Harvey Wasserman : Big Hurt Hits ‘Nuclear Renaissance’

Plant Vogle, nuclear power plant in Burke County, Georgia: $108 million in overcharges — and counting. Image from Georgia Country Blog.

Lab report:
Is the ‘nuclear renaissance’ dead yet?

By Harvey Wasserman / The Rag Blog / September 13, 2010

America’s much hyped “reactor renaissance” is facing a quadruple bypass. In actual new construction, proposed projects, and overseas sales, soaring costs are killing new nukes. And the old ones are leaking like Dark Age relics teetering on the brink of disaster.

As renewables plummet in cost, and private financing stays nil, the nuclear industry is desperate to gouge billions from Congress for loan guarantees to build new reactors. Thus far, citizen activism has stopped them. But the industry is pouring all it has into this fall’s short session, yet again demanding massive new subsides to stay on life support.

Here’s a lab report:

  • Soaring costs at Vogtle, the U.S.’s one active new reactor project, have stuck Georgia ratepayers with $108 million in unplanned overcharges… and that’s just for starters at a site where actual construction has barely begun. Georgia’s PUC now says it will hike rates by nearly 3 times the original $1.30/month promised when it first agreed to soak ratepayers for the plant — in advance. This new hike was opposed by the PUC’s own staff, which blasted the whole deal for being shrouded in secrecy.

    Currently calculated to cost a sure-to-soar $14.5 billion, the Vogtle project got $8.33 billion in federal loan guarantees from Obama in February. Citizen/taxpayer groups have since sued to see the details, which the administration is keeping secret.

Such soaring rates and slipping schedules defined the first generation of “too cheap to meter” reactors, which almost without exception came in years late and billions over budget. Costs of the two original Vogtle reactors jumped by 1,263% — from an original $660 million budget to nearly $9 billion — forcing up statewide rates more than 12%. Construction was promised for seven years, but actually took 16.

The French giant AREVA’s “new generation” projects in Finland and Flamanville, France, have also soared hugely over budget and behind schedule. So there’s every indication the new generation of reactors will be as catastrophically behind schedule and over budget as the first.

  • John Rowe, the CEO of Exelon, America’s top reactor owner (17 in 3 states), says low gas prices could delay construction of new merchant nukes in the U.S. by a “decade, maybe two.” Merchant power plants sell electricity into open competitive markets. Because atomic energy can’t compete with natural gas or renewables and efficiency, Exelon has withdrawn its application to build two reactors in Victoria County, Texas. “We haven’t totally abandoned” the project, says Rowe. But “it’s very unlikely we would do it for a long time.”
  • American reactor component makers are angry with India for passing new law requiring the industry to assume substantial liability for a catastrophe they might cause. The horrifying aftermath of Bhopal, where Union Carbide killed thousands of local citizens with a lethal gas emission for which they have not been held fully accountable, still weighs heavily in India.

    But the atomic industry will not tread where it’s held liable for the true costs of its potential disasters. In the U.S., liability is capped at around $11 billion, even though the financial damage from a full-scale catastrophe could easily soar into the trillions. Minimum estimates from the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, which occurred in a remote, impoverished area, have exceeded $500 billion. By recent estimates the death toll is 985,000 and still counting.

    On behalf of U.S. corporations, the Obama Administration is demanding the Indian liability requirements be lifted. Especially in the wake of BP’s Deepwater Horizon catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico, it is a stunning admission that even after 50 years, reactor technology cannot be held accountable for its technical vulnerabilities, here or abroad

  • America’s aging fleet of first generation reactors is leaking profusely. Indian Point, north of Manhattan, has suffered seven unplanned shut-downs in two years. In recent months serious emissions of tritium and other radioactive substances into the air and water have been found at Vermont Yankee, Indian Point, New Jersey’s Oyster Creek, and many more.

    Ohio’s infamous Davis-Besse, where boric acid ate virtually all the way through a reactor pressure vessel, has sprung some two dozen leaks which cannot be explained by its owner, First Energy. In Vermont, leaks from pipes the operators said did not exist have seeped contaminated water into the Connecticut River. As reactor owners petition to extend operating licenses for decades to come, the rickety, embrittled old plants become increasingly dangerous.

According to official records, the nuclear industry has spent at least $645 million in the past decade lobbying for taxpayer handouts. It got $18.5 billion in loan guarantees from the Bush Administration in 2005. Obama has asked for some $36 billion more. But so far a national grassroots movement has kept that from happening. The industry is demanding more from Congress, and will continue to do so as long as legislators need cash to run their campaigns.

But it is now clearer than ever that atomic energy cannot compete, that new construction means new rate hikes, that delays and cost overruns will always outstrip the industry’s initial public assurances, and that after a half-century this technology still can’t face the prospect of full liability for the disasters it might impose… or even for the “minor” radiation it constantly emits.

Will this will finally kill the much hyped “renaissance” of a Dark Age technology defined by quadruple failures in human health, global ecology, sound finance, and shaky performance?

That will depend on the power of citizen activism. Nuclear power can’t survive without protection from accident liability. Nor can new plants be built without huge public subsidies.

The longer those are stopped, the more likely a Solartopian transition to the only sources that can sustain us: increased efficiency and the green-powered birth of the Age of Renewables.

[Harvey Wasserman’s Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth is at www.solartopia.org, along with Pete Seeger’s “Song for Solartopia” on YouTube.

The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Marc Estrin : Unholy Ground


UNHOLY GROUND

By Marc Estrin / The Rag Blog / September 11, 2010

Here it is 9/11 again, and the world is all caught up in a debate on whether our “attackers” are being “insensitive” in demanding a presence at “ground zero” — or two blocks away, or 20, or on the island of Manhattan.

Although I’m a fiction writer, it’s hard for me to get involved in this debate concerning counterfactuals, sides taking passionate sides on the ethics of a fairy tale. Though it is interesting to thrash out whether Jack was right to steal the giant’s magic harp, the fact is that there was no giant; there was no harp; there was no Jack. At least not as real people in this marvelous story.

While there may have been some middle-easterners involved in some way (though the evidence is unclear), the concrete-set notion that “19 Arab highjackers with box cutters attacked us” is — to anyone who has looked at the physical and circumstantial evidence — perfectly silly, and certainly not grounds for an anti-Muslim crusade.

This is not the place to present the mountains of evidence against the “official story” of 9/11. For a brief fact sheet on the collapse of the three buildings, one might go here.

Suffice it to say that planes do not “vaporize” upon crashing, and steel buildings do not symmetrically collapse at free fall speed from airplane strikes or fire — or from no airplane strikes and tiny fires, as in the case of Building 7.

I began serious study of 9/11 issues back in 2004 after my reading of David Ray Griffin’s first book, The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11. Here is my review from back then.

In the six years since, I have read many articles, watched many videos, and had endless discussions with smart people about this issue. And I’ve concluded two things:

  1. The official story is transparent junk.
  2. It’s very difficult to get anyone to question it.

And while firm conclusions are a bit evasive — at least around the edges — about who actually “did” 9/11, much evidence points to those with motives, materials, authority, and opportunities to pull it off. The prime suspects combining all these are personnel and agencies of the U.S. government. But it will take an independent investigation to look into that. Nevertheless, it is very likely that “ground zero” is not only not “sacred,” but is rather intensely unholy, smelling of sulfur.

Given #2 above, it’s not likely that an independent investigation will happen soon — at least in the U.S.

So what should a novelist do? Since the MSM will not cover it, I decided to write SKULK, a comic novel about 9/11 issues. Maybe, I thought, the material could get beyond the truther choir out into the fiction-reading public. An end-run, as it were, around let’s-not-go-there-ism. Though the story is ridiculous (but rich), the websites mentioned by the schemers are real. Were a reader to be curious enough to check them out, he or she would be standing at the edge of a vast sea of real information generally out of public view.

So for this 9/11, I thought I’d share a short section of SKULK in which Skulk — Teresa Lee Skulkington of the Connecticut Skulkingtons — convinces her boyfriend, Prof. Richard Gronsky, of Kansas State University, that America needs a “teaching moment,” and that 9/11 truth is it.

Our heroine was originally modeled on Ann Coulter, and this scene germinated after I was told (I cannot vouch for this) that AC was — improbably — a Deadhead! So here, in a chapter called “The Wheel, our dynamic duo, high on Uncle Sam acid tabs, are recovering from a complex trip. Gronsky’s pet project is to get Kansas to secede from the union. I’ll explain anything else that needs explaining in [square brackets].

And at the seventh hour, they rested. The Dead cd had been retired. Richard lay sprawled out on the couch, eating green, green guacamole, singing to himself his favorite verse from Carmina Burana over and over like some tape loop at Kaufmann’s. [the department store where a mysterious year-round Santa Claus works]
Rex sedet in vertice
Caveat ruinam!
Mmmm, mmmm, mmm, yowsa…
Nam sub axe legimus
Hecubam reginam.
“Yes.”
She, on the other hand, was over-tired-revved, sitting in the chair, her arms around her knees, her head down, wrapped in teeming brain.
“You know that article you read me?”
“Unh unh.”
“The article about the kid and the water?”
“No. What kid? What water?”
“Hydrogen oxide or whatever.” [a conspiracy theory about the government putting di-hydrogen oxide in the water]
“Oh, yeah, yeah. What about it?”
“The Free State of Kansas is never going to happen…”
“What do you mean?” he loudly objected.
“Hold on there. Hear me out, hear me out.”
Richard closed his eyes.
“The Free State of Kansas is never going to happen — without some kind of shock, some huge consciousness-raising about the true state of things.”
“Isn’t Dubya enough?”
“No, no, no. Read your own goddamn Frank book. [Skulk has come down to Kansas to disprove Thomas Frank’s book, What’s the Matter with Kansas?] Rove has got the status quo sewn up. We’ve got to break…”
“Could we talk about this tomorrow?”
“This is tomorrow. Look at the sky. And you’ve got an eight o’clock class. So perk up!”
She poured what was left of the chardonnay in his lap.
“Look,” she continued, “the American public is very sweet — especially Kansans — and Love is All — and all — but they’re…I don’t want to say ‘stupid’. Let’s just say they’re a little hidebound in what they take to be the present. The official version of the present.”
“Let’s give ‘em all some Uncle Sam…” he suggested.
“Yeah, well they’ve had too much Uncle Sam already. They need to — what do you academics say? — unpack him. See what’s really in there.”
“But that’s ridiculous. They won’t,” Richard observed.
“They will if they are shaken up enough. Enough to see through some of the more obvious lies.”
“Like?”
“Like all the 9/11 stuff, liberal bonehead. What could be more explosive?”
“They’ve already been shaken up by 9/11.”
“Yeah, and they’ve circled the wagons. Around Dubya and the gang.”
“That’s predictable. People always support…”
“But what if they realized that Dubya and the gang were the ones that did it? I mean in some way did it?”
“What?”
“9/11.”
“Unh unh. I’m not going there. And no one else will either.”
He rose exhaustedly to his feet and began pacing.
“Look,” she lectured, “who ordered NORAD to stand down? Have you seen the early photos of the Pentagon? It’s only a little, tiny hole. Where’s the plane? Melted? Where are the engines? Engines don’t vaporize from burning fuel. How did two giant skyscrapers…”
“Three.”
“Three — collapse from fire when no steel buildings had ever collapsed like that before in the history of buildings? C’mon. Weren’t you suspicious when you saw all that on TV?”
“No. I was horrified.”
“Hey, these are the guys that took us into war to stop Saddam from dropping nuclear bombs on us. And they’ve got people still swallowing it.”
“These are the guys?? These are your buddies, your father’s friends. I can’t believe you’re saying this! You! Ms. Fierce Right-wingnut.”
“Yeah. Well that was then and this is now. Post. Don’t you want to see the Free State of Kansas?”
“Yes, of course.”
“So we need to shake our dear citizens out of their lethargy. Fight the mass psychosis.”
“How?”
Teresa sat down in Richard’s place.
“I don’t know.”
“Good.”
“But I do know this: Things seem pretty benign here at home, right? — at least for Dubya and the gang. But a haystack soaked with kerosene also looks benign. It doesn’t smell that way — but then neither does the country. But it appears content to just sit there — until you toss in a match.”
“And you want to be the match.”
“We want to be the match.”
“The 9/11 stuff.”
“What else? It’s the smoking gun.”
“I see.”
Richard plopped down next to her on the couch. They both sat in silence for several minutes, each concerned with conflagration.
“What was that place called with the French name that John Brown…where somebody slaughtered somebody else?” she asked out of the blue.
“Marais des Cygnes,” he answered, Swamp of the Swans. Why? You thinking of slaughtering somebody? Your once-beloved vice-president, when he comes to speak at Raytheon next week?”
“No,” she said, taking him seriously. “That would bring down a police state big time. Homeland Security über Alles. No, we need some kind of teaching moment. And it can’t be seen as a terrorist act.”
“A teaching moment.”
“You’re supposed to know about those. I just thought it was a nice name.”
“What?”
“Marais des Cygnes.”
“Oh.”
“It’s like you and me. You the swamp, and I the swan.”

How much Uncle Sam will it take to get people to understand the workings of Uncle Sam?

[Marc Estrin is a writer and activist, living in Burlington, Vermont. His novels, Insect Dreams, The Half Life of Gregor Samsa, The Education of Arnold Hitler, Golem Song, and The Lamentations of Julius Marantz have won critical acclaim. His memoir, Rehearsing With Gods: Photographs and Essays on the Bread & Puppet Theater (with Ron Simon, photographer) won a 2004 theater book of the year award. He is currently working on a novel about the dead Tchaikovsky.]

The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Battle of Algiers:
White vigilantes and the police in Katrina’s aftermath

By scott crow / The Rag Blog / September 8, 2010

“…within the war we are all waging with the forces of death, subtle and otherwise, conscious or not – I am not only a casualty, I am also a warrior.” –Audre Lorde

On the fifth anniversary of Katrina I want to share this narrative about anarchist organizing in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. This piece is made of stories about the early violence we came across in dealing with the white vigilantes and police in Algiers. It takes place upon my return to the area after a failed mission to find my friend Robert King of the Angola 3 right after the levees failed.

It also contains characters who had done something good only to reveal themselves as less than honorable, and somewhat harmful later. These stories take place just prior to organizing the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Ground_Collective Common Ground Collective. This is a rough draft excerpt from my forthcoming book: Black Flags and Windmills: Hope, Anarchy and the Common Ground Collective.

Five years later we have only scratched the surface of the atrocities of the vigilantes and the police. Many of us are still healing from those encounters. This story is just one of them.

On September 4th I was back home in Austin, resting uneasily from my draining trip. I received a call from my friend Malik Rahim who unknown to me had also remained in New Orleans. He on the other end of the crackling phone line saying we got racist white vigilantes driving around in pick up trucks terrorizing black people on the street. It’s very serious. We need some supplies and support…

He and his neighbors were being harassed and threatened by armed white men and the police. He had been interviewed for a piece that appeared in the San Francisco Bay View in California that explained the grim situation in detail. I had read it upon my brief return back to Austin. Now he was on the phone because he had heard I was just in NOLA looking for [former Black Panther and Angola 3 defendant] Robert King. I knew he was serious. He said he hoped I would come back to New Orleans to give them support and use it as another opportunity to search again for our friend King who was still missing.

Malik Rahim is a serious man with a broad smile and a big laugh. He was a former Black Panther, the Defense Minister for the New Orleans chapter. His days have been given to making the world a better place since that time. Throughout much of their lives, the histories of the men of the Angola 3 have been intertwined with that of Malik. He and King had not only been Panthers together, they had also been childhood friends in the Algiers neighborhood. I had visited him at his mom’s house a few times with King at the beginning of the century.

