Uppity.

This one has been all over the internet. Video taken yesterday, May 9, in Mariupol.

The Only Christie News That Really Matters

Are you, like me, bored senseless with the horserace "news" about the portly governor and former Federal Attorney of New Jersey? He's up! He's down! We got a horserace now! Hillary is wiping the floor with him; the woman mayor of Hoboken is wiping the floor with him! Cat-fight! Cat-fight! Yaaaaaay!

Bullshit.

All through this nonsense runs the devastation from Hurricane Sandy, devastation that lingers years after the event, just as the devastation on the Gulf Coast from Hurricane Katrina (and others) still lingers -- and probably will never be fully repaired, nor will displaced populations ever fully return.

This is how these storm situations are being handled these days. Send money to the best off so that they can get their beach mansions up above the storm surge levels in time for the next event, and deny money to the least well-off and most needy -- so that they will Go Away.

From time to time I get updates from Occupy Sandy and from various Occupy efforts and their offshoots going on around the country and the world, and today's email brought news of the Occupy Christie efforts to shame and ostracize the Governor and all his minions for their deliberate and ongoing refusal to address the real problems of the people of New Jersey left in the wake of the storm. While the events have been going on since last Sunday, and I only got the update this morning (having been drop-kicked from one of the email lists I was on and only just got it restored) I thought it might be useful to post the contents of the email so as to give some idea of the extent of the problems for recovery in New Jersey:

Dear friends and supporters, 

 In light of the recent disturbing disclosures concerning Governor Chris>

 Christie's flagrant misuse of federal Sandy aid money, the collective of
> storm survivors and their allies who organize under the Occupy Sandy New
> Jersey banner are hereby calling on residents of New Jersey to join us in
> Trenton in Occupying outside the Capitol starting this Saturday, January
> 18th, at noon. We intend to maintain our camp through Chris Christie's
> re-inauguration festivities on Tuesday, January 21st.
>
> In particular we invite and encourage Sandy survivors to make the trip to
> Trenton (we'll help you get here if you reach out: call 609-318-4271 or
> email OccupySandyNJ@interoccupy. net) to tell your stories to the state
> and national media already camped out nearby. We know that the people of
> New Jersey have stories to tell, to Chris Christie and to anyone willing to
> listen, and we plan to provide a safe space from which to do so.
>
> Since our Sandy recovery work continues on a daily basis?indeed, some of
> our volunteers and organizers may not even be able to make it to Trenton
> due to responsibilities in the field?this will only be a four day
> Occupation. However, should the administration fail to quickly fix its
> broken response to the storm and shift its attention to the state's
> residents who are most in need, we will not rule out returning to Trenton
> again soon. Governor Christie must understand that the last people he
> should be bullying right now are Sandy survivors.

> #OccupyChristie starts at high noon TOMORROW at the State Capitol. Bring
> sleeping bags.

> To Governor Chris Christie, here is our one demand: do your damn job!

> In solidarity,
> Occupy Sandy New Jersey
> ________________________________
>
> WHEN: Saturday, January 18th, NOON to Wednesday, January 22, 9am.
> WHERE: 140 W. State Street, Trenton, NJ
> WHAT: Camp #Sandygate (see partial schedule below)
> RSVP:?https://www.facebook.com/events/490811191030334/
> ________________________________
>
> ?
> Why "Camp Sandygate"?
> ?
> Sandygate is the real big scandal of Chris Christie's administration. While
> the state and national media are fixated on "Bridgegate" -which indeed does
> make for a good story -the real story should be the thousands of New Jersey
> residents who have been failed by Christie and the state. This is not
> simply an issue of storm recovery being a long and difficult process, as
> officials are often heard saying, but this is an issue of discrimination,
> misappropriation, and lies. Sandygate is about callous state officials
> deciding that one group of people will get help, while another will be
> ignored.

> 

> Frankly, Sandygate is a scandal about mistreating the most vulnerable
> among us.
> 

> Below are just a few of the grievances we hear most often through working
> with both survivors and service providers. As the links below demonstrate,
> the NJ media has actually done quite a good job of telling the real story.
> 

> Unfortunately, the national media has so far failed to put the pieces
> together:
> 

> Racial discrimination: Blacks and Latino applicants have been
> disproportionately rejected for resettlement and construction grants. 14.5%
> and 13.5% of White applicants were rejected by the Resettlement and RREM
> programs, respectively. Contrast these rates of rejection to 20.4% / 18.1%
> of Latino applicants, and a shocking 38.1% / 35.1% for African-Americans.
>
> Regional disparities: South Jersey's battered Delaware Bayshore has been
> almost completely left out of the recovery process. Residents of Cumberland
> County, one of the poorest counties in the state, are ineligible to receive
> state-administered federal funds. This means that while a beachfront
> homeowner on Long Beach Island is eligible to receive up to $150,000 to
> repair their home (or even to jack it up on stilts so their flood insurance
> remains affordable), bay-front or marsh-front homeowners in Downe Township
> could have lost everything and yet be eligible to receive nothing from the
> state.
>
> Discrimination against mobile-home owners: Despite assurances from the
> state that the grant application process did not exclude mobile-home
> owners, the process was riddled with confusion. In October, 2013, only 10
> of 3,500 statewide applicants for rebuilding grants were given to
> mobile-home owners. In the devastated Vanguard and Metropolitan parks, in
> affluent Bergen County's working class borough of Moonachie, only 4 of 400
> residences were approved. The state website still contains language
> excluding "RVs and trailers," which is believed to be the main cause of the
> confusion.
>
> Mishandled recovery for renters: Rental property recovery was underfunded,
> and relief went to landlords based on demand, rather than need, leaving
> renters out in the cold. As a result, $2 million of the $4.5 million
> awarded through the state's Incentives for Landlords program ended up in
> Essex County, which did not experience nearly the magnitude of
> storm-related damage as did other Atlantic counties. Devastated Ocean
> County, by contrast, received a mere $47,484 from the same program.
> Furthermore, while the state has been focused on landlords, renters
> themselves have too often been ignored.

