Showing posts with label Civil and political rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Civil and political rights. Show all posts

Monday, January 17, 2011

Dan Brown Column. A Difference in Leadership: The Civil Rights and Tea Party movements

Prominent figures of the African-American Civi...Image via Wikipedia





A Difference in Leadership
The Civil Rights and Tea Party movements



Behold this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him and we shall see what will become of his dreams” – Genesis 37:19

As the young Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. walked towards the Holt Street Baptist Church on the evening of December 5, 1955, he had no idea what to expect. A local seamstress named Rosa Parks had just been arrested for refusing to give up her seat to a white passenger, thus violating the Montgomery, Alabama bus segregation laws. While this was not the first case of such civil disobedience, it was the one upon which the local black activists had decided to make a stand. What would soon be known to the world as the Montgomery Bus Boycott got its start at a mass meeting with Dr. King chosen to be one of its primary organizers and speakers.

King left his wife and new-born daughter and hurried over to the gathering with an old college chum. They was amazed to find the Holt Street church overflowing with and surrounded by nearly 10,000 people who created a massive traffic jam several blocks long. In one of the greatest understatements in American history, King turned to his friend and observed, “You know something, Finley, this could turn into something big”.

Such an outcome was not a foregone conclusion. The South of the 1950’s was still a dangerous place for African-Americans who challenged the white power structure and King and his cohorts were planning to do just that. Unless the black population stood behind them, their movement could peter out and they would suffer the consequences. Lynching; remorseless and unpunished, was still a common occurrence.

Standing at the podium, Reverend King started his speech slowly, searching for the correct language, using all the elocution skills that his profession excelled at. Stating the reason for the assembly and its obvious unfairness, his logic was agreeable but failed to yield any visible emotions. The crowd waited, measuring both King and his message. He continued, stating with growing passion, “And you know, my friends, there comes a time when people get tired of being trampled over by the iron feet of oppression…..”

King barely finished as the rest of his soliloquy was lost in a volcanic explosion of cheers, foot stomping and applause that rocked the church to its foundations. It was an abrupt unleashing of all the anger, sorrow, frustration and resolve, accumulated over the centuries and finally given full voice. From that moment on, there would be no turning back. The thunderous response King ignited was the true beginning of the American Civil Rights movement and it launched the process that would culminate 53 years later with the election of Barack Obama to the office of the presidency.

Revolutions born in blood and rage are nothing new in world history. Bastilles fall, leaders are overthrown, and the opponents of each new regime disappear into some far-off wilderness Gulag. What made the Civil Rights saga unique was its dedication to non-violence, particularly what King himself described as the Christian principles of love, moral courage and justice.

Over the past year, pundits on the Conservative Right have tried to label the Tea Party insurgency as another civil rights movement, going so far as to schedule their own march on Washington D. C. on the anniversary of King’s legendary 1963 “I Have a Dream” rally. Both crusades were born from popular anger, they argue, and both are the result of a groundswell against oppressive tyranny.

Not quite.

While originally proclaiming its populist roots, the Tea Party has since revealed its true colors, namely as a mouthpiece for the extreme right-wing of the Republican Party and one that seems determined to bring out the reactionary worst in the American people. Far from exemplifying equality, Tea Party Nation is about saving nickels. As one party stalwart recently expressed to me, “I’ll be damned if the government is going to take my money and give it to the homeless!” God forbid. Tax breaks for billionaires, on the other hand, seem to be just fine.

And “oppressive tyranny”? According to the Tea Party, we are suffering such by being forced to buy health insurance. That’s it. And maybe such a definition makes sense in the alternate universe that their supporters inhabit. After all, what could be more tyrannical than a government interfering with your finances. In the real world, however, oppressive tyranny has a more sinister connotation. It means that security forces come to your house in the wee hours and haul your family off to some secretive dungeon, There, they torture your wife and children and eventually murder all of you, after which they deposit the bodies at the local garbage dump as a warning to others. All because you dared express differing politics.

In the United States for too many years, tyranny translated as denying citizenship and basic human rights to a significant portion of the population. That Dr. King could right such grievous wrongs while refusing to hate, places him light-years ahead of the mean-spirited, divisive and manipulative “leaders” of the Tea Party movement who would take American back to a time when injustice was not only the law of the land but considered the birthright of a corrupt and selfish status quo. Fortunately, the igniting of that emotional spark in 1955 which propelled the Civil Rights era to glory was rooted in the purest of American principles. During the coming years, it will be up to the citizens of this nation to decide whether they will uphold those same ideals or give in to shameless, fearful, and ultimately dangerous, demagoguery.

Dan Brown lives in Greenfield Massachusetts. This was first printed in the Recorder.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Zinn A True Patriot

Why the Feds Fear Thinkers Like Howard Zinn

by Chris Hedges
Today I will teach my final American history class of the semester to prison inmates. We have spent five weeks reading Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States.” The class is taught in a small room in the basement of the prison. I pass through a metal detector, am patted down by a guard and walk through three pairs of iron gates to get to my students. We have covered Spain’s genocide of the native inhabitants in the Caribbean and the Americas, the war for independence in the United States and the disgraceful slaughter of Native Americans. We have examined slavery, the Mexican-American War, the Civil War, the occupations of Cuba and the Philippines, the New Deal, two world wars and the legacy of racism, capitalist exploitation and imperialism that continue to infect American society.
We have looked at these issues, as Zinn did, through the eyes of Native Americans, immigrants, slaves, women, union leaders, persecuted socialists, anarchists and communists, abolitionists, anti-war activists, civil rights leaders and the poor. As I was reading out loud a passage by Sojourner Truth, Chief Joseph, Henry David Thoreau, Frederick Douglass, W.E.B Du Bois, Randolph Bourne, Malcolm X or Martin Luther King, I have heard students mutter “Damn” or “We been lied to.”
The power of Zinn’s scholarship—which I have watched over the past few weeks open the eyes of young, mostly African-Americans to their own history and the structures that perpetuate misery for the poor and gluttony and privilege for the elite—explains why the FBI, which released its 423-page file on Zinn on July 30, saw him as a threat. 
Zinn, who died in January at the age of 87, did not advocate violence or support the overthrow of the government, something he told FBI interrogators on several occasions. He was rather an example of how genuine intellectual thought is always subversive. It always challenges prevailing assumptions as well as political and economic structures. It is based on a fierce moral autonomy and personal courage and it is uniformly branded by the power elite as “political.” Zinn was a threat not because he was a violent revolutionary or a communist but because he was fearless and told the truth. 
The cold, dead pages of the FBI file stretch from 1948 to 1974. At one point five agents are assigned to follow Zinn. Agents make repeated phone calls to employers, colleagues and landlords seeking information. The FBI, although Zinn is never suspected of carrying out a crime, eventually labels Zinn a high security risk. J. Edgar Hoover, who took a personal interest in Zinn’s activities, on Jan. 10, 1964, drew up a memo to include Zinn “in Reserve Index, Section A,” a classification that permitted agents to immediately arrest and detain Zinn if there was a national emergency. Muslim activists, from Dr. Sami Al-Arian to Fahad Hashmi, can tell you that nothing has changed.
The file exposes the absurdity, waste and pettiness of our national security state. And it seems to indicate that our security agencies prefer to hire those with mediocre or stunted intelligence, dubious morality and little common sense. Take for example this gem of a letter, complete with misspellings, mailed by an informant to then FBI Director Hoover about something Zinn wrote.
“While I was visiting my dentist in Michigan City, Indiana,” the informant wrote.  “This pamphlet was left in my car, and I am mailing it to you, I know is a DOVE call, and not a HOCK call. We have had a number of ethnic groups move into our area in the last few years. We are in a war! And it doesn’t look like this pamphlet will help our Government objectives.”
Or how about the meeting between an agent and someone identified as Doris Zinn. Doris Zinn, who the agent says is Zinn’s sister, is interviewed “under a suitable pretext.” She admits that her brother is “employed at the American Labor Party Headquarters in Brooklyn.” That is all the useful information that is reported. The fact that Zinn did not have a sister gives a window into the quality of the investigations and the caliber of the agents who carried them out. 
FBI agents in November 1953 wrote up an account of a clumsy attempt to recruit Zinn as an informant, an attempt in which they admitted that Zinn “would not volunteer information” and that “additional interviews with ZINN would not turn him from his current attitude.” A year later, after another interrogation, an agent wrote that Zinn “concluded the interview by stating he would not under any circumstances testify or furnish information concerning the political opinions of others.”
While Zinn steadfastly refused to cooperate in the anti-communist witch hunts in the 1950s, principals and college administrators were busy purging classrooms of those who, like Zinn, exhibited intellectual and moral independence. The widespread dismissals of professors, elementary and high school teachers and public employees—especially social workers whose unions had advocated on behalf of their clients—were carried out quietly. The names of suspected “Reds” were handed to administrators and school officials under the FBI’s “Responsibilities Program.” It was up to the institutions, nearly all of which complied, to see that those singled out lost their jobs. There rarely were hearings.  The victims did not see any purported evidence. They were usually abruptly terminated. Those on the blacklist were effectively locked out of their professions. The historian Ellen Schrecker estimates that between 10,000 and 12,000 people were blackballed through this process.
The FBI spent years following Zinn, and carefully cutting out newspaper articles about their suspect, to amass the inane and the banal. One of Zinn’s neighbors, Mrs. Matthew Grell, on Feb. 22, 1952, told agents that she considered Zinn and another neighbor, Mrs. Julius Scheiman, “to be either communists or communist sympathizers” because, the agents wrote, Grell “had observed copies of the Daily Workers in Mrs. Scheiman’s apartment and noted that Mrs. Scheiman was a good friend of Howard Zinn.”
The FBI, which describes Zinn as a former member of the Communist Party, something Zinn repeatedly denied, appears to have picked up its surveillance when Zinn, who was teaching at Spelman, a historically black women’s college, became involved in the civil rights movement. Zinn served on the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. He took his students out of the classroom to march for civil rights. Spelman’s president was not pleased.
“I was fired for insubordination,” Zinn recalled. “Which happened to be true.”
Zinn in 1962 decried “the clear violations by local police of Constitutional rights” of blacks and noted that “the FBI has not made a single arrest on behalf of Negro citizens.” The agent who reported Zinn’s words added that Zinn’s position was “slanted and biased.” Zinn in 1970 was a featured speaker at a rally for the release of the Black Panther leader Bobby Seal held in front of the Boston police headquarters. “It is about time we had a demonstration at the police station,” Zinn is reported as telling the crowd by an informant who apparently worked with him at Boston University. “Police in every nation are a blight and the United States is no exception.”
“America has been a police state for a long time,” Zinn went on. “I believe that policemen should not have guns. I believe they should be disarmed. Policemen with guns are a danger to the community and themselves.”
Agents muse in the file about how to help their unnamed university source mount a campaign to have Zinn fired from his job as a professor of history at Boston University.
“[Redacted] indicated [Redacted] intends to call a meeting of the BU Board of Directors in an effort to have ZINN removed from BU. Boston proposes under captioned program with Bureau permission to furnish [Redacted] with public source data regarding ZINN’s numerous anti-war activities, including his trip to Hanoi, 1/31/68, in an effort to back [Redacted’s]  efforts for his removal.”
Zinn and the radical Catholic priest Daniel Berrigan had traveled together to North Vietnam in January 1968 to bring home three prisoners of war. The trip was closely monitored by the FBI. Hoover sent a coded teletype to the president, the secretary of state, the director of the CIA, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Department of the Army, the Department of the Air Force and the White House situation room about the trip. And later, after Berrigan was imprisoned for destroying draft records, Zinn repeatedly championed the priest’s defense in public rallies, some of which the FBI noted were sparsely attended. The FBI monitored Zinn as he traveled to the Danbury Federal Prison in Connecticut to visit Berrigan and his brother Philip. 
“Mass murders occur, which is what war is,” Zinn, who was a bombardier in World War II, said in 1972, according to the file, “because people are split and don’t think … when the government does not serve the people, then it doesn’t deserve to be obeyed. … To be patriotic, you may have to be against your government.”
Zinn testified at the trial of Daniel Ellsberg, who gave a copy of the Pentagon Papers to Zinn and Noam Chomsky. The two academics edited the secret documents on the Vietnam War, sections of which had appeared in The New York Times, into the four volumes that were published in 1971.
“During the Pentagon Papers jury trial, Zinn stated that the ‘war in Vietnam was a war which involved special interests, and not the defense of the United States,’ ” his FBI file reads.
By the end of the file one walks away with a profound respect for Zinn and a deep distaste for the buffoonish goons in the FBI who followed and monitored him. There is no reason, with the massive expansion of our internal security apparatus, to think that things have improved. There are today 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies working on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States, The Washington Post reported in an investigation by Dana Priest and William M. Arkin. These agencies employ an estimated 854,000 people, all of whom hold top-secret security clearances, the Post found. And in Washington, D.C., and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together, the paper reported, they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings—about 17 million square feet.
We are amassing unprecedented volumes of secret files, and carrying out extensive surveillance and harassment, as stupid and useless as those that were directed against Zinn. And a few decades from now maybe we will be able to examine the work of the latest generation of dimwitted investigators who have been unleashed upon us in secret by the tens of thousands. Did any of the agents who followed Zinn ever realize how they wasted their time? Do those following us around comprehend how manipulated they are? Do they understand that their primary purpose, as it was with Zinn, is not to prevent terrorism but discredit and destroy social movements as well as protect the elite from those who would expose them? 
Zinn’s book is revered in my cramped classroom. It is revered because these men intimately know racism, manipulation, poverty, abuse and the lies peddled by the powerful. Zinn recorded their voices and the voices of their ancestors. They respect him for this. Zinn knew that if we do not listen to the stories of those without power, those who suffer discrimination and abuse, those who struggle for justice, we are left parroting the manufactured myths that serve the interests of the privileged. Zinn set out to write history, not myth.  And he knew that when these myths implode it is the beginning of hope.
“If you were a Native American,” one of my students asked recently, “what would have been the difference between Columbus and Hitler?”
Chris Hedges writes a regular column for Truthdig.com. Hedges graduated from Harvard Divinity School and was for nearly two decades a foreign correspondent for The New York Times. He is the author of many books, including: War Is A Force That Gives Us Meaning, What Every Person Should Know About War, and American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America.  His most recent book is Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, March 25, 2010

Obama Uses Tortured Logic

Published on Thursday, March 25, 2010 by Salon.com
When Presidential Sermons Collide

by Glenn Greenwald

President Obama gave an interview earlier this week to an Indonesian television station in lieu of the scheduled trip to that country which was canceled due to the health care vote. In 2008, Indonesia empowered a national commission to investigate human rights abuses committed by its own government under the U.S.-backed Suharto regime "in an attempt to finally bring the perpetrators to justice," and Obama was asked in this interview: "Is your administration satisfied with the resolution of the past human rights abuses in Indonesia?" He replied:

We have to acknowledge that those past human rights abuses existed. We can't go forward without looking backwards . . . .

When asked last year about whether the United States should use similar tribunals to investigate its own human rights abuses, as well his view of other countries' efforts (such as Spain) to investigate those abuses, Obama said:

I'm a strong believer that it's important to look forward and not backwards, and to remind ourselves that we do have very real security threats out there.

That "Look-Forward/Not-Backward" formulation is one which Obama and his top aides have frequently repeated to argue against any investigations in the U.S. Why, as Obama sermonized, must Indonesians first look backward before being able to move forward, whereas exactly the opposite is true of Americans? If a leader is going to demand that other countries adhere to the very "principles" which he insists on violating himself, it's probably best not to use antithetical clichés when issuing decrees, for the sake of appearances if nothing else.

The New Yorker's Jane Mayer -- in the last paragraph of her new article documenting the multiple lies told by former Bush speechwriter and current Washington Post columnist Marc Theissen in his pro-torture book -- offered the best summary yet as to why Obama's "Look Forward/Not Backward" mentality is so destructive:

The publication of "Courting Disaster" suggests that Obama's avowed determination "to look forward, not back" has laid the recent past open to partisan reinterpretation. By holding no one accountable for past abuse, and by convening no commission on what did and didn't protect the country, President Obama has left the telling of this dark chapter in American history to those who most want to whitewash it.

Nothing enables the glorification of crimes, and nothing ensures their future re-occurrence, more than shielding the criminals from all accountability. It's nice that Barack Obama is willing to dispense that lecture to other countries, but it's not so nice that he does exactly the opposite in his own.
© 2010 Salon.com

Glenn Greenwald was previously a constitutional law and civil rights litigator in New York. He is the author of the New York Times Bestselling book "How Would a Patriot Act?," a critique of the Bush administration's use of executive power, released in May 2006. His second book, "A Tragic Legacy", examines the Bush legacy
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Monday, November 30, 2009

Book Reviews

By Al Hutchison

In the minds of those who enjoy reading, either for relaxation or self-improvement of one kind or another, books make excellent Christmas gifts.  It helps to know what kind of books a person likes, of course, because a devotee of science fiction may not fully appreciating finding even a superior a cookbook under the Christmas tree.

  Here are three recommendations, based on my own reading this past year:

1.  The Protest Singer: An Intimate Portrait of Pete Seeger, by Alec Wilkinson. This slim volume, which costs $22.95, captures the essence of one of the more enduring but controversial figures of the 20th century music scene in the United States.  Why was Seeger so controversial?  Because he believed – in his 90s, he still believes – in  the values we are taught to cherish in these United States and he sang about his beliefs to anyone who’d listen, including members of the Communist Party.  During the McCarthy Era, he famously offered to sing for the House Un-American Activities Committee, but he refused to answer the red-baiting politicians’ questions.

“He believes ardently in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  His interpretation of them is literal,” Wilkinson writes.  His causes included workers’ rights, civil rights, the movement against the Vietnam war and the ecological movement.  Almost single-handedly, he was responsible for the cleaning up of his beloved Hudson River

  “People ask, is there one word that you have more faith in than any other word,” Seeger told Wilkinson, “and I’d say it’s participation. I feel this takes on so many meanings.  The composer John Philip Sousa said ‘What will happen to the American voice now that the phonograph has been invented? Women used to sing lullabies to their children.’ It’s been my life’s work to get participation, whether it’s a union song, or a peace song, civil rights, or a women’s movement, or gay liberation.  When you sing, you feel a kind of strength; you think, I’m not alone, there’s a whole bunch of us who feel this way.
                                           

For most of us, Seeger’s greatest contribution has been his music itself.  Read this book and you’ll want to sit down and listen to it for a few hours.  And you’ll want to do good, somehow, in your own way.
                      
                                         

 
        You may not care about goats, but this book is a keeper. The author,    who lives on a 75-acre Vermont farm, takes his subjects – raising goats and making cheese from their milk – extremely seriously, and his writing skills could keep his readers happy on almost any topic.  

  Kessler, an experienced writer for New Yorker and other publications, respects his readers as much as he respects his goats and, ultimately, his homemade cheeses that the experts he consults proclaim them a smashing success.  That respect courses through a book that reflects the writer’s love not only of his expanding herd of goats but also of poetry, history and even religion.

   Did you know that in Sweden the goat herders were typically women, and that they sang while they looked after their goats?  On a quiz, could you explain the origins of the terms “scapegoat” and “bellwether”?  Read this book and you’ll ace the test.

  To read “Goat Song” is to learn that goats are among the most intelligent of farm animals. Compared to them, cows and sheep seem downright boring and dull-witted, although Kessler probably could make them seem exciting.

  “The longer I spent with our goats, the more complex and wondrous their emotional life seemed: their moods, desires, sensitivity, intelligence, attachments to place and one another, and us,” Kessler writes. “But also the way they communicated messages with their bodies, voices, and eyes in ways I can’t try to translate: their goat song.”
                                                 


  3. In Late Winter We Ate Pears: A Year of Hunger and Love, by Deidre Heekin and Caleb Barber.  $25.

  Tucked into a tiny upstairs space in a cozy corner of tourist-friendly Woodstock, Vermont, is a rather unusual eating and drinking (wine) establishment called Osteria Pane e Salute.  It seats only 22 customers, serves its own bakery products and, given the owners’ penchant for travel, is as likely to be closed as open.

The owners are Caleb Barber and his wife, Deirde Heekin, and if they team up in their restaurant as smoothly and lovingly as they do in this book, then Vermont is blessed with two tremendous talents who are happy to share their success with their customers and with those fortunate enough to read this book and its companion volume (written by Heekin), “Libation: A Bitter Alchemy.”

  First, an explanation is in order: In an Italian tradition that’s no longer religiously observed, there were three levels of public dining. Of these, the most formal was a “ristorante” that typically would have linen tablecloths and other fancy touches. Next there’s the somewhat less elegant “trattoria” and, finally, the most casual “osteria.”  In Italian, by the way, “pane e salute” translates into “bread and health.” 

“Our restaurant has become a way to preserve not only part of our past, but a larger historical past that is still important to the present: Italy,” Barber, the chef in the family, explains. “So much of the western world can be illuminated and explained by what you will find in Italy, especially when it comes to art.”

And that’s where Heekin and Barber found the inspiration and the instructions that feed their restaurant’s menu. This is a couple that clearly is in love with Italy, where they frequently have gone to live (they once stayed an entire year) and to enthusiastically absorb the nation’s varied culinary history. They also love Vermont, where you seldom expect to encounter top-of-the-line cuisine at moderate prices.  The owners want their customers to be able to afford what they serve, so their prices are always within reach.
                             

Heekin, a gifted writer who is blessed with the intellectual curiosity of a scholar or poet, provides the fast-moving narrative while Barber contributes intriguing recipes in a book that is neither travelogue nor cookbook yet a felicitous combination of both. This is a book to keep near the kitchen, yet it also makes for fine reading in an easy chair by a roaring fire on a cold winter’s night.

  Readers who already know and love Italy will be pleased to read Heekin’s descriptions of the couple’s travels through the rural countryside in search of authentic recipes and the peculiarly personal histories behind them. Those who have never had pleasure of spending time in an Italian village (or, even better, a trattoria or osteria) may feel they can skip around a bit without diminishing the rewards that come to the appreciative reader.

  What comes through, strong and clear, is the couple’s enduring affection for their chosen lifestyle and it’s contribution to their community.

“I think about Caleb working each day on a minimum of sleep, baking, cooking, paying bills, fixing a dripping faucet in the sink or an oven that’s gone on the blink,” Heekin writes. “I think about how late we stay up on Thursday nights planning the new dinner menu for every Friday, and I know why we do this.

  “We do this for Roberto at the Window Table, for Olga, who is a stranger in an unfamiliar land, for the Turkish man, the French woman, and all the other faces we see and to whom we smile and say, Good day,” she explains.

  Oddly enough, the college-educated authors had dreamed of becoming professional dancers but their love of Italy and of Italian cuisine got in their way. Their book expresses, in somewhat sensual terms, their love affair with their chosen careers.  And if you think you know your pizza, think again.  As told by Heekin, the history of that popular dish is an intriguing one most of us know almost nothing about.
                           
  The book’s 80 recipes are separated by season and while Barber’s writing is somewhat less poetic than Heekin’s, it is a pleasure to read. More important, his recipes are simple, straightforward and a clear invitation, even an inducement, to chefs, amateur or otherwise, to get cooking.

   “We believe cooking is an art form like any other: you learn the techniques, you learn what those techniques feel like, and then you learn by intuition, instinct, repetition, and your senses,” Barber writes.

  Finally, a note about the title: It comes not from Italy but from Quebec City and it alludes to a recipe in danger of disappearing.  Leave it to Heekin and Barber to keep it alive.

  (The above review first was published in The Rutland Herald and The Times Argus of Barre, Vt.)
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]