{MB: for the record, because I have already been asked, here is What I Mean By Anarchism)
What Do You Mean By "Anarchism?
AK Press
"Like all really good ideas," writes Clifford Harper, "Anarchy is pretty simple when you get down to it—human beings are at their best when they are living free of authority, deciding things among themselves rather than being ordered about." Anarchism means abolishing the state and all coercive social relations. It means a society in which individuals create and control their own collective organizations to meet their social and economic needs. These organizations would federate and democratically coordinate (rather than compete) among themselves without any government oversight. Some say that this is impossible, that without governmental authority we’d descend into violence, lawlessness, and corruption. But, look around: isn’t that pretty much what we have now? Government is a centralized force that imposes rules from above, suppressing individual initiative in the interests of a small minority. Capitalism is an economic system based on exploitation, private ownership (theft) of society’s resources, and a logic of ruthless competition. Rather than accept these human constructions as "natural," AK Press draws on a rich history of folks from all over the planet and from all walks of life who have imagined, fought for, and actually achieved something better.
No government, “revolutionary” or otherwise, has ever liberated its citizens from gender, racial, or class oppression. No government has ever developed a model for an environmentally sustainable society. With a record like that, it’s strange that anyone still backs that particular horse. Back in the day, as socialist ideas were developing and confronting the emerging capitalist system, revolutionaries claimed that “the emancipation of the working class is the task of the workers themselves.” Anarchists still make that claim. We don’t advocate “no control,” but insist on asking “control by whom?” We work to destroy arbitrary power (political, economic, and social), to take decision-making power away from “officials,” while developing our ability to fill that void and provide for ourselves. “People's governments” invariably become calcified and abandon the struggle for human freedom. This is why we identify with the liberatory strains within the history of socialism—the unbroken thread of impassioned resistance against both the terrors of capitalism and the tyranny of government.
Anarchism doesn't tell people what to do. It tells them that they have the ability to make decisions about the issues that affect them. Anarchism, and the anarchist movement, is about emancipation, empowerment, and agency. Ask yourself this: what would your ideal transportation system, agricultural system, neighborhood, school, or workplace look like? Now ask yourself how much influence you and the people around you have over these issues? Can we afford to leave these decisions to the same people who have been screwing up our lives thus far?
Evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould once wrote, “I am somehow less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.” The repressive hierarchies of capitalism and the state create human beings who are mere shells of what we could be, stunting us mentally, physically, and emotionally. Adding insult to injury, we’re then taught to blame ourselves for this situation, instead of looking for the institutional roots of our problems.
Beca0use destroying one form of oppression only leaves the others to fester, anarchism tries to focus on all unequal power relations simultaneously. Capitalism and the state didn’t invent racism, patriarchy, or gender oppression, but they use a variety of divisive tactics to bolster our dependence on them. Understanding how oppressions are interlinked is an important step in overcoming them, as well as a way to practice freedom here and now, rather than relegating it to some distant future.
For us, anarchism is a practical framework for working out these issues. It’s a revolutionary analysis that helps us understand the roots of domination, both as individuals and as members of exploited social groups. It offers a useful and instructive history of theoretical and practical experimentation by people who have worked to expand the definition of freedom itself by fighting those who violently constrain and deny it.
Read the Rest of This Statement
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Global Research: Gregory Elich - Putting the Squeeze on North Korea
Putting the Squeeze on North Korea
by Gregory Elich
Global Research
Tensions are escalating since North Korea’s launch of a satellite into orbit on December 12, 2012. Overwrought news reports termed the launch a “threat” and a “provocation,” while U.S. National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor called it “irresponsible behavior.” Punishment for North Korea was swift in coming.
North Korea’s Kwangmyongsong-3 was just one of 75 satellites that a variety of nations sent into space last year, but Pyongyang’s launch, and a failed launch earlier in the year on April 12, were the only ones singled out for condemnation. [1] In Western eyes, there was something uniquely threatening about the Kwangmyongsong-3 earth observation satellite, unlike the apparently more benign five military and three spy satellites the United States launched last year.
We are told that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK, the official name for North Korea) used the satellite launch to test ballistic missile technology. But the North Koreans could hardly have sent their satellite into orbit by slingshot. The Kwangmyongsong-3 was equipped with a camera intended to help assess the nation’s natural resources and forest distribution and to collect crop estimates. The Western press was quick to scoff at the satellite as having no rational economic purpose. Although the satellite failed to become operable, a common enough experience for nations putting their first satellite into space, the intent was to support much-needed ecological recovery in North Korea and to aid agricultural planning.
Specialists argue that the DPRK’s Unha-3 missile, used for the launch, is not a suitable candidate for delivering a nuclear warhead. According to analyst Markus Schiller of Schmucker Technologie in Germany, for North Korea to “become a player in the ICBM game, they would have to develop a different kind of missile, with higher performance. And if they do that seriously, we would have to see flight tests every other month, over several years.” [2] The North Korean missile “was developed as a satellite launcher and not as a weapon,” Schiller says. “The technology was suited only for satellite launch.” Brian Weedan, a space expert at the Secure World Foundation, agrees, and points out that the missile took a sharp turn to avoid flying over Taiwan and the Philippines. “That is definitely something more associated with a space launch than with a ballistic missile launch. It’s not what you would expect to see with a missile test.” [3]
The Unha-3 is simply too small for the job of delivering a nuclear warhead, even assuming that the DPRK had miniaturized a nuclear bomb, an endeavor requiring significant time and effort. The North Koreans would also need to develop a long-range guidance system and a reentry vehicle capable of withstanding the heat of returning through the atmosphere. Experts consider the DPRK to be years away from achieving such steps. [4]
In regard to North Korea’s satellite launches, Lewis Franklin and Nick Hansen of Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation remark, “The oft-repeated phrase ‘readily convertible to an ICBM’ posed by non-technical policy experts is engineering-wise unsupportable.” They explain that while other nations have utilized ICBMs for sending satellites into space, conversion of a light missile like the Uhha-3 into an ICBM “requires considerable redesign and testing, and no country has taken this route.” [5]
The other aspect of the launch that the U.S found so provocative was its violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1874 of June 12, 2009, which enjoined the DPRK from conducting “any launch using ballistic missile technology.” That resolution was prompted by a North Korean nuclear test. Yet, when Israel, Pakistan and India – all non-signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty – not only performed testing, but proceeded to build substantial nuclear arsenals and missiles capable of delivering nuclear payloads, no action was forthcoming. This double standard has not gone unnoticed in the DPRK, which understands that the distinction between the North Korean case and that of Israel, Pakistan and India hinges on the latter three nations being U.S. allies, while for decades it has been the target of Western sanctions, threats and pressure.
Interestingly enough, India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapon-capable ballistic missiles at around the time of North Korea’s failed satellite launch on April 12, 2012. [6] The Indian and Pakistani missiles did not carry satellites; these were purely military tests, a fact which did not perturb the Obama Administration. Criticism was reserved for North Korea alone, while in regard to India’s test, U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner merely noted that the U.S. has a “very strong strategic and security partnership with India.” [7] Following Pakistan’s launch, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland’s only comment was, “What’s most important is that they do seem to have taken steps to inform the Indians.” [8] These mild remarks contrasted with the vociferous abuse poured upon North Korea for its non-nuclear capable missiles carrying satellites.
Since the April ballistic missile launches, India and Pakistan have continued their tests, including India’s test of a nuclear-capable ballistic missile fired from underwater, part of its program to develop submarine-based nuclear missiles. [9] India conducted its underwater ballistic missile test on January 27, only a few days after the UN Security Council imposed sanctions on North Korea for putting a satellite into orbit.
When North Korea launched its satellite, India condemned the launch as “unwarranted,” and termed it an action adversely impacting peace and stability. [10] That same day, India test fired its nuclear-capable Agni-I ballistic missile, again without complaint by the U.S. [11] And just days after passage of the UN Security Council resolution against the DPRK, Japan put two spy satellites into space, both aimed at North Korea. [12] Not surprisingly, these missile launches evoked no complaint from U.S. officials.
South Korea successfully placed its own satellite into orbit on January 30, 2013, with the complete support of the U.S., which only added to North Korea’s growing sense of irritation over the blatant double standard. The hypocrisy is quite breathtaking. The U.S. sits atop the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, possesses the largest military machine on earth, regularly invades or bombs other nations, threatens nations who refuse to bend to its will, turns a blind eye to tests of ballistic missiles by India, Pakistan and Israel, and it condemns the small nation of North Korea for engaging in “provocative” behavior by sending a peaceful satellite into space.
The DPRK bears the distinction of being the only nation to have a UN Security Council resolution in effect banning it from launching a satellite. Yet, the international outer space treaty affirms that outer space “shall be the province of all mankind,” and that “Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind.” [13] Note the language used here: “without discrimination of any kind.” This is absolutely unambiguous. The treaty does not say “except when the powerful choose to deny this right to a small nation.”
To Read the Rest of the Article
by Gregory Elich
Global Research
Tensions are escalating since North Korea’s launch of a satellite into orbit on December 12, 2012. Overwrought news reports termed the launch a “threat” and a “provocation,” while U.S. National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor called it “irresponsible behavior.” Punishment for North Korea was swift in coming.
North Korea’s Kwangmyongsong-3 was just one of 75 satellites that a variety of nations sent into space last year, but Pyongyang’s launch, and a failed launch earlier in the year on April 12, were the only ones singled out for condemnation. [1] In Western eyes, there was something uniquely threatening about the Kwangmyongsong-3 earth observation satellite, unlike the apparently more benign five military and three spy satellites the United States launched last year.
We are told that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK, the official name for North Korea) used the satellite launch to test ballistic missile technology. But the North Koreans could hardly have sent their satellite into orbit by slingshot. The Kwangmyongsong-3 was equipped with a camera intended to help assess the nation’s natural resources and forest distribution and to collect crop estimates. The Western press was quick to scoff at the satellite as having no rational economic purpose. Although the satellite failed to become operable, a common enough experience for nations putting their first satellite into space, the intent was to support much-needed ecological recovery in North Korea and to aid agricultural planning.
Specialists argue that the DPRK’s Unha-3 missile, used for the launch, is not a suitable candidate for delivering a nuclear warhead. According to analyst Markus Schiller of Schmucker Technologie in Germany, for North Korea to “become a player in the ICBM game, they would have to develop a different kind of missile, with higher performance. And if they do that seriously, we would have to see flight tests every other month, over several years.” [2] The North Korean missile “was developed as a satellite launcher and not as a weapon,” Schiller says. “The technology was suited only for satellite launch.” Brian Weedan, a space expert at the Secure World Foundation, agrees, and points out that the missile took a sharp turn to avoid flying over Taiwan and the Philippines. “That is definitely something more associated with a space launch than with a ballistic missile launch. It’s not what you would expect to see with a missile test.” [3]
The Unha-3 is simply too small for the job of delivering a nuclear warhead, even assuming that the DPRK had miniaturized a nuclear bomb, an endeavor requiring significant time and effort. The North Koreans would also need to develop a long-range guidance system and a reentry vehicle capable of withstanding the heat of returning through the atmosphere. Experts consider the DPRK to be years away from achieving such steps. [4]
In regard to North Korea’s satellite launches, Lewis Franklin and Nick Hansen of Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation remark, “The oft-repeated phrase ‘readily convertible to an ICBM’ posed by non-technical policy experts is engineering-wise unsupportable.” They explain that while other nations have utilized ICBMs for sending satellites into space, conversion of a light missile like the Uhha-3 into an ICBM “requires considerable redesign and testing, and no country has taken this route.” [5]
The other aspect of the launch that the U.S found so provocative was its violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1874 of June 12, 2009, which enjoined the DPRK from conducting “any launch using ballistic missile technology.” That resolution was prompted by a North Korean nuclear test. Yet, when Israel, Pakistan and India – all non-signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty – not only performed testing, but proceeded to build substantial nuclear arsenals and missiles capable of delivering nuclear payloads, no action was forthcoming. This double standard has not gone unnoticed in the DPRK, which understands that the distinction between the North Korean case and that of Israel, Pakistan and India hinges on the latter three nations being U.S. allies, while for decades it has been the target of Western sanctions, threats and pressure.
Interestingly enough, India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapon-capable ballistic missiles at around the time of North Korea’s failed satellite launch on April 12, 2012. [6] The Indian and Pakistani missiles did not carry satellites; these were purely military tests, a fact which did not perturb the Obama Administration. Criticism was reserved for North Korea alone, while in regard to India’s test, U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner merely noted that the U.S. has a “very strong strategic and security partnership with India.” [7] Following Pakistan’s launch, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland’s only comment was, “What’s most important is that they do seem to have taken steps to inform the Indians.” [8] These mild remarks contrasted with the vociferous abuse poured upon North Korea for its non-nuclear capable missiles carrying satellites.
Since the April ballistic missile launches, India and Pakistan have continued their tests, including India’s test of a nuclear-capable ballistic missile fired from underwater, part of its program to develop submarine-based nuclear missiles. [9] India conducted its underwater ballistic missile test on January 27, only a few days after the UN Security Council imposed sanctions on North Korea for putting a satellite into orbit.
When North Korea launched its satellite, India condemned the launch as “unwarranted,” and termed it an action adversely impacting peace and stability. [10] That same day, India test fired its nuclear-capable Agni-I ballistic missile, again without complaint by the U.S. [11] And just days after passage of the UN Security Council resolution against the DPRK, Japan put two spy satellites into space, both aimed at North Korea. [12] Not surprisingly, these missile launches evoked no complaint from U.S. officials.
South Korea successfully placed its own satellite into orbit on January 30, 2013, with the complete support of the U.S., which only added to North Korea’s growing sense of irritation over the blatant double standard. The hypocrisy is quite breathtaking. The U.S. sits atop the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, possesses the largest military machine on earth, regularly invades or bombs other nations, threatens nations who refuse to bend to its will, turns a blind eye to tests of ballistic missiles by India, Pakistan and Israel, and it condemns the small nation of North Korea for engaging in “provocative” behavior by sending a peaceful satellite into space.
The DPRK bears the distinction of being the only nation to have a UN Security Council resolution in effect banning it from launching a satellite. Yet, the international outer space treaty affirms that outer space “shall be the province of all mankind,” and that “Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind.” [13] Note the language used here: “without discrimination of any kind.” This is absolutely unambiguous. The treaty does not say “except when the powerful choose to deny this right to a small nation.”
To Read the Rest of the Article
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Democracy Now: Barbara Ransby -- Remembering the Overlooked Life of Eslanda Robeson, Wife of Civil Rights Legend Paul Robeson
Remembering the Overlooked Life of Eslanda Robeson, Wife of Civil Rights Legend Paul Robeson
Democracy Now
In a Black History Month special, we remember the lives of the legendary civil rights activist, singer and actor Paul Robeson and his wife Eslanda, whose story is not as well known. One of the most celebrated singers and actors of the 20th century, Robeson was attacked, blacklisted and hounded by the government for his political beliefs. Eslanda Robeson, known by her friends as "Essie," was an author, an anthropologist and a globally connected activist who worked to end colonialism in Africa and racism in the United States. We’re joined by historian Barbara Ransby, author of the new biography, "Eslanda: The Large and Unconventional Life of Mrs. Paul Robeson."
Guest:
Barbara Ransby, author of the newly published biography, Eslanda: The large and Unconventional Life of Mrs. Paul Robeson. She is a professor of African-American studies, gender and women’s studies and history at the University of Illinois, Chicago. Her past books include the award-winning Ella Baker and the Black Freedom Movement.
To Watch this Episode
Democracy Now
In a Black History Month special, we remember the lives of the legendary civil rights activist, singer and actor Paul Robeson and his wife Eslanda, whose story is not as well known. One of the most celebrated singers and actors of the 20th century, Robeson was attacked, blacklisted and hounded by the government for his political beliefs. Eslanda Robeson, known by her friends as "Essie," was an author, an anthropologist and a globally connected activist who worked to end colonialism in Africa and racism in the United States. We’re joined by historian Barbara Ransby, author of the new biography, "Eslanda: The Large and Unconventional Life of Mrs. Paul Robeson."
Guest:
Barbara Ransby, author of the newly published biography, Eslanda: The large and Unconventional Life of Mrs. Paul Robeson. She is a professor of African-American studies, gender and women’s studies and history at the University of Illinois, Chicago. Her past books include the award-winning Ella Baker and the Black Freedom Movement.