>
> Leaving people out in the cold: As a result of the systemic mishandling
> and inequities in the Christie administration's recovery effort, many of
> the most vulnerable among Sandy's survivors have fallen through the cracks.
> The state has yet to commission a comprehensive survey of survivors, nor
> assessed the needs of those who currently live crammed into motel rooms
> with their whole family, or by sleeping in the condemned ruins of their
> home, or in between the reeds hidden in sand dunes. These and countless
> other survivors are still in urgent need of assistance with basic
> necessities such as food, clothing, medical services and stable housing. We
> do what we can for them every day, but there is so much more work to
> do.
>
> With so many resources going to well-off people and businesses, even one
> vulnerable person left behind should be a scandal. Tragically?and due to
> the decisions of Chris Christie and the state of New Jersey?thousands have
> been left behind.
>
> This is Sandygate. Please join us in Trenton tomorrow if you share our
> outrage.
>
> ________________________________
>
> PARTIAL SCHEDULE OF EVENTS:
> Day 1 - Saturday
>
> Noon - Occupy
>
> 6pm - Community Dinner & Assembly
>
> 8pm - Memorial Candlelight Vigil for Sandy's victims
>
>
>
> Day 2 - Sunday
>
> 9am - Breakfast
>
> 1 pm - Community Lunch & Assembly
>
> 7pm - Sunday Dinner
>
>
>
> Day 3 - Monday
>
> 9am - Breakfast
>
> 11am - Press conference
>
> 1 pm - Community Lunch & Assembly
>
> 7pm - Dinner
>
>
>
> Day 4 - Tuesday
>
> 8am - Breakfast
>
> 11am - Sandy Survivor Speakout
>
> 1pm - Lunch
>
> 7pm - Dinner
>
>
>
> Day 5 - Wednesday
>
> 9am - Breakfast and break down encampment

This is the real story of the Hurricane Sandy relief debacle. 

It's not about the mayors and the governor and Hillary and the polls

and the Rockefellers and all the rest, it's about the People and their struggle 

in the face of this ridiculous mess and media 

sideshow. 

This issue is the real story all over the world. 

One day, we might come to know about these things in real time. 

Haiti, anyone? 

Too Bad, So Sad -- The Continuing Impoverishment of the Millions

Yesterday marked a reduction in food stamp benefits for tens of millions of recipients; this is on top of the rigorous impoverishment of millions upon millions of people each and every year of the seemingly endless Recession. Obviously, the poorer you are, the less you need to eat, and if you're not working because there are no jobs available, you benefit from eating less. Extra calories would just be turned to fat as you laze around on your unemployed ass, as everyone knows.

I saw my own congressional rep on the teevee yesterday (Michelle Lujan Grisham, someone I don't know and have never had any contact with, as opposed to her predecessor, Martin Heinrich, who was either calling or having staff call all the time, and who held district constituent meetings regularly, something I don't think Lujan Grisham has ever done). Interesting that while she decried the current cut to food stamp benefits, she was quite eager, she said, to "work with Republicans" to cut food stamp benefits "responsibly." In other words, "too bad, so sad" for those who were just barely getting by as it was with their meager benefits intact. Let's cut them anyway! Responsibly. Of course.

New Mexico is a poor state, never mind all the rich folk who live here. One in five New Mexicans receive food stamp benefits, a number that has grown since the onset of the Endless Recession (endless for the proles) and since the Recession won't end, the number of beneficiaries doesn't decline. Food isn't cheap here, either. So those who are seeing a cut in benefits are essentially shit out of luck. Too bad, so sad.

They Aren't As Smart As They Think They Are

But they have all the Power, so it's a wash, right?

I'm talking about Our Betters, those who rule us with the rod and the staff. They just aren't very bright, as we've recently seen with the candidacy of one Willard Mitt Romney, aka "Mitch" (h/t Letterman). He was simply an avatar of his class however, no brighter nor particularly less bright than any of the dozens or hundreds of minted or legacy multibazillionaires who deign to own the government and thus to acquire the right to rule.

This is how an aristocracy is established and how it rots from the inside as well. We've had plenty of experience with legacy aristos wishing to -- and frequently succeeding in -- imposing their right through some permutation of le droit du seigneur. It is, strictly speaking, a form of official and sanctioned rape -- something made quite clear during the campaign with statements and actions by Republican candidates that simply denied that "rape" was a serious or real offense against the persons of The Little People, in this case The Little People With Lady Parts.

Much as I excoriate the Republicans for their stupidity and their cruelty, I don't let the Dems off blamelessly. After all, in our duopolistic political system, their role -- which they typically perform dutifully and frequently energetically -- is that of enablers for the stupid cruelties of the Rs. It's not unlike the role of the Church vis a vis the Spanish during the Conquest. While some of the clergy remonstrated with the conquistadors over their abject bloodlust and cruelty during (and after) the Conquest -- and were sometimes eloquent and forceful in their condemnations -- the upshot was to enable even worse abuses and ever more cruelty in pursuit of the supposed salvation of the savage's souls. In other words, the victims were truly better off dead.

There is no People's Voice in the midst of this. The People are little more than resources for exploitation or waste for disposal. The People's very existence is a bother to their Betters.

And that, perhaps, is the stupidest aspect of our current Ruling Class; they see the rest of us as a bothersome and ultimately irrelevant burden on their beautiful minds and lives, when in fact, it is the People who are responsible for providing all the benefits and comforts the Rulers desire and demand. Treat the People well, and all good things flow to those who serve them. Treat them poorly and the Ruling Class totters, eventually causing its own extinction.

The People are not abstractions or impediments. The People are the foundation upon which everything else is constructed. Our Betters once knew this and acted on it -- perhaps with some reluctance, but still...

They have forgotten.

The People have immense intrinsic power under the circumstances, but there is a general reluctance to use it, partly because there is no institutional memory among the masses of what to do when those who rule are as stupid and cruel as the ones we have today.