After living in Oakland, California for years, Malik had settled once again in Algiers, where through King he and I had become friends in 2001. It’s one of the oldest neighborhoods in New Orleans, situated across the Mississippi from the French Quarter.

Malik, too, had waited out the storm at his home with a woman named Sharon Johnson. While Katrina left massive damage in her wake it hadn’t flooded his neighborhood. Malik had no electricity and no water, but his phone still worked, and when he called I knew it was critical that we move quickly. No electricity, but a live phone. It reminded me of the days just earlier in the leaky vacant warehouse. What an odd coincidence I thought as we spoke.

With determination I decided I was going to go back there to deliver supplies and get to King. This was a chance to try again to find out what had really happened to my friend. The only thing I knew was that he had been trapped in his house, surrounded by dirty water for eight or nine days. I hoped he was still alive. Robert King had been in solitary confinement for 29 years in a 6’ x 9’ cell. I could not let him sit in the floodwaters any longer; I felt a duty to try and get to him.

On the way out of Austin again I stopped at a meeting called by local anarchists and activists who were organizing local aid for evacuees. I shared my stories, tears, fears, and the scary realities of what was happening on the ground. I then asked if anyone in the circled crowd of 50-60 people would come to New Orleans knowing what might transpire. Sadly, there weren’t any takers. Was I doing the right thing?

After my first trip to the Gulf I knew better what to bring on this mission: water, food, candles, matches, ammunition and guns; nothing more and nothing less. We were not prepared enough the first time — we were outgunned and under resourced — but not this time.

Fear of the unknown crawled under the surface of my skin, fear of what was about to happen as I headed back. I knew it was getting more desperate in the Gulf as time passed. Was a race war going to erupt? How many people had died needlessly already?

I had seen from the first trip the disregard and lack of empathy that some white rescuers had shown to desperate people. It had made me deeply angry but I had generally kept my mouth closed. I was torn between doing the work of simply helping people, and espousing my political ideals in the face of oppressive ignorance.

We hurried back to the scene of the floods, our truck speeding alone on the highway headed into an abyss. Few cars moved our way, apart from the occasional military vehicle. In the other direction the roadway was overflowing with evacuees — who began to look like refugees from another place.

People were piled into and on top of vehicles, carrying with them the remnants of their lives; others, stranded without cars, traveled on foot. Families, neighbors, and strangers trying to go somewhere — anywhere — that was away from the flooded areas. All the while the government repeated on the radio “order will be restored” when all anyone wanted to hear was that they would do what ever it took to get everyone to safety. It was a modern day exodus, caused by corruption and unresponsiveness that didn’t have to happen.

I asked myself “what the hell am I getting into?”

We changed course to go along the lower southwestern coastal route this time, traveling into what looked more and more like occupied war territory with military vehicles and personnel at every turn. I wondered if the doctored passes that we made would get us past the bureaucracy we knew was already rearing its head.

The military and the state only understood badges and uniforms. They wouldn’t let civilians help even though it was the right thing to do. Many of the young soldiers looked war-stressed and distant as we came up. They grilled us about why and where we were going. Half truths got us through; it was the only way.

After the last checkpoint we drove headlong onto the empty bridgeway; I knew we were “safe.” I let out a sigh of relief and continued to Malik’s. Ours was the only truck on the road, so we ignored the dead useless stop lights.

So much water so close to home

Algiers is situated in New Orleans, on the south and west sides of the Mississippi river in an area called, ironically, enough the “West Bank.” Like the West Bank halfway around the world in the Middle East, it too had an apartheid system — with two unequal populations. Before the storm, the West Bank was home to 70,000 people. It had a largely poor black population, and a small, wealthy white minority. Governments rendered the larger populace invisible in daily life; why would a storm make it any different?

Huge housing projects and surrounding neighborhoods were burned out or empty, first from neglect, and now the storm. There had been no social services or safety nets to speak of for decades. When the last clinic closed 10 years earlier it stayed that way, and it was the same with many shuttered schools.

It was surrounded by massive graying concrete levees on the Mississippi sides — almost like prison walls — which didn’t give way, despite nearly being crushed by a huge barge ship that Katrina had run aground within a few feet of the levee walls. This was why it hadn’t flooded, even though the river had swollen to the top of the levees.

After the storm, most residents were gone, with only about 3-4,000 remaining behind. Many were people who couldn’t leave. They had no money, transportation, or family support, or were elderly and in ill health. The storm had made an already terrible situation much worse for them.

The police command structures in the fourth district of Algiers were in shambles. There was scant military help on the ground on this side of the river. The city center — the money-making sections — were the most important to those in power. They had to get NOLA open for business and they neglected everything else.

There were dead bodies on the ground, and buildings smoldered in flames from unknown fires. Algiers, like the rest of New Orleans, was only a remnant of its former self. It was isolated geographically and psychologically from the other side of the river and the outside world.

What was called law enforcement at this stage was erratic, disorganized, and reactionary. It was made up of city, county, state, and some federal officers, but mostly it was Louisiana-based. If they had a plan — besides acting like thugs with badges — it hadn’t been revealed.

As in life before Katrina, laws were subjectively enforced. There were different standards for whites and everyone else, and threats from officers were all over the map in severity. They were accountable to no one but themselves. There were heavily fortified military zones and check points around the area but nothing inside. The residents were left to fend for themselves against the police.

Trapped in this situation, cut off from the rest of New Orleans and the world, Malik Rahim, Sharon Johnson, and a few nearby neighbors struggled to provide basic aid to each other with rudimentary food delivery of military MRE’s (Meals Ready to Eat) and water provided by a distant government military.

They had few resources: one busted-ass car with limited gas, including what they could find from abandoned cars. There was no Red Cross, no FEMA — nothing. To get anything you had to have a vehicle, and access to gas and money to buy it. Someone had to drive 20-30 miles to a remote military outpost, wait in a long line under armed security — and hope they would be let back into their community before curfew without running out of gas or being shot. The ordeal would take the whole day. That was all they had — there were no other options.

Tapestries of violence

This community had asked for support, so I returned to do what I could. It was what many of us on the outside with conscience would be doing in the weeks to come. But today that was an eternity from where I stood.

I arrived in New Orleans for the second time seven days after the levee failure on September 5th. Everyone pitched in to unload the supplies we had brought. Then the conversation turned to discussing the best way to search for King.

Before we did anything else, Malik took Brandon and me down the street to cover up the dead bullet-riddled body that lay near his house with a piece of sheet metal tin. The bloated and putrid body had been left there for days. We could smell it as we approached. Malik hoped someone would come and get it soon. But who was looking for this man, unknown to any of us, including the kids who found him?

His image haunts me among the string of deaths I experienced during my time there. He met an ignoble death without a chance. Left to decay on the sun-baked street, where others I had seen had been in the waters. I imagined they all deserved better. His death was a product of his skin color, economics, and chance.

We started establishing safety and security for ourselves and our immediate neighbors. Something else had happened in the short interim since our first arrival in New Orleans. While the state was in crisis, white vigilante militias had formed in Algiers Point and in the French Quarter district. These white vigilantes were little more than an organized mob. Signs on the backs of their trucks announced that it was their job to secure law and order in the absence of the police. The militia in Algiers seemed to be made up of drunken racist fools.

Algiers Point is a small, very wealthy, very white neighborhood that is about 10 blocks long in each direction. It is very separated from the Algiers neighborhood. Both sections are part of the broader Westbank, which is predominantly black working class, and poor.

Algiers Point was the only neighborhood on the West Bank where when traveling down the mostly abandoned and littered streets we saw hateful signs like “You loot, we’ll shoot” or “Your life ain’t worth what’s inside.” Signs proudly displayed on the houses that were still occupied, as well as the ones that were vacant and boarded up.

These kinds of signs were put up by the vigilante types who stayed. They believed it was their right to protect their private property and secure law and order. It was as if the dam of civil society that kept them from acting out their most racist tendencies had broken enough to allow their ugly hatred to emerge. They had another shot at the good old Klan days and they were going to take it.

This armed white militia rode around through largely low-income black communities and meted out their version of justice — intimidation — around Algiers and the West Bank. Their “defense,” as they called it, amounted to harassment of any unarmed black person on the street alone. With pride they acted and talked tough, never offering to help anyone who wasn’t white.

Their incendiary vigilante actions, thinly veiled under the guise of protecting themselves and their private property, was gasoline on the fire of the undeclared war on all who were desperate. I found myself asking what kind of people are more interested in their private property and security than in the well-being of another human?

I could understand the concept, given the right situation, of an armed group of people gathering to defend themselves in the absence of the state, and this disaster could be seen as such a situation. But ultimately in their racist actions and words they acted no better than Klansmen straight out of the old Deep South, as they paraded around in their trucks. Our conflicting ideas of what community self defense meant were on a collision course.

In those early days, the Algiers Point Militia openly threatened — and may have killed — desperate unarmed civilians. They foolishly bragged about it to a Danish media crew and to anyone else who would listen. Local representatives of the state, or what little remained of it, with their ingrained racist attitudes towards these marginalized communities they were supposed to protect, stood by and let these vigilantes do their thing.

There were bullet-riddled bodies of black men in the street, including one that we tried to get picked up for 15 days while it decomposed. Was it the vigilantes or was it the police or both? Those men’s bodies were on different streets — found separately — near nothing of value. Who killed these men? I know now — as I believed then — that the vigilantes or the police had killed them and gotten away with it.

In this country, on city streets, they killed people and were accountable to no one.

They regularly both drew their guns on, and shot at, numerous innocent people who happened to be unarmed, poor, black, and on foot, to scare and intimidate them. They threatened Malik—who they mockingly called the “Mayor of Algiers” — from the beginning, pointing guns as they would drive by, threatening to “get ’em.”

The police did nothing but close their eyes and continue their own harassment and shooting campaigns. The lines between law and thugs blurred, leaving people with nowhere to turn.

Undercurrents

From the moment I had set foot into the Algiers neighborhood and spoken with Malik and Sharon Johnson in more detail, I realized that this was going to be bigger, more difficult, and more dangerous than anyone thought. They were both exhausted from having to struggle for survival and remain vigilant about the militia and the police. There had been no help. People were left on their own.

Although Algiers had not flooded, it had been ravaged by the storm, and the long term neglect before that. The water was still high along the levees down the block rising at the edge of the dead end streets to the north and east sides of the banks; spirits were low in the streets below, but some desperate hope remained among those residents who had stayed. This had always been their home and they didn’t want to leave.

I had been here a few years before with Malik and King, who showed me their old stomping grounds as kids and young hustlers, before they became Black Panthers. Now, like the rest of city, trash and abandoned cars littered the empty streets and vacant lots. I asked myself — as I came in and passed the armed, sandbagged turrets at the intersections — what damage was new and what had been that way for a long time?

This place had been occupied by a police force before, but now the outskirts were occupied by an army that watched from bunkers without helping the people within. Military vehicles patrolled many of the city streets. It looked like low intensity warfare against a civilian population, not aid, eerily reminding me of what I had seen in Belfast and in East Berlin.

Immediately after delivering water and food, we met and talked with residents from the neighborhood who were scared and fed up with the white militia and the police. People, mostly men with little or no resources, both young and old, told us the stories of their live, and why they had stayed.

Some were forgotten vets from U.S. government wars, others had seen prison time for essentially being Black in Louisiana, while some were quiet and deeply religious men. But they all stayed because they had to. All of them had long family histories within these city blocks; many houses were multi-generational.

They cared about where they stayed and what happened to their neighbors. They worked together to make the most of a bad situation with no resources. They were men and women who had been reduced to statistics by the media, the government, and civil society; they were virtually invisible, characterized only as poor, black, unemployed — branded as hoodlums, drug addicts, or any other number of de-humanizing words — and now they were being called looters for managing to survive.

The small group talked about what we might do to defend ourselves should it become necessary. There were conflicting opinions on how the police might react, but we felt we had no other choice today. We inventoried what we had among us. Who was in, and who could have nothing to do with carrying arms.

Eventually — with Brandon Darby, Reggie B. and “Clarence” (not his real name) carrying civilian AK-47’s and a .45 caliber pistol, and me with a 9mm carbine rifle — we began our first rudimentary watches, standing or sitting on Malik’s porch and waiting, armed.

I wasn’t a white man taking it on himself to protect helpless locals. There was no machismo. I was anxious and honored to be amongst these people. To me this was solidarity with people whose lives were being threatened simply because of the color of their skin.

Being there was an expression of my anti-racist principles, my personal relationships, and my revolutionary beliefs that already existed before the storm. I had been asked for support and came, not blindly but as a matter of principle. I had come back ready to defend friends and strangers in the neighborhood, because they asked me to. They wouldn’t have, had it not been necessary. Civil society had given them no choices. It looked as if they were left to die. We had to at least give ourselves a fighting chance for survival.

I was a community organizer from another city who believed that the right to self-determination and self-defense are fundamental if we are going to have just communities. I accept the fact that dismantling coercive systems that hold people down will require various tools, and sometimes it might involve defending ourselves and our communities. Even if a violent world in the future is what we want to avoid. It is one of the hard and dirty realities that we must sometimes face while moving towards liberation.

Comrades in the Crescent City by the river asked — and I said yes. I was terrified but resolved in what I was doing. I had little previous experience in community self-defense. I had been tested on a much smaller scale — resisting neo-nazis and small time fascists, confronting police brutality in the streets, facing threats from private security for my environmental or animal rights work. But this was on a scale unlike anything I knew.

I had had a few years of firearms practice, but now I needed to transform a conceptual framework of armed self-defense into a reality with many unknowns. It was all to happen so quickly too, without much or time for processing or reflection. It was now time for action.

Friends of Durruti

The midday humidity hung heavy and the helicopters continued their constant noise in the overhead sky. A few neighbors remained gathered at Malik’s, a long narrow “shotgun” style house built in the thirties that sits high off the ground with a tall concrete porch behind a rusting chain link fence.

The white vigilantes came around the corner in their truck — and as before — slowed in front of the house on Atlantic Avenue, talking their racist trash and making threats. But this time it was different — when they came we were there, and nervously holding our ground — armed. There were four or five of us — most from the neighborhood — and we held the high ground.

We had more firepower, a better firing position and we were sober. Finally someone said for them to move on down the road. They would not be able to intimidate or threaten any more residents around here. In a flash this could turn bad in a hail of bullets. Time was standing still, each moment passing slowly, with my finger on the trigger of my rifle.

Earlier, we had all informally agreed that some of us would hold the space no matter what, although it wasn’t clear exactly what that meant. The previous days had been harrowing, but this was one of the most unnerving situations of my life.

After a few words were exchanged, the truck drove on without further incident. My heart and my head pounded with sickness and relief. I was shaking inside from fear and adrenaline. The incident seemed to have lasted forever, but in reality it probably happened over a few scant minutes. In opposing them we had made our presence known.

My head swirled with a tidal wave, with more questions than answers. How was the state going to react? How were we going to react? Was this the right thing to do? What if the situation continued to escalate? Would other movement groups support us? What if I had shot someone — or worse killed them? Would it have been worth it?

Some of these men in the truck were known to Malik and his neighbors. Had the veil of society stopped them from this kind of aggression in the past, and now they felt free to kill as they pleased? Even if they were ignorant they had no real power once they were challenged; this was immediately apparent. As they left there we felt guarded joy and relief — they were gone but would they stop their attacks on the neighborhoods?

