My recent exchange with Stephan Kinsella (see here, here, and here) got me to thinking about the semantics of thick libertarianism. Specifically, is “libertarianism” the right word for what I am talking about?

I think that political philosophy is broader than just the NAP and homesteading principle and their deductions; to put it into Aristotelian liberal terms, I think that preserving personal and social autonomy are important to political philosophy in addition to political autonomy. Granting that, however, does it make sense to call the whole “libertarianism”? I’m not sure.

Now, I’m not saying that my political philosophy isn’t libertarian; it most certainly is. Nor am I saying that I am not a thick libertarian; I think that various other values/norms are implied and entailed by libertarianism. I am just not sure that it is accurate to call the whole thing “libertarianism”, given that the word has been traditionally been used to refer to a position on the proper use of force. The same thing applies to other concerns as well; I don’t call my whole political philosophy “feminism” or “anti-racism” either, even though it is feminist and anti-racist.

So, what is the proper term? As of now, I am not sure. Geoff Plauche’s term, “Aristotelian liberalism”, is a close fit, but I take a more leftist view of things than he, and I also see my political philosophy as being more of a synthesis of classical liberalism and classical anarchism than purely liberal. No other term really seems to fit, or has already been taken (“autonomism”, for example). Perhaps “eudaimonist anarchist”? It is descriptive, but a little long…

As you probably know, next week the world’s leaders will meet in Copenhagen for the climate change summit. It’s a critical moment – the outcome is far from certain – and you’ll be as depressed as I am to know that Nick Griffin will be attending.

The BNP claims that climate change is a “global Marxist mantra” designed to “impose a one world government” and describes the Copenhagen Summit as an “anti-white guilt hatefest which will see billions more taxpayers’ cash poured into the Third World.” Apparently Griffin has said that he’s going to expose the “somewhat dodgy” evidence surrounding climate change.

Nice.

If like me you’d like to let the Copenhagen representatives know that Nick Griffin doesn’t speak for the UK, you can sign a letter from Hope Note Hate denouncing Griffin and the BNP, and urging the need for a comprehensive deal.

Sadly, it’s not enough to denounce the BNP’s lies once – we have to keep doing it whenever they appear. So please take just a moment to add your name to this letter and stand up to the BNP. Again.

While laying out topics to explore further (some of which may or may not turn into books), I stumbled upon an interesting topic.  While beginning research for my next publication I took a moment to think about African-Americans place on the art spectrum.  Unfortunately, there are only really three African American all-stars in art: Raymond Saunders,  Jean-Michel Basquait, and Kara Walker.

Whereas I have an abundance of white artists names and work floating through my head I found this anomaly to be rather interesting.  I also happen to think that this attribute is primarily associated with African-American artists and not with other non-white races.  It seems as though Chinese artists, artists from the Middle-East and Hispanic artists have and are making enormous strides in modern/contemporary art.

This issue in many ways can be related to the  struggle that women have had in art for centuries.  According to Jerry Saltz, in his New York Times article, only 3.5% of artists in the MoMa are women.  The MoMa of course being a singular example but I feel that it is an accurate example none-the-less of the massive ignorance towards women artists in history.

That being said, I think it is fairly accurate to associate African-Americans in a similar struggle.  The reasons for these struggles is somewhat obvious, being that African-Americans were largely oppressed until 1975.   It is also not like art wasn’t being created.  After the civil war for instance, there were several African-American artists who became notable later on, like Richmond Barthe, Aaron Douglas and Malvin Gray.   One of the more interesting stories of African American art was the group ‘The Highwaymen’.

The Highway men were a group of 26 African-American artists who were being largely rejected by galleries in the 1950’s and 60’s.  Because of this rejection, they sold their works out of the trunks of their cars.  Today they are now recognized as some of the best artists to come out of Florida during this time period.   Some artists were indeed entering the gallery scene during this time (like Norman Lewis and Sam Gilliam) but they were still widely ignored.  When the civil rights movement hit in the 60’s and early 70’s, more centers for African-American art began to emerge.  It was because of their resolve that African-Americans finally had artistic centers around the country.

Fast forward to present day.   I believe it to be ashame that the majority of the permanent collections at museums and galleries have an enormous lack of African-American artwork.  But then again, if we look at the timeline of oppression, African-American art is in its ‘acceptable’ infancy.  It is still growing and with it, will gain the respect and admiration of all who support and love art.  There are so many African-American artists out there to love: Camille Billops, Mark Bradford, Edward Clarke, Richard Hunt, Dimitri Wright, Alison Saar, Gale Ross, Joyce Scott… the list goes on and on.

A national day of action has been called for Wednesday December 2nd, 2009 to protest Canada’s racist immigration policies, especially as they relate to migrant workers.  Apparently, Farm Workers Feed Cities is already having a significant impact on organizing in Canada.  This is being led by some sort of committee formed by groups advocating on behalf of migrant workers.  We encourage people to take action locally.  And we hope this committee actually means business.  Although Farm Workers Feed Cities is independent of this committee, we encourage people to support the day of action by taking action in their communities.  Organize and resist Canada’s racist immigration policies.

Heard on this morning’s TJMS:

Tom Joyner: What’s the n-word in Swedish?

Sybil Wilkes: The same. It’s universal.

"precept." smcgee, http://www.flickr.com/photos/smcgee/309271236/

There seems to be a certain level of glee in the discussions about what might or might not have contributed to golfer Tiger Woods’ car accident near his home. Glee from all sorts of places, but right now I am interested in the glee coming from some quarters of Black folks.

I guess I should speak for myself in admitting that I have had an ambivalent relationship with Woods over the years. I am speaking for myself—but suspect others feel similarly.

I have rooted for him, and taken some level of satisfaction when he has achieved at the top of his field. I do not like golf one bit. Once when my father-in-law—an avid golfer since his childhood days—took me out to the course with him I got sunstroke and swore no golfing green would ever see my body again. Watching televised golf for me is only slightly more exciting than watching TV test color bars. But still I rooted for him and even watched SportsCenter highlight of his shots.

I have grieved for him. I sensed how close he and his father had been and knew what he must have been feeling when his first and biggest fan died. To me they made the cutest pair: the pride emanating from the elder man, Tiger with his baby face and broad grin by his side. I am not one to talk about folks “looking down from heaven” and being pleased (or displeased). I generally hope that if there is a heaven, there will be something more and better to do than keep tabs on the goings-on here on earth. But in Tiger’s case, I generally have hoped that his Dad was tuning in to tournaments and continuing to take pride in his boy’s accomplishments.

I have scratched my head at him. His characterizations of his racial identity have challenged me to walk my talk. I firmly believe that people should have the freedom to self-identify as they please, in such a way that feels authentic to them—the rest of us be damned. At the same time, I feel that choosing to self-identify as Black in a nation in which Black is degraded can be an important—and brave—political act. I believe that people should have the freedom to love who they want to love and who loves them back—the rest of us be damned. At the same time I am aware that some people in our society are deemed more “lovable” than others, and Black women are often holding the short end of the dating game desirability stick.

So against this context I took in the initial reports of Woods’ one-car collision. My first thought centered on the initial reports that his injuries were “serious.” I thought about how none of us really knows what is in store for us by dusk when we rise out of bed at dawn. How each moment is precious. How money and fame cannot protect us against the great equalizers.

Then the story seemed to stray off of the fairway into the rough. The developing story is starting to read like an action movie that starts out great, but then develops so many holes that you are no longer able to enjoy the plot or even the special effects. Your whole viewing experience dissolves into pointing out to your movie mates how implausible different aspects of the film are. This, actually, becomes the source of most of your enjoyment such that if these loose strings were somehow tied logically in the final act, you’d be disappointed. You cannot wait to review the film for all your friends and relations—telling them that they must see it for its non-intended laugh-value alone.

So the story of Tiger’s accident has developed. I’m not so much worried that he has suffered great injuries—and certainly I am no longer worried that he is on death’s door—as I am interested in the story he has given to the police (apparently) and to the public as well as the public’s reaction to that story. Which brings me back to the glee I am detecting in the reactions.

Again, I’ll speak to myself. (Though I think I could ask these same questions of others.)

I ask myself: do I feel vindicated to see that Woods is being exposed, perhaps, as a regular male human being with normal failings? Am I happy that White women may, after these rumors, no longer be perceived by some Black men as the higher value, lower drama alternative to Black women? Am I relieved that whatever happened in that driveway resulted in Tiger wearing cuts and scratched instead of his wife? Am I tickled and entertained at the implausible (though, I must say, still possibly true) details Woods is sharing with us? Am I titillated by the proactive “lawyering up” of the other woman identified in the gossip around this case? Do I secretly wish that through this experience that Woods may realize that no matter how loved and accepted he may be by mainstream media and White fans, he can still be knocked down to size (and race)?