The Occupy Movement (which has by no means gone away) was an attempt to formulate some kind of mass opposition to the character of the rule we are subject to. Whereas I saw it initially as the Revolution itself, I realized later it was at best a precursor -- a necessary one to be sure because the People do not know what to do in the face of such gross cruelty and incompetence by those in charge.

During the last 30 or 40 years the knowledge has been largely beaten, bred, and "educated" out of them. It all has to be relearned, in many cases from the ground up.  There is no political opposition to the rule of the stupid and cruel, and part of the learning process that's been going on has been finding the means and methods of sidestepping the politics while forcing the political system to be responsive and responsible. So far, nothing tried has really worked, though there are those who claim that what's been done to date has had a profound effect on the Ruling Class (I don't see it that way at all, but that's just me.)

Re-learning the basics of mass movements and social and revolutionary theory takes time, and actually using it takes lots of practice. There are no real shortcuts, though the Gene Sharp Method proposes a sort of short-cut to Revolution -- one that unfortunately leads too often to the triumph of neo-liberalism and greater misery for more people than before the Sharpian Revolutions. This is not exactly what we need at this time. We are already in the triumphant phase of a neo-liberal revolution among the ruling classes. We need to get beyond that.

There is a widespread lack of enthusiasm for the confirmation of  Team Obama in office -- along with simple disgust at the same sort of gridlocked Congress we've had for the last several years. The electorate apparently said keep them around to do their will, but we don't really know what their will is -- except that we can be sure it will include further depredations on the masses as a matter of course and right. Further stupidity. Further avoidance of the correct path toward the future.

And yet seemingly spontaneously all of it can change in a twinkling.

This Is Our Summer of Discontent

 

The traditional locution, out of Shakespeare massaged by Steinbeck is "our winter of discontent," from Richard III, Act I and Steinbeck's 1961 novel, his last as it would happen.

But Americans, like many other peoples, tend to hibernate in the wintertime. Discontent and rage are traditionally features of the summertime and in the past have included the inner cities exploding, all kinds of "random" gun violence, and troops in the streets. The summertime isn't and wasn't all trips to the summer place and picnics in the park.

The United States is not really a peaceful -- or peace loving -- nation and Americans are not a peaceful people. It has ever been thus.

This summer has been one of much discontent both for cause and for show. The two Shoot 'em Ups so far, together with the police shootings of suspects in acts that have been called summary executions, have beaten a kind of tattoo on the overall discontent Americans are experiencing due to what is clearly a terminally failed economy for the masses, a high-handed authoritarianism from the government, and a ridiculous level of self-absorption by the government's owners and sponsors, personified by one Willard "Mitt" Romney, Buffoon.

Protest, suppression, protest, suppression have occurred with some regularity across the land, in Philadelphia, New York, Burlington, Los Angeles, Chicago, Anaheim, San Francisco, Oakland and on and on around the country, sometimes aligned with the Occupy Movement, but often enough quite independent of it -- though perhaps inspired by the Occupy example. The People have outgrown the Occupy frame. Yet for Authority, the pup tent is still the most terrifying People's Weapon.

The pup tent. Imagine. What a country.

The Summer of Love now seems like an aberration, but at the time it was a naive-thoughtful contrast to the violence and bloodshed that had characterized summers in the recent past. Watts, Harlem, Chicago, Philadelphia, Rochester, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and so on...

Blogger George Washington observed that we may be in a situation today that leads to, perhaps requires, a Peasant's Revolt to force real change on an indifferent and monumentally stupid ruling class in thrall to the financiers. Others have suggested we're already in a Peasants Revolt, and like all the others it will be crushed, the Movement destroyed, the Peasants worse off than before.

As a rule, these things don't turn out well. For anyone. And yet, despite the carnage and despair that frequently results from the peasant's rising, change does occur, change that might not have been possible had the peasants not arisen.

We can look to our own history for that clue. Had it not been for the continual agitation of the labor movement, had it not been for the continual defiance of authority by strikers and others, had it not been for the success of the agrarian and populist movements, had it not been for the demands of the Bonus Marchers, had it not been for the protest riots of the 1960's, had it not been for Stonewall and Wounded Knee and all the other refusals to obey, we would not be as semi-free as we are, and we would not have any of the social benefits we take for granted, but which are being chipped away at by the Overclass at an increasingly maddening pace.

We are near the tipping point for another general rising of some kind. The Revolution, in point of fact, has been going on for nigh on a year now, but the Rising of the Masses has been deferred. The actions of the killers among us, seemingly randomly massacring, will have something of the same effect that the mere showing of guns at town halls had in 2009, only now with far more certainty to instill existential fear in the populace. People are afraid. Their afraid of the violence of the police in suppressing protest and demonstrations and they are mindfully afraid of the killers on the loose always ready, willing and able to cause misery and mayhem at the times and places and in the manner of their choosing.

The peasants will not rise, however, without a John Ball or a Wat Tyler in the vanguard, and we do not have that in this country at this time. Whether we will ever have a genuine leader of that sort is an open question as our Overclass has learned and internalized the lessons of previous revolts very well indeed, and it is perfectly capable of producing an ersatz Revolutionary Leader should circumstances warrant, that is, should the pressure on the Underclass become so severe that their only choice for survival is to rise en masse and to put an end to their torment or to die trying. Should that point ever come, the Overclass would be delighted to produce a firebrand to ignite the torch of ersatz "liberty" -- think Glenn Beck with a brain and charm. A Leader straight to perdition. These things have happened in the past; they can happen again.

The Summer of Our Discontent is prelude, however. It is not the actual event, it is the stage-setting and prop mounting for the Show which is still to come.

The election in November may prove to be the last straw, but only if it is as easily determined to be fraudulent as the 2000 election was. Elections have been on a path to irrelevancy for some time, but the image of them as a reflection of the People's Will is still strong. If the election in November is seen to be yet another fraud, though (regardless of who is awarded the White House) the People may simply accept it the way they have in the past as "one of those things, oh well."

We'll see. Won't we.