More volunteers would sit on Malik’s porch over the days to come and begin rudimentary neighborhood patrols, to keep the militia threat, and to a lesser degree the police, at bay. These acts and our refusal to leave in the face of repression made us enemies in the eyes of law enforcement, and race traitors to the racist militias.

I came to help, not end up on a porch with guns facing down a truck full of armed men. I, like the others, was ready to die defending the community from attacks. It meant something to them — especially at that time — that white people would come to their aid and put their lives on the line with them — as more would do as the days progressed. It had a profound effect on me, that by circumstances and choices we

had taken the step to not lie down, but to rebel against giving up hope.

There was no Red Cross, there was no FEMA, there was no protection except what we all were willing to organize ourselves. Under siege we stayed and soon myths were born from words that would take on lives of their own, as many currents swirled and converged taking us in new directions.

Sometime later the presence of whites and blacks working together in solidarity defense of these communities against the racist militia would be cited by local residents as one of the acts that helped ease the tensions in a racially and economically divided area devastated before the levees ever broke.

From self defense we created the Common Ground Collective based on anarchist principles and practice. An organization always at odds with the state, that took direct action to meet the needs of communities left to die.

[scott crow is an anarchist community organizer and writer based in Austin, Texas. He was one of the founders of Common Ground Collective, an organization formed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 to aid in the rebuilding of New Orleans.]

The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Leave a comment

Harry Targ : From Labor Day to Election Day

Obama’s Labor Day speech in Milwaukee: start of something new? Photo by Morry Gash / AP.

The working class built this country:
Now we must mobilize to transform it

By Harry Targ / The Rag Blog / September 9, 2010

From Labor Day to election day

I want to add my voice to the thousands of essayists and bloggers who have been contemplating the 2010 elections, the media “framing” of Tea Party influence, the role of progressives in the elections, and mobilizing for the last 50-plus days before the elections.

First, I think elections still matter. Since most people see politics and elections as equivalent and some of them actively participate in the electoral process, progressives need to be there as well.

In addition, in states and communities decisions will be made about how federal government money for local school corporations is to be allocated, about workers compensation for victims of asbestos related workplace injuries, so-called Right to Work laws, and how congressional and state legislative districts will be redesigned.

At the national level, policy decisions about such critical issues as jobs, climate change, education, military spending, and judicial appointments will be affected by election outcomes.

Second, most of these issues have not been the main narrative. The media have framed the fall elections around the big losses of Democrats, the rise of the Tea Party, and how the Obama administration has not fixed eight years of economic mismanagement and war (let alone 30 years of ill-conceived policies).

Third the “liberal” media, while more sophisticated and entertaining in its coverage of election year stories, over-emphasizes “making fun” of some of the outlandish Tea Party candidates for public office. And they, and their right wing media colleagues at Fox, have made the obscure former governor of Alaska a million dollar media star.

In response, Tea Party candidates, and their corporate sponsors, have decided to do two things: forget about trying to put together logical, coherent plans for an alternative set of policies and when challenged by enterprising reporters just walk away. Since the media they tell us is the enemy and most people are fearful of public speaking, incoherence and evasiveness will resonate well with a disillusioned public.

Fourth, part of the context for the unstable politics of the fall, 2010, is the continued economic crisis that grips working people. Unemployment, declining real wages, indebtedness, crumbling public services remains all too real for the majority of Americans.

In addition, until the President’s exciting Labor Day speech in Milwaukee, the Obama administration has failed to propose an economic stimulus program that could bring millions of un- and underemployed workers back to work and, until Labor Day, backed off his commitment to a massive program for creating green jobs.

For reasons of political exigency, he has postponed advocacy for immigration reform, climate change legislation, the Employee Free Choice Act, and an end to the blockade of Cuba. Perhaps most troubling for the long run, Obama appointed to positions of power many of the neoliberal financiers who were responsible for the current phase of capitalist crisis.

Having said all this, the administration has forestalled return to depression with a modest economic recovery program, created some public sector jobs, “saved” the U.S. auto industry, and has secured the passage of an inadequate health care reform bill but one which may stimulate more movement toward a single payer system in the future.

A little history

A high level of distrust of government, low regard for politicians, and periodic active anger at our public institutions is a characteristic feature of American history often reflected in voting against political incumbents and supporting candidates who are most vocal against government programs.

For example, the American National Election Studies (ANES) prepared an index of Trust in Government made up of several questions reflecting the points just raised. Looking over time the level of trust in government was at a score of 49 in 1958, 52 in 1964, 27 in 1980, 29 in 1992, 36 in 2000, and declined to 26 by 2008. Only twice in the Johnson years, did the Trust Index reach a score over 60 and six times since 1958 the index score was below 30.

The Tea Party is nothing new. Here’s “Citizen Know Nothing,” the nativist ideal of the American Party (aka the Know Nothing Party), 1854. American political prints 1766-1876 / Library of Congress / Wikimedia Commons.

In addition, a constant feature of political life has been active and extremist politics. For example, the American Party of the 1850s, or “Know Nothing Party,” got its name from members being instructed when asked about the party to say “I know nothing.” While short-lived they elected several national and state office holders before the civil war.

Throughout U.S. history so-called “nativist” groups formed and mobilized against waves of immigrants: Catholics, Germans, the Irish, Chinese, Jews, and Latinos. Armed Klan organizations terrorized the South and the Midwest in the 1880s and 1920s and 1930s and dominated the political life in many states in these eras.

Of course, extremist movements, often organized and funded by corporations and wealthy individuals, scared the American people during the dark days of anti-Communism in the 1940s and 1950s. Red Channels, a small but well-funded political organization, published lists of suspected Communists in the entertainment industry and pressured the new television corporations and advertisers to purge actors and actresses, with views supportive of labor, racial integration, and peace, from the airwaves. Their activism paralleled and reinforced Congressional reactionaries who used investigative committees to hound individuals and groups.

Alternatively, for all of Labor’s flaws, the history of the American labor movement has been central to social progress in the United States: from the demands for an eight hour day, skilled trades controls of the pace of work, health and safety at the work place, a fair wage, programs of health and retirement benefits, and, after much internal conflict, support for the struggles against racism and sexism.

There is no question that organized labor, although weakened and embattled, represents the most powerful force in today’s society resisting the privatization of social security, deregulation of the economy and environment, and the total marginalization of working people everywhere.

A progressive campaign program

So what to do now? History and context suggests that given the importance of elections, the enormous distrust of government, the existence of media and corporate capital support for the historic undercurrents of anti-government and anti-worker political traditions, often coupled with racism and fear of foreigners, progressives have only one choice for the next two months: work to elect political candidates from the city council to the Congress of the United States who support a “working people’s agenda.”

American political history tells us that movements like the Tea Party are not new. While the concern and anger reflected among those grassroots activists who participate in rallies and marches is usually sincere and motivated by fear of strange times and economic crises with no seeming resolution, its leaders offer no program, no vision, and no coherent agenda.

If Tea Party spokespersons and candidates are queried about their goals, they evade or refuse to respond. Some of their television heroes draw lines and circles and arrows on blackboards to illustrate the connections between people living down the street, working in a union job, teaching at a college, running for office, and the Russian Revolution of 1917.

No, progressives cannot argue with the Tea Party movement. But, what we must do is to campaign, not just for individual candidates or just for a party but for a “working people’s agenda.” That constitutes the only future for the vast majority of Americans. This agenda must include a fight for full employment.

As the AFL-CIO put it in 2009 action must be taken to extend unemployment benefits; rebuild America’s schools, roads, and energy systems; expand support for the maintenance of state and local public services; put all people who want to work on jobs that need to be done; and regulate banks more effectively so that they are required to support local projects that create businesses which will create jobs.

Laura Jackson, a member of the Communications Workers of America (CWA) noted recently: “We definitely need to make sure that the people making the decisions make jobs their top priority. I’m going to do all I can to make sure that happens including getting the message out to my family, union members, and anyone who will listen.”

Therefore, progressives, both in the labor movement and supportive of it, must welcome and support the new AFL-CIO campaign to mobilize voters in 26 states and 400 races to support candidates who endorse a working peoples’ agenda. This includes making sure that the “new Obama” proposals reflected in the President’s speech of September 6, 2010, carrying the message of green jobs and justice, become part of the agenda of every candidate we support this fall.

Also progressives must spread the word about the historic mobilization October 2 for “One Nation Working Together” organized by the AFL-CIO, the National Association of Colored People (NAACP), and the National Council of La Raza (NCLR). Already many peace and justice groups such as United For Peace and Justice (UFPJ) and the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS) have signed on as supporters.

Most important, progressives must work in their communities and in solidarity with workers, people of color, and youth to elect progressive candidates to public office and to monitor their conduct once they are elected. It must be made clear to all that the progressive majority is not engaged in politics to support candidates or parties but to transform America.

[Harry Tarq is a professor in American Studies who lives in West Lafayette, Indiana. He blogs at Diary of a Heartland Radical.]

The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

BOOKS / Alex Knight : Max Rameau’s ‘Take Back the Land’


Take Back the Land:
Give root to democracy

By Alex Knight / The Rag Blog / September 8, 2010

Take Back the Land: Land, Gentrification and the Umoja Village Shantytown, by Max Rameau (Nia Press, 2008); Paperback, 134 pp.; $12.95.

I first heard about a group called Take Back the Land, which was illegally moving homeless families into empty homes in Miami, in a study group about the Civil Rights movement and the grassroots organizing that made it so powerful.

The reference was highly appropriate. In many ways, Take Back the Land is a direct heir to that bottom-up, Black self-empowerment, civil disobedient, movement-building tradition, and is one of the most inspiring examples of a group renewing and developing that tradition today.

In our moment of crisis and stagnation, here is a group full of creativity, improvisation, and highly potent political analysis. Through its actions, the group proclaims: “Families are being foreclosed on and kicked out onto the street? We’re not going to lobby Washington and hope for some crumbs to come down. We’ll take matters into our own hands and move people directly into homes!”

This is precisely the spirit of direct action and participatory democracy that kick-started the Civil Rights movement, and the spirit that we need if we are to escape the human suffering that the elite are imposing on the poor and working class in this economic crisis.

Max Rameau, author of this book and a principal organizer in Take Back the Land Miami, came and spoke in Philadelphia a few months ago. I was struck not only by how charismatic and effective a speaker he was (something I could say about many smooth-talking political or corporate salesmen of our age), but by how Max was able to break down complex, abstract theoretical questions into common language that was easily understood.

In this way, he demystifies politics and translates concepts usually reserved for academics or professionals in such a way that average, everyday people can take away something new and useful from the exchange. It’s clear that his primary goal is not an ego trip to show off his brilliance, or to sell books and make money, but to do something much more difficult and meaningful: to spark movement to force the U.S. government to recognize housing as a human right.

This book is written in that same frank style. In fact, it’s basically a how-to on grassroots housing organizing. It’s short — only 132 pages — but all you need to know is laid out here: the political context of Miami and the nation in terms of lack of affordable housing and gentrification that drives poor and Black people out of their homes, the strategic decisions and organizing that go into launching a new organization and campaign, the challenges and joys of working with homeless people, and the difficult and deceptive terrain of interacting with politicians, who are often agents of larger and more powerful corporate forces.

Max Rameau just tells the story of his group, but in such a provocatively specific way. He explains to us exactly how things were done, who did them, who interfered and how, and he’s not at all afraid to name names.

The book centers on the incredible story of the Umoja Village, a shantytown built by Take Back the Land and allies on a vacant lot in a poor Black section of Miami. Because “In South Florida… local governments responded to the [housing] crisis by actively decreasing the number of low-income housing units” (pg. 23), Take Back the Land took the initiative to seize land and invite homeless people to take up residence there. The purpose of the action was not only to house people, an immediate need, but to draw attention to the crisis and to the government’s inaction, thereby hopefully shaming them into creating more low-income housing.

In the long run, the group’s “Political Objectives” were as follows (72):

  1. House and feed people.
  2. Assert the right of the black community to control land in the black community.
  3. Build a new society.

Even before the land seizure, much groundwork had been laid, including debating the strategy and politics of this type of action, discussing the possibility with allies and neighbors of the site, and trying to line up legal, fundraising, and other forms of support that would be necessary. Citing a legal precedent that homeless people had a right to not be evicted from territory where their basic living needs were met, the group was able to dissuade the police from immediately evicting them once they did move onto the land.

Seeing the police cars back away without arresting anyone made a strong impression on the homeless and poor people moving onto this land. “This was a real, tangible victory that the people witnessed with their own eyes” (65).

With shanty homes and compost toilets built, the Umoja Village stood on the land for six months, and was self-organized by the homeless residents. Take Back the Land prioritized that their group, while inspiring and leading this takeover, would become increasingly unnecessary in the day-to-day operation of the shantytown, so that the residents had total control.

The self-empowerment of the homeless was one of the most inspiring aspects of this book. You read about individuals who had been victims for decades, or their entire lives, and were grappling with mental illness and/or drug addiction, becoming confident by working with one another and making the decisions that affect their lives.

[W]e assert that the most marginal members of society are better qualified to run their “city” or “village” than the college educated elected official and bureaucrat. We not only asserted the proposition, we proved it as Umoja’s residents made real decisions about the rules of the Village and the manner in which it was run (75).

Here is precisely the principle of participatory democracy that Ella Baker championed in the Civil Rights movement. Rather than turn for help to political elites, religious leaders, business leaders, or whomever, we can take matters into our own hands and manage our own affairs. Forget what passes for “American Democracy.” Real democracy is about “people power.” Demos in Greek means people, cracy means rule. Put it together — Democracy: Rule by the people.

Unfortunately, true democracy is rarely tolerated by the U.S. corporate and governmental establishment, and that was the case in Miami. Shortly after the Umoja’s six-month anniversary celebrations, a “suspicious” fire burned down the entire village. Before Max, the homeless residents, and allies could clear the wreckage and begin the process of rebuilding, the city of Miami sent in the police to permanently evict them from the land.

What follows the disastrous fire and eviction is perhaps the most intriguing section of the book. Take Back the Land, still trying to reoccupy the site, is approached by a “progressive” city councilperson, who offers to house all the homeless residents in a new low-income housing unit that Take Back the Land would develop. The group then has to debate whether to accept this deal, which would mean giving up some of their oppositional character against the government, in order to gain the immediate goal of moving people off the street and into homes.

The difficulty of this decision opens up an important question that all grassroots movements need to address at some point: whether to compromise with government/”the system” and receive tangible gains, or hold fast to ideals and principles and potentially miss some opportunities. It is never an easy decision.

In Max’s words, “

as the opposition, it is difficult for us to accept victory, even when we win. Virtually any settlement between us and our political targets can be interpreted as a sell out simply because there is an agreement or because those in power no longer stand against the demand. Consequently, we, as a movement, must clearly define what constitutes victory, particularly in the context of the US political and economic system (118).

If the goal is to “Build a new society” and that necessitates sweeping away the existing order of oppression, how do you compromise with elites whose job is to uphold that very order? On the other hand, because those elites have the power to give you what you need, at least in the short term, how can you avoid accepting a deal when they agree to give you something you need?

Ultimately, it is a question about “revolutionary reforms” — theoretically a change in policy (reform) that leads to the empowerment of a movement, and therefore the ability to carry on further campaigns towards revolution. But what does that actually look like in a capitalist society that has successfully undercut and co-opted grassroots social movements for the last century or more, and which even more skillfully ignores and silences those movements so that they feel powerless and marginalized?

In a situation as desperate as our own, how do you avoid the temptation to work within the system, even if it means abandoning some of your political principles? And how do you stay true to those ideals while at the same time engaging that system to gain concrete victories?