To Watch this Episode
Monday, February 11, 2013
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Root's Crime, Deviance and Justice Page: Deviant Altruism
Deviant Altruism
Root's Crime, Deviance and Justice Page
A drunken panhandler stumbles through the Occupy encampment asking for change, and receiving none. Various activists mill around but most seem not to notice him or his humble request. She does. Explaining that she has no cash, she asks if he will go to the store with her so that she can get some. He reluctantly obliges. Pulling into the Neighborhood Wal-mart, she leaves him in the car with her husband while she buys a couple of bags of groceries: chicken, greens, flour, and a whole host of other things “necessities” she points out, ibuprofen, dishwashing detergent, and so on. He is flabbergasted and continually exclaims: “How did you know?” On the way to his girlfriend’s home, who he says is handicapped and poor, she picks him up a bottle of whiskey, just in case that was what he wanted to begin with, “but at least he won’t be hungry either for a few days,” she explains to her husband.
A man sits in his wheelchair, scar tissue covering his face like a quilt and the intersections where it was sewn back together deep and painfully evident to any who can bear to look him in the eye. For those who refuse to do so, his slurred speech is a constant reminder of his presence as he loudly uses awkward humor in attempts to explain the power of car accidents to maim and disfigure. For dozens of people within earshot, he is a source of discomfort, anxiety and perhaps no small measure of annoyance, as their body language betrays. But for her, his is a voice that is literally crying out for help. She walks over and tells him that he won’t be needing his cigarettes, his lighter, or any of the other random objects he is clutching in both hands. Helping him put all of these items away in his carry-on bag, she explains how all he needs out is his boarding pass. He thanks her, and shortly thereafter nods off in a deep narcotic sleep as the boarding pass flutters to the floor in front of him. Her actions seem to make those around her just as uncomfortable as those of the intoxicated and mutilated man.
An elderly woman recovers from a stroke in her hospital bed, surrounded by family. Tears roll down her cheeks as she laments, of all things, her hair. She is African-American, with very thin grey hair. Barely enough to cover her crown she does not want anyone to see her this way, and tries to explain, but the stroke has garbled her speech. Holding a wig catalog, she moans and points to what she wants, indeed, needs. A nurse clocks out from her shift and visits a wig shop around the corner taking care to match the bun to the woman’s fine hair. She explains the situation to the shopkeeper, who advises her of what other accessories will be needed and gives her a 10% discount “because you’re doing this for someone else.” When she returns, the woman and her family are awestruck and thankful. Showing off her new “do,” the patient looks at her daughter and says perfectly, “You’re just jealous.” The next morning, she has no problem stating how “it made me feel better.”
Standing outside the door is a man with a grocery bag. He was told that a homeless man was waiting to be discharged from the hospital, but the clothes that he came in wearing were nowhere to be found. The emergency room explained that this was likely “because they were nasty”. In the bag is two sweatshirts, four t-shirts, four pairs of socks, two pairs of underwear, a pair of blue jeans, a pair of denim shorts, a pair of shoes and a belt. This was his “honey-do” list for breakfast, and he’s bringing the bag at the request of his wife, who is currently busy complimenting her patient on how good her hair looks this morning.
If you don’t know already, this woman is the woman that I love. These random acts of kindness are perhaps random, but they are also part of her default setting. From the mix of wonder, confusion, awe, anger and sometimes even shame in the eyes of onlookers and bystanders (myself included) at the profundity and power of such simple gestures and acknowledgments, I believe it might be ours as well.
I had no intentions of pilfering through my closet to find clothes for someone less fortunate this morning. In fact, my goal was to read a few hundred pages of social movements literature in hopes that I could begin writing a theoretical framework section for a dissertation that voices my discomfort and displeasure with what I perceive as a whole lot of theory without practice.
Ain’t life funny?
Some of my more philosophically and/or sociologically-inclined comrades might accuse her of “hacking at the branches,” but this Root remains convinced that she’s the most radical human being he’s ever had the good fortune to encounter. Often, I’ve given her a hard time for being such a habitual rule-follower. If the sign says “Don’t step on the grass” not only will she not do so, she will quickly voice her displeasure at me if/when I do. She’s a stickler for protocol, regulations, guidelines, etc. Still, in terms of kindness and humanity, it hurts my heart a little bit to recognize that she may be one of the most deviant people I know. Fortunately, it heals quickly with the realization that she loves me.
Link to the Post
Root's Crime, Deviance and Justice Page
A drunken panhandler stumbles through the Occupy encampment asking for change, and receiving none. Various activists mill around but most seem not to notice him or his humble request. She does. Explaining that she has no cash, she asks if he will go to the store with her so that she can get some. He reluctantly obliges. Pulling into the Neighborhood Wal-mart, she leaves him in the car with her husband while she buys a couple of bags of groceries: chicken, greens, flour, and a whole host of other things “necessities” she points out, ibuprofen, dishwashing detergent, and so on. He is flabbergasted and continually exclaims: “How did you know?” On the way to his girlfriend’s home, who he says is handicapped and poor, she picks him up a bottle of whiskey, just in case that was what he wanted to begin with, “but at least he won’t be hungry either for a few days,” she explains to her husband.
A man sits in his wheelchair, scar tissue covering his face like a quilt and the intersections where it was sewn back together deep and painfully evident to any who can bear to look him in the eye. For those who refuse to do so, his slurred speech is a constant reminder of his presence as he loudly uses awkward humor in attempts to explain the power of car accidents to maim and disfigure. For dozens of people within earshot, he is a source of discomfort, anxiety and perhaps no small measure of annoyance, as their body language betrays. But for her, his is a voice that is literally crying out for help. She walks over and tells him that he won’t be needing his cigarettes, his lighter, or any of the other random objects he is clutching in both hands. Helping him put all of these items away in his carry-on bag, she explains how all he needs out is his boarding pass. He thanks her, and shortly thereafter nods off in a deep narcotic sleep as the boarding pass flutters to the floor in front of him. Her actions seem to make those around her just as uncomfortable as those of the intoxicated and mutilated man.
An elderly woman recovers from a stroke in her hospital bed, surrounded by family. Tears roll down her cheeks as she laments, of all things, her hair. She is African-American, with very thin grey hair. Barely enough to cover her crown she does not want anyone to see her this way, and tries to explain, but the stroke has garbled her speech. Holding a wig catalog, she moans and points to what she wants, indeed, needs. A nurse clocks out from her shift and visits a wig shop around the corner taking care to match the bun to the woman’s fine hair. She explains the situation to the shopkeeper, who advises her of what other accessories will be needed and gives her a 10% discount “because you’re doing this for someone else.” When she returns, the woman and her family are awestruck and thankful. Showing off her new “do,” the patient looks at her daughter and says perfectly, “You’re just jealous.” The next morning, she has no problem stating how “it made me feel better.”
Standing outside the door is a man with a grocery bag. He was told that a homeless man was waiting to be discharged from the hospital, but the clothes that he came in wearing were nowhere to be found. The emergency room explained that this was likely “because they were nasty”. In the bag is two sweatshirts, four t-shirts, four pairs of socks, two pairs of underwear, a pair of blue jeans, a pair of denim shorts, a pair of shoes and a belt. This was his “honey-do” list for breakfast, and he’s bringing the bag at the request of his wife, who is currently busy complimenting her patient on how good her hair looks this morning.
If you don’t know already, this woman is the woman that I love. These random acts of kindness are perhaps random, but they are also part of her default setting. From the mix of wonder, confusion, awe, anger and sometimes even shame in the eyes of onlookers and bystanders (myself included) at the profundity and power of such simple gestures and acknowledgments, I believe it might be ours as well.
I had no intentions of pilfering through my closet to find clothes for someone less fortunate this morning. In fact, my goal was to read a few hundred pages of social movements literature in hopes that I could begin writing a theoretical framework section for a dissertation that voices my discomfort and displeasure with what I perceive as a whole lot of theory without practice.
Ain’t life funny?
Some of my more philosophically and/or sociologically-inclined comrades might accuse her of “hacking at the branches,” but this Root remains convinced that she’s the most radical human being he’s ever had the good fortune to encounter. Often, I’ve given her a hard time for being such a habitual rule-follower. If the sign says “Don’t step on the grass” not only will she not do so, she will quickly voice her displeasure at me if/when I do. She’s a stickler for protocol, regulations, guidelines, etc. Still, in terms of kindness and humanity, it hurts my heart a little bit to recognize that she may be one of the most deviant people I know. Fortunately, it heals quickly with the realization that she loves me.
Link to the Post
Geek's Guide to the Galaxy #2: Paolo Bacigalupi
Geek's Guide to the Galaxy #2: Paolo Bacigalupi
Paolo Bacigalupi, author of The Windup Girl and Ship Breaker, talks global warming, literature for boys, and how SF can cause change in the real world...
To Listen to the Episode
Paolo Bacigalupi, author of The Windup Girl and Ship Breaker, talks global warming, literature for boys, and how SF can cause change in the real world...
To Listen to the Episode
Little Atoms: Adam Curtis; The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear; All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace
"Adam Curtis is a producer, writer and director of television documentaries such as Pandora's Box, The Mayfair Set, The Century of the Self, The Power of Nightmares and The Trap. Curtis' programs, though always about serious issues, maintain a sense of tongue-in-cheek humor and are characteristic in their extensive use of archive footage. In his film making, Curtis strives to find meaningful connections between historical situations and often focuses on the impact different ideologies have had on modern society. Adam's latest series, All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace..."
Link to the Two Interviews at Little Atoms
More resources:
Pt 1 of the Little Atoms Interview explores his earlier documentaries, including his influential The Power of Nightmares
The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear
Is the threat of radical Islamism as a massive sinister organised force of destruction, specifically in the form of al-Qaeda, a myth perpetrated by politicians in many countries—and particularly American Neo-Conservatives—in an attempt to ‘unite and inspire’ people following the failure of earlier, more utopian ideologies?
To Watch the 3 Part Series
Part 1 — Baby It’s Cold Outside
The first part of the series explains the origin of Islamism and Neo-Conservatism and draws the parallels between the two of their “optimistic visions to change the world”. It shows Egyptian civil servant Sayyid Qutb, depicted as the founder of modern Islamist thought, visiting the US to learn about the education system, but becoming disgusted with what he saw as a corruption of morals and virtues in western society through consumerism. When he returns to Egypt, he is disturbed by westernisation and becomes convinced that in order to save society it must be completely restructured along the lines of Islamic law while still using western technology. He also becomes convinced that this can only be accomplished through the use of an elite “vanguard” to lead a revolution against the established order. Qutb becomes a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and, after being tortured in one of Nasser’s jails, comes to believe that western-influenced leaders can justly be killed for the sake of removing their corruption. Qutb is executed in 1966, but he influences the future mentor of Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, to start his own secret Islamist group. Inspired by the 1979 Iranian revolution, Zawahiri and his allies assassinate Egyptian president Anwar Al Sadat, in 1981, in hopes of starting their own revolution. The revolution does not materialise and Zawahiri comes to believe that the majority of Muslims have been corrupted not only by their western-inspired leaders, but Muslims themselves have been affected by jahilliyah and thus both may be legitimate targets of violence if they do not join him. They continued to have the belief that a vanguard was necessary to rise up and overthrow the corrupt regime and replace with a pure Islamist state. At the same time in the United States, a group of disillusioned liberals, including Irving Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz, look to the political thinking of Leo Strauss after the perceived failure of President Johnson’s “Great Society”. They come to the conclusion that the emphasis on individual liberty was the undoing of the plan. They envisioned restructuring America by uniting the American people against a common evil, and set about creating a mythical enemy. These factions, the Neo-Conservatives, came to power under the Reagan administration, with their allies Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, and work to unite the United States in fear of the Soviet Union. The Neo-Conservatives allege the Soviet Union is not following the terms of disarmament between the two countries, and, with the investigation of “Team B”, they accumulate a case to prove this with dubious evidence and methods…
Part 2 — The Phantom Victory
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan on 25 December 1979 gives a common cause to an extraordinary alliance of radical Islamists in Afghanistan and around the world and to the neo-conservatives in the US, as a key battleground of the Cold War. As the United States provides funding and arms–including even Stinger missiles capable of shooting down Soviet helicopters–to Islamic Mujahideen fighters who would fire them, a young wealthy Saudi called Osama Bin Laden is among the many foreigners drawn to Afghanistan. When the Soviets eventually pull out and when the Eastern Bloc begins to collapse in the late 1980s, both groups falsely believe they are the primary architects of the “Evil Empire’s” defeat. Back in America, the Neo-Conservatives’ aspirations to continue to use the United States military power for further destruction of evils are thrown off track by the ascent of George H. W. Bush to the presidency, followed by the 1992 election of Bill Clinton leaving them out of power. The Neo-Conservatives, with their conservative Christian allies, attempt to ‘demonise’ Clinton throughout his presidency with various real and fabricated stories of corruption and immorality, but to their disappointment, the American people do not turn against Clinton. The Islamist attempts at revolution end in massive bloodshed, leaving the Islamists without popular support. Zawahiri and bin Laden flee to the sufficiently safe Afghanistan and declare a new strategy; to fight Western-inspired moral decay they must deal a blow to its source — the United States.
Part 3 — The Shadows In The Cave
This final episode addresses the actual rise of al-Qaeda, in particular by examining the United States’ role in its creation: After their failed revolutions, bin Laden and Zawahiri had little or no popular support, let alone a serious complex organisation of terrorists, and were dependent upon independent operatives to carry out their new call for jihad. In order to prosecute bin Laden for the 1998 US embassy bombings, US prosecutors had to prove he was the head of a criminal organisation responsible for the bombings. They find a former associate of bin Laden, Jamal al-Fadl, and pay him to testify that bin Laden was the head of a massive terrorist organisation called “al-Qaeda”. With the September 11th attacks, Neo-Conservatives in the new Republican government of George W. Bush use this created concept of an organisation to justify another crusade against a new evil enemy, leading to the launch of the War on Terrorism. But after the American invasion of Afghanistan fails to uproot the alleged terrorist network, the Neo-Conservatives focus inwards, searching unsuccessfully for terrorist sleeper cells in America. They then extend the war on “terror” to a war against general perceived evils with the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The ideas and tactics also spread to the United Kingdom where Tony Blair uses the threat of terrorism to give him a new moral authority. The repercussions of the Neo-Conservative strategy are also explored with an investigation of indefinitely-detained terrorist suspects in Guantanamo Bay, many allegedly taken on the word of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance without actual investigation on the part of the United States military, and other forms of “pre-emption” against non-existent and unlikely threats made simply on the grounds that the parties involved could later become a threat…
Pt 2 of the Little Atoms Interview above is about his documentary series: All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace
All Watched Over By Machines Of Loving Grace is a series about how humans have been colonised by the machines they have built — “Although we don’t realise it, the way we see everything in the world today is through the eyes of the computers.”
To Watch the 3 Part Series
Part 1 — Love and Power
Part one explores the dream that rose up in the 1990s that computers could create a new kind of stable world. They would bring about a new kind global capitalism free of all risk and without the boom and bust of the past. They would also abolish political power and create a new kind of democracy through the internet where millions of individuals would be connected as nodes in cybernetic systems – without hierarchy. The film tells the story of two perfect worlds. One is the small group of disciples around the novelist Ayn Rand in the 1950s. They saw themselves as a prototype for a future society where everyone could follow their own selfish desires. The other is the global utopia that digital entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley set out to create in the 1990s. Many of them were also disciples of Ayn Rand. They believed that the new computer networks would allow the creation of a society where everyone could follow their own desires, yet there would not be anarchy. They were joined by Alan Greenspan who had also been a disciple of Ayn Rand. He became convinced that the computers were creating a new kind of stable capitalism. But the dream of stability in both worlds would be torn apart by the two dynamic human forces – love and power.
Part 2 — The Use and Abuse of Vegetational Concepts
Part two shows how our modern scientific idea of nature, the self-regulating ecosystem, is actually a machine fantasy. It has little to do with the real complexity of nature. It is based on cybernetic ideas that were projected on to nature in the 1950s by ambitious scientists. A static machine theory of order that sees humans, and everything else on the planet, as components–cogs–in a system. But in an age disillusioned with politics, the self-regulating ecosystem has again become the model for utopian ideas of human “self-organising networks”, with dreams of new ways of organising societies without leaders and in global visions of connectivity like the Gaia theory. This powerful idea emerged out of the hippie communes in America in the 1960s, and from counter-culture computer scientists who believed that global webs of computers could liberate the world. But, at the very moment this was happening, the science of ecology discovered that the theory of the self-regulating ecosystem wasn’t true. Instead they found that nature was really dynamic and constantly changing in unpredictable ways. But it was too late, the dream of the self-organising network had by now captured imaginations…
Part 3 — The Monkey in the Machine and the Machine in the Monkey
This episode looks at why popular culture finds this machine vision so beguiling. The film argues it is because all political dreams of changing the world for the better seem to have failed, meaning the retreat into machine-fantasies that say we have no control over our actions because they excuse our failure. At the heart of the film is Bill Hamilton, a scientist. He argued that human behaviour is really guided by codes buried deep within us–a theory later popularised by Richard Dawkins as the “selfish gene”. It said that individual human beings are really just machines whose only job is to make sure the codes are passed on for eternity. This final part begins in 2000 in the jungles of the Congo and Rwanda, where Hamilton is to help prove his dark theories. But all around him the Congo is being torn apart. The film then interweaves the two stories–the strange roots of Hamilton’s theories, and the history of the West’s tortured relationship with the Congo and technology…
Adam Curtis: Journalist and Filmmaker (Dialogic Archive)
Link to the Two Interviews at Little Atoms
More resources:
Pt 1 of the Little Atoms Interview explores his earlier documentaries, including his influential The Power of Nightmares
The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear
Is the threat of radical Islamism as a massive sinister organised force of destruction, specifically in the form of al-Qaeda, a myth perpetrated by politicians in many countries—and particularly American Neo-Conservatives—in an attempt to ‘unite and inspire’ people following the failure of earlier, more utopian ideologies?