Winning Plutocracy -- the Juggernaut

One of the more remarkable aspects of the "Nonviolence" Wars -- or rather, the argument, it never came to blows after all -- was the apparent urge many of those in the "nonviolence" community had to make common cause with the Oppressor, in the immediate case with the Po-leece, but down the road, with the Plutocrats and Oligarchs that rule us.

Somehow, we were supposed to believe, being "nonviolent" would lead to the Police changing sides, and it would lead to the Overclass doing the right thing for once in their worthless and exploitative lives.

On the other side of that fabulist coin is the notion that if things only get bad enough, the people will spontaneously rise up and destroy the Ruling Class once and for all.

But that's not quite how it is working out. Nor do I think it has ever quite worked out that way.

Instead, what we have is the relentless march of Power and Money on a Juggernaut crushing all in its path, which has no consciousness of "doing the right thing" or making common cause with the masses, or even with some self-appointed "nonviolent" elite among the masses. It simply isn't happening.

(Not being an X-Men fan, I had no idea there was a character called "Juggernaut" that behaves pretty much like Our Rulers...Oh. My. :-0. Live and Learn.)

How do you make common cause with that?

The fact is that the Plutocrats and Oligarchs are interested in rule over the rest of us and they use their militarized police as shock troops and enforcers. It is striking how very little "changing sides" there has been. It has nothing whatever to do with how the forces of resistance resemble or fail to resemble GhandiKing. Nothing. It has to do with the simplest facts of Power: Power concedes nothing without the demand, and right now  and for some time past, there has been no demand Power has chosen to listen to or fear.

In Olden Days, it seems like you could always count on someone in the Ruling Classes or among their enforcers to break ranks and side with the People, and they simply aren't doing it now. If anything, the ranks are closing tighter and tighter, much more so than ever before.

And those who have from time to time appeared to be on the People's side aren't.

It's as solid a phalanx of Power and Money arrayed against the People as there has ever been, and they concede... nothing.

A lot of those engaged in the struggle and resistance against them -- and there are many millions world wide -- seem to think that persistence can win concessions, and it isn't happening. Persistence leads to ever greater levels of frustration and despair, not concession at all.

The other day I posted the video of Bella Eiko at the Public Safety Committee hearing of the Oakland City Council. She expresses her extreme frustration with the City administration and particularly with the Committee chair in no uncertain terms, at length. Her point of view, her anger and her frustration are shared by many in Oakland, and if people are honest with themselves, many more people would share her outrage at the blind indifference of officials to the ruin they spread in their wake. Bella Eiko was not polite in her outrage, and many would say she was engaged in "violent confrontation," but that would be a complete misreading of what was happening. She isn't violent, any more than Chris Moreland was violent when he was arrested in retaliation for sassing the Oakland police chief. She's furious -- as so many of us are -- at Power's complete indifference to the suffering they cause and perpetuate in service to... itself.

The lack of any concession by Power at all after months and years of growing need, protest and demand is one of the most striking aspects of the post-Soviet world we live in. Not only is there no concession, there are constant, growing, and often totally outrageous demands of the People by Power.

The Plutocracy is winning; the Plutocracy has won.

Recognizing that the Plutocrats and Oligarchs have won is not to concede to them, however.

I saw a comment the other day over at Digby's from someone who posts as CupOJoe, someone who I believe is the same online advocate for workers rights and a better life for all who has been posting on these topics for many years (the problem with Digby's comment section is that there is no way to be sure whoever is using this or that screen name is the same individual who has historically used the name). He said with regard to the Wisconsin Debacle in part:

Politics is a long, slow slog through the mud and we have not yet begun to fight in earnest.

and I was just kind of gobsmacked by it. Well, when to we start this fight "in earnest?" Digby has been writing about this struggle "in earnest" for over a decade now, and so has Joe, if CupOJoe is the same Joe I'm thinking of (I forget his last name right now, memory synapses are going haywire and all, but for a time, he had quite a prominent place on the advocacy side of the left-o-sphere.) I've had this blog since 2007, but I've been an activist online and in the field much longer than that going back to the ancient days of the 1960's. When therefore does the fight start in earnest? I'd really like to know.


And what constitutes fighting in earnest?

I've said, and I still believe, that Occupy represents "The Revolution," insofar as an actual Revolution is possible under the circumstances. It is by nature a nonviolent resistance campaign -- whether or not a random or purposeful window is broken or a raging citizen angrily confronts and denounces Power. This is the only way a Revolutionary action (especially on a global scale, as the Occupy Movement is) can proceed in the world as it is. The fight is very much "in earnest" and with an enormous number of moving parts.   It may not be as well-coordinated as one might wish, but no vast Movement of this sort ever is. Even the most adept of military campaigns are far less well-coordinated than legend might suggest. 


And the progress of the Juggernaut is not as well-managed and inevitable as it may appear. 

In fact, the Juggernaut can be stopped in its tracks much more simply than we may sometimes think. The Juggernaut doesn't think. It can't; it's inexorable. Thinking is not part of its nature. Nor actually is doing. In fact, all of its "doing" has to be done by those crowds eagerly surrounding it and pushing and pulling the cart forward. The Juggernaut cannot move on its own. The Juggernaut is mindless and relies entirely on worshipers for motive power.....


Bob Avakian of the Revolutionary Communist Party offered this insight a decade ago:

Stopping the Juggernaut and Making Revolution

A fundamental and essential question poses itself: Is it actually possible to stop this whole juggernaut without carrying out proletarian revolution? Well, we'll learn that in the event, as things actually develop, but certainly we can't say at this point that it would be impossible to stop this juggernaut without achieving the actual overthrow of the whole system--that only through revolution, to put it simply, could this juggernaut be derailed. Now, that may turn out to be the case, but that's not something we can determine at this point. So when we put forward the objective of actually stopping this juggernaut, it's not a gimmick; it's not a way to get people on a train, an express train with no local stops that goes only to revolution. It's an orientation toward actually uniting with people with a real objective in mind. We're not promising people that this is going to happen one way or the other, or pretending that we know the whole outcome of this. What we are saying is that we must have this as an objective--to stop this juggernaut--and we're serious in seeking to stop it, even if it means that it gets derailed short of revolution, because that will contribute greatly to revolution in any case, besides the fact that in terms of the two 90/10s*, and particularly in terms of the interests of the people of the world and their revolutionary struggles, it's important to stop this juggernaut.

But, at the same time, if we're not bringing forward, through the course of all this, the need for proletarian revolution, if we're not showing in a living way how this juggernaut is rooted in the very nature of this system--that it's one particular, concentrated expression of the nature of the beast and why we need to do in this beast--then we're not meeting what we need to be meeting in terms of the needs of the people and in terms of our revolutionary objectives. So this is another contradiction we're going to have to handle, once again, not in a linear or mechanical way but in a dialectical way, in accordance with the complexity of how these contradictions play out.

 _________________
Footnotes:
* The "two 90/10s" refers to a formulation in the Draft Programme of the RCP, in the section on building a united front under the leadership of the proletariat (UFuLP), where it speaks to the importance of seeking to win over the great majority of people within the U.S. itself (the "90 percent") "while doing this in unity with the `90 percent' internationally , the great majority of the people of the world who suffer exploitation and oppression under the domination of imperialism and its allies and puppets."

Interestingly, Avakian's statement (from this essay) strikingly prefigures some of the conceptualization that characterizes the mostly anarchic Occupy Movement, yet the RCP play essentially no role in the actions of Occupy.


What's necessary to stop the Juggernaut in its track is something Gandhi and King understood very well: noncooperation.


Noncooperation is a concept many people still have trouble grasping -- let alone doing. It's always difficult to say "no" in the face of implacable Power. Much as I admire the grit and fortitude of people like Bella Eiko and Chris Moreland when they confront Power directly with their rage and outrage, I also caution: "You're feeding Power when you do that." Ultimately, denunciation won't work because Power loves the attention -- positive or negative, it doesn't matter, the attention itself is what Power desires and demands. So. Ultimately, to stop the Juggernaut, you have to stop pulling and pushing it. Step away.


And it STOPS. Just. Like. That.

What About Those Who Don't Want Revolution?

For some time -- quite a few years, in fact -- I have been writing and commenting about the need for Americans to rise up in opposition to the screwage we've been undergoing first as playthings of the neo-cons, then for a change of emphasis, as neo-liberal objects of utility. Or disposal, as the case may be.

"Rising up" is typically characterized as Revolution, and I've written extensively on that topic, too, a good deal of which was written during the Bush Regime.

As far as I know, most of what I wrote about Revolution wound up in Salon's archive dumptster and I have no access to it now, but the point I argued most often at the time -- going back to 2001 -- was that the Busheviks were themselves a Revolutionary force or cadre; they achieved power through a judicial coup and they were using their power to implement a Rightist Revolutionary program, a program that included the institutionalization of an Imperial State, the extinction of the Constitutional Republic once and for all, and the implementation of a corporate-kleptocratic economy.

The Busheviks and their neo-con hangers-on were Revolutionary in part because they could be, in part because they wanted to be, and in part because they were embarked on a transformational crusade from which they could not be dissuaded.

Their opposition, such as it was, in that context was counter-Revolutionary, primarily interested in accommodating the Revolutionaries' demands and preserving what they could salvage of the status quo.

At the time, many people did not see and refused to believe how truly radical and Revolutionary the Busheviks were. Soon enough, especially after the attacks on 9/11 and the subsequent clearly domestic Anthrax attacks, the government of the United States was completely overhauled and transformed into that of an Imperial War-State, run out of the White House bunkers, served by an impotent and compliant Congress and an ambivalent court.

The People, to the extent they were considered at all, were at best considered accessories and props to the Pageant of Empire, to be manipulated and controlled by an enthusiastically complicit media into believing anything the Imperial Headquarters wanted them to. And they did, in their multitudes. They didn't rise up against what was being done to them, they embraced it.

Millions of people in the streets, "singing songs and carrying signs," in protest against the Iraq War -- a full-on, up front, balls out, Imperial war of aggression -- were ostentatiously ignored, protest of any kind was corralled, mocked and dismissed. Remember "Free Speech Zone" and directives from the Busheviks and their spokespeople about what sort of protest and protest message was "acceptable?"

The public treasury was promptly and efficiently looted -- these people do know how to plunder -- and taxation on the favored corporate and wealth sectors was virtually eliminated.

The People did not rise up even after they became uneasy about the course of events when some of the horrors being perpetrated in their names in Iraq and elsewhere became known, when their rights as citizens were dispensed with, even when the economy imploded.

The People were passive, nearly mute. There was no rising up, no People's Revolt, nothing.

When you think about American history and especially the history of resistance to tyranny and exploitative authority, this situation was distinctly odd. The whole country, and its entire tradition and systems of governance was being turned on its head, and the People did nothing. They continued to drudge along quietly, performing the rituals of voting as if they still mattered, becoming obsessed with candidates for office while their pockets were being picked by the corporate raiders who were the real powers behind the Throne.

It was so eerie that people abroad were amazed. "What is wrong with Americans that they resist not, neither do they rise up, nor even do they complain except in the most servile fashion?"

During the Bushevik reign, the Revolutionary changes in the Nation's state of being became normalized.

Most people either didn't notice or they didn't care.

But when the economy collapsed like the house of cards it was, the meme of Change took hold, the need for redemption was recognized, and Barack Obama was sent to sit on the Throne.

It was clear to me during his campaign that his principal role, once in office, was to manage the masses, to keep them in line during the forthcoming unpleasantness. He demonstrated many times that he was a master at it. The People who had grown weary of the Busheviks, their casual cruelties, their plundering ways, and their lies, saw salvation was nigh, and so Obama won the election.

It's impossible to imagine that Crabby Old Man and Herself, the candidates who stood against him in the election, performing the role he was assigned and doing it even a fraction as well.

That said, an ersatz "populist revolt" against him was engineered immediately after the 2008 election and was put in operation through numerous radio and some television ads. It was called "Grassfire, We Resist" (I've mentioned it before, no point in going into details here) and that revolt was transformed into the Tea Party shortly after the inauguration, and we know what that led to: an intensification of the neo-liberal economic follies, and even greater institutionalization of the Imperial Security State. That done, the rebels rested.

Except that another, unexpected, populist revolt got under way last September, Occupy Wall Street that almost immediately spread across the entire nation and overseas. This was the first real mass uprising the nation had seen since the Sixties, and it was clear the authorities had no idea what to do about it.

From very early on, Revolution was in the air; nonviolent Revolution to be sure, but Revolution just the same.

Not a counter-Revolution that would try to reverse the Bushevik-Obama Imperial Revolution, and return to some idealized status quo ante. No. This would be a real Revolution, forward thinking, not going back to anything in the past but forging a brand new path into the Future.

"We are unstoppable; another world is possible."

Six months into it, some people are recognizing the beginnings of success, especially in the more militant outposts of the Movement -- like the O-Place, Oakland.

And it is understandably terrifying.

Many people who signed up for Occupy This or That didn't sign on to Revolution; many who thought that Revolution was called for didn't think this would be it. But there's a Revolution going on anyway, no matter what they thought they were signing up for, and in Oakland, it's getting really scary.

"Victory" is nigh. Is Oakland what a successful Revolution will look like? They aren't there yet, so it's hard to say. They've achieved the first-level victory of de-legitimizing civic authority, but where does it go from there? Either nobody knows or nobody's saying.

A first-level victory standing alone, without a sufficiently coordinated and militant follow up is not ultimately a Revolutionary victory at all.

For example, the militant students at UC Davis achieved a spectacular first-level victory by delegitimizing the authority of the campus police and the administration during and immediately after the Pepper Spray Incident.

They thereupon called for the disbanding of the UC Police, the immediate resignation of the chancellor and a cessation of tuition increases. They held a huge campus rally which I attended, at which they heard contrition from the chancellor and her pledge to do better, they vowed to reestablish their encampment and press their demands relentlessly until they were met.

They might have done so except for the winter break that came swiftly, emptying the campus, but not before the students literally ceded power right back to the administration that had abused them. They did it at a town hall that combined both contrition and control by the administrators in one of the slickest events of the kind I've seen.

By appearing to listen and repeatedly expressing contrition for past misdeeds, and by vowing "full investigation of what happened," and promising that nothing like the Pepper Spray Incident would happen again, the students' emotional demands were satisfied, and the power of their anger was defused.

Not to say this was a totally fraudulent show -- I'll let Nathan Brown say that -- but apart from mitigating the overt brutality of the UC Police, and allowing (even enabling) the re-establishment of the encampment, very little change has actually taken place, and few or none of the students' other demands have been met; there are no reports, for example, and conclusions from the 'investigations' are long past due. Tuition increases have not been mitigated or cancelled. The campus is quiet; the rebellion has been tamed. Linda Katehi is hailed far and wide for successful management of the situation. Voila! No Revolution in Davis.

See how this works?

That's how a Revolution is defused, but in city after city, with Oakland as a sort of Revolutionary pivot, authorities have responded to the militancy of the Occupiers, with ever increasing levels of violence, destruction of property, brutality and mass arrest of demonstrators. That is how authority adds fuel to the fire of Revolution.

What happens to the people who didn't sign up for Revolution who are caught in the middle?

We're seeing the tragic results of what can happen play out in places like Libya and Syria, where the People rose up, believed they could achieve real change through non-violent means, were ruthlessly cut down time and again by what I metaphorically refer to as "The Tsar's Cossaks", which led soon enough to an armed insurrection which in Libya turned into a civil war, the conduct of which was very bloody, the outcome of which was determined by the intervention of outside interests through NATO.

In Syria the nonviolent resistance campaign was met with extravagant levels of state violence and bloodshed, which in turn triggered an armed insurrection which is being countered with even more state bloodlust, inspiring more armed resistance as well as outside intervention on behalf of the rebels -- or so the intervention (sanctions for now) is being propagandized.

In both of these tragic examples of what can happen when nonviolent resistance is met with gross state violence and bloodshed, rather than any attempt at listening to and "taking steps" demanded by the rebels, thousands of noncombatants caught in the middle are paying for someone else's Revolution with their homes and their lives.

There is no sign at all that Occupy will in any way turn into an armed insurrection, but nonviolent demonstrations are being met with increasing levels of police violence, in which many hundreds have been wounded and some nearly killed. Many people who did not sign up for this sort of resistance and the violent response of the police have been caught up in it, and many are conflicted about it and are speaking out.

For the most part, they want "the violence" to end; and most don't want a Revolution at all. The question becomes one of how to stop it, or whether those engaged even want to stop it.

Defusing a Revolution is simple enough if it is done early on; the longer the struggle continues, the harder it is to defuse. What if the authorities don't want to defuse the situation, they want to crush the rebels? And what if they are prepared to do it through any means necessary, including jeopardizing the safety of the non-Revolutionary minded?

And what is the responsibility of the Revolutionaries for the safety of those who are caught in the middle of the conflict, a conflict that potentially can't be defused (because it's too late or because the authorities don't want to defuse it)?

While the issues surrounding Violent/Nonviolent action and reaction are being worked on by various elements in the Occupy Movement, there are somewhat bigger issues looming. The question of responsibility for the safety of non-Revolutionaries in a conflict situation is one of them.

"These People Don't Know How Power Works!!"

The title of this post is based on a quote said to me during the disastrous visitation of Occupy Sacramento by the city's mayor a number of weeks ago.




I had to be away from the computer during the opening of the festivities of the Town Hall at UC Davis last night, so I was only treated to the question and answer session with the students. I'm not even sure who exactly was on the stage apart from Katehi. I will have to watch the recording when I get a chance and see if I can winkle out names and titles. I will say, however, that the Vice Chancellor sitting next to Katehi [The Provost & Executive Vice Chancellor of UC Davis Ralph J. Hexter] was one of the well-dressed people I was walking among on my way to the campus rally. I distinctly recall him speaking to his colleagues in defense of Katehi and the police and denouncing one of the unions on campus -- and being remonstrated with by someone defending the union. Hm. Interesting. (Of course, there is a caveat. I do not know these people personally. I recognized the Vice Chancellor as the man I heard while walking to the rally, but the mind and memory do curious things with external stimuli. I realize it may not have been him, but instead was someone of similar appearance and demeanor, and my "recognition" of him may be the recognition of similarity rather than the recognition of actuality.)

[Others on stage included: Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, Fred Wood at the far left; Lt. Matt Carmichael, Interim Police Chief; Ralph J. Hexter; Linda Katehi; and eventually Vice Chancellor for Administrative and Resource Management John Meyer, who has actual authority over the UCD Police Department.]

It was clear from the get-go that most of these students "don't know how power works" either.

Not. A. Clue.

Some do, it's true. But under these circumstances, they had little opportunity to make a case. The game was rigged from the outset.

The situation was somewhat analogous to the Town Hall Seattle panel discussion of "Occupy Seattle" referenced in an earlier post. But no one Mic Checked the Davis Town Hall the way some folks did in Seattle, so the actuality of what was going on may not have been recognized by the participants.

By assembling administrators on a higher level, giving them microphones all the time, having them make unchallenged statements (that part is left out of the video above, I am scouting for more), and allowing ASUCD proctors to "moderate" challenges as strictly as they do (I assume they are ASUCD, but again, I'm scouting for more info), the power dynamic is this: "We are in charge here. You may or may not be recognized for a moment or two, but we will always be recognized because the Power is Ours, not yours. Got that? Good."

The other side, the students, quite simply have no power in this dynamic -- unless they seize it -- at all. That's the point of the lesson here. "We control you and everything here. You control nothing."

This is the problem with the power dynamics in the whole country, the whole wide world in fact, and this is why there is -- by necessity -- a global revolution under way.

There is no other way for the People to be heard at all; on the other hand, exposing the actual power dynamic in play -- such as the one at UC Davis last night or in the disruption of it in Seattle a few days ago -- doesn't necessarily register on the first go-round.

People are conditioned to accept this power dynamic as "natural." Challenges to it are deeply discomforting. Most of the time, most people will abide by the rules and the structure of the power dynamic on display last night at Davis and will not challenge it. To do so is not just threatening to Power, it is a threat to ones own comfort and safety. Challenges to this power dynamic will be met with brutality and worse.

Never mind that that was the topic of discussion last night.

Discussing it in the way it was discussed last night does nothing about it. Promises were made by the panel nonetheless on behalf of "changing policies." Yes, well. That's nice and all, but it is also deliberately meaningless. The students couldn't even get the panelists to describe what the current policy is.

Indeed, they were shocked to learn that no one on the stage was responsible for the actions of the UC Police in last Friday's Incident, and that the police do not report to the Chancellor, and that she has no direct control over them at all. "Then who does?" the multitude demanded to know. She couldn't quite say, she didn't really know the title of the person who did have responsibility, some Vice Chancellor of Something Or Other, he was in the room, over there somewhere....

It was a remarkable moment. But typical. Typical. Typical.

"Never reveal your actual lines of Authority, or if you must reveal them, do so in a manner that confuses the masses; be prepared to change those lines of Authority suddenly."

So the Vice Chancellor of Something or Other was found and brought to the stage and spoke briefly from the podium, complaining that his "portfolio" had been expanded a couple of years ago when the number of Vice Chancellors was reduced, and supervision of the UC Police on campus was dropped in his lap, oh poor pitiful me.

Oh, and he'd come to the University from the Bay Area, where he had served as Assistant City Manager (OMG!) somewhere (it's in the video, I'll try to review it later today and clarify) Yes, better to clarify. Having reviewed the video, I'm kind of gobsmacked. This man was City Manager of Davis before taking up his role at UC, and I think there may be an unpleasant connection between him and a relative. I'm not sure, however, so I will say no more about it. His thinking was... or "the University's thinking" was... that they were looking at Oakland, and what happened there, and to a lesser extent at UC Berkeley, and they didn't want that to happen at UC Davis, so some of the decisions that were made about policing the Occupy demonstrations at Davis were based on what had happened in Oakland -- he said "Oakland!" many times. "Maybe it wasn't the right decision."

Ya think?

And?

"Well, it didn't go the way we'd hoped last Friday."

YA THINK??!

It was a revelatory moment but not particularly instructive. Well, it was instructive if you knew how to process it. The UC Police, effectively, are run out of an obscure office, by someone no one knows, on behalf of relatively shadowy interests, essentially independently of the rest of the University's operations, and their actions are based on "fears" of what might-could happen, because something happened somewhere else that they didn't want to repeat.

In other words, it's a DHS-type operation.

If you parse his commentary sufficiently, you see that the police were sent in as a riot squad because that's how the police are "supposed to" address this kind of encampment defiance by students. Policy, in other words. But what happened at Berkeley when the UC Police went berserk backfired, and they didn't want a repeat of that. It looked bad for one thing. Brought discredit to the University. Yadda yadda. So. The decision of how to break up the demonstration was left to the field commander of the operation -- Lt. Pike -- with the understanding that batons were not to be used except defensively, and only if absolutely necessary if the officers were attacked by the demonstrators.

If the demonstration had to be broken up, some other tactic had to be used. Pepper spray? Well, that's always good! Yes! Let's do pepper spray! Yay!

(It has been pointed out that the spray that was actually used was most likely bear repellant -- though some have denied it -- but that in any case it may have been far stronger than "normal" pepper spray.)

Of course the operational details would be left to the field commanders.

The fact that this Vice Chancellor came to the University from the city manager realm rather than the academic realm is vitally important. In California, police forces are mostly under the authority of the appointed City Managers, not the mayors or elected city councils.

This was something Occupy Sacramento learned very late in the game it seemed to me; though I and others had pointed it out numerous times, the notion did not actually click until the Mayor Himself said so at the disastrous GA he attended.

What this Vice Chancellor was afraid of what that the Occupy demonstration would "get out of hand" -- the same fear at UC Berkeley, BTW -- and "become like Oakland."

There's a whole world view involved in the idea of "becoming like Oakland." Ultimately, a statement like that has nothing to do with the Occupy Movement; it has to do with deep and abiding prejudice against the People of Oakland, many of whom aren't exactly white.

Many of those who are white in Oakland are social/political radicals.

Visit almost any UC campus today and you perhaps will notice that a large proportion of the student body... isn't... white.

You will note, too, that most of the administrators... are.

In other words, many UC campuses may look more "like Oakland" than many of the administrators are comfortable with.

And that discomfort with the People is a consistent issue within the City Manager realm. By and large they are not at all comfortable with the demographic changes going on in California.

Enough said about that.

Katehi was challenged on her experience as a student in Athens when the University she was attending was attacked by the fascist military junta -- and on her recent advisory role on behalf of the Greek government's revision of the University's asylum policy. She got very heated. This was one of the only times she became animated. Most of the time, she was just "tired."

She said that the students who rebelled in 1973 were "mainstream" not radicals at all. On the other hand, the University has been burnt to the ground "twice" she said, by "anarchists" since then. All the Universities in Greece have been "taken over" by "anarchists," she said, and the policies she advised the Greek government on recently had to do with restoring control of the Universities to the People and restoring a "safe" academic environment for the students. She did not advise the (Socialist! she pointed out) Greek government to put police forces back on the campuses the way they had been during the dictatorship.

[Note: from what I have been able to find out, her story is... not entirely true. This is a story of what happened in 1973. I won't get into the details here, but you can read some of eyewitness accounts of what was happening in Athens in December, 2008 -- which is when the anarchists took over the Polytechnic briefly -- here, here, here, here, and here.]

Yes. Well.

A whole other realm of interests and ideas opened up with this sequence.

This fear of "anarchists taking over" is perhaps the key to understanding why so much brutality has been unleashed on Occupy demonstrations so consistently in so many places all over the country and all over the world, and why it was so casually unleashed at UC Berkeley and then at UC Davis. (Not to mention all the other campuses that have experienced police assaults lately -- and there have been many.)

"Anarchists" are the New Terrorists.

Make no mistake.

That's the God-forsaken Truth.

We are all so far over the cliff and down the rabbit hole now that it sometimes seems there is no way back to sanity.

Yet the Revolution abides.

It's going to take me much longer than I have this morning to process all of this into any sort of coherent form. But the Bigger Picture of what is going on is becoming clearer.

I'd love to hear how others see the dynamics in the video above.

"El Pueblo Unido Jamás Será Vencido!"

This is a video made from images collected during the first phase of the Indignado occupation of the Puerta del Sol in Madrid and other plazas throughout Spain -- which began on May 15, 2011. The Indignados have been an inspiration for the global Occupy Movement that has gained so much strength since the September 17, 2011 launch of the Occupy Wall Street action in New York City.

The song is by Sergio Ortega, a Chilean composer, who heard the chant "El Pueblo Unido Jamás Será Vencido!" while passing by the main square of Santiago de Chile in 1973 just months before the Pinochet coup which overthrew the elected government of Salvadore Allende.

The song became an anthem of resistance against Pinochet and other Latin American dictatorships, and eventually for resistance and social justice movements all over the world.

After what happened in Oakland -- and the aftermath of what happened in Oakland -- "The People United Will Never Be Defeated" is now one of the global anthems of everyone who believes in


DIGNITY
JUSTICE
COMMUNITY
PEACE







Nobody expects the #SpanishRevolution -- now the #GlobalRevolution.

To Review:

Who knew?

I started this year with a vow not to be so negative about events and the future, despite the fact that I was sick as a dog when the new year dawned.

This has been one of the ironies of the New Year. As I think has been clear, I have been quite ill with pneumonia since December. I thought the first course of antibiotics had cleared it up and that I was simply recovering slowly. When I went to the ER, however, I came to understand that it was not cleared up at all, that it had come back with a vengeance, and that despite all the hooey about TB and cancer that they were giving me, I was damned sick just the same. I've been on a multi-pronged course of treatment ever since. Saw the doctor today; he's concerned that my chest x-ray still shows a significant -- though dimininshed -- infection in my upper lung, and he's inclined to recommend bioscopy to see what's going on, especially to see if there's any blockage in the trachea that had not been noted previously. That's as may be. Oh, and he ordered up another TB skin test just to confirm for all and sundry that I am not walking around spreading tuberculosis far and wide. Bless his heart.

Meanwhile, events have moved very quickly and surprisingly in the wider world, so much so that what seemed to be such important matters only a couple of months ago hardly even register any more.

The Uprisings have become the focus of attention for nearly everyone.

As they should be. Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, all have been subject to widespread political and social unrest that is almost all based on principles of Dignity and Justice -- principles that have been utterly lacking in the course of these mostly young people's lives to date.

But before there were Uprisings in North Africa and the Middle East, there were widespread anti-austerity protests throughout Europe, many of which are still going on. It started in Greece, but it spread swiftly from there to France, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, the UK, Albania, Hungary, Poland, and on and on.

Calls for "Dignity and Justice" in Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East combined with severe economic pressures brought on by an out of control financier class -- and oligarchs and plutocrats in general -- did not go unheard in this country.

Uprisings broke out here, too, with Wisconsin's continuing battle against the preening overreach of Scott Walker in the vanguard.

The struggle is just engaged. It's only just begun. But it seems to be the beginning of the end for a variety of oppressors far and wide, and the beginning of a New Community of, by and for the People, a spirit that is overdue for revival.

In this regard, the fascinations and problems of only a few months ago seem almost a self-indulgent fantasy now.

Power to the People. Power to the People, right on.