I encourage all to read this book and discover how Take Back the Land wrestled with these and other pressing strategic questions. I hope it won’t be a “spoiler” to say that in the end the city of Miami betrayed the “deal” and the land was never restored, nor was there any new low-income housing construction. The government failed the public yet again.

The U.S. housing crisis has only gotten worse since this book was written in 2007, especially now that the economy has tanked. An estimated 3.5 million homes will be foreclosed on in 2010, a 25% jump from 2009. The work of Take Back the Land therefore becomes increasingly relevant and inspiring. As Michael Moore’s latest film Capitalism: A Love Story highlighted, the group has gone from taking over one piece of land to moving many homeless families into abandoned buildings throughout Miami. In this way, they have continued to make headlines and push the issue of housing as a human right.

There is no way to sugarcoat the loss of Umoja Village. The land we controlled for just over six months is now out of our control, a tremendous defeat for the community and the movement. Our efforts to take full and legal control over the land also ended in failure. However, none should confuse the killing of a deal with the killing of a movement. Umoja not only forged a model for the adversarial takeover of land, but also established a potential conclusion to the struggle: community ownership of that land.” (130)

To solve the immense problems we face in this crisis, not just housing but unemployment, lack of health care, attacks on immigrants and Muslims, the endless wars, climate chaos, etc., requires active, confrontational, and creative social movements. Even more, it requires a return to Ella Baker’s principle of participatory democracy, the taking of power away from unsympathetic elites and putting it into the hands of people who are directly affected by issues on the neighborhood level. Take Back the Land is a particularly striking example of a group hard at work pursuing this vision.

[Alex Knight is an organizer, teacher, and writer in Philadelphia. He maintains the website endofcapitalism.com and is writing a book called The End of Capitalism. He can be reached at activistalex@gmail.com.]

The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

John Ross : Mexico’s Buy-Centennial ‘Grito’

Mexico’s Bicentennial: Miguel Hidalgo with the banner of the Virgen de Guadalupe.

Can a new revolution be far behind?
The countdown to Mexico’s Buy-Centennial

Viva Mexico! Let’s go kill some Gachupines!’

By John Ross / The Rag Blog / September 8, 2010

MEXICO CITY — The clocks are literally ticking as Mexico starts the final leg of the countdown to the 200th anniversary of its independence from Spain. Dozens of huge, solar-powered timepieces have been installed in this monster city’s great Zocalo plaza and 31 state capitols to mark the minutes until the Bicentennial celebration kicks in this September 15th-16th.

At 2.8 million pesos each, the price of the clocks is a mere drop in the bucket compared to what President Felipe Calderon is lavishing on the actual festivities.

Mexico has budgeted 3 billion pesos for the nation’s birthday fete but costs will surely exceed that modest allocation. In a country where 70% of the population lives in and around the poverty line, 50% of Mexican families cannot afford the basic food basket, and 13 million children go to bed without supper each night, Bicentennial bread and circuses will not staunch the hunger that stalks the land

How much of this multi-billion peso boodle will be pilfered, embezzled, subcontracted out to dubious friends of the house, or otherwise flushed down the drain, remains to be calculated.

Mexico is one of eight Latin American republics that will celebrate the 200th anniversary of their separation from a debilitated Spain back in 1810 this year — but it is the only country on the continent that will also commemorate the centennial of a landmark revolution that toppled an entrenched oligarchy.

The numerical coincidences between the catastrophic conflict that began in 1810 (500,000 were dead before the war of liberation was concluded in 1821) and the revolution of 1910 (a million killed) have given rise to the thesis that every hundred years, on the tenth year of the century, this distant neighbor nation explodes in lethal social upheaval.

In Mexico 2010, with an economy in free fall, unemployment at record levels, and 28,000 citizens slaughtered in Calderon’s uncalled-for war on the drug cartels, this timetable for renewed revolution is not an unlikely projection.

But aside from revolutionary numerology, there is an historical connection that explains the reoccurrence of social rebellion here in 1810 and 1910. 1910 was an election year and the dictator Porfirio Diaz, who had governed the country with an iron fist for 34 years, stealing election after election, was determined to maintain power despite his increasing unpopularity. Clapping his chief rival, the liberal Francisco Madero, in jail weeks before the balloting, the 83 year-old Don Porfirio once again crowned himself top dog — like Diaz, current president Felipe Calderon is often accused of having stolen the 2006 election.

Then as now in 2010, deep recession was on the land and Porfirio Diaz quashed social discontent by calling out the army to restore order (Calderon has 50,000 troops in the field.) Faced with disintegrating governability, the dictator moved to soothe the restive masses by throwing a big party to celebrate the Centennial of the nation’s independence.

Monuments and statues were erected throughout the capitol, most prominently the gilded Angel of Independence that still rises above the Paseo de La Reforma, the city’s most traveled thoroughfare. Indeed, the dictator invested millions in refurbishing the avenue and transforming it into a sort of Mexican Champs D’Elysie.

Borrowing a page from Don Porfi’s playbook, Calderon last spring laid the cornerstone for a multi-million-peso “Bicentennial Tower of Light” at the foot of Reforma Boulevard. Cost overruns on the monument have already doubled and the Tower will not be open for business until late 2011, if ever, due to engineering snafus.

A hundred years ago, among other Centennial projects, Porfirio Diaz cut the ribbon at the site of a new headquarters for the Congress of the country but two months later, revolution washed over the land and the dome-like structure was left unfinished — after the conclusion of hostilities, the dome was converted into the Monument of the Revolution.

Similarly, Calderon’s list of Bicentennial projects includes new quarters for the Mexican Senate — weeks before the big fiesta that building too remains unfinished.

One hundred years ago, commemorative events and glittering banquets and balls filled the dictator’s days and nights. Showers of fireworks lit up the skies. New pants were distributed to the poor although they were discouraged from attending the festivities. As is standard operating procedure in this ultra-centralized nation, the fiesta was confined to the capitol and the provincials uninvited, further ratcheting up tensions between the countryside and the big city.

When word got out that the dictator had spent Mexico’s entire social budget on the Centennial of Independence — there was no money left over to even pay the wages of teachers — all hell broke lose. On November 20th, 1910 the Mexican revolution erupted and Diaz was overthrown.

Felipe Calderon has been faithful to Don Porfi’s scenario. Aside from the Bicentennial Arch and the new Senate chambers, he has inaugurated a multi-billion peso extravaganza, the “Expo Bicentenario,” in Guanajuato (see sidebar below); streets and schools all over the country have been renamed for the “Heroes who gave us a Fatherland,” and a Bicentennial park in the north of Mexico City, constructed on the site of an abandoned refinery that befouled the air of this megalopolis for decades, is open for business. Toxicity levels are said to be still so high that just sitting on the grass can be dangerous to one’s health.

The ‘Bicentennial Tower of Light” at the foot of Reforma Boulevard may never happen. Image from Noticias.arq.

Calderon’s management of the Bicentennial has been haphazard. Five coordinators, starting with Cuauhtemoc Cardenas, the son of a beloved president, have signed on and then abruptly quit in the past six years, most recently when Juan Manuel Villalpando, a right-wing historian, turned over the reigns of the operation to Secretary of Public Education Alfonso Lujambio, often cited as Calderon’s successor in 2012.

With less than a month until the big birthday party, public buildings like the National Palace, the Palace of Bellas Artes, and the Supreme Court are being scrubbed down for the event. Miles of red, white, and green bunting — the colors of the Mexican flag — are being draped over downtown skyscrapers such as the 84-story Torre Mayor, the tallest building in the nation.

The Bicentennial cultural calendar is packed. A magnum exposition of patriotic icons, including the polished skull of Padre Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, the profligate priest who first gave voice to the struggle for independence, and the mixed bones of either 12 or 14 other martyrs (it has not yet been determined whose bones are whose) will be displayed in the National Palace which the citizenry is cordially encouraged to visit (the Palace is usually locked down and sealed by the military.)

Other commemorative offerings include the publication of a reedited official edition of The History of Mexico issued by Lujambio’s Public Education Secretariat. The volume has been heavily critiqued by academics because Calderon and his PAN party have imposed a right-wing spin on the nation’s biography. Much of the revised text appears to be the work of the discredited Enrique Krauze, house historian for Televisa, the senior partner in Mexico’s two-headed television monopoly and a bosom buddy of Juan Manual Villalpando.

The volume tilts towards a conservative interpretation of historical events and tends to gloss over darker moments in the national narrative –there is no mention of slavery and yet a third of the population at liberation was Afro-Mexican. The sugarcoated treatment of Antonio Lopez y Santana, an arch-villain who ceded half of Mexico’s national territory to Washington, is remarkable. The 1968 massacre of 300 striking students by the Mexican military is described as “a large demonstration that was repressed” with no attribution as to the repressors.

In a recent Proceso magazine interview, historian Victor Diaz Archiniaba disses the revised “History of Mexico” as a history of the country’s politicos and not its people. The right-wing PAN, posits the popular Autonomous Metropolitan University professor, is uncomfortable with lionizing personages such as Hidalgo, his successor Jose Maria Morelos, and revolutionary apostles Emiliano Zapata and Francisco Villa who defied the Catholic Church, rose up against repressive regimes, and overthrew conservative governments.

The Calderon government’s plans for the twin centennials have favored the 200th anniversary of Independence over the 100th year Centennial of the Mexican Revolution, an uprising of the poor with which the PANistas have never been sympathetic.

Capitalism has bought up the franchise for the “Buy Centennial” — as some unpatriotic wags have dubbed the upcoming festivities. As every year during September, “the patriotic month,” vendors push handcarts through the city streets laden with “tricolor” flags, plastic “coronetas“- a sort of Mexican vuvuzela whose braying bleats add to the urban din — and tons of patriotic tchotchkes. To honor the Bicentennial, the mugs of Padre Hidalgo and his coconspirators invite consumers to buy tee shirts, kids clothes, cigarette lighters, milk cartons, and cans of beans, phone cards, and lottery tickets.

A cartoon version of the struggle for independence, True Heroes, is about to roll. Creator Carlos Kuri concedes his film is a “lite” version of Mexico’s oft-violent history. Hidalgo, Morelos et al more resemble “Batman, Spiderman, and Indiana Jones” than their original role models, he says — Morelos’s voiceover was dubbed by “Brozo,” the green-haired “scary clown” AKA Victor Trujillo, a Televisa warhorse. True Heroes action figures are being heavily marketed.

Other Buy Centennial specials include a Bicentennial lottery (“Bicentenario“), a Bicentennial bike race (“Bicenton“), a time capsule to be opened a hundred years hence if in fact Mexico survives until then, the issuance of various postage stamps, a youth parliament, a racquetball championship, an international regatta, and an NBA exhibition game between the San Antonio Spurs and the Los Angeles Clippers.

Although the list of international dignitaries who are invited to the Bicentennial hijinks is closely held, the buzz is that Spain’s Prince Felipe and his princesa Dona Leticia will be on hand when Calderon pronounces the immortal “Grito de Independencia” from the presidential balcony overlooking the Zocalo on September 15th. Given the presence of the royals, the “Grito,” as first sounded by Father Hidalgo — “Viva Mexico! Let’s Go Kill Some Gachupines” (Spaniards) — will have to be modified for the occasion.

Calderon’s September 15th “Grito” will be preceded and followed by multiple military parades — foreign contingents, including one from the United States whose troops have invaded Mexico five times, will pad out the processions. Nearly half the Mexican army is currently in the field waging the President’s bloody drug war.

To top off the fiesta, the heavens over Mexico City will be illuminated by world-class pyrotechnics organized by Australian Ric Burch whose SpecTak Productions staged the opening pageant at the Beijing Olympics. Burch, who will be paid a million Yanqui dollars for the fireworks display, has promised to learn Spanish for the Bicentennial.

September 15th, traditionally “La Noche Mexicana” when the natives don floppy sombreros, tank up on rotgut tequila, yowl nostalgic mariachi tunes, and shoot off their pistolas like “real Mexicanos,” is always a blast but this year should be a lollapalooza. In 2008, purported narcos tossed a bomb into a crowd celebrating “La Noche Mexicana” in Morelia, Michoacan, killing eight party-goers and tens of thousands of Mexico City and federal police will be assigned to the Zocalo to keep the crowds from killing each other.

After an all-night fandango, Calderon will be helicoptered to Dolores Guanajuato where Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, a survivor of a failed conspiracy to overthrow the Spanish rulers, uttered the original “Grito,” the one about killing the Gachupines.

As legend has it, once the good padre had bellowed his murderous oath, he strode across the town plaza and threw open the doors of the local jailhouse. Hundreds of Indians and Afro-Mexicans who had been forced to slave in the silver mines (Mexico produced a third of the world’s currency in 1810) surged out, picked up machetes and torches, and marched on the nearby silver capitol of Guanajuato City where they rounded up the white elites in the grain house or Alhondiga and set it ablaze.

The fire is said to have been ignited by a disaffected miner whose nickname “El Pipila” now graces taco stands and other purveyors of roasting meats throughout Mexico.

On the morning of September 16th to conclude Bicentennial activities in Guanajuato, Felipe Calderon will host a gala breakfast for local elites at the Alhondiga, a structure from which the captured Padre Hidalgo’s head once swung.

Given the repression, economic devastation, hunger, corruption, and violence that blankets the land in this centennial year, many Mexicans are wondering if, much as in Porfirio Diaz’s day, a new revolution can be far behind?

[John Ross, author of El Monstruo: Dread and Redemption in Mexico City, is currently in San Francisco for medical treatment.]

Guanajuato:
The rotting cradle of Mexican independence

Largely because of Hidalgo’s revolutionary caper, the state of Guanajuato has been designated “the Cradle of Independence” and to celebrate the Bicentennial, this past July 17th President Calderon cut the ribbon at a hundred acre theme park, “Expo Bicentenario” near the agricultural nexus of Silao and facing Cubilete (Cupcake) Hill to whose “Christ the King!” shrine, the state’s Catholic zealots make an annual pilgrimage.

The Bicentennial Expo includes a pavilion dedicated to the heroic Mexican military, an institution that is currently under international fire for human rights violations, and a Hall of History featuring a life-sized caveman and cave woman, and even a baby mammoth specially flown in from Russia.

A virtual Hidalgo will declaim a virtual “Grito” and a virtual Pancho Villa will sit in a real train car and tell the story of the Mexican revolution. A monumental Guinness Book of Records Mexican flag flies over the pavilions and a 40 million-peso figure of “Winged Victory,” Calderon’s version of Porfirio Diaz’s “Angel of Independence,” stands guard over the theme park.

Also on the bill: a light show, carnival rides, and kiddie cars. Pop music stars like Cheyenne, Yuri, and the hoary Ballet Folklorico de Mexico have been booked in for nightly shows.

The Expo Bicentenario is the largest public works project ever built in the state of Guanajuato. Although Coca Cola will pick up part of the tab, the state government has kicked in 800,000,000 pesos which, much as in Don Porfirio’s day, will certainly diminish social budgets.

Guanajuato, which has been under the PAN’s thumb for a generation, is one of the most privatized states in the Mexican union — even the Mummies of Guanajuato, the mummified bodies of miners and their families and a venerable tourist attraction, are now owned by the private sector. The mummies are being transported to Mexico City as part of Calderon’s September fandango.

Guanajuato is an unlikely venue to celebrate this country’s struggle for liberty. Police repression in the state is horrific — nine prisoners have died in police custody in the last 14 months, including a farmer whose beating death was recorded by video cameras. A private U.S. security firm was hired last year to teach the industrial city of Leon’s security forces torture techniques.

