25, 2008Contact:ELIZABETH PAROWSKI, mailto:epoarowski@alleycat.org or 240-482-1984FRANCIE ISRAELI, fisraeli@johnadams.com or 202-737-8400ALLEY CAT ALLIES DEMANDS INVESTIGATION OF RICHMOND TV STATIONCites reports that local Fox station hired company to bulldoze outdoor catsBETHESDA – Alley Cat Allies, the nation’s advocate for stray and feral cats, today called for an investigation after eyewitnesses reported a colony of cats living in and around the property of a Richmond television station had been bulldozed.“We are told that Richmond WRLH Channel 35, and its owner, Sinclair Media Group, contracted with a local pest control company to have the cats trapped and killed, and that another company was hired to bulldoze the area where the cats lived, all over the vehement objections of local animal protection organizations,” said Becky Robinson, president of Alley Cat Allies. “We are also told that some of the cats may have been killed at the site.”“If this is true, then we call for an investigation of WRLH and Sinclair Broadcast Group. Plowing through cats with bulldozers is clear-cut animal cruelty, and should not be tolerated in civil society,” Robinson said.She noted that the cats had been living at the site for a long time, and most had been spayed or neutered and vaccinated. The colony was being cared for by local volunteers, and properties neighboring the Fox station reportedly had no concerns about the cats. Robinson also noted that that the station and its owner were offered nonlethal alternatives by several organizations, including the Richmond SPCA, but were not persuaded.“Humane cat repellants are readily available, and the station could have used any number of these to keep cats away from areas where they are not wanted,” said Robinson. “Today’s tragic situation could easily have been avoided.”“It is still unclear whether what happened today is illegal, but we will be working with the local authorities and animal organizations to ensure there is a thorough investigation,” Robinson said. “In the meantime, the cats have been frightened and displaced and their home has been destroyed.”# # #About Alley Cat AlliesAlley Cat Allies is dedicated to ending the killing of cats and leading the movement for their humane care. Their web site is http://www.alleycat.org/.~ ~ ~ ~ ~related news article : Cats Killed Outside Local TV StationWRIC, VA - June 25, 2008
“Simply one of the many biocidal glories of NAFTA…not long after American companies started plopping their most toxic operations just across the border to capitalize on such as lax Mexican environmental laws, a shocking spike in the number of babies born without a brain (anencephalic) became a legacy of the massive industrial pollution.”
By Rand Clifford
6/25/08
Bodies of evidence by the millions make the dumbing-down of Americans the most successful federal program of all time…. Not that a great challenge has been surmounted, nor much of a fight put up, nor any bounds of day-to-day comfort grossly exceeded; insidious is the motif. With shrewd play on human emotion—especially and always fear—people can be manipulated into consistently acting against their best interests, for the best interests of money-hung manipulators. By and large, the dumbed-down believe outrageous lies that defy all evidence if the lies are packaged and repeated appropriately. The official story of 9/11 for example, or its diabolical spawn, the war on terror—would these have any chance at all in a nation of alert and thoughtful people?
America propaganda…into the bouillabaisse of lies, stir in well-crafted bogeymen, along with heaping portions of distraction, envy, selfishness—and double-up on aversion to being different (who wants to be “the turd in the punch bowl” by controverting what we are officially supposed to believe?) In such a context, the term stemmer transcends sheer comic relief, into a realm of sobering relevance threatening to become terminal.
A man called Whizzer in the novel CASTLING, first published in 1995, identifies stemmers as a blight metastasizing among the American people under careful nurture at highest levels of government. A self-described Professor of Social Science, Whizzer deliciously merges charisma with science, employing experiments in human behavior to prove his theories.
Many people keen to America’s profound intelligence deficit cling to solid theories of a chemical dumbing-down…from fluoridation of public water supplies, to aerial spraying (chemtrails), to ubiquitous bisphenol-A plastics, to heavy metal contamination, to the enormous prevalence in our foods of neurotoxins such as MSG (in its many nefarious manifestations), and aspartame, on and on…. But, Whizzer’s extensive research supports his theory of atrophy…the simple, “use it—or lose it”. His theory of stemmers:
“It all has to do with how much of your brain is functioning,” he insists. “Scientific evidence is very clear that about all you really need to survive is a brain stem…your reptile brain.”
Whizzer’s research into stemmers grew from babies born without a brain down along the Rio Grande, such as in Brownsville, Texas. Simply one of the many biocidal glories of NAFTA…not long after American companies started plopping their most toxic operations just across the border to capitalize on such as lax Mexican environmental laws, a shocking spike in the number of babies born without a brain (anencephalic) became a legacy of the massive industrial pollution. Some of the babies born with only a brain stem are still able to live indefinitely with proper care. Enter Whizzer’s trademark comic relief: “But then again,” he says, “maybe nature’s just saying ‘Hey, you wouldn’t use the thing anyway. You’d be better off not lugging around all that waterlogged tissue.’ Yep, looks to me like the hand of evolution at work. Maybe we’re seeing the emergence of a new subspecies. Homo Sapiens Americanus Sans Cerebrum.” Note: Whizzer’s penchant for humor never fouls his fundamental science; his strict adherence to the scientific method puts to shame anything we now must categorize as “Bush science”, or, The Official Stuff. (Please see: Only One kind of science http://www.starchiefpress.com/articles/article05.html).
At a huge kegger wrapping up an annual tournament involving American and Canadian softball teams, Whizzer delivers a monologue regarding stemmers that captivates the crowd (he also uses “The Party” to run a key experiment to expose major differences in “gut-reaction” aggression between Canadians, and Americans; except for the border, these people are virtual neighbors).
Basics of Whizzer’s stemmer theory, in his own words: “The Rio Grande is a sewer and toxic cauldron. But that’s not the point. The point is a lot of babies born nearby have only a brain stem, but they can survive, sometimes for years and years…. Yeah, way way back, millions of years before they invented Canadian bacon or 4X4s, our ancestors had little more than a brain stem. The reptile brain. Over the years, cerebral cortex grew on top of the stem ‘cause they started puttin’ together a lot of abstract thoughts, and figuring out how to make life less of a bugger…how to get a little comfort. They worked hell outa those brains and like a muscle the brains kept growing and growing…. And that’s why now we lug around these big bone casings we call skulls—to protect all that brain mass we inherited. Well, down at the heart of all that grey matter lies the ol’ brain stem—all anyone really needs to survive. With it you can still eat, drink, sleep, reproduce, and fight…which brings us to my theory…. The human brain has stopped evolving. The human brain is currently devolving back toward stemhood, and fast. Proliferation of consumerism, of gadgets and celebrities, spectator sports and lottery, television, mega-religion, fast food, smart bombs, drive-by violence, main stream propaganda and the coolness of being stupid, just to name a few—they’re causing the bulk of Americans to slough their brains. Who needs all that gray matter? Around here we call those obviously running on little or no more than brain stem…we call them stemmers. Basically, they’re lizards in sheep’s clothing….”
In Part II: Stemmers, and the future of The American Experiment. Bilderberg, The Council On Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission…with the Nation so poised for martial law to usher in the New World Order, is there even time to identify America’s intellectual nadir for public evaluation of solutions, or will “My Pet Goat” herald our oblivion after all?
Rand Clifford is a writer living in Spokane, Washington, with his wife Mary Ann, and their Chesapeake Bay retriever, Mink. Rand’s novels CASTLING, TIMING, VOICES OF VIRES, and PRIEST LAKE CATHEDRAL are published by StarChief Press: http://www.starchiefpress.com
Trailer for "Out of Balance: ExxonMobil's Impact on Climate Change."
"Out of Balance: ExxonMobil's Impact on Climate Change" shows the influence that the largest company in the world has on governments, the media and citizens and what can be done about global warming. While the Earth's climate is pushed further out of balance by increasing use of fossil fuels, ExxonMobil continues to assert undue influence around the world—making record profits while ignoring climate science for which there has been overwhelming consensus for over ten years.
"Out of Balance" does not just critique ExxonMobil, it also offers challenging, large-scale ideas for the global social changes that must take place if there's any chance of having a livable planet for future generations.
http://www.worldoutofbalance.org/
How to sing like a planetScientists say the Earth is humming. Not just noise, but a deep, astonishing music. Can you hear it?
Article at SFGate
I'm not usually bothered by this at all, since I use the words myself, but his 'hell' placements (4 of them, 2 in one paragraph) & especially the 'goddamn' placement at the end I found insanely out of place in an article like that.
Hello Mark ! Hello Seth ! First I want to thank you for the last newsletter - it was fantastic & witty! Today I have a question for Seth: What is that noise ? The "Hum", a worldwide phenomenon. The "Hum" is a mysterious noise heard by 1 to 10 percent of the population in certain areas, including North America, Europe, Great Britain, and Australia. The classic hum sound is comparable to the sound of a distant diesel engine idling. There have been extensive reports of the Hum in the United Kingdom since at least the early 1970s. The two best-publicized areas in the United States that have been plagued by the Hum are Taos, New Mexico, and Kokomo, Indiana. Since 2005 I hear it too. I don't suffer from but it's scary. I add a PDF for you both. Kind regards from Germany.
Julian
6-16-08 3:47 PM
Now Julian, as you may know as a reader of my new books, the manifestation phenomenon is one of resonance. Consciousness Units resonate with their counterparts within all of created reality, to form replicas of certain CU's and thus Reality Constructs of all types and purpose. Remember, Reality Constructs also include the molecules of air in front of you, as well as the computer screen in front of you.
With your creative Consciousness you create, then, in alliance with everything else in your environment - other humans, other computer screens, other Reality Constructs of all types - your realities. There is a particular frequency of vibration or vibratory rate that is most congenial for the manifestation of Reality Constructs by the human mentality. And in fact, when one is in direct proximity to certain portals or vortices upon your Earth, through this resonance phenomenon one is brought up to this particular frequency, allowing the manifestation phenomenon to play out in an improved fashion. The great architects of your perceived past knew of the benefits to be gained by building their temples in proximity to these Power Points. The creative energies are facilitated in these places. The search for the Divine is assisted in these places of worship placed on the Power Spots. Your Taos, New Mexico is in proximity to one such vortex. Inter-dimensional communication is facilitated there. The entire area is one in which the ancestors can be contacted quite easily by laymen and practitioner alike.
Now this Hum you describe may well be the perception by sensitive humans, of this resonance phenomenon within close proximity to these vortices. The precise frequency plus its octave variations, may be perceived by the Inner Senses as a distinct Hum. It may be felt also within the body as a not unpleasant pressure from within and from without. Different people experience this breakthrough in sensing in different ways. There is nothing mysterious about it, however. It is the "sound" of atoms/CUs assembling into Reality Constructs within proximity of Power Points of accelerated vibration.
I trust I have answered your excellent question to your satisfaction. Seth. 4:00 PM
"Where your thought is, is precisely where you are - all of yourself is there." - Baal Shem Tov
[Ed. Note: Tres metaphysical..no?]
Where are you today?
There is not one moment greater than another. Do you get what that means?
If you did, you'd have no worries at all. That's what being connected to the Light is all about.
Today, when you are obsessing about what you'll do the next hour for lunch, for dinner, for life - set your obsessions aside and just enjoy the moment. Put all your thoughts into right now. Right now is bliss. Right now.
Cuban scientists said on Tuesday the first vaccine to extend lives of lung cancer patients has been approved by Cuban authorities for use and is available in the island's hospitals. The drug, CimaVax EGF, has been shown to increase survival rates on average four to five months and much longer in some patients, they said in a news conference at Cuba's Center of Molecular Immunology. In contrast to chemotherapy, the traditional treatment for lung cancer, they said CimaVax EGF has few side effects because it is a modified protein that attacks only cancer cells.
...
While U.S. corporations and their government continue to perpetrate worldwide atrocities on a scale that dwarfs — yes, dwarfs — the German abominations of WWII, most people I come across are shopping.
Deals or no deals.
That, or they’re planning to shop. Or returning some of what they’ve bought. Or going over — thinking about, talking about, etc. — what they’ve purchased. Or criticizing the shopping phenomenon. Or discussing other worthless topics such as Obama, McCain et. al., ad infinitum.
Whilst they dwell midst The Horror. Doing zero. Or merely chatting, writing about the… unspeakable. Marching in circles with placards (or the like) doesn’t count.
Do me a favor. Send me a list of all the conscious, caring people from the 30s and/or 40s who knew about what’s known as The Holocaust… who carried on business as usual. Who didn’t lift a compassionate finger. For all practical purposes didn’t. Who offered only token resistance.
I can certainly support my contention that what’s coming down today is worse — by almost any standard — than what transpired vis-a-vis the Nazis. PLEASE ask me to do so.
The problem isn’t that I’m way out there with my take of the times. Rather, it’s as if we’re all living right next door to Auschwitz, smelling the foul odors and cringing at the arrival of each train, but — ultimately — buying into the notion of American exceptionalism sufficiently to look, smell and listen the other way.
Or simply too invested in shopping.
For personal bargains.
I have a recommendation: Try bargaining with your Soul.
But remember: No Returns. No matter how warm it gets.
Rocco, who asks that most of his articles be read as prose poems, can be reached in Los Gatos, California at headburg@yahoo.com. He would really like contact for the purposes of acting in solidarity. Publishing more books and lecturing to larger audiences aren’t answers. Not any more than are longer stints with coffee shop blah blah or efforts at formal complaint. Ditto regarding protest plays, candlelight vigils, the usual conscious works of art…. And let’s forget about having our heads bashed in as we high profile our compassion. Bootless cries and the planting of singular seeds, perhaps, should be the exception not the rule for today. Get motivated by listening to a little Carlin? He wasn’t spot-on-target about everything, but the following isn’t a bad point of departure for meaningful action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktIECyzf4YM&feature=related . Then again, maybe I should be happy if I wind up with enough of a quorum to __________________ on a regular basis whilst everything and everyone burns down.
“Men and women who dedicate their lives to the realization of their gifts tend the office of that communion by which we are joined to one another, to our times, to our generation, and to the race.” - Lewis Hyde, The Gift
I just finished The Gift by Lewis Hyde, a fantastic treatise of gift economies and how they relate to artists working in a materialistic world. It is a tonic and a balm to read these ideas. Creating in a world where everything is gaged according to price can be disheartening. Box office receipts, record sales, Neilsens - these are measures of popularity, not necessarily of worth or quality.
That is a simple truth - and I have no beef with popularity, I love plenty of blockbusters and want what I make to reach the largest audience possible. In the making of things, however, it is best to let the muse or genius tell you what it is and how to make it. Self-censorship can be the worst kind of all; doubting whether something will work and be accepted in the world, whether it is “marketable.”
Hyde doesn’t offer specific answers, he presents the dilemma and the problem along with chapters focused on Walt Whitman and Ezra Pound and their varied struggles and successes. The afterword, written last year, addresses the particulars of our current era, which he calls “market triumphalism,” an age where everything is pushed to become professionalized and marketed.
Some things have worth that is incapable of being priced, like quality of life or nature (as a whole, not when it is broken up into “resources”) or spirituality. Art holds power, art binds us, it has purpose and meaning beyond itself when it is wrested from a true place. “Those parts of our being that extend beyond the individual ego cannot survive unless they can be constantly articulated.”
Some of my favorite stuff:
Gifts are “anarchist property,” they are meant to be continually given away, you are not supposed to hold on to them. Since talents are gifts, they are meant to be nurtured and then given away, shared. He is not saying artists should work for free, but also that a gift is not just something to exploit. It’s a fine line, to be sure.
“Pound is right: some knowledge cannot survive abstraction, and to preserve this knowledge we must have art. The liquid light, the nous, the fecundity of nature, the feeling of the soul in ascent — only the imagination can articulate our apprehension of these things, and the imagination speaks to us in images.”
Here is the NPR interview that alerted me to the book.
WASHINGTON - Comprehensive lifestyle changes including a better diet and more exercise can lead not only to a better physique, but also to swift and dramatic changes at the genetic level, U.S. researchers said on Monday.
In a small study, the researchers tracked 30 men with low-risk prostate cancer who decided against conventional medical treatment such as surgery and radiation or hormone therapy.
The men underwent three months of major lifestyle changes, including eating a diet rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes and soy products, moderate exercise such as walking for half an hour a day, and an hour of daily stress management methods such as meditation.
As expected, they lost weight, lowered their blood pressure and saw other health improvements. But the researchers found more profound changes when they compared prostate biopsies taken before and after the lifestyle changes.
After the three months, the men had changes in activity in about 500 genes -- including 48 that were turned on and 453 genes that were turned off.
The activity of disease-preventing genes increased while a number of disease-promoting genes, including those involved in prostate cancer and breast cancer, shut down, according to the study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The research was led by Dr. Dean Ornish, head of the Preventive Medicine Research Institute in Sausalito, California, and a well-known author advocating lifestyle changes to improve health.
"It's an exciting finding because so often people say, 'Oh, it's all in my genes, what can I do?' Well, it turns out you may be able to do a lot," Ornish, who is also affiliated with the University of California, San Francisco, said in a telephone interview.
"'In just three months, I can change hundreds of my genes simply by changing what I eat and how I live?' That's pretty exciting," Ornish said. "The implications of our study are not limited to men with prostate cancer."
Ornish said the men avoided conventional medical treatment for prostate cancer for reasons separate from the study. But in making that decision, they allowed the researchers to look at biopsies in people with cancer before and after lifestyle changes.
"It gave us the opportunity to have an ethical reason for doing repeat biopsies in just a three-month period because they needed that anyway to look at their clinical changes (in their prostate cancer)," Ornish said.
I've railed against the media's focus on polls rather than issues, but here I want to discuss polls themselves. A widely reported Los Angeles Times poll shows Obama with a 12-point lead over McCain, or a 15-point lead if Ralph Nader and Bob Barr are included in the poll.
My question is simple: why is there an "if" in that last sentence? Ralph Nader and Bob Barr are running for President, and they will be a choice for voters in November (as, in some states, will other candidates, like the Party for Socialism and Liberation's Gloria La Riva and a Green Party candidate, quite likely Cynthia McKinney). So why on earth, when asking voters who they will vote for, would you not include them in the list? Even if you didn't have the motive of giving voters a not-so-subtle clue that Nader and Barr and the others are not "serious" candidates, wouldn't you want to include them just to make your poll more accurate?
New York’s Whitney Museum is opening an exhibition this week bringing together the work of architect and visionary, R. Buckminster Fuller. More than two decades after his death, Fuller continues to inspire efforts for a more sustainable planet in the twenty-first century. From his famous geodesic dome to his shunned electric car, Fuller employed design to tackle problems including homelessness and environmental degradation.
Guests:
Jaime Snyder, filmmaker and co-founder of the Buckminster Fuller Institute. He is Buckminster Fuller’s grandson and studied and worked with him until his passing in 1983.
Dr. John Todd, renowned biologist and pioneer in the field of ecological design. On Monday, he was awarded the first-ever $100,000 Buckminster Fuller Challenge prize for a proposal to transform strip-mined lands in Appalachia into a self-sustaining community. He is currently a research professor at the University of Vermont.
Hunter Lovins, co-founder of the Rocky Mountain Institute and founder and director of Natural Capitalism, which promotes entrepreneurial and sustainable solutions to environmental problems.
*
AMY GOODMAN: With oil at over $4 a barrel, a lot of people are talking nuclear—nuclear power. John McCain has said he wants to build a hundred new power plants; Barack Obama also supports the expanded use of nuclear power, although he hasn’t laid out a detailed plan on building new plants. But there are also many who feel nuclear power is the wrong way to go.
This week, New York’s Whitney Museum is opening an exhibit bringing together the work of an architect and visionary, R. Buckminster Fuller. More than two decades after his death, Bucky Fuller continues to inspire efforts for a more sustainable planet in the twenty-first century. From his famous geodesic dome to his shunned electric car, Fuller employed design to tackle problems including homelessness and environmental degradation.
This is, well, former Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi introducing Fuller in 1968.
INDIRA GANDHI: We have with us today an unusual person, rather remarkable person. Mr. Fuller is described as an architect. He is that because of his intense concern with living space. But he’s something more than an architect, because his obsession is with the architecture of the universe.
We all have heard of Mr. Fuller’s invention, the geodesic dome. It is now seen all over the world. It is a brilliant use of space and material. Then, the world map and other items. But what is far more important, Mr. Fuller has shown how to get the maximum from the minimum material by making the most intelligent use of the resources available on earth.
AMY GOODMAN: To talk about Buckminster Fuller and his legacy today, I’m joined now by three guests.
Jaime Snyder is a filmmaker, co-founder of the Buckminster Fuller Institute. He is Buckminster Fuller’s grandson. He studied and worked with him until he died in 1983.
Dr. John Todd is a renowned biologist and pioneer in the field of ecological design. On Monday, he was awarded the first-ever $100,000 Buckminster Fuller Challenge prize for a proposal to transform strip-mined lands in Appalachia into a self-sustaining community. He is currently a research professor at the University of Vermont in Burlington.
And I’m joined by Hunter Lovins. She is co-founder of the Rocky Mountain Institute and founder and director of Natural Capitalism, which promotes entrepreneurial and sustainable solutions to environmental problems.
Hunter Lovins, let’s begin with you on the significance of Buckminster Fuller.
HUNTER LOVINS: Buckminster Fuller was in many ways the founder of what we now call sustainability. He wrote about many of the issues that we’re now talking about twenty, thirty, forty years ago. And it is appropriate that we award the inaugural Buckminster Fuller Award to Dr. John Todd, who is also one of the founders of this area that we call sustainability.
AMY GOODMAN: Before we get to this remarkable project that Dr. John Todd will embark on, Jaime Snyder, give us a snapshot of your grandfather, of Buckminster’s life, if that is at all possible.
JAIME SNYDER: Well, I certainly can’t—I think I can tell you the essence of what he was concerned about easily, and that is—
AMY GOODMAN: Where was he born?
JAIME SNYDER: He was born in Milton, Massachusetts.
AMY GOODMAN: And he died at the age of…?
JAIME SNYDER: Eighty—almost eighty-eight, thirty-six hours before his wife of sixty-six years.
AMY GOODMAN: And he was an architect?
JAIME SNYDER: I don’t think—
AMY GOODMAN: Of a sort?
JAIME SNYDER: Well, others called him an architect. He considered himself a comprehensive anticipatory design scientist. He was interested in solving problems, not by trying to change people’s ways of thinking or trying to convince them to do different things. He felt if you built a bridge over a roaring gorge and it worked, people would begin to use it, because it solved a problem, effectively. And so, he concerned himself with solving and addressing himself to the vexing problems facing our society, in terms of how do we provide life support on a sustainable basis for 100 percent of humanity and how do we tackle the impediments that are facing us now.
AMY GOODMAN: His inventions? The geodesic dome, electric car—when did he invent the electric car?
JAIME SNYDER: Actually, it was not electric. It was a three-wheeled car. It was quite an outstanding car. It was in 1933 that he built it. He built three prototypes. And he was—you know, his inventions were really exploring and prototyping solving problems. So he would invent things. He didn’t then get into getting too involved with the business side of it. He kind of went on, OK, what’s the next problem that’s important to tackle?
AMY GOODMAN: And the geodesic dome?
JAIME SNYDER: And the geodesic dome.
AMY GOODMAN: What is it?
JAIME SNYDER: Well, it was invented in the mid-’50s. And again, his concern throughout his life, an overarching theme, was, how are we really going to be able to use our resources effectively when it comes to shelter, so that we can actually provide a way of providing adequate shelter for a large number of people who don’t have it?
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to turn to Buckminster Fuller himself. A major theme in his writings and speeches was integrity. He’s speaking here in 1983, just months before his death.
R. BUCKMINSTER FULLER: When I was born, humanity was 95 percent illiterate. Since I’ve been born, the population has doubled, and the total population is now 65 percent literate. That’s a gain of 130-fold of the literacy. When humanity is primarily illiterate, it needs leaders to understand and get the information and deal with it. When we are at the point where the majority of humans themselves are literate, able to get the information, we’re in an entirely new relationship to universe. We’re at the point where the integrity of the individual counts and not what the political leadership or the religious leadership says to do. It’s a matter now of humanity getting to the point where it’s now qualifying to make some of its own decisions in relation to its own information. That’s why we’ve come to a new moment of integrity.
AMY GOODMAN: Buckminster Fuller, just months before he died. Hunter Lovins, this whole discussion about nuclear power: oil and gas, too expensive, let’s go to nuclear power. Barack Obama and John McCain agree, perhaps, on that point, though not exactly clear where Obama wants to go with this. What are your thoughts about nuclear power and where Buckminster Fuller would stand?
HUNTER LOVINS: Actually, I think Bucky and I stand in about the same place. We both liked nuclear power, remotely sited 93 million miles away will do just fine, thank you. He was a big fan of using renewable energy. And we can meet all of our energy needs, first of all, by using energy very efficiently—that’s the cheapest thing to do—second, by getting the remaining supplies that we need from the already available cost-effective renewables. And in fact, this is what’s happening.
Nuclear power, the two units outside of Tampa now, are at $17 billion and rising. New nuclear plants will probably come on at something like $12 billion. Neither McCain nor Obama have done the numbers. We simply can’t afford it. If you want very pricy energy, nuclear is a good choice.
AMY GOODMAN: So why is it being pushed?
HUNTER LOVINS: Because people—as Dale Bumpes once said, it’s better to do something big, even if it’s wrong. They think, “Oh, big. Good.” Absolutely wrong.
Again, wind last year came on—we brought on fifteen gigawatts. A gigawatt is roughly a nuclear-sized chunk of electricity. Fifteen gigawatts. If we’d have built fifteen nukes, you would have noticed. Nobody noticed. Wind is simply sweeping the market. It is either the first- or second-fastest growing energy supply, followed or led by solar photovoltaics, which are coming on equally rapidly.
In Germany now, more new jobs are being created by the renewables industry than by any other industry in Germany. If we want a vibrant economy, unleash the new energy economy. Have people fixing up buildings in our communities, putting solar on the roofs, building wind, urban turbines that are now going on the San Francisco PUC building, that will be a net-zero building. It will be producing more electricity than it needs, when the wind is blowing.
AMY GOODMAN: Hunter Lovins, if you can introduce, as you did yesterday at the ceremony, Dr. John Todd and why he has been chosen. You were on the jury of the first $100,000 Buckminster Fuller Award.
HUNTER LOVINS: It was a unanimous decision by the jury, and we received many fabulous proposals. What John is doing is setting forth to not only bioremediate the damaged coal lands in Appalachia—and there are damaged lands around the world that are in need of his technologies, which can bring back life, community, vibrancy in these areas—he is setting forth a new ecological theory of design, which is completely consonant with what Bucky was talking about.
AMY GOODMAN: That theory of design, Dr. John Todd, if you could you speak about it, what you’re planning to do, who you’re working with?
DR. JOHN TODD: Well, my plan is to take the million-plus acres of Appalachia that have been absolutely devastated by surface coal mining and try and restore those lands to create a new economy, perhaps a new kind of economy that’s never been seen before, one based on renewable energies, including the sun and the wind and biomass, and an economy that’s also based on going back to the great legacy of Appalachia, namely its biological basis. And so, my plan basically calls for restoring the soils and restoring the forests and doing these in a highly integrated way that’s never been seen before.
AMY GOODMAN: How?
DR. JOHN TODD: But which will—sorry?
AMY GOODMAN: How?
DR. JOHN TODD: How—well, first of all, it’s integrated, in that various kinds of economic activities will take place as the land is transformed from bare rock and polluted water over time, measured in decades, to a diverse economy that has forestry and agriculture and many other elements built into it.
AMY GOODMAN: How do you clean up the polluted land? How do you fix the strip-mined mountains, the mountaintop removals?
DR. JOHN TODD: Well, one of the first things you have to do is create soils—rich, world-class soils. And fortunately for us, over the last two or three decades around the world, scientists and others have learned how to create soils in years and decades that previously might have taken thousands of years. So these are ecological concepts, which taken in concert can result in this transformation that I’m proposing.
AMY GOODMAN: How do you create the soil?
DR. JOHN TODD: Well, you start, first of all, with the right kinds of minerals, which you apply. And these are fine rock powders that are ground up. Some of them might be even left over from mining. And then you—from there, you begin to work with various kinds of microorganisms and composting, and you also sequester or get—you take organic—you take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, which is a problem, and you introduce it into the soils through the medium of trees.
AMY GOODMAN: And the people of Appalachia? How do you work with them?
DR. JOHN TODD: The people of Appalachia—the plan is quite radical. It basically allows for the transformation of ownership from a large land trust into giving back ownership of the land of Appalachia to the people who are actually working on the land, the people who are working in the forest, on the farms, in the biomass plantations, in the game ranching areas, all of these things. And so, critical to my plan is giving the people of Appalachia a genuine stake and a genuine ownership in the new economy which will be created. It’s the opposite of what is there today. And our plan also is intended to involve the miners of today being part of the restorers of tomorrow. Even some of the machinery that they use to destroy mountains could be used to build soils.
AMY GOODMAN: John Todd, the first recipient of the $100,000 Buckminster Fuller prize. I want to end with Buckminster Fuller’s grandson, Jaime Snyder. In thirty seconds, how you want your grandfather to be remembered, his work carried on?
DR. JOHN TODD: Well, I remember driving with him to the airport not long before he passed on. We had a short ride in Los Angeles, and we got in the car. We’re driving down. He said, “Jaime, what’s the most important thing we can be talking about right now?” He was a person who lived his life very much in touch with the critical survivability of the planet and believed that individuals are the key to fixing those problems.
AMY GOODMAN: On that note, I want to thank you all for being with us, Jaime Snyder, Buckminster Fuller’s grandson; Dr. John Todd, professor at the University of Vermont; and Hunter Lovins, head of the Natural Capitalism Institute.
By Laura Knight-Jadzcyk (her blog link), check out this excerpt (3 pages, links at bottom of each page). Well, this will make a lot of seekers reconsider properties of their belief system. It sure did with mine. I'll have to re-read it a few more times even and delve into some more Castaneda, although the fictional & real-life Castaneda aspects make me not trust that man very much either. Though don't let my first lines fool you, I have no idea how truthful this is again, I have no idea what the level of disinfo or cointelpro, bs (belief influenced & censored information) or plain ignorance is in this research. Holy crap has the datastream been corrupted. This text involves channeling ("Cassiopaeans", supposedly us in the future) & negative entities feeding on us so that always raises my BS detector to the max but intriguing nonetheless. If anyone has some comments on this, I'd appreciate it. (will probably update this post once I've re-read the whole thing attentively.)
Here are some quotes I liked from it:
"One of the greatest accomplishments of the seers of the Conquest was a construct he called the three-phase progression. By understanding the nature of man, they were able to reach the incontestable conclusion that if seers can hold their own in facing [human] petty tyrants, they can certainly face the unknown with impunity, and then they can even stand the presence of the unknowable.
The average man's reaction is to think that the order of that statement should be reversed," he went on. "A seer who can hold his own in the face of the unknown can certainly face petty tyrants. But that's not so. What destroyed the superb seers of ancient times was that assumption. We know better now. We know that nothing can temper the spirit of a warrior as much as the challenge of dealing with impossible people in positions of power. Only under those conditions can warriors acquire the sobriety and serenity to stand the pressure of the unknowable."
Don Juan - Carlos Castaneda
The others are all from the author Laura Knight-Jadzcyk:
Evil is REAL on its own level, and the task of man is to navigate the Cosmic Maze without being defiled by the Evil therein. This is the root of Free Will. Man faces a predicament as REAL as himself: he is forced to choose - to utilize his knowledge by applying it - between the straight path which leads to Being, and the crooked paths which lead to Non-Being. Human beings are required to discern between good and evil - consciousness energy directors - at every stage of their existence in this reality.
The task of the Seeker is to discover what is immutable within, and to purify and amplify it. This is the development of Will. Will is a relationship, which follows knowledge while knowledge follows the object of knowledge. In the process of "ascension," the object of knowledge is YOU. Knowledge, in and of itself, has no effects. YOU, however, the seeker, can give to knowledge what you actually are, in yourself, thereby displaying YOURSELF in knowledge by your actions in concert with your knowledge.
As noted, there are many Names of God that call to us in our present state of existence. But you are not required to answer every one that calls. The fact that human beings are, in general, ignorant of their own true "essence" gives them the illusion of freedom. And the fact is, all paths come from God, and all paths Lead back to God, but again, it can be via different faces. As the Shaykh says: "Unto Allah all things come home, and he is the end of every path. However, the important thing is which divine name you will reach and to which you will come home?"
And this brings us to what the Shaykh calls "perspicacity." This is the special development of the "eye of insight," or "seeing the unseen" that is crucial to the Seeker. Just as the physical eye, with the refraction of light from the Sun, can discern between the large and the small, the beautiful and the ugly, colors, the moving from the still, high and low, the ability to see the unseen is a property of an "inner light." This light reveals to the seeker things about external objects that are NOT apparent to the five senses. It reveals to its possessor when a choice that may appear to be benevolent, is a step on the path of Evil. It reveals when a choice that may appear to human estimation as negative is actually a difficult step to felicity for all involved. The Sufis tell us that some individuals have achieved such a level of "seeing" that - upon seeing a person's footprint on the ground, even if the person is not present - they are able to say whether he is following a life of felicity or wretchedness.
What is evident is that those who have it possess an immutable nature of Being which is able to "see" good and evil (symbolized also by the masonic checkered game-of-life-floor?) - they do not see "only good."
As the reader can easily see by now, the teachings of the current spate of New Age Gurus constitute the idea that we can exert our will and voice that exists "down here" upward to change what is "above" us in order to change our reality down here.They tell us that we can change our lives, our thinking, move our brains into harmony, or aid the "heart in opening," obtaining "harmony and balance" which is then going to "open windows in our mind, our heart, and our spirit," etc. It is claimed that we can do this basically by assuming God's point of view that "all is one, all is love." It is stated, (with some truth I should add, since good disinformation is always wrapped in a warm and fuzzy truth), that, "without Divine Unity inside of us, these windows of inspiration are rarely available." What they do NOT tell you is that the staircase to Divine Unity of Being requires a full field of awareness of Being and Non-being, and this can only be achieved by divesting oneself of the controls of Nonbeing which are, indeed, part of Being, but which seek to obviate Being in a paradoxical sleep of "Unification" which often begins by believing the lie that "knowledge protects" simply by having it.
Also check this article: The Positive/Negative Realms of Higher Densities
'Think for a moment, and tell me how you would explain the contradiction between the intelligence of man the engineer and the stupidity of his systems of beliefs, or the stupidity of his contradictory behavior. Sorcerers believe that the predators have given us our systems of beliefs, our ideas of good and evil, our social mores. They are the ones who set up our hopes and expectations and dreams of success or failure. They have given us covetousness, greed and cowardice. It is the predators who make us complacent, routinary, and egomaniacal.'
Don Juan - Carlos Castaneda
The paradox of widespread poverty in resource-rich Bolivia
Populist Evo Morales and the new Bolivia
Nationalization of the energy sector
Autonomy and the testing of democracy
The uncertain future of a leftist, unified Bolivia
Two members from a rightwing Santa Cruz youth group were arrested outside the Trompillo airport on June 19 with a rifle, telescopic sight, and 300 rounds of ammunition in a purported assassination attempt on President Evo Morales. In an unprecedented and highly questionable move, the accused were freed the very next day by a Santa Cruz attorney sympathetic to their separatist cause. This potentially violent scenario is telling of the fractious nature of politics currently unfolding in Bolivia, a country plagued by extreme social inequality and political marginalization.
Three days after the alleged attempt, a referendum aimed at increasing the autonomy of the Tarija department from the national government was resoundingly approved, marking the fourth such victory for the departmental autonomy movement in Bolivia over the past two months. While Morales hopes to strengthen the central government in an effort to equitably redistribute Bolivia’s resource wealth throughout the country, his opposition, a number of departmental political leaders, aspire to increase their autonomy from the central government in order to preserve the privileged status the country’s elite have enjoyed for centuries. The stage is now set for a dramatic showdown that will undoubtedly shape the future of Bolivia, the choices offered to its citizenry, and their prospects for more meaningful lives.
Bolivia’s Natural Wealth
Bolivia is rich in natural resources. According to the CIA World Factbook, the landlocked Andean country has more than 650 billion cubic meters of proven natural gas reserves, second only to Venezuela in all of South America. Bolivia exports over 10 billion cubic meters of natural gas annually, making it the sixteenth largest exporter in the world. In addition, the country is home to a variety of mineral deposits, including zinc, tin and silver. Consider also that Bolivia is a net exporter of crude petroleum, and the importance of the wealth of its vast commodity resources – real and potential – becomes abundantly clear. Possession of such valuable commodities should guarantee Bolivia prosperity on a national scale. However the reality for the majority of the population is far from this egalitarian ideal. Indeed, Bolivia is narrowly divided along geographic and ethnic boundaries by ideologies, language, race, cultural and fiscal policies that, until recently, have ensured that the majority remain impoverished while an economic and political elite few inordinately benefit.
Bolivia’s Poor Majority
Bolivia’s indigenous peoples, who account for well over half of the population, have been systematically oppressed for centuries. Living primarily as subsistence farmers in the arid western mountainous regions of the country – the Andean Altiplano – Bolivia’s indigenous majority largely lacks access to basic educational, health, and economic opportunities. The Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress reports that over 80 percent of rural residents lack access to clean water and means of sanitary waste disposal. The 2007/08 UNHumanDevelopmentReport ranks Bolivia languishing behind every country in the western hemisphere except for Guatemala and Haiti, with regards to life expectancy, educational opportunities, literacy, and GDP per capita. One may question how a country so blessed with natural riches can suffer such poverty.
The Rich Minority
Living conditions in the eastern lowlands, home to the country’s mestizo (30 percent) and white (15 percent) populations, are dramatically different. Nestled in the corner of the Amazon, the tropical climate allows for much more arable land, evident by greater agricultural production as well as different land usage. In the east, large landholdings are not the exception but the rule. According to the United Nations Development Program, 25 million hectares of prime farmland is controlled by some 100 families. In comparison, the remaining 5 million hectares of farmland in the country are shared among 2 million campesinos. This lopsided pattern of land use is reminiscent of the hacienda system, the form of land organization utilized during the high days of Spanish colonialism.
The case of U.S. national Ronald Larson, who owns more than 140,000 acres of land in the eastern department of Santa Cruz, exemplifies the intensity uneven land distribution. The white landowner employs large numbers of indigenous farmhands, and although he is not an oppressive employer by any means, the fact that the existing land tenure system has tolerated a single individual being able to amass such extensive landholdings essentially guarantees the continuation of the rigid divide between rich and poor in Bolivia. Says one laborer: “We are not slaves, but we are not prospering. We just exist” (New York Times, AmericanRancherResistsLandReformPlansinBolivia). As long as such vast tracts of land are held by a privileged few, the potential wealth hidden in Bolivia’s soil will remain largely inaccessible to most of the population.
The large agribusinesses of the east have normally generated healthy profits, but it is what lies beneath the soil that traditionally has accentuated Bolivia’s grievous earning gap. Most of Bolivia’s natural gas and petroleum deposits are located in the wealthier and more educated eastern regions of the country, in such departments as Santa Cruz, Tarija, Pando, and Beni. Until recently, profits from the exploitation of their resources have been unfairly shared sparsely with the rest of the country through an imperfect tax system. The revenues that the energy sector has generated in the east are largely responsible for the development of the bulk of the financial markets and business services located there. As a result, this region enjoys a much higher cross-the board per capita standard of living compared to the rest of the country.
Evo Morales and Democratic Reform
The marginalization of the masses is now being challenged by a populist indigenous movement. Evo Morales was elected President of Bolivia on December 18, 2005, running on the Movement for Socialism (MAS) party ticket. As president, he has introduced a new economic model aimed at the equitable redistribution of the nation’s patrimony. “CapitalismoAndinoAmazónico” (Andean-Amazonian Capitalism) represents a pluralist approach to economic growth designed to give every citizen equal access to Bolivia’s literal goldmine. Vice-President Álvaro Gracia Linera explains, “Industry in Bolivia should learn to coexist with forms of self-organization and commercial development owned in particular by the people in the Andes and Amazon.” The AgenciaNodoSur (South Node Agency) explains that Andean-Amazonian Capitalism is neither socialism nor neoliberalism, but a system catering to the contemporary realities of Bolivia which recognizes communal, state, and private forms of economic organization as being equal under the law.
One of Morales’ primary objectives as president has been to implement a new constitution that protects the rights of all citizens. To this end, the Bolivian Constituent Assembly approved a relatively moderate constitution in December 2007. Still, its approval was highly controversial. Members of the opposition party claimed that they were physically prevented from attending the proceedings by pro-government social movements, such as trade unions and coca growers; the MAS maintains that those who were absent from the vote on the constituent assembly were so in order to boycott the proceedings. Regardless, the draft constitution contains two progressive measures that, if promulgated, should quickly serve to benefit the majority of Bolivians. First, it creates the strong central government necessary to ensure the equitable division of the nation’s natural resources amongst the citizenry. Second, the proposed constitution will respect regional autonomy while protecting the rights of indigenous groups on a level equal to their mestizo counterparts, so as to promote a more pluralist national cultural identity. This arrangement is being contested by some orthodox politicians who fear that allowing indigenous groups to practice traditional customs, especially in those regions with a mixed demographic profile, will further splinter an already badly fractured political system. Other contested issues include agrarian reform and the division of natural gas profits through taxes.
Morales Makes His Move
While the new constitution awaits ratification by the electorate, Morales has not waited to make his populist vision a reality. First, he has nationalized the all-important energy sector. On May 1, 2006 – International Workers Day – Morales ordered the army to reclaim gas fields, pipelines, and refineries throughout the country. He announced that “the state recovers ownership, possession and total and absolute control” of Bolivia’s vast natural gas reserves (Reuters, Bolivia’smilitarytakescontrolofgasfields, May 2, 2006). The government demanded that private firms relinquish at least 51 percent of ownership to the Bolivian state energy firm, YacimientosPetroliferosFiscalesBolivianos (YPFB), within 6 months. Although the existing private companies and multinationals based in Bolivia were not pleased by the above moves, they for the most part accepted Morales’ terms. According to the BBC, the 10 largest private firms operating in Bolivia signed new contracts accepting the government’s terms just days before the predetermined deadline lapsed.
However the nationalization process was not as “absolute” as it may seem. Indeed, the appropriation of the energy sector falls in line with the mixed-economic model of Andean-Amazonian Capitalism. The new agreement provides for state ownership of hydrocarbons and control of their sale. Some private companies will continue to operate production facilities, and may receive up to 50 percent of the value of production, so long as they respect the stipulations of law. On June 2, 2008, Morales shifted control of the natural gas pipelines previously owned by Ashmore Energy International and Shell Gas to YPFB because the foreign companies had failed to be in compliance with government regulations.
The idea behind the new arrangement is to retain the efficiency of a private company while securing profits for state use. The dual involvement of state and private interests effectively balances productive capacity and social welfare, a healthy approach to achieving the national prosperity that is too often absent in South America. Although it may be unnecessary in the long run, a strong central government is viewed by many political scientists as being necessary for Bolivia at the present time in order to deconstruct the racial and cultural barriers which have divided society over the decades. In this regard, Morales is attempting to mediate between several competing groups so as to create a unified Bolivia. It is clear that the overall success of Bolivia takes precedence over the benefits to any particular party, regardless of its respective affiliation. As he explained during the nationalization of a processing plant formerly owned by Glencore International AG, a Swiss mining company, “Companies that respect Bolivian laws that do not steal money from the Bolivian people, will be respected. But if the companies do not respect the laws, I have no other alternative than to recover those companies” (Associated Press, BoliviatoNationalizeMineralPlant, February 8, 2007).
The Moon Rises in Bolivia
Morales’ reforms, however, have faced stiff opposition. Indeed, the constituency of his popular movement is fiercely opposed by the far more affluent mestizo minority, as the redistribution of wealth and resources threatens the power maintained by this elite class. The country’s so called “Half Moon,” where most of the opposition forces are based, is made up of the four previously mentioned hydrocarbon-producing departments situated along Bolivia’s eastern border. These departments particularly have taken issue with the aforementioned redistribution of wealth, claiming that the earnings from natural gas production, for example, should stay in the region where the resource was found.
The big political debate, then, revolves around who should have first draw on the profits from the sale of natural resources. The current hydrocarbons tax (ImpuestoDirectoalosHidrocarburos), drafted in 2005, divides 12.5 percent of hydrocarbon tax revenues between the four aforementioned producing departments; 6.25 percent goes to each of the five non-producing departments; and 56.25 percent goes to the national government. Having the majority of profits going to the national government seems to be the most appropriate policy in a country sharply divided since Spanish colonial times along ethnic, economic, and political boundaries because it allows the government to address these problems with a unified approach. Indeed, critics of Bolivia’s current situation insist that a strong, transparent and democratic central government is needed to achieve meaningful reform. Morales’ administration has thus far filled this role surprisingly well, given the obstacles it has had to face and the tenacity of his political foes.
The Vote for Autonomy
Leading the opposition to Morales is Ruben Costas, the prefect of Bolivia’s largest and wealthiest department, Santa Cruz. Costas spearheaded a referendum, held on May 4, 2008, calling for increased regional autonomy and voiding some of Morales’ reforms to prevent Santa Cruz’s copious wealth from being redistributed to the entire nation. Key provisions of the entirely illegal referendum on autonomy, which Costas’ side overwhelmingly won, reserves Santa Cruz the right to negotiate its own contracts with foreign oil companies and gives it control over the possession, distribution, and administration of its own land holdings. According to Bolivian federal authorities, Morales is in favor of granting some autonomy to both departments and indigenous communities, however only if this condition is pursued through a legal constitutional framework and will preserve the integrity of the nation. The May referendum in Santa Cruz clearly did not meet this criterion.
Nevertheless, pro-autonomy forces received more than 80 percent of the vote in all of the autonomy-seeking departments. Santa Cruz’s results were replicated on June 1 in the smaller departments of Pando and Beni and on June 22 in Tarija, however the legitimacy of the Tarija vote deserves even greater scrutiny than the others. There, the department prefect, Mario Cossío, refused to recognize a similarly illegal vote organized by his opposition on June 15 that selected a sub-prefect and departmental councilor. Cossío’s critics claim that his position, clearly guided by politics and not the law, further undermine the results of Tarija’s autonomy referendum.
A Growing Problem
The Tarija case is characteristic of the situation being played out on a national scale. Competing political groups are attacking each other through illegal means and neither side is willing to negotiate with its respective opposition. If these counterproductive methods continue, with neither side conceding to the other, it could trigger the political disaster that has thus far been avoided. Succession was once merely a threat used by the Half Moon departments to bring attention to their cause, but it is once again gaining steam in various forms. In Tarija, for example, residents of the Gran Chaco region have expressed interest in splitting from their current department and forming a new one. The proposed “Chaco” department, which would be the nation’s 10th such political division, is indicative of the multitude of political alliances currently at play in Bolivia.
“MASismo has failed,” said the conservative Costas, in reference to Morales’ political party, “We have set out on a road towards a new republic and modern state that will be forged in the four autonomous provinces, until this becomes the most decentralized country in Latin America” (Galdu.org). The primary point of contention between Costas and Morales is the question of to whom autonomy should be granted. Morales wants to recognize regional, departmental, and indigenous groups in a mixed political system comparable to his diverse economic model. Meanwhile, Costas is trying to divide the country strictly along political and geographic boundaries without granting indigenous groups any special powers, a concession which he opposes because it would undermine his administrative capabilities as well as those of nation’s other prefects. Although Costas is essentially proposing a federalist society, he is careful to avoid the term because of the negative connotations it produces in Bolivia, namely its association with the Federal War of 1899, in which mestizo elites first allied with and then betrayed native Aymara indigenous groups.
The Legal System: A Political Reality Check
Regardless of their successes, the aforementioned referendums were blatantly illegal. Two months before the Santa Cruz vote, the Bolivian National Electoral Court (CNE), the nation’s highest governing authority with plenary jurisdiction over elections, declared the then planned referendums unconstitutional. Admittedly, the CNE is loaded with Morales’ supporters – including its president, José Exeni – but the ruling was also backed by the Bolivian Congress and other institutional bodies. Several international organizations have also sided with the government; the OAS and the EU both chose not to send electoral monitors to oversee the referendums due to their illegality, representing a strong show of support for the CNE decision. Furthermore, the results of the referendums also have been rejected by the newly formed South American Union, UNASUR. Up to now, the U.S. has encouraged dialogue between the involved parties, but has otherwise remained mum on the issue.
MAS, using some creative mathematics, has nonetheless claimed victory in the referendums, citing a 38 percent abstention rate in Santa Cruz, 46.5 percent in Pando, 34 percent in Beni, and 35 percent in Tarija, according to the Latin Daily News. When these numbers are combined with those who voted “no” to autonomy, it can be established that the referendums have been rejected by 52 percent, 56 percent, 40 percent, and 55 percent, respectively, in terms of the absolute percentage of the electorate. In addition, MAS has brought attention to numerous omissions on voter registration lists and other irregularities designed to assist the opposition in its illegal bid for autonomy.
It is interesting to note that Costas, Cossío, and Bolivia’s other prefects were elected by popular vote, and not selected by the president as is stipulated by law. Thus, Morales could demand the resignation of the leadership of this regional opposition, but according to Dr. Martin Mendoza, a Cambridge political science professor, this would be far too controversial a step to take during these tumultuous times. Such an action could ignite the political tension into outright violence. At least one person died during the Santa Cruz referendum and many were injured there as well as in Pando and Beni during skirmishes instigated by the anti-Morales, ultra rightwing Youth League (to which the two accused in the assassination attempt belong). Instead of exercising his constitutional power to preserve his presidency, Morales has opted to leave this decision up to the people through a new referendum.
An Uncertain Future
Responding to the opposition, Morales has called for another referendum aimed at gauging national confidence in the President and all of the prefects. According to this template, the contested leaders must be affirmed by at least the percentage they received when voted into office. If not, their positions will be vacated and new elections will be held. This “confidence vote” – which is legally sanctioned – is scheduled for August 10th. Some experts, including Juan Carlos Hidalgo of the Cato Institute, have claimed that the recall vote is a ploy by the opposition to delay a vote on the new constitution. Indeed, Bolivian law stipulates that only one national referendum can be held in any given year, so the August 10 vote will push back a vote on the constitution until at least 2009.
However this move by the opposition could very well backfire. Many of the opposition prefects are no longer confident that they will survive the recall vote and have thus joined forces under the Conalde (national democratic council) to voice their disagreement. On June 23, the prefects from the four aforementioned departments, along with Manfred Reyes Villa from Cochabamba, publicly rejected the upcoming referendum. None of these prefects were elected by a clear majority and their newfound hostility to the legally-sanctioned referendum is a telling sign that they fear dismissal by their constituencies in August. Instead they have called for the renewal of “national dialogue,” which although necessary to quell the worsening political turmoil, is in this case guided by self-serving interests and for that reason serves only to confound the problem.
Meanwhile, in a recent opinion poll, 55 percent of respondents approved of the president, a slight increase from April. For this reason, it is widely believed Morales will win the upcoming vote. He was elected by 53.74% of voters in 2005, an unprecedented victory in Bolivian politics, so it is unlikely that he will be ousted in August. What matters, then, is the margin by which Morales wins. A clear victory will further legitimize his government, strengthen the MAS party, and expedite the referendum ballot needed to approve the new constitution. A narrow victory, however, may serve to unify the somewhat divided opposition and give it new leverage against Morales. Even if he loses, there is no constitutional mandate to legitimize the ouster of the president in such circumstances, so Morales will likely be able to stall the impact of any vote until the next scheduled elections in January 2011, at which time it may no longer be relevant.
This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Chris Sweeney
The La Riva/Puryear PSL Presidential Campaign is proud to announce that we have achieved ballot status in Arkansas, Vermont and Colorado!We are also in the final stages for ballot status in Utah, Florida, New Jersey and Iowa.Over the next two months, we will be working to gain ballot access in many additional states, including Washington state, New York, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, California and other states.Please make an urgently needed donation to help us get on the ballot in states across the country!The name of PSL Presidential candidate Gloria La Riva will appear on the ballot in Arkansas, Vermont, Colorado and many additional states. Workers will have the opportunity to protest the corrupt two-party electoral system of capitalism through their vote, and express support for a socialist solution to society’s ills. This tremendous accomplishment was made possible by the hard work of PSL volunteers. The La Riva/Puryear PSL presidential campaign is truly a grassroots campaign with no paid campaign workers.In order to achieve ballot status in Arkansas and Vermont, we had to collect 1,000 valid signatures of registered voters in each of these states. This meant collecting 2,000 in each state to ensure PSL would be on the ballot. Teams of volunteers traveled to these states in February, March and April. Volunteers braved snow storms and below-freezing temperatures in Vermont, and tornadoes and heavy rain in Arkansas, in order to collect petition signatures. In Arkansas, most of our petitioning was in Little Rock and nearby towns. We focused on large university campuses, like University of Arkansas-Little Rock and University of Central Arkansas. Other petitioning sites included Hendrix College, Pulaski Technical College, and in front of busy restaurants and government buildings in downtown Little Rock. The campaign was received positively in Arkansas. Many people were enthused with our message and agreed with our platform. Others were happy to sign because they felt that the electoral process should include more candidates and perspectives. A progressive student group at UCA hosted a forum which featured a speaker from the PSL’s campaign. In Vermont, most of the petitioning was done in Brattleboro and Burlington at post offices, office buildings, restaurants, food co-ops, convenience stores and at the University of Vermont. PSL presidential candidate Gloria La Riva also spoke to the Vermont Law School about the case of the Cuban Five. At another event, La Riva and PSL vice-presidential candidate Eugene Puryear addressed a public meeting called, "The socialist view of the elections." Speaking to a crowd of supporters and newcomers, the candidates touched on a variety of issues, from the Iraq war to the economy and the Democratic primaries. La Riva and Puryear contrasted the revolutionary socialist position with the positions of the imperialist candidates. We are happy that workers and students in Colorado will also have a chance to vote for the PSL campaign. The necessary number of presidential electors has been submitted to the state, completing the process for ballot access. There is an alternativeEverywhere that the La Riva/Puryear PSL presidential campaign has traveled, we have been received with great enthusiasm by working-class people who agree with our message of putting people over profits. Our campaign can inspire more working-class organizing, agitation and revolutionary consciousness. People who have never even thought about socialism are subscribing to our publications and eagerly learning about the inherent contradictions of capitalism. Our volunteers have been thanked and hugged by workers who are sick of being attacked by a system that cares only about profits. They are excited to know that a militant and disciplined party is on the streets fighting for our class’s liberation everyday. We are building a true peoples’ movement.Unlike the campaigns of the Democratic and Republican candidates, who have hundreds of millions of dollars from corporations and lobbyists, the La Riva/Puryear PSL presidential campaign is a grassroots effort. Getting the PSL candidates on the ballot has been carried out on the smallest budget possible.But still there have been many expenses, including travel, supplies and petitioning materials, and the production of campaign flyers, posters, brochures and more. We need your help to continue this effort.In addition to being confirmed on the ballot in Arkansas, Vermont and Colorado, we are in the final stages of filing for ballot status in Utah, Florida, New Jersey and Iowa. Over the next two months, we will be working to gain ballot access in Washington (state), New York, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, California and other states.Presidential candidate La Riva also just traveled with PSL members to Iowa and Illinois where she spoke with people who were affected by the terrible floods. She helped sandbag to stop the flow of the Mississippi’s waters into people’s homes, stores and cropland, meanwhile discussing the PSL campaign and our demand for immediate aid to the people of the Midwest. Ballot access and concrete solidarity and struggle are necessary components of the PSL’s 2008 presidential campaign. Our necessary work can only continue with your assistance. 1) Please make an urgently need donation to the La Riva/Puryear PSL presidential campaign today.
2) Click this link to volunteer with the VotePSL campaign.3) Click this link to go to VotePSL.org and read more about the campaign.4) Click this link to read a report about the effort to get on the ballot in Utah.
"Intellect and feeling together make up your existence, but the fallacy is particularly in the belief that the aware mind must be analytical and above all. Imagination and emotions are the most concentrated forms of energy that you possess as physical creatures. Any strong emotion carries with it far more energy than, say, that required to send a rocket to the moon. Emotions, instead of propelling a physical rocket, for example, send thoughts from interior reality through the barrier between non-physical and physical into the “objective” world - no small feat, and one that is constantly repeated. No feeling brings you to a dead end. Each feeling is in motion and that always leads to another feeling. As it flows it alters your entire physical condition, and that interchange is meant to be consciously accepted. Your emotions will always lead you into a realization of your beliefs if you do not impede them."
Oil executives are sworn in prior to testifying on Capitol Hill.
(Photo: Evan Vucci / AP)
Testimony to US Congress will also criticize lobbyists. "Revolutionary" policies needed to tackle crisis.
New York - James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.
Hansen will use the symbolically charged 20th anniversary of his groundbreaking speech to the US Congress - in which he was among the first to sound the alarm over the reality of global warming - to argue that radical steps need to be taken immediately if the "perfect storm" of irreversible climate change is not to become inevitable.
Speaking before Congress again, he will accuse the chief executive officers of companies such as ExxonMobil and Peabody Energy of being fully aware of the disinformation about climate change they are spreading.
In an interview with the Guardian he said: "When you are in that kind of position, as the CEO of one the primary players who have been putting out misinformation even via organisations that affect what gets into school textbooks, then I think that's a crime."
He is also considering personally targeting members of Congress who have a poor track record on climate change in the coming November elections. He will campaign to have several of them unseated. Hansen's speech to Congress on June 23 1988 is seen as a seminal moment in bringing the threat of global warming to the public's attention. At a time when most scientists were still hesitant to speak out, he said the evidence of the greenhouse gas effect was 99% certain, adding "it is time to stop waffling".
He will tell the House select committee on energy independence and global warming this afternoon that he is now 99% certain that the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere has already risen beyond the safe level.
The current concentration is 385 parts per million and is rising by 2ppm a year. Hansen, who heads Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, says 2009 will be a crucial year, with a new US president and talks on how to follow the Kyoto agreement.
He wants to see a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants, coupled with the creation of a huge grid of low-loss electric power lines buried under ground and spread across America, in order to give wind and solar power a chance of competing. "The new US president would have to take the initiative analogous to Kennedy's decision to go to the moon."
His sharpest words are reserved for the special interests he blames for public confusion about the nature of the global warming threat. "The problem is not political will, it's the alligator shoes - the lobbyists. It's the fact that money talks in Washington, and that democracy is not working the way it's intended to work."
A group seeking to increase pressure on international leaders is launching a campaign today called 350.org. It is taking out full-page adverts in papers such as the New York Times and the Swedish Falukuriren calling for the target level of CO2 to be lowered to 350ppm. The advert has been backed by 150 signatories, including Hansen.
by John RossAs the global food crisis escalates, Big Biotech (Monsanto, Novartis, Syngenta, Dupont-Pioneer, Dow et al) are capitalizing on the desperation of the hungry at runaway prices and rapidly diminishing reserves as a wedge to foist genetically modified (GMO) seeds on a reluctant Third World.
Latin America is a prime marketing target for Big Biotech's little darlings, often tagged "semillas asasinas" or "killer seeds" for their devastating impacts on local food stocks. Now the killer GMOs are suspected of literally provoking murder most foul.
Last October, Armando Villareal, a farm leader in the Mexican border state of Chihuahua, was gunned down after a farmers' meeting in Nuevo Casas Grandes. Villareal had been denouncing the illegal planting of GMO corn in the Mennonite-dominated municipalities of Cuauhtemoc and Naniquipa.
Chihuahua Mennonite communities originally migrated from Canada after a dispute with the Canadian government over education in the 1920s and were granted land by post-revolutionary president Alvaro Obregon. Over the decades, the Mennonites have successfully cultivated up to 60,000 hectares in the northeast of the state. Acutely insular with their signature dress (denim overalls for the men, prairie dresses and calico bonnets for the women) and speaking low-German as befits their European roots, the Mennonites have never integrated into the Mexican mainstream and their success as farmers - they have benefited from Mexican government irrigation projects - has created tensions in a region where aridity limits agricultural production for most farmers.
Hundreds of tractors lined up in a cortege at Villareal's October 15th funeral during which he was compared to another Chihuahua hero, Francisco Villa. Ironically, the slain farmers' leader who claimed to have evidence that the Mennonites' killer seeds had been smuggled in from Kansas, was not opposed to planting GMO corn which his "Aerodynamica" group hoped would save strapped farmers money on pesticides and power costs. His followers had even burnt tractors to demand that the Mexican government grant them permits to plant the transgenic corn.
The Chihuahua farm leader's assassination is not the only death of a militant Latin American campesino being linked to Big Biotech's encroachments. In Parana Brazil about the same time Villareal was gunned down in Chihuahua, Keno Mota, an activist of the Movement of Landless Farmers ("Movimento de Sem Terras" or MST), affiliated with the international poor farmers coalition Via Campesina, was drilled by security guards during an action on an illegal experimental station under cultivation by the Biotech giant Syngenta - the Syngenta plot, adjacent to Iguazu National Park, a protected nature reserve, violated Brazilian strictures as to where such "semillas asasinas" can be planted.
Unlike Mexico, Brazil has few restrictions on GMO crops and indeed under social democrat president Lula da Silva, has become the second-largest GMO soybean producer on the continent. Neighboring Argentina is Numero Uno. Big Argentinean growers, who have been blocking that southern cone nation's highways in a dispute over tariffs on soy exports for weeks, have announced intentions to surpass the United States as the largest grower of genetically modified maize in coming years. Argentinean corn is grown exclusively as feed for the gaucho nation's cattle industry, a cornerstone of its agrarian economy.
Mexico, where maiz was first domesticated 8000 years ago and where corn is at the core of culture as well as nutrition, has been more circumspect in embracing GMO seed. Under the banner of the "No Hay Pais Sin Maiz" ("we have no country without corn") campaign, farmers and environmentalists have joined hands to prevent GMO contamination of native species and the nation's Bio-Security Commission, initialed CYBOGEN, an inter-secretarial government body, declared a moratorium on the cultivation of genetically modified corn in the late 1990s.
Nonetheless, millions of tons of GMO maize pour into Mexican tariff-free each year from the U.S. under provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA.)
Now, in the wake of the much-hyped global food crisis, Big Biotech is pressuring the Mexican government to permit experimental plantations of the semillas asasinas as the only solution to predicted shortages, a ploy that Monsanto and its ilk have successfully sprung on the European Union.
Although GMO corn remains officially proscribed in Europe, seven EU members will grow the modified maize this year. Agribiz combines like the British National Beef Association, insist that "all resistance to GMO crops must be abandoned" in light of the growing international food psychosis.
One motive for the industry's big push, according to Sylvia Ribero who keeps tabs on Big Biotech for the left daily La Jornada: patents for some of the major GMO seed brands like Monsanto's BT corn are set to expire in the next five years.
Buckling under the Biotech barrage, Mexico's CYBOGEN posted regulations this March for applicants who contemplate cultivation of "experimental" GMO corn. Now, with a 60-day countdown ticking, Mexican farmers could be legally planting genetically modified maiz by July.
Under ground rules issued by both the Agriculture and Environmental secretariats (SAGARPA and SAMARNAT), experimental patches of GMO corn must be limited to regions where native corn stocks will not be contaminated by windblown pollens from such fields.
But the Mennonite farmers who occupy huge tracts in Chihuahua apparently jumped the gun. Under the tutelage of Monsanto and Syngenta-Golden Harvest with the SAGARPA and the SAMARNAT turning a blind eye, the Mennonites have sewn GMO corn in at least two of their "camps" or agricultural stations (#102 and #305) in the municipality of Naniquipa where Villareal spotted the illegal patches last year. Decrying insufficient safeguards against windblown pollens, Chihuahua campesinos led by Victor Quintana of the "No Hay Pais" campaign, also affiliated with Via Campesina, and a deputy in the Mexican congress for the left-center Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), have threatened to tear out the Mennonite fields before they flower in mid-summer.
Quintana's group worries that the Mennonite "experiment" will germinate five to 25 million "granos" or kernels, each of which is a potential threat to native corn.
SAGARPA regards the Mennonite "experiment" as a field test to see just how far the pollens can be spread by winds and other weather conditions.
Windblown GMO pollens are held responsible for the contamination of maiz in neighboring Sinaloa state where Greenpeace activists found traces of genetically modified corn in 96% of samples taken in nine municipalities in 2007 - Sinaloa is Mexico's top corn producing state. Aleira Lara, Greenpeace anti-GMO campaign coordinator, considers that trying to confine experimental plots to one geographical region is merely cosmetic. Last year, the Greenpeacers listed 39 instances of windblown GMO contamination in 23 countries.
Native Mexican corn was first found to have been infected by NAFTA GMO imports in 2001 when Indian campesinos in Oaxaca's Sierra of Juarez discovered that maiz from a lot introduced from Michigan and sold by a local government DICONSA grain distribution center had been inadvertently planted in the Zapotec-Chinanteco village of Calpulapan. Subsequent investigation by the National Ecology Institute, documented in a report suppressed by the Secretary of Agriculture, turned up traces of GMO contamination (some as high as 60%) in 11 out of 22 corn-growing regions in Oaxaca and Puebla. Maiz was first domesticated in the Puebla-Oaxaca altiplano eight millenniums ago.
Although the CYBOGEN has never until now licensed the production of genetically modified corn in Mexico, the semillas asasinas have almost certainly been cultivated here since the late 1990s. The International Commission for the Betterment of Corn and Wheat (CIMMYT), financed by the Rockefeller Foundation, with experimental fields in Texcoco just outside Mexico City is thought to be one source of windblown contamination. Roberto Gonzalez Barrera, the King of the Tortilla, the owner of MASECA, the world's biggest corn flour miller now a third owned by Archer Daniels Midlands, once boasted that he had thousands of hectares under GMO corn. NAFTA imports fall off DICONSA trucks on rural highways and the pollens are blown into roadside "milpas" (cornfields.)
Now GMO infestation is about to get much more acute. In a move to offset soaring prices and shrinking reserves that invariably generate social discontent, Mexican president Felipe Calderon has announced the tariff-free importation of millions of tons of basic grains (corn, wheat, soy, sorghum.) Because the Cargill Corporation, which has dominated grain distribution in Mexico ever since the government's CONASUPO system was privatized in 1999, claims it cannot separate out GMO from uncontaminated imports, the impacts on native corn and other grains will be greatly magnified - Greenpeace estimates that 60 to 70% of all corn imports are contaminated by genetically modified organisms.
John Ross is in Mexico City pounding away on "El Monstruo - Tales of Dread & Redemption In the World's Most Terrifying Urban Monster" (working title) to be published in 2009 by Nation Books. Ross himself is available at johnross@igc.org.
Dedicated to my invaluable, loving friend from Vienna, H.H., who I trust will want to spread the word among like-minded Europeans
“Too bad but it’s the life you lead….” — Bill Joel
“What took a century to destroy can’t be rebuilt in thirty days.” — The author, paraphrasing Talleyrand, in response to the question of how long a second Congress of Vienna+ might last
Exactly fifteen years ago, there was a two-week Austrian shindig — World Conference on Human Rights — held in Vienna. (1a) By consensus 171 states adopted The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action. All the pledges and commitments, for the most part very well-intentioned by any standards, have come to exactly nothing. Well, maybe… not enough. Not nearly enough, we can all agree to that, yes?
But that’s only to be expected when the leading state in the world (in terms of POWER) has been so disrespectful of international law, moral conventions. Yes, I know that the U.S. is not the only reason — not by far — that human rights have actually taken a nosedive since the early 90s, BUT (I’m singling it out because) it’s a country that can now be held accountable for its roguish, inhumane behavior, enabling new leaders to step up… to do the right thing, by example.
That’s partly what was done in the early 1800s when Napoleon took a dive, and the leaders of Europe — conquerors of France’s Diminutive Horror — met to make love, war and peace at the Congress of Vienna. (1b) They set the tone, and much more, for the following century, creating international peace of a sort for about 100 years, the various smaller abominations (such as the Spanish-American War, indigenous genocide, cutting off the hands of Congolese on King Leopold’s personal estate, etc.) notwithstanding. One could indeed argue that the Congress of Vienna had more impact than Napoleon in world history.
If John McCain gains an unlikely victory it’s all over in the deepest possible sense, on a truly fast track. I can’t begin to delineate what horror would come down with that scenario. But if Obama wins as expected and isn’t assassinated [a 50/50 proposition, if you ask me (2a)], the U.S. is in for the Biggest Surprise of Its Overrated Life.
And now that it appears as if Barack Obama will take over the Oval Office in Washington, D.C., there’s a terrific opportunity for Europe to have a huge rendezvous once again… to celebrate and make proper plans for the future (dis)respecting the total collapse of America the Unbeautiful. Rating and berating the U.S. appropriately.
Yes, a Second Congress of Vienna+.
A call for like-minded people in Europe to gather for the purpose of joyously jumping out of their skin in happiness in public regarding the Decline and Fall of The Latest Vicious Empire. And a call for the same individuals to put out a call to those in power to do what they can to have the worn-out dollar replaced by the euro as a standard worldwide… where it’ll count for something. For starters.
Hey, for those with little knowledge about such things, I call your attention to the fact that wanting to head off such (euro in lieu of $) trouble at the pass is one of the most significant reasons why the U.S. pushed its troops and others into Iraq in the first place. (2b) And why American leaders have been acting so abominably… forever. When economic competitiveness fails military pressure is applied. Rule of (heavy) thumb.
With an Obama victory American dreams will die… for good. All the “promise” will dissipate in short order. Things won’t get better. Oh no, they’ll get worse. Much worse than anyone can imagine.
I say that not just because he’s lying through his teeth (3a), but because all of the important issues from the dire environment to the country’s economic collapse, and from the soaring health care crises to overseas atrocities, will not be addressed. Because the worst villains on the American stage, like Big Pharma & Co. and Pentagon, Inc., are slated to make the nation more toxic than ever, increasing the intolerable gap between the rich and those who are fighting for survival as they continue to emulate Exxon. And give the shiv to the world like Chevron and Citigroup (3b).
At a time when such cannot be absorbed.
Oh yes, 20% or so of U.S. citizens will make out like bandits possibly for awhile longer, but nothing will keep the Karma of U.S. incessant support of Congo and Palestinian genocide (4) from coming home to roost like a carcinogenic chicken with rabies. A plague will finally descend on Main Street, and the taste of each and every plate of Apple Pie will die… slowly in the mouth.
Freud died of mouth cancer, yes? Yes. Back to Vienna.
Where they discovered on February 26, 1815 that Napoleon had slipped past his guards on Elba, and escaped back to France. That news put quite a damper on the wild waltzes that were dominating the royal 19th century bedrooms. (3c) And on the unbridled, masked fornication (and much else) in other rooms, locales.
By August, 1815, however, the Little Colonel was caught and banished — under stricter terms — to St. Helena, and irresistible Viennese harmonies held sway once again, panic subsiding, debauchery resumed. Once Nappy was finally firmly ensconced, in between relaxed ejaculations the diplomats wrangled over the spoils of his former empire by day, and dined on his china at night with delight.
Those gathering in Vienna to celebrate America’s Waterloo should prepare properly for the demise of the U.S. For one, they cannot afford to slip back into delusions regarding American exceptionalism… or solidarity… or compassion… or freedom. Cannot let Obama escape.
I am America’s Mortician here. And I ask my European brothers and sisters to bury Obama (as he’s burying himself) with an all-out effort to destabilize the dollar, denigrate The Arrogance… and let the chips fall where they may. I know that there will be serious fallout in Europe if that happens, and I know that the leaders of other countries are fully capable of unimaginable horrors too. But it is time to force a radical change in leading players for the world stage. The Tsar, if you will, for Guaranteed Tsuris.
It’s not time to play along with the image of another Napoleon donning the peasant garb and popular speech of a disaffected Italian patriot, and making like he’s going to meet expectations or hopes and dreams of unification. Confusing? I’m trying to paint a picture here of the disingenuous Obama, the guy who I just caught doing a commercial for the new American TV series, Army Wives. He is NOT “Just Folks.” (5)
This is just the very tip of an iceberg’s worth of thought regarding The Second Conference of Vienna+. There’s much, much more to share upon request. The fun of the nuts and bolts, for one. For a production that wouldn’t be the usual star-studded emptiness along Sir Geldorf or Bono or Sting lines. Which leads to nothing significant. Because it refuses to call a spade a spade, preferring the easy route of attacking scarecrows, straw men. PC for PR (6).
No, this shindig would not only address The American Abomination, it would call attention to the scam that is the EU, wherein leaders are logged in along class lines whilst those ruled are encouraged to self-label nationally. Making change from the ground up… unlikely. Oh, there’s a whole lot that can be covered that’s only been covered up before.
Especially when you’re putting on a watershed event. Intending to out-influence Napoleon. Like Talleyrand… who was a guest of honor (of sorts) in 1814, in spite of his previous collaboration with Horror.
In the meantime (until you contact me at headburg@yahoo.com), I recommend that you zone out with your own imaginative powers to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7hORtbGk3c …or with another version. Or with another song. Or another singer.
As long as there will be music in our lives.
As long as there will be music in our lives.
Footnotes:
(1a) http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu5/wchr.htm
(1b) I almost always expect readers to check out terms, events, etc. with which they’re unfamiliar; I rarely write pieces laying out all the who, what where, etc., believing that my type of communication makes reader research, inititative an integral part of any hoped for solution that I’m focusing on. Short of that, it seems to me, all one has is the usual interesting or fascinating made-for-spectator-at-a-distance writing.
(2a) The scenario that would follow such an act would be tantamount to a McCain victory. With or without fires being set nationally a la the sixties, the total psychological and physical damage to the country would far outweigh what happened with Martin Luther King’s assassination. A dream wouldn’t die, dreaming would…within the dominant culture.
(2b) For an introduction to this notion, see http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Iraq/Iraq_dollar_vs_euro.html
(3a) http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/17974
(3b) The Citigroup scamming, as is often the case with other shiv-in-the-back shenanigans, involves federal agencies as per http://www.counterpunch.org/martens06212008.html
(3c) Waltzes at the 1814 balls were not yet the dance of later Vienna fame, but they were still quite controversial… for dancers moved as couples, not in groups, and there was a helluva lot more touching than there had been with any previous dance in modern history. The thrust of it all carried over into the decadent boudoirs.
(4) That’s just to name two ongoing, longstanding examples. See http://allthingspass.com/ for an introduction of sorts to American complicity in Africa. Keith Harmon Snow risks his life to get the information to you. Few Americans know or care about the role of Barrick Gold in the Congo. Let alone who owns major shares in the company. Kind of like the ignorance regarding the role of Rudder Finn in the Balkans. Ad infinitum. Hell, most educated souls in the U.S. would be hard pressed to tell you a single thing about the original Conference of Vienna. Or much about Vienna, for that matter. And people ask me why I don’t want my son Marcel to go to American schools! Why would any parent wish acclimatization to such arrogant complacency on their offspring?
(5) As per the not “Just Folks” comment, see http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/17971. None of the major American political candidates are ever any good, all with deep red blood on their filthy hands. The peripheral ones like Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader, however, often have much to offer. The ones who will never be given the chance to plant seeds… in the electoral arena.
(6) Anything but political correctness clothed in public relations. Just as the original 1814 Vienna Congress was not destined to be a congress, no parliament of equal sovereign states, certainly not any kind of a deliberate assembly of Europe, Vienna Congress #2 would be a site of many individual negotiations, a Europe without distances, wherein people on the ground, of the street, might meet… in lieu of a Central Committee or Directing Committee of Great Powers. This is about as far from the best of what’s been organized to date as a pregnant partridge from a barren, greenless pear tree. Not a gathering of egotistical and/or bootless cries directed at compassionless leaders. A real addressing of balance of power. In spite of my thrill over this whole idea, friends are urging me to drop my “save the world syndrome,” and to simply enjoy myself. What then, open an Anti-American Coffee Central somewhere on Mariahilfer Strasse?
Central to anarchism is the belief in self-organization and self-determination of the people. But there are topics on which many anarchists reject the pro-freedom position, paticularly involving free speech and also national self-determination.
Central to anarchism is the belief that people can organize themselves to efficiently meet their needs, without top-down hierarchies, coercion, or rewards and punishments. People will make mistakes, because we are imperfect, but we can learn from our mistakes and improve over time. This is the belief in freedom. Anarchism is usually presented as the most extreme form of a belief in freedom. It has often been said that anarchism is a synthesis of classical liberalism—carried to its extreme—and socialism. Another historical name for anarchism (and antistatist Marxism) is “libertarian socialism.”
Yet there is a certain amount of ambiguity among anarchists about freedom. There are topics on which some—many--anarchists reject the pro-freedom, libertarian, position.
For example, concerning freedom of speech. Some anarchists have generalized from our attitude toward fascists (where we attempt to physically drive them off the streets and break up their meetings). These anarchists (and other leftists) have applied this to other groups which are non-fascist--conservatives for example--breaking up their meetings (such as assaulting the platform at Columbia University in New York City of the group which organized “Islamo-fascist Week”). Or anarchists are often against admitting Marxist-Leninists to anarchist gatherings or bookfairs—not only denying them literature tables (which may make sense at an anarchist bookfair) but questioning their right to attend. This is especially true toward the Spartacist League, a Trotskyist group which specializes in “political combat” through being obnoxious, or the Revolutionary Communist Party, a Maoist group which would shoot us if it took power. This denial of free speech has been justified by some with a revival of the 1960s theory of Herbert Marcuse of “repressive tolerance.”
Freedom under capitalism
Capitalist politicians jabber about freedom, liberty, democracy, and more freedom. Revolutionary anarchists point out that freedom under capitalism is limited and hypocritical. Mostly the bourgeois (capitalist) politicians mean the freedom to get rich, including capitalists’ “freedom” not to be bothered by unions or by pesky anti-discrimination laws or environmental regulations. Capitalists want the “liberty” to not promote African-Americans or women at work or to rent out apartments without having to modify them for the physically disabled. This is the “freedom” to oppress others (to deny others their freedom). Needless to say, what I am for is the freedom of the oppressed to be free of their oppression! Even the most democratic bourgeois state protects the rule of its capitalist minority. This minority gets rich by exploiting the working class majority of the population. The people vote for one or another candidate of the rich to rule over us for 2 or 4 to 8 years. But day-to-day we go to work and take orders from unelected bosses who serve the unelected minority which owns the economy. These capitalists decide (under the pressures of the market) whether employment should go up or down, whether prices should rise or fall, whether or not pollutants should be spewed into the atmosphere, and so on. There is “free speech,” but one side owns the printing presses, the radios, and the television, while dissenting voices can barely be heard over the roar of the mass media. That is why even a capitalist democracy is rightly called a “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.” In its heroic period, the revolutionary bourgeoisie promised all sorts of freedoms: “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” or “liberty, equality, and fraternity,” of the U.S. and French revolutions. This meant the end of all pre-capitalist discrimination and oppression based on anything except wealth (ending oppression based on race, skin color, gender, religion, nationality, etc.). Of course, the bourgeoisie has never lived up to its protestations, as we can see by the slave-holders who made the U.S. revolution. They do not live up to it today, in the epoch of semi-monopoly capitalism and imperialist decline. Every bit of freedom which the people enjoy was won by the struggle and blood of the people, fighting against the feudal lords or against the capitalists themselves. This makes these freedoms precious to us. They are ours. We mean to hold on to them (see my chapter on “Democracy versus the State” in Price [2007]). Bourgeois democracy has benefits for the rich. It lets them settle differences between competing factions without having to shoot it out. It lets them get rid of a lousy leader (e.g. Bush) without a coup. It lets them pretend to the working people that the people control their government. It lets them coopt talented individuals from the bottom of society into the ruling strata (e.g. Obama). But bourgeois democracy also has benefits for working people. It is simply easier to live from day to day in a bourgeois democracy than under a one-party police state. Besides that, it is easier for radical minorities (such as anarchists) to organize, to develop our theory, to publish our literature, and to reach out to others, than under a police dictatorship. We can argue that the bourgeois-democratic regime is hypocritical, contradicting the principles it claims to stand on. Anarchists, socialists, communists, and revolutionaries are a small minority in the U.S. and most industrialized countries. Most working people strongly disagree with us. One of our best defenses is our appeal to traditions of free speech, democracy, and fairness. Anarchists benefit greatly by being able to make this appeal. We would be foolish to give it up. After World War II, in the anti-Communist McCarthyite Red Scare, the capitalists benefited greatly from the fact that everyone knew that the Communist Party was antidemocratic. Everyone knew that if the Communists ever came to power, they would do as they had done in Eastern Europe and set up a one-party police state. So why defend their free speech? people asked themselves. Similarly, the capitalists have previously attacked the anarchists by portraying us as bomb-throwing terrorists, a danger to everyone, and not deserving of free speech. In our own time we have seen how the fear of terrorism can be used to justify the denial of civil liberties--and that many ordinary people were willing to accept this denial out of fear of being blown up by random bombs. Therefore it is important that we do not make it easy for the state to portray anarchists as terrorists and anti-free speech. There is a line, based on the theory of “repressive tolerance,” which says that, since the bourgeoisie (also) benefits from free speech and other freedoms, once we radicals take power we will deny free speech, etc. Right now, of course, we are a minority and use free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of association, etc. But once we take over, this says, we will deny these freedoms to people we disagree with! This is not presented as the control of ACTIONS (such as our stopping counterrevolutionary armies or organized sabotage) but of SPEECH and writing. Its advocates do not apply it just to exceptional circumstances (e.g., if things should develop into a civil war, we would not allow the enemy to make propaganda behind our lines), but even to a peaceful, stable, period, on principle. As everyone knows, this is the position of the fascists as it is of the Communist Parties. However for anarchists to openly state this program is pretty stupid. By doing so, we would forfeit all the sympathy which others give us on the grounds of our right to free speech. That is aside from the sheer wrongness of these politics.
What about the “rights” of Fascists?
In a number of Western countries, the making of racist, pro-fascist, or Holocaust-denying statements are illegal. Not so in the U.S., with its First Amendment. However, most anarchists do not call on the government to suppress fascists or reactionary statements. We oppose laws limiting fascist speech. In this, we are in full agreement with free-speech civil libertarians (such as the American Civil Liberties Union). Quite simply, we do not trust the government, this bourgeois-patriarchial-racist state. Even if suppressing right wing speech were good, we would expect the state to use any speech-suppression powers to focus on suppressing left-wing speech, that is, ours. And so it has. Instead, we organize workers, students, African-Americans, and immigrants, to counterdemonstrate at fascist demonstrations, and, where possible, to bust up their forces, driving them out of the neighborhoods. Why? When people organize a Nazi outfit, they are not organizing the equivalent of a Conservative Discussion Club. They are deliberately choosing to identify with those who broke up unions and left parties, who overthrew bourgeois democracy in favor of bourgeois dictatorship, who exterminated millions of Jews and others, and who waged aggressive wars. Similarly, people who identify with the Ku Klux Klan are choosing to imitate those who covered their faces to gather at night in order to murder African-Americans and their white supporters. By calling themselves Fascists, Nazis, or Klansmen, they are declaring their readiness to engage (in the fairly short-term) in violent, extralegal, ACTIONS against others. It is like forming a chapter of the Mafia. It would be foolish for us to wait until the police catch them doing something illegal. We have every right to protect ourselves, our friends, and our communities from this threat. In 1930s Germany, the problem with the Nazis was not what they said or wrote. It was that they beat up socialists and communists selling their papers, they attacked union or socialist party meetings, they burned down union halls, and they murdered prominent leftists and even liberals. The police would not arrest them, or if they did, reactionary judges let them off with a slap on the wrist. This, not Free Speech for Fascists, was the issue, and should have been the justification for the left to unite and physically drive the Nazis from the streets (see my chapter on “The Fight Against Nazism in Germany” in Price [2007]). It is different when dealing with a real Conservative Discussion Club. For us to just call everyone on the right “fascist” and try to break up their meetings is to put ourselves in a false and vulnerable position. The issue is not really “free speech for reactionaries” any more than the right to a fair trial is “civil liberties for criminals.” We want freedom of speech for ourselves, therefore we must defend it for others, even those whom we hate. The same goes for free speech for Communists, Maoists, and orthodox Trotskyists, who would, after all, establish totalitarian states and throw us in jail, if they could. Yet attacks on their free speech, by the government or anyone else, are attacks on the whole left, on everyone. (So we should allow the Spartacists to attend our gatherings.)
The socialist-anarchist revolution must be freely self-organized
The bourgeois-democratic revolution was based on a lie. Although it may have improved life for most people, its real function was to place a minority elite in power, to rule over and plunder the mass of people. This it could not say openly. Therefore the mass struggles which carried it out had to stay within certain limits. But this was acceptable for the capitalist revolution, because its main task is to break down the barriers to the market. Once the capitalist market is freed-up to run more-or-less automatically, then capitalism can take off in its historic role of capital accumulation and industrialization. How democratic or authoritarian the government is, is not the central issue for capitalism. The revolution of the working class (and its allies among the oppressed) will be qualitatively different. It needs the truth, that all elites must be overturned and the big majority must take power. It needs people to be conscious of what they are doing. It replaces the automatic market with a democratically planned cooperative economy. All this requires awareness, consciousness, and deliberation among the mass of people. This only happens when there is open discussion and democratic decision-making. Of course, a movement can be built on lies, on obedience to leaders, and on unthinking emotionality. That is how the fascists build their movements, how the Communist Parties build theirs. In reality, it is how liberal and conservative movements are built. They do not need--they cannot tolerate--free speech and democracy within their movements. But we do! Concerning freedom of speech, “Here is a proposition: There can be no contradiction, no gulf in principle, between what we demand of this existing state, and what we propose for the society we want to replace it, a free society…. What we demand of this state does constitute our real program…. The kind of movement we build now, on a certain basis, will determine our new society, not good intentions…. Our aim by its very nature requires the mobilization of conscious masses. Without such conscious masses, our goal is impossible. Therefore we need the fullest democracy.” (Draper, 1992; pp. 165-166 & 170; Draper, the coiner of the term “socialism-from-below,” was no anarchist, but he was insightful on this topic.)
Freedom for all includes the right of national self-determination
Capitalism cannot fulfill its own bourgeois-democratic program. But the working class can, and can create a society a thousand times more democratic than Jefferson could ever dream of. We revolutionary anarchists must be the champions of every democratic freedom, every struggle against oppression, whatever its immediate relation to the class struggle as such. This includes the struggle of oppressed nations for self-determination. This is often treated as a special case, but it is not. It is just one of the democratic struggles of masses of people (that is, the workers, peasants, extreme poor, and small shopkeepers) for freedom. Almost all libertarian socialists agree that most of humanity is oppressed by imperialism, but many libertarians do not like the choices which the oppressed peoples would make. At this time in history, oppressed nations are unlikely to chose horizontalized federations of self-managed workplaces and communes. Unfortunately, the Palestinians and Iraqis, say, will (at first) chose national states with capitalist economies. Since this is not what we internationalist anarchists advocate, many anarchists decide that they cannot support the freedom of the Palestinians and Iraqis to make their own choices. These supposed libertarians then refuse to take sides between the imperialist power of the U.S. and the oppressed people of Iraq and Palestine. People of oppressed nations, like everyone else, learn to want anarchist revolution only by open debate, new experiences, and living the alternatives. They will not learn if anarchists turn our backs on them and their struggles, refuse to engage with them, and refuse to show solidarity with them against their imperialist and colonialist enemies. What we advocate is no small change in society but a total one, involving a complete transformation of popular consciousness and practice. That is why anarchists are advocates of extreme freedom and radical democracy, of popular participation in every sphere of society and in every way.
A non-binding resolution to demand that President Bush impose "stringent inspection requirements" on trade with Iran - language that leaves the door open for a military blockade - will likely come to the House floor this week, according to sources close to Congressional leadership. The legislation, H.Con.Res.362, which is paralleled by a similar Senate bill, has gained bipartisan support rapidly, with more co-sponsors signing on by the day. Once it hits the floor, it's bound to "pass like a hot knife through butter," a staffer in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office told Chelsea Mozen of the nonprofit Just Foreign Policy....
I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately. -- George Carlin
The last vote that George Carlin said he cast in a presidential race was for George McGovern in 1972.
When Richard Nixon, who Carlin described as a member of a sub-species of humanity, overwhelmingly defeated McGovern, the comedian gave up on the political process.
"Now, there's one thing you might have noticed I don't complain about: politicians," he explained in a routine that challenged all the premises of today's half-a-loaf reformers. "Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good; you're just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it's not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here… like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There's a nice campaign slogan for somebody: 'The Public Sucks. Fuck Hope.'"
Needless to say, George Carlin was not on message for 2008's "change we can believe in" election season.
His was a darker and more serious take on the crisis – and the change of consciousness, sweeping in scope and revolutionary in character, that was required to address it.
Carlin may have stopped voting in 1972. But America's most consistently savage social commentator for the best part of a half century, who has died at age 71, did not give up on politics.
Recalling George Bush's ranting about how the endless "war on terror" is a battle for freedom, Carlin echoed James Madison's thinking with a simple question: "Well, if crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight? They never mention that part to us, do they?"
Carlin gave the Christian right – and the Christian left – no quarter. "I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State," Carlin said. "My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
Carlin's take on the Ronald Reagan administration is the best antidote to the counterfactual romanticization of the former president – in which even Barack Obama has engaged – remains the single finest assessment of Reagan and his inner circle. While Carlin did not complain much about politicians, he made an exception with regard to the great communicator. Recorded in 1988 at the Park Theater in Union City, New Jersey, and later released as an album -- What Am I Doing in New Jersey? – his savage recollection of the then-concluding Reagan-Bush years opened with the line: "I really haven't seen this many people in one place since they took the group photograph of all the criminals and lawbreakers in the Ronald Reagan administration."
But there was no nostalgia for past fights, no resting on laurels, for this topical comedian. He read the papers, he followed the news, he asked questions – the interviews I did with Carlin over the years were more conversations than traditional Q & A's – and he turned it all into a running commentary that focused not so much on politics as on the ugly intersection of power and economics.
No one, not Obama, not Hillary Clinton and certainly not John McCain, caught the zeitgeist of the vanishing American dream so well as Carlin. "The owners of this country know the truth: It's called the American dream because you have to be asleep to believe it."
Not just aware of but steeped in the traditions of American populism – more William Jennings Bryan and Eugene Victor Debs than Bill Clinton or John Kerry – Carlin preached against the consolidation of wealth and power with a fire-and-brimstone rage that betrayed a deep moral sense that could never quite be cloaked with four-letter words.
"The real owners are the big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions. Forget the politicians, they're an irrelevancy. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don't. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They've long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the statehouses, the city halls. They've got the judges in their back pockets. And they own all the big media companies, so that they control just about all of the news and information you hear. They've got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying – lobbying to get what they want. Well, we know what they want; they want more for themselves and less for everybody else," ranted the comedian whose routines were studied in graduate schools.
"But I'll tell you what they don't want," Carlin continued. "They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don't want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They're not interested in that. That doesn't help them. That's against their interests. They don't want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they're getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago. You know what they want? Obedient workers – people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork but just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, reduced benefits, the end of overtime and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it. And, now, they're coming for your Social Security. They want your fucking retirement money. They want it back, so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. And you know something? They'll get it. They'll get it all, sooner or later, because they own this fucking place. It's a big club, and you ain't in it. You and I are not in the big club."
Carlin did not want Americans to get involved with the system.
He wanted citizens to get angry enough to remake the system.
Carlin was a leveler of the old, old school. And no one who had so public a platform – as the first host of NBC's "Saturday Night Live," a regular on broadcast and cable televisions shows, a best-selling author and a favorite character actor in films (he was even the narrator of the American version of he provided the narrative voice for the American version of the children's show "Thomas the Tank Engine & Friends") – did more to challenge accepted wisdom regarding our political economy.
"Let's suppose we all just materialized on Earth and there was a bunch of potatoes on the ground, okay? There's just six of us. Only six humans. We come into a clearing and there's potatoes on the ground. Now, my instinct would be, let's everybody get some potatoes. "Everybody got a potato? Joey didn't get a potato! He's small, he can't hold as many potatoes. Give Joey some of your potatoes." "No, these are my potatoes!" That's the Republicans. "I collected more of them, I got a bigger pile of potatoes, they're mine. If you want some of them, you're going to have to give me something." "But look at Joey, he's only got a couple, they won't last two days." That's the fuckin' difference! And I'm more inclined to want to share and even out," he explained in an interview several years ago with the Onion.
"I understand the marketplace, but government is supposed to be here to redress the inequities of the marketplace," Carlin continued. "That's one of its functions. Not just to protect the nation, secure our security and all that shit. And not just to take care of great problems that are trans-state problems, that are national, but also to make sure that the inequalities of the marketplace are redressed by the acts of government. That's what welfare was about. There are people who really just don't have the tools, for whatever reason. Yes, there are lazy people. Yes, there are slackers. Yes, there's all of that. But there are also people who can't cut it, for any given reason, whether it's racism, or an educational opportunity, or poverty, or a fuckin' horrible home life, or a history of a horrible family life going back three generations, or whatever it is. They're crippled and they can't make it, and they deserve to rest at the commonweal. That's where my fuckin' passion lies."
Like the radicals of the early years of the 20th century, whose politics he knew and respected, Carlin understood that free-speech fights had to come first. And always pushed the limit – happily choosing an offensive word when a more polite one might have sufficed. By 1972, the year he won the first of four Grammys for best comedy album, he had developed his most famous routine: "Seven Words (You Can't Say on Television)."
That summer, at a huge outdoor show in Milwaukee, he uttered all seven of them in public – and was promptly arrested for disturbing the peace.
When a version of the routine was aired in 1973 on WBAI, the Pacifica Foundation radio station in New York,. Pacifica received a citation from the FCC. Pacifica was ordered to pay a fine for violating federal regulations prohibiting the broadcast of "obscene" language. The ensuing free-speech fight made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which rile 5-4 against the First Amendment to the Constitution, Pacifica and Carlin.
Amusingly, especially to the comedian, a full transcript of the routine ended up in court documents associated with the case, F.C.C. v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978).
"So my name is a footnote in American legal history, which I'm perversely kind of proud of," recalled Carlin. Proud enough that you can find the court records on the comedian's website: www.georgecarlin.com
There will, of course, be those who dismiss Carlin as a remnant of the sixties who introduced obscenity to the public discourse – just as there will be those who misread his critique of the American political and economic systems as little more than verbal nihilism. In fact, George Carlin was, like the radicals of an earlier age, an idealist – and a patriot --of a deeper sort than is encountered very often these days.
Carlin explained himself best in one of his last interviews. "There is a certain amount of righteous indignation I hold for this culture, because to get back to the real root of it, to get broader about it, my opinion that is my species--and my culture in America specifically--have let me down and betrayed me. I think this species had great, great promise, with this great upper brain that we have, and I think we squandered it on God and Mammon. And I think this culture of ours has such promise, with the promise of real, true freedom, and then everyone has been shackled by ownership and possessions and acquisition and status and power," he said. "And perhaps it's just a human weakness and an inevitable human story that these things happen. But there's disillusionment and some discontent in me about it. I don't consider myself a cynic. I think of myself as a skeptic and a realist. But I understand the word 'cynic' has more than one meaning, and I see how I could be seen as cynical. 'George, you're cynical.' Well, you know, they say if you scratch a cynic you find a disappointed idealist. And perhaps the flame still flickers a little, you know?"
Movement Building at the Summer Conventions
Cindy Milstein
(Note: This essay is reprinted from the July–August 2008 issue of Left Turn magazine, which features a special section on the elections; it was written shortly before Obama secured the nomination.)
“The world as it is, is not the world as it has to be.”(1) Long our basic aspiration, this ideal now springs from a U.S. presidential contender. And yet the gap between the change that Barack Obama promises and the transformation that we know is crucial may offer a space of possibility. For even as liberals are utilizing “hope” to captivate millions this election, embodied in Obama’s “New Politics,”(2) I would maintain that those of us who seek a nonhierarchical world are still the real carriers of utopia. Nevertheless, this election supplies us the opening to reject statism in a way that’s sensitive to the historical moment and prefigurative of a directly democratic society—but only if we mind the gap.
As libertarian leftists, we view presidential contests as egregious reaffirmations of the state, and thus challenge electoralism’s connection to statecraft but also hierarchy. Yet often the best we can muster is an anti-politics, where our organizing goes into decrying those institutions and social relations we oppose. We seem to forget that presidential campaigns are one of few times when there’s widespread interest in politics; a public, political culture in this privatized, depoliticized country; and occasionally, such as now, tremendous involvement. Also, uniquely, there will be a female or black Democratic nominee for president. Engaging in a thoughtful, imaginative way with this election could allow us to hold out a reconstructive vision for those thousands who will be disappointed by the new administration, and so potentially looking for alternatives. And we just might learn something about ourselves.
Lessons Learned
Nearly as early as the candidates, anarchists were crafting their own campaigns, aimed specifically at the Republican and Democratic National Conventions (RNC and DNC). Much good work has gone into these plans; still, it’s helpful to briefly recall several examples during the 2000 and 2004 convention protests, in an effort to build on our achievements and limit similar missteps in 2008.
Back in 2000, the conventions followed on the heels of the emergent North American branch of the global anti-capitalist movement, which for its part gave visibility to both anarchism and a horizontalist zeitgeist. This sense of potentiality carried through into the DNC and RNC, translating into lived experiments with self-organization. From convergence centers and Indymedia, to skills trainings and affinity groups, the stress was on direct democracy. We created our own (albeit temporary) counterinstitutions for collective decision-making—a precondition for any egalitarian, nonstate-based society. But the “we” was limited. To cite one example, radicals guarded spokescouncil meeting doors during the RNC to determine who could and couldn’t enter (based on who looked the part?). In turning people away, we disenfranchised those who also wanted to practice face-to-face politics, thereby undercutting our aim: power by all the people. Another case during the 2000 RNC was the March for Economic Human Rights, in which some 15,000 people, pledged to nonviolence, walked single file, flanked by “March Security Teams.” Many anti-capitalists either ignored the poor people’s march or all but taunted its supposed passivity and reformism. Militancy trumped solidarity, even as the police threatened the many at-risk marchers, from single parents and people of color, to children and people with disabilities.
The 2004 conventions also saw some intriguing new experiments. First, there was the DNC-to-RNC bike ride, where anti-authoritarians pedaled between the conventions to explicitly relate the two, stopping in small towns along the way to highlight, in contrast, community self-management. This culminated in the cyclists entering New York City for a march for direct democracy, conversing with passersby about a nonelectoral politics. Then there was the “Don’t Just (Not) Vote” campaign, devised from a National Conference on Organized Resistance panel to encourage the idea that politics should be the collective self-organization that’s done 364 days, 23 hours, and 55 minutes of the year—versus the 5 minutes of voting (or not) on Election Day. At its best, this campaign spurred literature on self-governance and shifted our own stance to a proactive one, reflected in the sentiment borrowed from the Argentine assembly movement: “Our dreams will never fit in their ballot boxes.” These and other efforts, despite trying to reach a wider range of people, remained fairly insular, thereby signaling a turn to a politics of (our) everyday life—necessary but not sufficient without larger self-instituted decision-making bodies as eventual replacements for states.
Both the 2000 and 2004 counterconvention organizing strove to move beyond protest, and both captured their times.
Current Challenges
Now we arrive at 2008. The progress here is in the long view taken by the organizers, via a string of consultas, outreach tours, and transparent action frameworks. Much appears to be a step backward, however. There seems to be little thought about accounting for—and acting in relation to—this specific moment in political history. Unconventional Action—an emerging network aiming to complement the work of local organizers in Denver (DNC, August 24–28) and the Twin Cities (RNC, September 1–4)—issued a broadsheet, for instance, that says a simple no to white supremacy and patriarchy. Sure, Obama and Clinton won’t eradicate either, but for millions the viability of a person of color or female president has profound meaning in the struggle against racism and patriarchy. Moreover, the assertion in a more recent Unconventional Action broadsheet, titled “False Hope vs. Real Change,” that the color of the president doesn’t matter, seems almost willfully designed to alienate these millions, and assure that they view anarchists as anything but allies in working through the legacy of slavery, segregation, and so on in the United States.(3) It’s not that Obama is the antidote to racism; it’s that if his self-described “improbable journey” moves many, many people, we should at least be cognizant and perhaps understanding of how a president of color might matter in certain ways, at a certain time and place. One last example here is the “Disrupt the DNC!” zine, which doesn’t even mention Obama at all, thereby signaling offense through omission.4
The trick is to meet people “where they’re at” yet boldly encourage them to venture beyond “the world that is,” toward the “world that could be.” This would involve asking ourselves a series of hard questions, including: Which convention might be best to focus our efforts on? How could we approach the conventions as an explicit campaign toward something, such as mentoring future generations of radicals, linking local and global horizontal experiments, and offering visions? And how do we relate to an election that brings relief globally from the Bush era as well as hope around the idea of a black or female president?
Honest answers might lead to different conclusions about the form and content of our actions—and it’s not too late to reconsider, especially given the changing landscape. The DNC may in fact demand flexibility in our responses to questions of gender, race, and even representative “democracy,” depending on the Democratic primaries’ outcome (or fallout, or simply how various social movements choose to engage with the DNC).
This relates to our motivations. For many, the conventions appear as an elixir to revive the anti-capitalist movements of the late 1990s, or for some, even the nostalgia of the 1960s. Others feel despondent about our radical milieu or disempowered, and want to cathartically shut something down. Still others claim that since “everyone” will be protesting, we should be part of the spectacle too, and even create a counterspectacle. Sadly, one can’t wish a watershed into existence; nostalgia can blind us to past mistakes—do we really want, as Denver’s “Re-create 68” argues, “to pick up where our predecessors left off”? And in an era when states and capitalism increasingly thrive on creating spectacle, adding to it only seems to linger within the same detestable logic.
The Medium and the Message
The lack of a substantive “why” in these motivations, despite the understandable feelings behind them, is evidenced in the lack of meaningful messaging—that is, slogans and literature that grapple with this historical moment. It’s hard to express much of anything in a tagline for a mobilization or on a banner, but one thing that’s gotten lost over the past few years appears to be the desire to try. Compare this year’s “Crash the Convention” to the “Convergence against Capitalism” slogan from early 2000. The former is an empty descriptor, mirroring an empty action: blockading the RNC, essentially an expensive party celebrating a done deal. The latter phrase, conversely, holds substance: our convergences were infused with a sensibility that allowed us to reject shifts within capitalism. So when we tried to shut down the World Trade Organization, for one, we were exposing a powerful decision-making body, even as we ourselves practiced a self-organized unity in diversity, thereby prefiguring a world without hierarchy.
It is a step back that in 2008, the notion of putting out reconstructive ideas seems to be off the table. The slogans emerging so far speak volumes about the poverty of our own planning and self-understanding, and put us further out of touch with the many people embracing hope. Take such anti-convention phrases as “we’re an ungovernable mass” or we’re in the “serious business of fucking their shit up.” Shouldn’t a nonhierarchical politics assert that “we’re a self-governing society of individuated people,” or that we seriously intend to “unfuck their shit up,” humanely remaking the world, not adding to its crap?
The DNC is another story; we might face not a party but a feud. Yet even here, what will our “days of resistance” be addressing, when likely there will be many outside the convention angry over why a female or black has lost, or why the so-called Democratic Party is acting undemocratically or hasn’t adequately dealt with a variety of issues such as the war. We might just want to seize this moment of disillusionment to exhibit a “festival of democracy” that doesn’t reside in one park (as is planned) but lives daily as the very body politic by which everyone self-governs. Perhaps our actions could always combine, coextensively, the best of both social critique and social reconstruction.
What’s been lost in both these mass mobilizations is a messaging framework, precisely as a way to bind our aspirations to the action frameworks. Such a unifying slogan, though, should also tie the DNC and RNC together under a clear statement that captures why we’re all there, since as anti-statists we do see a relationship between the two: politics. Of course, for us this means contrasting visions of directly democratic politics to the hierarchical form of representative democracy. Just as self-evident, any such overarching tagline needs to be open enough to meet the diversity of political concerns that will and should be brought to the convergences. It should also, I’d argue, take as a jumping off point the possibility that can be gleaned from this historical moment. In this light, one especially apropos suggestion for a potential messaging framework, made by someone at the recent Unconventional East Coast Convergence in Washington, DC, is this: “Hope comes from people, not from presidents.”(5)
Possible Visions?
Beyond a single slogan, however, there are three areas that deserve our particular attention, and that could all provide promising, perhaps necessary ground for qualitative forms of engagement.
We could queer and trouble identity. We strive to be antiracist, pro-feminist, and so on, but when confronted with a public debate on the meaning of race and gender expression, we remain largely silent. Part of the reason, I fear, is that we have little to say; that alone should be rationale enough for us to struggle with the meaning of race, racism, and antiracism, with sex, sexuality, and gender, in ways that are at once historically situated, complex, and liberatory. Even if we only self-educate, that would be enormous. But this moment could also allow us to act in critical solidarity, particularly with those people of color and female- or feminist-identified people who find meaning in this election. For regardless of who’s the Democratic nominee, many will be moved by this “historic” moment, which is historic within the U.S. context. Maybe it is precisely at the DNC that we can learn from those who feel newly empowered, and also offer them a truly empowering politics beyond electoralism and representation.
We could also substantively link hope, change, and needs/desires. Obama has clearly created a space for the hope that millions already hold to visibly manifest itself. We, too, should believe in the human capacity for simultaneously aspiring toward higher ideals while meeting needs—but also connect it to a revolutionary tradition. For unlike the alleged either-or of “Obama as change” or “Hillary as realpolitik,” it is essential to continually couple social transformation with qualitative improvements in daily life. Obama has done far more than we have of late to nurture people’s yearning for hope, yet he won’t fulfill that promise. And that’s exactly why we should assume that the desires for hope, change, and dealing with survival issues are genuine, and that we have much more to offer by pointing to the ways that today’s horizontalist movements are attempting to institute social freedom. We shouldn’t circumscribe hope; rather, we should work to expand its horizon, and the horizons of those who long for change.
Finally, we could encourage self-organization and participation while radicalizing the newly politicized. This focus builds on, though contrasts Obama’s community organizing style of top-down politics, which nonetheless has raised expectations. Obama comes across “as a nonhierarchical, collaborative leader who can inspire autonomous individuals to cooperate for the sake of common concerns.”(6) He speaks of the influence of the civil rights and New Left movements. We can scoff at Obama’s organization, or learn from its results and go one better. Even Obama understands that once activated, the desire to self-organize can coalesce into social movements that contest the very institutions or individuals that gave rise to the impulse in the first place. And that’s our task. To pick up where Obama’s liberalism leaves off—encouraging, mentoring, and providing mutual aid to those who soon may want to collectively struggle for a world without messiahs or masters. But this also means that we’ll need to be good community organizers, rather than merely good at countercultural projects. We could, say, counter Obama’s summer 2008 Organizing Fellows program—meant to develop “a new generation of leadership that believes . . . real change comes from the ground up”7—with our own summer 2009 Organizing Radicals camps, promoting them at the conventions, or do our own door-to-door campaigns for everything from neighborhood assemblies to noncommodified food security alternatives.
In terms of the DNC and RNC, let’s turn the tables on the spectacle. Rather than playing into it, let’s spend our time conversing with and organizing events for newly politicized nonradicals, to both listen and educate, laying the groundwork for the day when they, too, will want to break with the spectacle. This would imply that we blanket the convention cities with propaganda and projects that speak to our ethics, rather than merely our critiques. So let a million visionary flyers rain on the conventions’ parade! Let gigantic posters and “bike-in” movies depicting our dreams overlay the high-rises! If we do blockade, let’s use the action to wrap the entire convention center in banners—facing outward, with us in between—calling for face-to-face assemblies, on the spot, thereby utilizing our time together to do long-term strategizing and movement building, while publicly illustrating self-governance! Let’s show that the world as it is, already contains glimpses of the world that ought to be!
Cindy (cbmilstein@yahoo.com) is an Institute for Anarchist Studies board member, co-organizer of the annual Renewing the Anarchist Tradition conference, and a collective member of Black Sheep Books and Free Society in Montpelier, VT. For her essays related to direct democracy and anarchism, see http://www.freesocietycollective.org/archives/cat_cindy_milstein.html; for a longer, audiovisual version of this essay, see http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3162255534532924685&hl=en.
Notes:
1. Barack Obama, “Join,” Super Bowl ad, February 3, 2008.
2. David Brooks, “A Defining Moment,” New York Times, March 4, 2008.
3. Also, as someone pointed out to me, this same broadcast has the word “bullshit” printed over a photo of Obama’s face; see http://hackasheville.com/nornc/uaftp/downloads/falsehopevsrealchangespreads.pdf.
4. This zine (available at https://lists.riseup.net/www/d_read/unconventionaldenver/Disrupt_the_DNC.pdf) also illustrates one of the problems with ignoring Obama. For better or worse, he inspires tens of thousands to believe that “yes, we can,” again echoing the do-it-ourselves sensibility, albeit stripped of its utopian thrust, that anarchists and others on the libertarian Left have long advocated and practiced. Rather than meeting this circumscribed “yes” with our own many expansive affirmations, as the Zapatista movement should have taught us, this zine as well as the DNC and RNC direct actions all seem to be only capable of loudly proclaiming “no.” For example, there’s a “We Vote No!” direct action planned by anti-authoritarians for August 26 at the DNC, but it would be lovely if we “voted” yes in this direct action instead to everything from self-organization and mutual aid, to a free and ecological society, and so on—as a way to start from where people are at and yet hopefully radicalize the content of their yeses.
5. Thanks here to the participant at the convergence for this intriguing slogan idea, which emerged during a “messaging caucus.” For info on the recent DC organizing weekend, see http://ecc.dead-city.org/.
6. Brooks, “A Defining Moment.”
7. As described on the Obama Web site, available at http://www.barackobama.com.
Obscenis, peream, Priape, si non uti me pudet improbisque verbis sed cum tu posito deus pudore ostendas mihi coleos patentes cum cunno mihi mentula est vocanda ("I'd rather die than use obscene and improper words; but when you, as a god, appear with your balls hanging out, it is appropriate for me to speak of cunts and cocks.")Verpa is also a basic Latin obscenity for "penis". It appears less frequently in Classical Latin, but it does appear in Catullus 47: vos Veraniolo meo et Fabullo verpus praeposuit Priapus ille? ("Did that dick, that Priapus, prefer you to my dear little Veranius (erection) and Fabullus?")
By Simon RomeroSunday, June 22, 2008LOS TEQUES, Venezuela: When Nurul Asyiqin Ahmad was delivered seven months ago to her cell at the National Institute for Feminine Orientation, a prison perched on a hill in this city of slums on the outskirts of Caracas, learning how to play Beethoven was one of the last things on her mind."The despair gripped me, like a nightmare had become my life," said Ahmad, 26, a shy law student from Malaysia who claims she is innocent of charges of trying to smuggle cocaine on a flight from Caracas to Paris. "But when the music begins, I am lifted away from this place." Ahmad plays violin and sings in the prison's orchestra.In a project extending Venezuela's renowned system of youth orchestras to some of the most hardened prisons in the country, Ahmad and hundreds of other prisoners are learning a repertoire that includes Beethoven's Ninth Symphony, folk songs from the Venezuelan plains and Mercedes Sosa's classic lullaby "Duerme Negrito."The budding musicians include murderers, kidnappers, thieves and, here at the women's prison, dozens of "narcomulas," or drug mules, as small-scale drug smugglers are called. The project, which began a year ago, is expanding this year to five prisons in Venezuela from three."This is our attempt to achieve the humanization of prison life," said Kleiberth Lenin Mora, 32, a lawyer who helped create the prison orchestras, modeling them on the system that teaches tens of thousands of poor children in Venezuela classical music. "We start with the simple idea that performing music lifts the human being to another level."Few nations have prison systems as much in need of humanizing as Venezuela, where 498 inmates out of a total population of 21,201 were murdered in 2007, according to the Venezuelan Prison Observatory, a group that monitors prison violence.The women's prison, the scene of gang fights and hunger strikes by inmates in recent months, is not immune to this violence. But it is not all bleak. Inmates have free access to the Internet. They can pay to use cellphones. A dispensary sells soft drinks and snack food.And now the prison, known as INOF, for its Spanish acronym, has its orchestra, which most of the more than 300 women incarcerated here opt to avoid. But the 40 or so who have joined find themselves enmeshed in an experience unexpected in their lives in or out of prison."Before this my music was reggaetón," said Irma González, 29, a street vendor serving a six-year sentence for robbery, referring to the fusion of reggae, hip hop and Latin pop that emanates from Venezuelan slums. Now she plays the double bass. Her proudest moment, she said, was when her four children, ages 14, 13, 10 and 9, recently came here to watch her play."When they applauded me, I finally felt useful in this life," González said, flashing an infectious smile that included a tongue-piercing offering a hint of past mischief. Like other participants, she hopes to reduce her term by playing in the orchestra, which judges may consider the equivalent of hours of study.Officials say it is too early to tell whether the project will improve overall conditions here and at the two male prisons where it started, in the Andean states of Mérida and Táchira. No stars have emerged like Gustavo Dudamel, the 27-year-old phenom from the youth orchestra system named as the next music director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic.For now, the project, which receives $3 million from President Hugo Chávez's government and the Inter-American Development Bank, takes baby steps. It staged its first public performance last month in Teresa Carreño Theater in Caracas. And it focuses on requiring its participants to hew to a few specific rules.For instance, no one can threaten the professors, many of whom are drawn from the youth orchestra system. Everyone must speak clearly during discussions in the daily practice sessions. Everyone must stand up straight and take care of their instruments. Smoking and chewing tobacco are not allowed.The orchestra at INOF (or "enough") is one of the most cosmopolitan in Venezuela. Foreigners arrested on drug smuggling charges comprise much of prison population. Women from Colombia, Spain, Malaysia and the Netherlands play instruments or sing in the chorus alongside Venezuelans."I drain away by bad thoughts in the orchestra," said Joanny Aldana, 29, a viola player serving a nine-year sentence for kidnapping and auto theft. Like some of the other inmates, she is imprisoned here with her child, a 2-year-old daughter. Still, she despairs sometimes. "There's the pain of my children, of having destroyed my life, my youth," she said.Perhaps no amount of music can make up for such loss. Perhaps that explains the fervor with which some of the women play their instruments or sing. It is not uncommon to see one of them shedding a tear when a certain note is struck.For Yusveisy Torrealba, 18, that moment comes when the orchestra's chorus sings a few words from "Caramba," the folk song by the Venezuelan composer Otilio Galíndez performed with the cuatro, a four-string guitar. Torrealba, caught in April taking cocaine on a flight to Orlando, looks no older than 16.In her soft voice, she sang this refrain for a visitor one recent afternoon: "Caramba, my love, caramba / The things we have lost / The gossip I could hear / Between the rocks of the river.""Caramba," she repeated quietly, as if contemplating how much time remained in an eight-year sentence that began last month. "The only thing keeping me together is this music."Sandra La Fuente contributed reporting.
CARACAS, Venezuela Venezuela's environment minister said that the government will put national interests first in the mining sector and forbid mining in a biodiverse forest reserve that is home to two of the country's largest gold concessions.Minister Yubiri Ortega did not give a direct answer when asked Saturday if the government is planning to nationalize the mines. But she said Venezuela is "taking control" in order to "save and appropriate what is ours."...
Now, on YouTube, you can find The Grey Video, which experimentally brings Danger Mouse’s concept to video. The video, created by two Swiss directors, meshes clips from The Beatles’ film A Hard Day’s Night with footage of Jay-Z performing. Watch it below, and get more info on The Grey Album here. Also check our collection of MP3 Music Blogs.
By Patricia Grogg
HAVANA, Jun 20 (IPS) - Cuba is paradoxically the same, yet not the same, under President Raúl Castro, who said he would change "everything that should be changed" to perfect the socialist path taken by the revolution nearly half a century ago.
While most of the expected or predicted transformations have yet to materialise, the stage is being set by ending some of the prohibitions that particularly irritated a society educated for decades to be egalitarian.
Digna María likes to say that she now feels like other Latin Americans, because she can have a mobile phone, spend a night at a five-star hotel, or buy a computer.
"I may never be able to afford to do any of those things, but I have been given back my right to do them," she said with conviction.
She disagrees with those who argue that lifting the restrictions preventing Cubans from staying at hotels reserved for international tourists was merely a "cosmetic" change.
"I could never understand the reason for that ban," Digna María told IPS, on condition that her surname be withheld.
Her remarks reflect the reception of some of these unaccustomed novelties in Cuban society, where hope is mingled with uncertainty and contradictions, together with frustration in some sectors aspiring to more radical changes, either for or against socialism.
Government decisions taken in March and April granted Cubans access to mobile phones, computers, motorcycles, DVD players and other household appliances, sold in the network of shops accepting only hard currency.
"They were particularly irksome prohibitions. The fact that Raúl (Castro) eliminated them was understood by many people here as a liberalisation or a vindication," a veteran of the rebel army commanded by Fidel Castro which took power on Jan. 1, 1959 told IPS from Santiago de Cuba, 847 kilometres east of Havana.
FUTURE CHANGES
Many people are hoping that other restrictions will soon be cancelled, such as limitations on foreign travel, the right to own homes and cars, and broader freedom for self-employment, which has been permitted for an increasingly narrow range of occupations and subject to rules that sometimes make it impracticable, according to economic sources.
Cubans wishing to travel for personal reasons need a letter of invitation from a friend or relative abroad, and an exit permit from the authorities, among other requirements that hinder and, in some cases, prevent them from making the trip.
In April there were persistent rumours that a reform measure eliminating both these restrictions was about to enter into force, although it was said to exclude doctors, military personnel, and recent university graduates who had not completed their obligatory two years of social service.
According to sources knowledgeable on migration issues, these exceptions have complicated the adoption of the new measures. But the very fact that flexibilisation of rules that have been in force for decades is being discussed is seen as another important change. "People feel that they are finally being listened to," a researcher said.
These and other changes, regarded as necessary by the majority of Cuba’s 11.2 million people, are part of 1.3 million proposals that emerged from debates convened by the government itself to discuss a critical speech by Raúl Castro on Jul. 26, 2007, when he was still acting president.
Among the concerns expressed was the fall in the quality of public education, once an untouchable subject, which was debated at the Seventh Congress of the Cuban Writers and Artists Union (UNEAC), held in early April.
Then Education Minister Luis Ignacio Gómez was dismissed before the end of the month.
Another sign of the times was the Jun. 4 approval by Public Health Minister José Balaguer of standards for comprehensive medical care for transsexuals, including free sex change operations.
RAÚL CASTRO’S PRIORITIES
A discreet man known for his outstanding organisational skills, Raúl Castro announced in July 2007 the main planks of his government programme. At that time he was provisionally replacing his 81-year-old brother Fidel, who is still convalescing from the illness that prompted him not to seek another presidential term in February.
This week, which featured an official visit to Havana by Uruguayan President Tabaré Vázquez starting on Wednesday, the historic leader of the Cuban Revolution showed that while he has to rest, he has not fully retired from the national political scene.
Vázquez held official talks with Raúl Castro and visited the Latin American School of Medicine (ELAM) in Havana, where he thanked Cuban doctors who carried out free eye operations on 2,000 Uruguayans. He also spent two hours and 20 minutes in conversation with Fidel.
"Fidel is alive and kicking, thinking, writing and creating important strategic guidelines for Cuba and Latin America. And Raúl has taken up the reins," Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez said during a lightning visit to his ailing friend on Tuesday.
Official video images and photographs of the meeting showed the Castro brothers and Chávez talking about the impact of soaring world food prices, which they called "a strategic issue and a national security problem."
The issue is of the highest priority for Raúl Castro, a military strategist who had already taken measures to guarantee food for the Cuban people in the economic crisis of the 1990s, arguing that at that time "beans were more important than guns."
In his speech last July, Castro admitted that salaries were too low and that farming did not produce enough to supply the food needs of a country where the cost of food imports this year will rise to between 1.9 and two billion dollars.
In keeping with his promise "to introduce whatever structural and conceptual changes are necessary" to increase productivity in the Cuban countryside, the agricultural and livestock sector is being restructured, beginning with an increase in the prices paid by the state to farmers for milk and meat.
The restructuring is ongoing, and its full extent is still uncertain. As far as is known, it will include giving more decision-making power to the municipalities, establishing new forms of marketing, and even distributing idle land to small farmers.
STRAIGHT TO THE POCKETBOOK
In regard to wages, a February Labour Ministry resolution widened the system of performance-based payment (with productivity bonuses) to the entire state enterprise system, in order to stimulate production.
It was explained that the purpose of the resolution is to "increase productivity, reduce expenses and costs, and decrease energy consumption," as well as improve the quality of goods and services, replace imports, and increase exports and state revenues.
As for workers not covered by the performance-based wage system, in May a wage increase of up to 55 percent came into effect for the judicial sector, as well as a general raise in pensions and assistance to low-income families, of up to 20 percent.
The Sixth Congress of the governing Communist Party, to be held in late 2009, is regarded as a key milestone in the process of change, especially for determining a forward-looking economic strategy that will supercede solutions improvised on the spur of the moment.
The Congress may open up new channels for diversity, in a society that is learning to be more tolerant of difference, and to discuss frankly and without fear of disagreements. "Never before have people talked so openly about their reality in the streets of Cuba," said one local writer.
CUBA:By Patricia Grogg
HAVANA, Jun 20 (IPS) - Cuba reacted cautiously to the announcement that the European Union would lift the diplomatic sanctions adopted after 75 dissidents received lengthy jail terms on charges of conspiring with Washington to destabilise the Cuban state, and three men convicted of hijacking a passenger ferry were executed, in 2003.
The governing Communist Party daily newspaper Granma published the news Friday under the headline: EU Foreign Ministers Revoke Unjust Sanctions against Cuba. The brief article also says "the EU plans to reactivate political dialogue with Havana."
But European diplomatic sources consulted by IPS clarified that the article cannot be considered an official response by the government.
"There will surely be a response when the authorities see the document on the question," which could be approved next Monday in Brussels, according to one of the sources.
"If that has occurred, I believe it is a step in the right direction," Cuban Foreign Minister Felipe Pérez Roque said Thursday night when approached by a Reuters journalist at a reception held in honour of Uruguayan President Tabaré Vázquez.
EU ambassadors in Havana held their monthly meeting Friday, in which the decision to lift sanctions, which was already expected, was "just one more point" on the agenda, said a diplomat who spoke to IPS on condition of anonymity.
Some dissident groups responded to the announcement with disappointment or outright rejection, while more moderate groups said the EU decision was "the right thing to do."
"We support dialogue as a route towards democratisation," dissident leader Manuel Cuesta told IPS. "Now we have to say that the ball is in the Cuban government’s court."
The EU temporarily suspended the sanctions in 2005. But in March, the Cuban government insisted that dialogue would only be possible if the measures were officially eliminated.
The sanctions included a limit on high-level government visits, a reduction in EU participation in Cuban cultural events, and invitations to dissidents to the receptions held in European embassies in Havana on the countries' national days.
The participation of dissidents in embassy receptions particularly irritated the Cuban government, which considers them "mercenaries" at the service of a hostile U.S. policy towards Cuba.
According to the news from Brussels, the foreign ministers of the 27 EU countries reached an agreement that proposes, besides the removal of the measures, the start of a political dialogue with the Cuban government, now headed by Raúl Castro.
But at the behest of several countries opposed to the decision, the EU will reassess the results of the dialogue on political and human rights questions a year from now.
Spain’s Foreign Minister Miguel Ángel Moratinos clarified, however, that the reassessment will not consider a renewal of the measures, which have been definitively struck down.
Granma said that condition was "a renewed commitment to the so-called Common Position" on Cuba sponsored in 1996 by the Spanish rightwing government of Prime Minister José María Aznar (1996-2004), which in Havana’s view is "an instrument that meddles in Cuba’s internal affairs."
The Common Position was approved by the European Council with the stated aim of encouraging a gradual, peaceful transition towards a pluralist democracy and respect for human rights and basic freedoms in Cuba, and towards improved living standards.
That stance, which has complicated relations and has stood in the way of a framework cooperation accord between the EU and Cuba for years, was not mentioned as a hurdle to the normalisation of ties during European Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid Louis Michel’s visit to Havana in March.
On that occasion, Michel and his host, Foreign Minister Pérez Roque, agreed that to engage in broad political dialogue encompassing all issues, including human rights, it was essential to lift the 2003 sanctions.
Michel said he was in favour of such a move, but clarified that it was up to the European Council to decide, and that the decision had to be unanimous.
In a press conference in Brussels, Foreign Minister Moratinos said the aim in removing the diplomatic measures was to initiate a stage of dialogue that is neither conditioned nor limited by measures that, in the view of Spain’s socialist government, have never been especially useful and were even counterproductive.
Madrid heads the group of countries in favour of dialogue with the Cuban government, which has repeatedly stated that it will not accept pressure or impositions of any kind.
If all the end of this continuous strivingWere simply to attain,How poor would seem the planning and contrivingThe endless urging and the hurried drivingOf body, heart and brain!But ever in the wake of true achieving,There shine this glowing trail –Some other soul will be spurred on, conceiving,New strength and hope, in its own power believing,Because thou didst not fail.Not thine alone the glory, nor the sorrow,If thou doth miss the goal,Undreamed of lives in many a far to-morrowFrom thee their weakness or their force shall borrow –On, on, ambitious soul.*
The Farm www.thefarm.org is a spiritual intentional community in Summertown, Tennessee, based on principles of nonviolence and respect for the Earth. The Farm was founded in 1971 by Stephen Gaskin and 320 San Francisco hippies. The focus of this eco tour video-pod is on the Ecovillage Training Center, a learning center for sustainability founded by Albert Bates. The Ecovillage Training Center is a living workshop environment where you can learn organic food production, natural building, permaculture and how to create and live in harmony within the means of nature. This video pod is an educated walkthrough intended to create a window into some of these eco methodologies and green technologies as well as thoughts and ideas by Albert regarding the creation of an ecovillage and the need to scale down our wants and needs.[..Miss Anne:
Chicago native Lily Koppel went Dumpster diving in her Manhattan neighborhood and came up with a treasure trove of memories in the form of a diary from the 1930s. Koppel tracked down the writer of the diary, Florence Wolfson, who is now 90 and living in Florida. Through interviews with Florence and entries from the diary, Koppel has crafted The Red Leather Diary (Harper, 336 pages, $23.95), a story of a curious, creative Upper East Side young woman in Depression-era Manhattan.
Artist Trevor Paglen's time-exposure photographs show the streaks of light left by classified satellites.
Photo: Trevor Paglen
BERKELEY, California -- For most people, photographing something that isn't there might be tough. Not so for Trevor Paglen.
His shots of 189 secret spy satellites are the subject of a new exhibit -- despite the fact that, officially speaking, the satellites don't exist. The Other Night Sky, on display at the University of California at Berkeley Art Museum through September 14, is only a small selection from the 1,500 astrophotographs Paglen has taken thus far.
In taking these photos, Paglen is trying to draw a metaphorical connection between modern government secrecy and the doctrine of the Catholic Church in Galileo's time.
"What would it mean to find these secret moons in orbit around the earth in the same way that Galileo found these moons that shouldn't exist in orbit around Jupiter?" Paglen says.
Satellites are just the latest in Paglen's photography of supposedly nonexistent subjects. To date, he's snapped haunting images of various military sites in the Nevada deserts, "torture taxis" (private planes that whisk people off to secret prisons without judicial oversight) and uniform patches from various top-secret military programs.
The nearly vertical streak in this image shows a satellite called Keyhole 12-3 crossing the sky near the constellation of Scorpio.
Photo: Trevor Paglen
While all of Paglen's projects are the result of meticulous research, he's also the first to admit that his photos aren't necessarily revelatory. That's by design. Like the blurry abstractions of his super-telephoto images showing secret military installations in Nevada, the tiny blips of satellites streaking across the night sky in his new series of photos are meant more as reminders rather than as documentation.
"I think that some of the earliest ideas in the modern period were actually from astronomy," Paglen explains. "You look at Galileo: He goes up and points his telescope up at Jupiter and finds out, hey, Jupiter has these moons."
More significant than the discovery itself, Paglen says, was the idea that anyone with a telescope could verify it and see the same exact thing that Galileo saw -- an idea Paglen is trying to re-create in his own photographs.
"It really was analogous to a certain kind of promise of democracy," says Paglen, who sees a similar anti-authoritarian premise running through his own work.
Paglen says his most recent project is the culmination of close to two years of trial-and-error experimentation with astrophotography, untold hours of fieldwork and analysis, an ongoing collaboration with amateur astronomers, and many nights in his Berkeley backyard and at California's Mono Lake.
"Lacrosse/Onyx II Passing Through Draco (USA 69)" shows the transit of another surveillance satellite.
Photo: Trevor Paglen
To capture his images, the researcher and "experimental geographer" employs a motorized mount with various combinations of telescopes and digital and large-format film cameras. Paglen uses spy-satellite data compiled by Ted Molczan -- a renowned amateur astronomer profiled by Wired magazine in 2006 -- to predict where a given "black satellite" will be in the sky. Then he decides how he wants to compose the image.
"I'll find where a star will be in the compositional plane," he says. "Then I'll use one telescope, which is attached to a webcam, to focus on that star."
With the help of a computer program that controls the mount of the telescope and keeps it focused on the heavenly body, Paglen says he can get the telescope to swivel with the Earth's rotation.
He then uses another telescope attached to a high-end digital camera for his deep-sky shots, similar to the rig he used for his desert shots.
"I'll see the satellite in the sky, kind of know where it's going to be in the frame, then I'll open the shutter and take a long exposure of the satellite passing through."
Paglen's initial interest in the government's so-called "black projects" took shape while combing through U.S. Geological Survey archives of satellite prison photos in 2002. He noticed that many of the photo frames of prison sites were missing or, in some cases, heavily edited.
"I thought: What the hell is this? We still have blank spots on maps? We've mapped the whole structure of the cosmos and the human genome, so what's this all about?" Paglen said.
Eventually, those blank spots led Paglen to other covert subjects and turned a hobby into a full-time job -- one with a decidedly political stance.
"For a time, people were getting arrested for photographing the Brooklyn Bridge," Paglen notes. "So to me, what it meant to do photography also changed. There was a new kind of politics to it -- something that was very aggressive and dangerous -- and a presumption that it would reveal some kind of truth or evidence."
Ultimately, the satellite photos are an attempt to critique that attitude. While the budget for black military operations has more than doubled in the last 10 years and the government continues to espouse the virtues of secrecy, it can't prevent interested amateur astronomers from calculating the orbital paths of spy satellites.
"The National Reconnaissance Office cannot classify Kepler's laws of planetary motion," Paglen says. "They just work ... and they're unbelievably accurate."
From NBC/NJ's Athena JonesHere's what Obama said about the ex-Clinton campaign manager who is now joining his campaign -- as the running mate's chief of staff: "Patti Solis Doyle I think is a terrific experienced campaign hand. She's from Chicago. Her brother and I organized on the southeast side of Chicago when I first moved to Chicago as a community organizer, so I've known the family for a very long time. I think that she will bring not only a set of skills that we're gonna need as we put our ticket together but shes going to be a terrific adviser and offer insight and judgment that will help us."
San Francisco Protest Against Health Insurance Companies
On June 19th, between 2,500 and 3,000 people gathered for a very spirited "Heathcare-Yes, Insurance Companies-NO" rally outside the Moscone convention center in San Francisco. The largest contingents came from the CSEA-California School Employees Association and California Nurses Association unions and the California Universal Health Care Organizing Project. Many other labor, community and political organizations mobilized significant contingents including the American Federation of Teachers, Lo. 2121, Senior Action Network, Gray Panthers, Calif. Alliance for Retired Americans, ANSWER-Act Now to Stop War & End Racism-Coalition, United Educators of San Francisco, Cindy Sheehan for Congress Campaign, Iraq Moratorium, and the Party for Socialism and Liberation. Gloria La Riva, PSL Presidential candidate, and Nathalie Hrizi, 12th Congressional District candidate of the PSL and Peace and Freedom Party distributed hundreds of flyers supporting free quality health care for all and calling for the insurance companies to be abolished.
Inside the center, insurance executives and their political mouthpieces were attending the convention of the American Health Insurance Association. In order to enter, many of the attendees had to pass by hundreds of workers chanting, "Shame, Shame, Shame."
Many of the rally speakers testified about having been denied health care by insurers when suffering life-threatening diseases. Others spoke of family members who had died after denial of benefits.
The main theme of the rally was the need for a universal health care system. The rally featured Sen. Sheila Kuehl and included protestors from the groups Physicians for a National Health Program, California Alliance for Retired Americans, California Nurses Association, Senior Action Network and California Universal Health Care Organizing Project.
Photos: 1 | 2 | 3 | California Alliance for Retired Americans California Nurses Association California School Employees Association California Universal Health Care Organizing Project Gray Panthers of San Francisco Senior Action Network United Educators of San Francisco
The Green Party faces a problem — democracy. More specifically, how do you treat each person’s vote equally in a country where the two parties do their best to undermine participation of new parties?
Efforts to craft democracy in the Green Party’s presidential preference process have failed in large part because some states allow third parties to participate in tax-payer funded primary elections (as long as they meet reasonable requirements), while many other states put very high hurdles in front of third parties, effectively blocking their participation. Without being on the ballot, third parties are largely invisible. Another factor affecting party visibility is whether a state lists recognized political parties on their voter registration forms, allowing the voter to affiliate with a party — and how high the hurdles are before a party can be listed.
As a result, state Green parties use a variety of methods: government-run presidential primaries, caucuses, state party conventions, party-run balloting by mail, or some combination. With so many ways to count who is a voter, it is challenging to ensure one-person, one-vote. This confusion has allowed prevention of a truly democratic system by those who want small state parties to have more power than large state parties.
As a result, the Green Party does not have anything close to a one-person, one-vote process. Table 1 below shows the number of Greens voting in their state presidential preference contest, and the number of delegates each state gets at the coming national Green Party presidential convention in July.1 The resulting ratio of Green voters per delegate measures how much weight each Green’s vote will carry at the national convention. (These data are for the first 21 states for which the vote count data is available.)
TABLE 1 — Popular Votes Received by Each Candidate (So Far)
(For the 20 states with data available)
State
Greens
voting
Convention
Delegates
Green voters
per delegate
CA
35,844
168
213
IL
2,672
44
61
AR
838
8
105
MA
1,941
32
60
DC
530
16
33
MN
187
12
15
WI
97
24
4.0
NJ
70
12
5.8
RI
36
8
4.5
OH
31
12
2.6
MI
47
19
2.5
WA
103
12
8.6
NC
31
8
3.9
CT
48
20
2.4
CO
27
12
2.3
TN
21
8
2.6
MD
70
16
4.4
VA
88
8
11
DE
12
8
1.5
NE
67
8
8.4
PA
134
32
4.2
If you group the 5 states each having a popular vote count of over 500 Green voters, and you group the other 16 states each having less than 500 Green voters, the average Greens voting per delegate at the nominating convention is shocking:2
5 states with >500 Greens voting: 156 voters per delegate
16 states with <500>5 voters per delegate
An even more shocking way to look at it is that among these first 21 state parties, the GPUS National Committee has given more convention delegates to 6% of the voters than it has to the disenfranchised 94% !!!
(CA+IL+MA together accounted for 40,457 of the 42,894 votes of these first 21 states, or 94.3%. These 3 states have 244 delegates between them. The other 18 of these first 21 states accounted for 2,437 of the 42,894 votes, or 5.7%. Together, these 18 states have 251 delegates.)
THE RESULT OF UNDEMOCRATIC STRUCTURE
The rejection of one-person, one-vote by the GPUS National Committee has guaranteed that Ralph Nader had the deck stacked against him very, very heavily. Nader probably realized this early in the nomination process and thus decided not to seek the Green nomination.
Before Nader dropped out of the Green nomination process on Feb. 29, however, his name was included in some primaries, where he gained a large popular vote lead. This early boost has kept him in the popular vote lead — even to this day. The leader in delegates in those same 20 states, however, is Cynthia McKinney. Here are the standings in those first 20 states, in order of popular vote:3
TABLE 2 — Green Presidential Popular Vote & Delegates Won
(First 21 States, except NE & NJ*)
Candidate
Popular
Votes
Votes
(Percent)
Delegates
Won
Delegates
(Percent)
Ralph Nader**
23,069
37.9%
143
30.5%
NOTA, NOC,
Uncommitted,
or Blank***
18,977
31.2%
35
7.5%
Cynthia McKinney
12,478
20.5%
213
45.6%
Elaine Brown
1,640
2.7%
9
1.9%
Kent Mesplay
1,303
2.1%
22
4.7%
Kat Swift
1,272
2.1%
17
3.7%
Jared Ball
1,009
1.7%
11
2.4%
Jesse Johnson
711
1.2%
17
3.6%
Other
427
0.7%
1
0.2%
TOTAL
60,886
100%
468
100%
* NE & NJ haven’t reported delegate allocations yet (nor NJ its vote breakdown by candidate).
** Nader’s totals include the 498 votes and 8 delegates won by Howie Hawkins, who stood in for Nader in a few early primaries, and who had pledged to urge his delegates to vote for Nader.
*** These categories each appeared on the ballot in one or more states. The categories have some overlap, and are thus counted together here: “NOTA”=”None Of The Above”; “NOC”=”No Candidate”; “Uncommitted” means the resulting delegate will not be pledged to any candidate; “Blank” means the voter did not mark any of the listed presidential candidates, though many of these voters may have voted for a write-in candidate (which many state governments do not fully tabulate).
Table 2 shows that Nader, despite having 38% of the popular vote in these first 20 states, has only 32% of the delegates from those states. The disparity is even greater for McKinney, but in the opposite direction. She has only 21% of the popular vote, but more than twice that percentage of delegates so far: 44%. The rejection of one person, one vote is having the same effect in 2008 as it did in 2004 when David Cobb won the GPUS nomination — thwarting the choice of the majority of rank-and-file voting Greens.
Cynthia McKinney will almost certainly be the Green Party nominee in the current four-way race, as she already has an outright majority of the delegates allocated so far. And with Nader out of the race, he is not gaining new delegates.
The former Georgia congresswoman is certainly much stronger than the 2004 nominee, as she has actually served in Congress, where she took strong progressive positions on foreign and domestic policy. She has probably been unaware of how undemocratic the Green process has been because the tabulation of Green popular vote was not published until June 5. No such tabulation was published for the 2004 nomination race. (The tabulation this year has not been compiled and published by the GPUS, either — but by individual, concerned Greens.)
CONCLUSION: A NEW PARTY IS NEEDED (GREEN OR OTHERWISE)
What is the solution to the lack of democracy in the Green Party? One approach is to count the votes in the primaries, caucuses and state party conventions, and give each vote equal weight in delegate representation. Rather than states gaining delegates according to a complex formula of measurements having nothing to do with actual Green participation in the presidential preference process, delegates could be apportioned by counting the actual votes of Greens in that process.
Many people in the Green Party, who have seen their reform efforts come to little over the last four years, have now given up on reforming the GPUS. Two successive presidential cycles have now seen a massive rejection of one-person, one-vote by the GPUS National Committee. Some of these Greens have decided that a new party is needed, though concrete work towards that goal is on hold during the current campaign cycle. However, the Nader-Gonzalez Campaign is creating some new state-level parties in those states where a party can gain ballot access easier than an independent can.
If a new party is created, it would not be surprising to see some state Green parties take stock of the extreme disenfranchisement created by the Green Party National Committee in the presidential selection process, and disaffiliate from the Green Party to help build the new, democratic, progressive party. These state Green parties, along with the new state parties created for Nader-Gonzalez ballot access, would provide the basis for a new party founded on the principle of one-person, one-vote.
On the other hand, Cynthia McKinney is in a unique position. She has the admiration of most Greens, including most Nader supporters. Once McKinney is nominated, she should bring her ‘Power to the People’ campaign inside the Green Party itself and insist that the National Committee enact a one-person, one-vote method of selecting presidential delegates in the future. If she does so, she may save the party’s unity. At this point, she is the only one who can.
Source for Table 1, “Green Voters and Delegates by State”:
Chuck Giese has voted Green for many years, and finally registered as a Green voter in California in 2004. He resides in Fremont, California. He may be contacted at: chuckgiese_cal@yahoo.com. Read other articles by Chuck.
By WAJAHAT ALI
...ALI: What does the Norman Finkelstein tenure debacle at Depaul and his scathing critique and dismantling of Alan Dershowitz’s book, Case for Israel, tell of intellectual honesty and integrity in the United States? Is this a warning for academics and intellectuals who don’t “play by the rules” and openly challenge ideologies espoused by powerful interest groups and lobbies? Or, is this just an isolated incident without profound implications or reflections regarding the intellectual environment of post 9-11?
CHOMSKY: The behavior of the DePaul administration in overturning the faculty recommendation for tenure was of course deplorable, but this case should not be generalized too far. It had special features, notably the role of the desperate and fanatic Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz. Finkelstein demonstrated with impeccable scholarship that Dershowitz is a slanderer, a liar, and a vulgar apologist for the crimes of his favored state. Dershowitz turned over heaven and earth to try to prevent the book from being published, and after he failed, launched a hysterical crusade to try to suppress its contents. He is not a fool, and knows that he cannot respond at the level of fact and argument, so turned to what comes naturally to him: a stream of vilification and abuse, and an extraordinary campaign of intimidation, to which the administration finally succumbed, presumably because of concerns that funders would be mobilized. The depraved performance is reviewed with fair accuracy in standard journals, like the Chronicle of Higher Education, and I need not comment further here.
It is true that there are major efforts to prevent honest and independent discussion of Middle East issues, particularly anything relating to Israel. Nonetheless, this is a special case. And it has nothing to do with the post-9/11 environment.
...
* The Cuban Libertarian Movement (MLC) - founded in 1961 and active in exile in Mexico, Spain and France - interviewed via internet a punk musical group active in Havana for over 10 years who are today a significant reference in a counter cultural scene that merits recognition and solidarity.
Without a doubt, Porno Para Ricardo www.pornopararicardo.com has become a legend of countercultural resistance in Cuba and a milestone inside the Latin American punk scene; likewise we’ve been able to confirm the growing interest in the international anarchist milieu regarding the activities and the anti-establishment attitude of the band’s members who self-describe openly against authority of whatever color.
However, we think it’s not enough to advertise the existence against all odds of a growing and every day more important countercultural scene in Cuba where punk stands as the tip of the spear against all authority. It is precisely in this scene where PPR stands out with their independent and do-it-yourself music, full of irreverent lyrics which have resulted in harsh persecution by the bourgeois dictatorship of the Castro brothers.
This open repression against Cuba’s countercultural movement leads us, as Cuban anarchists, to add our voice to the necessary international solidarity campaign for Porno Para Ricardo. Therefore we publish this interview with Gorky and other members of the PPR collective as a first step in this campaign.
MLC: First we want to inform you that this interview will appear in El Libertario, a Venezuelan anarchist publication, and also in Cuba Libertaria, voice of the Group of Support to Libertarians and Independent Syndicalists in Cuba; besides other anarchist organizations who will surely publish it in their respective media.
PRR: We don’t call ourselves anarchists per se because we are not very well informed about what this philosophy means today and we’d like to design “our” anarchy for ourselves because after all this philosophy is very seductive.
MLC: When did PPR start as a countercultural musical endeavor?
PPR: The group started towards the end of 1998 motivated by unhappiness with the Cuban rock scene, that is, if we wanted to continue doing what we liked we could not continue to be just public, we had to form our own group. Our proposal has evolved but very little, it has been the same or very similar from the beginning, essentially as our hatred of the system increases and our bodies spend more years submerged in it, so has increased our radical stand with respect to that which bothers us – the older we get the more radical we become. Should it be the other way around?
MLC: Why Porno Para Ricardo? How did the name come up?
PPR: We don’t remember from so much repeating it, let’s have coffee and then we’ll answer you … Ricardo (an individual) + Porn (a censured pleasure) = Porno Para Ricardo – against the famous slogan “Fatherland or Death”
MLC: In what context did you decide to come together and express yourselves as a band?
PPR: Under official repression and total misunderstanding – we’re talking about the public, our colleagues etc – but also funny because being well liked was never too important for us, if that were the case we would’ve made a Salsa group.
MLC: what was the young people’s reaction to the appearance of PPR in the Cuban countercultural scene?
PPR: Since the beginning our public was small and to tell the truth our shows were never wholly accepted by the “classic” rock public because the public as well as the artists live in a state of frozen neurons typical of provincial cultures little informed and also because the culture of fear and intolerance that permeates people’s minds. Today more people understand our message, even transcending the boundaries of rock and being listened to by not only the followers of the genre, and that is where we believe we make our impact inside Cuba because a lot of people want to hear what we say in our lyrics since that is what many people think but are incapable of expressing because of fear.
MLC: And the state’s reaction?
PPR: Same as always, it’s always been obvious to us that we must pay a price for our obstinacy, for our way of thinking.
MLC: We know first hand of the persecution and repression the bourgeois dictatorship of the Castro brothers and the thousand and one ways of implementing it against whoever disagrees with the internal order of the Farm. In the case of the PPR collective, how has the Cuban state repressed you?
PPR: It is well known because we have denounced it every time we have a chance, summons to the police station, intimidation, acts of repudiation, discrimination, humiliation and even jail.
MLC: Porno Para Ricardo has set a precedent in the Cuban punk scene. Are there other punk bands and collectives in Cuba?
PPR: There are, but not at the radical level we have, which doesn’t make us proud because we would like to have more groups so we wouldn’t feel so lonely and to have somebody to go to because in many cases we are plague ridden, many people from other bands say they identify with us but when push comes to shove they freeze. What would be very sad for us is that when change comes many of those who kiss the official’s asses suddenly become “radical” and “anti-establishment” and invent stories to present themselves as heroes like it has happened in other occasions.
MLC: There are definitely clear differences between the life time totalitarianism of the Castro brothers and the bad copy of it that comandante Chavez tries to implant in Venezuela; perhaps because of it, taking advantage of such differences, the Venezuelan anarcho-punk scene has been able to establish strong links and coordinate among autonomous bands and collectives such as Cooperative of Self-managed Bands, that includes bands such as Apatia No, Doña Maldad, Skoria Social among others and initiatives such as Toche Records, La Libertaria de Biscucuy, the journal El Libertario, etc.; with the goal of organizing concerts and countercultural events in different cities. Is there in Cuba any coordination among punk bands and collectives?
PPR: The only thing we have in Cuba is a wrongly named “rock movement” which is even directed by a governmental agency called “Rock Agency” that answers to the government. It is a total aberration of what rock is, when did rock ever had to be institutionalized?, the saddest thing is that some people believe that they need the state to support their creativity and are not conscious of the “do it yourself” spirit that has always been the standard of rock and roll.
We certainly would like to make contact with this Cooperative of Self-managed Bands and perhaps learn from their experience and make interchanges since in Cuba there are very few punk bands, to mention a few also in the punk scene: Eskoria, ALbatros, Barrio Adentro, the rest are bands in this new thing of EMO and pop-punk that are in no way anarchist nor anti-establishment but in many ways the opposite.
MLC: We spoke of the “clear differences” that can still be observed between the Cuban and the Venezuelan states, but given the more evident similarities, would you like to coordinate efforts with anarcho-punk bands and collectives in Venezuela?
PPR: Definitely yes.
MLC: What about a joint effort as a first step?
PPR: We love the idea, count us in.
MLC: PPR lives under very particular conditions due to the scarcities, deprivations and restrictions of which the Cuban people but not its dominant class is victim which, together with the specific repression you suffer due to your anti-establishment position as a group, it multiplies your difficulties regarding your creative labor and its publicity. How can we help you? What do you need and how can we bring it to you?
PPR: We suffer necessities of every type but we have always prioritized among material things what we need for our recordings. The most urgent item right now when we’re trying to record our 4th self-managed record is a fast computer because we only have an old Pentium 3 where the software gets stuck when we try to put down several tracks with effects – imagine, we do our own mixes. We could also use a microphone to record voice because not even clandestinely people dare record the lyrics in their home studios for fear of reprisals. A good mike for us would be a Marshall 9000 or something like that. Our records can be bought in our web site: www.pornopararicardo.com . Buying them is another direct way to help us.
MLC: Would you like to add something else?
PPR: Thank you for the solidarity … Analchists –as we say here- of all countries Unite! And let everyone do with their ass as they wish.
[To learn more about the alternative Cuban scene: www.cubaunderground.com.
To contact the MLC: movimientolibertariocubano@gmail.com. Current information about Cuban anarchism can be found in El Libertario – Venezuela: www.nodo50.org/ellibertario]
American oil companies are salivating as Mexico’s president, Felipe Calderón, tries to push the state-owned oil company, Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX), towards privatization. Mexico’s behemoth oil company is currently suffering and Calderón and his cronies believe that the cure is to open the market to foreign investment by privatizing certain sectors of the enterprise. In opposition, Mexico’s leftist party, the PRD, vehemently advocates maintaining state ownership of the company.
PEMEX has been nationalized since 1938, when President Cardenas heroically expropriated Mexico’s oil holdings from greedy U.S. and British private oil companies. Cardenas’ audacious stand against foreign oil companies is commemorated as a national holiday called Oil Expropriation Day, every March 18. The national pride for Mexico’s publicly owned PEMEX runs deep.
On April 8, Calderón proposed the reform, which will open 37 of PEMEX’s 41 divisions to private subcontractors. Despite his enthusiasm for the project, Calderón’s conservative, pro-business administration has met obstacles posed by the left-leaning opposition PRD, spearheaded by President Calderón’s former presidential opponent, Andrés Manuel López Obredor (AMLO). The PRD has challenged Calderón’s energy reform in a 71 day debate that began on May 13 and is scheduled to end on July 23.
PEMEX has problems
Skyrocketing gas prices are good news for oil companies and usually correspond to an augmentation of gains. However, PEMEX (the sixth largest crude oil producing company in the world) has defied this trend by experiencing a $1.7 billion net loss in 2007. This colossal enterprise, with a workforce of over 150,000 workers, is the single main contributor to the Mexican economy. PEMEX turns 61 percent of its revenue over to the government through taxes which account for 40 percent of the national budget. The government’s dependency on the company stifles PEMEX’s capacity to modernize its infrastructure and technology, as well as hinders its ability to probe the depths of the Gulf of Mexico for new oil deposits.
Weathered facilities also impede PEMEX from performing at its full potential. In order to repair infrastructure troubles, PEMEX requires an immediate $9 billion. A network of 36,738 kilometers of deteriorating pipelines (on average 25 years old) drapes and drips across the Mexican landscape. A reported 45,000 liters have leaked from these aging facilities, polluting the immediate vicinities. On December 22, 2007, a pipeline burst and spewed over 5,000 barrels of oil. The pipelines are also subject to illegal tapping. Mexico only has 6 refineries, all of whose conditions are comparable to the dilapidated pipelines. The country’s refining capacity is unable to swallow PEMEX’s huge crude production rates in order to transform it into gasoline. Much of that excesses oil has to cross the border to be refined by some of the U.S.’s 150 refineries. It is humiliating and inefficient for a state-owned oil company that illuminates so much national pride to have to import 40 percent of its own gasoline.
The production in Mexico’s largest oil field, Cantarell, already has peaked and is now on the decline; the rest of PEMEX’s crude oil and natural gas production has followed the same trend. In 2004, PEMEX was able to extract 3.4 million barrels of crude oil a day, this number now has dropped to 3 million barrels a day. The expected lifespan of PEMEX’s oil reserves is now less than a decade. PEMEX’s expiration date has galvanized the government to compose a farseeing energy reform bill. Only 20% of Mexican territory has been properly explored for oil deposits, and experts hold great hope for large oil pockets to be found in the depths of the Gulf of Mexico. However, “PEMEX doesn’t currently have the technical, organizational, administrative capacity, nor the highly qualified personnel, to begin exploratory drilling in ultra-deep waters” (Ultraprofundas, by Sergio Sarmiento, El siglo de Torreon, March 24th, 2008).
As if putting salt on PEMEX’s wound, rampant corruption presents another formidable impediment. Rogelio Montemayor, a former PRI senator and governor was appointed to be PEMEX’s director. He was soon accused of illegally transferring more than $140 million from PEMEX’s account to support a fellow PRI presidential candidate, Francisco Labastida, who eventually was defeated by Vincent Fox in the 2000 presidential election. PEMEX director, Raúl Muñoz, was fined $80 million and forbidden to hold a public office position for 10 years in July 2007, for the misuse of $170 million in company funds. Among other offenses he used money from PEMEX’s account to pay for two of his wife’s liposuction operations. Apparently PEMEX pumps fat as well as oil.
President Calderón’s Energy Reform
President Calderón proposed a bill that he and his party, the PAN, believe to be the blueprint for PEMEX’s convalescence and later good health. His proposal includes allowing foreign investment and “minor” privatization of certain sectors of PEMEX. This energy reform bill would give the oil sector more autonomy from the state in order to contract work and handle its budget more freely. Also, to release the government’s grip on PEMEX, Calderón plans to make tax changes to give the state oil company more financial breathing room. The president believes that more help from the foreign capital market and less government leaching would solve PEMEX’s financial problems and allow it to clean up its present calamitous infrastructure.
Calderón also addresses the issues of corruption by insisting on a heightened sense of transparency. He wants to integrate independent members into PEMEX’s Board of Directors and has called for an independent auditing system. Roger Tissot, director of PFC Energy’s Country Strategies and a specialist in Latin American energy policy, commented that, “foreign investment would force transparency and efficiency, and would go a long way to improving environmental and health practices in these [national] companies.” Calderón’s proposal would have the “invisible hand” use privatization to tighten PEMEX’s loose bolts, resulting in a well functioning oil company.
AMLO’s Rebuttal
President Calderón sells his energy reform bill by softening his rhetoric against Mexico’s oil nationalization. He states that PEMEX is not being transferred to the private sectors in its entirety, but will only experience “minor” reforms that will privatize its refining, storing, and transportation sectors. AMLO and his PRD see PEMEX as an integrated entity and consider all those sectors to be components of PEMEX’s conglomerate make up. In his account, to privatize “just those sectors” would be tantamount to privatizing PEMEX. AMLO renounces Calderón’s energy reform bill because he feels it will undermine Mexico’s sovereignty and hurt the country’s working class.
First, AMLO connects the beginning of PEMEX’s decay to the last reigning years of Mexico’s PRI party and the installation of the PAN in December of 2000. According to AMLO, the PAN intentionally neglected PEMEX’s needs in order to create a crisis situation to facilitate a transition into privatization and an inevitable call for foreign help. AMLO states that, “the government, for 25 years, has acted in a deliberate manner to ruin PEMEX because they have only one goal: to make PEMEX into booty to be plundered, and to privatize the oil business.” (Lopéz Obrador told the NewYorkTimes on April 8.)
A large portion of the Mexican public agrees with the PRD that Calderón’s energy reform bill challenges national sovereignty and that it will ultimately drive more Mexican families deeper into poverty. Marches, protests, and even hunger strikes have sprouted throughout the country in an effort to hamper the move towards privatization. After President Calderón’s public announcement of plans to modernize PEMEX in April, his approval rating dropped 4 percent from what was January’s all-time-high figure of 66 percent. His disapproval rating also jumped from January’s 18 percent to April’s 25 percent.
Another aspect that induces strife between AMLO and Calderón’s ideal PEMEX reform is the potential violation of 12 articles of the Mexican Constitution if the restructuring is successful. If the constitution is to be amended, AMLO wants the public’s voice to influence the future of its own oil company by way of a national referendum.
Any privatization of PEMEX would go against an international trend whereby private oil companies are being nationalized. Over 77 percent of the world’s oil reserves are now nationalized. Brazil, Venezuela, and Bolivia, some of South America’s most competitive countries in the oil market, have made significant steps towards nationalization of their entire holding revenues. Bolivia’s oil companies have experienced an immense growth in revenues since nationalization- from $172 million in 2002 to $1.57 billion in 2007. The catalysts for nationalization today are the same as they were when Mexico expropriated its oil industry in 1938; principal among them is the transnational oil companies pilfering and pollution in the countries in which they operate. As a result, the trend of nationalizing oil companies is occurring worldwide.
Sheinbaum’s Proposal
The PRD has composed its own proposal on how to attend to PEMEX’s obvious ailments. The plan includes strengthening its profit-making potential, diminishing imports, increasing oil reserves, and lowering prices, without making major judiciary reforms. The author of this anti-privatization reform proposal is Dr. Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo, one of PRD’s founding members and adviser of the National Commission for Energy Conservation. Her proposal would instead direct PEMEX towards increased nationalization and less foreign influence.
PRD’s proposed adjustments to PEMEX would reintegrate it as one whole functioning body, unlike its current format of divided sectors. This move towards integration would unify all parts of PEMEX, from exploration of oil fields to commercialization of the final product. An assimilated industry would facilitate and lower the costs in the production/value chain, which currently is costing the company more than $20 billion annually. Sheinbaum’s proposal stresses the importance of internalizing PEMEX’s price system of hydrocarbons by connecting it to the cost of production and national income. It is presently pegged to the price system of the U.S.
The Mexican government would also have to take responsibility for the debt built up in President Fox’s investment setup known as PIDIREGAS (Proyectos de Inversión Diferida En El Registro del Gasto) in order to liberate it from its fiscal burden. This would supply PEMEX a budget of $1.5 billion to be allocated to its necessary areas in order serve and improve production, refining, storage, as well as the exploration of new reserves. Sheinbaum also stresses the importance of investment in renewable sources of energy such as wind and solar power. This enhanced budget would also include the construction of three new refineries that would help wean Mexico from dependence on Houston refineries. The PRD’s plan requires that present private contracts be broken. Sheinbaum claims that PEMEX’s debt exists because of the private contracts and the fees which they impose. The official proposal by the Calderón administration would invite more private contracts, and the strengthening of foreign private businesses participating in Mexico’s oil industry
Sheinbaum’s proposal also focuses on the problem of corruption within PEMEX and guarantees a functioning Anti-Corruption Committee in the Council of Administration. Qualifications for membership on this committee will include Mexican citizenship and no relation to PEMEX or the executive branch of government.
Sheinbaum’s proposal also addresses pollution, exploitation, waste and other negative externalities of the oil industry. First, Sheinbaum would like to close 80 contaminated wells that burn 500,000 barrels of crude daily, releasing 700 million cubic feet of pollution into the atmosphere. The dilapidated infrastructure and sporadic explosions and leaks are in dire need of attention, but the PRD plans to request the help of Mexico’s engineering sector instead of seeking aid from an outside source. A nationalized engineering sector would draft an expert Mexican team to assist PEMEX personnel with all their technological and administrative demands. This group would consist of experts from the IMP (Instituto Mexicano del Petróleo), the UNAM (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México), the Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Intituto de Investigaciones Eléctricas and other prestigious public institutions involved in education and research. This team of engineers and managers would facilitate Mexico’s means of exploration and extraction of crude and natural gas in order to add heft to PEMEX’s dwindling reserves. The PRD proposal would give this challenge of innovation and skill to their very own people and would also fortify Mexican institutions dealing with education, research, innovation, and engineering. This proposal contrasts with Calderón’s which would simply pay private foreign companies to install their own versions of administrative measures and technology in selective sectors of PEMEX.
This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Braden Webb
Shortly after an extended question and answer session, Cindy Sheehan, anti-war activist and nominative challenger to the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi in California’s California’s 8th congressional district, easily secured an endorsement from the San Francisco Green Party last night.
Sheehan answered a wide variety of questions helping to overcome a wide perception that she is a one-issue candidate. Sheehan reiterated her widely known stance about ending the War in Iraq and dramatically reducing the amount of money spent by the Pentagon, explaining that the United States’ founders intended for us to have militia, not a multi-trillion dollar military used for “corporate imperialism.”
She also demonstrated a competency in general in topics that are important to party members, underscoring a commitment to the Green Party’s “10 Key Values,” while acknowledging that her campaign’s platform on indigenous rights is still being developed.
She stressed her differences from speaker Pelosi’s positions, and reaffirmed her belief that Pelosi has been complicit in maintaining the US presence in Iraq. Sheehan pointed out that she presently lives in the district, whereas Pelosi only recently purchased a home in Pacific Heights, her first in San Francisco. Pelosi has often been criticized for her absence from the district she represents. Sheehan provided an understanding of local issues including the recent Hunter’s Point controversy, reiterating her commitment to “affordable housing, better mass transit, alleviating traffic, dependence on fossil fuels, rent control.”
Sheehan is receiving support from independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader and likely Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney—when asked who she would endorse for president, Sheehan replied, “It’s a tossup between Ralph and Cynthia.”
Cindy Sheehan is still collecting the signatures needed to get on the ballot by the July filing date, but is expected to gain a substantial amount at the Gay Pride celebrations in the upcoming weeks. Sheehan is not running as a Green Party candidate, and has the endorsement of the local Peace and Freedom Party.
Also present was Green Party candidate for California’s 12th district, which includes most of the south west quarter of San Francisco, Barry Hermanson
We can never forget that everything that Hitler did in Germany was ‘legal,’ and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did was ‘illegal.’ It was ‘illegal’ to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany, but I am sure that if I lived in Germany during that time I would have comforted my Jewish brothers even though it was illegal… we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive.
– Martin Luther King, Jr.
There have been over 15,000 arrests for resistance to war since 2002. There were large numbers right after the run up to and invasion of Iraq. Recently, arrests have begun climbing again. Though arrests are a small part of anti-war organizing, their rise is an indicator of increasing resistance.
The information comes from the Nuclear Resister, a newsletter that has been reporting detailed arrest information on peace activists and other social justice campaigns since 1980. Felice and Jack Cohen-Joppa, publishers of the Nuclear Resister, document arrests by name and date based on information collected from newspapers across the country and from defense lawyers and peace activists.
Since 2002, the Nuclear Resister has documented anti-war arrests for protestors each year:
“Arrests for resistance to war are far more widespread geographically than most people think,” according to Cohen-Joppa of Nuclear Resister. “Yes, there are many arrests in DC and traditional big cities of anti-war activity — like San Francisco, NYC and Chicago, but there have also been anti-war arrests in Albany, Ann Arbor, Atlanta, Bangor, Bath, Bend, Brentwood, Burlington, Campbell, Cedar Rapids, Chapel Hill, Charlottesville, Chicopee, Colorado Springs, Denver, Des Moines, East Hampton, Erie, Eugene, Eureka, Fairbanks, Fairport, Fort Bragg, Fort Wayne, Grand Rapids, Great Dismal Swamp, Hammond, Huntsville, Joliet, Juneau, Kennebunkport, La Crosse, Los Angeles, Madison, Manchester, Memphis, Newark, Northbrook, Olympia, Omaha, Pittsburgh, Portland, Portsmouth, Providence, Richmond, Sacramento, San Diego, Santa Fe, Smithfield, Springfield, St. Louis, St. Paul, Staten Island, Superior, Syracuse, Tacoma, Toledo, Tucson, Tulsa, Vandenberg, Virginia
Beach, Wausau, Wheaton and Wilmington just to name a few.”
“In fact,” notes Cohen-Joppa, “in 2007, anti-war arrests were reported during 250 distinct events in 105 cities in 35 states and the District of Columbia. So far in 2008, arrests have been reported at 65 events in 43 different cities in 19 states and D.C.”
An example of the scope of resistance can be found in the Chicago-based Voices for Creative Nonviolence. They joined with other major peace groups like CODEPINK, Veterans for Peace, and the National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance in early 2007 to launch The Occupation Project, a campaign of resistance aimed at ending the Iraq War. Theirs was a campaign of sustained nonviolent civil disobedience to end funding for the U.S. war in and occupation of Iraq. The Occupation Project resulted in over 320 arrests in spring of 2007 in the offices of 39 U.S. Representatives and Senators in 25 states.
“I am energized by the dedication of so many conscientious activists across the country willing to take the risks of peace and speak truth to power,” says Max Obuszewski of the National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance. “We have been unsuccessful so far in stopping this awful war and occupation of Iraq, but it is not for the lack of direct action. We are taking on the greatest empire in world history, but we will continue to act.”
“There are large numbers of new people being arrested,” notes Cohen-Joppa, “most typically saying, ‘I have tried everything else from writing to voting, but I have to do more to stop this war.’ The profile of people arrested includes high school teenagers to senior citizens, mostly people under 30 and over 50.”
Anti-war arrests are significantly under-reported by mainstream media. For example, around the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq in March 2008, most news stories wrote that there were 150 to 200 arrests nationwide. Cohen-Joppa and Nuclear Resister report there were over double that number, well over 400, many outside the cities where regular media traditionally look.
Though arrests typically drop off in election years, as people’s hopes are raised that a new President or Congress will make a difference and stop the war, this year looks like arrests are likely to continue to rise. In part, that will depend on the attitude of authorities in Denver and Minneapolis, where the political conventions are being held. In 2004, New York City authorities overreacted so much to protestors at the Republican convention that they arrested historic numbers of protestors — including hundreds who had no intention to risk arrest. If Senator McCain is elected, anti-war resistance activities are expected to rise much higher.
Why do people risk arrest in their resistance to war? Perhaps Daniel Berrigan, on trial for resistance to the Vietnam War, said it best:
The time is past when good people may be silent
when obedience
can segregate us from public risk
when the poor can die without defense.
How many indeed must die
before our voices are heard
how many must be tortured dislocated
starved maddened?
How long must the world=s resources
be raped in the service of legalized murder?
When at what point will you say no to this war?
We have chosen to say
with the gift of our liberty
if necessary our lives:
the violence stops here.
The death stops here.
The suppression of truth stops here.
This war stops here.
Though war resistance activities and arrests have not stopped the war in Iraq, those struggling for peace remain committed. “None of us know what will happen if we continue to work for peace and human rights,” says a handmade poster of one involved in the resistance, “But we all know what will happen if we don’t.”
By ANDREW TAYLOR | Democratic and GOP leaders in the House announced agreement Wednesday on a long-overdue war funding bill they said President Bush would be willing to sign. The agreement on the war funding bill, announced by Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., and Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, also paves the way for a quick infusion of emergency flood relief for the Midwest, an extension of unemployment payments for the jobless and a big boost in GI Bill college for veterans.
It would also provide about $165 billion to the Pentagon to fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for about a year. That’s enough time for Bush’s successor to set Iraq policy.
“This is an agreement that has been worked out in a bipartisan way that I think is acceptable to both most Democrats and most Republicans and to the White House,” Boehner said.
Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the agreement contains several priorities for Democrats in the Senate but stopped short of issuing a direct endorsement, saying Reid needed to consult with his colleagues.
The agreement would require that the Senate would agree to drop most of the more than $10 billion it added last month for programs such as heating subsidies for the poor, wildfire fighting, road and bridge repair and help for the Gulf Coast.
The House is slated to pass the measure Thursday, but the Senate won’t turn to it until next week, Manley said.
The agreement drops restrictions on Bush’s ability to conduct the war and gives him almost all of the funding he sought well over a year ago for Iraq and Afghanistan. But he also backed away from veto threats he issued earlier over Democrats’ insistence on using the Iraq funding bill to carry a generous boost in the GI Bill and a 13-week extension of unemployment payments for people whose benefits have run out.
Democrats dropped a provision to extend unemployment benefits for an additional 13 weeks in states with particularly high unemployment rates.
The war funding bill had bedeviled Democratic leaders for months. Its passage has become more urgent with looming furloughs next month of civilian employees and contract workers.
Conservative “Blue Dog” Democrats are upset that the new GI Bill benefits, with costs tentatively estimated at $62 billion over the next decade, will be added to the deficit instead of being “paid for” as called for under House rules.
But the White House and Republicans insisted that House Democrats’ offset — a one-half percentage point surcharge on wealthier taxpayers — was unacceptable.
Boehner and Hoyer would not immediately release details, saying the verbal agreement had yet to be written in congressional legalese.
The agreement came just a day after the Bush administration urged Congress to provide $1.8 billion in immediate disaster aid for the Midwest and elsewhere. Congress is likely to add a little more, though details had not been ironed out.
A dozen senators in both parties are pressing to add money for levee repair and help for displaced homeowners, among other pressing needs.
Democrats and governors across the country emerged the victors in a battle with the White House to block new Bush administration rules designed to cut spending on Medicaid health care for the poor and disabled.
I write in connection with the police operation surrounding the President George W Bush to Downing Street today. I am not a habitual complainer about the police, as a scan of the public record and my history of cooperation with Tower Hamlets police and the Muslim Support Unit will quickly show. But I must say I witnessed scenes today, some of them inches from my face, which were both deeply shocking and completely unnecessary.
I was asked by the chairman of the Stop the War Coalition as the only member of parliament present at the demonstration in Parliament Square to march to the police barricade in Whitehall symbolically to demonstrate the outrageousness of the government’s decision to forbid marchers to enter Whitehall . As one of the leaders of the Stop the War Coalition I felt it was my duty to comply with his request, although it was Fathers Day, I had my children with me and had intended to leave Parliament Square shortly after my speech.
I made my way to the front of the putative march and purely by chance found myself in the hottest spot of the confrontation which followed. I was trapped there for the best part of an hour and a half, unable to move forward, back or sideways. Consquently, I was both closer to and for longer exposed to the events as they unfolded.
A considerable line of uniformed officers were in full control of the situation for a substantial part of this time. Most of the officers were impassive throughout. Some did their best to defuse the situation, which was clearly the proper tactic in the circumstances. But a number of your officers behaved with a viciousness and lack of control such as I have not witnessed since the miners strike of 1984-85. Batons were drawn at least prematurely and were used with a level of aggression which frankly took my breath away.
These were not hardened trouble-makers they were facing who’d come for a fight with the police. They were young, peaceful, allbeit frustrated and angry anti-war protesters. You will know that there has never been any trouble on the score of Stop the War marches that London has scene hitherto. One particular officer, I will not give his number at this stage as I intend to make a formal complaint about his conduct and I am releasing this letter to the press, was quite simply out of control. He assaulted a young woman; he deployed his metal baton in a frenzied way; he ripped placards from the hands of several demonstrators when I can assure you the demonstrators in question were not using these cardboard placards in any improper way. He was standing next to a sergeant, whose number I also have, who if he tesitfies truthfully will bear out what I am saying.
A senior officer - I could see no identifying number, but I know he was senior because he was giving out orders - was actually taunting the demonstrators, including me in a display of political partiality such as I have never witnessed.
But the most serious mistake is one I believe you have a duty toinvestigate, and that was the tactical decision to deploy the black-boiler-suited riot squad - when there was clearly no riot. This decision, however, was one which appeared designed to start one. Given the small number of demonstrators involved - far less than the number of revellers on an ordinary Friday night in Romford - it was an unnecessary and provocative overreaction and served as nothing other than a provocation compounding the protesters’ feelings about the denial of what they and I regard as their rights as citizens in a free country.
This squad behaved intolerably. It was as if they were facing a dangerous crowd of molotov cocktail throwing, pike wielding insurrectionists. It was a scene redolent of the Troubles in Northern Ireland and cannot possibly be justified by the scale of this incident. This squad proceeded to deal out a shocking level of violence against unarmed civilan protesters, overwhelmingly young and many of them female. I have no doubt the large number of press photographers present and taking pictures of the scenes will bear this out.
This was not the Metropolitan Police’s finest hour, Commissioner. It was a sledgehammer to crack a nut and did harm to the reputation of your officers and their commanders, and I believe you have a duty to investigate it.
Wordpress Theme
A video compilation
by Frank Dorrel
This video compilation is an excellent and invaluable educational tool that reveals the true nature of U.S. foreign policy. It's been seen in many classrooms, churches, home screenings, on cable TV and shown by many Peace and Justice organizations.
People such as Howard Zinn, S. Brian Willson, Blase Bonpane, Michael Parenti, Oliver Stone, Father Roy Bourgeois, Ramsey Clark, Ed Asner, Casey Kasem, Susan Sarandon, Chalmers Johnson and many others have seen this video and find it very informative and empowering!
If you're already familiar with this video and would like price information, see our ORDERS PAGE
'What I've Learned About U.S. Foreign Policy'
This 2-hour video compilation
features the following 10 segments:
SEGMENT 1
1. Martin Luther King, Jr.,
(segment 2:55) read segment
He was not only a civil rights advocate, he also spoke out against the U.S. war in Vietnam. Some people feel he was assassinated after he criticized our involvement there and other regions of the world. "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
SEGMENT 2
2. John Stockwell, former C.I.A. Station Chief
(segment 6:14) read segment
Former CIA Station Chief in Angola 1975, working for then Director of the CIA, George Bush. A 13 year veteran of the agency, Stockwell provides a short history of the CIA, estimating 6 million people have died as a direct consequence of the agency's covert operations since its inception in 1947. This talk was given in the late 1980's.
Recommended reading: John Stockwell's
The Praetorian Guard : The US Role In The New World Order
SEGMENT 3
3. Coverup: Behind the Iran-Contra Affair
(segment 19:34) read segment
This investigative documentary has been seen in theaters worldwide. Directed by Barbara Trent of the Empowerment Project. The Iran-Contra scandal is not an aberration of U.S. foreign policy. It has been estimated that between 20 to 30,000 Nicaraguan men, women and children were killed in U.S. sponsored terror conducted by the CIA backed right-wing Contra forces.
Elizabeth Montgomery narrates. Includes a short history of CIA covert operations by Peter Dale Scott
This segment comes from the full-length documentary 'CoverUp: Behind the Iran-Contra Affair' available from The Empowerment Project
SEGMENT 4
4. School of Assassins
(segment 13:25) read segment
The School of the Americas, located at Fort Benning, Georgia - our own terrorist training school right here in the United States. This documentary is narrated by Susan Sarandon and features Father Roy Bourgeois talking about this U.S. Army school where soldiers from Central and South America are trained in the art of torture, terrorism, and assassination. This school has since officially been renamed "Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation."
This film was directed and produced by Robert Richter of Maryknoll World Productions.
This segment comes from the documentary "School of Assassins" available from the School of the Americas Watch web site.
SEGMENT 5
5. Genocide by Sanctions
(segment 12:58) read segment
Produced and directed by Gloria La Riva in 1998 (long before the current war in Iraq), this film features former Attorney General of the United States, Ramsey Clark, as he shows the terrible conditions the Iraqi's were suffering from due to the first U.S. war on Iraq. UNICEF, the International Red Cross and other world organizations estimate around 5,000 children were dying every month in Iraq after that war and the imposition of sanctions placed on that country.
Over 1.5 million Iraqi's died as a result of the sanctions alone. Ramsey Clark goes into the hospitals and talks with Iraqi doctors, who say many of these deaths could have been prevented if they had medicine to give to the children. The United States bombed out their way of life; their water treatment facilities, food delivery systems, sewage treatment facilities, electrical systems, their mass communication facilities and more. And American's were lead to believe that this was a good thing.
This segment comes from the documentary 'Genocide By Sanctions.' Check out the Left Books web site for more info.
SEGMENT 6
6. Philip Agee, former C.I.A. Case Officer
(segment 22:08) read segment
Philip Agee spent 13 years in the C.I.A. before resigning in 1969. His book "Inside the Company: C.I.A. Diary" was first published in 1975 and has been translated in to 27 languages. It was a best seller world-wide. His autobiography, "On The Run" was published in 1987.
In this speech given in 1991 after the first Gulf War, Agee analyzes why the U.S. invaded Iraq. He also describes "the war against the third world" as being fought for the natural resources, the labor and the markets of these third world countries the United States invaded either overtly or covertly since the end of World War II.
SEGMENT 7
7. Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now!
(segment 5:12) read segment
Journalist and host of Democracy Now!, a daily radio and TV news program on over 400 stations. Amy is the best at what she does! On this segment, Amy talks about two genocides Indonesia committed, first against its own people in 1965 and then against the people of East Timor in 1975. Both of these mass slaughters were sanctioned by the United States government and aided by the C.I.A. Includes scenes from "Bitter Paradise," a video by Elaine Briere. Amy Goodman was filmed by Ralph Cole of Justice Vision.
SEGMENT 8
8. The Panama Deception
(segment 22:10) read segment
Won the 1993 Academy Award for Best Documentary. Directed by Barbara Trent of the Empowerment Project. This film documents the untold story of the December 1989 U.S. invasion of Panama. The United States military deliberately attacked and destroyed primarily residential neighborhoods, killing an estimated 3 to 4 thousand people in the process. This segment exposes the role the U.S. government and the mainstream media play in suppressing information about U.S. foreign policy. Includes never before seen footage of this invasion. Narrated by (actress) Elizabeth Montgomery
This segment comes from the feature-length documentary 'The Panama Deception' available from The Empowerment Project
SEGMENT 9
9. Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General
(segment 7:58) read segment
Former Attorney General of the United States speaking in 1998 in Los Angeles. I was there that night and it was a very memorable evening called "Save the Iraqi Children." Ramsey's talk is very powerful as he conveys the sorry truth about U.S. foreign policy. He quotes Martin Luther King Jr. saying, "The greatest purveyor of violence on the earth is my own government." The entire evening's event was filmed by Ralph Cole of Justice Vision.
Recommended Reading:
"The Fire This Time: U.S. War Crimes in the Gulf War"
by Ramsey Clark
SEGMENT 10
10. S. Brian Willson, Vietnam Veteran and Peace Activist
(segment 8:45) read segment
Brian is the Vietnam veteran who, in 1987, lost both his legs when run over by a munitions train at the Concord Naval Weapons Station, located in California. The bombs and munitions aboard this train were bound for Central America. Brian is one of the most spiritual, courageous and honest activists who Wages Peace against our violent foreign policies. He is a hero in Central America where the people understand that he has stood up for their rights as equal human beings. Brian says that he doesn’t want mothers and fathers and children to be killed and maimed in our name with our tax money!
Brian’s web site features his auto-biography and a series of essays he has written since then. With an introduction by Kris Kristofferson, this segment includes scenes from "The Healing of Brian Willson" by Lori Joyce of Idanha Films and "Nicaragua Diary" by Mark Birnbaum.
[Thanks to yankeesfanz for this link]The Democratic nominee, in an interview with Fortune, says he wants free trade "to work for all people."By Nina Easton, Washington editorWASHINGTON (Fortune) -- The general campaign is on, independent voters are up for grabs, and Barack Obama is toning down his populist rhetoric - at least when it comes to free trade.In an interview with Fortune to be featured in the magazine's upcoming issue, the presumptive Democratic nominee backed off his harshest attacks on the free trade agreement and indicated he didn't want to unilaterally reopen negotiations on NAFTA."Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified," he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA "devastating" and "a big mistake," despite nonpartisan studies concluding that the trade zone has had a mild, positive effect on the U.S. economy.Does that mean his rhetoric was overheated and amplified? "Politicians are always guilty of that, and I don't exempt myself," he answered.Obama says he believes in "opening up a dialogue" with trading partners Canada and Mexico "and figuring to how we can make this work for all people."Obama spokesman Bill Burton said that Obama-as the candidate noted in Fortune's interview-has not changed his core position on NAFTA, and that he has always said he would talk to the leaders of Canada and Mexico in an effort to include enforceable labor and environmental standards in the pact.Nevertheless, Obama's tone stands in marked contrast to his primary campaign's anti-NAFTA fusillades. The pact creating a North American free-trade zone was President Bill Clinton's signature accomplishment; but NAFTA is also the bugaboo of union leaders, grassroots activists and Midwesterners who blame free trade for the factory closings they see in their hometowns.The Democratic candidates fought hard to win over those factions of their party, with Obama generally following Hillary Clinton's lead in setting a protectionist tone.In February, as the campaign moved into the Rust Belt, both candidates vowed to invoke a six-month opt-out clause ("as a hammer," in Obama's words) to pressure Canada and Mexico to make concessions.Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper called that threat a mistake, and other leaders abroad expressed worries about their trade deals. Leading House Democrats, including Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel, distanced themselves from the candidates.Now, however, Obama says he doesn't believe in unilaterally reopening NAFTA. On the afternoon that I sat down with him to discuss the economy, Obama said he had just spoken with Harper, who had called to congratulate him on winning the nomination."I'm not a big believer in doing things unilaterally," Obama said. "I'm a big believer in opening up a dialogue and figuring out how we can make this work for all people."Obama has repeatedly described himself as a free-trade proponent who wants to be a "better bargainer" on behalf of U.S. interests and wants agreements to include labor and environmental standards.In May 2007, congressional Democrats and the Bush administration agreed to a plan to include environmental and international labor standards in upcoming trade agreements. Still, later that year Obama supported one agreement (Peru) and opposed three others (Panama, Colombia, South Korea). Labor leaders - many of whom backed Obama in the primary - were the chief opponents of those pacts.Obama jumped into the anti-trade waters with Clinton even though his top economics adviser, the University of Chicago's Austan Goolsbee, has written that America's wage gap is primarily the result of a globalized information economy - not free trade.On Feb. 8, Goolsbee met with the Canadian consul general in Chicago and offered assurances that Obama's rhetoric was "more reflective of political maneuvering than policy," according to a Canadian memo summarizing the meeting that was obtained by Fortune. "In fact," the Canadian memo said, Goolsbee "mentioned that going forward the Obama camp was going to be careful to send the appropriate message without coming off as too protectionist."In the Fortune interview, Obama noted that despite his support for opening markets, "there are costs to free trade" that must be recognized. He noted that under NAFTA, a more efficient U.S. agricultural industry displaced Mexican farmers, adding to the problem of illegal immigration.We "can't pretend that those costs aren't real," Obama added. Otherwise, he added, it feeds "the protectionist sentiment and the anti-immigration sentiment that is out there in both parties."Obama also reiterated his determination to be a tougher trade bargainer. "The Chinese love free trade," he said, "but they are tough as nails when it comes to a bargain, right? They will resist any calls to stop manipulating their currency. It's no secret they have consistently encroached on our intellectual property and our copyright laws. ...We should make sure in our trade negotiations that our interests and our values are adequately reflected."Republican nominee John McCain, for his part, is emphasizing his consistent position as a free-trader. In a press conference in Boston this week, he attacked Obama as protectionist: "Senator Obama said that he would unilaterally - unilaterally! - renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement, where 33 percent of our trade exists. And you know what message that sends? That no agreement is sacred if someone declares that as president of the United States they would unilaterally renegotiate it. I stand for free trade, and with all the difficulties and economic troubles we're in today, there's a real bright spot and that's our exports. Protectionism does not work."
by david modersbach
open pit of Alumbrera Mines in Andalgalá, Catamarca, Argentina For the first time in latin america, criminal charges were brought against the Alumbrera mines (Xstrata, Goldcorp, Yamana) for environmental contamination in the Argentina provinces of Catamarca and Tucumán. An account of the facts and history of this interesting case. First Ever in Latin America: Mining Corporation Charged with “Crimes Against the Environment” in Catamarca, Argentina. 16 June, 2008 Ten days ago, the Federal Chambers of Tucumán in Argentina brought criminal charges of environmental contamination against Julián Rooney, Vice-President of Bajo La Alumbrera, Argentina’s largest mining operation located in Catamarca and Tucumán. Rooney is free, but his possessions are impounded, and the company will appeal the ruling to the Court of Appeals, and possibly to the Supreme Court. This is the first ruling in all of Latin America against a mining company for crimes against the environment. Mina Alumbrera is the largest, oldest and most profitable open-pit metals mine in Argentina. Located in the northwest province of Catamarca, Alumbrera moves 120 million metric tons of earth annually to produce an average of 160,000 tons of copper, 600,000 ounces of gold and other metals in form of a mineral concentrate, or slurry. Alumbrera is joint-owned by three of the largest metals mining transnationals: Xstrata, Goldcorp and Yamana Gold. The ruling has sent shock waves through the mining industry in Argentina and throughout the world, leading the Argentine mining association CAEM to issue a statement claiming that the ruling will paralyze an economic sector that “generates jobs and high-paying salaries.” Not only is Alumbrera on trial for contamination, but also under scrutiny for tax evasion, corruption and contraband. And called for questioning as presumed accomplices in the contamination are local and national government officials including Secretary of Mining Jorge Mayoral. The ruling is a product of a complaint filed ten years ago by citizens groups and biologist Juan González, Secretary of Environment for the Province of Tucumán. They discovered that Alumbrera was dumping millions of liters of toxic liquid wastes into DP2, a canal used by animals and farmers alongside the Alumbrera pumping and filtration station in Tucumán. González ordered a series of tests, and the Provincial Health System (SIPROSA) found lead, cadmium, copper, selenium, mercury, cyanide and arsenic above legal health limits. A claim was filed in 1998 against Alumbrera for violating the laws in Argentina’s National Constitution which regulate toxic waste emissions. Alumbrera’s Chain of Operations: Contamination and Desertification Like every modern mine, at the Alumbrera open-pit in Catamarca, mountains are exploded and ore is removed, crushed and leached with chemicals to produce a thick, metal-rich slurry. The slurry is pumped 140 miles through a pipeline over a 8,000 foot mountain pass to the province of Tucumán, where the slurry is “dewatered” and liquids simply dumped in canal DP2 in Tucumán, headwaters of the extensive Sali-Dulce river basin. The dried “mineral” is then carried by train 450 miles to Puerto Alumbrera on the Paraná river near Rosario, Argentina, and shipped to overseas plants for the extraction and foundry of gold, copper, silver and other minerals within. Alumbrera’s extensive “chain” of operations involves multiple river basins and five provinces. In the twelve years since Alumbrera began operations, the operation has become notorious for the enormous plume of contamination released at the many points along this chain of operations. More ominous still is the large-scale regional desertification attributed to Alumbrera’s operations: The project consumes between 60 and 100 million liters of water a day pumped from depleted water tables, to return contaminated directly to river systems and aquifers. Over the years, as contamination increased, community pressures grew. However, the case languished in the corrupt and inefficient Argentine justice system. Alumbrera continued to produce Environmental Impact Reports every two years, many times even reporting levels above legal limits. The impunity that Alumbrera enjoyed was compounded by economic hardships facing residents of Catamarca and Tucumán, as Big Mining companies such as Barrick Gold, Xstrata, Goldcorp and dozens of others bought off politicians and carried out well-moneyed social insertion PR campaigns while creating a corrupt political system based on patronage to mining interests, while small groups of environmentalists and dedicated officials were marginalized for their opposition. However, two years ago, spurred to action by complaints from citizens, new Tucumán District Attorney Antonio Gustavo Goméz resurrected the case. In a way it came late, years after a series of fish die-offs in 2001-2004 left the Sali-Dulce river system entirely dead. In recent months, environmentalists pushing the courts to take action were threatened as “terrorists” for their advocacy. But they succeeded: On May 30, Tribunal judges finally voted 3-1 to press criminal charges against Alumbrera. But at the mine, production never stops. After twelve years of continuous operations, Alumbrera’s pit is enormous and declining ore grade means the company is literally "running the mine into the earth" by increasing volume and tonnage mined, in order to maintain mine "productivity.” Alumbrera runs two shifts of workers, operating day and night, every day of every year Increased production means more energy and water use, and generates more waste and contamination. The mine and tailings had been constructed on a complex system of fault lines, and the unlined tailings reservoir permits heavy metals infiltration into water tables. The mineral pipeline is aging, and has ruptured repeatedly throughout its 140 miles. What will happen? Alumbrera’s ecological damages are by and large “irremediable” and will require works into perpetuity. But when the mine closes in five years, Alumbrera (Xstrata, Goldcorp and Yamana) is not obligated to clean up or pay for restoration costs: Due to agreements signed by the government and Alumbrera in 1996 responsibility for cleanup will fall upon local authorities. The Argentine state is clearly unable to handle any form of environmental oversight, maintenance and restoration on the scale of Alumbrera. Catamarca is a beautiful desert province of northwest Argentina, with mountain ranges, deserts and verdant oasis valleys. Runoff from snow-capped peaks and underground aquifers once supplied small-farmers throughout the region with pure mineral waters for their crops of fruit, nuts and vegetables. These lands are now dried up and waters undrinkable, contaminated with heavy metals. Family farms have dried up, leaving poverty and creating a culture of exclusion and dependency. The town of Andalgalà in Catamarca is emblematic of the social and ecological conflicts brought on by Big Mining: Miners live in gated communities, while common citizens cannot drink the tap water and schools and health systems languish, and the corrupt mayor just spent $40,000 of municipal to pay Nobel laurate Joseph Stiglitz to speak at a conference in support of Big Mining. Resistance: The problem won’t end with Alumbrera: This is just the first of a series of mega-mining projects under exploration and construction in the region. Residents are bitterly fighting Yamana’s Agua Rica mine, to be located some 40 km from Alumbrera will be three times larger and draw from the same depleted water tables. It is one of dozens of projects slated for Catamarca’s new mining “Sacrifice Zone”. Throughout Catamarca, citizens are taking to the streets to halt these mega-mining operations: Residents of Aconquija blockaded roads to protest ruptures of the mineral pipeline; in western Catamarca, Tinogasta residents blockaded Alumbrera’s which carry explosives and chemicals from Chile and return laden with contraband mineral, and Alumbrera’s “blue train” has been repeatedly blockaded by Santiagueños. Argentines are learning that perhaps the key to stopping contamination and plunder is by applying pressure all along Alumbrera’s chain of operations. Citizens of other countries, especially USA, Canada and Switzerland can, and should support the people of Argentina in their struggle. For more information, here are some key contacts: www.noalamina.org www.minesandcommunities.org (English) http://asambleasocioambientalcatamarca.blogspot.com/http://aconquija.blogspot.com/http://belenresiste.blogspot.com/http://www.olca.cl/oca/index.htmhttp://www.tinogasta-catamarca.blogspot.com/http://www.orosucio.madryn.com/By David Modersbach National University of Rosario, Argentina dmoders@yahoo.com
All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field.
From Alvin Baltrop's Pier Photographs 
Jamilah Hoffman has lived in Texas her entire life though she now considers herself to be a citizen of the world. It was Hurricane Katrina and the Bush regime's criminal actions which caused her to question the role of government in the lives of its people. Jamilah asked herself at the time, "What's the point of having a government if they can't rescue people from their roofs?" After hearing an ad on Air America Radio about World Can't Wait and mobilizing for November 2, 2005, Jamilah has been active with the Houston chapter of World Can't Wait and focusing on the youth of her community. 
Photos: 
I write in connection with the police operation surrounding the President George W Bush to Downing Street today. I am not a habitual complainer about the police, as a scan of the public record and my history of cooperation with Tower 