To Watch the 3 Part Series
Part 1 — Baby It’s Cold Outside
The first part of the series explains the origin of Islamism and Neo-Conservatism and draws the parallels between the two of their “optimistic visions to change the world”. It shows Egyptian civil servant Sayyid Qutb, depicted as the founder of modern Islamist thought, visiting the US to learn about the education system, but becoming disgusted with what he saw as a corruption of morals and virtues in western society through consumerism. When he returns to Egypt, he is disturbed by westernisation and becomes convinced that in order to save society it must be completely restructured along the lines of Islamic law while still using western technology. He also becomes convinced that this can only be accomplished through the use of an elite “vanguard” to lead a revolution against the established order. Qutb becomes a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and, after being tortured in one of Nasser’s jails, comes to believe that western-influenced leaders can justly be killed for the sake of removing their corruption. Qutb is executed in 1966, but he influences the future mentor of Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, to start his own secret Islamist group. Inspired by the 1979 Iranian revolution, Zawahiri and his allies assassinate Egyptian president Anwar Al Sadat, in 1981, in hopes of starting their own revolution. The revolution does not materialise and Zawahiri comes to believe that the majority of Muslims have been corrupted not only by their western-inspired leaders, but Muslims themselves have been affected by jahilliyah and thus both may be legitimate targets of violence if they do not join him. They continued to have the belief that a vanguard was necessary to rise up and overthrow the corrupt regime and replace with a pure Islamist state. At the same time in the United States, a group of disillusioned liberals, including Irving Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz, look to the political thinking of Leo Strauss after the perceived failure of President Johnson’s “Great Society”. They come to the conclusion that the emphasis on individual liberty was the undoing of the plan. They envisioned restructuring America by uniting the American people against a common evil, and set about creating a mythical enemy. These factions, the Neo-Conservatives, came to power under the Reagan administration, with their allies Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, and work to unite the United States in fear of the Soviet Union. The Neo-Conservatives allege the Soviet Union is not following the terms of disarmament between the two countries, and, with the investigation of “Team B”, they accumulate a case to prove this with dubious evidence and methods…
Part 2 — The Phantom Victory
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan on 25 December 1979 gives a common cause to an extraordinary alliance of radical Islamists in Afghanistan and around the world and to the neo-conservatives in the US, as a key battleground of the Cold War. As the United States provides funding and arms–including even Stinger missiles capable of shooting down Soviet helicopters–to Islamic Mujahideen fighters who would fire them, a young wealthy Saudi called Osama Bin Laden is among the many foreigners drawn to Afghanistan. When the Soviets eventually pull out and when the Eastern Bloc begins to collapse in the late 1980s, both groups falsely believe they are the primary architects of the “Evil Empire’s” defeat. Back in America, the Neo-Conservatives’ aspirations to continue to use the United States military power for further destruction of evils are thrown off track by the ascent of George H. W. Bush to the presidency, followed by the 1992 election of Bill Clinton leaving them out of power. The Neo-Conservatives, with their conservative Christian allies, attempt to ‘demonise’ Clinton throughout his presidency with various real and fabricated stories of corruption and immorality, but to their disappointment, the American people do not turn against Clinton. The Islamist attempts at revolution end in massive bloodshed, leaving the Islamists without popular support. Zawahiri and bin Laden flee to the sufficiently safe Afghanistan and declare a new strategy; to fight Western-inspired moral decay they must deal a blow to its source — the United States.
Part 3 — The Shadows In The Cave
This final episode addresses the actual rise of al-Qaeda, in particular by examining the United States’ role in its creation: After their failed revolutions, bin Laden and Zawahiri had little or no popular support, let alone a serious complex organisation of terrorists, and were dependent upon independent operatives to carry out their new call for jihad. In order to prosecute bin Laden for the 1998 US embassy bombings, US prosecutors had to prove he was the head of a criminal organisation responsible for the bombings. They find a former associate of bin Laden, Jamal al-Fadl, and pay him to testify that bin Laden was the head of a massive terrorist organisation called “al-Qaeda”. With the September 11th attacks, Neo-Conservatives in the new Republican government of George W. Bush use this created concept of an organisation to justify another crusade against a new evil enemy, leading to the launch of the War on Terrorism. But after the American invasion of Afghanistan fails to uproot the alleged terrorist network, the Neo-Conservatives focus inwards, searching unsuccessfully for terrorist sleeper cells in America. They then extend the war on “terror” to a war against general perceived evils with the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The ideas and tactics also spread to the United Kingdom where Tony Blair uses the threat of terrorism to give him a new moral authority. The repercussions of the Neo-Conservative strategy are also explored with an investigation of indefinitely-detained terrorist suspects in Guantanamo Bay, many allegedly taken on the word of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance without actual investigation on the part of the United States military, and other forms of “pre-emption” against non-existent and unlikely threats made simply on the grounds that the parties involved could later become a threat…
Pt 2 of the Little Atoms Interview above is about his documentary series: All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace
All Watched Over By Machines Of Loving Grace is a series about how humans have been colonised by the machines they have built — “Although we don’t realise it, the way we see everything in the world today is through the eyes of the computers.”
To Watch the 3 Part Series
Part 1 — Love and Power
Part one explores the dream that rose up in the 1990s that computers could create a new kind of stable world. They would bring about a new kind global capitalism free of all risk and without the boom and bust of the past. They would also abolish political power and create a new kind of democracy through the internet where millions of individuals would be connected as nodes in cybernetic systems – without hierarchy. The film tells the story of two perfect worlds. One is the small group of disciples around the novelist Ayn Rand in the 1950s. They saw themselves as a prototype for a future society where everyone could follow their own selfish desires. The other is the global utopia that digital entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley set out to create in the 1990s. Many of them were also disciples of Ayn Rand. They believed that the new computer networks would allow the creation of a society where everyone could follow their own desires, yet there would not be anarchy. They were joined by Alan Greenspan who had also been a disciple of Ayn Rand. He became convinced that the computers were creating a new kind of stable capitalism. But the dream of stability in both worlds would be torn apart by the two dynamic human forces – love and power.
Part 2 — The Use and Abuse of Vegetational Concepts
Part two shows how our modern scientific idea of nature, the self-regulating ecosystem, is actually a machine fantasy. It has little to do with the real complexity of nature. It is based on cybernetic ideas that were projected on to nature in the 1950s by ambitious scientists. A static machine theory of order that sees humans, and everything else on the planet, as components–cogs–in a system. But in an age disillusioned with politics, the self-regulating ecosystem has again become the model for utopian ideas of human “self-organising networks”, with dreams of new ways of organising societies without leaders and in global visions of connectivity like the Gaia theory. This powerful idea emerged out of the hippie communes in America in the 1960s, and from counter-culture computer scientists who believed that global webs of computers could liberate the world. But, at the very moment this was happening, the science of ecology discovered that the theory of the self-regulating ecosystem wasn’t true. Instead they found that nature was really dynamic and constantly changing in unpredictable ways. But it was too late, the dream of the self-organising network had by now captured imaginations…
Part 3 — The Monkey in the Machine and the Machine in the Monkey
This episode looks at why popular culture finds this machine vision so beguiling. The film argues it is because all political dreams of changing the world for the better seem to have failed, meaning the retreat into machine-fantasies that say we have no control over our actions because they excuse our failure. At the heart of the film is Bill Hamilton, a scientist. He argued that human behaviour is really guided by codes buried deep within us–a theory later popularised by Richard Dawkins as the “selfish gene”. It said that individual human beings are really just machines whose only job is to make sure the codes are passed on for eternity. This final part begins in 2000 in the jungles of the Congo and Rwanda, where Hamilton is to help prove his dark theories. But all around him the Congo is being torn apart. The film then interweaves the two stories–the strange roots of Hamilton’s theories, and the history of the West’s tortured relationship with the Congo and technology…
Adam Curtis: Journalist and Filmmaker (Dialogic Archive)
Saturday, February 09, 2013
Joshua Holland: Scary Flashes of Iraq and Afghanistan Wars in the LAPD's Manhunt for Chris Dorner
Scary Flashes of Iraq and Afghanistan Wars in the LAPD's Manhunt for Chris Dorner
by Joshua Holland
Alternet
On Thursday, police hunting for Chris Dorner, a veteran and former LAPD officer who allegedly launched a killing spree on Sunday, opened fire on a blue pickup truck driving without its headlights in the early morning hours. Two short Latina women delivering newspapers – 71-year-old Emma Hernandez and her 47-year-old daughter, Margie Carranza – were hit in the hail of gunfire. Hernandez was shot twice in the back and is in intensive care as of this writing.
Chris Dorner, who is a large black man bearing no resemblance to the victims, was reportedly driving a blue pickup.
Nearby, officers also opened fire on a black pickup truck. Fortunately, the innocent driver wasn't hit in that shooting.
The first thought that came to my mind when I read about these incidents was that they reminded me of the accounts veterans returning from Iraq shared with me about what it was like manning check-points in Baghdad.
Our wars always come home to us. That's been notably apparent in recent weeks. First, Eddie Ray Routh, an Iraq vet who was suffering from PTSD allegedly gunned down famed American Sniper Chris Kyle. (Kyle was lauded as a hero despite writing that, “our ROEs [rules of engagement]... were pretty simple: If you see anyone from about sixteen to sixty-five and they’re male, shoot ’em. Kill every male you see.") Then, this week, Dorner allegedly went bonkers.
It's important not to demonize military vets as crazy and dangerous – that kind of stigma results in veterans who end up in the criminal justice system getting two more years in jail, on average, than non-veterans convicted of the same offense. But the reality is that we've seen a number of similar incidents in recent years: an Iraq war vet was accused of killing six people in Orange County last March; that same month, another killed his 11-year-old sister before turning his gun on himself; and another killed a park ranger in Washington last January.
Most people are at least somewhat aware of the struggles some veterans have readapting to normal society. But a question that's rarely asked is how the wars we've fought for over a decade may be affecting our domestic policing. Police departments provide a lot of jobs to former vets. According to GI Jobs.com, a Web site for veterans seeking civilian employment, 80 percent of the Dallas Police Department's hires over a two-year period were military vets; approximately 20 percent of LAPD officers have military backgrounds.
The image of the truck Hernandez and Carranza were driving brought to mind the terrifying accounts relayed to me in 2008, when I interviewed more than a dozen returning Iraq war vets, many of whom had served multiple tours. Several told me how the Rules of Engagement had shifted between their first and last tours; early on, they were told to fire only on people who posed an immediate threat – Iraqis carrying weapons. Later in the conflict, “force protection” became the overarching principle, and several soldiers told me they were ordered to open fire on Iraqis caught walking in the wrong area or carrying tools that might be used to bury a roadside bomb.
To Read the Rest of the Commentary
More Resources:
Reason: LAPD Had "No Idea" Who They Were Shooting At In Dorner Pursuit, Says Victims' Attorney
by Joshua Holland
Alternet
On Thursday, police hunting for Chris Dorner, a veteran and former LAPD officer who allegedly launched a killing spree on Sunday, opened fire on a blue pickup truck driving without its headlights in the early morning hours. Two short Latina women delivering newspapers – 71-year-old Emma Hernandez and her 47-year-old daughter, Margie Carranza – were hit in the hail of gunfire. Hernandez was shot twice in the back and is in intensive care as of this writing.
Chris Dorner, who is a large black man bearing no resemblance to the victims, was reportedly driving a blue pickup.
Nearby, officers also opened fire on a black pickup truck. Fortunately, the innocent driver wasn't hit in that shooting.
The first thought that came to my mind when I read about these incidents was that they reminded me of the accounts veterans returning from Iraq shared with me about what it was like manning check-points in Baghdad.
Our wars always come home to us. That's been notably apparent in recent weeks. First, Eddie Ray Routh, an Iraq vet who was suffering from PTSD allegedly gunned down famed American Sniper Chris Kyle. (Kyle was lauded as a hero despite writing that, “our ROEs [rules of engagement]... were pretty simple: If you see anyone from about sixteen to sixty-five and they’re male, shoot ’em. Kill every male you see.") Then, this week, Dorner allegedly went bonkers.
It's important not to demonize military vets as crazy and dangerous – that kind of stigma results in veterans who end up in the criminal justice system getting two more years in jail, on average, than non-veterans convicted of the same offense. But the reality is that we've seen a number of similar incidents in recent years: an Iraq war vet was accused of killing six people in Orange County last March; that same month, another killed his 11-year-old sister before turning his gun on himself; and another killed a park ranger in Washington last January.
Most people are at least somewhat aware of the struggles some veterans have readapting to normal society. But a question that's rarely asked is how the wars we've fought for over a decade may be affecting our domestic policing. Police departments provide a lot of jobs to former vets. According to GI Jobs.com, a Web site for veterans seeking civilian employment, 80 percent of the Dallas Police Department's hires over a two-year period were military vets; approximately 20 percent of LAPD officers have military backgrounds.
The image of the truck Hernandez and Carranza were driving brought to mind the terrifying accounts relayed to me in 2008, when I interviewed more than a dozen returning Iraq war vets, many of whom had served multiple tours. Several told me how the Rules of Engagement had shifted between their first and last tours; early on, they were told to fire only on people who posed an immediate threat – Iraqis carrying weapons. Later in the conflict, “force protection” became the overarching principle, and several soldiers told me they were ordered to open fire on Iraqis caught walking in the wrong area or carrying tools that might be used to bury a roadside bomb.
To Read the Rest of the Commentary
More Resources:
Reason: LAPD Had "No Idea" Who They Were Shooting At In Dorner Pursuit, Says Victims' Attorney
Weekly Signals: Joe Allen - Vietnam: The (Last) War the U.S. Lost
An interview with Joe Allen author of Vietnam: The (Last) War the U.S. Lost.
Weekly Signals
Unlike most books on the topic, constructed as specialized academic studies, The (Last) War the United States Lost examines the lessons of the Vietnam era with Joe Allen's eye of both a dedicated historian and an engaged participant in today's antiwar movement.
Many damaging myths about the Vietnam era persist, including the accusations that antiwar activists routinely jeered and spat at returning soldiers or that the war finally ended because Congress cut off its funding. Allen reclaims the stories of the courageous GI revolt; its dynamic relationship with the civil rights movement and the peace movement; the development of coffee houses where these groups came to speak out, debate, and organize; and the struggles waged throughout barracks, bases, and military prisons to challenge the rule of military command.
Allen's analysis of the US failure in Vietnam is also the story of the hubris of US imperial overreach, a new chapter of which is unfolding in the Middle East today.
Joe Allen is a regular contributor to the International Socialist Review and a longstanding social justice fighter, involved in the ongoing struggles for labor, the abolition of the death penalty, and to free the political prisoner Gary Tyler.
To Listen to the Interview
More resources:
Joe Allen's series on the Vietnam War at Internationl Socialist Review:
"Part One: from the French conquest to the overthrow of Diem."
From the overthrow of Diem to the Tet Offensive
"From Quagmire to Defeat."
Weekly Signals
Unlike most books on the topic, constructed as specialized academic studies, The (Last) War the United States Lost examines the lessons of the Vietnam era with Joe Allen's eye of both a dedicated historian and an engaged participant in today's antiwar movement.
Many damaging myths about the Vietnam era persist, including the accusations that antiwar activists routinely jeered and spat at returning soldiers or that the war finally ended because Congress cut off its funding. Allen reclaims the stories of the courageous GI revolt; its dynamic relationship with the civil rights movement and the peace movement; the development of coffee houses where these groups came to speak out, debate, and organize; and the struggles waged throughout barracks, bases, and military prisons to challenge the rule of military command.
Allen's analysis of the US failure in Vietnam is also the story of the hubris of US imperial overreach, a new chapter of which is unfolding in the Middle East today.
Joe Allen is a regular contributor to the International Socialist Review and a longstanding social justice fighter, involved in the ongoing struggles for labor, the abolition of the death penalty, and to free the political prisoner Gary Tyler.