Hunger is endemic in Guanajuato, particularly among the state’s 40,000 indigenous residents, as graphically demonstrated by the looting of grain boxcars in the city of Celaya earlier this year. The state has one of the highest out-migration exoduses to the United States in Mexico.

The PAN’s ferocious clampdown on public morals is often humiliatingly painful. Kissing in public is a punishable offense in Guanajuato city, which was once renowned for its famed “Callejon del Beso” or Kissing Alley. Last year, a civic group in Leon burnt public school sex education text books on a pyre in the city square because they contained anatomical diagrams of reproductive organs, and Luz Maria Ramirez Villalpando, director of the Guanajuato Women’s Institute, does power point presentations stigmatizing as deviants women with tattoos and piercings because they “cheapen moral values.”

Abortion, even for rape and incest victims, has long been outlawed in Guanajuato with women receiving up to 35-year sentences for simply soliciting an interruption to unwanted pregnancies. Six women are currently imprisoned in state penitentiaries for purportedly murdering their children in the womb — Governor Juan Manuel Oliva who labels pro-choice groups as “terrorists,” insists that he has proof that all of the women gave birth and then killed their offspring, a fact vehemently rejected by local feminists.

“What are we supposed to celebrate when Guanajuato, the cradle of national emancipation, forces girls that have been raped to be mothers, access to therapeutic abortions is denied, and women are jailed for seeking to end unwanted pregnancies?” feminist Georgina Altuna recently wrote in the left daily La Jornada.

Such is the state of constitutional liberties in the place that gave birth to Mexico’s Independence as the Buy Centennial gets underway.

— J.R.

The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Battle of Algiers: white vigilantes and the police in Katrina’s aftermath

By scott crow / The Rag Blog / September 8, 2010

“…within the war we are all waging with the forces of death, subtle and otherwise, conscious or not – I am not only a casualty, I am also a warrior.” –Audre Lorde

On the fifth anniversary of Katrina I want to share this narrative about anarchist organizing in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. This piece is made of stories about the early violence we came across in dealing with the white vigilantes and police in Algiers. It takes place upon my return to the area after a failed mission to find my friend Robert King of the Angola 3 (see “It takes a spark” from INFOSHOP archives) right after the levees failed.

It also contains characters who had done something good only to reveal themselves as less than honorable, and somewhat harmful later. These stories take place just prior to organizing the Common Ground Collective. This is a rough draft excerpt from my forthcoming book: Black Flags and Windmills: Hope, Anarchy and the Common Ground Collective.

Five years later we have only scratched the surface of the atrocities of the vigilantes and the police. Many of us are still healing from those encounters. This story is just one of them

On September 4th I was back home in Austin, resting uneasily from my draining trip. I received a call from my friend Malik Rahim who unknown to me had also remained in New Orleans. He on the other end of the crackling phone line saying we got racist white vigilantes driving around in pick up trucks terrorizing black people on the street. It’s very serious. We need some supplies and support…

He and his neighbors were being harassed and threatened by armed white men and the police. He had been interviewed for a piece that appeared in the San Francisco Bay View in California that explained the grim situation in detail. I had read it upon my brief return back to Austin. Now he was on the phone because he had heard I was just in NOLA looking for Robert King. I knew he was serious. He said he hoped I would come back to New Orleans to give them support and use it as another opportunity to search again for our friend King who was still missing. cite?

Malik Rahim is a serious man with a broad smile and a big laugh. He was a former Black Panther, the Defense Minister for the New Orleans chapter. His days have been given to making the world a better place since that time. Throughout much of their lives, the histories of the men of the Angola 3 have been intertwined with that of Malik. He and King had not only been Panthers together, they had also been childhood friends in the Algiers neighborhood. I had visited him at his mom’s house a few times with King at the beginning of the century.

After living in Oakland, California for years, Malik had settled once again in Algiers, where through King he and I had become friends in 2001. It’s one of the oldest neighborhoods in New Orleans, situated across the Mississippi from the French Quarter.

Malik, too, had waited out the storm at his home with a woman named Sharon Johnson. While Katrina left massive damage in her wake it hadn’t flooded his neighborhood. Malik had no electricity and no water, but his phone still worked, and when he called I knew it was critical that we move quickly. No electricity, but a live phone. It reminded me of the days just earlier in the leaky vacant warehouse. What an odd coincidence I thought as we spoke.

With determination I decided I was going to go back there to deliver supplies and get to King. This was a chance to try again to find out what had really happened to my friend. The only thing I knew was that he had been trapped in his house, surrounded by dirty water for eight or nine days. I hoped he was still alive. Robert King had been in solitary confinement for 29 years in a 6’ x 9’ cell. I could not let him sit in the floodwaters any longer; I felt a duty to try and get to him.

On the way out of Austin again I stopped at a meeting called by local anarchists and activists who were organizing local aid for evacuees. I shared my stories, tears, fears, and the scary realities of what was happening on the ground. I then asked if anyone in the circled crowd of 50-60 people would come to New Orleans knowing what might transpire. Sadly, there weren’t any takers. Was I doing the right thing?

After my first trip to the Gulf I knew better what to bring on this mission: water, food, candles, matches, ammunition and guns; nothing more and nothing less. We were not prepared enough the first time — we were outgunned and under resourced — but not this time.

Fear of the unknown crawled under the surface of my skin, fear of what was about to happen as I headed back. I knew it was getting more desperate in the Gulf as time passed. Was a race war going to erupt? How many people had died needlessly already? I had seen from the first trip the disregard and lack of empathy that some white rescuers had shown to desperate people. It had made me deeply angry but I had often kept my mouth closed. I was torn between doing the work of simply helping people, and espousing my political ideals in the face of oppressive ignorance.

We hurried back to the scene of the floods, our truck speeding alone on the highway headed into an abyss. Few cars moved our way, apart from the occasional military vehicle. In the other direction the roadway was overflowing with evacuees — who began to look like refugees from another place. People were piled into and on top of vehicles, carrying with them the remnants of their lives; others, stranded without cars, traveled on foot.

Families, neighbors, and strangers trying to go somewhere — anywhere — that was away from the flooded areas. All the while the government repeated on the radio “order will be restored” when all anyone wanted to hear was that they would do what ever it took to get everyone to safety. It was a modern day exodus, caused by corruption and unresponsiveness that didn’t have to happen.

I asked myself “what the hell am I getting into?”

We changed course to go along the lower southwestern coastal route this time, traveling into what looked more and more like occupied war territory with military vehicles and personnel at every turn. I wondered if the doctored passes that we made would get us past the bureaucracy we knew was already rearing its head.

The military and the state only understood badges and uniforms. They wouldn’t let civilians help even though it was the right thing to do. Many of the young soldiers looked war-stressed and distant as we came up. They grilled us about why and where we were going. Half truths got us through; it was the only way.

After the last checkpoint we drove headlong onto the empty bridgeway; I knew we were “safe.” I let out a sigh of relief and continued to Malik’s. Ours was the only truck on the road, so we ignored the dead useless stop lights.

So much water so close to home

Algiers is situated in New Orleans, on the south and west sides of the Mississippi river in an area called, ironically, enough the “West Bank.” Like the West Bank halfway around the world in the Middle East,

it shared many similar apartheid systems between two unequal populations. Before the storm, the West Bank was home to 70,000 people. It had a largely poor black population that and a small, wealthy white minority. Governments rendered the larger populace invisible in daily life; why would a storm make it any different?

Huge housing projects and surrounding neighborhoods were burned out or empty, first from neglect, and now the storm. There had been no social services or safety nets to speak of for decades. When the last clinic closed 10 years earlier it stayed that way, and it was the same with many shuttered schools.

It was surrounded by massive graying concrete levees on the Mississippi sides — almost like prison walls — which didn’t give way, despite nearly being crushed by a huge barge ship that Katrina had run aground within a few feet of the levee walls. This was why it hadn’t flooded, even though the river had swollen to the top of the levees.

After the storm, most residents were gone, with only about 3-4,000 remaining behind. Many were people who couldn’t leave. They had no money, transportation or family support, or were elderly and in ill health. The storm had made an already terrible situation much worse for them.

The police command structures in the fourth district of Algiers were in shambles. There was scant military help on the ground on this side of the river. The city center — the money-making sections — were the most important to those in power. They had to get NOLA open for business and they neglected everything else.

There were dead bodies on the ground, and buildings smoldered in flames from unknown fires. Algiers, like the rest of New Orleans, was only a remnant of its former self. It was isolated geographically and psychologically from the other side of the river and the outside world.

What was called law enforcement at this stage was erratic, disorganized, and reactionary. It was made up of city, county, state, and some federal officers, but mostly it was-Louisiana based. If they had a plan — besides acting like thugs with badges — it hadn’t been revealed yet. As in everyday life, laws were subjectively enforced. There were different standards for whites and everyone else, and levels of threats from officers were all over the map in severity.

They were accountable to no one but themselves, providing law and order above support or help. There were heavily fortified military zones and check points around the area but nothing inside. The residents were left to fend for themselves against the police.

Trapped in this situation, cut off from the rest of New Orleans and the world, Malik Rahim, Sharon Johnson and a few nearby neighbors struggled to provide basic aid to each other with rudimentary food delivery of military MRE’s (Meals Ready to Eat) and water provided by a distant government military.

They had few resources: one busted-ass car with limited gas, including what they could find from abandoned cars. There was no Red Cross, no FEMA — nothing. To get anything you had to have a vehicle, and access to gas and money to buy it. Someone had to drive 20-30 miles to a remote military outpost, wait in a long line under armed security — and hope they would be let back into their community before curfew without running out of gas or being shot. The ordeal would take the whole day. That was all they had — there were no other options.

Tapestries of violence

This community had asked for support, so I returned to do what I could. It was what many of us on the outside with conscience would be doing in the weeks to come. But today that was an eternity from where I stood.

I arrived in New Orleans for the second time seven days after the levee failure on September 5th. Everyone pitched in to unload the supplies we had brought. Then the conversation turned to discussing the best way to search for King.

Before we did anything else, Malik took Brandon and me down the street to cover up the dead bullet-riddled body that lay near his house with a piece of sheet metal tin lying nearby. The bloated and putrid body had been left there for days. We could smell it as we approached. Malik hoped someone would come and get it soon. But who was looking for this man, unknown to any of us, including the kids who found him?

His image haunts me among the string of deaths I experienced during my time there. He met an ignoble death without a chance. Left to decay on the sun-baked street, where others I had seen had been in the waters. I imagined they all deserved more. His death was a product of his skin color, economics, and chance.

We started establishing safety and security for ourselves and our immediate neighbors. Something else had happened in the short interim since our first arrival in New Orleans. While the state was in crisis, white vigilante militias had formed in Algiers Point and in the French Quarter district. These white vigilantes were little more than an organized mob. Signs on the backs of their trucks announced that it was their job to secure law and order in the absence of the police. The militia in Algiers seemed to be made up of drunken racist fools.

Algiers Point is a small, very wealthy, very white neighborhood that is about 10 blocks long in each direction. It is very separated from the Algiers neighborhood. Both sections are part of the broader Westbank, which is predominantly black working class, and poor.

Algiers Point was the only neighborhood on the West Bank where when traveling down the mostly abandoned and littered streets we saw hateful signs like “You loot, we’ll shoot” or “Your life ain’t worth what’s inside.” Signs proudly displayed on the houses that were still occupied as well as the ones that were vacant and boarded up.

These kinds of signs, a rarity in most other places, were put up by the vigilante types who stayed. They believed it was their right to protect their private property and secure law and order. It was as if the dam of civil society that kept them from acting out their most racist tendencies had broken enough to allow their ugly hatred to emerge. They had another shot at the good old Klan days and they were going to take it.

This armed white militia rode around armed through largely low-income black communities and meted out their version of justice — intimidation — around Algiers and the West Bank. Their “defense,” as they called it, amounted to harassment of any unarmed black person on the street alone. With pride they acted and talked tough, never offering to help anyone who wasn’t white.

Their incendiary vigilante actions, thinly veiled under the guise of protecting themselves and their private property, was gasoline on the fire of the undeclared war on all who were desperate. I found myself asking what kind of people are more interested in their private property and security than in the well-being of another human?

I could understand the concept of an armed group of people gathering to defend themselves in the absence of the state given the right situation, and this disaster could be seen as such a situation. But ultimately in their racist actions and words they acted no better than Klansmen straight out of the old Deep South, as they paraded around in their trucks. Our conflicting ideas of what community self defense meant were on a collision course.

In those early days, the Algiers Point Militia openly threatened and — may have killed — desperate unarmed civilians. They foolishly bragged about it to a Danish media crew and to anyone who would listen. Local representatives of the state, or what little remained of it, with their ingrained racist attitudes towards these marginalized communities they were supposed to protect, stood by and let these vigilantes do their thing.

There were bullet-riddled bodies of black men in the street, including one that we tried to get picked up for 15 days while it decomposed. Was it the vigilantes or was it the police or both? Those men’s bodies were on different streets — found separately — near nothing of value. Who killed these men? I know now — as I believed then — that the vigilantes or the police had killed them and gotten away with it.

Every bullet that passed from their guns was a shot that faded any veneer of righteousness or justice leaving blood on the hands of the state’s failures. In this country, on city streets they killed people and were accountable to no one.

They regularly both drew their guns on, and shot at, numerous innocent people who happened to be unarmed, poor, black and on foot, to scare and intimidate them. They threatened Malik—who they mockingly called ‘the mayor of Algiers’– from the beginning, pointing guns as they would drive by, threatening to ‘get em’.

The white supremacist attitude and actions of this militia, and of many white rescuers and the state, added nothing but desperation, mistrust, and resentment from local residents, who were deciding to defend themselves. The police did nothing but close their eyes and continue their own harassment and shooting campaigns. The lines between law and thugs blurred within the vigilante and police camps, leaving people with nowhere to turn. The Klan would have been proud.

Undercurrents

From the moment I had set foot into the Algiers neighborhood and spoke with Malik and Sharon Johnson in more detail, I realized that this was going to be bigger, more difficult and more dangerous than anyone thought. They were both exhausted from having to struggle for survival and be vigilant about the militia and the police. There had been no help. People were left on their own. Although Algiers had not flooded, it had been ravaged by the storm, and the long term neglect before that. The water was still high along the levees down the block rising at the edge of the dead end streets to the north and eat sides of the banks almost like prison walls not to keep people in but to keep the waters of the Mississippi; spirits were low in the streets below, but some desperate hope was there with those residents who had stayed. This had always been their home and they didn’t want to leave.

I had been here a few years before with Malik and King who showed me their old stomping grounds as kids and young hustlers, before they became Black Panthers. Now, like the rest of city, trash and abandoned cars littered the empty streets and vacant lots. I ask myself as I came in and passed the armed, sandbagged turrets at the intersections. What damage was new and what had been that way for a long time? This place had been occupied by a police force before, but now the outskirts were occupied by an army who watched from bunkers without helping the people within. Military vehicles patrolled many of the city streets. It looked like low intensity warfare against a civilian population, not aid, eerily reminding me of the apartheid I had seen in Belfast and in East Berlin.

Immediately after delivering water and food, we met and talked with residents from the neighborhood who were scared and fed up with the white militia and the police. People, mostly men with little or no resources, both young and old, told us the many varied stories of their lives and why they had stayed. Some were forgotten vets from U.S. government wars, others had seen prison time for essentially being Black in Louisiana, while some were quiet and deeply religious men, but they all stayed because they had to. All of them had long family histories within their city blocks, many houses were intergenerational. They cared about where they stayed and what happened to their neighbors. They worked together to make the most of a bad situation with no resources. They were men and women who had been reduced to statistics by the media, the government, and civil society; characterized only as invisible, poor, black, unemployed, branded as hoodlums, drug addicts, or any other number of de-humanizing words and now they were being called looters for surviving.