Am I hoping I am the first to think of the following board-game-inspired punchline to some joke about the affair: Mrs. Woods, in the driveway, with a nine iron?

Am I “wrong” for any or all of these reactions?

On the other hand, do I fear that the familiar apologies for domestic violence—e.g., most of the time it’s the woman who starts it—will be given fuel? Am I sad that whatever the case may be, two little children will have to suffer the upset to their family life and privacy? Am I wary that Blacks harboring unresolved ambivalence toward Woods will be singing the same chorus as Whites harboring unresolved bigotry toward him? Will I be tricked, as I have been in the past, by letting my attention drift to this new, shiny thing instead of focusing on more important national and global matters?

Black and White Feather (Photo by Cathie Bird)

My inner call to an anti-racist journey did not come at some immediately recognizable, definable point in time, wasn’t really in the realm of epiphany. It was almost more retrospective, and maybe even more of a renaming or reframe or focusing on a narrower segment of what I’d been calling spiritual path.

In my spiritual tradition, the Biblical story of Cain and Abel is viewed, in part, as an allegory that reveals early spiritual history of the race of man on Earth. In particular, it encodes some specific information about ancient patterns of relationship that became anchored so tightly into the fabric of human life that we, as a human race, struggle with it yet today.  This relational pattern is — for the human collective — as enduring as what we might call a personality trait at the level of individual development and expression.

We know the pattern by many names: master-slave relationships, caste systems, haves and have-nots, privileged and oppressed — these are the coarsest terms for it perhaps, but I think there’s a wider arena of re-enactment than we think in 21st Century America. Not that this hurtful relationship doesn’t operate elsewhere on the planet, but some people involved in anti-racism work say that the situation in the United States is unique. For this and other reasons I’m focusing on what I see and experience here in the United States.

In the society in which this pattern became entrenched, an experiment to explore the denser material dimensions of Earth had gone very wrong, leaving a certain segment of that society unable to access powers and talents that we all have as spiritual beings. For those who retained access to these powers, there arose a question of responsibility to those who had lost them. Some believed there was obligation under spiritual law and principle to help their brothers and sisters find their way out of their entrapment. Others apparently were enjoying “privilege” and became more interested in maintaining the status quo.

This is where the “brother’s keeper” clue comes in. We have brother’s keeper questions all over the place today, one of the most urgent and visible of which is fair access to quality, affordable health care. And it’s not only about being brother’s (and sister’s) keepers — if we decide we are keepers, then how should we “keep”? Mighty questions, indeed. And harder to answer without getting deeper into the roots.

The ancients had eventually managed to structure their society so as to exclude the “have-nots” from any meaningful participation. I wonder sometimes if the brother’s keeper question can become a distraction that never really allows us to take a hard look at the larger problem of how our institutions are structured. If that structure serves one segment of society to the exclusion of another, then we can keep our sisters ’til we drop, but may fail to re-empower anyone to truly share in the adventure of nation-making and keeping each other.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the earliest structuring of institutions in the United States gave privilege of citizenship only to white males. Those ancient battles of the privileged Cains and Abels took place geographically on land that is now within the borders of the United States. We are at ground zero for prototypical systemic racism. What our society and its institutions reflect today is a re-enactment of a civil war that we will do over and over until we get to the old history, the hidden truths that will explode the delusion of privilege if they can be spoken.

So this is the spiritual history of Earth, as I understand it, that fires my enthusiasm for an anti-racist journey. It also fuels my interest generally in work for social and environmental justice. I thought this was an important piece to document as part of the journey because for me the spiritual dimensions are of utmost importance.

I don’t remember what side I was on back then but, today, I’m casting my lot with the Abels, the ancient ones who argued on behalf of helping their fallen brothers and sisters back into full spiritual consciousness. Part of my anti-racist journey is about raising Cain — first and foremost, that of Cain consciousness that still lives in me. I don’t think it’s ever about killing some part of yourself off, but raising it up to a higher level of expression.

I hope to get back soon with more blogging on how I see Cain and Abel alive and well in the 21st Century USA.

I wrote in a little more detail about the historical Cains and Abels on another blog. If you are interested and open-minded, you can read it here.

The Swiss have today voted in a national referendum to ban the future construction of minarets. 59% backed the move, which had been motivated by the far-right Swiss People’s Party as part of its campaign against what it ludicrously poses the Islamification of Switzerland. Currently that country has just four minarets, and only 400,000 out of 7.5million people living in Switzerland are Muslim. Of these, more than half are non-practising.

As the Financial Times reports, the vast majority of the Swiss bourgeoisie opposed the measure, fearing economic and political isolation internationally. A political shift in the Swiss political mainstream towards concessions to racism in recent years is the likely cause for stoked fears amongst the electorate about the threat of Muslims to traditional culture.

However, there is little doubt that the surprise win for Swiss racists forms part of the Europe-wide trend in recent years towards hatred and intolerance, in particular directed against Muslim communities. Combined with the recent gains in Britain by the fascist BNP, the pattern is decisively in favour of those who stand in Hitler’s legacy.

Update: Read Tariq Ramadan’s interesting take on the poll result over at Comment is Free.

The people of Wrexham were already hostile to the EDL, but tensions increased after the racist demonstrators unfurled a large English flag, sang God Save The Queen, and chanted racist slogans such as “kill the Muslims”.

One woman, laden with shopping bags, summed up the feelings of the whole town when she stood her ground as the EDL tried to rush the much larger, and by this stage extremely hostile, audience of working people and shouted; “This is our town and you are not welcome here”!

MORE

After the on the spot reportage now the Daily Post weighs in-

FOUR people were arrested at an anti-Muslim demonstration amid a strong police presence in Wrexham. Around 40 members of a group calling themselves the Welsh Defence League (WDL) shouted racial abuse and gestured towards locals, saying they were protesting against plans for a new mosque. Four people were arrested for public order offences, and North Wales’s Temporary Deputy Chief Constable, Ian Shannon said the day passed without “significant incident”. Meanwhile Unite Against Fascism held a counter-protest, near where the WDL gathered on Saturday.

And a Wrexham Communities Against Racism festival attracted around 200 people. Residents were joined by faith groups, the Wales TUC, Searchlight, Unison and members of Wrexham Council. Searchlight Cymru secretary Ian Titherington said none of the WDL protestors were Welsh, and they appeared to be members of the English Defence League (EDL). He said: “This was the final humiliation for the EDL’s disastrous visits to Wales. The only way they could hold an event was to bus in 30 from Bolton, who on arrival went to the nearest pub, got drunk and bawled out racist chants.

The EDL gathering did not exactly sell any local links, by displaying a Bolton Wanderers FC English flag and singing God Save the Queen.” The WDL was formed in June 2009 as an off-shoot of the EDL, which claims to campaign against Islamic extremism. The group insists it is not fascist. But at a march in Swansea in October, onlookers were confronted by jeering men giving Nazi salutes, and one was arrested for a racially aggravated public order offence.

An EDL supporter posted a short video (subtitled ‘Outnumbered and we still stand our ground‘ thus admitting their low numbers and it’s not so much ‘stand our ground’ as milling around where the cops said to stand so your small group doesn’t disrupt the traffic or any passing badgers) in which you can hear no Welsh accents, they chant EDL not WDL, plus the worst/funniest murdering of God Save The Queen I have yet to hear (a piece of music that is so droning, joyless & plodding it is almost impossible to wreck it, yet somehow…they do!). You almost feel sorry for them, I don’t think this is endangering any kind of no platform policy, propaganda’s meant to improve your image, not demolish it. Comedy gold-

So I was only peripherally aware of this situation until I saw the “resolution” and decided to read more. Let’s see if I can briefly (me?!) summarize the situation . . .

A Christian publisher, Zondervan, apparently released a men’s book recently that had some pretty overt and stereotypical Asian content. Apparently the title of the book played off of this cluster of stereotypes, and to add insult to injury, the marketing campaign went even further.

A handful of Asian-American bloggers challenged both Zondervan and the book’s authors about the hurtful nature of these stereotypes. The part that really caught my attention was when Zondervan CHOSE TO DO THE RIGHT THING–they acknowledged that they had been wrong, and pulled the books. ALL of the books. (doing the right thing is usually not cheap, either.)

I read the blog entry of one of the people originally involved in the conversation about this, and found this blogger to be gracious, kind, and extremely generous to the authors. He had actually already reached out to one of the authors, and was hoping he would be able to meet the other one. Having come into this debate very late in the game, my sense was that this man was a complete gentleman and extremely gracious despite the pain that this incident had caused him.

I was almost in tears for Zondervan’s act of bravery, blown away by the fact that they had admitted their sin and had enough courage to remedy the situation. It was one of those moments where I felt a glimmer of hope for the future of the church, when for a brief moment, I wasn’t quite as weary on this journey as I so often am.