To Listen to the Interview
More resources:
Joe Allen's series on the Vietnam War at Internationl Socialist Review:
"Part One: from the French conquest to the overthrow of Diem."
From the overthrow of Diem to the Tet Offensive
"From Quagmire to Defeat."
Free Speech Radio
[HUM 221 students, and others, this is a great resource for keeping up to date on world news, with an emphasis on civil rights/human rights struggles. This is an example of Free Speech Radio's 30 minute shows. There is quite a range of materials covered and they still manage to give a good introduction to each issue. Each episode is also preceded by the headlines for the day (similar to Democracy Now headlines. Click on Newscast and Headline links to hear the episodes.]
Newscast for Thursday, February 4, 2013
At Senate confirmation hearing, CIA chief nominee Brennan comes under scrutiny for role in US drone killing program
President Obama’s nominee to head the CIA, John Brennan, faced a senate committee today, with much of the focus on Brennan’s role in the controversial drone killing program. In his opening statement, Brennan was repeatedly interrupted by protesters. One woman held a sign that read “Brennan = drone killing.” Committee Chair Senator Dianne Feinstein cleared the room and refused to let “Code Pink associates” re-enter. Brennan withdrew his bid to become CIA chief in 2008 after rising criticism about his role in the Bush Administration's torture and extraordinary rendition program. According to a report last month from Reuters, Brennan had “detailed, contemporaneous knowledge” of the CIA’s use of so-called enhanced interrogation techniques, including water-boarding. For more, we’re joined by Pardiss Kebriaei, senior staff attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights.
At memorial for Aaron Swartz, calls to reform federal computer fraud law
Since the suicide last month of open-Internet activist Aaron Swartz, many of his friends and colleagues are calling for changes to the federal law under which he was charged: the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Some of them gathered this week in Washington, DC for a memorial service, including Dan Goodwin, Swartz’ coworker at the organization ThoughtWorks. He said the harsh sentences from the decades-old law don't appropriately distinguish between people who take intellectual property for their own gain and those like Swartz who download content to share with the public.
GOODWIN: Because so many years in prison can be threatened, it makes it extremely difficult for someone to take a principled stand, and say, "No that's not what the law say. That's not what the law should say." Instead, they are pressured to take some lesser punishment, and the entire injustice of the law isn't put to the test.
Several Democrats and Republicans from the House and Senate were also at the memorial. There, FSRN's Alice Ollstein spoke to California Democrat Zoe Lofgren, who recently wrote a bill she named "Aaron's Law." In the spirit of open access that Swartz championed, she shared a draft of the bill and asked for feedback on Reddit, the website he helped found. That was California Democrat Zoe Lofgren, speaking to FSRN’s Alice Ollstein. Oregon Democrat Ron Wyden plans to introduce a version of "Aaron's Law" in the Senate. Speaking at the memorial service, he promised to continue Aaron's "march for freedom and a more just world."
WYDEN: When Aaron hacked, a poorly written law called him a dangerous criminal. Common sense and conscience knows better. And we are going to change this unjust law. Because of Aaron and because of his family.
Federal court in Manhattan hears challenge to indefinite detention in NDAA
The federal court of appeals heard arguments this week about the constitutionality of the National Defense Authorization Act. Lawyers for plaintiffs in the case Hedges v. Obama argued against the U.S. government defense of a section of the 2012 NDAA that critics say would allow the indefinite military detention without charges of U.S. citizens. FSRN’s Linda Perry Barr reports.
In India, social media opens space for dialogue on long-running Nagaland conflict
Nagaland is home to one of India’s oldest ethnic conflicts. Naga separatists in the country’s northeast have been fighting for independence since 1947. The conflict has caused continued economic, social and political instability in the region. Many civilians avoid public dialogue. But now the Internet and social media are giving young Nagas a platform to discuss and debate politics openly. With assembly elections scheduled later this month, the online community is raising some key issues. FSRN’s Gayatri Parameswaran and Felix Gaedtke report from Nagaland.
Headlines for Thursday, February 7, 2013
Police raid journalist home looking for protest footage
German police raided the homes of freelance photojournalists across the country yesterday. They’re searching for photographs of a demonstrator who allegedly attacked a police officer in an anti-capitalist protest in Frankfurt, in March 2012. But the raids have called into question the freedom of the press in Germany and drawn criticism from politicians and the German Journalist’s Association. FSRN’s Cinnamon Nippard has more from Berlin.
German photojournalist, Thomas Rassloff, just got back from two weeks in Syria. He’s the photographer who captured the shocking images of over 70 bodies by the river in Aleppo, which is the largest recorded mass execution of the Syrian civil war. Returning to Berlin last night he discovered that police had raided his apartment. They confiscated his computers, hard-drives, SD-cards, USB-sticks, and cellphones. “I have told the police six months ago I haven’t any picture of this crime scene in this demonstration.” Rassloff remembers the demonstration, where he was at the front with the other photojournalists. “But the violence was at the back of the demonstration so no photographer was there. So I don’t know why the police is thinking we have pictures. We couldn’t take pictures.” Rassloff says he has seen increasing police violence against journalists and photographers at demonstrations. The German police have accused some photographers of being members of the left-wing scene. The German Journalist’s Association has condemned the raids, as have the German Greens Party. It is unclear when police will return the files and equipment, but they say they will if their suspicions are incorrect. Cinnamon Nippard, FSRN, Berlin.
Russian NGOs say new crackdown on their staffs violates European human rights laws
A group of Russian human rights organizations is challenging a law that requires them to register as foreign agents because they engage in political work that is supported from abroad. They sent the claim to the European Court of Human Rights today. FSRN’s Ekaterina Danilova reports.
Eleven human rights and environmental groups involved in the suit say the law violates the European Convention on Human Rights. They say it essentially labels them as spies and that organization risks sanctions or closure for violating the complicated bureaucratic requirements. Oleg Orlov is the head of the human rights group "Memorial." "From our point of view all this set of unclear, absurd demands was done only for one purpose - to groundlessly denigrate certain organizations in the eyes of Russian society.” The foreign agents law is part of a larger effort to restrict the activities of organizations, particularly those with ties to the United States. The latest law prohibits Russians who have American citizenship from heading Russian NGOs. Ekaterina Danilova, FSRN, Russia.
Vietnam releases human rights lawyer as crackdowns continue on activists
Vietnam has released a prominent human rights lawyer from prison, but has also intensified its crackdown against activists and bloggers. FSRN's Mike Ives reports from Vietnam.
Authorities here released Le Cong Dinh Wednesday after he served 3.5 years of a five year term. Dinh studied at Tulane University and served as vice chairman of Ho Chi Minh City's bar association. He was arrested in 2009 on subversion charges after calling for political pluralism.The US Embassy said Thursday it applauded the government’s decision. But this leniency by the Vietnam's one-party government contrasts sharply with its recent crackdowns on dissent. Thirty-five activists have been jailed in the last month, including 22 who received sentences Monday, ranging from 10 years to life. Rights advocates say the one-party state has intensified its crackdown on dissident in recent months. Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said releasing Dinh just before Tet, Vietnam's Lunar New Year holiday, is no excuse for jailing political dissidents on specious charges. "The important thing to remember also is that these people are being put away for things that shouldn't be considered crimes in the first place." In other news, Vietnam last week deported Nguyen Quoc Quan, an American pro-democracy activist who was arrested at Ho Chi Minh City's airport last April. Quan is a leading member of Viet Tan, a non-violent, pro-democracy group that Hanoi labels a terrorist organization. Mike Ives, FSRN, Hanoi.
Newscast for Thursday, February 4, 2013
At Senate confirmation hearing, CIA chief nominee Brennan comes under scrutiny for role in US drone killing program
President Obama’s nominee to head the CIA, John Brennan, faced a senate committee today, with much of the focus on Brennan’s role in the controversial drone killing program. In his opening statement, Brennan was repeatedly interrupted by protesters. One woman held a sign that read “Brennan = drone killing.” Committee Chair Senator Dianne Feinstein cleared the room and refused to let “Code Pink associates” re-enter. Brennan withdrew his bid to become CIA chief in 2008 after rising criticism about his role in the Bush Administration's torture and extraordinary rendition program. According to a report last month from Reuters, Brennan had “detailed, contemporaneous knowledge” of the CIA’s use of so-called enhanced interrogation techniques, including water-boarding. For more, we’re joined by Pardiss Kebriaei, senior staff attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights.
At memorial for Aaron Swartz, calls to reform federal computer fraud law
Since the suicide last month of open-Internet activist Aaron Swartz, many of his friends and colleagues are calling for changes to the federal law under which he was charged: the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Some of them gathered this week in Washington, DC for a memorial service, including Dan Goodwin, Swartz’ coworker at the organization ThoughtWorks. He said the harsh sentences from the decades-old law don't appropriately distinguish between people who take intellectual property for their own gain and those like Swartz who download content to share with the public.
GOODWIN: Because so many years in prison can be threatened, it makes it extremely difficult for someone to take a principled stand, and say, "No that's not what the law say. That's not what the law should say." Instead, they are pressured to take some lesser punishment, and the entire injustice of the law isn't put to the test.
Several Democrats and Republicans from the House and Senate were also at the memorial. There, FSRN's Alice Ollstein spoke to California Democrat Zoe Lofgren, who recently wrote a bill she named "Aaron's Law." In the spirit of open access that Swartz championed, she shared a draft of the bill and asked for feedback on Reddit, the website he helped found. That was California Democrat Zoe Lofgren, speaking to FSRN’s Alice Ollstein. Oregon Democrat Ron Wyden plans to introduce a version of "Aaron's Law" in the Senate. Speaking at the memorial service, he promised to continue Aaron's "march for freedom and a more just world."
WYDEN: When Aaron hacked, a poorly written law called him a dangerous criminal. Common sense and conscience knows better. And we are going to change this unjust law. Because of Aaron and because of his family.
Federal court in Manhattan hears challenge to indefinite detention in NDAA
The federal court of appeals heard arguments this week about the constitutionality of the National Defense Authorization Act. Lawyers for plaintiffs in the case Hedges v. Obama argued against the U.S. government defense of a section of the 2012 NDAA that critics say would allow the indefinite military detention without charges of U.S. citizens. FSRN’s Linda Perry Barr reports.
In India, social media opens space for dialogue on long-running Nagaland conflict
Nagaland is home to one of India’s oldest ethnic conflicts. Naga separatists in the country’s northeast have been fighting for independence since 1947. The conflict has caused continued economic, social and political instability in the region. Many civilians avoid public dialogue. But now the Internet and social media are giving young Nagas a platform to discuss and debate politics openly. With assembly elections scheduled later this month, the online community is raising some key issues. FSRN’s Gayatri Parameswaran and Felix Gaedtke report from Nagaland.
Headlines for Thursday, February 7, 2013
Police raid journalist home looking for protest footage
German police raided the homes of freelance photojournalists across the country yesterday. They’re searching for photographs of a demonstrator who allegedly attacked a police officer in an anti-capitalist protest in Frankfurt, in March 2012. But the raids have called into question the freedom of the press in Germany and drawn criticism from politicians and the German Journalist’s Association. FSRN’s Cinnamon Nippard has more from Berlin.
German photojournalist, Thomas Rassloff, just got back from two weeks in Syria. He’s the photographer who captured the shocking images of over 70 bodies by the river in Aleppo, which is the largest recorded mass execution of the Syrian civil war. Returning to Berlin last night he discovered that police had raided his apartment. They confiscated his computers, hard-drives, SD-cards, USB-sticks, and cellphones. “I have told the police six months ago I haven’t any picture of this crime scene in this demonstration.” Rassloff remembers the demonstration, where he was at the front with the other photojournalists. “But the violence was at the back of the demonstration so no photographer was there. So I don’t know why the police is thinking we have pictures. We couldn’t take pictures.” Rassloff says he has seen increasing police violence against journalists and photographers at demonstrations. The German police have accused some photographers of being members of the left-wing scene. The German Journalist’s Association has condemned the raids, as have the German Greens Party. It is unclear when police will return the files and equipment, but they say they will if their suspicions are incorrect. Cinnamon Nippard, FSRN, Berlin.
Russian NGOs say new crackdown on their staffs violates European human rights laws
A group of Russian human rights organizations is challenging a law that requires them to register as foreign agents because they engage in political work that is supported from abroad. They sent the claim to the European Court of Human Rights today. FSRN’s Ekaterina Danilova reports.
Eleven human rights and environmental groups involved in the suit say the law violates the European Convention on Human Rights. They say it essentially labels them as spies and that organization risks sanctions or closure for violating the complicated bureaucratic requirements. Oleg Orlov is the head of the human rights group "Memorial." "From our point of view all this set of unclear, absurd demands was done only for one purpose - to groundlessly denigrate certain organizations in the eyes of Russian society.” The foreign agents law is part of a larger effort to restrict the activities of organizations, particularly those with ties to the United States. The latest law prohibits Russians who have American citizenship from heading Russian NGOs. Ekaterina Danilova, FSRN, Russia.
Vietnam releases human rights lawyer as crackdowns continue on activists
Vietnam has released a prominent human rights lawyer from prison, but has also intensified its crackdown against activists and bloggers. FSRN's Mike Ives reports from Vietnam.
Authorities here released Le Cong Dinh Wednesday after he served 3.5 years of a five year term. Dinh studied at Tulane University and served as vice chairman of Ho Chi Minh City's bar association. He was arrested in 2009 on subversion charges after calling for political pluralism.The US Embassy said Thursday it applauded the government’s decision. But this leniency by the Vietnam's one-party government contrasts sharply with its recent crackdowns on dissent. Thirty-five activists have been jailed in the last month, including 22 who received sentences Monday, ranging from 10 years to life. Rights advocates say the one-party state has intensified its crackdown on dissident in recent months. Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said releasing Dinh just before Tet, Vietnam's Lunar New Year holiday, is no excuse for jailing political dissidents on specious charges. "The important thing to remember also is that these people are being put away for things that shouldn't be considered crimes in the first place." In other news, Vietnam last week deported Nguyen Quoc Quan, an American pro-democracy activist who was arrested at Ho Chi Minh City's airport last April. Quan is a leading member of Viet Tan, a non-violent, pro-democracy group that Hanoi labels a terrorist organization. Mike Ives, FSRN, Hanoi.
Friday, February 08, 2013
Michael Dean Benton: "He Could Resist"
“he could resist”: The Lexington Tattoo Project and A Noosed Life
By Michael Dean Benton
North of Center
...
A few months ago I saw an announcement by Transylvania University professors Kurt Gohde and Kremena Todorva for The Lexington Tattoo Project. They had a dream of their own, a collective art project that would involve 250 participants tattooing onto their bodies parts of a Bianca Spriggs poem written to Lexington.
As an advocate of participatory and communal art, I was intrigued and read through the poem for tattoo options. We were told that we could make multiple choices, with the understanding that we may not get our first choice, that the tattoo would be donated by the artist Robert Alleyne (Charmed Life), and that we could choose where to place it on our bodies.
“he could resist”
Out of the 250 possible choices, only one word cluster spoke to me—or more accurately, seemed worthy of being inked onto my body. It was the phrase “he could resist.” These three words raised so many questions. What could I resist? Better yet, should I resist? And with no clear punctuation for the three words, the statement also seemed supportive, strength-giving even, telling me, yes, he could resist!
I knew this was the only choice that I would accept. It almost seemed as if Bianca had written the words for me, at this particular place and time, to prompt those necessary questions and to provide me strength in answering them. I entered just that phrase into the collective poetry/tattoo lottery and promised myself that if those words were not available I would not participate.
To my surprise, delight and trepidation, I was given my choice. Then the anxiety came. What was I doing? I’m 48 years old and about to get my first tattoo. I considered judicious body locations to have the tattoo placed—where would it easily escape notice?, I wondered—and settled on the back of my left shoulder where I could flaunt it when I wanted and cover it as needed.
But Bianca’s words kept reverberating in my head. I was in the midst of intense research for teaching a class on the contemporary global history of civil resistance. The histories of the incredible people and groups who put their lives on the line to resist oppression began to occupy my waking and dreaming thoughts. Always I would return to Bianca’s words: he could resist. Was it a challenge? And if so, what would be my response?
On the day I was to get the tattoo, I awoke from my dreams with the conviction that I could not hide Bianca’s words and still embrace the spirit of the project and/or my respect for their power as a guiding force. I decided that morning to place Bianca’s phrase on my left forearm, where it would serve me as a reminder and where, when people asked about it, I would be required to explain what it meant “to me.”
Through the tattoo, the poet’s words have begun to occupy a permanent place in my thoughts. They continue to affect me in ways I never expected and are shifting my understanding of art, creativity and language.
“A Noosed Life”
With all this on my mind I visited the Bianca Spriggs and Angel Clark art exhibition The Thirteen at Transylvania University’s Morley Gallery. I moved through most of the exhibition fairly quickly until I entered the video display for “A Noosed Life” (filmed by Angel Clark and Paul Brown, and edited by Paul Brown and Bianca Spriggs). I was creatively poleaxed; the imagery hit me so hard I had to sit down immediately.
“A Noosed Life” is a one and a half minute looped video of two actors displaying basic movements. The first (or the first that registered in my perception) is of a kneeling African-American woman touching slowly and intently around her exposed neck while gazing skyward. The image is overlaid with the white hands/arms of a man stretching and testing a rope.
To Read the Entire Essay
By Michael Dean Benton
North of Center
...
A few months ago I saw an announcement by Transylvania University professors Kurt Gohde and Kremena Todorva for The Lexington Tattoo Project. They had a dream of their own, a collective art project that would involve 250 participants tattooing onto their bodies parts of a Bianca Spriggs poem written to Lexington.
As an advocate of participatory and communal art, I was intrigued and read through the poem for tattoo options. We were told that we could make multiple choices, with the understanding that we may not get our first choice, that the tattoo would be donated by the artist Robert Alleyne (Charmed Life), and that we could choose where to place it on our bodies.
“he could resist”
Out of the 250 possible choices, only one word cluster spoke to me—or more accurately, seemed worthy of being inked onto my body. It was the phrase “he could resist.” These three words raised so many questions. What could I resist? Better yet, should I resist? And with no clear punctuation for the three words, the statement also seemed supportive, strength-giving even, telling me, yes, he could resist!
I knew this was the only choice that I would accept. It almost seemed as if Bianca had written the words for me, at this particular place and time, to prompt those necessary questions and to provide me strength in answering them. I entered just that phrase into the collective poetry/tattoo lottery and promised myself that if those words were not available I would not participate.
To my surprise, delight and trepidation, I was given my choice. Then the anxiety came. What was I doing? I’m 48 years old and about to get my first tattoo. I considered judicious body locations to have the tattoo placed—where would it easily escape notice?, I wondered—and settled on the back of my left shoulder where I could flaunt it when I wanted and cover it as needed.
But Bianca’s words kept reverberating in my head. I was in the midst of intense research for teaching a class on the contemporary global history of civil resistance. The histories of the incredible people and groups who put their lives on the line to resist oppression began to occupy my waking and dreaming thoughts. Always I would return to Bianca’s words: he could resist. Was it a challenge? And if so, what would be my response?
On the day I was to get the tattoo, I awoke from my dreams with the conviction that I could not hide Bianca’s words and still embrace the spirit of the project and/or my respect for their power as a guiding force. I decided that morning to place Bianca’s phrase on my left forearm, where it would serve me as a reminder and where, when people asked about it, I would be required to explain what it meant “to me.”
Through the tattoo, the poet’s words have begun to occupy a permanent place in my thoughts. They continue to affect me in ways I never expected and are shifting my understanding of art, creativity and language.
“A Noosed Life”
With all this on my mind I visited the Bianca Spriggs and Angel Clark art exhibition The Thirteen at Transylvania University’s Morley Gallery. I moved through most of the exhibition fairly quickly until I entered the video display for “A Noosed Life” (filmed by Angel Clark and Paul Brown, and edited by Paul Brown and Bianca Spriggs). I was creatively poleaxed; the imagery hit me so hard I had to sit down immediately.
“A Noosed Life” is a one and a half minute looped video of two actors displaying basic movements. The first (or the first that registered in my perception) is of a kneeling African-American woman touching slowly and intently around her exposed neck while gazing skyward. The image is overlaid with the white hands/arms of a man stretching and testing a rope.
To Read the Entire Essay
George Ciccariello-Maher and Mike King: American Blowback - Cop-on-Cop Crime in LA
[Finally a breath of sanity in the media hysteria surrounding the manhunt for Christopher Dorner in California and an unique application of Frantz Fanon's theories to the policing of South Central Los Angeles.]
American Blowback: Cop-on-Cop Crime in LA
by George Ciccariello-Maher and Mike King
Counterpunch
Yesterday was not simply a day like any other, and yet an entire system is grinding into motion to ensure that the peculiarities of the day be promptly forgotten: another crazy person lost it and committed unthinkable acts. The act of killing stands in and speaks for the person: look what he has done, of course he must be crazy. Case closed.
What they want you to see is just another Adam Lanza, just another inexplicable act, and when the act speaks for the assailant, words are secondary and there is no need to listen. But this is not, and has never been, a good way to understand reality.
What they want you to forget is the sheer strangeness of what is happening in Los Angeles. Christopher Dorner allegedly killed a police officer and two civilians. This was not a random shooting by a right-wing gun-nut mourning the loss of the “Real America.” Here is a man with good things to say about liberal democrats, a supporter of heightened gun control, a former LAPD officer and Navy reservist, targeting his own institution, which he accused of racism, violence, and corruption.
Dorner’s “Last Resort”
We know all of these things because what is most peculiar about this entire case is the written testament that Dorner has left us. In a letter titled only “Last Resort” and addressed to “America,” he makes clear his grievances, his objectives, and the rationale behind his actions – a chilling declaration of war on the Los Angeles Police Department.
The press is busy citing only those bits of the statement which make Dorner seem crazy: when he addresses Tim Tebow or Larry David, for example, or when he laments the fact that he will not survive to see The Hangover 3. (See for example, Buzzfeed’s “Everything You Need to Know,” which conspicuously says very little). But the vast majority of the letter paints a picture of someone who, while clearly undergoing some sort of mental break, is astonishingly lucid as to the causes and candid as to what he intends to do about it. These causes and these intentions, regardless of what you may hear on MSNBC or Entertainment Tonight (both will essentially carry the same message), begin and end with the LAPD.
The LAPD has long played a vanguard role in white supremacist policing in the United States. Whether it be the conscious recruitment of racist cops from the south in the 1960s under William Parker (sparking the 1965 Watts Rebellion) or the continuity of well-worn brutal methods under Darryl Gates (sparking the massive 1992 L.A. Rebellions), there has been little new under the sun. Even after 1992, when change seemed for a moment inevitable and when the Bloods and Crips had, themselves, laid down arms and put forth a plan to rebuild the city, this long-needed transformation didn’t materialize. Instead, South Central became South L.A., Gates was canned, and the LAPD forcibly destroyed the gang truce. Nothing had changed.
It wasn’t long before the next scandal. Toward the end of the 1990s, what many had already known became public knowledge: that the LAPD, and especially the Rampart Division, routinely brutalized suspects and planted evidence. As a result of this revelation, the LAPD was charged under the RICO Act (as a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization) and placed under the federal oversight of a consent decree that would only be lifted in 2009.
Not coincidentally, “Globocop” Bill Bratton, currently en route to advise the Oakland Police Department, amidst widespread public opposition, is credited with cleaning up the LAPD, and Dorner’s statement appears on many websites alongside a picture of the former officer beaming alongside Bratton (it has emerged that Dorner mailed evidence to Anderson Cooper last week, including a gift from Bratton, on which he wrote “Thanks, but no thanks Will Bratton”).
According to Dorner’s statement:
“The department has not changed since the Rampart and Rodney King days. It has gotten worse. The consent decree should never have been lifted. The only thing that has evolved from the consent decree is those officers involved in the Rampart scandal and Rodney King incidents have since promoted to supervisor, commanders, and command staff, and executive positions… Are you aware that an officer… seen on the Rodney King videotape striking Mr. King multiple times with a baton on 3/3/91 is still employed by the LAPD and is now a Captain on the police department? … As a commanding officer, he is now responsible for over 200 officers. Do you trust him to enforce department policy and investigate use of force investigations on arrestees by his officers?”
One indication of this is the fact that, during the course of more than a decade of investigation of the Rampart case, only five officers were terminated, which suggests just how shallow the investigation efforts were. Dorner ominously adds that “I will correct this error,” and deems his actions a “necessary evil” not only to clear his own name, but to force “substantial change” within the LAPD.
To Read the Rest of the Essay
More resources:
Huffington Post: LAPD, Torrance Police Shot At Innocent People In Frenzied Hunt For Former Cop Christopher Dorner
Cato Institute: National Police Misconduct Reporting Project
American Blowback: Cop-on-Cop Crime in LA
by George Ciccariello-Maher and Mike King
Counterpunch
Yesterday was not simply a day like any other, and yet an entire system is grinding into motion to ensure that the peculiarities of the day be promptly forgotten: another crazy person lost it and committed unthinkable acts. The act of killing stands in and speaks for the person: look what he has done, of course he must be crazy. Case closed.
What they want you to see is just another Adam Lanza, just another inexplicable act, and when the act speaks for the assailant, words are secondary and there is no need to listen. But this is not, and has never been, a good way to understand reality.
What they want you to forget is the sheer strangeness of what is happening in Los Angeles. Christopher Dorner allegedly killed a police officer and two civilians. This was not a random shooting by a right-wing gun-nut mourning the loss of the “Real America.” Here is a man with good things to say about liberal democrats, a supporter of heightened gun control, a former LAPD officer and Navy reservist, targeting his own institution, which he accused of racism, violence, and corruption.
Dorner’s “Last Resort”
We know all of these things because what is most peculiar about this entire case is the written testament that Dorner has left us. In a letter titled only “Last Resort” and addressed to “America,” he makes clear his grievances, his objectives, and the rationale behind his actions – a chilling declaration of war on the Los Angeles Police Department.
The press is busy citing only those bits of the statement which make Dorner seem crazy: when he addresses Tim Tebow or Larry David, for example, or when he laments the fact that he will not survive to see The Hangover 3. (See for example, Buzzfeed’s “Everything You Need to Know,” which conspicuously says very little). But the vast majority of the letter paints a picture of someone who, while clearly undergoing some sort of mental break, is astonishingly lucid as to the causes and candid as to what he intends to do about it. These causes and these intentions, regardless of what you may hear on MSNBC or Entertainment Tonight (both will essentially carry the same message), begin and end with the LAPD.
The LAPD has long played a vanguard role in white supremacist policing in the United States. Whether it be the conscious recruitment of racist cops from the south in the 1960s under William Parker (sparking the 1965 Watts Rebellion) or the continuity of well-worn brutal methods under Darryl Gates (sparking the massive 1992 L.A. Rebellions), there has been little new under the sun. Even after 1992, when change seemed for a moment inevitable and when the Bloods and Crips had, themselves, laid down arms and put forth a plan to rebuild the city, this long-needed transformation didn’t materialize. Instead, South Central became South L.A., Gates was canned, and the LAPD forcibly destroyed the gang truce. Nothing had changed.
It wasn’t long before the next scandal. Toward the end of the 1990s, what many had already known became public knowledge: that the LAPD, and especially the Rampart Division, routinely brutalized suspects and planted evidence. As a result of this revelation, the LAPD was charged under the RICO Act (as a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization) and placed under the federal oversight of a consent decree that would only be lifted in 2009.
Not coincidentally, “Globocop” Bill Bratton, currently en route to advise the Oakland Police Department, amidst widespread public opposition, is credited with cleaning up the LAPD, and Dorner’s statement appears on many websites alongside a picture of the former officer beaming alongside Bratton (it has emerged that Dorner mailed evidence to Anderson Cooper last week, including a gift from Bratton, on which he wrote “Thanks, but no thanks Will Bratton”).
According to Dorner’s statement:
“The department has not changed since the Rampart and Rodney King days. It has gotten worse. The consent decree should never have been lifted. The only thing that has evolved from the consent decree is those officers involved in the Rampart scandal and Rodney King incidents have since promoted to supervisor, commanders, and command staff, and executive positions… Are you aware that an officer… seen on the Rodney King videotape striking Mr. King multiple times with a baton on 3/3/91 is still employed by the LAPD and is now a Captain on the police department? … As a commanding officer, he is now responsible for over 200 officers. Do you trust him to enforce department policy and investigate use of force investigations on arrestees by his officers?”
One indication of this is the fact that, during the course of more than a decade of investigation of the Rampart case, only five officers were terminated, which suggests just how shallow the investigation efforts were. Dorner ominously adds that “I will correct this error,” and deems his actions a “necessary evil” not only to clear his own name, but to force “substantial change” within the LAPD.
To Read the Rest of the Essay
More resources:
Huffington Post: LAPD, Torrance Police Shot At Innocent People In Frenzied Hunt For Former Cop Christopher Dorner
Cato Institute: National Police Misconduct Reporting Project
Thursday, February 07, 2013
Ted Rall: Drone Mentality -- A Reverse Perspective
[I was just trying to explain drone warfare to my Kentucky students a few days ago and gave a similar scenario to provide some perspective on what it must be like to live in a place being attacked by unmanned drones -- thanks Ted Rall for another great visualization!]
Ted Rall shares this second part:
Ted Rall shares this second part:
The Expert Witness Show: Richard Stratton - The Capture of Whitey Bulger
[From 2011, Bulger still hasn't been brought to trial. A few days ago Johnny Depp agreed to star in a film directed by Barry Levinson about Whitey Bulger.]
The Capture of Whitey Bulger
The Expert Witness Show
After 16 years on the lam, James “Whitey” Bulger – a notorious Irish mobster from Boston, who was number 2 on the FBI’s most-wanted list for over 14 years – has finally been captured by the FBI.
Tonight, Mike and Mark speak with noted author Richard Stratton, who has not only researched and written about Bulger, but actually met the man face-to-face when Bulger acted to save Richard from a Mafia hit contract. We’ll talk about Bulger’s history, his turning of FBI agents, the methods used to bring him in, whether or not he’s responsible for a whole string of armed robberies as the infamous “geezer bandit” in Orange County, California…and what secrets he still may have to tell about a thoroughly corrupt FBI that aided him in murdering his rivals.
To Read the rest of the show description and to listen to the interview
The Capture of Whitey Bulger
The Expert Witness Show
After 16 years on the lam, James “Whitey” Bulger – a notorious Irish mobster from Boston, who was number 2 on the FBI’s most-wanted list for over 14 years – has finally been captured by the FBI.
Tonight, Mike and Mark speak with noted author Richard Stratton, who has not only researched and written about Bulger, but actually met the man face-to-face when Bulger acted to save Richard from a Mafia hit contract. We’ll talk about Bulger’s history, his turning of FBI agents, the methods used to bring him in, whether or not he’s responsible for a whole string of armed robberies as the infamous “geezer bandit” in Orange County, California…and what secrets he still may have to tell about a thoroughly corrupt FBI that aided him in murdering his rivals.
To Read the rest of the show description and to listen to the interview
Wednesday, February 06, 2013
Open Society Justice Initiative: Globalizing Torture: CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition
Report Tallies 54 Countries, 136 Prisoners in CIA Torture Program
Democracy Now
A new report has revealed a detailed look at global involvement in the CIA’s secret program of prisons, rendition and torture in the years after 9/11. The Open Society Justice Initiative says 54 countries aided the CIA until President Obama halted the program in 2009. The report, called "Globalizing Torture," also discloses at least 136 people were held by the CIA during those years — the largest tally to date. The countries’ assistance ranged from allowing CIA planes to refuel to hosting the prisons where the detainees were tortured. The report’s author, Amrit Singh, said: "The moral cost of these programs was borne not just by the U.S. but by the 54 other countries it recruited to help."
Link to the Headline
More resources:
Open Society Justice Initiative - Globalizing Torture: CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition
The Washington Post: A staggering map of the 54 countries that reportedly participated in the CIA’s rendition program
Democracy Now
A new report has revealed a detailed look at global involvement in the CIA’s secret program of prisons, rendition and torture in the years after 9/11. The Open Society Justice Initiative says 54 countries aided the CIA until President Obama halted the program in 2009. The report, called "Globalizing Torture," also discloses at least 136 people were held by the CIA during those years — the largest tally to date. The countries’ assistance ranged from allowing CIA planes to refuel to hosting the prisons where the detainees were tortured. The report’s author, Amrit Singh, said: "The moral cost of these programs was borne not just by the U.S. but by the 54 other countries it recruited to help."
Link to the Headline
More resources:
Open Society Justice Initiative - Globalizing Torture: CIA Secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition
The Washington Post: A staggering map of the 54 countries that reportedly participated in the CIA’s rendition program
Glenn Greenwald: Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens
Chilling legal memo from Obama DOJ justifies assassination of US citizens
by Glenn Greenwald
The Guardian
The president's partisan lawyers purport to vest him with the most extreme power a political leader can seize
The most extremist power any political leader can assert is the power to target his own citizens for execution without any charges or due process, far from any battlefield. The Obama administration has not only asserted exactly that power in theory, but has exercised it in practice. In September 2011, it killed US citizen Anwar Awlaki in a drone strike in Yemen, along with US citizen Samir Khan, and then, in circumstances that are still unexplained, two weeks later killed Awlaki's 16-year-old American son Abdulrahman with a separate drone strike in Yemen.
Since then, senior Obama officials including Attorney General Eric Holder and John Brennan, Obama's top terrorism adviser and his current nominee to lead the CIA, have explicitly argued that the president is and should be vested with this power. Meanwhile, a Washington Post article from October reported that the administration is formally institutionalizing this president's power to decide who dies under the Orwellian title "disposition matrix".
When the New York Times back in April, 2010 first confirmed the existence of Obama's hit list, it made clear just what an extremist power this is, noting: "It is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing." The NYT quoted a Bush intelligence official as saying "he did not know of any American who was approved for targeted killing under the former president". When the existence of Obama's hit list was first reported several months earlier by the Washington Post's Dana Priest, she wrote that the "list includes three Americans".
What has made these actions all the more radical is the absolute secrecy with which Obama has draped all of this. Not only is the entire process carried out solely within the Executive branch - with no checks or oversight of any kind - but there is zero transparency and zero accountability. The president's underlings compile their proposed lists of who should be executed, and the president - at a charming weekly event dubbed by White House aides as "Terror Tuesday" - then chooses from "baseball cards" and decrees in total secrecy who should die. The power of accuser, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner are all consolidated in this one man, and those powers are exercised in the dark.
In fact, The Most Transparent Administration Ever™ has been so fixated on secrecy that they have refused even to disclose the legal memoranda prepared by Obama lawyers setting forth their legal rationale for why the president has this power. During the Bush years, when Bush refused to disclose the memoranda from his Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) that legally authorized torture, rendition, warrantless eavesdropping and the like, leading Democratic lawyers such as Dawn Johnsen (Obama's first choice to lead the OLC) vehemently denounced this practice as a grave threat, warning that "the Bush Administration's excessive reliance on 'secret law' threatens the effective functioning of American democracy" and "the withholding from Congress and the public of legal interpretations by the [OLC] upsets the system of checks and balances between the executive and legislative branches of government."
But when it comes to Obama's assassination power, this is exactly what his administration has done. It has repeatedly refused to disclose the principal legal memoranda prepared by Obama OLC lawyers that justified his kill list. It is, right now, vigorously resisting lawsuits from the New York Times and the ACLU to obtain that OLC memorandum. In sum, Obama not only claims he has the power to order US citizens killed with no transparency, but that even the documents explaining the legal rationale for this power are to be concealed. He's maintaining secret law on the most extremist power he can assert.
Last night, NBC News' Michael Isikoff released a 16-page "white paper" prepared by the Obama DOJ that purports to justify Obama's power to target even Americans for assassination without due process (the memo is embedded in full below). This is not the primary OLC memo justifying Obama's kill list - that is still concealed - but it appears to track the reasoning of that memo as anonymously described to the New York Times in October 2011.
This new memo is entitled: "Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a US Citizen Who is a Senior Operational Leader of Al-Qa'ida or An Associated Force". It claims its conclusion is "reached with recognition of the extraordinary seriousness of a lethal operation by the United States against a US citizen". Yet it is every bit as chilling as the Bush OLC torture memos in how its clinical, legalistic tone completely sanitizes the radical and dangerous power it purports to authorize.
To Read the Rest of the Commentary
by Glenn Greenwald
The Guardian
The president's partisan lawyers purport to vest him with the most extreme power a political leader can seize
The most extremist power any political leader can assert is the power to target his own citizens for execution without any charges or due process, far from any battlefield. The Obama administration has not only asserted exactly that power in theory, but has exercised it in practice. In September 2011, it killed US citizen Anwar Awlaki in a drone strike in Yemen, along with US citizen Samir Khan, and then, in circumstances that are still unexplained, two weeks later killed Awlaki's 16-year-old American son Abdulrahman with a separate drone strike in Yemen.
Since then, senior Obama officials including Attorney General Eric Holder and John Brennan, Obama's top terrorism adviser and his current nominee to lead the CIA, have explicitly argued that the president is and should be vested with this power. Meanwhile, a Washington Post article from October reported that the administration is formally institutionalizing this president's power to decide who dies under the Orwellian title "disposition matrix".
When the New York Times back in April, 2010 first confirmed the existence of Obama's hit list, it made clear just what an extremist power this is, noting: "It is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing." The NYT quoted a Bush intelligence official as saying "he did not know of any American who was approved for targeted killing under the former president". When the existence of Obama's hit list was first reported several months earlier by the Washington Post's Dana Priest, she wrote that the "list includes three Americans".
What has made these actions all the more radical is the absolute secrecy with which Obama has draped all of this. Not only is the entire process carried out solely within the Executive branch - with no checks or oversight of any kind - but there is zero transparency and zero accountability. The president's underlings compile their proposed lists of who should be executed, and the president - at a charming weekly event dubbed by White House aides as "Terror Tuesday" - then chooses from "baseball cards" and decrees in total secrecy who should die. The power of accuser, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner are all consolidated in this one man, and those powers are exercised in the dark.
In fact, The Most Transparent Administration Ever™ has been so fixated on secrecy that they have refused even to disclose the legal memoranda prepared by Obama lawyers setting forth their legal rationale for why the president has this power. During the Bush years, when Bush refused to disclose the memoranda from his Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) that legally authorized torture, rendition, warrantless eavesdropping and the like, leading Democratic lawyers such as Dawn Johnsen (Obama's first choice to lead the OLC) vehemently denounced this practice as a grave threat, warning that "the Bush Administration's excessive reliance on 'secret law' threatens the effective functioning of American democracy" and "the withholding from Congress and the public of legal interpretations by the [OLC] upsets the system of checks and balances between the executive and legislative branches of government."
But when it comes to Obama's assassination power, this is exactly what his administration has done. It has repeatedly refused to disclose the principal legal memoranda prepared by Obama OLC lawyers that justified his kill list. It is, right now, vigorously resisting lawsuits from the New York Times and the ACLU to obtain that OLC memorandum. In sum, Obama not only claims he has the power to order US citizens killed with no transparency, but that even the documents explaining the legal rationale for this power are to be concealed. He's maintaining secret law on the most extremist power he can assert.
Last night, NBC News' Michael Isikoff released a 16-page "white paper" prepared by the Obama DOJ that purports to justify Obama's power to target even Americans for assassination without due process (the memo is embedded in full below). This is not the primary OLC memo justifying Obama's kill list - that is still concealed - but it appears to track the reasoning of that memo as anonymously described to the New York Times in October 2011.
This new memo is entitled: "Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a US Citizen Who is a Senior Operational Leader of Al-Qa'ida or An Associated Force". It claims its conclusion is "reached with recognition of the extraordinary seriousness of a lethal operation by the United States against a US citizen". Yet it is every bit as chilling as the Bush OLC torture memos in how its clinical, legalistic tone completely sanitizes the radical and dangerous power it purports to authorize.
To Read the Rest of the Commentary
Democracy Now: Daniel Ellsberg - NDAA Indefinite Detention Provision is Part of "Systematic Assault on Constitution"
Daniel Ellsberg: NDAA Indefinite Detention Provision is Part of "Systematic Assault on Constitution"
Democracy Now
A lawsuit challenging a law that gives the government the power to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens is back in federal court this week. On Wednesday, a group of academics, journalists and activists will present oral arguments in court against a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, authorizing the military to jail anyone it considers a terrorism suspect anywhere in the world without charge or trial. In a landmark ruling last September, Judge Katherine Forrest of the Southern District of New York struck down the indefinite detention provision, saying it likely violates the First and Fifth Amendments of U.S. citizens. We’re joined by Daniel Ellsberg, a plaintiff in the case and perhaps the country’s most famous whistleblower. Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers in 1971, exposing the secret history of the U.S. involvement in Vietnam.
Guest:
Daniel Ellsberg, Pentagon Papers whistleblower.
To Watch the Episode
Democracy Now
A lawsuit challenging a law that gives the government the power to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens is back in federal court this week. On Wednesday, a group of academics, journalists and activists will present oral arguments in court against a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, authorizing the military to jail anyone it considers a terrorism suspect anywhere in the world without charge or trial. In a landmark ruling last September, Judge Katherine Forrest of the Southern District of New York struck down the indefinite detention provision, saying it likely violates the First and Fifth Amendments of U.S. citizens. We’re joined by Daniel Ellsberg, a plaintiff in the case and perhaps the country’s most famous whistleblower. Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers in 1971, exposing the secret history of the U.S. involvement in Vietnam.
Guest:
Daniel Ellsberg, Pentagon Papers whistleblower.
To Watch the Episode
Democracy Now: Kill List Exposed - Leaked Obama Memo Shows Assassination of U.S. Citizens "Has No Geographic Limit"
Kill List Exposed: Leaked Obama Memo Shows Assassination of U.S. Citizens "Has No Geographic Limit"
Democracy Now
The Obama administration’s internal legal justification for assassinating U.S. citizens without charge has been revealed for the first time. In a secret Justice Department memo, the administration claims it has legal authority to assassinate U.S. citizens overseas even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the United States. We’re joined by Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "If you look at the memo ... there’s no geographic line," says Jaffer. "The Obama administration is making, in some ways, a greater claim of authority [than President Bush]. They’re arguing that the authority to kill American citizens has no geographic limit."
Guest:
Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU.
To Watch the Episode
Democracy Now
The Obama administration’s internal legal justification for assassinating U.S. citizens without charge has been revealed for the first time. In a secret Justice Department memo, the administration claims it has legal authority to assassinate U.S. citizens overseas even if there is no intelligence indicating they are engaged in an active plot to attack the United States. We’re joined by Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "If you look at the memo ... there’s no geographic line," says Jaffer. "The Obama administration is making, in some ways, a greater claim of authority [than President Bush]. They’re arguing that the authority to kill American citizens has no geographic limit."
Guest:
Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the ACLU.
To Watch the Episode
Tuesday, February 05, 2013
HUM 221: Civil Resistance and Social Movements Bibliography
(Ongoing bibliography -- feel free to suggest resources)
Abu-Jamal, Mumia. We Want Freedom: A Life in the Black Panther Party. South End Press, 2004.
Ali, Tariq and Susan Watkins. 1968: Marching in the Streets. NY: Free Press, 1998.
Allen, Theodore W. The Invention of the White Race: Racial Oppression and Social Control. Volume 1. Verso Books, 1994/2012.
---. The Invention of the White Race: The Origin of Racial Oppression in Anglo-America. Volume 2. Verso, 1997/2012.
Aptheker, Herbert. American Negro Slave Revolts. NY: International, 1943.
Brecher, Jeremy, et al. Globalization From Below. Boston: South End Press, 2000.
Carson, Clayborne, et al, eds. The Eyes on the Prize Civil Rights Reader: Documents, Speeches, and Firsthand Accounts from the Black Freedom Struggle. NY: Penguin, 1991.
Castells, Manuel. The Power of Identity. Volume II: The Information Age. 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2003.
Croucher, Sheila. Globalization and Belonging: The Politics of Identity in a Changing World. Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.
Duncombe, Stephen. Cultural Resistance Reader. NY: Verso, 2002.
Fanon, Frantz. The Wretched of the Earth. NY: Grove Press, 1966.
Feenberg, Andrew and Jim Freedman. When Poetry Ruled the Streets: The French May Events of 1968. Albany, NY: SUNY, 2001.
Goodwin, Jeff and James M. Jasper, ed. The Social Movements Reader: Cases and Concepts. 2nd ed. Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.
Halper, Stefan and Jonathan Clarke. America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order. NY: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Hardt, Michael and Antonio Negri. Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire. NY: The Penguin Press, 2004.
Katsiaficas, Georgy. The Subversion of Politics: European Autonomous Social Movements and the Decolonization of Everyday Life. AK Press, 2006.
Kaufman, Cynthia. Ideas for Action: Relevant Theory for Radical Change. Boston: South End Press, 2003.
Klein, Naomi. No Fences, No Borders: Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Globalization Debate. NY: Picador, 2002.
Kunstler, William. Politics on Trial: Five Famous Trials of the 20th Century. Ocean Press, 2003.
Kurlansky, Mark. 1968: The Year That Rocked the World. NY: Ballantine Books, 2003.
Lasn, Kalle. Culture Jam. Quill, 2000: 215 pages
Leistyna, Pepi, ed. Cultural Studies: From Theory to Action. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2005.
Linebaugh, Peter and Marcus Rediker. The Many-Headed Hydra: Sailors, Slaves, Commoners, and the Hidden History of the Revolutionary Atlantic. Boston: Beacon Press, 2000.
Martinez-Alier, Joan. “’Environmental Justice’ (Local and Global).” The Cultures of Globalization. Eds. Fredric Jameson and Masao Miyoshi. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998: 312-326.
McCarthy, Timothy Patrick and John McMillian, eds. The Radical Reader: A Documentary History of the American Radical Tradition. NY: The New Press, 2003.
Mertes, Tom. A Movements of Movements: Is Another World Possible? NY: Verso, 2004.
Meyer, David S. Social Movements: Identity, Culture, and the State. NY: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Noddings, Nel. “Global Citizenship: Promises and Problems” and “Place-Based Education to Preserve the Earth and Its People” Educating Citizens for Global Awareness. Ed. Nel Noddings. NY: Columbia University Press/Teachers College Press, 2005: 1-22; 57-69.
Notes From Nowhere Collective. We are Everywhere: The Irresistible Rise of Global Anticapitalism. NY: Verso, 2003.
Roberts, Adam and Timothy Garton Ash, ed. Civil Resistance & Power Politics: The Experience of Non-Violent Action from Gandhi to the Present. Oxford University Press, 2011.
Roy, Arundhati. An Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire. Boston: South End Press, 2004.
Rudnick, Lois P., et al. American Identities: An Introductory Textbook. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2006.
Sakolsky, Ron and Fred Wei-Han Ho. Sounding Off: Music as Subversion/Resistance/Revolution. Brooklyn, NY: Autonomedia, 1995.
Shaw, Randy. The Activist’s Handbook. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001.
Sklair, Leslie. “Social Movements and Global Capital.” The Cultures of Globalization. Eds. Fredric Jameson and Masao Miyoshi. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998: 291-311.
Snow, David A. The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004.
Solnit, David. Globalize Liberation: How to Uproot the System and Build a Better World. San Francisco, CA: City Lights Publishers, 2003.
Sunstein, Cass. Why Societies Need Dissent. Harvard UP, 2003.
Tétreault, Mary Ann and Robin L. Teske, eds. Partial Truths and the Politics of Community. (Feminist Approaches to Social Movements, Community, and Power: Volume II) Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 2003.
Tilly, Charles. Social Movements, 1768-2004. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2004.
Vienet, Rene. Enrages and Situationists in the Occupation Movement, France, 1968. Brooklyn, NY: Autonomedia, 1992.
Waziyatawin and Michael Yellow Bird, ed. For Indigenous Minds Only: A Decolonization Handbook. School for Advanced Research, 2012.
Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the United States: 1492-Present. NY: Perennial Classics, 1999.
Zinn, Howard and Anthony Arnove, ed. Voices of a People’s History of the United States. NY: Seven Stories Press, 2004.
Abu-Jamal, Mumia. We Want Freedom: A Life in the Black Panther Party. South End Press, 2004.
Ali, Tariq and Susan Watkins. 1968: Marching in the Streets. NY: Free Press, 1998.
Allen, Theodore W. The Invention of the White Race: Racial Oppression and Social Control. Volume 1. Verso Books, 1994/2012.
---. The Invention of the White Race: The Origin of Racial Oppression in Anglo-America. Volume 2. Verso, 1997/2012.
Aptheker, Herbert. American Negro Slave Revolts. NY: International, 1943.
Brecher, Jeremy, et al. Globalization From Below. Boston: South End Press, 2000.
Carson, Clayborne, et al, eds. The Eyes on the Prize Civil Rights Reader: Documents, Speeches, and Firsthand Accounts from the Black Freedom Struggle. NY: Penguin, 1991.
Castells, Manuel. The Power of Identity. Volume II: The Information Age. 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2003.
Croucher, Sheila. Globalization and Belonging: The Politics of Identity in a Changing World. Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.
Duncombe, Stephen. Cultural Resistance Reader. NY: Verso, 2002.
Fanon, Frantz. The Wretched of the Earth. NY: Grove Press, 1966.
Feenberg, Andrew and Jim Freedman. When Poetry Ruled the Streets: The French May Events of 1968. Albany, NY: SUNY, 2001.
Goodwin, Jeff and James M. Jasper, ed. The Social Movements Reader: Cases and Concepts. 2nd ed. Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.
Halper, Stefan and Jonathan Clarke. America Alone: The Neo-Conservatives and the Global Order. NY: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Hardt, Michael and Antonio Negri. Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire. NY: The Penguin Press, 2004.
Katsiaficas, Georgy. The Subversion of Politics: European Autonomous Social Movements and the Decolonization of Everyday Life. AK Press, 2006.
Kaufman, Cynthia. Ideas for Action: Relevant Theory for Radical Change. Boston: South End Press, 2003.
Klein, Naomi. No Fences, No Borders: Dispatches from the Front Lines of the Globalization Debate. NY: Picador, 2002.
Kunstler, William. Politics on Trial: Five Famous Trials of the 20th Century. Ocean Press, 2003.
Kurlansky, Mark. 1968: The Year That Rocked the World. NY: Ballantine Books, 2003.
Lasn, Kalle. Culture Jam. Quill, 2000: 215 pages
Leistyna, Pepi, ed. Cultural Studies: From Theory to Action. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2005.
Linebaugh, Peter and Marcus Rediker. The Many-Headed Hydra: Sailors, Slaves, Commoners, and the Hidden History of the Revolutionary Atlantic. Boston: Beacon Press, 2000.
Martinez-Alier, Joan. “’Environmental Justice’ (Local and Global).” The Cultures of Globalization. Eds. Fredric Jameson and Masao Miyoshi. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998: 312-326.
McCarthy, Timothy Patrick and John McMillian, eds. The Radical Reader: A Documentary History of the American Radical Tradition. NY: The New Press, 2003.
Mertes, Tom. A Movements of Movements: Is Another World Possible? NY: Verso, 2004.
Meyer, David S. Social Movements: Identity, Culture, and the State. NY: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Noddings, Nel. “Global Citizenship: Promises and Problems” and “Place-Based Education to Preserve the Earth and Its People” Educating Citizens for Global Awareness. Ed. Nel Noddings. NY: Columbia University Press/Teachers College Press, 2005: 1-22; 57-69.
Notes From Nowhere Collective. We are Everywhere: The Irresistible Rise of Global Anticapitalism. NY: Verso, 2003.
Roberts, Adam and Timothy Garton Ash, ed. Civil Resistance & Power Politics: The Experience of Non-Violent Action from Gandhi to the Present. Oxford University Press, 2011.
Roy, Arundhati. An Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire. Boston: South End Press, 2004.
Rudnick, Lois P., et al. American Identities: An Introductory Textbook. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2006.
Sakolsky, Ron and Fred Wei-Han Ho. Sounding Off: Music as Subversion/Resistance/Revolution. Brooklyn, NY: Autonomedia, 1995.
Shaw, Randy. The Activist’s Handbook. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001.
Sklair, Leslie. “Social Movements and Global Capital.” The Cultures of Globalization. Eds. Fredric Jameson and Masao Miyoshi. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1998: 291-311.
Snow, David A. The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004.
Solnit, David. Globalize Liberation: How to Uproot the System and Build a Better World. San Francisco, CA: City Lights Publishers, 2003.
Sunstein, Cass. Why Societies Need Dissent. Harvard UP, 2003.
Tétreault, Mary Ann and Robin L. Teske, eds. Partial Truths and the Politics of Community. (Feminist Approaches to Social Movements, Community, and Power: Volume II) Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 2003.
Tilly, Charles. Social Movements, 1768-2004. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2004.
Vienet, Rene. Enrages and Situationists in the Occupation Movement, France, 1968. Brooklyn, NY: Autonomedia, 1992.
Waziyatawin and Michael Yellow Bird, ed. For Indigenous Minds Only: A Decolonization Handbook. School for Advanced Research, 2012.
Zinn, Howard. A People’s History of the United States: 1492-Present. NY: Perennial Classics, 1999.
Zinn, Howard and Anthony Arnove, ed. Voices of a People’s History of the United States. NY: Seven Stories Press, 2004.
HUM 221: Lecture for 2/5
Mavis Staples: Eyes on the Prize
Mavis Staples: 99 and 1/2
Mavis Staples: Down in Mississippi
Isabel Wilkerson: Leaderless March That Remade America
On Rosa Parks’ 100th Birthday, Recalling Her Rebellious Life Before and After the Montgomery Bus
Mumia Abu-Jamal: "The United States Is Fast Becoming One of the Biggest Open-Air Prisons on Earth"; Noelle Hanrahan & Stephen Vittoria: "Long Distance Revolutionary" - Mumia Abu-Jamal’s Journey from Black Panthers to Prison Journalist
Open Channel: Michael Isikoff - Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans
Justice Department memo reveals legal case for drone strikes on Americans
Open Channel (NBC)
By Michael Isikoff
The 16-page memo, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects abroad, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes.
The secrecy surrounding such strikes is fast emerging as a central issue in this week’s hearing of White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, a key architect of the drone campaign, to be CIA director. Brennan was the first administration official to publicly acknowledge drone strikes in a speech last year, calling them “consistent with the inherent right of self-defense.” In a separate talk at the Northwestern University Law School in March, Attorney General Eric Holder specifically endorsed the constitutionality of targeted killings of Americans, saying they could be justified if government officials determine the target poses “an imminent threat of violent attack.”
But the confidential Justice Department “white paper” introduces a more expansive definition of self-defense or imminent attack than described by Brennan or Holder in their public speeches. It refers, for example, to what it calls a “broader concept of imminence” than actual intelligence about any ongoing plot against the U.S. homeland.
“The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the memo states.
Instead, it says, an “informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government may determine that the targeted American has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.” The memo does not define “recently” or “activities.”
To Read the Rst
Open Channel (NBC)
By Michael Isikoff
The 16-page memo, a copy of which was obtained by NBC News, provides new details about the legal reasoning behind one of the Obama administration’s most secretive and controversial polices: its dramatically increased use of drone strikes against al-Qaida suspects abroad, including those aimed at American citizens, such as the September 2011 strike in Yemen that killed alleged al-Qaida operatives Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan. Both were U.S. citizens who had never been indicted by the U.S. government nor charged with any crimes.
The secrecy surrounding such strikes is fast emerging as a central issue in this week’s hearing of White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, a key architect of the drone campaign, to be CIA director. Brennan was the first administration official to publicly acknowledge drone strikes in a speech last year, calling them “consistent with the inherent right of self-defense.” In a separate talk at the Northwestern University Law School in March, Attorney General Eric Holder specifically endorsed the constitutionality of targeted killings of Americans, saying they could be justified if government officials determine the target poses “an imminent threat of violent attack.”
But the confidential Justice Department “white paper” introduces a more expansive definition of self-defense or imminent attack than described by Brennan or Holder in their public speeches. It refers, for example, to what it calls a “broader concept of imminence” than actual intelligence about any ongoing plot against the U.S. homeland.
“The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” the memo states.
Instead, it says, an “informed, high-level” official of the U.S. government may determine that the targeted American has been “recently” involved in “activities” posing a threat of a violent attack and “there is no evidence suggesting that he has renounced or abandoned such activities.” The memo does not define “recently” or “activities.”
To Read the Rst
Monday, February 04, 2013
Early this morning, an Oklahoma woman locked her neck to Keystone XL machinery, stopping work for several hours.
Early this morning, an Oklahoma woman locked her neck to Keystone XL machinery, stopping work for several hours.
Check out Great Plains Tar Sands Resistance's website for more info.
Democracy Now: Jeanne Theoharis - On Rosa Parks’ 100th Birthday, Recalling Her Rebellious Life Before and After the Montgomery Bus
On Rosa Parks’ 100th Birthday, Recalling Her Rebellious Life Before and After the Montgomery Bus
Democracy Now
Born on Feb. 4, 1913, today would have been Rosa Parks’ 100th birthday. On Dec. 1, 1955, Parks refused to give up her seat to a white passenger on a city bus in Montgomery, Alabama. Her act of resistance led to a 13-month boycott of the Montgomery bus system that would help spark the civil rights movement. Today we spend the hour looking at Rosa Parks’ life with historian Jeanne Theoharis, author of the new book, "The Rebellious Life of Mrs. Rosa Parks." Often described as a tired seamstress, no troublemaker, Parks was in fact a dedicated civil rights activist involved with the movement long before and after her historic action on the Montgomery bus. "Here we have, in many ways, one of the most famous Americans of the 20th century, and yet treated just like a sort of children’s book hero," Theoharis says. "We diminish her legacy by making it about a single day, a single act, as opposed to the rich and lifelong history of resistance that was actually who Rosa Parks was." We also air audio of Rosa Parks in her own words. In the midst of the boycott in April of 1956, she spoke to Pacifica Radio about the action she took.
Guest:
Jeanne Theoharis, author of The Rebellious Life of Mrs. Rosa Parks. She is a professor of political science at Brooklyn College and has written extensively about the civil rights and Black Power movements.
To Watch the Episode
Democracy Now
Born on Feb. 4, 1913, today would have been Rosa Parks’ 100th birthday. On Dec. 1, 1955, Parks refused to give up her seat to a white passenger on a city bus in Montgomery, Alabama. Her act of resistance led to a 13-month boycott of the Montgomery bus system that would help spark the civil rights movement. Today we spend the hour looking at Rosa Parks’ life with historian Jeanne Theoharis, author of the new book, "The Rebellious Life of Mrs. Rosa Parks." Often described as a tired seamstress, no troublemaker, Parks was in fact a dedicated civil rights activist involved with the movement long before and after her historic action on the Montgomery bus. "Here we have, in many ways, one of the most famous Americans of the 20th century, and yet treated just like a sort of children’s book hero," Theoharis says. "We diminish her legacy by making it about a single day, a single act, as opposed to the rich and lifelong history of resistance that was actually who Rosa Parks was." We also air audio of Rosa Parks in her own words. In the midst of the boycott in April of 1956, she spoke to Pacifica Radio about the action she took.
Guest:
Jeanne Theoharis, author of The Rebellious Life of Mrs. Rosa Parks. She is a professor of political science at Brooklyn College and has written extensively about the civil rights and Black Power movements.
To Watch the Episode
Salim Yaqub: The United States and the Arab World - Sources of Antagonism, Prospects for Accommodation
[MB: A revealing historical background on the US government's alternating relationship with Iraq and Iran.]
"The United States and the Arab World: Sources of Antagonism, Prospects for Accommodation"
CHIASMOS
A talk by Salim Yaqub, Assistant Professor of History, U. of Chicago; moderated by Marda Dunsky, Assistant Professor at the Medill School of Journalism, Northwestern University.
To Listen to the Presentation
"The United States and the Arab World: Sources of Antagonism, Prospects for Accommodation"
CHIASMOS
A talk by Salim Yaqub, Assistant Professor of History, U. of Chicago; moderated by Marda Dunsky, Assistant Professor at the Medill School of Journalism, Northwestern University.
To Listen to the Presentation
Open Source: Isabel Wilkerson’s Leaderless March that Remade America
Isabel Wilkerson’s Leaderless March that Remade America
Open Source with Chris Lydon
Isabel Wilkerson is the epic tale teller of the Great Migration of Southern black people that remade America — sound, substance and spirit — in the 20th Century. The proof is in the soundtrack — musical highlights of a comprehensive revolution. It was one of two modern migrations, it’s been said, that made American culture what it is — of blacks from the Jim Crow South, and of Jews from Central and Eastern Europe.
The movement of masses is an ageless, ongoing piece of human history: in India and China today, more people migrate internally from village to city in one year than left the South from the onset of World War I (1915) to the end of the Civil Rights era (1970), as Isabel Wilkerson frames her story. But was there ever a migration that beyond moving people transformed a national culture as ours did? Songs, games, language, art, style, worship, every kind of entertainment including pro sports — in fact almost all we feel about ourselves, how we look to the world, changed in the sweep of Isabel Wilkerson’s magnificent story, The Warmth of Other Suns.
Great swaths of the pop and serious culture I grew up in – my children as well – were fruit of Ms. Wilkerson’s story: Jazz and its immortals like Louis Armstrong, Nat King Cole, Illinois Jacquet, Miles Davis, the Basie and Ellington bands and stars like Duke’s greatest soloist Johnny Hodges, whose family moved from Virginia to Boston very early in the century; Mahalia Jackson and Gospel music; Rhythm and Blues, Ray Charles, the Motown sound, the Jackson family and little Michael; sports immortals like Bill Russell and Jackie Robinson, and athletes without number are players in this story. Writers, actors, politicians, comedians… Toni Morison, Spike Lee, Michelle Obama are all children of the Great Migration.
It was “the first big step the nation’s servant class took without asking,” in one of many graceful Wilkerson lines about “a leaderless revolution.” But it was a graceless, usually violent, threatened, lonely experience. Isabel Wilkerson is speaking of the mothers, fathers and families that faced it down — the Russells of Monroe, Louisiana, in one example, who gave the world the greatest team-sport winner we ever saw (13 seasons with the Boston Celtics, 11 NBA championships), the most charismatic defensive player in any game on earth. But for the migration, Wilkerson observes, Bill Russell “might have been working in a hardware store. It’s hard to know — there are a lot of mills around Monroe, LA. It’s hard to imagine what would have happened to that enormous talent that changed a sport…
To Listen to the Conversation
Open Source with Chris Lydon
Isabel Wilkerson is the epic tale teller of the Great Migration of Southern black people that remade America — sound, substance and spirit — in the 20th Century. The proof is in the soundtrack — musical highlights of a comprehensive revolution. It was one of two modern migrations, it’s been said, that made American culture what it is — of blacks from the Jim Crow South, and of Jews from Central and Eastern Europe.
The movement of masses is an ageless, ongoing piece of human history: in India and China today, more people migrate internally from village to city in one year than left the South from the onset of World War I (1915) to the end of the Civil Rights era (1970), as Isabel Wilkerson frames her story. But was there ever a migration that beyond moving people transformed a national culture as ours did? Songs, games, language, art, style, worship, every kind of entertainment including pro sports — in fact almost all we feel about ourselves, how we look to the world, changed in the sweep of Isabel Wilkerson’s magnificent story, The Warmth of Other Suns.
Great swaths of the pop and serious culture I grew up in – my children as well – were fruit of Ms. Wilkerson’s story: Jazz and its immortals like Louis Armstrong, Nat King Cole, Illinois Jacquet, Miles Davis, the Basie and Ellington bands and stars like Duke’s greatest soloist Johnny Hodges, whose family moved from Virginia to Boston very early in the century; Mahalia Jackson and Gospel music; Rhythm and Blues, Ray Charles, the Motown sound, the Jackson family and little Michael; sports immortals like Bill Russell and Jackie Robinson, and athletes without number are players in this story. Writers, actors, politicians, comedians… Toni Morison, Spike Lee, Michelle Obama are all children of the Great Migration.
It was “the first big step the nation’s servant class took without asking,” in one of many graceful Wilkerson lines about “a leaderless revolution.” But it was a graceless, usually violent, threatened, lonely experience. Isabel Wilkerson is speaking of the mothers, fathers and families that faced it down — the Russells of Monroe, Louisiana, in one example, who gave the world the greatest team-sport winner we ever saw (13 seasons with the Boston Celtics, 11 NBA championships), the most charismatic defensive player in any game on earth. But for the migration, Wilkerson observes, Bill Russell “might have been working in a hardware store. It’s hard to know — there are a lot of mills around Monroe, LA. It’s hard to imagine what would have happened to that enormous talent that changed a sport…
They lived under a caste system … known as Jim Crow. Bill Russell’s family experienced some of the harsh realities of that. One story involving Bill Russell’s father involves a day where he was just wanting to get gas. The custom in the Jim Crow South is that when an African American was in line for something, any white southerner who came up could cut in line.
One white motorist after another had shown up and gone in front of him, and he had to wait, and he had to wait, and he had to wait. Eventually he decided he would just back out and drive the half-hour to the next gas station where he might be able to get served. As he was beginning to back out, the owner of the gas station stopped pumping gas for the white motorist he was working with and got a shotgun, held it to Bill Russell’s father’s head and said “You’ll leave when I tell you to leave. Don’t ever let me see you trying that again.”
His mother was, around the same time, stopped on the street because she was dressed in her Sunday clothes. … A police officer stopped her and said “You go home right now and take that off. That is not what a colored woman should be wearing.” …
The family decided that they would leave Monroe Louisiana, a very difficult decision, for a far away place, Oakland California. And it was there that Bill Russell had the opportunity to go to integrated schools, to be able to go to an NCAA school; he would never had had the opportunity to do that had they stayed in the South. He ended up leading the Dons of UCSF to two NCAA championships, and then of course came to the attention of the Celtics… Basketball would not be what we know it to be, had this Great Migration not occurred. And he’s but one person out of this entire experience of six million people who migrated.
Isabel Wilkerson in conversation with Chris Lydon, October 5, 2010.
To Listen to the Conversation
Sunday, February 03, 2013
Michael Paalberg: US unions' continued decline masks new forms of worker activism
US unions' continued decline masks new forms of worker activism: Most Americans wish for union protections, though membership has slipped to 1916 levels. But that's not the whole story
by Michael Paalberg
The Guardian
America's long and steady march toward a fully disposable workforce continues apace, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported this week. Union membership is at its lowest point in nearly a century, with just 11.3% of all workers – the same level it was in 1916. To put this in proper historical perspective, union members are as rare today as they were at a time when being one could get you shot to death in a mining camp by the Colorado national guard.
Not that there is a great public outcry to return to the halcyon days of garment factory fires and tubercular slaughterhouses, or workers rallying to demand their bosses take away their pensions and bathroom breaks. Surveys show that most people wish they had more, not less input into their working conditions, and that a majority of non-union workers would choose to join a union, given the opportunity. Most do not get that opportunity, whether due to outright intimidation, or the ongoing shift of large parts of the economy toward part-time, temporary, low-wage and no-benefit jobs.
Union decline is nothing new: it began in the US in the mid 1950s and has been accelerating since the mid 70s. What's new this year is why: while deunionization was long linked to deindustrialization, now union losses are concentrated in government, the last bastion of organized labor. Decades ago, facing factory closings, many unions shifted to the public sector, organizing what were then seen as stable jobs: teachers, firefighters, cops, state-funded healthcare and childcare workers.
Then came the recession, and a new breed of Republican governors who seized the moment as a chance to punish their political opponents. One of the sharpest declines has occurred in Wisconsin, where Governor Scott Walker stripped most state employees of their bargaining rights (notably excluding those unions that had endorsed him).
But if labor markets are adapting to the reality of a mostly union-free America, so too is labor activism. Last year, two of the highest profile labor actions in the country – one-day "flash" strikes at fast food restaurants in New York City, and at Walmart stores nationwide – were coordinated by groups that are not traditional unions: New York Communities for Change and OUR Walmart (though both received union support). And both strikes were carried out without the traditional aim of formal union recognition.
...
To Read the Rest of the Article
by Michael Paalberg
The Guardian
America's long and steady march toward a fully disposable workforce continues apace, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported this week. Union membership is at its lowest point in nearly a century, with just 11.3% of all workers – the same level it was in 1916. To put this in proper historical perspective, union members are as rare today as they were at a time when being one could get you shot to death in a mining camp by the Colorado national guard.
Not that there is a great public outcry to return to the halcyon days of garment factory fires and tubercular slaughterhouses, or workers rallying to demand their bosses take away their pensions and bathroom breaks. Surveys show that most people wish they had more, not less input into their working conditions, and that a majority of non-union workers would choose to join a union, given the opportunity. Most do not get that opportunity, whether due to outright intimidation, or the ongoing shift of large parts of the economy toward part-time, temporary, low-wage and no-benefit jobs.
Union decline is nothing new: it began in the US in the mid 1950s and has been accelerating since the mid 70s. What's new this year is why: while deunionization was long linked to deindustrialization, now union losses are concentrated in government, the last bastion of organized labor. Decades ago, facing factory closings, many unions shifted to the public sector, organizing what were then seen as stable jobs: teachers, firefighters, cops, state-funded healthcare and childcare workers.
Then came the recession, and a new breed of Republican governors who seized the moment as a chance to punish their political opponents. One of the sharpest declines has occurred in Wisconsin, where Governor Scott Walker stripped most state employees of their bargaining rights (notably excluding those unions that had endorsed him).
But if labor markets are adapting to the reality of a mostly union-free America, so too is labor activism. Last year, two of the highest profile labor actions in the country – one-day "flash" strikes at fast food restaurants in New York City, and at Walmart stores nationwide – were coordinated by groups that are not traditional unions: New York Communities for Change and OUR Walmart (though both received union support). And both strikes were carried out without the traditional aim of formal union recognition.
...
To Read the Rest of the Article
Georgi Derluguian: The Making of Chechen Terrorists - The Clash of Forces and Discourses
"The Making of Chechen Terrorists: The Clash of Forces and Discourses"
CHIASMOS
A talk by Georgi Derluguian, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Northwestern University; introduced by Ronald Grigor Suny, Professor of Political Science and History, U. of Chicago.
To Listen to the Presentation
CHIASMOS
A talk by Georgi Derluguian, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Northwestern University; introduced by Ronald Grigor Suny, Professor of Political Science and History, U. of Chicago.
To Listen to the Presentation
Democracy Now: Ex-CIA Agent, Whistleblower John Kiriakou Sentenced to Prison While Torturers He Exposed Walk Free; Whistleblower John Kiriakou - For Embracing Torture, John Brennan a "Terrible Choice to Lead the CIA"
Ex-CIA Agent, Whistleblower John Kiriakou Sentenced to Prison While Torturers He Exposed Walk Free
Democracy Now
Former CIA agent John Kiriakou speaks out just days after he was sentenced to 30 months in prison, becoming the first CIA official to face jail time for any reason relating to the U.S. torture program. Under a plea deal, Kiriakou admitted to a single count of violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act by revealing the identity of a covert officer to a freelance reporter, who did not publish it. Supporters say Kiriakou is being unfairly targeted for having been the first CIA official to publicly confirm and detail the Bush administration’s use of waterboarding. Kiriakou joins us to discuss his story from Washington, D.C., along with his attorney, Jesselyn Radack, director of National Security & Human Rights at the Government Accountability Project. "This ... was not a case about leaking; this was a case about torture. And I believe I’m going to prison because I blew the whistle on torture," Kiriakou says. "My oath was to the Constitution. … And to me, torture is unconstitutional."
Guests:
John Kiriakou, former CIA analyst and case officer who will soon go to prison for whistleblowing on the CIA’s torture program. He is the author of Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA’s War on Terror.
Jesselyn Radack, attorney for CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou. She is the National Security & Human Rights director at the Government Accountability Project and a former ethics adviser to the U.S. Department of Justice.
To Watch the Episode
Whistleblower John Kiriakou: For Embracing Torture, John Brennan a "Terrible Choice to Lead the CIA"
Days after he was sentenced to 30 months in prison, John Kiriakou — the first CIA official to be jailed for any reason relating to the torture program — denounces President Obama’s appointment of John Brennan to head the CIA. "I’ve known John Brennan since 1990," Kiriakou says. "I worked directly for John Brennan twice. I think that he is a terrible choice to lead the CIA. I think that it’s time for the CIA to move beyond the ugliness of the post-September 11th regime, and we need someone who is going to respect the Constitution and to not be bogged down by a legacy of torture."
Guests:
John Kiriakou, former CIA analyst and case officer who will soon go to prison for whistleblowing on the CIA’s torture program. He is the author of Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA’s War on Terror.
Jesselyn Radack, attorney for CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou. She is the National Security & Human Rights director at the Government Accountability Project and a former ethics adviser to the U.S. Department of Justice.
To Watch the Episode
Democracy Now
Former CIA agent John Kiriakou speaks out just days after he was sentenced to 30 months in prison, becoming the first CIA official to face jail time for any reason relating to the U.S. torture program. Under a plea deal, Kiriakou admitted to a single count of violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act by revealing the identity of a covert officer to a freelance reporter, who did not publish it. Supporters say Kiriakou is being unfairly targeted for having been the first CIA official to publicly confirm and detail the Bush administration’s use of waterboarding. Kiriakou joins us to discuss his story from Washington, D.C., along with his attorney, Jesselyn Radack, director of National Security & Human Rights at the Government Accountability Project. "This ... was not a case about leaking; this was a case about torture. And I believe I’m going to prison because I blew the whistle on torture," Kiriakou says. "My oath was to the Constitution. … And to me, torture is unconstitutional."
Guests:
John Kiriakou, former CIA analyst and case officer who will soon go to prison for whistleblowing on the CIA’s torture program. He is the author of Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA’s War on Terror.
Jesselyn Radack, attorney for CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou. She is the National Security & Human Rights director at the Government Accountability Project and a former ethics adviser to the U.S. Department of Justice.
To Watch the Episode
Whistleblower John Kiriakou: For Embracing Torture, John Brennan a "Terrible Choice to Lead the CIA"
Days after he was sentenced to 30 months in prison, John Kiriakou — the first CIA official to be jailed for any reason relating to the torture program — denounces President Obama’s appointment of John Brennan to head the CIA. "I’ve known John Brennan since 1990," Kiriakou says. "I worked directly for John Brennan twice. I think that he is a terrible choice to lead the CIA. I think that it’s time for the CIA to move beyond the ugliness of the post-September 11th regime, and we need someone who is going to respect the Constitution and to not be bogged down by a legacy of torture."
Guests:
John Kiriakou, former CIA analyst and case officer who will soon go to prison for whistleblowing on the CIA’s torture program. He is the author of Reluctant Spy: My Secret Life in the CIA’s War on Terror.
Jesselyn Radack, attorney for CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou. She is the National Security & Human Rights director at the Government Accountability Project and a former ethics adviser to the U.S. Department of Justice.
To Watch the Episode
Saturday, February 02, 2013
Mumia Abu-Jamal: "The United States Is Fast Becoming One of the Biggest Open-Air Prisons on Earth"; Noelle Hanrahan & Stephen Vittoria: "Long Distance Revolutionary" - Mumia Abu-Jamal’s Journey from Black Panthers to Prison Journalist
Mumia Abu-Jamal: "The United States Is Fast Becoming One of the Biggest Open-Air Prisons on Earth"
Democracy Now
In a rare live interview, Mumia Abu-Jamal calls into Democracy Now! as the new film, "Long Distance Revolutionary," about his life premieres in New York City this weekend. After 29 years on death row, he is now being held in general population at the Pennsylvania State Correctional Institution – Mahanoy. "How free are we today, those who claim to be non-prisoners? Your computers are being read by others in government. Your letters, your phone calls are being intercepted," says Mumia Abu-Jamal. "We live now in a national security state, where the United States is fast becoming one of the biggest open-air prisons on earth. We can speak about freedom, and the United States has a long and distinguished history of talking about freedom, but have we exampled freedom? And I think the answer should be very clear: We have not." In 1982, Mumia was sentenced to die for killing Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner. He has always maintained his innocence and is perhaps America’s most famous political prisoner. In 2011, an appeals court upheld his conviction, but also vacated his death sentence. It found jurors were given confusing instructions.
Guest:
Mumia Abu-Jamal, former death row prisoner. For decades, Abu-Jamal has argued racism by the trial judge and prosecutors led to his conviction for the killing of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner. Last year, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals set aside his death sentence after finding jurors were given confusing instructions that encouraged them to choose the death penalty rather than a life sentence.
To Watch the Interview
"Long Distance Revolutionary": Mumia Abu-Jamal’s Journey from Black Panthers to Prison Journalist
The new documentary, "Long Distance Revolutionary: A Journey with Mumia Abu-Jamal," premieres today in New York City. We play an excerpt of the film and speak to writer, producer and director Steve Vittoria, as well as Noelle Hanrahan of Prison Radio, who has interviewed Abu-Jamal many times over the years. The film features many supporters of Mumia, including actress Ruby Dee, writer Tariq Ali, and author Michelle Alexander.
Guests:
Stephen Vittoria, longtime documentary filmmaker. Most recently, he is the writer, director, producer and editor of Long Distance Revolutionary: A Journey with Mumia Abu-Jamal. The film premiers in theaters in New York City Feb. 1-3. We recently featured his 2005 documentary, One Bright Shining Moment, about Senator George McGovern.
Noelle Hanrahan, director of Prison Radio and a producer of Long Distance Revolutionary.
To Watch the Conversation
Democracy Now
In a rare live interview, Mumia Abu-Jamal calls into Democracy Now! as the new film, "Long Distance Revolutionary," about his life premieres in New York City this weekend. After 29 years on death row, he is now being held in general population at the Pennsylvania State Correctional Institution – Mahanoy. "How free are we today, those who claim to be non-prisoners? Your computers are being read by others in government. Your letters, your phone calls are being intercepted," says Mumia Abu-Jamal. "We live now in a national security state, where the United States is fast becoming one of the biggest open-air prisons on earth. We can speak about freedom, and the United States has a long and distinguished history of talking about freedom, but have we exampled freedom? And I think the answer should be very clear: We have not." In 1982, Mumia was sentenced to die for killing Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner. He has always maintained his innocence and is perhaps America’s most famous political prisoner. In 2011, an appeals court upheld his conviction, but also vacated his death sentence. It found jurors were given confusing instructions.
Guest:
Mumia Abu-Jamal, former death row prisoner. For decades, Abu-Jamal has argued racism by the trial judge and prosecutors led to his conviction for the killing of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner. Last year, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals set aside his death sentence after finding jurors were given confusing instructions that encouraged them to choose the death penalty rather than a life sentence.
To Watch the Interview
"Long Distance Revolutionary": Mumia Abu-Jamal’s Journey from Black Panthers to Prison Journalist
The new documentary, "Long Distance Revolutionary: A Journey with Mumia Abu-Jamal," premieres today in New York City. We play an excerpt of the film and speak to writer, producer and director Steve Vittoria, as well as Noelle Hanrahan of Prison Radio, who has interviewed Abu-Jamal many times over the years. The film features many supporters of Mumia, including actress Ruby Dee, writer Tariq Ali, and author Michelle Alexander.
Guests:
Stephen Vittoria, longtime documentary filmmaker. Most recently, he is the writer, director, producer and editor of Long Distance Revolutionary: A Journey with Mumia Abu-Jamal. The film premiers in theaters in New York City Feb. 1-3. We recently featured his 2005 documentary, One Bright Shining Moment, about Senator George McGovern.
Noelle Hanrahan, director of Prison Radio and a producer of Long Distance Revolutionary.
To Watch the Conversation
Friday, February 01, 2013
On the Media: Trevor Aaronson - The FBI's "Hatching and Financing" of Terrorist Plots
The FBI's "Hatching and Financing" of Terrorist Plots
On the Media
Since 9/11, the FBI has stepped up its reliance on sting operations to catch potential terrorists before they strike. But in the process, says journalist Trevor Aaronson, the agency has ended up "hatching and financing more terrorist plots in the United States than any other group." Bob talks with Aaronson about his new book, The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI's Manufactured War on Terrorism.
To Listen to the Interview
On the Media
Since 9/11, the FBI has stepped up its reliance on sting operations to catch potential terrorists before they strike. But in the process, says journalist Trevor Aaronson, the agency has ended up "hatching and financing more terrorist plots in the United States than any other group." Bob talks with Aaronson about his new book, The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI's Manufactured War on Terrorism.
To Listen to the Interview
Nick Turse: Kill Anything That Moves - New Book Exposes Hidden Crimes of the War Kerry, Hagel Fought in Vietnam
"Kill Anything That Moves": New Book Exposes Hidden Crimes of the War Kerry, Hagel Fought in Vietnam
Democracy Now
Two of the leading figures nominated to head President Obama’s second-term foreign policy establishment have their political roots in the Vietnam War. If confirmed, Chuck Hagel will become the first Vietnam War veteran to head the Pentagon, while John Kerry will helm the State Department after becoming one of the most prominent veterans to oppose the Vietnam War upon his return from duty. Although Vietnam is far behind them, Kerry and Hagel will now have to contend with the longest-running war in U.S. history: Afghanistan. We’re joined by Nick Turse, managing editor of TomDispatch.com and author of the new book, "Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam." The title is taken from an order given to the U.S. forces who slaughtered more than 500 Vietnamese civilians in the notorious My Lai massacre of 1968. Drawing on interviews in Vietnam and a trove of previously unknown U.S. government documents — including internal military investigations of alleged war crimes in Vietnam — Turse argues that U.S. atrocities in Vietnam were not just isolated incidents, but "the inevitable outcome of deliberate policies, dictated at the highest levels of the military."
Guest:
Nick Turse, author, journalist, and managing editor of TomDispatch.com. His new book is Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam. Other books include The Case for Withdrawal from Afghanistan and The Complex.
To Watch the Episode
Democracy Now
Two of the leading figures nominated to head President Obama’s second-term foreign policy establishment have their political roots in the Vietnam War. If confirmed, Chuck Hagel will become the first Vietnam War veteran to head the Pentagon, while John Kerry will helm the State Department after becoming one of the most prominent veterans to oppose the Vietnam War upon his return from duty. Although Vietnam is far behind them, Kerry and Hagel will now have to contend with the longest-running war in U.S. history: Afghanistan. We’re joined by Nick Turse, managing editor of TomDispatch.com and author of the new book, "Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam." The title is taken from an order given to the U.S. forces who slaughtered more than 500 Vietnamese civilians in the notorious My Lai massacre of 1968. Drawing on interviews in Vietnam and a trove of previously unknown U.S. government documents — including internal military investigations of alleged war crimes in Vietnam — Turse argues that U.S. atrocities in Vietnam were not just isolated incidents, but "the inevitable outcome of deliberate policies, dictated at the highest levels of the military."
Guest:
Nick Turse, author, journalist, and managing editor of TomDispatch.com. His new book is Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam. Other books include The Case for Withdrawal from Afghanistan and The Complex.
To Watch the Episode
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)