The small group talked about what we might do to defend ourselves if it became necessary. There were conflicting opinions on how the police might react, but we felt we had no other choice today. We inventoried what we had between us. Who was in, and who could have nothing to do with carrying arms. Eventually Brandon Darby, Reggie B. and ‘Clarence’ (not his real name), carrying civilian AK-47’s, a .45 caliber pistol, and I carrying a 9mm carbine rifle began our first rudimentary watches, standing or sitting on Malik’s porch and waited–armed . I wasn’t a white man taking it on himself to protect helpless locals. There was no machismo, I was anxious and honored to be amongst some of these people. To me this was solidarity with people affected by the very real threats to their lives simply for the color of their skin.

Being there was an expression of my anti-racist principles, my personal relationships and my revolutionary beliefs before the storm. I had been asked for support and came, not blindly but in principle. I had come back ready to defend friends and strangers in the neighborhood who had asked. They wouldn’t have had it not been necessary. Civil society had given them no choices. It looked as if they were left to die. We had to at least give ourselves a fighting chance for survival. I was a community organizer from another city whose belief in the right to self determination and self defense as fundamentals in having just communities. I accept that dismantling any coercive systems that hold people down, takes various tools and sometimes it might involve defending ourselves and our communities. Even if a violent world in the future is what we want to avoid. It is one of the hard and dirty realities that we as movements must sometimes face while moving towards liberation.

Comrades in the Crescent City by the river asked–and I said yes. I was terrified and resolved in what I was doing. Before I arrived, my actions of defense had been mostly tested on much smaller scales resisting neo-nazis, small time fascists, confronting police brutality in the streets, or in facing threats from private security for my environmental or animal rights work, but this scale was unlike any reality I knew. I had a few years of firearms practice, but this was taking a conceptual framework of armed self defense into a reality with many unknowns. It was all to happen so quickly too, without much processing or time for reflection. It was time for action.

Friends of Durruti

The midday humidity hung heavy and the helicopters continued their constant noise in the overhead sky. A few neighbors remained gathered at Malik’s, a long narrow ‘shotgun’ style house built in the thirties that sits high off the ground with a tall concrete porch behind a rusting chain link fence. The white vigilantes came around the corner in their truck–and as before–slowed in front of the house on Atlantic Ave. talking their racist trash and making threats. But this time it was different–when they came we were there, and nervously held our ground–armed. There were four or five of us–most from the neighborhood– and we held the high ground. We had more firepower, a better firing position and we were sober. Finally someone said for them to move on down the road. They would not be able to intimidate or threaten any more residents ‘round here. In a flash this could turn bad in a hail of bullets. Time was standing still, each moment passing slowly, with my finger on the trigger of my rifle.

Earlier, we had all informally agreed that some of us would hold the space no matter what, although it wasn’t clear exactly what that meant. Many of the previous days had been harrowing, but this was one of the most unnerving situations of my life. After a few words were exchanged, the truck drove on without further incident. My heart and my head pounded with sickness and relief. I was shaking inside from fear and adrenaline. All those moments seemed to have lasted forever, but in reality it probably happened over a few scant minutes. In opposing them we had made our presence known. My head swirled with a tidal wave of more questions than answers. How was the state going to react? How were we going to react? Was this the right thing to do? What if the situation continued to escalate? Would other movements support us? What if I had shot someone–or worse killed them? Would it have been worth it? Some of these men in the truck were known to Malik and his neighbors. Had the veil of society stopped them from this in the past and now they were free to kill as they pleased? Even if they were ignorant they had no real power once they were challenged, which became apparent. As they left there was guarded joy and relief amongst us–they were gone but would they stop their attacks on the neighborhoods? More volunteers would sit on Malik’s porch over the days to come and begin rudimentary neighborhood patrols, to keep the militia threat, and to a lesser degree the police, at bay. These acts and our refusal to leave in the face of repression made us enemies in the eyes of law enforcement, and race traitors to the racist militias.

I came to help, not end up on a porch with guns facing down a truck full of armed men. I like the others were ready to die defending the communities from attacks. It meant something to them–especially at that time–that white people would come to their aid and put their lives on the line with them as more would do as the days progressed. It had a profound effect on me, that by circumstances and choices we had taken the step to not lie down, but to rebel against giving up hope.

There was no Red Cross, there was no FEMA, there was no protection except what we all were willing to organize ourselves. Under siege we stayed and soon myths were born from words that would take on lives of their own, as many currents swirled and converged taking us in new directions. Sometime later the presence of whites and blacks working together in solidarity defense of these communities against the racist militia would later be cited by local residents as one of the acts that helped ease the tensions in a racially and economically divided area devastated before the levees ever broke.

From self defense we created the Common Ground Collective based on anarchist principles and practice. An organization always at odds with the state, that took direct action to meet the needs of communities left to die.

Type rest of the post here

Source /

The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Leave a comment

David Corn : Republican Bob Inglis Blasts Tea Party’s Paranoia

Photo from Bossier (Louisiana) Tea Party demonstration. Image from Craig Considine.

Tea Party takeover of the GOP:
Republican Rep. Bob Inglis takes on
Racism, paranoia, ignorance of the far right

By David Corn / September 7, 2010

It was the middle of a tough primary contest, and Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) had convened a small meeting with donors who had contributed thousands of dollars to his previous campaigns. But this year, as Inglis faced a challenge from tea party-backed Republican candidates claiming Inglis wasn’t sufficiently conservative, these donors hadn’t ponied up.

Inglis’ task: Get them back on the team. “They were upset with me,” Inglis recalls. “They are all Glenn Beck watchers.”

About 90 minutes into the meeting, as he remembers it, “They say, ‘Bob, what don’t you get? Barack Obama is a socialist, communist Marxist who wants to destroy the American economy so he can take over as dictator. Health care is part of that. And he wants to open up the Mexican border and turn [the U.S.] into a Muslim nation.'” Inglis didn’t know how to respond.

As he tells this story, the veteran lawmaker is sitting in his congressional office, which he will have to vacate in a few months. On June 22, he was defeated in the primary runoff by Spartanburg County 7th Circuit Solicitor Trey Gowdy, who had assailed Inglis for supposedly straying from his conservative roots, pointing to his vote for the bank bailout and against George W. Bush’s surge in Iraq.

Inglis, who served six years in Congress during the 1990s as a conservative firebrand before being reelected to the House in 2004, had also ticked off right-wingers in the state’s 4th Congressional District by urging tea-party activists to “turn Glenn Beck off” and by calling on Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) to apologize for shouting “You lie!” at Obama during the president’s State of the Union address. For this, Inglis, who boasts (literally) a 93 percent lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union, received the wrath of the tea party, losing to Gowdy 71 to 29 percent.

In the weeks since, Inglis has criticized Republican House leaders for acquiescing to a poisonous, tea party-driven “demagoguery” that he believes will undermine the GOP’s long-term credibility. And he’s freely recounting his frustrating interactions with tea party types, while noting that Republican leaders are pushing rhetoric tainted with racism, that conservative activists are dabbling in anti-Semitic conspiracy theory nonsense, and that Sarah Palin celebrates ignorance.

U.S. Rep. Bob Inglis, Republican of South Carolina. Photo from TPM.

The week after that meeting with his past funders — whom he failed to bring back into the fold — Inglis asked House Republican leader John Boehner what he would have told this group of Obama-bashers. Inglis recalls what happened:

[Boehner] said, “I would have told them that it’s not quite that bad. We disagree with him on the issues.” I said, “Hold on Boehner, that doesn’t work. Let me tell you, I tried that and it did not work.” I said [to Boehner], “If you’re going to lead these people and the fearful stampede to the cliff that they’re heading to, you have to turn around and say over your shoulder, ‘Hey, you don’t know the half of it.'”

In other words, feed and fuel the anger and paranoia of the right.

During his primary campaign, Inglis repeatedly encountered enraged conservatives whom he couldn’t — or wouldn’t — satisfy. Shortly before the runoff primary election, Inglis met with about a dozen tea party activists at the modest ranch-style home of one of them. Here’s what took place:

I sat down, and they said on the back of your Social Security card, there’s a number. That number indicates the bank that bought you when you were born based on a projection of your life’s earnings, and you are collateral. We are all collateral for the banks. I have this look like, “What the heck are you talking about?” I’m trying to hide that look and look clueless. I figured clueless was better than argumentative.

So they said, “You don’t know this?! You are a member of Congress, and you don’t know this?!” And I said, “Please forgive me. I’m just ignorant of these things.” And then of course, it turned into something about the Federal Reserve and the Bilderbergers and all that stuff. And now you have the feeling of anti-Semitism here coming in, mixing in. Wow.

Later, Inglis mentioned this meeting to another House member: “He said, ‘You mean you sat there for more than 10 minutes?’ I said, ‘Well, I had to. We were between primary and runoff.’ I had a two-week runoff. Oh my goodness. How do you…” Inglis trails off, shaking his head.

While he was campaigning, Inglis says, tea party activists and conservative voters kept pushing him to describe Obama as a “socialist.” But, he says, “It’s a dangerous strategy to build conservatism on information and policies that are not credible… This guy is no socialist.” He continues:

The word is designed to have emotional charge to it. Throughout my primary, there were people insisting that I use the word. They would ask me if he was a socialist, and I would always find some other word. I’d say, “President Obama wants a very large government that I don’t think will work and that spends too much and it’s inefficient and it compromises freedom and it’s not the way we want to go.” They would listen for the word, wait to see if I used the s-word, and when I didn’t, you could see the disappointment.

Why not give these voters what they wanted? Inglis says he wasn’t willing to lie:

I refused to use the word because I have this view that the Ninth Commandment must mean something. I remember one year Bill Clinton — the guy I was out to get [when serving on the House judiciary committee in the 1990s] — at the National Prayer Breakfast said something that was one of the most profound things I’ve ever heard from anybody at a gathering like that.

He said, “The most violated commandment in Washington, DC” — everybody leaned in; do tell, Mr. President — “is, ‘Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.'” I thought, “He’s right. That is the most violated commandment in Washington.” For me to go around saying that Barack Obama is a socialist is a violation of the Ninth Commandment. He is a liberal fellow. I’m conservative. We disagree… But I don’t need to call him a socialist, and I hurt the country by doing so. The country has to come together to find a solution to these challenges or else we go over the cliff.

Inglis found that ideological extremism is not only the realm of the tea party; it also has infected the official circles of his Republican Party.

In early 2009, he attended a meeting of the GOP’s Greenville County executive committee. At the time, Republicans were feeling discouraged. Obama was in the White House; the Democrats had enlarged their majorities in the House and Senate. The GOP seemed to be in tatters. But Inglis had what he considered good news. He put up a slide he had first seen at a GOP retreat. It was based on exit polling conducted during the November 2008 election.

The slide, according to Inglis, showed that when American voters were asked to place themselves on an ideological spectrum — one being liberal, 10 being conservative — the average ended up at about 5.6. The voters placed House Republicans at about 6.5 and House Democrats at about 4.3. Inglis told his fellow Republicans, “This is great news,” explaining it meant that the GOP was still closer to the American public than the Democrats. The key, he said, was for the party to keep to the right, without driving off the road.

Image from Velocity Blog.

Inglis was met, he says with “stony” faces: “There’s a short story by Shirley Jackson, ‘The Lottery.'” The tale describes a town where the residents stone a neighbor who is chosen randomly. “That’s what the crowd looked like. I got home that night and said to my wife, ‘You can’t believe how they looked back at me.’ It was really frightening.” The next speaker, he recalls, said, “‘On Bob’s ideological spectrum up there, I’m a 10,’ and the crowd went wild. That was what I was dealing with.”

Inglis acknowledges he’s intimately familiar with extreme politics. He was part of the GOP gang that went after Clinton and impeached him for the Lewinsky affair:

I hated Bill Clinton. I wanted to destroy him. Then I had six years out [after leaving Congress in 1999] to look back on that, and now I would confess it as a sin. It is just wrong to want to destroy another human being and to spend so much time and effort trying to destroy Bill Clinton — some of it with really suspect information. We went on and on about Whitewater. We had talked about the strange things about Vince Foster’s death. The drug dealing at Mena airport. So in the six years I was out, I looked back and realized, “Oh what a waste.”

When he returned to the House in 2005, Inglis, though still a conservative, was more focused on policy solutions than ideological battle. After Obama entered the White House, Inglis worked up a piece of campaign literature — in the form of a cardboard coaster that flipped open — that noted that Republicans should collaborate (not compromise) with Democrats to produce workable policies. “America’s looking for solutions, not wedges,” it read.

He met with almost every member of the House Republican caucus to make his pitch: “What we needed to be is the adults who say absolutely we will work with [the new president].”

Instead, he remarks, his party turned toward demagoguery. Inglis lists the examples: falsely claiming Obama’s health care overhaul included “death panels,” raising questions about Obama’s birthplace, calling the president a socialist, and maintaining that the Community Reinvestment Act was a major factor of the financial meltdown. “CRA,” Inglis says, “has been around for decades. How could it suddenly create this problem? You see how that has other things worked into it?” Racism? “Yes,” Inglis says.

South Carolina Tea Partiers in action. Photo from The People’s Cube.

As an example of both the GOP pandering to right-wing voters and conservative talk show hosts undercutting sensible policy making, Inglis points to climate change. Fossil fuels, he notes, get a free ride because they’re “negative externalities” — that is, pollution and the effects of climate change — “are not recognized” in the market.

Sitting in front of a wall-sized poster touting clean technology centers in South Carolina, Inglis says that conservatives “should be the ones screaming. This is a conservative concept: accountability. This is biblical law: you cannot do on your property what harms your neighbor’s property.” Which is why he supports placing a price on carbon — and forcing polluters to cover it.

Asked why conservatives and Republicans have demonized the issue of climate change and clean energy, Inglis replies, “I wish I knew; then maybe I wouldn’t have lost my election.” He points out that some conservatives believe that any issue affecting the Earth is “the province of God and will not be affected by human activity. If you talk about the challenge of sustainability of the Earth’s systems, it’s an affront to that theological view.”

Inglis voted against the cap-and-trade climate legislation, believing it would create a new tax, lead to a “hopelessly complicated” trading scheme for carbon, and harm American manufacturing by handing China and India a competitive edge on energy costs.

Instead, he proposed a revenue-neutral tax swap: Payroll taxes would be reduced, and the amount of that reduction would be applied as a tax on carbon dioxide emissions — mainly hitting coal plants and natural gas facilities. (This tax would be removed from exported goods and imposed on imported products — thus neutralizing any competitive advantage for China, India, and other manufacturing nations.)

Here was a conservative market-based plan. Did it receive any interest from House GOP leaders? Inglis shakes his head: “It’s the t-word.” Tax. He adds, “It’s so contrary to the rhetoric we’ve got out there, to what Beck, Limbaugh, and others are saying.”

For Inglis, this is the crux of the dilemma: Republican members of Congress know “deep down” that they need to deliver conservative solutions like his tax swap. Yet, he adds, “We’re being driven as herd by these hot microphones — which are like flame throwers — that are causing people to run with fear and panic, and Republican members of Congress are afraid of being run over by that stampeding crowd.”