And then I started reading the comments on this gentleman’s blog . . . and as I did, that hope I had felt began to fade.

White (I’m assuming) Christians, oblivious to their white privilege and to the offense that had been caused in this situation, were spewing accusations TOWARDS THIS BLOGGER and towards the other Asian-Americans involved in this conversation. I usually don’t read more than a handful of comments, but I think I read almost 2/3 of them this time.

The accusations were ugly. Not only had these meddling Asians caused Zondervan to cowtow to the secular god of political correctness, they had also surely cost the salvation of millions of (purportedly white) men whose lives had been changed by this ministry. (Because Jesus is incapable of changing men’s lives without the help of one particular book/website?)

Oh, and also–the Asians made the Body of Christ look bad because they had dragged this all out in the public square, where millions of non-Christian Facebookers and Tweeters would see how horribly divided the Christians were.

(might the non-Christian world not instead be amazed by the testimony of humility and grace displayed in the resolution of this situation? And at any rate, I don’t think we have the option anymore in the 21st century to NOT be in the public square when it comes to social media. and one more thing–it’s my understanding that a bunch of people were Tweeting about what a stupid decision Zondervan had made . . . is THAT glorifying God?!)

I was flabbergasted by this backlash, until I remembered that the thing that keeps racism going is its invisibility. I was watching the wages of white privilege unfold right before my eyes. We white folks don’t get it–and we don’t NEED to get it. We are not “the other”, and that “other” makes an extremely convenient target when we don’t want to look at ourselves.

I know that I have a problem following up when it comes to this type of thing, but I really want to write to Zondervan and tell them how thrilled I am that they chose to do what was right, even at such a great cost (and I am speaking of more than the financial cost).

The reaction to this is proof positive that we have so far to go in fighting this disease of racism . . . and though I rejoice in small victories, I am still sometimes so overwhelmed by the seemingly never-ending road that we still have to travel.

My prayer is that more and more people and organizations will have the courage to do what Zondervan did–to admit to their blindness to the racism that wounds our brothers and sisters in Christ, and to take steps towards seeing, even when that seeing is painful.

Things have been pretty quiet here at Post-Post-Racial Life. Working on a college campus again means I am once again yoked to the academic calendar and all the work that means for this time of year. I have also been traveling for work. I have also been less than my usual 80%, health-wise; Nothing serious, just a chronic condition flaring up worse than normal. I have also been on a pleasure-reading binge—brought about, I think, by my brilliant though simple move of bringing a comfy chair from the living room and a floor lamp from the office into my bedroom.

But mainly I have been quieter than usual because I have become exhausted by about 99% of the news and analysis in Blogland.

This is no fault of bloggers. Bloggers have been observing and analyzing and discussing the day’s events with skill, sensitivity, and often, humor. But the news they have to report on is just so incredibly heartstucking. From abuse and murder of little kids to continuing racism and veiled (and not-so-veiled) violence against the President. It is all just so…much. As I have said before, sometimes a body needs a break from all this. Sometimes self-care must trump the desire to post—or to even read and comment on other posts.

Research has shown that people who watch a lot of television news have unrealistic perceptions about the prevalence of crime, who commits crime, and where crime is likely to occur. I think the same might be true for bloggers. It may be that heavy diets of blognews and bloganalysis might be warping our views about the amount of nonsense that exists in the “real world.”

Or it may be that we haven’t even scratch the surface.

But whatever the case may be, sometimes we should hit the “re-set” button on our perceptions. Just for our own sanity and piece of mind.

"brainy smurf was a tagger." deepwarren, http://www.flickr.com/photos/fuzzhead/11287941/

Recently a blog friend commented on a post and said her blog had been fluffy and weak as of late. I reiterated my thought that maybe she just needed a break, and opined that “fluffy” does not equal “weak.” I joked that real fluffy blogging would involve posting about Hello Kitty and the Smurfs.

But really—what is so bad about a little “fluff” every now and then? That is one of the things about the Old School Friday meme that I love so much. Even when the weekly theme is pretty serious, being able to express it through music makes blogging soul-enhancing instead of soul-sapping. But I have even missed posting OSF entries lately—two Fridays in a row!

I tell you: That will not happen again, if I can help it!

So what is the point of this post? I am not retiring. I’m not even “resting” per se. But the topics of my posts for the next…how many ever days I need…will be less weighty than is often the case here.

I have photos to share. I’ll catch the blog up on some music offerings. I even will get to Part 2 of my latest “At the Front” tale. And I have a couple other tales that might finally see the light of blog. I do not plan on actual posts on The Smurfs or Hello Kitty or The Care Bears. But I’m warning you: I may come close.

A statement by students at the university occupation in Vienna. See here for an interview with one of the activists involved. This document was published early in the struggle but is only newly available in English.

The strike signifies the refusal of work, but in this case it means an enormous intensity of labour. For more than a week people have been organizing, coordinating, communicating, writing, filming, photographing, cooking, doing media work and much more.

The university occupations didn’t occur out of the blue. Rather, they’re part and parcel of many years of work done by students, teachers, workers and particularly by non-institutional and self-organized groups and people. They not only call attention to the grievances with the university, the educational sector, and social structures more broadly – they are generating analyses, organising resistance, elaborating alternatives and living them. Therefore they are constantly fighting for the time and space to realize this. Without the work of this multitude of people, the protests happening here and now would not be possible.

These events are connected to the worldwide development of social movements. In this sense what is being fought for is not only better working conditions for students, teachers and other university personnel – rather it’s a fight for better working conditions across all sectors and borders.

Importantly, we’re also referring to the working conditions of those who are not directly contracted by the university, be they cleaning personnel or scientists. The protests argue for the visibility of these working conditions, including all of the unpaid and badly paid work – mostly done by women – in the household, in the educational and care sectors, and so many other fields.

Society benefits from the knowledge that is appropriated and applied across those unpaid domains of work that aren’t accredited with symbolic capital. Alongside this an image of a certain type of worker is imposed – a highly competitive, resilient, goal-oriented individual, capable of performing specified tasks at high speed, no doubt without any incentive to question working conditions. What’s wanted is human capital, what’s wanted is performance indicators for the national economy. This is highlighted by the reams of badly paid or unpaid internships that are being carried out at the present time.

The demand to improve the conditions of work is not a demand for an extra 5 cents per hour, 3 Euros more child benefit, or simply more money for the universities. The demand to improve working conditions means fundamental social changes – it’s obvious that the current social order mainly produces exclusion and discrimination. Exclusion of minorities, be they migrants, people with special needs, elderly or socially disadvantaged persons. And they are exclusions, the cost of which is primarily carried by women. These exclusions are promoted and exercised by the quasi-democratic, economized, patriarchal processes of decision- making that dominate society. This also includes certain kinds of societies, such as the traditionalist patriarchal organizations (Burschenschaften – Brotherhoods) that find their host in the university. Fundamentally responsible however are the hegemonial patriarchal, sexist, anti-Semitic, anti-roma, racist, nationalist, conservative, repressive and quasi-democratic politics that prevail in Austria.

Whilst a large part of the Austrian mediascape has been belittling or scandalizing the protests in the usual manner, there emerges a wave of amazement at how transversal, persistent, strong and significant these protests are. We refuse the appropriation of the protests by the Rector of the Academy of Fine Arts – this movement is not driven by an avant-garde of socially critical art that happens to be compatible with the market. With these protests, we are fighting for a space that is also imaginable because of the historical and political knowledge generated within the universities. More importantly however the space of this protest is constituted by the experiences we’re making and articulating across the interstices of our tight study schedules and difficult working conditions.

What’s lived and demanded here is:

- the abolition of exploitative power structures and their mechanisms of exclusion
- the absolute democratization of all institutions
- the end of racist and sexist laws, labour market politics and educational politics
- the end of racist and sexist service economies
- the end of free-work and appropriate payment of internships
- the payment of services that haven’t been accredited as labour, such as Housework, childcare, and caring for the sick, no matter who is doing it.
- the acknowledgement of non-institutionally legitimized knowledge’s

We demand free access to the educational system for everyone.
We demand not only the end of the economisation of education.
We demand the end of exploitation in all areas of life.

Re*claim your education
Re*claim your body
Re*claim time and space
Re*claim your life

Left Foot Forward, by way of Duncan Borrowman, today exposes the pervasive racism at the heart of Cameron’s Conservatives. Tory councillor and former Mayor of London hopeful Peter Hobbins wrote to the Orpington Conservative Association:

I have been contacted by a Mr Dilon Gumraj and a Zerha Zaidi and others who are all on the approved Conservative Parliamentary Candidates list. Not one of them has a ‘normal’ English name.

They want to be the PPCs for Orpington and asked me for my personal advice on how they would be the best candidates for the Orpington Constituency. My view? For hells sake. Why are the Candidates Department so keen on these foreign names?!!!!

Of course, the irony is that now this has become public it is Peter Hobbins’ name that will forever be considered abnormal … and also remembered as a racist scumbag.

David Cameron professes to have changed the culture of the Conservative Party to make them a party fit for government in the 21st century. Of course, his party is a little more reluctant to ditch the bigotry that has underpinned the ideology of the Tory party for centuries.

Thanks to Proper Tidy for this report from comments:-

Fantastic day. Several hundred attended the communities festival throughout the day – atmosphere was positive, peaceful and fun all day long! Andy H, the young drummers from Flintshire, and Chris from Sinnermen/The Mayors did us proud, along with all the speakers from Socialist Party, SWP, Plaid Cymru, Labour, Youth Fight for Jobs and various faith & community groups. Thanks to Peter, who MC’d throughout the day, and Pol Wong for his excellent martial arts exhibition. Kids enjoyed the carousel, but it was a very wet day!

Around 40 EDL (mostly Bolton hooligans) stayed in Wetherspoons for most of the day – and when they came out on to the street they were opposed by 150+ working people (not anti-fascist campaigners but ordinary Wrexham folk) who made it clear that they did not welcome the EDL – in the words of one lady: “These are my streets”. The EDL responded by unfurling a St George’s Cross and chanting racist slogans but were heavily outnumbered by Wrexham people outraged at the EDL.

The community festival in Queens Square was entirely peaceful and was such a positive place to be, with people from all walks of life, some excellent music, some rousing speeches, and people dancing in the streets! A 100% success today – the only thing that went wrong today was the weather! We demonstrated the true face of Wrexham; a peaceful, proud, tolerant and diverse working-class town; and we did it the right way – by having a good time together. Proud of everybody involved and proud of Wrexham.

In case Rupert Read remains unconvinced by the previous post and the comments on it, here’s a piece at Contested Terrain – read it, and the antisemitic post to which it links, as a case of the active conflation of Zionists with Jews. This is common practice in contemporary antisemitism.

Note what a good cover anti-Zionism makes for antisemitism, and think about why it might be that many Jews may feel it necessary to oppose anti-Zionism.

Read also Steve Cohen, left anti-Zionist campaigner against left antisemitism, on former attempts to “de-Zionise” Britain and their effects on Jews, in his book (republished free online by Engage in 2005) ‘That’s Funny, You Don’t Look Antisemitic‘. If you read nothing else from it, see particularly Chapter 3, ‘The Left Returns to Zion‘. After a review of the relationship between antisemitism and what currently passes for anti-Zionism, it ends:

“For zionists to believe that such a state is no longer necessary, it is vital to attack that which necessitated it—namely anti-semitism. When confronted by the spectacle of an arsonist firing a person’s home, it is not morally justifiable for a passive observer to blame that person for jumping—even if s/he lands on a complete stranger. Certainly the stranger may be justifiably aggrieved—and with equal certainty cannot be expected to take responsibility for a fire they did not create. However, if no other homes are to be burned then the arsonist must be stopped. Moreover, isolated householders cannot be expected to do this unaided. As long as passers-by remain observers then the sorry saga will continue. The analogy with the triangle of the anti-semite, the Jew and the Palestinian is obvious. The onus for resisting anti-semitism cannot be on Jews alone. Wherever there is anti-semitism the socialist and labour movements have to oppose it. Unfortunately these movements have, all too often, been either passive or complicit.”

I think most people would agree that things are going the wrong way at the moment.

Update: I go to my inbox and receive this news from Karl Pfeifer, libelled as party to a massacre of Palestinians in the ’40s. There is no evidence, but “He is a Zionist”. This is the grim essence of prejudice and discrimination. Are we looking at a prelude?

from Où va la CGT: see here for an interview with migrant worker reps and report on the occupation of the Pompidou centre’s restaurant

A month on strike for 5,000 undocumented workers in the Paris region: a month of mobilising people, strikes, pickets in the cold and in the rain. Their determination is unfailing, even if some are starting to tire.

But there is a problem with the direction of this massive, multi-site strike. Many reps are starting to question the manner in which the CGT union federation is guiding it.

There are no clear perspectives, apart from negotiations whose progress no-one is able to assess. Indeed, we have the very strong feeling that the CGT’s objective is simply to secure a parliamentary bill, such as the one it falsely touted at the end of the 2008 strike, which in fact never existed… For our part, the answer is clear: “parliamentary bill or not, regularisation for all!”.

They refuse to centralise and unite the action, even if only to launch a demonstration as a show of force. For the CGT leadership, apparently, “demonstrations are not struggle”… we have to pinch ourselves, when we remember the days of action following the 2008 strike, when demos were meant to be the last word in collective action! But now that the strikers are spread over 40 sites, there is a need to regroup, show collective strength, or else it will be a class struggle which shies away from unity, shies away from “all together”! The tram line strikers at Porte des Lilas did demonstrate through the district on Saturday 7th, but only because activists from the Solidaires union took the initiative.

Even the reps’ assemblies, which take place under CGT control, have no role in decision making: all decisions are taken by the small CGT committee at the helm of the union. No striking worker is participating in the negotiations, although that would evidently be possible. No consultations have taken place, for example to discuss why the union refused  to receive the Vitry undocumented workers’ collective at a general meeting, even though it is engaged in an appropriate means of action, an occupation in front of the town’s tax office. The strike belongs to undocumented workers, it is for them to lead it, and no-one else!

There has been some mumbling about extending the strike beyond the capital, but nothing put into action: displaying the CGT’s lack of desire for a real generalisation and collective struggle. If the CGT decided to really push the envelope, we would see the well-known steamroller of directives, articles, support, orders etc… to be able to build it, even if only in a few symbolic towns. There is no impulse, no real desire: even militant CGT activists on the ground are lost, not knowing how to engage and waiting for a lead…

More and more questions are being asked, and the discussions at pickets and strike meetings more agitated…for sure they will be discussing it more very soon.

Apart from that, the first strike magazine has now been released, with a large print run. What to say of this? On the one hand it is a tool which can be used to raise awareness of the strike and feed support. Class fighters will not let themselves down selling this magazine – don’t worry, it has nothing really horrific.

But the story that has been re-written here is indeed one designed to restore the image of the CGT (who obviously have directed its publication). Here we find the tale of the supposed late 2008 parliamentary bill, which no-one else has ever seen any trace of: but, you see, given this was used as  a prop to finish off the movement, it still has to be justified.

It also notes the general amnesty by the 1997-2002 left government on various previous anti-immigration measures.

They give a space for the CFDT union to speak, and there’s no real shame in that. It is however odd to see a CFDT confederal representative, from a union which has never done anything, writing about it nonetheless… Even if it would have been useful to have had their formal support, it’s another matter to give them a platform in a strike magazine to justify their inactivity. SUD-Rail had more interesting things to say, for example on the long strike by undocumented workers working in security at St Lazare station. The CGT once again lines up with the meekest variety of trade unionism.

But ultimately the real problem is if no other measure is taken to extend the strike. So if this magazine is here, it allows the growth of the movement and the reinforcement of support: so don’t hesitate to do so!

In September 2009 Unite the union ordered the Latin American Workers Association (LAWAS) without notice to vacate the office which it had provided the Association with in its southeast region HQ in Manor House, thus ending a five year partnership. This followed an organised campaign by officials againt LAWAS, because of the latter´s support for an unofficial dispute and support for undocumented workers. But what was the background to this breakdown in the relationship, and the closure of this well known point of contact between latino workers and the trade union movement, and what is the future for LAWAS?

Firstly , some history. LAWAS was reformed in 2003 by Ernesto Leal, Julio Mayor and other Latin American workers in London, many of them political exiles and trade unionists in their own countries. It was in fact the second incarnation of the Association as the first version existed in the 1980s, which is a story for another day. The aim was to address directly the exploitation and abuses faced by Latin American workers in London, and to link these workers to the broader working class movement.

The new LAWAS operated out of cafes and park benches and temporarily in a community centre in Dalston, before being offered a more permanent home by various organisations including Unite (then the T&G), whose offer was accepted in mid-2004. Thus began the partnership. LAWAS was supported by Unite with office space and volunteer expenses, but maintained an independent existence and was never part of Unite´s democratic structures.

From its small room in Unite´s Manor House offices LAWAS combined advice and representation by workers for workers with a huge union recruitment drive, of which Unite was the main beneficiary with new members running into four figures, concentrated above all in contract cleaning. Word was spread through a publicity drive in the Latin American community taking in radio, newspapers, churches, embassies, public meetings and festivals like the annual Carnival – all of which are still key points of contact with the community. Email bulletins to the ever growing list of members and supporters became and still are a key tool of communication. Some coverage was achieved in British left media, but in the words of a Unite organizer assigned to working with LAWAS, its work was largely ´under the radar´ of the union. The response of the community was overwhelming, and LAWAS became known colloquially ín the community as the ´sindicato latino´.

At the same time the Justice for Cleaners (J4C) campaign was getting into gear and LAWAS´s efforts fed into that, as a majority of the workers who approached LAWAS worked in this sector. A good working relationship was developed with individual J4C organisers and activists in activities which ranged from English classes to organizing buildings, and in general promoting J4C in the Latin American community. Indeed LAWAS´s first office volunteer, Jose Vallejo, was reruited within a year by J4C. IN 2007 the J4C organisers branch made a sizeable donation to LAWAS in recognition of its support, especially in union recognition fights and organising the first ´papers for all´march. On the surface LAWAS was a success story which the T&G/Unite was happy to sell and did so, both inside and outside the union.

However, for the many latino cleaners who joined Unite but did not work in the buildings targetted by J4C it was almost impossible to take part in their new union. Lacking a functional branch, LAWAS became their de facto ´branch´, but this put LAWAS under an intolerable strain as it lacked the normal facilities of a branch, and because the union often would not assist when collective issues and organising opportunities presented themselves: the National Physical Laboratory and the BBC being just two examples. Where possible these workers and LAWAS did what they could alone. But without organisational backup this was difficult. It often felt like LAWAS was just there to increase membership numbers and take the strain alone of  new members with all their problems.

In these circumstances LAWAS made it a priority to educate its new union members. For a long time it was unable to get serious union support despite repeated efforts, so it organised its own English and workplace rights classes, both alone and in conjunction with the College of North East London (CONEL) and the London Coalition Against Poverty – activities which continue to this day. Finally, thanks to pressure from both LAWAS and key J4C organisers, Unite arranged a piot English course. LAWAS made this possible by supplying a professional volunteer teacher and enough students to make the pilot project such a success that a large scale programme of education in basic skills was then laid on for cleaners. This programme is now a major showpiece of Unite´s educational work.

A similar process happened when a pilot immigration law course were arranged by the Migrant Rights Network for Unite activists following immigration raids. LAWAS drew on its pool of Latin American activists to provide half the students and interpreting for the Spanish speakers. Again, the success of the pilot course led to it being invested in and rolled out nationally.

Links were also forged with the hospitality and domestic workers branches of T&G/Unite; with a host of Latin American solidarity and community groups which evolved into the Coordinadora Latinoamericana; and with other unions such as the CWU and RMT, and TUC initiatives such as the Vulnerable Workers Project. Joint Employment Tribunal work was carried out with community law centres in cases where union lawyers or officers had failed to support members, on one well known ocasion because they didn´t grasp the legal issues facing migrant workers This was not just an issue with Unite.

In 2008 LAWAS gave unconditional support to a number of inspiring cleaners´ campaigns both inside and outside J4C. A public meeting in Elephant and Castle at the end of the year organised by LAWAS and other groups brought together a number of these previously isolated campaigns. A grassroots reinstatement campaign for 5 Colombian cleaners sacked for circulating a leaflet at the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) was in full swing, and was important as the first recent example of a campaign driven by Latin American workers. Those workers as well as others from Schroders Bank, and SOAS spoke of their experiences in struggle. Some raised criticisms of the ways union officials had handled their disputes. But as the Bolivian UCU activist who chaired the meeting stated at the end “despite the criticisms we are not anti union, because we are the union”.

The issue of immigration checks and raids was a constant theme at the meeting, as a means by which companies and the government itself were intimidating workers who organised. Unite Regional Industrial Organizer (Jose Vallejo) turned up to make the case for supporting the Strangers into Citizens campaign for a limited amnesty, while the majority present advocated a ´papers for all´ position which would not preclude critical support for the upcoming Strangers into Citizens march. Shortly afterwards his boss, regional secretary Steve Hart, in a sign of things to come, warned one of the sacked NPL cleaners that their campaign was being backed by ´extreme groups´. Needless to say, Unite made no effort to support the NPL cleaners campaign beyond the strictly and legally necessary, despite pickets taking place within walking distance of their national headquarters. Was this related to the fact that one of the cleaners main grievances before being sacked had been the use of an immigration raid to break their incipient organisation?

In 2009 official indifference turned into extreme hostility triggered by two issues:   LAWAS´s support for sacked cleaners at the Willis building in the City of London, and its ongoing committment to a full regularization of undocumented workers.

In January 2009 a series of unofficial weekly protests by a shop steward and three workmates from the J4C campaign began, after they had been sacked by cleaning contractor Mitie at global insurance giant Willis in the City. The sackings were framed as redundancies after the company awarded the Living Wage but counter-attacked as elsewhere by drastically altering shift times, cutting personnel and smashing union organisation in the process. Union leaders argued they had done all they could and it was the workers fault a deal was not sealed. They disowned the protests, afraid of ´damaging the good relations with Mitie´, as one official put it. The workers felt let down and said so publcially after the union withdfrew all support. But from then on they concentrated their fire on the two companies, despite legal threats. Other cleaners flocked to the protests, including other ex Willis workers who had found work elsewhere but supported their colleagues´plight.

After four months LAWAS and the Coordinadora Latinoamericana forced a meeting with the Regional Industrial Organiser, in which the official pledged to try and open up a new space for negotiation with the employer, presumably making the most of the good unon-employer relationship to find four appropiate At the end as people packed up to leave, the official proposed a trade off for the support offered, whereby the Latin American groups supporting the Willis cleaners would support the May 4 march for a limted amnesty. Suspecting there was more to this, the groups present argued this was a separate issue and should be dealt with as such.

The offer of support was then quashed in a letter then sent by Assistant General Secretary Jack Dromey to the cleaners involved, which reiterated that no support would be given and making no mentin of the aforementioned meeting. In response to this a petition with four hundred signatures of trade unionists was raised at union and community events and branch meetings, and publically presented at Unite´s central office in Holborn. Among the signatories were dozens of union cleaners as well as as MPs John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn, and film director Ken Loach.

When the petition was presented those present were filmed and photographed by a sidekick of the regional industrial organizer, until he was confronted and stopped from doing so. This was the first sign of a vicious organised public campaign driven from the highest reaches of Unite, initially against the Willis cleaners and ultimately against LAWAS and indeed any critical voices. Leading the attack was the Regional Secretary supported by the likes of Women and Equalities Officer Teresa Mackay (ironic for a dispute involving mainly ethnic minority women) and their internal allies such as the Regional Industrial Organizer.

Unite officers went into overdrive to convince J4C branch committee members and the wider union, using highly confrontational language to suggest the workers involved were the main enemy: “people need to decide whose side they are on” wrote Hart in a briefing, contrasting the “mass of the cleaners” with “tiny groups seeking to undermine our united campaign”. And yet when Willis shop steward Edwin Pazmino presented himself as a candidate to the cleaners branch committee at its first ever elections, he gained a credible 29 out of 80 votes, despite never being informed of the meeting unlike other candidates, who were able to campaign beforehand. And if one thing characterised the Willis protests, and previous disputes led by Latin American workers, it was the solidarity of cleaners from different companies, as reported in the Morning Star throughout the long course of the dispute.

A leaflet was produced in the name of Justice for Cleaners and distributed by officers, despite not being approved by the new branch committee and certainly not its Latin American cleaner members, who along with many ordinary members almost unanimously supported the Willis cleaners. The leaflet trumpeted J4C´s successes in organising and education. This was ironic, because it was people like the Willis cleaners, and their supporters in LAWAS and elsewhere who had done so much over the years to create these successes in the first place. Instead fellow official and Regional Industrial Organizer Jose Vallejo was lauded to the point of featuring a colour photo of him on the leaflet, along with members of a youth group hired to wave Justice for Cleaners flags. The ´four cleaners and their handful of supporters´ were described as leading a ´scurrilous campaign´ which did not have the support of the majority of branch members – an allegation contradicted by the support actually received.

In another incident, a Unite branch which tried to speak about the dispute was silenced at a regional meeting of the ´United Left´ faction of Unite, to the disgust of many of those present. At a public meeting later organised by the Labour Representation Committee, fellow trade unionists from Unite, Unison and RMT proposed mediation in  the presence of Unite officials, amnd suported by speakers John McDonnell MP and NUJ president Jeremy Dear. The proposal was ignored.

Why the ferocity of the attacks? This was not the first time union members had criticized official positions, held unofficial protests or presented a petition. The problem was that Justice for Cleaners was a flagship campaign controlled from the very top since its inception, and image meant everything. While criticisms and unofficial actions were had to be tolerated in sections of the union with a longer history, this new campaign had to be tightly controlled, and if that meant crushing internal dissent by any means necessary, then so be it. They chose to forget the basic point that it is workers who make campaigns, not officials, and sometimes, unfortunately, workers will take their own initiative and also be critical.

The other issue which Unite could not tolerate was LAWAS´s support for papers for all undocumented workers. Only two years previously LAWAS had worked closely with J4C organisers on this basis. Now however the official position had changed and dissenting voices again could not be tolerated. On the May 4 amnesty march organised by the Strangers into Citizens, LAWAS and other groups in the Coordinadora raised the slogans of ´noone is illegal´and ´papers for all´. Incidentally among these other groups were the UK branch of Colombia´s main opposition party (Polo Democratico) and the main Bolivian and Ecuadorian community groups mobilizing diaspora support for left wing governments in their countries – MERU and Bolivia Solidarity Campaign). Hardly extremists!

In May LAWAS representative Miguel Puerto asked to meet the Regional Secretary Steve Hart in order to find a solution to the Willis dispute. Instead he was met in worst company management style by not one but three officials including Hart, who instead of entering into a positive dialogue launched an all out attack on LAWAS for its support for the Willis cleaners and its behaviour on the amnesty march.

Worse was to follow. Around the same time LAWAS and J4C activist Alberto Durango was arrested in a trap sprung by his employer Lancaster, a tactic used on other migrant workers previously. They were unhappy with his recent activism at the bank. But police and UKBA officials also asked him about his employment at Willis – despite the fact he didn´t work there. But Durango and Schroders cleaners´ public support for the Willis dispute made them think he did. This raised the spectre of a blacklist among cleaning companies. Durango was freed without charges and dismissed. And yet when a picket was held outside the appeal against his dismissal, at which he was represented by a Unite lay representative, his union reacted by ordering an ´ínvestigation´ into him and, on Vallejo´s orders, refusing him access to educational courses! Six months later there has been no result of this mysterious investigation, nor a lifting of the ban.

Vallejo then went further by claiming at the cleaners branch committee that those involved in cross-union protests against recent immigration raids at both the Willis building and SOAS (University of London), were being sponsored by the cleaning companies themselves. Apparently other unions (Unison and RMT) were “approaching and dealing with the companies before organising their members” and that

“the so-called Cleaners for Justice called the members to disobey and as a consequence some were arrested facing deportation. We should ten [sic] have every reason to believe that the organisers of this campaign, Cleaners for Justice are paid by the Cleaning Bosses to attack the cleaners.”

It should be noted that Cleaners for Justice has never existed beyond being a slogan used by sacked Unite cleaners to express their desire for a cross-union cleaners campaign, with the workers themselves in the driving seat. This is an ideal which LAWAS has always supported, in place of the foolish competition which led, for example, to Unite not supporting cleaners strikes on the underground in 2008 but then publically claiming the credit for the successes of the strikes while offering no solidarity to those victimised through immigration arrests and the like as as a result.

Unite then moved to force LAWAS out of its office. At the start of the year he had presented a relative of his to LAWAS as a new office volunteer. LAWAS accepted in good faith. But it soon became clear that this relative wanted nothing to do with LAWAS and instead was there to act as Vallejo´s personal secretary. LAWAS then put forward a new volunteer of its own, as had always been the custom, but was prevented from doing so by the Regional Secretary. Instead the family member came to work an increasing number of days in the office. Volunteers were paid ´loss of earnings´ at aorund $65.00 a day once they had completed some basic training, but the monies paid to her were never revealed by the union despite requests by LAWAS. This stood in complete contrast to the rule enforced by Unite officials for five years whereby volunteers had to sign one and the same weekly expenses form for each day of work.

LAWAS held off by making a public statement about all of the above so as not to prejudice Juan Carlos Piedra, a LAWAS and J4C activist who after intense pressure from many quarters had succeeded in getting Unite representation after being sacked for union activity from his job at University College London. Instead LAWAS sought as always to resolve its problems with Unite by requesting another meeting with the Regional Secretary, and was about to do so but was pre-empted. Firstly, Vallejo took control of the volunteer rota on the basis that LAWAS had been advising workers to join other unions. A ridiculous allegation, because workers simply been advised in LAWA´s bulletins to join the union which corresponded to their workplace or occupation – as previously instructed by Unite officials! Still, LAWAS continued publicizing Unite and recruiting into it far more than into any other union. A week later regional secretary Steve Hart, sensing perhaps that a scandal might be on the cards, ordered LAWAS out of its office without notice. Even after that move a meeting was requested to address the situation, but to no avail.

And so an era has ended. But despite the problems, the last year has been a very positive one for LAWAS. The campaigns it supported breathed new life into the organisation and won it many friends across different unions and in the Latin American community. As a result the annual assembly held in August 2009 was the largest ever and a new committee was elected which for the first time represented almost all the main Latin American nationalities resident in London. With its new temporary premises in the National Union of Journalists, it is up to that committee and all Latin American workers to secure the future. This means fighting inside unions, including Unite, so they are led by the members, and joining with workers of al nationalities and backgrounds in doing so. It means working with those officials who are not corrupt and self-serving, and unmasking those who are.  And it means recognising the achievements of struggles, but also preserving the right to criticize aspects of these and act independently when necessary.

OK, Lou Dobbs is out at CNN.  Part of the story is “who fucking cares?”  But I think we’re capable of thinking clearer than that.

Apparently, CNN was so not into Lou Dobbs’ re-birth as an anti-immigrant xenophobe that they gladdly threw him $8 million to split ASAP rather than pay $12 million to keep him on their team for the next year and a half (the remaining length of his contract), decent ratings or not.  And while Dobbs’ late career move to the racist, anti-immigrant right is generally what he’s known for (that and his willingness to use his prime time slot on CNN to give quasi-legitimacy to the ‘birther’ movement) I see a little bit more here, and I find it somewhat fascinating.

Dobbs moved, after all, from being a boisterous cheer-leader for free market capitalism and neo liberalism (with all its WTO, IMF, NAFTA, etc alphebet soup glory) to being decidedly on the side of “middle class America”- lamenting U.S. corporatism and cronyism, as well as the rising pay inequality and umemployment of post-industiral America.  In so doing, Dobbs helps expose a dirty little trick of both the mainstream media and mainstream politicians: that the term “middle class” is code for “working white people”.  In post modern (post-industrial) society class analysis is far more complicated that Marx’ original observations or simple notions of haves, have-nots, or working class vs ruling class.  And it’s not enough, as has often been the case, to merely add in the middle class and call it an acurate breakdown of society.  But Dobbs aimed for and nailed a crucial part of the U.S. electorate: the working white folks, who often see immigration and immigrants (largely) as a threat to their own livelihoods or security at best, or a scary, un-trustable, evil unknown at worst.

And perhaps the most important word in that last sentence is “electorate”; not only because it notes that segment of the population’s relative voter turn-out (or, at least, capability of), but- more so- in a more true display of what wields power in capitalist America, because it is that segment of the population most apt to frivolously spend their money on complete and utter bull shit which, whether on the retail, wholesale, distribution, development, or marketing end, is taking the hard-earned money of one person and lining the pockets of someone up the chain.

Dobbs may certainly be best known for his immigration stance, but his surprising switch from corporate, free market stooge to “defender of the middle class” is far more interesting- and telling- than I often see it talked about.  ”Middle class America” (i.e., working white people) is a substantial block- in terms of votes, but more importantly in terms of spending power.  The danger that Dobbs perpetuates is in confusing racial issues into the mix, by making it “us from here” (not literally as in Native Americans of course, but Northern Europeans) versus “those from there”.

Tea partiers brutally beaten by pro-amnesty group
Shocking! Illegal immigration protesters attacked, pushed into traffic

Article: WorldNetDaily

Che Guevara supporters with a radical pro-amnesty coalition viciously attacked and bludgeoned tea party protesters at a Florida anti-illegal-immigration rally, including a 62-year-old man who was beaten and kicked in the face.

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC called for “Tea Parties Against Amnesty and Illegal Immigration” to form quickly across the nation on Nov. 14. In less than 30 days, protests were scheduled for more than 50 towns and cities.

But two Fort Lauderdale, Fla., tea party protesters were brutally beaten by pro-amnesty activists on the day of the nationwide rally as they attempted to film Florida’s Act Now to Stop War and End Racism Coalition counterprotest.

You see, what “they” fail to understand is that Americans aren’t against immigration. No, not at all. What we ARE against is ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. GRANTING AMNESTY. Because, you know, majority of the illegal shitstains that enter this country have no desire to become legal citizens to begin with. Not to mention that majority of Americans don’t WANT to grant amnesty to a bunch of fuckwits who refuse to learn English, who don’t have ANY desire to take the legal steps to becoming a legitimate American citizen, and whose loyalties aren’t with America. There’s no racism about it. I don’t know what the “Act Now to Stop War and End Racism Coalition” is all about. Just a bunch of bullshit. That’s right I said it. Besides; look at the people who “represent” the illegal immigrants. Savory characters indeed. /end sarcasm

ANSWER members carried Che Guevara signs and other black and yellow placards that stated “Full rights for all immigrants.” They shouted, “Amnesty yes, racists no!”

Wouldn’t a more appropriate placard read: “Equal punishments for all criminals”? Or how about shouting “Take the legal steps to becoming an American Citizen, YES, we don’t care where your country of origin is, NO”. Yes. I think so.

As the two men attempted to film the protest, an ANSWER member in a black tanktop and blue jeans lunged after one of the cameramen and beat him with a sign, pushing him into traffic. Another ANSWER member in a white T-shirt attacked the same cameraman while the victim defended himself with what appears to be a camera tripod.

A female tea party protester began screaming as Dave Caulkett of Floridians for Immigration Enforcement and the initial ANSWER attacker fought in the middle of the street.

The following is a video of the attack released by ALIPAC:

“Supporters of President Obama’s amnesty plans attacked Tea Party Against Amnesty & Illegal Immigration demonstrators in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., on Saturday, Nov. 14, 2009. One of the men attacked is 62 years old,” ALIPAC reported. “Dave Caulkett of FLIMEN is assaulted and then kicked in the face while he is down. The other cameraman from the tea party is hit with several signs.”

ALIPAC revealed that ANSWER Florida sent out an e-mail invitation urging members to join its “protest to shut down racist anti-’amnesty’ rally” in Fort Lauderdale prior to the event. ANSWER’s letter stated the following:

The ANSWER Coalition is calling on all its members, allies, and friends to join us tomorrow to confront and shut down the racist “Anti-Amnesty Tea Party” in Fort Lauderdale.

The “Anti-Amnesty” rallies being held across the country tomorrow have been initiated by fascist, white supremacist organizations that include the Minutemen and the so-called Americans for Legal Immigration.

Recent months have shown a significant rise in extreme-right activity with hate crimes and attacks on immigrants skyrocketing. White supremacist and fascist organizations have boasted rapid growth since the onset of the economic crisis. The new administration has continued the government’s anti-immigrant policies with “desktop raids” – the liberal response to the fascist like workplace raids of the Bush years.

Racism is like anything else in this world: in order to make it fall, you must smash it! That is why we are calling on all people to come out tomorrow, to organize a militant confrontation with the so-called “tea baggers.” Beating back these forces will require us to organize together, take the streets, fight the racists wherever they show their faces and drive them out of every community. …

We are building a movement that will beat back racism so that working people of all nationalities can unite and fight against our one, shared enemy: capitalism. Amnesty, full rights for ALL immigrants, is a demand that should be raised not just by the immigrant communities, but by every working class community in our struggle to solve this crisis by our own means.

Join us tomorrow, and join us in building the movement against racism and capitalist exploitation!

Sounds like someone’s pointing their fingers in the wrong direction. Who sounds like the “racists” to YOU?

As WND reported earlier, ALIPAC Chief William Gheen said his group had been calling for a “peaceful, political revolution and uprising in America.”

Haven’t been blogging that much mainly cos I have been tired therefore lack energy to write something thoughtful…usually I bang out these posts in a conveyor belt style but alas I have been doing other things..mainly politicking and campaigning. Just not the time to write so world has been passing me by a tad.

There has been interesting posts over at TCF such as on the Labour Left , future of the Left , and Paul’s Labour Left 5. plan. Plus this article (thanks to Splintered for telling me about it) And this from AVPS re Compass, all of which I have been meaning to engage in as these are important questions and discussions to be had around how the Left organises in the next few months but after the next general election ‘cos whoever gets elected there will be a fight to be had. Also, it is an excuse for me (haha) to debate the merits of democratic centralism and witness the collective cyberspace glazed over expressions of comrades….

But in the meantime, Kevin raises important questions about Griffin standing against Margaret Hodge, what does the Left do, call for a vote for Hodge based on ‘anyone other than Griffin’?

And this post troubled me a lot. I find myself despairing at both the post and the comments (indeed I really thought I had stumbled onto the comments of CiF). And it becomes like another Groundhog Day experience. Many on the Left shoulda, coulda and do know better when it comes to feminism but it is easier to indulge in the usual sexist, defensive and tired old tabloid-esque parodies. And the usual argument that has been thrown at me in the past is that feminism is ‘petit – bourgeois’ (I had this ‘debate’ in Weekly Worker a couple of years ago). And this reminds me of Barbara Ehrenreich when she wrote about ‘mechanical Marxists’ who ignore the totality of society and how patriarchal capitalism invades every sphere of life. And frankly, I describe myself as a Socialist feminist as feminism is integral to Socialism. Yes, there are various different strands of feminism but why it is when it is debated sometimes on the Left it is belittled, disregarded, devalued and parodied by mainly men, who, to be honest view oppression in a very reductionist way. And ask yourself, why do many active and organised feminists by-pass the Left…? One reason, ‘cos they have to put up with this kind of crap that goes by the name of debate.

When I first got involved in politics in the mid-1980s many of leftie men I encountered professed some understanding of feminism, indeed not perfect not brilliant but at that time there was a still functioning dynamic feminist movement and a vibrant Left that did influence, ideas feeding off each other. But rather like the Left, feminist movement is smaller and fragmented therefore that influence in developing political consciousness about women’s oppression isn’t that great. Like I said, it wasn’t perfect and I always encountered individuals/groups who dismissed feminism but certainly there was at least some understanding. But then you had/have leftie blokes who had/have, for example, an excellent grasp of dialectical materialism yet knew/know basically sweet fa about feminism….There’s no bloody excuse for it.

I think the comment that best sums up the ‘debate’ over at Dave’s blog is Eddie Truman’s, Ha ha, man spouts sexist drivel knowing fine well it’ll wind up the women comrades, male comrades all laugh together and get another round in at the bar.

I think Eddie hits the nail on the head when it comes to these defensive leftie men. And that’s how I certainly saw the ‘debate’.

The following is from Unite Against Fascism, on BNP leader Nick Griffin’s announcement that he is to stand against Margaret Hodge for the Barking constituency in East London at the General Election.

It makes the Friendly Lefty wince to say it, but we need to get out the vote for Hodge in a serious way. Stained by the failures of the present government she is; complicit in the government’s pandering to racism and Islamophobic sentiment, certainly; but a fascist not at all – in fact a committed anti-fascist. The choice in that election will be between her and Griffin and therefore is no choice for progressives.

There is also a demo at 6pm tonight that has been called by the RMT union.

We’ll make sure Griffin’s MP bid for Barking is a failure, anti-fascists vow

Anti-fascist campaigners and trade unionists in east London have vowed to ensure that Nick Griffin, leader of the British National Party, fails in his bid for a Westminster seat in Barking. Griffin announced his intention to stand in the seat at a BNP conference last weekend.

Unite Against Fascism believes Griffin’s candidacy is an insult to the people of Barking. Barking is a multi-racial and working class area. Griffin, in contrast, is a convicted racist and lifelong Nazi. He will do nothing to address the constituency’s needs in terms of public services and housing. The BNP’s only interest is in whipping up race hatred and falsely blaming the constituency’s problems on immigrants and Muslims.

Margaret Hodge, MP for Barking, said: “We have been fighting the BNP for the last three years, so we have been expecting a BNP candidate to stand against me – and it now turns out to be Nick Griffin. We want to expose the BNP for what they really are, not what they pretend to be. The more people see the BNP the less they like them. The BNP have no place in democratic politics and Labour will campaign against them across the country.”

Steve Hart, London and Eastern regional secretary of Unite the Union, said: “Barking and Dagenham have a proud history of multi-racial trade unionism. It’s vital that we take that tradition forward and fight together against the BNP. We will be working to support Barking residents as they fight for a better Barking and a better London – one that respects all our citizens.

“Only last month Griffin described London as ‘ethnically cleansed’ and ‘a city that is no longer British’. This shows he is out to divide and destroy rather than unite. Where the BNP goes, racial violence follows. That is why Griffin and the BNP must be stopped.”

Weyman Bennett, joint secretary of Unite Against Fascism, said: “Griffin is coming to Barking to peddle his racist poison in order to divide and weaken the community. We bring people together in a campaign to expose him as a Nazi. The vast majority of people in Barking hate Griffin and the BNP. We want to mobilise that majority to drive Griffin’s vote down – and drive the BNP out of town.”

Join the protest 12 noon, Weds 18 November, Templar House, 81-87 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6NU

The cleaning contract on London Underground’s Bakerloo, Victoria and Central Lines is set to be renegotiated and a new company is expected to grab it. It is likely to demand new (and worse) conditions and will trawl again through workers’ immigration status.Cleaners, many of them migrant workers, are sick of being handed around from company to company, and continually facing poor pay and conditions. Their RMT union has called a protest in their support at the headquarters of Metronet—which is responsible for the contract.

RMT press release:

TUBE AND TfL union RMT will be holding a demonstration in support of London Underground cleaners fight against privatisation this Wednesday (18 November) as it emerged that senior TfL bosses have received a 50% increase in bonus payments over the past two years from £3.6 million in 2007 to £5.3 million this year.

The tube cleaners, who are also fighting for TfL Chair Boris Johnson’s London Living Wage, will be outside the former Metronet headquarters at Templar House, 81-87 High Holborn at 12 noon on Wednesday 18^th November.

RMT is demanding that all tube cleaning services should be brought back in house on decent wages and terms and conditions with the cleaners recognised as an integral part of the London Underground team rather than a soft touch for cuts and exploitation.

In a separate part of RMT’s campaign for Cleaners Justice the union has attacked the private company Advance – who clean train trains for Southern running out of London Bridge and Victoria – for slashing staffing levels in order to prop up their profits. RMT is warning that the cleaning cuts will leave trains dirty on these important London commuter services.

Bob Crow, RMT General Secretary said:

“The continued attacks on tube cleaners, and on the staff working for Advance on Southern, show that senior tube and rail managers, and the Mayor himself, are prepared to turn a blind eye while those doing the dirtiest jobs on the lowest pay are kicked from pillar to post. That’s a disgrace.

“Londoners should not tolerate a situation where TfL bosses get a 50% increase in bonuses over the past two years while some of their own cleaners on the tube are denied the Mayor’s London Living Wage and are forced to endure the uncertainty of repeated privatisation.

“RMT’s fight for justice for cleaners on our transport system will continue to put this issue right in front of the Mayor and the senior bosses who have the power to stop this exploitation.”

Most Blacks nowadays are what we call people with dual consciousness, to borrow a particularly unpleasant anti-racist phrase. That is, they are profoundly ethnocentric (Blacks are much more ethnocentric than Whites) while at the same time drinking the PC anti-racist Krazy-Aid of race denial when it suits their interests.

Whenever Black folks do good things or when White folks do back things to Blacks, a Black race does in fact exist. Whenever Blacks folks screw up or don’t cut it, automagically, the Black race ceases to exist. Wa-la, like a rabbit out of a hat. Can’t be us, cuz we don’t exist in the first place.

After all, if race really does not exist, as the race-denying crazies insist, then consequently racism must not exist either, right? Racism means hatred of others based on their race. But the race-deniers say there is no such thing as race. Hence, it is not really possible to hate people based on something that does not even exist at all.

This post will set out to show how Blacks are in fact different from other races in a variety of ways. In many cases, I think that these differences are biological. That does not mean that Blacks are doomed to their genes for better or for worse, but it does mean, that absent a Super-Culture such as Islam, Communism or some other “gene-warping” culture, Blacks will have a tendency to behave in this way on average.

This post will also address some racial myths.

First of all, a Black personality.

One myth is that due to widespread racism, Blacks hate themselves, and they all want to be White. Black men like White women because their own women are too ugly. There really is no evidence for this. Frankly, it’s amazing, considering the shit we Whites constantly say about Blacks, that Blacks don’t hate themselves. I think if I were Black I would. I cannot imagine being Black and having to deal with all the evil crap other races say about me. Being a neurotic, I think it might go to my head.

Nevertheless, the evidence is clear. Blacks have no problems with self-esteem.

Blacks do not think they are ugly. Black men think Black women look just fine, in fact, they seem to prefer them to other women. Black women think Black men look just fine. They definitely prefer them to other men. Quite a few White women also think Black guys are good-looking. I’ve talked to quite a few such White women. If Black men are good looking (by the objective views of many White women) Black women must be good looking too.

There’s nothing about Black features that looks good on a man but bad on a woman (or if there is, please make a case in the comments). Racists seek to objectively prove that Blacks are ugly. But anyone knows that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. An argument that it can be scientifically proven that Blacks are ugly must be rejected. Standards are beauty are not really in the realm of science anyway.

Following on this line, White nationalists as usual lie feverishly, and don’t make any sense. First they throw lots of data at you showing that every race really prefers to associate with and mate with their own. Fair enough. However, they use this to justify their own racism, as one might figure.

But if this is really true, then why the obsessive worry about miscegenation and the coming Extinction of the Great White Race? I mean, if people only want to breed with their own, why worry about race-mixing, right? The answer is because humans do not only wish to breed with their own; many outbreed.

In an effort to make even less sense, White nationalists then insist that every other race secretly hates themselves and wants to be White. If they can’t be White, they want to mate, breed or fuck White. Wait a minute, I thought everyone preferred their own? At the same time, further muddying their argumentative mess, they argue that all humans are profoundly ethnocentric such that they hate everyone who is not one of the Tribe. But if this were so, what’s with all the non-White self-hatred and desire to screw White wimmins?

One classic argument made by many Whites, not just White nationalists, is that all over the world, everyone prefers that luscious lighter skin to that yucky suntanned look. Of course, the lightest of all are those wonderful Aryan folks from Northern Europe.

But in Africa, Black men show no preference at all in terms of skin color, and Blacks do vary considerably in skin tone on the Dark Continent. Furthermore, in aboriginal Tasmania, darker skin was preferred, and up to a certain point, this was true on the dope smoke-shrouded Southern California beaches and ski slopes were I misspent much of my golden youth.

Further, this is usually the case only with women and not with men. That is, men want a lighter woman (no one really knows why) but women don’t give a damn how dark a guy is. Hell, they even like ‘em dark and handsome. And this was the case in China before the Chinese had ever heard of White people, so it’s not a case of Chinese thinking Whites are superior.

Furthermore, in most human groups, females have lighter skin than the males. This means that evolutionarily, most groups of males have been preferentially selecting lighter females. There is no lightening effect seen in any male group anywhere. Reasons for male preference for a lighter female are not known.

As we might expect, Blacks think they are better looking than Whites. This statement is confusing. It does not mean that Blacks think they are better looking than White people. The surveys were done of high school students. 11-16 year old Blacks rated their attractiveness higher than Whites did.

Nor do Blacks suffer from low self-esteem or low confidence in terms of their academic skills. Their poorer average performance is due to the fact that they are not as good at this stuff, not because they are insecure about their abilities. I have not seen studies, but I would assume that the highest scorers would be the most neurotic and insecure about their abilities. Blacks think they are better at reading, science and history, even though they had poorer scores. Taken together, these findings suggest an overconfidence that we will discuss below.

Blacks also have better self-esteem, worry less and are less neurotic. This has long been known and is part and parcel of the “Black personality.” I have an old Abnormal Psychology textbook from 1957, that, while dated, is very interesting.

That Blacks have few of the classic neuroses was taken as a given. Obsessive-compulsive neurosis (now OCD), perhaps the ultimate neurosis in the sense that it is driven heavily by conscience, fear, timidity, guilt, doubting and near-miniscule levels of aggression, is quite rare among Blacks. However, since I work with OCD patients, I have since met 2 Blacks with OCD. Both were, as one might expect, highly intelligent. One was from South Africa.

The book stated that the typical mental illness among Blacks was sort of a wild acting out manic-type episode. I believe that studies have found that depression is lower among Blacks, and the Black suicide rate has always been much lower than the White rate, though in the past 20 years there has been a disturbing rise in suicide in young Black American males.

Anyone who spends a lot of time around Blacks will realize that if there is any problem at all, it is excessive self-esteem and overconfidence, which in my opinion, leads to a lot of problems for Black people. You will also find that Blacks don’t worry all that much. Blacks seem to think that White neurotics are completely idiotic and somewhat baffling fools.

Blacks are less neotenous than Whites, and Whites are less neotenous than Asians. Asians are the slowest developing race of all, and Blacks are the fastest developers. Blacks are also the loudest babies, and Asians babies are known for their serenity. Blacks are more active at an earlier age than other groups. In addition, they mature more quickly.

I see no reason why there should be a cultural component to this, and it’s clear to me that these differences are genetic. Asians even seem to retain a neotenous (child-like) appearance far into life, definitely into early adulthood. These differences hold across all cultures, everywhere on Earth.

Yet another possible attribute of a Black personality is reduced ability to delay gratification. A classic 1961 study found that Black children are much more likely than White children to ask for a small candy bar today than wait a week for a bigger one. This study has been repeated many times with similar results. The reduced tendency to delay gratification is probably genetic, but it’s probably not irremediable, that is, a culture could probably make Blacks delay gratification more, though it would be an uphill climb.

This is what we might expect from a more extroverted group, and Blacks are the most extroverted of the three major races, Asians being the least. Asians are probably the most likely to delay gratification. I’ve known many White extroverts, and one thing they were lousy at was delaying gratification. Delaying gratification is glorified in America, but it’s definitely a drag, speaking from one who has spent most of his life doing just that.

Unfortunately, reduced ability to delay gratification probably has something to do with the much elevated Black crime rate.

References

Mischel, W. 1961. Preference for Delayed Reinforcement and Social Responsibility. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 62:1:1-7.