Inglis says that it’s hard for Republicans in Congress to “summon the courage” to say no to Beck, Limbaugh, and the tea party wing. “When we start just delivering rhetoric and more misinformation… we’re failing the conservative movement,” he says. “We’re failing the country.” Yet, he notes, Boehner and House minority whip Eric Cantor have one primary strategic calculation: Play to the tea party crowd. “It’s a dangerous strategy,” he contends, “to build conservatism on information and policies that are not credible.”

Asked if there are any 2012 GOP contenders who can lead the party in a more credible direction, Inglis points to Rob Portman, a former House member who was President George W. Bush’s budget director. But Portman is now running for Senate in Ohio. He’s not 2012 material.

What about Sarah Palin? Inglis pauses for a moment: “I think that there are people who seem to think that ignorance is strength.” And he says of her: “If I choose to remain ignorant and uninformed and encourage people to follow me while I celebrate my lack of information,” that’s not responsible.

After winning six congressional elections since 1992, Inglis is now a politician without a party, a policy maven without a movement. And in a few months, he will be without his present job. He has no specific plan yet for his future. He mentions looking for “private sector opportunities” in a sustainable energy field — or an academic or think tank position. Becoming a lobbyist is another option he has started to mull.

Inglis is a casualty of the tea party-ization of the Republican Party. Given the decisive vote against him in June, it’s clear he was wiped out by a political wave that he could do little to thwart. “Emotionally, I should be all right with this,” he says. And when he thinks about what lies ahead for his party and GOP House leaders, he can’t help but chuckle.

With Boehner and others chasing after the tea party, he says, “that’s going to be the dog that catches the car.” He quickly adds: “And the Democrats, if they go into the minority, are going to have an enjoyable couple of years watching that dog deal with the car it’s caught.”

© 2010 Mother Jones Online All rights reserved.

[David Corn is the Washington bureau chief of Mother Jones and the co-author of Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War and is the author of The Lies of George W. Bush. He blogs at davidcorn.com. This article first appeared on Mother Jones Online.]

Source / Progressive America Rising

The Rag Blog

Posted in RagBlog | Tagged , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Glenn W. Smith : Attacks on Voting Rights in Houston

The top photo is the captured still from a video (see it here) put out by True the Vote that alleges “Democrats” manipulate elections. Digital Dupes then reported that it appeared that some of True the Vote’s evidence might be manipulated, pointing out, as an example, that the type on the poster in the top photo was “perfectly flat,” and that “the font is clearly Comic Sans with a slight compression along the x-axis, not hand lettered which would make this an unlikely meticulous stencil or expensive printed sign.” Then the un-doctored original (lower photo) was found.

Contempt for democracy in Houston:
Attacks on voting rights

By Glenn W. Smith / The Rag Blog / September 6, 2010

In Harris County (Houston), Texas, a tea party group called King Street Patriots is engaged in a systematic attack on voting rights. They are working dirty hand in dirty hand with a Republican County voter registrar to suppress the votes of those they believe unworthy, that is, those who might disagree with their own political choices.

Of course, they say they just want fair and open elections. “It’s really about truth,” says King Street founder Catherine Engelbrecht in an eight-minute video that includes doctored images and phony charges of “fraud” against… well, you only see pictures of African-Americans when fraud is discussed, so the implication is clear.

Maybe it was just coincidence that the warehouse containing all — all — of Houston’s voting machines burned down mysteriously just as King Street Patriots and their ally, Tax Assessor-Collector Leo Vasquez, went public with their fraud allegations. Whatever the case, the voter intimidation and suppression campaign is clearly part of a well-funded national effort to put barriers in the way of voters suspected of disagreeing with the perpetrators’ right-wing agenda.

The contempt for democracy demonstrated by partisans who think nothing of violating the fellow citizens’ right to vote is staggering. Not only are election outcomes potentially altered, the health of civil society itself is altered.

I wrote that back in 2004 after surveying decades of GOP voter suppression campaigns for my book, The Politics of Deceit. Voter suppression is the most under-reported political scandal of my lifetime, and it pains me to admit that I under-reported it myself when I was a political writer for daily newspapers.

Journalists tend to shrug it off as a kind of prankish misdemeanor. But mail pieces like that one pictured above (read about it at Lone Star Project) are clearly intended to scare would-be voters into thinking any misstep will land them in jail. Mailers like the one below are now a common part of every election.


Groups like King Street Patriots hide behind rhetoric that they are the guardians of fair, open, and honest elections. If that is true, why do they lie? Why do they invent stories of fraud where none exist? Why do they doctor images in their video? If truth is what they want, why do they poison it?

Their lies betray their real goal: to limit the voting rights of their political opponents. Let me detail one of their lies. They claim repeatedly that in Houston, six people are registered to a vacant lot. The claim is the symbolic center of their phony accusations of voter fraud.

It didn’t take very many minutes of research to discover how ridiculous this charge was. Incidentally, the Liberty Institute has taken the image down from its website. LI is run by King Street Patriots lawyer, Kelly Shackleford, the guy who tried to suppress the Alaska Legislature’s Sarah Palin report. Anyway, it turns out that there was a rent house on that vacant lot until 2010. A demolition permit was issued in September 2009. Tax records indicate the house stood until 2010. The six registered voters mentioned in the attack were renters going back 10 years.

If any doubt remains, here’s a Google Earth photo of the house that once stood on King Streets’ allegedly vacant lot.


King Street Patriots doesn’t care, of course, because the truth of an allegation is irrelevant. Like all voter suppression and intimidation campaigns (Greg Mitchell’s account of the the 1934 California gubernatorial race tells a great story about how unfounded accusations of fraud can be used to suppress votes) racist allegations of widespread fraud are used to stir anger among (usually white) conservative voters and intimidate minority voters.

Here’s another example. In their video, King Street Patriots uses a doctored image of an African-American rally-goer holding a sign that reads, “I Only Got to Vote Once.” [See above.] The sign is lettered in the Comic Sans font and was clearly photoshopped. Once again we have to ask, if truth and fairness are what they want, why phony-up images? This one actually makes me chuckle for its sheer absurdity. Under what possible circumstances would anyone publicly complain that they only got to vote once?

By the way, there is a national effort to find the young female victim of this particular little fraud. Go to DigitalDupes.org to participate.

The Right wants its suckers to believe that scary people are out there undoing what would otherwise be the natural result of “fair” elections: the absolute hold on power by, well, them.

King Street Patriots appears to be connected to the national right-wing network funded by the notorious Koch brothers. Jane Mayer’s recent piece on them in the New Yorker should be mandatory reading. I think the voter intimidation and suppression campaigns in 2010 will be better funded and more organized than ever before. And I think the best way to discredit them is to expose their lies.

An argument over a lot at 2307 Jackson Street in Houston, Texas, may seem trivial. But it’s not. Caught in a lie, King Street Patriots betrays its true intentions, intentions shared by a national network of anti-democracy forces that will disrupt the 2010 elections any and every way they can.

[Austin’s Glenn W. Smith, according to Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas, is a “legendary political consultant and all-around good guy.” His excellent blog on politics and culture is DogCanyon, where this article also appears.]

The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Rabbi Arthur Waskow : Five Steps to Burning Books

“On Sunday evening, members of the Harvest Assembly of God Church in Penn Township sing songs as they burn books, videos and CDs that they have judged offensive to their God,” Butler Eagle, March 26, 2001. Photo from American Library Association.

Does burning people come next?
Five steps to burning books

How did we get to the point where some Americans would burn a sacred book, and many more oppose the building of a sacred mosque…?

By Rabbi Arthur Waskow / The Rag Blog / September 6, 2010

From a small right-wing church in Florida, there has gone out a call to burn copies of the Quran on September 11. Instead of being ignored as clearly cuckoo, this call won national media coverage.

As the German Jewish poet Heinrich Heine wrote almost two centuries ago, “Those who begin by burning books will end by burning people.” The theater piece for which he wrote those words, called Almansor, was addressing the Inquisition’s burning of the Quran. In 1933, university students in Heine’s own beloved homeland burned his books, along with many others. They burned people soon after.

Many American religious communities and organizations, as well as secular groups like Common Cause, have condemned this call for burning. The road to burning people is by no means so open here, now, as it was in Germany in 1933.

But still, we need to face the question: How did we get to the point where some Americans would burn a sacred book, and many more oppose the building of a sacred mosque in their own town — not only in Lower Manhattan, but in many other neighborhoods?

It would be easy to start with the aftermath of the terror attacks against the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. But the spiritual chasm between Christianity and Islam goes back centuries. The hostility of Jews toward Islam, on top of the ignorance of almost all European and American Jews about Islam, goes back at least to 1948. And the economic dislocations and unwinnable wars of recent years also have their place in pouring out the fear and anger that provides the fuel for the spark of bigotry.

Anti-Islam blogger Pamela Geller. MSNBC image from Loonwatch.com.

Step 1: The old hostilities

There are perverse and paradoxical spiritual roots to the hostility between Islam and Christianity.

All the great religious traditions — not only those we call monotheist, but Hinduism and Buddhism and Shinto and Wicca and for that matter what we call “secular” traditions like socialism and liberalism — are rooted in the profound effort to make loving contact with the ONE. One God, one historical dialectic, one Web of life in soul and body on our planet––ONE.

Once a community has begun to reach out toward the ONE, it begins to create the metaphors, the rituals, the languages, the practices in daily life, the festivals to embody this searching toward the ONE. And then the community bumps into another community that also claims it is in contact with the ONE, and has its own quite different set of metaphors, rituals, languages, and daily practices, with which to make this contact real.

There are often two responses to this discovery:

One is to say with surprise and delight, “You have shaped a different path from ours! Of course there must be many ways of lighting up the Infinite, unfolding truth. How could the great Infinity reveal itself except through sacred diversity? Let us learn from each other!”

The other response is to say: “We have unearthed the one way to the ONE, and any other path must be a false one. And worse than false––since you claim falsely to have made contact with the ONE, you must be lying. Corrupt. Deceitful. Worth killing.”

In the various British colonies that became the United States, this bitterly hostile response was embodied in the persecution of one or another faith community (e.g. Quakers, Jews, Roman Catholics), by one or another of the original colonial governments. The uncertainty of who might get persecuted in the nation as a whole was one of the factors leading to adoption of the First Amendment, and much of the hostile reaction was then muted by the existence of the First Amendment. If no religion could wield state power and violence against another, this reaction was less likely.

Native American religions and Mormonism did not “count” in this context; state power or pressure was used against these religious communities. And there was public pressure in the 19th century against Roman Catholicism, and in the 20th century against the “Nation of Islam” (a racially focused variant not accepted by any other Muslims as truly Islamic).

Step 2: The 9/11 attack

Until 2001 in America, both hostility and interfaith exploration were quiescent, in regard to classical Islam. Then a tiny proportion of the more than one billion Muslims of the world, claiming they were acting on behalf of Islam and God, murdered about 3,000 people.

Again, there were two responses:

There was a wave of rage against Muslims and anyone who looked as if he might be Muslim. Some were attacked, a few were killed. Officials arrested hundreds of Muslims out of fear, almost always utterly unjustified, that they were would-be terrorists. Some of them were held for months without access to families or attorneys.

And during the same weeks and months, some Americans — often religiously motivated Christians and Jews — rallied to protect Muslims and their mosques. Some stood guard to prevent attacks, some created vigils, some brought together Jews, Christians, and Muslims under ” The Tent of Abraham, Hagar, and Sarah.”

Step 3: The wars with Islam

Soon after, the government of the United States began wars against two Muslim-majority nations. It quickly became clear that what began under the banner of “liberation” actually became conquest and occupation. Yet the wars dragged on, bringing death to thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan civilians. And meanwhile, there were deadly U.S. military attacks on Pakistanis, threats of war against Iran, and a continuing close alliance with the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands and people in the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem.

There is a process that researchers in psychology have uncovered and call “cognitive dissonance.” People who begin with one opinion but act in a way contrary to that opinion change their ideas more than their behavior. After almost a decade of American wars against a number of Muslim-majority societies, and several actual murderous attacks by self-proclaimed Muslims against civilians in various countries allied to America, some Americans who had begun with few opinions about Islam in general began to view it with anger and disgust:

“If we are killing lots of them and they are killing some of us, there must be something evil about them.”

Anti-Semite Father Coughlin in action. Photo from the Library of Congress.

Step 4: The Great Slump

Meanwhile, Americans experienced a disastrous economic slump. The last time that rates of disemployment and of home foreclosure had been this high, during the Great Depression of the 1930s, one of the reactions was a great wave of anti-Semitism across America. Father Coughlin on radio, Henry Ford through the Dearborn Independent, were reaching millions of Americans with fear and hatred of the Jews.

So now, in another time of economic trauma — and now also of unwinnable wars and a deep sense of cultural dislocation — there was seething not quite visible below the surface of American culture and society a current of xenophobia. Hispanic immigrants, legal and illegal, became suspect. And Muslims.

Step 5: Crystals of bigotry

And then into this hyper-saturated solution of fear, suspicion, and hatred came some who chose deliberately to drop the poisonous crystals of bigotry .

In December 2009, The New York Times — a liberal leader of opinion — and Laura Ingraham — a conservative leader of opinion — carried articles and interviews about plans of American Muslims to establish Cordoba House, a community cultural center in Lower Manhattan. There was no fuss, no fury.

Not till May 2010 did the ultra-right-wing anti-Islam blogger Pamela Geller and organs of Rupert Murdoch, the right-wing publisher who later gave $1 million to the Republican Governors Association, begin to carry inflammatory stories about what they call the “Ground Zero Mega-Mosque.”

And then, step-by-step, the crystal they sowed precipitated the super-saturated solution into a noxious brew. Right-wing blogs and talk-radio programs described the Cordova House as an insult to the dead of 9/11, a triumphal celebration by Islam of its victory in the attacks on the World Trade Center, anything to arouse fear and hatred of Islam.

Even Jewish organizations that claimed their mission was to prevent “defamation” not only of Jews but of all religious and ethnic groups, or claimed their mission was to promote “tolerance,” spoke out against the planning for Cordova House. “Yes,” they said, “Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan have every constitutional right to place their mosque or cultural center two long long New York City blocks from Ground Zero, but it is not ethically right or spiritually wise to do so. It would offend the sensibilities of the survivors of the 9/11 dead.”

These assertions ignored both an important fact and a crucial principle. The fact was that hundreds of 9/11 survivors, in the organization called September 11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, had endorsed the placement of Córdoba House. The principle was that the constitutional right of freedom of religion has no reality if a wave of hostility from “private” citizens, sparked by great media empires and backed up by public officials, can prevent the fully legal placement of a house of worship.

Why then did the right wing media and right-wing politicians like Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich decide to light this conflagration? The spark would not have lit a fire if there had not been gallons of gasoline beneath the surface, but why light the spark?

I think the answer is that the right wing was and still is hoping to split the vote of progressive Americans by using not just Cordoba House but also broader fear of Islam as a wedge issue, just as they used the issue of gay marriage –which now has little bite. They have used the fear of Hispanic immigrants in the same way.

Fanning fear an — may offer the possibility of splitting the Jewish vote, which is, next to the vote of African-Americans, the most progressive voting bloc in the country.

Indeed, many Jews, outraged by attacks on Israel that are sponsored by two Muslim organizations — Hezbollah and Hamas — and by Holocaust denials from some leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran, may be susceptible to an Islamophobic campaign. At the same time, of all American communities, Jews are perhaps the most likely to smell and taste the danger of bigotry against a religious minority.

So the American Jewish community is one of the crucial arenas of struggle over whether burning the Quran becomes a step on the path that Heinrich Heine prophesied toward burning people.

Out of this witches’ brew of dark past and explosive present, there emerged not only bigotry but another wave of interfaith engagement. Those of many religious and ethical communities gathered to condemn the burning of the Quran and to affirm all sacred texts, all sacred gathering places.

This kind of affirmation is important. And if indeed the official wars against Muslim-majority countries and the great wave of disemployment and home foreclosures have been crucial to pouring the gasoline of fear and anger that have been ignited by sparks of bigotry, then working for economic healing, a peaceful foreign policy, and the transfer of war budgets into rebuilding America are also crucial.

The path America will take is still uncertain.

As for the Jewish community, in its possibly pivotal role: Let us hope that a story from my own childhood echoes so strongly the memories and sensibilities of other American Jews that overwhelmingly, we will walk the path toward freedom and diversity, peace and economic healing:

When I was about seven years old (1940), my grandmother interrupted other Jewish women in line at the kosher butcher shop who were talking contemptuously about “the shvartzes” — that is, Black people. She challenged them: “That’s the way they talked about us in Europe. This is America, and we must not talk like that!”

We must not act like that, either.

[Rabbi Arthur Waskow is the director of The Shalom Center. He is co-author of The Tent of Abraham: Stories of Hope and Peace for Jews, Christians, & Muslims; author of Godwrestling, Round 2 and Down-to-Earth Judaism; and editor of Torah of the Earth (two volumes, eco-Jewish thought from earliest Torah to our own generation).]

The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

David Bacon : Life in an Immigrant Labor Camp

Immigrant workers at labor camp in northern California. Photos by David Bacon / The Rag Blog.

Journalist and long-time labor organizer David Bacon will be Thorne Dreyer‘s guest on Rag Radio on KOOP 91.7 FM in Austin, Tuesday, September 7, 2-3 p.m. (CST). They will discuss immigration politics, the labor movement, NAFTA, the border, and more. To stream Rag Radio live, go here. To listen to this show after the broadcast, or to listen to earlier shows on Rag Radio, go here.

With or without papers:
The same life in a labor camp

By David Bacon / The Rag Blog / September 5, 2010

See gallery of photos, Below.

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA — On a ranch north of the Bay Area, several dozen men live in a labor camp. When there’s work they pick apples and grapes or prune trees and vines. This year, however, the ranch has had much less work, as the economic recession hits California fields. State unemployment is over 12%, but unemployment in rural counties is always twice what it is in urban ones. Unemployment among farm workers, however, is largely hidden.

In the case of these workers, it’s hidden within the walls of the camp, far from the view of those who count the state’s jobless. Because they work from day to day, or week to week, there are simply periods when there’s no work at all, and they stay in the barracks.

In the past, the ranch’s workers were mostly undocumented immigrants. In the last several years, however, the owner has begun bringing workers from Mexico under the H2-A guest worker program. While there are differences in the experiences of people without papers and guest workers, some basic aspects of life are the same.

For the last several weeks, all the workers in the camp have been jobless, and neither undocumented workers nor guest workers can legally collect unemployment benefits. Everyone’s living on what they’ve saved. And since the official total of the state’s unemployed is based on counting those receiving benefits, none of the men here figure into California’s official unemployment rate.

The camp residents share other similarities. Poverty in Mexico forced them all to leave to support their families. Living in the camp, they do the same jobs out in the fields. All of them miss their families and homes. And home, as they see it, is in Mexico. Here in the U.S. they don’t feel part of the community that surrounds them.

A residence visa, or “green card,” would allow them to bring their families, and perhaps eventually to become integrated into the community. But for people coming from Mexico to look for work in California fields, “green cards” are not available. Their only alternatives are what they call “walking through the mountains” — that is, crossing without papers — or signing up as a guest worker.

In addition, as one man points out, because farmers are in the U.S. during planting season, the fields they’d normally cultivate at home go unplanted.

Some of their options as unemployed workers are different, however, because of their different immigration status. Ironically, in one way guest workers have a disadvantage they don’t share with the undocumented. Guest workers have a visa, but they can only work for the rancher or contractor who brought them to the U.S. If they’re out of work and leave the ranch to look for a job with another employer, they violate the terms of their visa and can be deported.

Undocumented workers, however, can and do look for jobs outside the ranch when work there gets slow. The dangers of deportation and working without a visa hang over their heads every day they’re in the U.S. They’re no higher if they look for work during times of unemployment.

Three of the workers talked with David Bacon about their lives. Their names were changed for their protection

Jose Cuevas:

I’m 38 years old, and I come from Leon, Guanajuato, where there are a lot of factories making shoes. I spent 10 years working in those factories as a cutter. If you work a 10-hour day, you can make 1,100 pesos (about $100) a week. That’s not enough to support a family, even there. And I have three kids, who are still living there with my wife.

I came to the U.S. because of the economic pressure of trying to provide for them. I wanted them to get an education, and just eat well, just so they’d be healthy. We all felt terrible when I decided to come here nine years ago. The kids were little — they didn’t really understand. But when they got older, they’d ask me why I had to be gone so long.

It’s been five years since I’ve been able to go home. I came without any papers, just crossing the border in the mountains. When I think about my friends with papers, I wish I’d had the chance. But the truth is, I couldn’t come that way.

There always used to be times when you could go back to Mexico. But it’s too difficult now. To begin with, it costs about $5000 now to cross the border coming back. And the border has become very dangerous. It’s not like it was before. If you leave, you’re not sure you’ll be able to get back, even walking through the mountains.

So I’ve been trapped here for five years. But I tried to take advantage of it, and not think too much about going back. I work here in the grapes and the apples. I knew about the work here from my wife’s brothers. Years ago, a lot of people came here from Leon. Now I’m the only one. Lots of those other folks left, and I was the only one who stayed.

This year it’s been harder. I’ve hardly worked on the ranch this year — just a couple of months. I looked for other work, but there wasn’t a lot. In January and February I went to the day labor center near here, and got work pruning apple trees. I’m very grateful to them.

Even when there wasn’t work on the ranch here, we could work other places and still live in the camp. They never charged us rent. When they have work, they expect you to work for them. You’re living in their housing. Some of the jobs are paid by piece rate. When they pay by the hour, it’s about $9.85 per hour.

Sometimes if we’re working we eat meat every day. But when you’re not working, you eat tortillas and salt. That’s the normal thing. Before coming here, when I was living in Mexico, we didn’t eat meat very often.

When you’re here, you’re always thinking about Mexico. This is going to be my last year. I’ve decided to stay in Mexico, and to try not to think about coming here anymore. I’ve put some money into a house and a little land. I’ll go back to work in those shoe factories. I still know how to do all the work there. We’ll suffer economically, but I hope we’ll be OK. Who knows?

Here everything is just work. It’s all very serious. Mexico feels more free. Living here, it’s not your country.

My oldest son is studying psychology, and will go to the university in Leon. He has a good future because he studies, and I support him. I hope for a good future for my other kids too, and I’m hoping that they’ll have a future in Mexico. I don’t want them to leave. With more education, I hope they won’t have to.

Rodrigo Huerta:

I’m 21 — not married yet. I come from Tlazezalco in Michoacan, where my father works in the fields. My grandfather has some land, and so his sons rent from him.

My father worked in the U.S. many years ago, in the 80s before I was born. He just worked one year and never went back. Then my brother went to Atlanta eight years ago.

I actually never planned to come here. I always said, I’m not going. But now look. Here I am.

I have a dream — to build a house, get married, and have a family. I have someone in mind, but you can’t rush it. She told me to go, so I’m hoping she’ll wait for me.

I never wanted to come to the U.S. by walking through the mountains. But one Christmas Eve my aunt asked me if I’d ever thought about coming here. At first I wasn’t that enthusiastic, but then I began thinking about it.

Every Christmas she goes back to Michoacan. She said, “They’re hiring people, and they asked me to give them a hand.” So they brought me here, on an H2-A visa. Now I’ve been coming this way for three years.

The bosses here on the ranch arrange for the visa. Then the foreman meets us at the border. We have to pay our own expenses to get there from our town. They pay for transportation and food from the border to the ranch here. The first two times we came in at Nogales, and this last time through Tijuana.

The foreman takes us to the appointment with the consulate, where they tell you if you’ve been approved or not. If they don’t approve you, you have to go back home. This last time two of us weren’t approved. The consulate asked them if they had experience working in the fields, and they’d worked in factories. They said you need two months experience working in the fields to come here.

The visa only lasts for six months. We’re only supposed to work on this ranch. I guess we could work other places but you’d be breaking the agreement, so it’s better not to risk it. But we haven’t had work here for several weeks.

In the last two years, I really haven’t made a lot of money. But the pay is better here. It’s easier to save, because you’re not spending so much. In six months, you can save what it might take you two years at home.

In my town there aren’t any factories, so the work is all in the fields, but there’s not much work there. Some weeks you work three days, and others where you don’t work at all. The economy is bad all over. Here you can eat meat every day if you want. The way things are in Mexico, you can’t buy meat every day.

To me, I just have a temporary life here. I have friends here who invite me to play football, but it’s not a real team. I could never join one, because I’m not here during part of the football season. So I just play with friends.

Here I’m always living against the clock. I’m not here to make a home. That’s just the way my life is here. Temporary. In reality, my home is my town, Tlazezalco. I wouldn’t trade it for any other.

Antonio Perez:

I came here because of the poverty. There’s work at home, but just a little. I rent a little land, and plant corn and garbanzos, and raise some animals. But you can’t actually live on the money you make farming. It just helps a little.

I’m always working in other jobs, in someone else’s fields, or on a hog farm. When I work for someone else, I get paid by the day. When I work for myself, it depends on the price of what I’m able to grow or how much I get for an animal I raise. The corn price has been the same for a while — 70 or 80 pesos. Sometimes you can sell it, but other times you just feed it to the animals.

There are times when my family can survive this way. But if you have a big family, it doesn’t really give you anywhere near enough money.

So my aunt got me to come here as an H2-A. We’ll see how it works out. I haven’t decided if it’s worth it yet. We’re not here for that long, but you always want to be with your family.

I’m not planting anything this year either, because I’m here during the planting season.

[David Bacon is a writer and photojournalist based in Oakland and Berkeley, California. He is an associate editor at Pacific News Service, and writes for TruthOut, The Nation, The American Prospect, The Progressive, and the San Francisco Chronicle, among other publications. His documentary photography has been exhibited widely. For 20 years, Bacon was a labor organizer for unions in which immigrant workers made up a large percentage of the membership. Those include the United Farm Workers, the United Electrical Workers, and the International Ladies’ Garment Workers. This article was also published at New American Media.]

  • For more articles and images, go here.

Also see:






Immigrant workers at northern California ranch. Photos by David Bacon / The Rag Blog.

The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Marc Estrin : What’s a Jew to Do?

Photo from the USHMM / National Archives / About.com.

What’s a Jew to do (with you)…

By Marc Estrin / The Rag Blog / September 4, 2010

…you, in this case, being the arch-conservative Catholic composer, Anton Bruckner, next to Wagner, Hitler’s favorite, whose birthday it is as I write?

I knew I wasn’t supposed to like Bruckner when, in my Jewish-guilt ridden, self-assigned curriculum, I decided to spend a summer listening to and learning all the Bruckner symphonies during my back and forths to Bread & Puppet. But it turns out that the orchestration is such that I often could hear only the upper half of the sound over the interstate tire noise. So I gave up that project, to fill in my Bruckner gap more slowly, as it comes.

For The Education of Arnold Hitler, my novel about a really sweet guy with a really shitty name, I knew I’d have to write a section on Bruckner, so I listened up on the Seventh, and wrote the following. Evelyn Brown, Arnold’s new girlfriend, a performance artist investigating evil by playing at neo-Nazism, and Arnold, have built him a bunker under an on-ramp onto the Bruckner Expressway in the Bronx out of stolen cement blocks and plastic sheeting. They have a bunker-warming for their little love nest as follows:

  “Whatcha got for music?” he asked.
  “Bruckner, what else?”
  “Ah.”
  She switched out the light. There was only the ghostly glow of distant streetlamps through the mirror film. Arnold crawled in under the quilt.
  “I brought you the slow movement from the Seventh Symphony.” She was somewhat slow herself. “Here.”
  She pushed PLAY, and the small room was filled with the rich sounds of low strings and horns in C# minor, a long, sinuous phrase culminating in surprisingly masculine chords, and lapsing back into a gentle feminine ending, serene, consolatory, moving.
  “Nice,” he said. “I’ve never heard Bruckner.”
  “You told me that. I thought this would be a good place to start.”
  “Beautiful, but so sad,” he said, as the melodies spun out of the original germ.
  They lay there silent, sipping their glasses as the harmonies and textures grew ever richer, and the keys slipped by until one amazing moment when the music, with a thrilling shock, slips and falls a half-step to climax streaming out on C major, filling the dark room with light.
  “Jeezuz!” Arnold muttered,.
  The music quieted, and the movement ended with a transfigured major version of the opening funeral music, a majestic threnody framed by the sound of Wagner tubas. They were silent for a long time after it finished.
  “The Nazis dug him too,” Evelyn finally said, “his monumental scale, grandiose, lavish, spiritual… They’d play him in Dunkelkonzerte — lights all out, sacred space. Listening to Bruckner was like going to church.”
  She snuggled in under the quilt.
  “His most famous piece, that,” she murmured. “They played it on German radio after Hitler died, after he was burned to a crisp. Hey, you wake?”
  She nudged him. No answer. She pulled off her clothes and lay her body against his as the kitties and bunnies watched the night.

OK, so Hitler and the Pope notwithstanding, Bruckner writes some fabulous music, even for a Jewish ear. So did Wagner, the fulminating-enough antisemite.

Which brings up the larger, long-standing, subtle, difficult question: can one detach an artist’s life from his or her works? Celine is a great writer, but a murderous maniac (as was Gesualdo). Heidegger was IMO the most important philosopher of the 20th century, and ended his inaugural address as rector of Freiburg Universtiy with three “Heil Hitler”s.

What are people, Jews especially, supposed to do with this gorge-rising stuff?

One approach has been “if you can’t beat ’em, recruit them” — as in this scene from my novel, Golem Song. Alan Krieger gives his shiksa German psychiatrist girlfriend a present of Arthur Naiman’s wonderful little book, Every Goy’s Guide To Common Jewish Expressions, Also Recommended for Jews Who Don’t Know Their Punim From Their Pupik. I’ll save you some space: Open the link if you like. It’s pretty funny.

(Nice little side story: when I wrote Arthur, asking for permission to quote his book in mine, he wrote back, “Permission is for goys. Fair use is for Jews,” and gave me… what?… who knows? Anyway a “Sure, go ahead.”)

OK, so Beethoven was Jewish, black jazz heroes are Jewish, all the (Good!) antisemites were Jewish, but what about Netanyahu? Lieberman? the politics of the current state of Israel? Are THEY Jewish?

Here’s what Alan Krieger’s brother writes him — interspersed in a scene from Golem Song in which the Ursula of the link above, takes Alan out to a French restaurant (Alan is very bad at French restaurants).

So, yes, what’s a Jew to do? What are any of us to do? It’s worth writing novels about.

[Marc Estrin is a writer and activist, living in Burlington, Vermont. His novels, Insect Dreams, The Half Life of Gregor Samsa, The Education of Arnold Hitler, Golem Song, and The Lamentations of Julius Marantz have won critical acclaim. His memoir, Rehearsing With Gods: Photographs and Essays on the Bread & Puppet Theater (with Ron Simon, photographer) won a 2004 theater book of the year award. He is currently working on a novel about the dead Tchaikovsky.]

The Rag Blog

Posted in Rag Bloggers | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments