Nov. 21, 2008, Issue #141 ACTIVIST CALENDAR
PART 2 of HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER
jacdon@earthlink.net, http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/
——————————————

Editor's Note

1. Part 1, the Activist Newsletter, will be emailed in a week, featuring an analysis of what we can expect from the Obama Administration.

2. The elections cut down on activist events in the last several months, which is not unusual, but things haven't picked up yet. The national peace movement has been unusually quiet lately though plans are afoot for big actions around the sixth anniversary of the unjust Iraq War in mid-March. We hope people are not going to ease up because they think all's well now that President Bush is about to leave the White House at long last. We're in the midst of three wars, a deep recession and more problems than we have picket signs.

3. You may also access this calendar and past newsletters at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/. Spam filters on mass mailings are getting more sophisticated so add our email address, above, to your address book to avoid the chance of having the newsletter blocked.
——————————————

THE CALENDAR:

Saturday, Nov. 22, ALBANY: There will be a free public showing tonight of the 42-minute documentary "No Logo: Brands, Globalization and Resistance," based on activist author Naomi Klein's book of that title. It is a critical evaluation of the economic and cultural impact of multinational corporations. The 7:30 p.m. event is sponsored by Solidarity Committee of the Capital District, Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace, and Upper Hudson Peace Action. Information, (518) 426-0883, dbull@capital.net, http://www.jflan.net/solidarity.

Saturday, Nov. 22, NANUET: We no longer list the scores of weekly peace vigils in the Hudson Valley since they are well known by now, but it is a pleasure to note the sixth anniversary today of the vigil here sponsored by the Rockland Coalition for Peace and Justice. Well done friends! The cause of peace, as the U.S. prepares to send tens of thousands more troops into Afghanistan, needs you as much today as the day you first began. They will observe the anniversary at the usual time and place — 1-3 p.m. at Rt. 59 and N. Middletown Rd. Join 'em if you can. Information, http://www.rocklandaction.org.

Saturday, Nov. 22, MARBLETOWN/STONE RIDGE: It was announced in the Nov. 17 Kingston Freeman that the peace vigil that has been taking place Saturdays for nearly three years at the intersection of Rt. 209 and Rt. 203 has been suspended, at least "officially," starting today. According to the newspaper, the "group decided to suspend their activities as a result of Obama's promises to withdraw from Iraq on a reasonable and sensible timetable and to correct the nation's current foreign policy." However, the Freeman was told, "some members have chosen to continue protest efforts for reasons of their own." We don't know who the contact person is for those who plan to continue the vigil. People in the region may want to check it out. The struggle continues.

Saturday, Nov. 22, SCHENECTADY: There will be a peace contingent in this city's annual Holiday Parade, according to Schenectady Neighbors for Peace. The parade is a rain or shine event and lasts about two hours. From Neighbors for Peace: "We invite all peace-minded folk to join in and help build our theme of 'Peace is Not a Fairy Tale' (the parade has a fairy tale theme). This should be fun! Dress suggestion: Wear a costume with a fairy tale theme. Please bring your own sign, if needed…. The parade is a family event and participants are asked to keep all images and signs appropriate for children." Participants will meet at 4:30 p.m. in the church library of the First United Methodist Church, 603 State St. RSVPs are requested. Information and RSVPs, Elaine at (518) 346-0517, elaineklein@hotmail.com.

Saturday, Nov. 22, DELMAR: Ghaith al-Omari, policy director at the American Task Force for Palestine, and Diane Balser, executive director of Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, will discuss perspectives on new prospects for peace between Israelis and Palestinians in a meeting at the Bethlehem Public Library, 451 Delaware Ave. (See directly below for a slightly different version of this meeting in Albany, Nov. 23.) We're informed, "al-Omari was foreign policy advisor to the Palestinian Authority, participated in negotiations at Camp David and Taba, and was the lead Palestinian drafter of the Geneva Accords. A graduate of Georgetown and Oxford, he taught international law in Jordan and was active in human rights advocacy there." This event is free, though donations are appreciated. The sponsors are Brit Tzedek v'Shalom; Sidney Albert Interfaith Lecture Series Board; Interfaith Alliance of New York State; and the Commission on Peace & Justice of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany. Information, jalexa56@earthlink.net.

Sunday, Nov. 23, ALBANY: Ghaith al-Omari, policy director at the American Task Force for Palestine, will discuss perspectives on new prospects for peace between Israelis and Palestinians at a 2-4 p.m. meeting moderated by Rabbi Debora S. Gordon of Congregation Berith Sholom in Troy. It will take place at the Hubbard Interfaith Sanctuary, Campus Green South of The College of Saint Rose, 1009 Madison Ave., between S. Main and Partridge. We're informed, "al-Omari was foreign policy advisor to the Palestinian Authority, participated in negotiations at Camp David and Taba, and was the lead Palestinian drafter of the Geneva Accords. A graduate of Georgetown and Oxford, he taught international law in Jordan and was active in human rights advocacy there." This event is free, though donations are appreciated. The sponsors are Brit Tzedek v'Shalom; Sidney Albert Interfaith Lecture Series Board; Interfaith Alliance of New York State; and the Commission on Peace & Justice of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany. Information, jalexa56@earthlink.net.

Sunday, Nov. 23, NEW PALTZ: Arts for Peace is holding a Fair Trade Sale at 8 White Oaks Lane, 2-5 p.m. with handcrafts, fair trade coffee, tea, chocolate; also peace calendars and bookmarks. Information, Julie Wegener, (845) 255-2871, yo-mom@earthlink.net.

Monday, Nov. 24, NEW PALTZ: A debate and discussion on "Human Nature and the Self" is set for 7:30-9 p.m. at New Paltz Village Hall, 25 Plattekill Ave. Learn about the limits of science in discovering the essence of humanity. The sponsor is Hudson Valley Humanists. Free and public. Information, Ed Poll at (845) 247-0098, hvhumans@yahoo.com, http://hudsonvalley.humanists.net/.

Tuesday, Nov. 25, KINGSTON: "Where do we go from here?" is the topic of a post-election discussion 7:30-9 p.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of the Catskills, 320 Sawkill Rd. With a Democrat in the White House, what — ask the organizers — should "progressive secular and spiritual groups focus their efforts on now?" Well, there's always the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and on Terrorism, the military budget, and nuclear weapons for starters. Then there's…. Oh well, go to the meeting. Information, Mike Ignatowski at (845) 758-4119, mikeig@yahoo.com, http://www.uucckingston.org.

Thursday, Nov. 27, AMERICA: This is Thanksgiving Day. About 300 million turkeys are being raised and slaughtered in the United States in 2008. Nearly 50 million of them will be put to death to celebrate today's holiday. We don't allow them much of a life, and there's no Thanksgiving at all for these poor flightless domestic birds. What a pity they can't just fly far away from the horror of it all. According to GoVeg.com, these animals "will be killed when they are only 5 or 6 months old, and during their short lives, they will be denied even the simplest pleasures, like running, building nests, and raising their young. Like chickens, the 300 million turkeys raised and killed for their flesh every year in the United States have no federal legal protection. Thousands of turkeys are crammed into filthy sheds after their beaks and toes are burned off with a hot blade. Many suffer heart failure or debilitating leg pain, often becoming crippled under the weight of their genetically manipulated and drugged bodies. When the time comes for slaughter, they are thrown into transport trucks, and when they arrive at the slaughterhouse, their throats are cut and their feathers burned off — often while they are still fully conscious." Information, including a vegetarian starter kit, http://www.goveg.com/.

Friday-Saturday, Nov. 28-29, KINGSTON & WORLDWIDE: These are big shopping days — but today in North America, and tomorrow internationally, they are also Buy Nothing Days. According to Adbusters, which sponsors this brief consumer boycott: "Take the Plunge! As the planet starts heating up, maybe it’s time to finally go cold turkey. Take the personal challenge by locking up your debit card, your credit cards, your money clip, and see what it feels like to opt out of consumer culture completely, even if only for 24 hours." In Kingston on Saturday, 10 a.m.-2 p.m., you may wish to "avoid the malls, fight consumerism, swap items at a free rummage sale, and spend time with some like-minded people. Donations accepted, but no computer equipment please." It takes place at the UU Congregation of the Catskills, 320 Sawkill Rd. Information, mikeig@yahoo.com, (845) 758-4119.

Saturday, Nov. 29, KINGSTON: Three films about Iraq will be shown tonight, 7:30-11:30 p.m., at The Bunker, 15 Gage St. near Foxhall Ave. The film directors will be present for the Q&A. The films are "Gunner Palace," "The Prisoner — Or How I Planned to Kill Tony Blair," and "Bulletproof Salesman." The Bunker is described as a "liberated space." Information, thebunker@frontiernet.net. Access the website for more information, http://www.myspace.com/downinthebunker.

Monday, Dec. 1, OLD CHATHAM: The documentary "On the Line" will be shown at 7 p.m. at Powell House Quaker Conference and Retreat Center, 524 Pitt Hall Rd. off County Route 13. The film provides an inside look at the activist movement to close the notorious School of the Americas (renamed "Western Hemisphere Institute for Cooperation") at Ft. Benning, Georgia. This U.S. Army school has been a training camp for soldiers sent to it by right-wing governments in Latin America. Over the years its graduates have taken part in actions to repress civilian populations. Public and free. PG-13. Refreshments will be served. A moderated discussion will follow. Information, (518) 794-0259. Directions http://www.oldchathamquakers.org.

Tuesday, Dec. 2, WEST NYACK: The Rockland County AARP Chapter is sponsoring a meeting about Single Payer Health Care (Medicare for All) beginning at 7 p.m. at the JCC Rockland, 450 W. Nyack Rd. "We’re having a Doctor and Nurse discuss the need for the Single Payer Health Care system and how it can reduce the cost of health care." Information, Steve at polanve@optimum.net.

Friday, Dec. 5, POUGHKEEPSIE: This holiday season documentary asks an interesting question: "What Would Jesus Buy?" You will find out if you attend the 7:30 p.m. free public showing at The Muddy Cup, 305 Main St. This film follows Reverend Billy and the Church of Stop Shopping Gospel Choir as they go on a cross-country mission to save Christmas from the imperatives of the ultra-consumer society. Discussion to follow. The sponsor is the Dutchess Peace Coalition. Information, Fred Nagel (845) 876-7906, http://www.dutchesspeace.org.

Saturday, Dec. 6, WHITE PLAINS: The WESPAC Foundation's Annual Fair Trade Crafts Festival is open 10 a.m.-5 p.m. at Memorial United Methodist Church, Asbury Hall, 250 Bryant Ave. This benefit features Fair Trade coffee, tea, chocolate and olive oil; crafts from an indigenous Mayan women's collective in Guatemala; Native American hand-woven clothing and silver jewelry; Siwok crafts from Argentina and much more. Admission, $1. Information, (914) 449-6514, (914) 682-4690, Joan842@optonline.net, http://www.wespac.org.

Sunday, Dec. 7, NEW PALTZ: Two experts on the political and social situation in Haiti, the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere which has just suffered from calamitous hurricanes, will give a talk at New Paltz Village Hall, 25 Plattekill Ave., a block from Main St. They are Kim Ives, an editor of Haiti Liberte, and Haitian activist and DC 1707 union organizer Ray LaForest. The 6 p.m. (sharp) meeting will take place at New Paltz Village Hall on Plattekill Ave., one block south of Main St. (Rt. 299), a mile or so west of Thruway exit 18. A potluck dinner begins at 5 p.m. for those who wish to partake. This free public event is sponsored by the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project. Information, jacdon@earthlink.net.

Thursday, Dec. 11, WOODSTOCK: The Middle East Crisis Response group meets at 7-8:30 p.m. at the Woodstock Public Library, 5 Library Lane. All are welcome. Information, (845) 876-7906, http://www.mideastcrisis.org, gale@mideastcrisis.org.

Saturday, Dec. 13, WOODSTOCK: The monthly vigil commemorating the 1948 Palestinian "Nakba" exodus will be held 2:30-4 p.m. at the Village Green, 12 Tinker St. "Nakba," meaning a catastrophic event, refers to the refugee flight of Palestinian Arabs during and after the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The sponsor of this vigil, which takes place on the second Saturday of every month, is Middle East Crisis Response. Information, (845) 876-7906, fred@acornfilm.com, http://www.mideastcrisis.org.

INTERIM ACTIVIST CALENDAR, November 12, 2008
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter

Information and updates about the following events became available after publication of the October 27 Hudson Valley Activist Calendar and will take place before the new edition late next week. Previous newsletters and calendars may be located at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com.

Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net Subscribe at the same address

———————————————

EDITOR’S NOTE:

1. A number of new readers have been added with this issue, so this is for them: Many other events during the rest of November are listed in our last calendar and if you don't have a copy, go to our web address above. Spam filters on mass mailings are getting more sophisticated. Add our email address, above, to your address book to avoid the chance having the newsletter blocked.

2. The Onion has a humorous 2 ½ minute video take-off on post-election Obamamania. It's at http://www.theonion.com/content/video/obama_win_causes_obsessive.

———————————————

Thursday, Nov. 13, NEW PALTZ (SUNY campus): An award-winning documentary film on the current and historical root causes of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be shown at 7:30 p.m. in Lecture Center room 102. The title is Occupation 101 (http://www.occupation101.com/). This free public event is sponsored by the campus Muslim Students' Association. Campus map, http://www.newpaltz.edu/map/. Information, yasmin3566@gmail.com.

Thursday, Nov. 13, PURCHASE: (Manhattanville College campus): “Understanding The Current Financial Crisis – How Will It Affect You?” is the topic of a talk by Ghassan Karam, a Pace University economics professor. This free public event, sponsored by the Connie Hogarth Center for Social Action, begins at 7:15 p.m. at Brownson Hall room 8. Information, (914) 323-7156.

Friday, Nov. 14, NANUET: A vigil will be held 5-7 p.m. tonight in this Rockland County town to protest the racist murder of an immigrant worker from Ecuador, Marcello Lucero, in the Suffolk County town of Patchogue on Long Island. Seven teenage youths have been arrested for this this terrible crime. The vigil will take place at Rt. 59 and Middletown Rd., sponsored by the Rockland Immigration Coalition. Information about the lynching: A New York Times editorial, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/opinion/11tue3.html. Vigil information, hamanaka@optonline.net, info@rocklandaction.org.

Friday, Nov. 14, NEW PALTZ: The film "King Corn — You Are What You Eat" will have a free public showing at the Elting Library, 93 Main St. King Corn "is a 2007 feature documentary about two friends, one acre of corn, and the subsidized crop that drives our fast-food nation." Information, tellall45@yahoo.com. A review is at http://fooddemocracy.wordpress.com/2007/10/17/king-corn-you-are-what-you-eat/.

Saturday-Sunday, Nov. 16, POUGHKEEPSIE (Vassar College campus): There's a Fair Trade Bazaar here this weekend. We're told: "Purchase beautiful fair-traded items made in developing countries or by local artisans. Food by Twisted Soul; music by The Walker Family and Lost
in the Woods. Saturday 11-5 and Sunday 11-3, The Aula, Ely Hall, Vassar. Information, http://www.uupok.org; campus map at http://www.vassar.edu; or
contact Pat Lamanna, patla@hvc.rr.com; (845) 452-4013.

Sunday, Nov. 16, POUGHKEEPSIE: Americans concerned about global warming are hearing a lot about the number 350 these days. That's the amount of particles per million of carbon emissions in the atmosphere beyond which the Earth will begin moving to a climate-change tipping point. The number at present is said to have climbed to 385, and environmental leaders such as Bill McKibben are urging that demonstrations take place throughout the world demanding action to urgently lower the amount of greenhouse gases below 350 ppm. Several local groups have organized an event here today titled a "350-for-350 Rally for a Green New Deal on the FDR Mid-Hudson Bridge" — the first 350 being the least number of people desired to participate in the bridge event. Demonstrators will meet at 2 p.m. at the Holy Light Pentecostal Church, 33 S. Clover St. to hear from speakers and the choir. At 3 p.m. the procession will walk to the bridge for a rally. Sponsors of the action are the Real Majority Project (led by county legislator Joel Tyner, a peace activist and organizer of the event), Rhinebeck and Arlington High School Environmental Clubs, Vassar Greens, Bard Environmental Collective, Hudson Valley Network of Spiritual Progressives, and NYPIRG. Information about the worldwide project is at http://www.350.org. About the walk and rally, (845) 489-5479, joeltyner@earthlink.net.

Tuesday, Nov. 18, ALBANY: A huge progressive New York coalition will rally and lobby at the state capitol 10 a.m.-3 p.m. today in opposition to anticipated major reductions in the state budget. Much of the action will take place at West Capitol Park, Swan St. Steps, at South Swan and Washington Ave. Many people will gather at noon. The One New York: Fighting for Fairness Coalition includes almost 100 organizations including unions and other groups that advocate for and serve New Yorkers needing services such as AIDS support, child care, child welfare, education, health care, homeless housing, housing, immigrant services, income support, legal services, disabilities support, and senior/youth services. Buses will bring demonstrators from New York City, leaving at 7 a.m. According to the United Federation of Teachers, the coalition seeks "to protect the city’s core safety net — including public school education — in the wake of hard fiscal times. The coalition aims to defend needed services for poor and middle-income New Yorkers." Citizen Action of New York, a member of the coalition, offers Albany information at (518) 465-4600, ext. 109, for Hudson Valley residents. From NYC the contact is (718) 222-1089, ext. 276, email oneny@aqeny.org. The main website, where you may also sign a petition to the governor and members of the state legislature, is http://www.fightthecuts.org.

From the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter, Nov. 5, 2008

AFTER OBAMA'S GREAT VICTORY,
NOW COMES THE EVEN HARDER PART

After eight years of reactionary George W. Bush, what progressive American does not feel a sense of relief with the election of Barack Obama instead of right wing John McCain?

After hundreds of years of vicious white racism and second-class citizenship for blacks, what progressive American does not feel proud of Barack Obama's great achievement?

There is tremendous joy today in most of America, and pride, too. The turnout was high, particularly among young voters who supported Obama by a large margin. The African American community is ecstatic for obvious reasons.

And there is no better time to ask, "Now what?" After the tumult and shouting of the election, America remains a country enveloped in daunting difficulties:

•A serious economic recession with millions of families losing their homes, jobs, and standard of living.

• A stalemated unjust war in Iraq and an expanding war in Afghanistan, with recent illegal U.S. attacks on Pakistan and Syria, and the continuing possibility of a serious attack on Iran.

• A foreign policy dedicated to maintaining world hegemony and unipolar dominance, through overwhelming military might if necessary.

• A society where a small minority essentially rules by virtue of its enormous wealth, where wages for the working class and much of the middle class have been stagnant for decades, where the disproportion between riches and poverty grows ever wider, and where millions of families — African American, Latino, and Native American — suffer additional discrimination in income, jobs, and housing.

• A system with an increasingly regressive tax structure, a huge and costly military budget, giveaway welfare policies for its powerful corporations, and inadequate social programs to care for its citizens.

• A government unprepared for the crises of the relatively near future, including the impending environmental catastrophe and the crumbling of the national infrastructure.

We have estimated that 90% of those who read the Activist Newsletter voted for Obama, and 10% voted for candidates to his left. Virtually all of them, we have reason to believe, seek at minimum the end to the Bush wars, a less warlike foreign policy, a more economically equal society, and improved welfare for the masses of people, including universal healthcare.

There are further reforms that many readers support, such as higher taxes on the rich and the big corporations, greater public control of the banking and financial systems, and a crash program to create jobs through rebuilding America's infrastructure, partly financed by big reductions in the Pentagon war budget. Others go further by opposing imperialism and its handmaiden, militarism, in our country; by demanding extensive social democratic reforms, and more.

Objectively, as we wrote in the Nov. 1 newsletter, the conditions exist at this juncture in the United States for another period of progressive social reform. The opportunity to seize the moment is of limited duration, perhaps a couple of years, before conditions change, further delaying needed substantial reforms in our country.

Barack Obama and his party have made a number of political compromises to win this election, adding a center-right component to their centrist orientation — hardly a harbinger of pronounced social progress.

Today's Democratic Party is not the center/center-left party of Franklyn D. Roosevelt or Lyndon Johnson. The center-left was buried along with the New Deal and the Great Society. Conservatism is still a major influence within the entire political system and society. It will take much more than the electoral defeat of a thoroughly disgraced Republican government to transform the next four or eight years into a period of progressive reform.

But some important advances can be made, particularly if the millions of progressives who voted for Obama commit themselves to exercising organized and unrelenting pressure on the new political administration in Washington to fight for significant reforms.

That's the hard part — and without a maximum mobilization by those forces it could be the failed part — after the relief, pride and joy of Barack Obama's fantastic victory.

Nov. 1, 2008, Issue #140
HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER/CALENDAR
jacdon@earthlink.net, http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/

This newsletter/calendar, published in New Paltz, N.Y., appears once a month, supplemented by additional listings of new activist events, usually sent to Valley readers only. Editor, Jack A. Smith (who writes all the articles that appear without a byline or credit to other publications). Copy Editor, Donna Goodman. Calendar Editor, Rocco Rizzo. If you know someone who may benefit from this newsletter, ask them to subscribe at jacdon@earthlink.net. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, unsubscribe at the same address. Please send event listings to the above email address. The current and back issues of the newsletter/calendar are available at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com.

—————————————————

EDITOR'S NOTE

1. Our prediction about Nov. 4: Obama will win. We will express our views on the election in the first three articles below. If you're in the Mid-Hudson's 19th CD, don't forget to vote for Rep. Maurice Hinchey so he can win big. He opposes the war and voted both times against the $700 billion bailout, for the correct reasons. Hinchey is not without shortcomings, but he generally takes a progressive stance and deserves support.

2. Despite the recession and all the talk about the economy, the corporate media have been mute about the possibility of penalizing the devious financiers and stock market manipulators whose actions contributed to the financial fiasco. However, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd made up for the lapse Oct. 19, and we nominate the following paragraph from her column as our Quote of the Month. Making reference to fictional French anti-aristocrat Thérèse Defarge in Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens, Dowd wrote: "I’m feeling as vengeful and bloodthirsty as Madame Defarge sharpening her knitting needles at the guillotine…. I can’t wait to see the tumbrels rumble up and down Wall Street picking up the heedless and greedy financial aristocracy…. Heads must roll."

3. Here's a modest proposal: The huge $700 billion financial bailout package for Wall St. and the banks — an amount that will be paid with interest by future generations of American workers — could be absorbed in full from the combined assets of just the 54 wealthiest citizens of the United States. Yes, we know, it would be unfair to demand that this handful pay the entire bill. Here's a workable compromise: Let's have Washington instruct the 400 wealthiest Americans to donate somewhat less than half their fortunes to cover the total cost of the bailout package. This would be a marvelous gesture on their part and they'd still have about $800 billion to share among themselves or save to donate again in the next recession five or 10 years from now.

——
Notes: 1. The activist Calendar was sent to Hudson Valley readers a few days ago. 2. Spam filters on mass mailings are getting more sophisticated. Add our email address, above, to your address book to avoid the chance having the newsletter blocked.

—————————————————

CONTENTS

1. Editorial: OBAMA THE SOCIALIST! — The McCain/Palin red-baiting and ultra-nationalism is a last refuge for these two scoundrels. And Obama is no more a socialist than McCain.

2. Editorial: OBAMA AND THE ELECTION — Most of the progressive and left forces will vote for Obama but the are dreaming if they expect centrism to really address the problems besetting our society and the world.

3. Editorial: OUR CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT — Obama's obviously better than McCain and we hope he wins, but there are interesting alternatives on the left.

4. RECESSION AND CHANGE IN AMERICA — This article attempts to tell the whole story of the capitalist contretemps from a left perspective, and there's even a semi-hopeful conclusion.

5. THE NEWS IN BRIEF —Marijuana arrests; Many mammals face extinction; Inequality kills; Mumia's appeal is rejected; Combat force deployed back home for civil strife.

6. THE UN BACKS CUBA ONCE AGAIN — Imperial hubris gets trounced for the 17th time.

7. THE COST OF BOOTS ON THE GROUND — It takes half a million dollars per year to maintain each U.S. Army sergeant in combat in Iraq

8. CHECK IT OUT — Three short videos including Jackson Browne's new song about Cuba.

————————————————

1. Editorial: OBAMA THE SOCIALIST!

In the last weeks of the election campaign Republicans Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin have descended deeply into the sewer of scandalous innuendo against Democratic rival Sen. Barack Obama. This is a measure of their fear that Obama is going to trounce them on Nov. 4, as we believe he will, and an exposure of the depths to which the right wing will sink in order to retain power.

Of course we strongly object to their suggestions that Obama lacks patriotism, or that he associates with domestic terrorists at home and Islamic terrorists abroad, or ludicrously enough that he is pro-Palestinian despite his continual genuflection to Israel, among other such attacks. And this doesn't even mention the subterranean right wing efforts to exploit racist sentiment against the first African American to approach the White House.

One of the most absurd of the conservative allegations is that Obama is a socialist, about which we will make a few points:

1. When McCain declares that Obama's tax proposal sounds "a lot like socialism," and Palin calls the proposal an "experiment with socialism" — all with approval, of course, of the nation's leading Republican, Joe the Plumber — this is an indication of the extreme conservative political atmosphere pervading the United States at this juncture. The Democratic leadership long ago jettisoned the party's center-left wing and doesn't even acknowledge the lingering remnant of liberalism within its ranks — and yet Obama is supposed to be a socialist! The McCain/Palin red-baiting and ultra-nationalism is a last refuge for these two scoundrels — the one a neoconservative imperialist, the other a far right political and religious fanatic.

2. Obama is about as close to socialism as McCain and Palin are to truly supporting the economic and social interests of the majority of American workers. His views are identical to those of the center/center-right Democratic Party leadership, which is why the Democrats in this election are supported by a large sector of Wall St. and big wealth. According to media critic Jeff Cohen, speaking to a packed meeting at SUNY New Paltz Oct. 30 on the subject of Money in Politics, "the amount of money from Wall St. to Obama is record-breaking in this election."

The Democratic candidate is backed by the majority of the American people because his program — despite shortcomings from our perspective — is to the left of the Republican candidates and their continual mocking disparagement of "spreading the wealth," as though doing so was an expression of "un-Americanism," as the right wing used to call it, instead of the purest democracy. Without relative economic democracy, which would come from truly spreading the wealth far beyond Obama's dreams, the concept of political democracy is seriously compromised.

3. Socialism has been introduced in the campaign as a pejorative, similar to the derogatory intent of the reactionary forces behind the McCain/Palin odd-couple in emphasizing Obama's biracial background, middle name, or the fact that his father was a Muslim. It's an outright appeal to the most base instincts of sector of the electorate, and in these conservative times it seems acceptable to do so.

In our view, it would be much better for America if the leading presidential candidate indeed was a socialist, or at least a committed social-democrat, at this disastrous moment in U.S. economic and political affairs with our recession and poverty, wars, militarism, imperialism, gross inequality and our paltry program of social welfare.

In time, perhaps sooner than later, there will be a progressive backlash against all this, as there was a conservative backlash decades ago against the reforms and leftism of the Sixties, and it is still going on but evidently losing steam. We think the next progressive upsurge and era of reform — given America's mounting problems, which are only getting worse — will in part include a new respectability for certain socialist solutions, and for socialism itself.

————————————————

2. Editorial: OBAMA AND THE ELECTION

We estimate that 90% of our readers will vote next week for Democratic Sen. Barack Obama to become president of the U.S. rather than Republican Sen. John McCain, and that 10%, (about 350 readers) will vote for a left third party candidate.

We want Obama and Sen. Joe Biden, his running mate, to win this election. They are head and shoulders above neoconservative McCain and his astonishing choice of a running mate, ultra-conservative Gov. Sarah Palin. It would also be good for the country for an African American to be elected president of the United States, given our country's long history of racism.

There are many things to like about Barack Obama, the most important politically being the fact that he is not George W. Bush or Bush's clones disguised in maverick's motley, McCain and Palin.

Obama is obviously intelligent, extremely disciplined and deliberative, organized and evidently in possession of management and legal skills, ambitious, energetic, a good speaker and charming. His experience as a community organizer in Chicago will serve him in good stead because this has given him some feel for the problems of the people, particularly the poor, the working class and lower middle class majority in our country.

That said, our own views are to the left of the center/center-right politics of Obama and the Democratic Party, and we will raise a few issues that we hope our readers will kept in mind when, and if, they vote for the junior senator from Illinois.

Centrism is completely inadequate to the task of resolving the multitude of complex economic, political and social problems confronting our people, our country and — considering that the U.S. is the dominant global power — our world. America needs a political leadership equal to the immense changes that must be brought about in our society, even as it remains capitalist, such as:

Adjusting economic policy to eliminate the grave gap between great wealth and the rest of the people; imposing sharp regulations and continual oversight over the banks, Wall Street and the giant corporations; creating jobs with adequate pay and benefits for every worker; removing anti-labor laws and encouraging the growth of unions; providing housing for all; vastly improving our system of public education; removing the barriers to equality that hamper most African Americans, Latinos and Native Americans; guaranteeing single-payer medical care; rebuilding our nation's infrastructure; launching a massive program to halt environmental degradation — and so much else.

Can a centrist Obama government and the Democratic Party as it now stands take on a domestic program such as this? Will it really significantly reduce the Pentagon budget and hike taxes on the corporations and the wealthy to obtain the funding required for such a program?

And how will a Democratic government and Congress deal with international affairs? Will they quickly terminate the endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, while also making sure they won't spread to Iran, Syria and Pakistan? Will they see to it, since the U.S. has the power to do so, that the interests and needs of the Palestinian people, as well as the Israeli people, are satisfied? Will such a government put the U.S. in compliance with the Non-Proliferation Treaty by sharply reducing its nuclear stockpile? Will Obama make certain that Washington will henceforth participate in a multipolar world leadership as opposed to an America-only unipolar arrangement as now exists. Will Obama sharply cut back the number of U.S. military bases abroad? Will the U.S. join the rest of the world in adding its significant weight to ending global warming? And much else.

Accomplishing such difficult tasks is entirely possible. But a centrist government that tilts to the right, and constantly compromises with its conservative opposition, as Bill Clinton did and Barack Obama will do, is not capable of making any of these necessary changes.

"Change" is Obama's constant mantra. He recently brought down the house with these emotionally stirring words: "Our time has come, our movement is real, and change is coming to America." His principal slogan is "Change we can believe in." What disturbs us about these absolute centerpieces of the Democratic campaign is that the change being offered is quite intentionally and deviously concealed. The only ones who can "believe in" this kind of change are multimillions of Americans so desperate for a different kind of society that they will follow the Democratic Pied Piper without knowing where he is taking them, if in fact he is taking them anywhere. It's such an effective ploy that McCain latched onto it almost immediately.

As far as we can see the biggest change will be that the extraordinary unpopular present occupant of the White House will vacate the premises in a couple of months. Yes, there are lots of programmatic promises in Obama's platform but by far the most will be discarded as were those of President Clinton. Actually, Obama and Clinton are quite alike in terms of program, their aversion to their party's remnant center-left, and willingness to triangulate the middle way and compromise with the right wing opposition. The big difference between the two is that Clinton was comfortably situated upon a huge economic bubble for most of his eight years, and Obama will enter the White House with the task of cleaning up the enormous damage after the bursting of the Bush administration housing bubble.

For us, one of the tip-offs to trouble ahead was another Obama slogan that seems to inspire multitudes of voters, which is truly alarming: "There is not a liberal America, or a conservative America, but a United States of America." What does that mean? That there is no need for political struggle? That lion and lamb are about to bed down together, solving the problems of the country and world with some pillow talk among all us Americans finally freed from the stressful complications of politics? This is preposterous, of course.

But Obama is better than McCain, and most progressives and even much of the left will vote for him as the lesser evil, which unfortunately seems to be a permanent feature of American style democracy, contrived as it is to eliminate the left from political influence.

As we said in the beginning, about 10% of this newsletter's readers will vote for one progressive third party or another. It could be more. Given that most of us reside in New York State, where an Obama victory is certain, we think that progressive and left voters with qualms about the center/center-right orientation of Obama and the Democratic Party should explore third-party options, as shall we discuss below.

————————————————

3. Editorial: OUR CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT

Progressive voters agree that Democrat Barack Obama would be a much better president than Republican John McCain, a "maverick" clone of the failed Bush Administration. They are correct in the sense that the center trumps the right as far as the left is concerned.

Some on the left, however, question whether the political centrism and timidity of the national Democratic Party and presidential ticket is an adequate response to the extraordinary problems confronting our country today — from the recession to the widening war in Afghanistan, from the impending environmental crisis to the need for a rational, peaceful foreign policy.

New York is a safe state for Obama. So those progressives with serious qualms about the efficacy of a centrist solution for a deeply troubled America can cast a vote for a left program and solution without fearing McCain will take our state.

There are good third-party candidates, including Cynthia McKinney or Ralph Nader. But to make a stronger statement, progressives might consider a socialist candidate for president — West Coast union leader and left activist Gloria La Riva of the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) — and her running mate, Eugene Puryear. They are on the ballot in 12 states including New York, where their ticket secured 30,000 signatures to qualify.

La Riva and Puryear say: "End the rule of the billionaires, bankers and militarists — fight for real democracy for working people." They demand an immediate moratorium on foreclosures, evictions and rent hikes; single-payer healthcare for all; a jobs creation program for full employment and a $15 minimum wage; extended and increased jobless benefits; an end to the unjust wars and cutting the Pentagon budget, investing instead to fully fund human needs at home; higher taxes on the rich and greater government supervision of the corporate and banking systems and the financial and stock markets.

The United States is the only advanced industrialized democracy in the world where the political possibilities are limited to centrism or the right wing by the nature of the two-party system. Every other such country has a viable "third" alternative, either a mass socialist or social-democratic party. That's one reason virtually all of them are miles ahead of our country in terms of benefits for working people — from lower levels of poverty to more years of life, from universal healthcare to longer vacations.

You want change? Think of voting for the socialists for a change. They won't come even close to winning, but they will come close to what the country needs.

— Information about the La Riva/Puryear campaign: http://www.pslweb.org/site/PageServer?pagename=votepsl_home.

————————————————

4. RECESSION AND CHANGE IN AMERICA

The United States economy has entered into a recession, though not yet officially acknowledged. It is said to be the worst financial breakdown in the last 25 to 40 years if not longer, and may last about 24 months. But "if confidence and credit dry up," wrote The Economist in an editorial Oct. 18, "a near-certain recession will become a depression."

The recession will cause hardship, to one extent or another, for billions of people around the world because it is a capitalist phenomenon, and capitalism rules the global economy. It will adversely impact the great majority of the American people. Many U.S. businesses are in a tailspin as consumers — who account for nearly 70% of the GDP — sharply reduce spending. It's been estimated such spending may drop by $300 billion within the next two years.

The main immediate causes are the collapse of the U.S. housing market leading to crises in banking and finance, a crash in stock prices, and the freezing of credits and loans. This development, while hardly alien to capitalism, was exacerbated by decades of Washington's indulgence in extreme laissez faire economic policies, especially the deregulation of banking and the financial markets. There is a possibility, as we shall discuss later, that this crisis may provoke a progressive backlash leading to certain economic reforms.

A key factor in the collapse was a high rate of default on subprime mortgages which are offered at higher interest rates to low income buyers. But an even larger number of prime and adjustable rate mortgages for buyers with higher credit ratings went into default. Homeowners from low to middle income found it difficult to finance monthly mortgage payments at a time of higher commodity prices, zooming medical expenses, increasing unemployment, and stagnant wages and salaries. As foreclosures mount while incomes weaken, housing prices will continue to fall, wiping out trillions of dollars in homeowner assets.

There were other important causes as well, not least being the Bush Administration's willingness to encourage the expansion of an $8 trillion housing bubble in order to create the impression of economic well being in the United States. An economic bubble occurs when stock market speculators and traders in quest of ever-greater profits drive up the price of a particular commodity far beyond its actual value. This was reflected in higher housing prices and a building boom, until the bust. Bubbles such as this frequently terminate with a stock crash.

Writing in Financial Times Oct. 28, columnist Martin Wolf described the elements that compose the "near-disintegration of the Western world’s banking system," as "the flight to safe assets, the tightening of credit to the real economy, collapsing equity prices, turmoil on currency markets, continued steep declines in house prices, rapid withdrawal of funds from hedge funds and ongoing collapses of the so-called shadow banking system." He earlier said that "America's economy risks the mother of all meltdowns.

In a statement Oct. 10, the Center for Economic and Policy Research declared: "The current economic crisis is the result of an extraordinary period of extreme economic mismanagement. The world's central banks, most importantly the Federal Reserve Board in the United States, made the decision to ignore, if not actively cultivate, the growth of asset bubbles. This was the case with stock market bubbles in the '90s and housing bubbles in the current decade. They compounded this mistake by ignoring the explosive growth of credit and new complex derivative instruments. They allowed financial institutions to become hugely over-leveraged [indebted], ensuring that the collapse of the bubble would lead to major financial disruptions."

Although a crash had been predicted for the last few years, the Bush Administration and Congress waited far too long to intervene. New York University Professor Nouriel Roubini, who forecast the collapse over two years ago, suggested this past February that the coming economic meltdown would be "catastrophic." When the government finally moved decisively seven months later in September, it was too little, too late, despite the sky-is-falling urgency portrayed by President Bush and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

So far, the advanced industrialized economies of the world have been infected the most by the U.S. downturn, but the quickly spreading contagion may result in a worldwide recession or worse. The developing countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America are beginning to experience considerable hardship as investments, credits and exports shrivel.

Periods of economic crisis, or "corrections" as they are termed in financial circles, have been recurrent and endemic to capitalism throughout its over 500-year history beginning in Europe. The first general capitalist collapses began in the early 1800s at the dawning of the Industrial Revolution. They usually result from overproduction, assisted by stock market manipulation and government deregulation of financial operations, among other causes.

During the century just past, the American economy experienced recessions or depressions for 28 years out of 100. In recent times there was the 1987 Wall Street crash, followed a couple of years later by the Savings and Loan collapse, and then the disintegration of the "dot.com" technology bubble in 2001. The impact of the fairly mild recession at the beginning of the 21st Century lasted almost two years, but the recovery was unusually weak. The present malaise, which had been brewing at least two years, will be considerably more severe, paving the way for future recessions at various levels of magnitude every five or 10 years as long as the capitalism exists.

The main casualties from these episodic crises are not those responsible for bringing them about — the financiers, investors, big business owners, corporate officials and key politicians and bureaucrats in government. In the U.S., the main victims comprise about 80% of the population and are largely situated in the working class — with its lowest income component suffering the most — and in large sectors of the middle class. The upper middle and the wealthiest classes take hits, but usually have economic cushions to fall back upon until their investment portfolios and businesses revive or their golden parachutes make a soft landing in one playground or another.

Unemployment in America totaled 6.1% in October, signifying that 800,000 workers have lost their jobs so far this year. About 10 million workers who seek jobs are "officially" unemployed. This does not include millions of "discouraged" jobless workers not counted in government statistics. There are also, at minimum, about 8 million part-time workers searching for full-time jobs but unable to find them. This situation will further deteriorate until the economy bottoms out. Before that happens, the jobless rate may reach 9%.

Some 3.2 million American families — consisting of at least 10 million people and probably more — will lose their homes to foreclosure in 2008-9 as a result of the bursting housing bubble. The rate is about 10,000 lost homes a day. This painful process accelerated in 2006 when foreclosure filings jumped to 1.2 million, 42% higher than 2005. Last year, new foreclosure filings climbed to 2.2 million, 75% above 2006. Foreclosure of homes and dispossession from rental units are among the most traumatic events that can befall a family, causing disruption and worse for many years.

In addition, the wages of the U.S. working class and lower middle class have been stagnant since the mid-1970s, while new government social programs to benefit working people virtually ended around the same time. According to recent data from MetLife, 44% of American workers live from paycheck to paycheck with negligible, if any, savings, and most often with mounting debts. The recession will sharply increase the number of the nearly 40 million Americans already condemned to poverty, the additional 90 million or more people living in low-income households, and the nearly 50 million without medical insurance.

For African Americans the official jobless total is now 11.4%, and it's going up. "As is often the case in a recession," the Economic Policy Institute commented Oct. 3, "black joblessness is rising more quickly than that of the overall work force." From unemployment to median income status and family assets, most black families are far behind whites — a tragic legacy of racism that has been assiduously ignored in this year's presidential contest.

Meanwhile, the top 5% of wealthy families in the U.S. now possess 58.9% of all assets and wealth, while the bottom 80% possess of 15.3% — a reminder that gross economic inequality is another endemic feature of capitalism. In terms of "net worth" (assets minus debts), according to New York University economist Edward Wolff, the “top” 1% of the American people enjoy 34.4% of the nation’s assets, which is more than that possessed by the "bottom" 90% of the people, who share 28.7%. The remaining "top" 9% have harvested the rest.

The U.S. still remains the world's strongest economy, but it is sinking ever deeper into national indebtedness. In recent years this is mainly a consequence of the enormous expenditures for the Bush Administration's two unnecessary wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the bloated militarist budget, the millionaire tax cuts, and now allocations to avoid a total economic collapse.

The annual deficit attained a record high this year of $437 billion, and it doubtless will be higher in 2009 no matter who is president. At this writing the national debt is roughly $10.5 trillion — about $34,500 for every citizen of the United States. This debt has continued to increase an average of $3.45 billion per day during the last year. In mid-October Congress raised the debt limit to $11.315 trillion. (A thousand million is a billion; a thousand billion is a trillion.) Foreign nations have been loaning Uncle Sam the money to keep the U.S. going, principally China and Japan.

What's behind the current U.S. economic crisis? First it must be recognized that there are two economies, and they interact. One is the real economy with its production of goods and services which are exchanged for money and other value. Then there is the financial shadow economy based on paper value exchanged in the gambling casino known as the stock market. In recent years, the casino introduced a new and complex gaming opportunity — derivatives — that few investors understood but avariciously partook, and it nearly broke the bank, not in Monte Carlo but Washington, London, Paris, Rome, Madrid, Bonn and other advanced industrialized capitals.

The bursting of the housing bubble and rampant foreclosures leading to the credit crises was serious enough. But it became far worse and spread throughout world financial system because these mortgage debts had been sold and resold around the world as debt-backed securities, often converted into speculative bets on derivatives such as "collateralized debt obligations," "credit default swaps," and "structured finance products."

Derivatives "derive" from a particular stock but become abstract instruments of massive unregulated trading, far more costly by many trillions of dollars than the defaulted mortgages. "The derivatives market," reported the New York Times Oct. 9, "is $531 trillion, up from $106 trillion in 2002 and a relative pittance just two decades ago. Theoretically intended to limit risk and ward off financial problems, the contracts instead have stoked uncertainty and actually spread risk amid doubts about how companies value them."

Warren Buffet, the second richest man in the world with a net worth of $50 billion and one of America's top capitalists, who also happens to be fairly liberal, wrote in his diversified Berkshire Hathaway Inc. annual report six years ago that "I view derivatives as time bombs, both for the parties that deal in them and the economic system…. In my view, derivatives are financial weapons of mass destruction, carrying dangers that, while now latent, are potentially lethal." And so they became, thanks in good part to former Federal Reserve chair Alan Greenspan, who championed derivatives and forbade their regulation.

In addition to the collapse of housing and credit, other causes of the recession include deregulation, legal and illegal fast-buck practices that might profit some individuals but cause havoc in the real economy, and as always in capitalism's periodic setbacks, overproduction — of housing in this case.

Housing and its directly associated commodities amount to more than 17% of America's gross domestic product of some $14 trillion, so this market is of great importance to the nation's economy. A few years ago, in order to sell a burgeoning supply of new houses to a thinning number of new buyers with sufficient resources, millions of Americans were induced to assume a huge housing debt burden, ultimately above their ability to pay, in order to absorb surplus production and increase profits for construction-related businesses, realtors and investors.

Many subprime home buyers were convinced to purchase beyond their means by the waiving of down payments, low "teaser" monthly mortgage obligations for the first two years, and assurances from mortgage lenders that in hard times they could always refinance at a profit "since housing values always increase."

But when monthly payments jumped after two years, the value of those homes had decreased. Homeowners couldn’t any longer pay the mortgage. They were evicted, as are renters, without recompense by the banks and other mortgage lenders for past repairs and upgrading, although some made substantial improvements in what they thought was their "American Dream," their God's Little Acre gone horribly wrong.

Millions of Americans have doubled up with relatives or friends or ended up in emergency shelters. Some families are living in their cars or in tent cities. In Florida, for example, according to an article in the July 26, 2008, USA Today, after losing their homes, 29% moved in with family or friends, 25% went to emergency shelters, 12% entered a transitional shelter, 13% obtained a rental home and 16% ended up homeless on the streets.

How is it possible for housing to be "overproduced" in a country where tens of millions of people live in dilapidated homes or overpriced apartments. How is it possible that in any given year millions of Americans are homeless for a few days, weeks, months or the entire period when there are several million vacant homes or apartments? This is because decent housing in our society, along with healthcare, is simply not a human right but a commodity sold to the highest bidders.

Some of the roots of today's recession go back over three decades to when powerful financial and business leaders made two strategic decisions.

One was to introduce a neoliberal economic regime based on gradually eliminating government regulations on finance and banking, some of which went back to the Great Depression, so the "magic of the marketplace" could work its profitable wonders without Washington's interference. Here are two relatively recent examples:

In 1999 President Bill Clinton signed legislation greatly modifying the Depression-era Glass-Steagall legislation that sought to regulate an out-of-control banking industry. A key proviso of the bill — which prohibited banks from offering combined commercial banking, investment, and insurance services — was overturned. This permitted big banks to set up investment and insurance departments, greatly enhancing the power of these institutions to act as they pleased — a factor in the current recession.

Another deregulation, this time in 2004 during the Bush Administration, gravely aggravated the subprime fiasco a couple of years later. It was granted by the Security and Exchange Administration after five of America's major investment banks — Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Morgan Stanley and Bear Stearns — argued for exemption from a regulation limiting the amount of debt such banks could accumulate. By the beginning of this year, four of the firms were in debt for about $31 for every $1 of stockholder investment. The fifth company, Goldman Sachs, had a ratio — or leverage , as it is called — of about $24 to 1$. The bailout was engineered by Treasury Secretary Paulson who in 2004, as chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs, argued for lifting the debt ceiling.

The second strategic decision was intended to destroy three decades of a post-war social compact between capital and labor engineered at the end of the liberal Roosevelt Administration’s New Deal. In the thinking of America's leading capitalists and their minions in the political system, the labor movement had gained too much power, and working people had become, in effect, fat and sassy.

The upshot was that the corporations, banks and other business sectors came to an informal understanding about the need for a new social reality vis-à-vis working people. This meant, in effect, trade unions were to be crippled by additional anti-labor laws, business was to cut job benefits and wages (severing the correlation between compensation and rising productivity in the process), and Congress was to avoid passing important new social programs benefiting the people.

This program has been quite successful, assisted by the atrophy of the center-left in the Democratic Party, leaving a lopsided political spectrum in the U.S. that extends from center to right, without an influential left to challenge the anti-worker social compact and runaway businesses.

The labor movement was hit hard by these circumstances, declining in size and clout, and now playing little role on the national level except as a liberal support vehicle for the Democrats. Until the unions regain their strength and show willingness to flex muscle in the struggle with capital it will remain difficult to wage a serious fightback on behalf of the nation's working people or to take political advantage of the contradictions presently besetting the economy and society.

Since lower wages mean less consumer spending, the business and financial class encouraged the accumulation of consumer debt, facilitating spending through the proliferation of credit cards, additional family wage earners, and other measures. In the early 1990s, American household debt was a quite high 80% of disposable income. Today it is more than 130% — another reason why the American people are so vulnerable to the painful vicissitudes of the system's inevitable periodic "corrections."

And "now comes the credit card crisis," reported the New York Times in a front page article Oct. 29. "After years of flooding Americans with credit card offers and sky-high credit lines, lenders are sharply curtailing both, just as an eroding economy squeezes consumers. The pullback … threatens an already beleaguered banking industry with another wave of heavy losses after an era in which it reaped near record gains from the business of easy credit that it helped create." The reason? "Lenders wrote off an estimated $21 billion in bad credit card loans in the first half of 2008… [and] the industry stands to lose at least another $55 billion over the next year and a half."

The recession will worsen, perhaps significantly so, and it probably will take years for the U.S. to recover, during which time Washington and the 50 state governments will impose severe budget cutbacks in all programs that service the needs of the people.

New York Democratic Gov. David Paterson said Oct. 28 that the state budget deficit will reach $47 billion over three years. Big program cuts are coming, and significant cutbacks are expected. Testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee in Washington the next day, Paterson asked for state aid in these terms: "Just like the financial services industry, we need a partner in the federal government in order to help stave off an impending financial calamity and stabilize our fiscal condition."

Unemployment throughout the country will increase markedly. New York State will lose 160,000 private sector jobs in the next 14 months. The nation's pensions will further degrade ($2 trillion in pension savings has been lost in the past 15 months), poverty will rise, and spreading hunger will haunt the poor.

According to an Oct. 28 speech in Augusta, Maine, by Maura Daly, a vice president of the nonprofit Feeding America (formally Second Harvest), "poverty is a disease and hunger is a chronic symptom. One in eight Americans are at risk for going hungry." The demand upon the nation's system of food banks recently increased by 15%, she said, "and 80% of them are not able to adequately serve their communities."

Confronted with this crisis, the first order of business for the White House, Congress and the political structure — which primarily function as an executive committee overseeing the good health and success of the economic apparatus and its main beneficiaries — is to rescue the capitalist system, and to bail out the bankers, financial gamblers and corporate giants.

That's where the Bush Administration and Congress is investing the $700 billion it has just extracted from the pockets of American working families, who will get very little if anything in return — proof extraordinaire of the inherent inequality of the U.S. socio-economic system.

Paulson and Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, went public with the bailout plan in late September, based on using most of the $700 billion to buy nearly worthless mortgage-backed securities — a faulty scheme that has been largely dropped after the money was appropriated. The original three-page proposal contained few details to support their contention that, in effect, the U.S. was simply going to keel over unless funds were immediately injected into the credit market to alleviate what is now called "Wall Street’s biggest crisis since the Great Depression." The plan quickly gained the approval of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and presidential candidates Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain.

The House voted against the measure the first time, partly because it violated the laissez faire ethos so dear to a certain sector of the congressional right wing (they called it "socialism"), but principally because of massive constituent opposition to bailing out greedy banks and investors. Congress insisted on changing the measure to mollify public antipathy, ultimately adding another 400-plus pages with several big modifications but leaving intact the $700 billion to repair the damage caused by the very system that was being saved. The proposal was approved by the Senate 74-25 Oct. 1, and by the House 263-171 two days later. Commenting on the fact that the appropriation was intended to benefit the bankers and financiers to the exclusion of those who will suffer most — the working class and middle class — Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), a consistent center-leftist, excoriated the measure as "the largest single act of class warfare in the modern history of this country."

Announcing his second vote against this historic subsidy for big business, et al, on Oct. 3, Hudson Valley liberal Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) declared: "The $700 billion plan brought to the House floor for a vote today is far too big and ignores the pressing need to directly help working and middle class Americans make ends meet and survive these tumultuous times. The measure also fails to reinstate any real regulatory authority over the financial markets to prevent Wall Street from abusing the system again and creating a similar crisis in the future."

Instead of an immediate turnaround upon passage of this huge bailout, share prices on the domestic and international stock markets continued to fall after a nanosecond-brief rise. In a concerted action Oct. 8, six central banks, including the Federal Reserve, reduced interest rates by a half point — but the markets continued to fall, as they are still doing at this writing.

In an important step Oct. 13, Paulson and Bernanke executed a significant course correction by putting aside the plan to purchase toxic mortgages. Instead, they decided to follow the example of British and other European governments by investing the first bailout allotment of $250 billion directly into the banking industry to encourage bankers to resume providing credit, mainly to other banks — a necessity for the smooth running of American business. Half the investment went to the nation's nine largest banks, in return for preferred stock; the rest will be directed where necessary among a number of smaller banks.

Actually, a number of these banks already had sufficient cash to resume major lending, but were disinclined to service other banks, fearing they would lie about their ability to repay the loan. They evidently didn't trust their own banking system. The infusion of government money was supposed to provide banks with the confidence to lend to other banks. So far the lending has been extremely slow, and it is suspected that many banks had other uses for the money.

The financial press suggests that another, unexpressed, reason the Treasury invested in the banks was to encourage some of them to merge and to acquire other healthy banks to consolidate the entire banking system in fewer hands. "The bailout was sold as a way to spur loans," an angry N.Y. Times editorial noted Oct. 29. "If that never was — or no longer is — the primary aim, Congress and the public need to know that. Lawmakers should not release the second installment — $350 billion — until they have answers and guarantees that the bailout money will be spent in ways that put the public interest first."

While strengthening the banks received general support from politicians and the mass media since it contains an eventual payback from the equities, it contains important shortcomings, the main one being that the government will not have a seat on the board of directors and will hold only non-voting shares in the banks. According to an editorial in the Oct. 14 N.Y. Times, "This means the banks' current boards and current management — the same people who got the country into this mess — will still be making all the decisions. The Treasury also seems far too sympathetic to the banks' pleas for leniency when it comes to restrictions on the pay of bonuses of executives at banks that are bailed out…. The Treasury should also insist on stepped up government supervision to ensure that sound lending resumes and that reckless lending does not."

Another major failing is that the government, in making its investment, did not instruct the banking sector and all mortgage lenders to take steps to reduce foreclosures by modifying loan payback terms, including the reduction in interest rates. Nor did Paulson insist, as he could have, that the banks not use bailout money to pay dividends to stockholders, among the largest of whom are bank officials. At this stage, about 20% of the cash infusion may go for this purpose.

Allegations from sectors of the right wing that Washington's so-called "nationalizations" amount to "socialism" are absurd. As Otto Spengler wrote in Asia Times Sept. 23, " If America is to adopt socialism, why not have socialism for the poor, rather than for the rich? Why should American households that earn $50,000 a year subsidize Goldman Sachs partners who earn $5 million a year?"

John Bellamy Forster, the Marxist editor of Monthly Review, also dismissed the nationalization-equals-socialism argument. In an article Oct. 15 in MRZine.com he described the Treasury Department's investment in banks as "just another desperate stop-gap measure aimed at preventing a full-scale debt deflation. But as a sign of the total collapse of the 'U.S. model' of 'free market' finance capitalism, the moral and political consequences are vast."

In an article in Znet the same day, left intellectual Noam Chomsky argued that the roots of the present crisis go far deeper than to the collapse of the housing bubble. "In part," he said, "they lie in the triumph of financial liberalization [deregulation and so on] in the past 30 years — that is, freeing the markets as much as possible from government regulation…. Financial liberalization has effects well beyond the economy. It has long been understood that it is a powerful weapon against democracy. Free capital movement creates what some have called a 'virtual parliament' of investors and lenders, who closely monitor government programs and 'vote' against them if they are considered irrational: [i.e.] for the benefit of people, rather than concentrated private power. Investors and lenders can 'vote' by capital flight, attacks on currencies and other devices offered by financial liberalization."

The New York Times noted that representatives of the nine banks were at first dubious about Paulson's proposal, but "as they heard more, some of the bankers began to realize how attractive the program was for them."

Paulson has come under considerable criticism from a number of influential bankers and investors for his initial handling of the crisis. His decision to bail out some investment firms but to allow the global giant Lehman Brothers to go bankrupt was condemned by many because the fall of Lehman was a factor in triggering the crash. He also came under fire for wasting valuable time by first proposing to buy out the bad mortgage debts — a measure that did nothing to regain Wall Street's lost confidence — before deciding to invest directly into the banking system.

Despite the Bush Administration's infusion of money into the economy, the stock market remains volatile and very cautious. As a New York Times economic analyst wrote recently: "The malaise on Wall Street simply will not lift."

President Bush will host what is termed an emergency summit meeting with a score of foreign leaders in Washington Nov. 15 to discuss means of coping with present and future economic downturns. Also attending will be the heads of the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and other international institutions. The ANSWER Coalition and other groups will mount a protest outside the White House the evening of Friday, Nov. 14, during a posh presidential dinner for the delegates, and throughout Saturday, Nov. 15, near the meeting venue, which is to be announced.

So far in all the government's calculations, the needs of the masses of people are distinctly secondary to those of the banks, the stock market and business. The people in their many millions are suffering as a result of the economic crisis, from losing homes or jobs, to going without healthcare or medicine, to sinking into deeper poverty, to foregoing a higher education or cutting back on food and other needs. It's rumored an administration program is on the way to meet some of these needs. The Democrats are reportedly putting together a second economic stimulus package following Bush's initiative earlier this year. The Fed's Bernanke said Oct. 20 that he supports a second stimulus effort.

Presidential candidates Obama and McCain have both put forward proposals for dealing with the foreclosure crisis that are more extensive than the Bush Administration has offered. Obama's plan is better than McCain's, as is his entire domestic program, but that will have to await his entry into the White House in January. However, neither center/center-right Democrat Obama nor neoconservative rightist Republican McCain has evidenced the slightest inclination to seriously bail out not only the immediate victims of this growing recession but the majority of the American people who have seen their living standards erode for decades while a privileged minority with great wealth and political power rules the land.

"American workers need a financial bailout" is the title of an article in New York's daily Newsday Oct. 7 by leftist economics Professor Michael Zweig at Stony Brook University on Long Island. He wrote: "It's time to turn immediate attention to the expanding crisis on Main Street by adopting an economic stimulus package that will help to reverse the recession we are slipping into and restore the jobs we have lost through most of this year. Congress should take $220 billion of the $700 billion it has set aside for the current crisis and apply it to those who need it most: the millions of economically distressed workers across the country who have gotten absolutely nothing from the 'rescue package' so far….

"Economic stimulus should also come from infrastructure projects. New and repaired bridges, roads, ports and rail lines will provide long-term support for private-sector economic growth once they've been completed, as well as offer short-term stimulus from the jobs and income they generate as they are built. But infrastructure projects take a year or more to begin, so other stimulus measures must come first."

There undoubtedly will be efforts in the coming year to ameliorate some of the unsavory and obviously failed aspects of the free-market, neoliberal economic project, as happened in response to the Great Depression and earlier crises. New regulations in the banking and financial systems will be forthcoming, particularly now that right wing libertarian Alan Greenspan finally acknowledged one of his main mistakes during questioning before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Oct. 23. He declared:

“Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself included, are in a state of shocked disbelief…. I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such as that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms." In other words the notion of self-regulating financial markets is a myth.

As chairman of the Federal Reserve for 18 years under Presidents Bush I, Bill Clinton, and Bush II, retiring in 2006, Greenspan fought consistently for deregulation and opposed any effort by Congress to put restraints on derivatives, arguing that "derivatives markets … have been a major contributor to our economy's ability to respond to the stresses and challenges of the last two years. This [congressional] proposal would limit this contribution, thereby increasing the vulnerability of our economy to potential future stresses."

New and tougher regulations are desirable, of course. The problem, as in the past, is that as soon as a recession or depression is over, free-market conservatives start chipping away at them and the deregulation cycle starts anew because there is no strong left political force to block therm.

When he took office in 1981, far-rightist President Ronald Reagan — a firm believer in the "magic of the marketplace" who often spoke of the "invisible hand of the market" as though it was attached to the wrist of God — famously declared that "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

This conservative mantra continues to echo in the gated mansions of wealth, corporate boardrooms, marbled banks, gilded markets, the White House and much of Congress, but with an interesting variation during times of trouble: As the bailout demonstrates, government miraculously becomes their "solution" when the inevitable contradictions of capital begin to sharply cut profit margins and threaten the goose that produces their golden egg.

Now the automotive industry, and insurance as well, are clamoring for part of the bailout money, and they probably will get it. Both Chrysler and General Motors face great losses, have opened merger talks, and seek government aid. In a statement Oct. 27, G.M. spokesman Greg Martin declared: "We believe the federal government should consider using all the tools available to it, including some recently enacted, to support industries that are in distress and that are essential to the U.S. economy." Ford, too, is losing money. The motor industry has been set back by the recession, but its unwillingness over the years to produce smaller, more fuel-efficient models to compete against foreign carmakers in the American market was a major factor as well.

In an Oct. 26 article in MRZine, University of Massachusetts at Amherst economics Professor Rick Wolff wrote that "The next president will arrive at an historic moment when most of the business leadership will be looking to (if not also begging) Washington for massive intervention to save the private capitalist economy. These conditions may then ripen a major realignment within U.S. politics."

In our view — accepting Reagan's cadence but changing his words — we think that the current economic disaster shows that "capitalism is not the solution to our problem; capitalism is the problem." And we suspect that many more people these days in the U.S. and around the world are beginning to contemplate this particular heresy, whether as progressive reformists, social-democrats or socialists of one kind or another.

Real change is in the air, and we don't mean the basically empty rhetoric of "change" so prominent this election season. The dreadful, failed Bush era is ending with a bang — the recession — after eight years that seemed to last as long as the hundreds of years it took the Roman Empire to decline and finally fall.

People want change for many reasons, not just because of the recession and the subsequent discrediting of conservative economic nostrums. For many it's also about the continual unjust wars for hegemony, and the preposterous military budget; for others it may be stagnant wages and the ever widening gap between rich and poor, or the pitiful response from our ruling parties to the impending environmental catastrophe, and the government's indifference to America's crumbling infrastructure. For yet others it's regressive taxation, the end of welfare "as we know it," the paucity of programs benefiting working people, the anti-labor laws, the weakening of affirmative action, and the absence of a mass left party to contest with the two parties of the right and center.

According to University of Massachusetts economics Professor Robert Pollin during an interview by journalist Mike Whitney in CounterPunch Oct. 16, "Whether or not this crisis will mean the end of the neoliberal era will depend on political mobilization — specifically, how successful the left will be in building coalitions behind an agenda that combines egalitarianism with a stable financial system…. Wall Street has now been discredited to a degree unprecedented since the 1930s. That should give the left serious political leverage….. [W]e are in the midst of a major historic turning point, equivalent to the 1930s New Deal, or the emergence in 1979/80 of full-tilt neoliberalism under Thatcher in the UK and Reagan in the U.S."

One of the main disputes between conservative capitalism and socialism is the concept of national economic planning. The right wing shuns such planning, leaving to the free market, and the left considers it an imperative for the rational organization of the economy. But liberal capitalist economist James K. Galbraith, writing in the November Harper's, easily crossed over and seems to suggest others should as well: "Planning has been a dirty word in America for decades…. But without public planning, who is in charge? Lobbyists who represent the private planning of the great corporations. The public interest ceases to exist, and the public sector becomes nothing more than a trough at which private interests come to feed."

The positive aspect of these distressing and conservative times is that objective conditions — i.e., the situation in our country based on a realistic assessment of economic, social and political factors — appear favorable for a new period of significant social reform. Today's iniquities and excesses of capital bring to mind the conditions that led to the reforms of the Gilded Age (late 1800s), the Progressive Era (early 1900s) and the New Deal reforms of the Great Depression (1930s).

However, subjective conditions for the needed change — i.e., the status of the progressive and left movements (including the unions) and their collective level of consciousness and willingness to unify and struggle — are not yet sufficiently mature to take maximum advantage of the objective opportunities for social transformation in the near future. This could improve if currently powerless center-left progressives either mount a sharp showdown struggle within their centrist Democratic Party or decamp to a third political entity of the left, and if the fractured left were to unify around certain specific interim reforms while simultaneously pursuing their longer range goals.

The important thing for those who seek a better, more equal society and a world at peace — which is probably the perspective of almost all of our readers — is to keep up the struggle for positive, far-reaching social change, even when it appears little progress is being made, as now. History has a way of taking a long time to change, then doing so with seeming abruptness when objective and subjective conditions are aligned. And a good part of the change is because many disparate and unnoticed people and movements were constantly at work the entire time, each contributing to what ultimately becomes social transformation in a matter of years or generations.

————————————————

5. THE NEWS IN BRIEF

[Editor's Note: Nathan Rosenblum will be writing this column of short news items in future issues of the Activist Newsletter. He is a senior at Mount St. Mary College in Newburgh.]

MARIJUANA ARRESTS UP: The FBI’s Uniform Crime Report indicated 872,721 people were arrested last year on charges related to marijuana, almost 90% of which were for nothing more than possession. According to Paul Armentano, deputy director of the National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws (NORML), this is the largest annual number of arrests for marijuana in history. Arrests have doubled since 1993. There are currently over 40,000 people in state or federal prison in the United States for offenses relating to marijuana. In mid-October, the number of marijuana arrests in U.S. history reached 20 million. A NORML study three years ago determined that nearly 75% of those arrested were under 30 years of age. Some 25% were 18 or younger. The organization notes that marijuana — unlike alcohol and tobacco — is comparatively safe and that component compounds such as cannabinol have been found to have numerous beneficial properties in treating illnesses including cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson disease, and diabetes. The racist nature of the government's “anti-drug” campaign is well known with African Americans being among the most targeted sector of the population.

MAMMALS FACE DANGER OF EXTINCTION: A new report recently released from the International Union for Conservation of Nature indicates that one in four mammals may be at risk of extinction, predominantly due to hunting and destruction of habitat, although global warming and collisions with ships and fishing nets have a substantial effect as well . Of the 4,651 known species of mammals, 1,139 are under threat. Since the beginning of the 16th century, it is estimated that 76 species of mammal have become extinct demonstrating the dangerous rate at which this current crisis is progressing. New mammals have been discovered in increasing numbers in recent years and there is a major concern among scientists that it may not be possible to study these in great detail should they begin to decline rapidly. Only about 5% of mammals are believed to be increasing in number.

INEQUALITY KILLS: A recent report from the World Health Organization (WHO) states that social injustice and income inequality lead to health inequality that "really is a matter of life and death." This applies, according to the report, to inequality between countries and within the same country. In the United States, for example, the report concluded that "886,202 deaths would have been averted between 1991 and 2000 if mortality rates between white and African Americans were equalized." Only a few poor countries and regions were noted as providing good and equitable care for their populations, including Cuba with its renowned, and free, medical care, and in the Indian southwest state of state of Kerala, with a population of about 32 million, which has for decades been governed by the Indian Communist Party (Marxist). The vast majority of the world's poor, which includes billions of people, live without adequate shelter and clean drinking water, according to the report, and this leads to early deaths. The report and background material is located at http://www.who.int/social_determinants/final_report/en/index.html.

MUMIA'S APPEAL IS REJECTED: The U.S. Supreme Court this month rejected a petition for a new trial for Mumia Abu-Jamal, 53, perhaps America's best known political prisoner. The former journalist, once a youthful member of the Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, has long been a voice for social justice from his death row cell in Pennsylvania. Mumia, as he is known to many millions of supporters in the U.S. and around the world (Parisians even named a street after him), was sentenced to death 27 years ago, after being convicted of killing police officer Daniel Faulkner. He steadfastly denies participation in the crime, and some witnesses have recanted their original testimony — a factor behind the 2001 reversal of his death sentence, but he remains on death row awaiting a new state resentencing hearing. The courts could reimpose the death penalty or keep Mumia behind bars for life. The Philadelphia police department has a long history of racism, and the judge at his first trial made overtly racist remarks. While in prison, Mumia has written books, created his own radio program, and has published many articles on domestic and world affairs for left and progressive publications. Mumia's radio broadcasts are available at http://www.prisonradio.org/mumia.htm. Other websites with background are at http://www.freemumia.com/, and http://www.freemumia.org/.

COMBAT FORCE DEPLOYED BACK HOME.: Beginning in October, and for the first time, a U.S. Army combat unit is being stationed within the U.S. to prevent “civil unrest” as part of "homeland defense." While it is being touted that these soldiers will be used to respond to disasters and assist in search and rescue, inside sources paint a more ominous picture. According to an article in Army Times, a Brigade Combat Team of the Army's Third Division “may be called to help with civil unrest and crowd control.” The Army claims the soldiers are being supplied with non-lethal weapons. They are, however, equipped with electric stun guns called tasers, which are extremely painful and have caused deaths. Deploying active duty soldiers for action in the United States violates the Posse Comitatus Act, passed in 1778.

————————————————

6. THE UN BACKS CUBA ONCE AGAIN

The word "hubris," according to Webster's New World Dictionary, means "wanton insolence or arrogance resulting from excessive pride." In other references it means "an act of transgression evidently based on overbearing pride."

What word, especially if it's imperial hubris, could more aptly define a country that repeatedly — for 17 consecutive years — refused to heed the criticism of virtually the entire rest of the world? This criticism was hurled at Washington once again Oct. 29 by 98.4% of the member nations in United Nations General Assembly.

The U.S. was one of three countries that voted "No" against 185 countries that voted "yes" on a measure demanding that America discontinue its nearly half-century economic embargo of Cuba.

Joining the U.S. was Israel, which has voted against Cuba every year since the first UN vote on the matter in 1993, and Palau, a 177-square mile island in the Pacific that's a virtual U.S. dependency. The combined population of the three allies is about 310 million people, thumbing their collective nose at the remaining world population of more than 6.3 billion people.

To us this seems the very definition of hubris, particularly since the small country on the receiving end of Washington's antagonism never threatened or harmed the U.S. or other countries in any way. Havana's armed forces are relatively small and purely defensive. Cuba doesn't reveal its annual military budget but the highest estimate we've seen from U.S. sources (and its likely too high) is about what the U.S. spends in just two days in Iraq — $1.4 billion. The White House calls Cuba a "terrorist" country, but we know of no act of terrorism committed by the Havana government.

It's the other way around. Since the victory of the Cuban Revolution on Jan. 1, 1959, the U.S. has organized a failed invasion of the island, hundreds of assassination attempts against Cuban government leaders, and subversion of all kinds including crop destruction. Washington also winked at the 1976 terror bombing of a Cuban civilian airliner in which all 73 people on board were killed, and gave protection in America to some of those responsible.

Perhaps the worst harm done Cuba by the neighboring colossus to the north has been the political and economic embargo initiated in 1960 by Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower, and broadened in 1962 by Democratic President John F. Kennedy. In 1992, Congress passed the "Cuban Democracy Act," introduced by New Jersey Democrat Robert Torricelli, that extended the blockade to bar subsidies of U.S. firms abroad from trading with Cuba. In 1996, Democratic President Bill Clinton signed into law the vindictive "Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act," otherwise known as the Helms-Burton bill, which in effect bars foreign companies from trading with Cuba.

According to Cuban Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque, the embargo has cost Cuba over the years about $224 billion in today's dollars, a huge amount for a developing country with a population of 11.4 million people. Pope John Paul strongly backed ending the embargo when he visited Cuba in 1998, encouraging the people of the world to "take practical steps to bring about changes."

The U. S. has long barred most American citizens from traveling to Cuba. President Bush has toughened the restrictions by preventing some two million Cuban-Americans from traveling to Cuba for visits to family more than once every three years. Bush has also increased funding to anti-Cuban groups in the U.S. and to anti-government elements within Cuba.

At this stage, White House policy remains fixated on regime-change in Cuba, replacing the communist government with an administration subordinate to Yankee domination, as existed some 60 years from 1898 when the U.S. seized Cuba from Spain until popular forces led by Fidel Castro ousted the Washington-backed dictator Fulgencio Batista and liberated the island from America's embrace.

The U.S. election won't bring much change in Washington's Cuba policy, which is also known as the South Florida policy because of the way national politicians cater to the desires of the Cuban-American community quartered there. A victory by Republican John McCain will be a continuation of the Bush Administration's subversion and enmity. A victory for Democrat Barack Obama will essentially be a continuation of the Clinton policy of somewhat less heavy-handed subversion and enmity. Obama is slightly more forthcoming than McCain, but he pledges to keep the embargo and travel restrictions on American citizens until the Cuban government, in effect, renounces socialism.

One of Obama's sharpest and continually repeated criticisms of the Havana government is the plight of Cuba's political prisoners. "The road to freedom for all Cubans," Obama says, "must begin with justice for Cuba's political prisoners." A couple of months ago he said he would maintain sanctions against Cuba until it makes substantial changes, "beginning with the freeing of all political prisoners."

After nearly 50 years of anti-Cuban propaganda, the American people probably believe Cuba is one huge prison. Obama must know better, since he is sure to have heard of Amnesty International. According to Amnesty, which is no friend of the Havana government, there are approximately 58 prisoners of conscience in Cuba today, and thirteen others who are serving their sentences outside prison because of health concerns.

Much of what the U.S. government reports about Cuba is gravely distorted, from allegations about "terrorism" to the implication that the island is sinking under the weight of its prisoners of conscience. Most of the rest of the world sees through this, and is also aware of Washington's imperial hubris, which is why it never misses the opportunity to tweak the nose of Uncle Sam in the annual lopsided UN sanctions vote.
——
Note that Jackson Browne has just recorded an unusual new song about Cuba. Go to the "Check It Out" column below to access the music.

————————————————

7. THE COST OF 'BOOTS ON THE GROUND'
By Jon Basil Utley
Foreign Policy in Focus (Oct. 9)

It takes half a million dollars per year to maintain each sergeant in combat in Iraq. Thanks to a Senate committee inquiry, an authoritative government study finally details the costs of keeping boots on the ground. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), in its report Contractors' Support of U.S. Operations in Iraq, compared the costs of maintaining a Blackwater professional armed guard versus the U.S. military providing such services itself. Both came in at about $500,000 per person per year.

News reports of the study have largely focused on the total cost of U.S. contractors. The 190,000 contractors in Iraq and neighboring countries, from cooks to truck drivers, have cost U.S. taxpayers $100 billion from the start of the war through the end of 2008. Overlooked in this media coverage has been the sheer cost per soldier of keeping the army in Iraq. This per-soldier cost is more comprehensible and alarming than the rather abstract aggregate figure.

Whether in maintaining U.S. soldiers or private-sector contractors, the costs of occupation are enormous. With no end in sight, unending foreign wars do have one clear consequence: the eventual bankruptcy of the United States.

The cost of a sergeant is complicated to calculate. His or her actual cash pay is $51,000-$69,000 per year, which puts sergeant pay in the middle of the pay grade, according to another CBO report, Evaluating Military Compensation. Non-cash benefits – pensions, medical care, child care, housing, commissaries – likely double this amount, even during peacetime. Pensions are the biggest ticket item. The average retirement benefit for a soldier or sailor who stays in for 20 years equals $2.6 million, if he or she lives to the age of 77 (though most soldiers don't stay in the service long enough to get this benefit).

A major portion of the $500,000 figure comes from the "support staff" and rotation system that allows for recuperation, training, and accumulated vacations after each year in combat. It's allocated on the basis of one or two sergeants in the United States backing up each one overseas. The CBO report does not, however, factor in bonuses for re-enlistment, which offers tens of thousands of dollars for soldiers with special skills. Nor does the report calculate operating or equipment costs per soldier. The $500,000 figure applies to personnel costs alone.

"Support staff" refers to headquarters management and specialized skills supervising the enlisted men. To make the comparison the CBO identified a hypothetical Army unit that could deliver roughly the same caliber of men as the Blackwater guards. This "would require about one-third of an Army light infantry battalion – a rifle company plus one-third of the battalion's headquarters company." This support staff would "include not only command elements, but also medics, scouts, snipers, and others who functionally correspond to some of Blackwater's supervisory and specialized personnel."

Contractors, meanwhile, are increasingly filling the roles once played by U.S. Army personnel. In terms of total costs, the CBO points out that there are about an equal number of contractors as soldiers, the highest proportion for any war in American history. However, only 20% are U.S. citizens. And most contractors, for example kitchen personnel, are paid much less than the guards who earn $1,222 per day. The report also notes that their contracts allow for much more flexibility and shorter assignments than what regular Army soldiers cost the government.

The studies are only for personnel. They don't include the long-term costs of care for disabled and handicapped veterans. They don't include the costs of replacing or maintaining equipment. Nor do they factor in the costs for allies' supplies and training or the cost of interest on all the borrowed billions used to fight the war. That's how Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes reached the astronomical cost estimate approaching $3 trillion for Iraq and Afghanistan. That study estimated actual yearly cost per soldier in the field at $400,000, a number comparable to the CBO estimate for sergeants.

Perhaps the accountants who did the CBO study were themselves surprised at the costs of fielding an American army. Their objective was only to analyze the costs of hiring guards at $500,000 a year, compared to fielding soldiers. The study only incidentally shows the individual costs of American occupation forces facing resistance.

Given these costs, which are only part of a military budget and other defense expenditures that approach a trillion dollars, it's easy to see how the wars are bankrupting America. Washington has borrowed the money, and the impact can already be felt in the dollar's declining value and America's deteriorating infrastructure. The national debt, since the war started, has increased from six to nine trillion dollars. Ancient Rome simply taxed its citizens into ruin and clipped the coinage to pay for its armies. Higher taxes, a lower standard of living, and unending wars will drive us to the same end.

————————————————

8. CHECK IT OUT

GOING DOWN TO CUBA: Here's a fine new song on video by Jackson Browne expressing opposition to the U.S.. economic blockade of Cuba, entitled "Going Down to Cuba" and first performed about a month ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-72fOcOwKc4.

SEVEN DEADLY PLASTICS: Goods made of plastic are a daily part of human life, but plastic can also be a danger to human life. Have you ever wondered about those little numbers from 1 through 7 on the bottoms of your plastic food and drink containers? Here is your chance to find out what they stand for through a quite entertaining but disturbing four-minute music video featuring The Princes of Serendip, a Mid-Hudson singing group including T.G. Vinini who wrote the song "Seven Deadly Plastics." It's at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IP-oC-0hOC0, and at the group's website, http://www.princesofserendip.info/.

McCAIN'S RAGE: We've always known the Republican candidate was a hothead, but this four minute video, titled "McCain's Rage is a National Security Concern," depicts him as an individual with an extreme anger problem who shouldn't be allowed near the nuclear trigger: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAyK-enrF1g.

Oct. 27, 2008, Issue #140
ACTIVIST CALENDAR
PART 2 of HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER
jacdon@earthlink.net, http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/
——————————————

Editor's Note

1. The Part 1 news and articles portion of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter will be emailed in a few days.

2. You may also access this calendar and past newsletters at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/. Spam filters on mass mailings are getting more sophisticated so add our email address, above, to your address book to avoid the chance having the newsletter blocked.

—————————————

Tuesday, Oct. 28, NEW PALTZ (SUNY campus): A free public screening of the documentary "Beyond Elections: Redefining Democracy in the Americas" will take place at 5 p.m. at the CSB Auditorium. Filmmakers Michael Fox and Sílvia Leindecker will answer questions after the showing. The film discusses various forms of democracy in the Americas, particularly in Latin America in the post-dictatorship era when countries are also breaking away from U.S. hegemony. Information, (845) 257-2697. About the film, http://www.beyondelections.com. Campus map, http://www.newpaltz.edu/map/.

Wednesday, Oct. 29, GUILDERLAND: The documentary "Unconstitutional — The War on Our Civil Liberties" will be shown at 6:45 p.m. at the Public Library, 2228 Western Ave. The film, made in cooperation with the ACLU, "details how the civil liberties of American citizens and immigrants have been negatively affected since 9/11 and the passage of the USA Patriot Act."
This free public event is sponsored by Guilderland Neighbors For Peace. Information, webmaster@neighbors4peace.org, (518) 464-6788, http://guilderland.neighbors4peace.org.

Wednesday, Oct. 29, NEW PALTZ (SUNY campus): A panel discussion on "The Electoral Politics of Gender, Race, Class and Age" will be held 3:30-5:30 p.m. at the Honors Center in College Hall on campus. Speakers at this free public event sponsored by the Women's Studies Program include the New Paltz Professors Suzanne Kelly, Gowri Parameswaran, Danielle Wallace and historian and author Rickie Solinger. Information, (845) 257-2975.

Sunday, Nov. 2, NEW PALTZ: Joel Kovel, a professor of social studies at Bard, political activist, and author, will speak on "The Crisis in the Environment and the U.S. Elections" at a public meeting in New Paltz Village Hall. Kovel is the author of "The Enemy of Nature," an analysis of the relationship between the current practices of the capitalist economy and the gathering environmental disaster. He will examine the environmental positions of both Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain, and also discuss his own views about what must be done to avoid an ecological meltdown. Village Hall on Plattekill Ave., one block south of Main St. (Rt. 299), a mile or so west of Thruway exit 18. The meeting starts promptly at 6 p.m. A potluck dinner begins at 5 p.m. for those who wish to partake. This free public event is sponsored by the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project. Information and directions, (845) 255-5779 or email jacdon@earthlink.net.

Sunday, Nov. 2, NEWBURGH: Here's an event that supports 16 workers at a local factory here who were fired last month for seeking representation from the Teamsters Union. The majority of workers at Concept Packaging are immigrant women, some of whom have worked for over 20 years, rarely earning more than the minimum wage. Workers are involved in mixing, bottling and packaging toxic items. Many employees work in enclosed areas with no ventilation. Workers have experienced symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, bloody noses, asthma, chronic flu-like symptoms, and dizziness. A film showing and benefit for the workers will be held at 2:30 p.m. at the Church of the Good Shepherd, 271 Broadway at Mill St. The film is the Emmy award winning documentary "Made in LA," the true story of three Latina immigrants working in Los Angeles garment sweatshops as they embark on a three-year odyssey to win basic labor protections from a trendy clothing retailer. If you cannot attend but wish to send a donation, mail checks payable to the Rural & Migrant Ministry Inc. (with "Fired Newburgh Workers Fund" in the memo line) to Rural & Migrant Ministry Inc., PO Box 4757, Poughkeepsie, NY 12602. Sponsored by the Workers' Rights Law Center of New York Inc. and Teamsters Union Local 445. Information, (845) 331-6615 or pschell@wnylc.com.

Monday, Nov. 3, POUGHKEEPSIE: The Dutchess County Peace Coalition meets 7-9 p.m. at Unitarian Fellowship, 67 S. Randolph Ave. to discuss planning of antiwar and anti-recruitment activities. Information: (845) 876-7906, http://www.dutchesspeace.org.

Monday, Nov. 3, OLD CHATHAM: The film "Constantine's Sword" will be shown at 7 p.m. at the Powell House Quaker Conference and Retreat Center, 524 Pitt Hall Rd., off County Rt. 13. This free public film is about James Carroll, a former Catholic priest who confronts the past and reveals the roots of religiously inspired violence and war. Sponsored by the Old Chatham Quaker Meeting. A moderated discussion will follow. Information, (518) 766-2992. Directions, http://www.powellhouse.org

Tuesday, Nov. 4, NATIONWIDE: Election Day. Polls in New York are open from 6 a.m.-9 p.m. Check to see if you are registered, and find your polling place at, https://voterlookup.elections.state.ny.us/votersearch.aspx.

Thursday Nov. 6, NEW PALTZ: A free public showing of Estella Bravo's biographical documentary film "Fidel — The Untold Story" will be held 7-9 p.m. at the Elting Library, 93 Main St. at North Front St. Fidel Castro has been the target of criticism and attempts at regime-change from 10 U.S. presidents since he led the Cuban Revolution in 1959. This film will present a side of the Cuban leader and his accomplishments largely unknown to the American people. The New York Daily News calls it "A sympathetic, convincing and even moving portrait of the charismatic Cuban leader, guaranteed to be highly controversial." In addition to Castro, the film includes appearances by Harry Belafonte, Alice Walker, Angela Davis, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., Ramsey Clark, Wayne Smith, Rep. Charles Rangel and a former CIA agent. This event is sponsored by the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project. Information and directions, jacdon@earthlink.net.

Thursday, Nov. 6, DELMAR: By now, the election will be over (at last!) — so let's talk, says Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace, which is sponsoring "a discussion of election results, the economic situation, the peace movement, and the future of the country. There will be an open mic session at the end. Bring your poetry, songs, and your ideas for future organizing." It begins at 7 p.m. at the Bethlehem Public Library, 451 Delaware Ave.
Information, (518) 466-1192, tquaif@yahoo.com, http://www.BethlehemForPeace.org.


Friday, Nov. 7, POUGHKEEPSIE: The documentary "Life and Debt" will be screened at The Muddy Cup, 305 Main St, at 7:30 p.m. Part of the "Give Peace a Film" series, sponsored by the Dutchess Peace Coalition, this film depicts the hidden world behind Jamaica's tourist paradise. Audience discussion to follow. Information: http://www.dutcesspeace.org.

Saturday, Nov. 8, RHINEBECK: The annual Mid-Hudson/Larreynaga Sister City Dance begins at 8 p.m. at the Church of the Messiah Parish Hall, 6436 Montgomery St. (Rt. 9 one block north of the four-corner stoplight, near Chestnut St.). The band Sonando will be playing. This event is to raise money for the schoolchildren of Larreynaga, Nicaragua. The Sister City Project has been in existence since 1988, sending delegations from the Hudson Valley to provide this small village with medical, school and financial support. The cost is $20 per person, or $35 for couples. Information, (845) 876-7906, fnagel@earthlink.net, http://www.mhsistercity.org.


Saturday, Nov. 8, NEWBURGH: An Alternative Energy Forum takes place at Mount St. Mary College, Hudson Hall Auditorium, at 1 p.m. Topics to include wind, biomass, hydro, and solar energy. Sponsored by Cornell Cooperative Extension Hudson Valley. Information (845) 344-1234, cah94@cornell.edu, http://cce.cornell.edu/orange. Campus map: http://www.msmc.edu/home/Directions_to_Campus.html

Tuesday, Nov. 11, ALBANY: An "Election Recovery Potluck" and discussion will be held 6-9 p.m. at the First Unitarian Universalist Society of Albany, 405 Washington Ave. It's sponsored by Upper Hudson Peace Action as "a gathering of peace activists after the election, to share food and provide mutual support and encouragement for the time ahead." The group will discuss "What Next for the Peace Movement?" Information, david@peaceact.net, (518) 463-5907, http://www.peaceact.net.


Thursday, Nov. 13, WOODSTOCK: The Middle East Crisis Response group meets at 7-8:30 p.m. at the Woodstock Public Library, 5 Library Lane. All are welcome. Information, (845) 876-7906, http://www.mideastcrisis.org.

Thursday, Nov. 13, MAHOPAC: First Annual Putnam County N.Y. Women of Worth Awards at Public Library, 688 Rt. 6 at 6 p.m. in the community room. Featuring Allison Bloom, Women's Study Program, Vassar College; Nada Khader of WESPAC, and others. Honoring Lynne Eckardt, Susan Spear, Margaret Yonco Haines, Jennifer Maher, Margaret Flannery on the 88th anniversary of Seneca Falls. Admission is $20. Sponsored by Putnam County NOW Chapter. For information, M. Laura Leonard, (845) 207-9488, Kathy G. Meyerson, (845) 278-8410, Mahopac Library, (845) 628-2009.

Thursday, Nov. 13, NEW PALTZ (SUNY campus): Oren R. Lyons, the Faithkeeper of the Onondaga Nation of the Iroquois Confederacy, and distinguished service professor at SUNY Buffalo, will speak at 4:30 p.m. in Lecture Center 100 about indigenous rights movements around the world. From the organizer: "Lyons has been a passionate voice in the worldwide movement to protect the global environment. Working with native peoples around the world for the past three decades, his efforts contributed toward the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples." Information, contact SUNY Professor Lawrence Hauptman at (845) 257-3523 or the Office of Public Affairs, (845) 257-3245. Campus map, http://www.newpaltz.edu/map/.

Thursday, Nov. 13, NEW YORK CITY: A rally demanding national health insurance in the U.S. —"One Nation, One Plan" — will begin at 4 p.m. at 42nd St. and Seventh Ave. in Manhattan, followed by a 5 p.m. march to GHI-HIP, 34th St & 9th Ave. Sponsor: Private Health Insurance Must Go! Coalition. Information, (212) 865-6027, (718) 703-4041, http://phimg.org.

Friday, Nov. 14, SAUGERTIES: The Haitian People's Support Project is sponsoring its 10th Annual Benefit Dance and Haitian Arts and Crafts Sale to benefit Sonando for Haitian Children and Hurricane Victims. It takes place at New World Home Cooking, 1411 Rt. 212, 7:30 p.m.-1 a.m. Dance starts at 9:30 p.m. HPSP supports educational and nutritional programs in orphanages, schools and temporary shelters throughout Haiti. This year's benefit will specifically help victims of the four hurricanes that devastated the entire country in August and September. Art sale is free. The suggested donation for the dance is $20. Information, (845) 679-7320, (845) 246-0900, http://www.haitiansupportproject.org .

Friday-Saturday, Nov. 14-15, WASHINGTON, DC: Two-days of protests will take place in the nation's capital to coincide with an emergency summit meeting between President Bush and a score of foreign leaders to discuss means of coping with the economic crisis. Also attending will be the heads of the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and other international institutions. The ANSWER Coalition, VoteNoBailout.org, ImpeachBush.org, and other organizations will mount a protest outside the White House starting at 5 p.m. Friday during a posh presidential dinner for the delegates, and throughout Saturday, starting at 11 a.m. near the meeting venue, which is to be announced. The demonstrations will demand, "Money for People's Needs, Not Bankers' Greed." Information, info@internationalanswer.org, http://www.internationalanswer.org.

Saturday, Nov. 15, ALBANY: The Citizens' Environmental Coalition (CEC) is organizing a day-long public environmental meeting titled "Zeroing Out Waste" at the Westminster Presbyterian Church, 85 Chestnut St. According to the sponsor, "Expert national speakers will discuss how New York communities can start eliminating waste with re-use, recycling, composting and re-manufacturing. In addition, there will be strategy sessions on key zero waste issues, including fighting incinerators and landfills, composting all organics (food and yard waste, etc.), economic development and green jobs, among other topics." Speakers Include Neil Seldman, Institute of Local Self Reliance; Professor Paul Connett, international waste management researcher; Majora Carter, environmental justice leader, and founder of Sustainable South Bronx, and Barbara Warren, Citizens' Environmental Coalition." The cost is $15, including lunch and refreshments, with scholarships available. Information, cectoxic@igc.org, (518) 462-5527, Ext. 16, http://www.cectoxic.org.

Friday, Nov. 21, NEW PALTZ: Radical folk music by the Last Internationale, and speakers will begin at 8 p.m. at 60 Main Collective, 60 Main St. at 8 p.m. Information, edgeyp@aol.com

Friday-Sunday, Nov. 21-23, FT. BENNING, GA: The annual Close the School of the Americas demonstration will take place on these days. Sponsored by School of the Americas Watch. Information or to attend, (202) 234-3440, info@soaw.org, http://www.soaw.org.

Sept. 27, 2008, Issue #139
HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER/CALENDAR
jacdon@earthlink.net, http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/

This newsletter/calendar, published in New Paltz, N.Y., appears once a month, supplemented by additional listings of new activist events, usually sent to Valley readers only. Editor, Jack A. Smith (who writes all the articles that appear without a byline or credit to other publications). Copy Editor, Donna Goodman. Calendar Editor, Rocco Rizzo. If you know someone who may benefit from this newsletter, ask them to subscribe at jacdon@earthlink.net. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, unsubscribe at the same address. Please send event listings to the above email address. The current and back issues of the newsletter/calendar are available at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com.

—————————————————

EDITOR'S NOTE

1. This is a special issue of the newsletter. It is devoted almost entirely to the historic developments now taking place in Bolivia — the struggle by the government of President Evo Morales to implement a progressive political agenda, and to achieve equality for the indigenous people who constitute a majority of the country. It is also a fight for survival against right wing forces, backed by the U.S., who have been disrupting the country with violent demonstrations, sabotage and occupations of government buildings to weaken and remove the government. Our magazine-length first article will bring you the history, facts and analysis about what's going on. The five brief articles that follow concern the indigenous people of Bolivia and elsewhere. What's happening in Bolivia today is having a major impact on Latin America's course of development away from U.S. hegemony.

2. We remind readers about an item in last week's Activist Calendar (sent to Valley residents only): If you want to hear a left view of the financial crisis and the bailout, plus comments on the election and the peace movement, plan to attend Brian Becker's talk Sunday, Oct. 5, at 6 p.m. in New Paltz Village Hall. Becker heads the ANSWER antiwar coalition, which has organized most of the huge peace demonstrations in Washington. Village Hall is on Plattekill Ave., one block south of Main St. (Rt. 299), a mile or so west of Thruway exit 18. A potluck dinner begins at 5 p.m. for those who wish to partake.

3. We thank the activists who turned out for a vigil in New Paltz this morning (Sept. 27) to demand, in the words of our signs, "After the damage of two hurricanes… END THE U.S. COLD WAR BLOCKADE OF CUBA." The event was sponsored by the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project and this newsletter.
——
Spam filters on mass mailings are getting more sophisticated. Add our email address, above, to your address book to avoid the chance having the newsletter blocked.

—————————————————

CONTENTS

1. BOLIVIA: THE STRUGGLE NEARS A CLIMAX — Most Americans know extremely little, if anything, about the important struggle going on in Bolivia. Right wing oligarchs, corporate leaders, big landowners and politicians, emboldened by their support from the Bush Administration, are doing their all to defeat the progressive government, and paralyze the indigenous struggle for equality. They were whipped in the recent election, so now they are engaging in massive disruption, and are threatening secession.

2. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THE WORLD — A news and fact sheet.

3. "LET'S RESPECT OUR MOTHER EARTH" — Bolivian President Evo Morales' words to the people of the world about treating our environment with the greatest respect.

4. FROM MARX TO MORALES — This excerpt about "indigenous socialism" sheds light on what's happening in Latin America today.

5. TEN COMMANDMENTS TO SAVE THE PLANET — From an indigenous left perspective.

6. INDIGENOUS SOLIDARITY WITH BOLIVIA — Indigenous organizations from Ecuador, Colombia, Chile and Brazil express support for the defense of the Bolivia against U.S. schemes.

—————————————————

1. BOLIVIA: THE STRUGGLE NEARS A CLIMAX

The United States government has been seeking energetically to disrupt and if possible bring about the overthrow of two democratically elected populist governments in South America — those of President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela and President Evo Morales of Bolivia.

Washington's campaign has been intensified in recent months and is now mainly focused on Morales, an extremely popular leader in Bolivia who is also the target of a fierce, violent right wing crusade to remove him from office.

The Bush Administration, which supported an unsuccessful coup against Chávez in 2002, is deeply involved in the efforts to thoroughly destabilize Bolivia and make it impossible for Morales to implement his progressive program, or to govern at all.

On Sept. 10 Morales responded to what appears to be a slow-motion coup in progress by ordering the expulsion of U.S. Ambassador Philip Goldberg, essentially on the grounds of subversion. "Without fear of the [U.S.] empire," Morales announced, "I stand before the Bolivian people today and declare United States Ambassador Mr.[Philip] Goldberg persona non grata. We don't want people here who conspire against our unity. We don't want people who threaten our democracy."

The Bush Administration denied the charges, but the facts — compounded by the entire history of Yankee machinations in the region since the seizure of Cuba and Puerto Rico from Spain in 1898 — support Morales.

Out of solidarity with Bolivia's move, Chávez the next day expelled U.S. ambassador to Venezuela Patrick Duddy, also accusing Washington of supporting a coup plot against his Caracas regime by four retired military officers who were arrested in early September.

Morales addressed the UN General Assembly in New York Sept. 23 and discussed the right wing campaign against his government. Noting that the 12-member Union of South American States (UNASUR) has condemned the insurgency while Washington has remained mute, the Bolivian leader declared that "I would like to hear representatives of the U.S. government rejecting these acts of terrorism. But you know, they are allies; of course they will never condemn this."

Both Chávez and Morales are socialist leaders of capitalist countries who stand on the left wing of the progressive political trend establishing itself in 10 or so capitals in Latin America and the Caribbean — a region that has served as the principal sphere of U.S. hegemony for well over a century, and Uncle Sam is indisposed to accept any diminution of Yankee authority.

Preparing public opinion for further U.S. efforts at destabilization, the White House has sought to demonize both leaders, accusing them of being undemocratic authoritarians — if not outright dictators — and human rights violators. The characterization is spurious . According to a Sept. 14 statement from the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, a respected Washington think-tank, "neither Chávez nor Morales can in any manner be condemned for any democratic lapses, lack of human rights observance, nor mistreatment, nor abuse of their citizens."

We will go back now six weeks to early August, and trace events until this writing on Sept. 27, 2008, including earlier events as we progress. It is important to remember that Bolivia is the only country in the Western Hemisphere with an indigenous majority, and Morales is the only indigenous president. What is happening is historic — a rising of the poorest and most oppressed, on the one hand, and forces determined not only to stop the advance of the left but to impede the progress of the indigenous people (also called Native Bolivians).

August 10 was the date that the leftist Bolivian leader won a recall election demanded by the right wing with an extraordinary 67.4% of the popular vote, a democratic majority greater than any enjoyed by a U.S. president since 1820, when the voting procedure was undemocratic. Over 83% of the eligible voters turned out. His total significantly exceeded the 53.7% that first brought him to power in the election of December 2005. Actually the 2005 vote percentage was exceptionally high by previous Bolivian standards. Since hundreds of years of Spanish colonialism were ended in 1825, the country has experienced some 200 military coups and counter-coups, a world record.

Winning with Morales and Vice President Alvaro Garcia, however, were several right-wing prefects (governors) of departments (states) estranged from the central government for reasons we shall explain. These prefects are helping lead the struggle against Morales, backed by the extreme right wing and in some cases fascist organizations.

Huge and joyous crowds in La Paz, the capital, jammed the Plaza Murillo outside the presidential palace on election night, often chanting "Evo, brother, the people are with you." Another chant was "Evo, mano duro," meaning to use a hard fist or hand to establish social order in the face of right wing attacks. This latter suggestion reflects the views of some Bolivian social and labor movements and left organizations that support Morales but believe he has been too hesitant to strike back forcefully against those seeking to destroy the government and its social programs.

The enemies of the left government, supported and financed in part by Washington, are determined to cripple or bring down this regime of progressive reform. They responded in the weeks following the electoral triumph of Morales with defiance, violence, occupations of government buildings and airports, blowing up natural gas pipelines, beatings and humiliations of indigenous people, and a vicious massacre. Without U.S. backing, far less of this would have happened.

The Morales government responded to the violent opposition with an unusual degree of conciliation and calls for negotiations with the right wing forces disrupting the country. Talks are now taking place in Cochabamba department in the center of Bolivia. The rightists are reported to be making extensive demands, one of which is an insistence upon an extreme form of autonomy verging on secession. Morales was willing to entertain a modest autonomy for the right wing departments but on Sept. 25 he rejected what he termed their demand for "de facto independence." The talks are in suspension for a few days so the atmosphere could cool down.

For several weeks after the attacks started the government evidently discouraged mass organizations of workers and peasants from intervening against the rightist onslaught. This situation may be changing. "Some 20 thousand miners, peasants and coca growers are moving on the city [of Santa Cruz, center of the rebellion] to reclaim state institutions occupied by autonomist forces," BoliviaRising.blogspot.com reported Sept. 25. The report quotes Morales as saying he did not agree with the plans to march into the city." This will be played out shortly.

Morales was elected with the overwhelming support of the country's indigenous population, and from many low-wage workers, poor farmers and progressives of various hue. The main left party, which brought Morales to power, is the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS). He governs as a populist social democrat with a program MAS describes as a “democratic and cultural revolution," though not a socialist revolution.

The opposition forces include such right wing organizations as the umbrella group and command center for the disruptions known as the National Democratic Council (CONALDE), the Santa Cruz Civic Committee, and the neofascist Santa Cruz Youth Union (UJC), about which Jeffery R. Webber wrote in CounterPunch Sept. 11:

"Indigenous peasant and working-class supporters of the government set off on Aug. 29 for a peaceful march to the Plaza 24 September, in the centre of the city of Santa Cruz. A gathering of autonomists [those demanding autonomy from the central government], organized in part by the UJC, were there to greet them.

"According to the mainstream daily La Prensa, one UJC speaker at the autonomist rally declared: 'We are not going to permit [them] into the Plaza…. We don’t want this damned race in our territory.' Other chants and phrases used that day… [included] 'Indians return to your lands.'
"After the speeches, the racists went on a rampage against the unarmed trade unionists and peasants, as well as any visibly indigenous person in proximity of the plaza. Indigenous women wearing the traditional pollera, or gathered skirt, were particularly vulnerable to beatings and racist taunts. One autonomist youth leader, Amelia Dimitri, was captured in video footage and photographs whipping an indigenous woman wearing a pollera. This occurred immediately after Dimitri addressed the crowd of autonomist thugs in a rousing speech. She’s only the latest face of hatred on the autonomist right.

"On national television, Bolivians watched as racist teenagers wielded clubs, whips, and two-by-fours against unarmed indigenous workers and peasants. Images of men and women with broken noses and shirts literally drenched in blood quickly made their way to You Tube, private and national state media, and the front pages of the local newspapers. These are the 'democracy supporters' supported by imperialism against the 'dictatorship' of Evo Morales."

The worst act of violence took place Sept. 11. In this incident, a group of unarmed peasants en route to a large pro-Morales rally protesting rightist attacks on government offices in the department of Pando were massacred by a right wing paramilitary unit with assault rifles. At least 15 unarmed demonstrators were killed (some reports say 30), nearly 40 were wounded and some were reported missing.

Morales, who has not always acted swiftly in response to past anti-government violence, declared a state of siege in Pando, and sent in Army troops who arrested prefect Leopoldo Fernandez, a rightist anti-Morales fanatic who is known to have organized death squads. He acknowledged ordering the attack and has been jailed and removed as prefect.

The right wing has refused repeatedly to respect the authority of the central government in La Paz, high in the Andes to the west, over their lowland political dominions in the eastern half of Bolivia known as the Media Luna (half moon) for its shape.

The main right wing party, Democratic and Social Power, is known by its acronym Podemos (meaning "We Can"). It has a plurality in the Senate while MAS enjoys a majority in the Assembly.

The major political demand of the rightists is for regional autonomy, with the implicit threat of rebellion or secession unless Morales grants them significant economic and political concessions. For him to capitulate would weaken the MAS's reform agenda, particularly since the progressive government has made concessions before in the name of social peace.

The autonomy movement demands considerable control over part of what is now the national economy. It insists upon the power to dispose of lowland natural resources, including having the various eastern departments, not La Paz, receive the bulk of wealth from natural gas extracted from Media Luna; immunity from central government plans to break up unused portions of massive land holdings in order to enlarge the plots of small farmers; and the right to negotiate with foreign investors and even governments, among many other sectional privileges.

These demands would deprive the government of the funding required to carry out the social programs for which it was elected. By nationalizing, with compensation, and taxing nearly 50 oil and gas companies, the Morales government has boosted annual government revenues by $2 billion from profit-hungry enterprises that had previously paid La Paz only $180 million a year. Podemos and its backers want a large portion of such monies to go directly to the eastern departments.

Bolivia is the poorest country in South America. Some 60% of its 9.25 million people lived below the poverty line in 2006, according to the CIA World Factbook. This includes slightly over half this number who are desperately poor by UN standards. Most of the poor are malnourished. Bolivia has the 12th highest poverty rate in the world. President Morales hopes to reduce poverty to 40% or so in a few years — an ambitious goal the right wing seeks to subvert.

In terms of population, 55% of the people are indigenous to the region. They include the Aymara people (of which Morales is one) with 25% of the population, and the Quechua people, 30%. Within these numbers are several other quite small indigenous groups, such as the Chaquenos and Weenhayek. Of the remainder, 30% are mestizo (of mixed heritage) and 15% are white. Most of the economic power is in the hands of the whites.

The majority of Native Bolivians reside in the Andean highlands. They are the poorest of the poor, a status existing since the European Conquest. Morales, a former union leader, was brought into power in large part by the political activism of indigenous workers, coca farmers, the Bolivian Workers' Center, the Huanuni tin miners, FSTMB miners' union, the Workers Confederation and various mass social movements. Some members of these organizations are to the left of the MAS and Morales, and have expressed disappointment at what they consider an overly cautious approach to class politics and of concessions to the European-descended oligarchy.

A special UN investigator looked into the situation of indigenous people in Bolivia and reported to the Human Rights Council last April that there was a "serious persistence of racism and discrimination against indigenous people, and especially against indigenous women. This is still manifested in the behavior of public officials at the national and subnational levels and in the attitudes of political parties and pressure groups, which sometimes incite violence against persons based on their indigenous status…. The mobilization of indigenous peoples in recent years has led to substantial progress in recognition of their rights and their role in the national political process."

Among the struggles that ultimately led to the election of Evo Morales was the historic successful battle in 2000, largely waged by the indigenous population of the altiplano, against the government-approved privatization of the water supply by the U.S. multinational Bechtel Corp. This was followed by five years of insurrectionary strikes and uprisings against neoliberalism, the U.S.-backed former regime's coca eradication project, and the giveaway of natural gas cheaply to foreign investors — actions that forced a government to fall. A second regime was ousted by worker protests in June 2005, this time demanding nationalization of oil and gas.

Morales was elected six months later, after pledging to end neoliberal and free trade policies foisted upon previous governments by the U.S.; to eliminate the oppression of indigenous people; to elevate the living standards of Bolivia's workers; to strengthen small business and the lower middle class; to nationalize certain enterprises; to promote land reform to benefit small farmers; and to provide pensions for older workers. "We are ending privileges," he says, "so that everyone can live well, and not better than our counterparts."

At the same time, he does his best to attract foreign investment, and is not anti-business in practice, though he is in fact an anti-capitalist of the indigenous socialist variety. (Several articles follow that try to explain this concept further, as well as other indigenous issues.)

The right wing opposition is mainly concentrated in the eastern lowlands, within which central government authority seems to be fast evaporating. This wealthy sector of the country includes most of the corporate enterprises, big agricultural estates and abundant natural resources, including the hemisphere's second largest reserves of natural gas amounting to 28.7 trillion cubic feet. According to the Wall St. Journal, this region accounts "for about 65% of Bolivia's economic output," though some estimates go as high as 80%. It is mainly here that the richest families own the biggest landholdings. The UN Development Program reports that just 100 wealthy families own 62 million acres (averaging 620,000 acres per family) while 2 million subsistence farm families average 6 acres each.

Much of the lowland population is of white European extraction and speaks Spanish, including many new arrivals in recent decades, and mestizo. The lowland Native Bolivian minority is often looked down upon, exploited and poor. A deep racist antagonism toward the indigenous citizens is evident in the lowlands. The separatist campaign exploits racism to consolidate its struggle against the left government.

Vice President Garcia sees the racism this way: "We were, and continue to be, a profoundly colonial society where our differences, our jobs, our opportunities are all a function of skin color," he told AP May 2. And speaking in reference to Bolivians of wealth, he said more recently that "they have to understand that the state is no longer a prolongation of their haciendas."

An article distributed Sept. 25 by Latin America Press points out that "Morales has on various occasions accused the opposition of trying to 'tumbar al indio' or 'knock down the Indian,' meaning that it is seeking to topple his government just because he is indigenous. The word 'Indian' has a strong negative connotation in today's Bolivia, and has been largely replaced by the more politically correct indigenous."

The lowlands are politically dominated by a reactionary agro-business oligarchy which is centered in the powerful department of Santa Cruz and spreads out to the smaller departments of Beni, Tarija, Pando, and Chuquisaca. All of them except the last conducted illegal referenda this spring with large majorities — 82% in Santa Cruz, for example — supporting autonomy. The voting percentage was misleading. Most of the pro-Morales forces refused to participate in the voting since it was not recognized by the central government. If the number of those who voted against autonomy were joined by those who boycotted the referendum, not too much more than 50% of those eligible voted for autonomy in a province that harbors the largest opposition to the La Paz government.

The U.S. claims that reports of its intervention in Bolivia to weaken the Morales government are untrue. This is difficult to believe for two reasons. First, its known deportment in Bolivia shows otherwise. Second, history suggests that the White House has rarely, if ever, ignored an opportunity to undermine or replace a Latin American government veering toward departing the Yankee sphere of influence.

Cuba has been punished for nearly a half-century for its act of lèse-majesté in overthrowing an American-favored dictator in 1959 and checking out of the Uncle Sam Hacienda. In 2002, when Venezuelan President Chávez tweaked Washington's intrusive nose once too often, the Bush Administration backed a right-wing coup that failed after holding him prisoner for three days.

Some other unwelcome U.S. intrusions over the years were in Puerto Rico, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Honduras, Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, and Grenada plus all the right-wing military dictatorships in South America aided and abetted from "El Norte" until democracy took hold during the last couple of decades, no thanks to the White House. There are literally several score instances in 110 years when the U.S. has invaded, occupied, bombed, subverted or overthrown governments south of the border — and many other episodes of supporting right wing governments against their own people.

It is hardly surprising that much of Latin America assumes U.S. imperialism has been working with the Bolivian right wing to discredit or overthrow its elected government.

In a press conference after his UN speech in September, Morales told reporters "we have the evidence" of U.S. involvement with the right wing opposition. According to an Inter-Press Service account, "The Bolivian president charged that the George W. Bush administration has not only given away a 'tremendous amount of money' to the opposition groups through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), but also provided them with ammunition to carry out acts of sabotage and killings of unarmed indigenous people." Morales also revealed that he has received "a message" from President George W. Bush saying "if I'm not a friend, I am an enemy."

According to Eva Golinger, a Venezuelan-American New York lawyer and author of the 2006 book "The Chávez Code: Cracking U.S. Intervention in Venezuela," both the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the USAID are backing the campaign to destabilize the La Paz regime.

In an article last September, Golinger wrote that the USAID "program in Bolivia is openly supporting the autonomy of certain regions, such as Santa Cruz, Beni, Pando and Tarija, and therefore promoting separatism and the downfall of its elected government. The NED, another one of Washington’s financial organs which promotes subversion and intervention in more than 70 countries across the world, including Venezuela, is also funding groups in regions such as Santa Cruz, which fight for separatism." She has also charged that the U.S. has provided about $130 million to the anti-Morales opposition over a three-year period.

Until he was expelled, Ambassador Goldberg is said to have spent more time in Santa Cruz (the capital of the leading autonomy-seeking province of the same name) than in La Paz. He is experienced in the breakup of nations, having had diplomatic involvement in Yugoslavia during its U.S-assisted disintegration throughout the 1990s, serving for a time as the State Department's Bosnia Desk officer. From 2004 to 2006 he was Chief of Mission in Kosovo, priming the breakaway province for secession.

On Aug. 25, weeks before Goldberg was ousted, he had a secret meeting with Santa Cruz departmental prefect Ruben Costas — a strong advocate of autonomy, the main leader of the five oppositional departments, and a major enemy of Morales. Days later, Costas led an uprising in Santa Cruz city, ordering the occupation and sacking of government facilities such as the tax office, state telecommunications office and oil company, and the Education Dept., among other facilities. During this period office occupations took place in four other cities. Goldberg met the prefects of all the rebellious departments at one time or another.

On Sept. 12 the progressive Washington think-tank Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) called on the U.S. State Department, USAID, and other agencies to release information detailing whom it is funding in Bolivia. Co-director Mark Weisbrot declared that "If Washington has nothing to hide in terms of whom it is funding and working with in Bolivia, then it should reveal which groups those are…."

CEPR also noted that "On Feb. 8 ABC News revealed that the Embassy had repeatedly asked Peace Corps volunteers and a Fulbright Scholar to spy on people inside Bolivia USAID has an Office of Transition Initiatives operating in Bolivia, funneling millions of dollars of training and support to right-wing opposition regional governments and movements."

The Andean Information Network reported Sept. 10 that "USAID made a decision early in the Morales administration to carry out projects directly with departmental governments, the majority of which opposed MAS," and not with the central government. "Furthermore, the funding of a trip for prefects to Washington created the impression that the Embassy sought to strengthen a political opposition bloc."

The main tactical issue of contention between the government and the rightists is the draft constitution Morales seeks to put before the people in a near future referendum. The document expands the powers of the central government, provides the framework for implementing the government's progressive platform, and would allow Morales to run for a second full term. The right wing Senate refused to even consider the matter, so the proposed new constitution was brought to the Assembly, where it was passed last December. Podemos politicians boycotted the final Assembly session when it was evident that MAS delegates would prevail.

The right wing has consistently opposed allowing the masses of people to decide the fate of the draft constitution in a democratic referendum since it would quickly become law. If the agro-business oligarchy succeeds in preventing a vote, Morales could be barred from reelection in 2010.

In response to the mayhem created by the autonomists, the UNASUR convened in Santiago, Chile, Sept. 15, for an emergency meeting attended by nine heads of state who expressed "their full and firm support for the constitutional government of President Evo Morales, whose mandate was ratified by a big majority," and who warned that "our respective governments energetically reject and will not recognize any situation that attempts a civil coup and the rupture of institutional order and which could compromise the territorial integrity of the Republic of Bolivia." They also offered their good offices to help mediate the dispute. In attendance were leaders from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay, Venezuela and of course Bolivia.

Venezuelan President Chávez sought to convince his peers to condemn Washington for supporting the autonomy movement and destabilizing Bolivia, but did not succeed. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, a leading figure at the gathering and a moderate within the left trend among Latin American governments, joined in the denunciation of the separatist movement, but was opposed to criticizing Washington in the statement. According to the Guardian (UK), Lula, as he is known, "has faced some domestic political criticism for not immediately defending Bolivia's territorial integrity more strongly."

Morales was grateful for UNASUR's support, which was essential for Bolivia, and he did not press the issue of condemning the U.S. when it was clear that Lula, Colombia, and probably some others were hesitant to do so. The leading Santa Cruz newspaper, El Deber, said the statement by the South American presidents "undeniably strengthened" Morales.

Expressing his gratitude to UNASUR, Morales said: “For the first time in South America’s history, the countries of our region are deciding how to resolve our problems, without the presence of the United States.”

The outcome of the UNASUR meeting, combined with discussions that had been going on for days in Bolivia between the La Paz government and representatives of the political opposition, was the beginning of formal negotiations between both sides to seek a resolution to the political crisis. This process began Sept. 19 and will take months. According to Prensa Latina, the Cuban news agency, the negotiations focused on two main problems:

(1) The new constitution, including the matter of autonomy. Morales had already incorporated a proviso for granting greater autonomy for some indigenous communities, largely to protect their culture, land rights and language . This is quite different from the demands of the right wing autonomists who seek a disproportionate share of the nation's wealth, considerable control of its natural resources, and many other concessions. Now, Prensa Latina reported, Morales was prepared to incorporate changes in the document that would include the "autonomy aspirations in the Santa Cruz, Beni, Pando, Tarija and Chuquisaca departments," presumably if agreement could be reached on the nature of those "aspirations." It is not yet known how much Morales will concede to the right wing on this issue.

(2) The disposition of funds from the taxation of natural gas revenues. This is of exceptional importance. The central government quasi-nationalized the natural gas industry soon after Morales came to power, and it now taxes the substantial profits generated from the export of hydrocarbons largely to Brazil and Argentina. This financial windfall has mostly been used to pay for an anti-poverty program, an increase in the minimum wage, and free school meals. The oligarchy and right wing prefects of the Media Luna departments insist that the bulk of this tax money should go to the local governments from whence the resources are derived, not to La Paz. The government is expected to make concessions in this case as well.

The talks in time will cover the matters of changing the constitution to remove the one-term limit, the popular referendum to legalize the changes, and many other differences between the two sides.

Representatives from several institutions are attending the Cochabamba talks, trying to mediate a settlement. They are UNASUR, European Union, Organization of American States, the United Nations and the Roman Catholic Church, to which 95% of the religious adhere in Bolivia.

So far, Morales has relied on his strong electoral majority and popular support to inaugurate basic social reforms and quasi-nationalizations (often joint ventures with Bolivia holding majority control) which have indeed been progressive though limited and within the economic and democratic norms of class society. He has strengthened national sovereignty by developing alliances with all the left-leaning and other governments in the region, and this provides the La Paz administration with a degree of protection from the imperial colossus to the north, but certainly not a true defense. He has also sought allies from afar, including Russia, China, Iran, and others to create an international buffer zone against White House shenanigans.

The Bolivian president has unhesitatingly criticized U.S. imperialism, capitalism, neoliberal globalization, and "free" trade. This left line seems to meet with the approval of the large majority of Bolivians judging by the vote totals, and this has had a progressive political impact upon the Latin American masses and the trend toward declaring independence from Yankee domination.

Now comes the hard part, when not just the contradictions, but the knives, are sharpening.

The right wing oligarchs, corporate leaders, big landowners and politicians who are directing the opposition to the government are emboldened by their support from the United States. They will only be satisfied when they drive Morales, the Movement Toward Socialism, the indigenous struggle for equality, and left wing politicians and supporters out of power in Bolivia by any means necessary.

Failing that, the right wing might settle for severely weakening the Morales government, which is what it hopes will result from the negotiations. Should that fail, the rightists will probably accelerate the campaign to make the lowland departments ungovernable for Morales, and move further toward separation, perhaps seceding with support from Washington. And there's also the possibility of a military coup.

Since assuming the presidency, Morales has sought to avoid a military confrontation with the opposition. He is well aware of Bolivia's history of military coups and counter-coups, the fact that he has inherited an army command handed down from previous conservative governments, and that he must deal with U.S. subversion and its support for a politically powerful and aggressive right wing enemy imbued with contempt for the indigenous majority.

At issue in this situation is just how much Morales is going to sacrifice in state funds, social programs and control of resources to achieve social peace with an intransigent, greedy, racist and undemocratic right wing which was thunderously defeated in a free and fair election less than two months ago. He has retreated before in the face of right wing pressure, for which he has been criticized in some left circles, though not in others.

One fairly harsh American critic is James Petras, the left wing author and observer/participant in Latin American social movements. He wrote in June that the Morales-Garcia government "approved a number of concessions to the oligarchic elites in Santa Cruz, which enabled them to effectively re-build their natural political power base, sabotage an elected Constitutional Assembly and effectively undermine the authority of the central government. Right-wing success took less than 2 1⁄2 years, which is especially amazing considering that in 2005, the country witnessed a major popular uprising which ousted a right-wing president, when millions of workers, miners, peasants and Indians dominated the streets."

Many left supporters are far less critical, given the complex circumstances within which the government finds itself. But according to various Bolivian sources, La Paz has been too restrained in responding to attacks from the reactionaries, and too generous in its concessions to the opposition.

There are two other factors influencing the outcome of this struggle. One, is the United States. The other is the status of the peoples' forces.

Washington's major hemispheric headaches today are Venezuela and Bolivia, who embody the left wing of the progressive trend away from U.S. domination. By neutralizing or eliminating that left wing, the White House may figure it can make a deal with the rest of the region by offering a new alternative: The Hegemony With a Human Face Initiative, perhaps, though camouflaged with a more inspiring title, such as the 20th Century Good Neighbor Alliance for Progress, or somesuch, as Barack Obama seems to be contemplating. McCain, the maverick, won't change the Bush policies, even as a cosmetic makeover.

Could the U.S. be entertaining an "Allende" solution for Morales? This refers to the U.S.-backed military coup against democratically elected President Salvador Allende of Chile on Sept. 11, 1973, paving the way for a 17-year fascist-type dictatorship. There are similarities between the two leaders. Each is a socialist. Each governed despite opposition from most of the ruling class; the White House opposed them both; and the Bolivian army has had long experience with coups d'état. There are several reasons to think Washington may avoid this kind of open exposure today.

(1) The Bolivian army has not yet provided an indication of disloyalty to the Morales government. (2) The United States would immediately be Suspect Number 1 if there were a serious coup, thus alienating much of today's Latin America; (3) Allende won a three-party election with 36.3% of the vote as opposed to 67.4% for Morales. (4) In 1973 Washington controlled Latin America with an iron fist, backing the most brutal right wing dictatorships as part of its fanatical anti-communism binge. (5) Allende and his leftist Popular Unity party had hardly any support from regional governments except Cuba; Bolivia has many allies.

The second factor is that a strong and militant workers' movement with a long history of struggle is behind the Morales government and its reforms, as is the entire indigenous community and a number of progressive social movements and parties. Some of them want the MAS government to speed up its reforms and to take a tougher stance toward the right wing disrupters.

The supporters of Evo Morales — the raw popular power behind the 2000-2005 uprisings — have been virtually demobilized by the left government since it assumed office in January 2006, except for electoral tasks. They seem to have been held back even in the face of the post-election destabilization campaign of violence and intimidation. A part of this popular force, evidently without orders from La Paz, showed up in several places to counter right wing brutality in the weeks after the August election. The reported march toward Santa Cruz is an example of what could happen on a much larger scale.

If called upon in a more serious crisis — an attempted coup, a revolutionary offensive, or the U.S.-engineered secession of the wealthiest half of the country — they can become a decisive element in the struggle, assuming they are organized, armed and provided with strong, unwavering leadership from the center. This brings up Chile again: Allende had numerous supporters — several hundred thousands of whom rallied in Santiago before the coup — but political circumstances made it difficult for his government to mobilize and arm the masses.

In Bolivia the government has overwhelming support and tough mass movements. There are those in that country today who believe these forces should be mobilized sooner than later to make sure that the popular progressive program backed by the overwhelming majority of Bolivians is not scuttled by a right wing minority and its behind-the-scenes U.S. patron.

————————————————

2. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THE WORLD

The political situation in Bolivia has focused attention on that country's indigenous peoples, who, as we noted above, constitute 55% of the population — the largest proportion in the Americas.

In Guatemala and Peru, the indigenous peoples are between 40-45% of each population — and they are still struggling for their rights. In Peru they are fighting off a government effort making it easier to sell off native lands to promote capitalist investment in the highlands, as mandated by the impending U.S. free trade arrangement. In Guatemala, indigenous groups are demanding that the government take steps to implement the terms of the UN's Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Many countries in the Western Hemisphere have huge populations of the part-indigenous, known by the Spanish word mestizo. In Colombia, where 3.4% of the population is indigenous, 82.1% is mestizo; in El Salvador it's 1% and 90%; in Brazil, 0.4% and 30%. Bolivian President Evo Morales is an indigenous person. Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez is a mestizo, as is 49% of his country's population (2% are Indigenous).

One definition of indigenous peoples is that they possess the earliest historical connection to the geographic region they inhabit, or have been removed from. A word sometimes interchanged with indigenous is autochthonous, which means "formed or originating in the place where found."

Another definition, in the UN files, holds that "Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of societies now prevailing in those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop, and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal systems."

The University of Minnesota Human Rights Center reports: "Indigenous peoples worldwide number between 300-500 million, embody and nurture 80% of the world’s cultural and biological diversity…. Despite such extensive diversity in indigenous communities throughout the world, all indigenous peoples have one thing in common — they all share a history of injustice. Indigenous peoples have been killed, tortured and enslaved. In many cases, they have been the victims of genocide. They have been denied the right to participate in governing processes of the current state systems. Conquest and colonization have attempted to steal their dignity and identity as indigenous peoples, as well as the fundamental right of self-determination."

Native peoples are almost always the poorest and most oppressed segment of the population in 21st century nation states. Today, following the Euro-American policy of extermination, oppression, displacement, and forced assimilation, the remaining Native American population (about 0.9% of total population) for the most part exists in extreme poverty. One symptom of this deplorable treatment is that Native Americas probably have "the highest suicide rate in the world," according to the U.S. Indian Health Service in April. The American Psychological Association reported last year the incidence of suicide among Native Americans was "two and a half times higher than the national average. The rate for Indian youth and young adults 15 to 24 years old is over three times higher than the national average for this age group."

Here are some key facts about indigenous peoples of the world:

• Indigenous peoples amount to about 5% of the world’s population yet account for about 15% of the world’s poor.

• Indigenous peoples have some 4,000 languages.

• There are more than 5,000 different groups of indigenous peoples living in more than 70 countries.

• Indigenous peoples live in every region of the world, but about 70% of them live in Asia.

• Latin America’s 50 million indigenous people make up 11% of the region’s population.

• During the 1990s the indigenous poverty gap in selected countries in Latin America grew to be wider than ever in history. And of course they suffer the greatest discrimination.

• In Guatemala 86.6% of indigenous peoples are poor, and in Mexico 80.6% of them are poor.

• A recent study indicated that ending the marginalization of indigenous peoples could bring about the expansion of the national economies of Bolivia (by 37%), Brazil (by 13%), Guatemala (by 14%) and Peru (by 5%).

— Many of these brief facts were gathered from the Rural Poverty Portal, accessed at: http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/english/index.htm

————————————————

3. "LET'S RESPECT OUR MOTHER EARTH"

Protection of the natural environment is a key element in indigenous thought. On Sept. 27, 2007, Bolivian President Evo Morales wrote and sent a letter to all the member representatives of the United Nations on the issue of the environment. It was titled, "Let's Respect Our Mother Earth." The letter follows:

Sister and Brother Presidents and Heads of States of the United Nations:

The world is suffering from a fever due to climate change, and the disease is the capitalist development model. Whilst over 10,000 years the variation in carbon dioxide (CO2) levels on the planet was approximately 10%, during the last 200 years of industrial development, carbon emissions have increased by 30%. Since 1860, Europe and North America have contributed 70% of the emissions of CO2. 2005 was the hottest year in the last one thousand years on this planet.

Different investigations have demonstrated that out of the 40,170 living species that have been studied, 16,119 are in danger of extinction. One out of eight birds could disappear forever. One out of four mammals is under threat. One out of every three reptiles could cease to exist. Eight out of ten crustaceans and three out of four insects are at risk of extinction. We are living through the sixth crisis of the extinction of living species in the history of the planet and, on this occasion, the rate of extinction is 100 times more accelerated than in geological times.

Faced with this bleak future, transnational interests are proposing to continue as before, and paint the machine green, which is to say, continue with growth and irrational consumerism and inequality, generating more and more profits, without realizing that we are currently consuming in one year what the planet produces in one year and three months. Faced with this reality, the solution can not be an environmental make over.

I read in the World Bank report that in order to mitigate the impacts of climate change we need to end subsidies on hydrocarbons, put a price on water and promote private investment in the clean energy sector. Once again they want to apply market recipes and privatization in order to carry out business as usual, and with it, the same illnesses that these policies produce. The same occurs in the case of biofuels, given that to produce one liter of ethanol you require 12 liters of water. In the same way, to process one ton of armfuls you need, on average, one hectare of land.

Faced with this situation, we - the Indigenous peoples and humble and honest inhabitants of this planet - believe that the time has come to put a stop to this, in order to rediscover our roots, with respect for Mother Earth; with the Pachamama as we call it in the Andes. Today, the Indigenous peoples of Latin America and the world have been called upon by history to convert ourselves into the vanguard of the struggle to defend nature and life.

I am convinced that the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, recently approved after so many years of struggle, needs to pass from paper to reality so that our knowledge and our participation can help to construct a new future of hope for all. Who else but the indigenous people, can point out the path for humanity in order to preserve nature, natural resources and the territories that we have inhabited from ancient times.

We need a profound change of direction, at the world wide level, so as to stop being the condemned of the earth. The countries of the north need to reduce their carbon emissions by between 60% and 80% if we want to avoid a temperature rise of more than 2º in what is left of this century, which would provoke global warming of catastrophic proportions for life and nature.

We need to create a World Environment Organization which is binding, and which can discipline the World Trade Organization, which is propelling as towards barbarism. We can no longer continue to talk of growth in Gross National Product without taking into consideration the destruction and wastage of natural resources. We need to adopt an indicator that allows us to consider, in a combined way, the Human Development Index and the Ecological Footprint in order to measure our environmental situation.

We need to apply harsh taxes on the super concentration of wealth, and adopt effective mechanisms for its equitable redistribution. It is not possible that three families can have an income superior to the combined GDP of the 48 poorest countries. We can not talk of equity and social justice whilst this situation continues.

The United States and Europe consume, on average, 8.4 times more than the world average. It is necessary for them to reduce their level of consumption and recognize that all of us are guests on this same land; of the same Pachamama.

I know that change is not easy when an extremely powerful sector has to renounce their extraordinary profits for the planet to survive. In my own country I suffer, with my head held high, this permanent sabotage because we are ending privileges so that everyone can "Live Well" and not better than our counterparts. I know that change in the world is much more difficult than in my country, but I have absolute confidence in human beings, in their capacity to reason, to learn from mistakes, to recuperate their roots, and to change in order to forge a just, diverse, inclusive, equilibrated world in harmony with nature

Evo Morales Ayma
President of the Republic of Bolivia

————————————————

4. FROM MARX TO MORALES

Following is an excerpt from a longer essay by John Riddell titled "From Marx to Morales: Indigenous Socialism and the Latin Americanization of Marxism." It was posted to MRZine.org. June 17 this year. This provides an insight into the struggles in Bolivia and Latin America. Here's the excerpt:

The boldest governmental statements on the world's ecological crisis are coming from Cuba, Bolivia, and other anti-imperialist governments in Latin America. The influence of Indigenous struggles is felt here. Bolivian President Evo Morales points to the leading role of Indigenous peoples, "called upon by history to convert ourselves into the vanguard of the struggle to defend nature and life."

This claim rests on an approach by many Indigenous movements to ecology that is inherently revolutionary. Most First-World ecological discussion focuses on technical and market devices, such as carbon trading, taxation, and offsets, that aim to preserve as much as possible of a capitalist economic system that is inherently destructive to the natural world. Indigenous movements, by contrast, begin with the demand for a new relationship of humankind to our natural environment, sometimes expressed in the slogan, "Liberate Mother Earth."

These movements often express their demand using an unfamiliar terminology of ancestral spiritual wisdom -- but behind those words lies a worldview that can be viewed as a form of materialism.

In pre-conquest Andean society, says Peruvian Indigenous leader Rosalía Paiva, "Each was a part of all, and all were of the soil. The soil could never belong to us because we are its sons and daughters, and we belong to the soil."

Bolivian Indigenous writer Marcelo Saavedra Vargas holds that "It is capitalist society that rejects materialism. It makes war on the material world and destroys it. We, on the other hand, embrace the material world, consider ourselves part of it, and care for it."

This approach is reminiscent of Marx's thinking, as presented by John Bellamy Foster in [his book] "Marx's Ecology." It is entirely appropriate to interpret "Liberate Mother Earth" as equivalent to "close the metabolic rift." [Editor's Note: According to the Encyclopedia of the Earth, "Metabolic rift in the most general sense refers to a disruption in the exchange between social systems and natural systems, which is hypothesized to lead to ecological crisis."]

Hugo Chávez says that in Venezuela, 21st Century Socialism will be based not only on Marxism but also on Bolivarianism [named after the South American independence leader Simón Bolívar], Indigenous socialism, and Christian revolutionary traditions….

I will conclude with a story told by the Peruvian Marxist and Indigenous leader Hugo Blanco. A member of his community, he tells us, conducted some Swedish tourists to a Quechua village near Cuzco. Impressed by the collectivist spirit of the Indigenous community, one of the tourists commented, "This is like communism."

"No," responded their guide, "Communism is like this."

— The full text of John Riddell's "From Marx to Morales…" is available at http://www.monthlyreview.org/mrzine/riddell170608.html

— The Encyclopedia of the Earth is at http://www.eoearth.org/

————————————————

5. TEN COMMANDMENTS TO SAVE THE PLANET

On April 21, 2008, Evo Morales delivered a speech in New York at the Seventh United Nations Indigenous Forum, known as his "Ten Commandments to Save the Planet, Life and Humanity." Here is a brief excerpt just listing the "commandments."

1-Stopping the capitalist system
2-Renouncing wars
3-A world without imperialism or colonialism
4-Right to water
5-Development of clean energies
6-Respect for Mother Earth
7-Basic services as human rights
8-Fighting inequalities
9-Promoting diversity of cultures and economies
10-Living well, not living better at the expense of others

— A report about the speech is available at http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/17251.

————————————————

6. INDIGENOUS SOLIDARITY WITH BOLIVIA

On Sept. 26, six indigenous organizations from Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Ecuador, called for an "International meeting of solidarity with Bolivia in Santa Cruz, Oct. 23-25, 2008." They headlined their document with these words: "Those who stand with Bolivia, stand for all people, all the time!" The names of the groups are at the bottom. We here print the text of their call without alteration to provide our readers with a deeper sense of the objectives and the role of indigenous peoples in South America in the struggle for a better world, as expressed by some of their organizations:

1. The dignified inhabitants of this Abya Yala (American) continent have been struggling for centuries to re-establish SUMAK KAWSAY (Living Fully) that was seized from us by the invaders and subsequent colonizers. Throughout the ages they have murdered worthy leaders, usurped the wealth of the people and at the height of their greed, violated all human rights and those of Pachamama [Mother Earth], aided and abetted by members of the religious hierarchies who forged accords with the political and economic power in each historical period.

2. After 516 years, the neo-invaders and conquistadores seek to abort the libertarian rebirth in Latin America, and so the descendants of the murderers and usurpers return with their neoliberal policies, provoking new genocides and larcenies.

3. North American imperialism and its allies within the Latin American oligarchy are trying to halt the liberation processes in countries such as Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Nicaragua, among others; and so the oppressors shed their sheep's clothing in order to fully display their predatory wolves' fangs, ready to save their outdated political, social, economic and cultural system by any means necessary. Bolivia is now the target of the largest offensive by these sectors who believe themselves to be owners and lords of the world, intending to permanently appropriate for themselves the water, gas, oil, and land that belong to the Bolivian people.

4. In Bolivia, the groups that make up the so-called "Half-Moon," which are fascist civic-prefectural groups, descendants of those who served Hitler in his deathly project and following their defeat in the Second World War, fled to various countries, Bolivia among them, are unable to comprehend that the time has come for stolen property to be returned to its legitimate owners.

They cannot bear that in Bolivia, for the first time in Latin American history, with more than 53% of the vote {in December 2005], the people chose the Aymara brother, Evo Morales Ayma as their president; an heir to the rebellion of Tupac Katari, Bartolina Sisa, Tupak Amaru and Che Guevara; a man born of Pachamama and forged in the social insurgency lit by the millennial fire of the sacred COCA leaf; who called a new Constituent Assembly and won all battles cleanly and with dignity; who struggles for a true Agrarian Reform in a country where more than 80% of the population is impoverished, and who was ratified as President of the Republic by 67% in a referendum held August 10th; who nationalized strategic resources such as oil and natural gas; who implemented social measures in solidarity, in order to favor the least protected; who with a dignified attitude expelled the United States Ambassador in La Paz, Philip Goldberg, for conspiring against Bolivia's sovereignty and refusing to respect the people's right to self-determination; among other measures that demonstrate his unwavering commitment to serve the people who now ratify him as President.

5. These anti-democratic sectors, finding themselves defeated and in the middle of complete desperation to maintain their privileges, began a divisive plan of autonomy for Santa Cruz, Tarija, Beni, Pando, and with the help of a terrorist group called the "juventud cruceñista" [Santa Cruz Youth Union] are implementing a new phase of their COUP PLAN, by the taking of public institutions, and in an effort to destabilize the legitimate government of Evo Morales, SLAUGHTERED AND KILLED scores of unarmed indigenous and peasants in Porvenir (Pando), the very same who through their struggle have been added to the thousands of heroes and martyrs who have offered their lives for the ultimate recovery of Sumak Kawsay on our continent.

6. Faced with these situations, in the name of Pachamama's loving and rebellious cry for justice, of the dignified women and men who aspire to leave our sons and daughters a planet where we might live in universal brotherhood, through the exercise of the right to a dignified life, the right to self-determination for the people, and respect for inter-cultural and multinational coexistence; for a just and fraternal world, we call on all organizations of indigenous, Afro-Americans, peasants, workers, women, social movements, students, networks, intellectuals, personalities, friends of revolutionary causes, to the INTERNATIONAL MEETING OF SOLIDARITY WITH BOLIVIA, to be held on October 23 and 25 in Santa Cruz, Bolivia, in order to unite our forces and hearts, and testify together to the world that BOLIVIA DOES NOT STRUGGLE ALONE.
That is why we join with President Evo Morales and endorse his words:

"Many times I will be wrong, who isn't once in awhile? But in the struggle against neoliberal colonization, I will never be wrong, I will never betray them." (Evo Morales, Umala, May 3rd, 2008)

CONVOCATION

• Confederation of People of Kichwa Nationality from Ecuador. (ECUARUNARI)
• Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE)
• National Indigenous Organization of Colombia (ONIC) - Colombia
• Council of All Lands - Chile
• Landless Movement (MST) - Brazil
• Campesina Way - Brazil

[End]

INTERIM ACTIVIST CALENDAR, Sept. 23, 2008
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter

Information and updates about the following events became available after publication of the latest issue of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter/Calendar and will take place before the new edition. Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net Subscribe at the same address. Previous newsletters and calendars may be located at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com.

—————————————————

EDITOR’S NOTE — Our full newsletter will be sent in a few days. In the meanwhile, here are four items:

1. An action in New Paltz this Saturday, Sept. 27.
2. In Washington today — and perhaps as you read this because it's supposed to last 24 hours — Members of Veterans for Peace are conducting a protest at the National Archives building with a huge sign (22 ft x 8 ft.) reading, "Defend Our Constitution — Arrest War Criminals Bush and Cheney."
3. Two "No Wall St. Bailout" protests are taking place: One on Wednesday, tomorrow, in White Plains, and the other Thursday in New York City.
4. A new website — VoteNoBailout.org— offers a critique of the $700 billion Wall St. bailout plan being debated in Washington and gives you a chance to send a message to Congress. We print the text below, plus the website address for your message. It appears the new website is associated with VoteToImpeach.org, which has so far collected 1,014,935 votes for impeachment.

—————————————————

1. Humanitarian aid, not Cold War sanctions:
JOIN THE VIGIL IN NEW PALTZ SEPT. 27

A picket line will be established from 10:30 a.m. to 12 noon in front of the New Paltz Elting Library at Main St. and North Front St. Saturday, Sept. 27, demanding an end to the U.S. economic and trade embargo against Cuba.

The action is being called in the aftermath of two Hurricanes that recently devastated that Caribbean island country. "What's needed now is humanitarian aid, not obsolete Cold War sanctions," said a statement from the organizers, the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project and the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter.

Every part of Cuba was slammed by Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, damaging or destroying 440,000 homes and causing several billion dollars in damage. A total of 3,179,846 people were evacuated to higher land and more secure shelter, out of a population of 12,000,000. Only four people died as a result of these back-to-back "killer" storms because of Cuba's renowned hurricane survival arrangements, but hundreds of thousands are living in temporary makeshift shelters.

The vigil is intended to draw public attention to the difficulties of reconstruction in Cuba because of Washington's 45-year embargo. The organizers quote from a Sept. 11 editorial in the New York Times to make their case:

"The United States is refusing to temporarily ease core aspects of the longstanding trade embargo to help Cuba deal with the emergency." Washington is refusing Cuba's request to buy American construction materials to rebuild homes and repair the mangled electricity grid. It won't allow Cuba to buy American food on credit, and it has, so far, refused to lift restrictions on the money that Cuban-Americans may send back to their relatives. We believe the embargo against Cuba is about as wrongheaded a policy as one can devise."

Demonstrators will carry signs, mostly homemade, calling for an end to the economic blockade. For information, jacdon@earthlink.net.

A half-hour after this vigil ends, the regular weekly peace vigil organized by Women in Black will take place on the same corner, 12:30-1:30 p.m. This coming Saturday the 27th there will be something special: The WIB vigil will be part of a "National Day of Action to Stop a War on Iran Before it Begins." Protests will be held across the country, and many weekly Hudson Valley peace vigils will focus on Iran for the day.

Come to the New Paltz next Saturday and take part in both actions if you can.

—————————————————

2. VETS DEMONSTRATE IN WASHINGTON

[Since the action is still taking place here is the raw text of information sent to us by Veterans for Peace just as the event was starting]

On Tuesday, September 23rd, at the front of the National Archives on Constitution Ave. in Washington, D.C., five military veterans will risk arrest as they climb a 9-foot retaining fence and occupy the 35 ft. high ledge to raise a 22 foot banner stating, “DEFEND OUR CONSTITUTION. ARREST BUSH AND CHENEY: WAR CRIMINALS!”

The group, which includes Vietnam and Iraq War veterans, has declared its intention to stay on the ledge, fasting for 24 hours “in remembrance of those who have perished and those still suffering from the crimes of the Bush administration,” according to a written statement. With a portable PA system, they will broadcast recorded statements from prominent Americans for the impeachment and/or arrest of George W. Bush and Richard Cheney. “Citizens Arrest Warrants” will be distributed to people waiting in line to enter the National Archives.

In a written statement, the veterans emphasized they are taking this action because “Bush and Cheney’s serial abuse of the Law of the Land clearly marks them as domestic enemies of the Constitution…they have illegally invaded and occupied Iraq, deliberately destroyed civilian infrastructure, authorized torture, and unlawfully detained prisoners. These actions clearly mark them as war criminals…accountability extends beyond impeachment to prosecution for war crimes even after their terms of office expire.”

“We take this action as a last resort,” their statement added. “For years we have pursued every avenue open to good, vigilant citizens to bring these men to justice, to re-establish the rule of law, and to restore the balance of power described in our Constitution. We are not disturbing the peace; we are attempting to restore the peace. We are not conducting ourselves in a disorderly manner; our action is well-ordered and well-considered. We are not trespassing; we have come to the home of our Constitution to honor our oath to defend it.”

——————————————

3. TWO "NO WALL STREET BAILOUT" PROTESTS

Wednesday, Sept. 24, in White Plains starting at 12 noon at the office of Rep. Nita Lowey, 222 Mamaroneck Ave. The rally is set to coincide with hearings on the bailout by the House Financial Services Committee. Congresswoman Lowey is a member of the House Appropriations Committee, which gives her a financial connection to
the bailout. It's sponsored by the WESPAC Foundation and Consumers for Peace.

Thursday, Sept. 25, Wall St. area of Manhattan, NYC. People are gathering to say "We won't pay for the Wall St. bailout." Demonstrators are asked to "meet at 4 p.m. at the Southern end of Bowling Green Park, in the plaza area. Bring banners, noisemakers, signs, leaflets, etc."

——————————————

4. NO BAILOUT!
Demand that the Bailout Legislation Be Rejected
Send a message to Congress: http://www.votenobailout.org/

From VoteNoBailout.org: We are witnessing a bankers' coup d’etat. In the name of saving the economy from a crisis created by their own greed and immense profits, the biggest bankers have taken a country and a people hostage.

“Give us your money and tear up what’s left of your Constitution or we will sink your economy,” is the message from Wall Street and the Bush Administration. “Give us the power and money we demand or you will be left jobless from a new economic depression."

Congress is poised to vote to give the Executive Branch of government, and specifically the White House’s political appointees in the Treasury Department, the absolute right to take our money and give it to domestic and foreign banks and corporations without any oversight of elected officials, from the courts, or from the people.

The new legislation states: “Decisions by the Secretary [of the Treasury] pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.” The Legislation allows the Treasury Department to appoint the same bankers who created the crisis to administer and dictate the use of trillions of our tax dollars. Send a message to Congress: http://www.votenobailout.org/.

We will not stand by and let the Bush Administration formalize its vision of a “government of, by and for the richest bankers."

The new system institutionalizes theft on a grand scale. Lehman Brothers bankers will receive $2.5 billion in bonuses after their company went bankrupt last week, but the new dictatorial authority under the White House and Treasury Department has ruled out any relief for the millions of working families who are being foreclosed.

We live in a $15 trillion annual economy. Instead of taking our tax dollars and giving it to the already rich and powerful, these funds should be used provide to decent paying jobs, affordable housing, health care and a good education for our children. There is another way!

Now is the time to hear the voice of the people. A spineless Congress authorized Bush’s illegal war in Iraq and rubber-stamped the Patriot Act. Now they are being herded like sheep again to give the White House and Wall Street dictatorial control over the people’s money.

Sept. 15, 2008, Issue #139
ACTIVIST CALENDAR
PART 2 of HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER
jacdon@earthlink.net
http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/
——————————————

Editor's Note

1. The Part 1 news and articles portion of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter will be emailed later in the month. Included will be a geopolitical analysis of the Georgia events, focusing on U.S.-Russia relations; a survey of U.S.-Latin America relations in view of the elections and the Bush Administration's latest efforts to subvert progressive governments in the region; a full account of the crisis in Bolivia; and a look at the presidential campaign, among other articles.

2. There seem to be fewer activist events than usual from mid-September throughout October. Part of this is because in presidential election years liberal activists focus their efforts on electing Democrats to the exclusion of much else. But the antiwar movement has been fairly quiet as well, more so, it seems to us, than usual.

3. At the very end of this calendar is a special treat.

——————————————

Wednesday, Sept. 17, POUGHKEEPSIE (Vassar College campus): The well-known British-Pakistani progressive intellectual Tariq Ali will deliver a public lecture on "The Deadly Triangle: The U.S., Pakistan and Afghanistan." He will speak on campus at 5 p.m. in Sanders hall, room 212. Enter at 124 Raymond Ave. Ali, an historian and a journalist associated with the UK's New Left Review, has just published the latest of his several books, titled "The Duel: Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power." The event is sponsored by Vassar Green Party. Information, redunlea@vassar.edu

Thursday, Sept. 18, PLEASANTVILLE: The 2008 documentary, "The New 'Selling of the
President' 2008," will be shown at 8 p.m. followed by a discussion with David Schwartz (Museum of the Moving Image), Allison Fine (author, Rebooting America), Micah Sifry (author, activist), and Steve Apkon (Jacob Burns Film Center). It will be an evening of political commercials and Internet clips from the Obama/McCain contest interspersed with conversation, speculation and interpretation. The venue is the Jacob Burns Film Center, 364 Manville Rd. Information, (914) 773-7663, nirainjana@yahoo.com.

Friday, Sept. 19, PURCHASE: A discussion on "Access to Health Care:
Westchester & Putnam Counties" will last from 8:30-10-30 a.m. in the Performing
Arts Center, at Purchase College. Speaking will be Lillian Jones (Access to Health Care
Coalition), Rep Nita Lowey (D-NY), many others. Sponsors include American Cancer Society, BALCONY, Purchase College, United Way of Westchester & Putnam, Westchester Visiting Nurse Services, Westchester/Putnam AFL-CIO Central Labor Body, Westchester Community Foundation.

Friday, Sept. 19, NEW PALTZ: The documentary "Hacking Democracy" will be shown at the Elting Library, 93 Main St., at 8 p.m. The film demonstrates how election machines were rigged in Florida in 2000, the difficulty in obtaining information about such violations, and the ease of hacking into such voting systems, one type of which is approved for use in New York State. Public and free.

Saturday, Sept. 20, YONKERS: A forum on police brutality is to be held at the Yonkers Riverfront Library, 1 Larkin Ave., 12 noon-3 p.m. The sponsor is the Westchester chapter of Blacks in Law Enforcement. Information, damonkjonesnbpa@aol.com.

Saturday, Sept. 20, ALL OVER: Thousands of activists across the United States will be knocking on doors soliciting signatures for petitions to Congress to end the unjust, illegal war in Iraq and to bring the troops home within a year. Groups participating in the "Million Doors for Peace" campaign include Catholics United, Cities for Peace, CodePink, Democracy for the America, MoveOn.org, Pax Christi USA, Peace Action, Progressive Accountability, Progressive Democrats of America, Organic Consumers Association, United for Peace & Justice, Voters for Peace, and Win Without War. The project has been initiated by TrueMajority.org and USAction Education Fund. For information and to participate, http://www.milliondoorsforpeace.org/whatisthis.php?code=vfp. To view the petition, http://www.milliondoorsforpeace.org/petition.php.

Monday, Sept. 22, ALBANY: Today is a national day of action against health insurance companies and to promote a single payer healthcare solution. In the Capital District, meet in front of the NYS Insurance Department, 99 Washington Ave., 5-6 p.m. Sponsored by Hunger Action Network, Capital District Alliance for Universal Healthcare and the Solidarity Committee, HealthCare-NOW! Information dbull@capital.net, (518) 426-0883 http://www.healthcare-now.org.

Friday, Sept. 26, MILLBROOK: The disappearance of a substantial portion of the bee population in America is the topic of a discussion beginning at 7 p.m. David Hackenberg, former president of the American Federation of Beekeepers, will read from and comment upon author Michael Schacker's recent book "A Spring Without Bees: How Colony Collapse has Endangered our Food Supply." The free public event will be held at the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Route 44A at 7 p.m. Sponsored by the institute and Merritt Books. Information (845) 647-6487, maureenrad@aol.com, http://www.ecostudies.org.

Saturday, Sept. 27, ALL OVER: Today is the National Day of Action to Stop War on Iran before it begins. Marches, rallies, teach-ins, and vigils will be held in up to 100 cities, according to the organizers, the Stop War On Iran Campaign. In NEW YORK CITY, activists will meet at 12 noon for a march at Times Square, 42nd St. and Broadway, a few blocks from Hudson Valley train and bus connections. In WAPPINGERS FALLS, participants in the weekly antiwar vigil will carry "No War in Iran" signs as part of the national action. This local event takes place 12 noon-2 p.m. at the intersection of Rts. 9 and 9D in Wappingers Falls, near the South Hills Mall and across from Staples. Other weekly vigils may also be dedicating this day t o Iran. Information, stopwaroniran@safewebmail.com, http://www.stopwaroniran.org. For the Wappingers Falls vigil, patla@hvc.rr.com, http://www.dutchesspeace.org.

Saturday, Sept. 27, ALBANY: Before he was elected president of Bolivia in December 2005 — the first indigenous president in all the Americas — Evo Morales was a union leader. The 2007 documentary Cocalero, which will be shown tonight at 7 p.m., focuses on "the union formed by Bolivian farmers in response to the Bolivian-U.S. government effort eradicate coca crops, and the man who would come to represent them." This free public event takes place at First Unitarian Universalist Church of Albany, 405 Washington Ave. Sponsored by the Solidarity Committee of the Capital District, Upper Hudson Peace Action, Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace. Information, dbull@capital.net, (518) 426-0883, http://www.jflan.net/solidarity.


Sunday, Sept. 28, NEW YORK CITY: Animal rights activists may wish to travel to NYC today to take part in the Annual Farm Sanctuary Walk for Farm Animals, which has been organized in scores of cities. It's intended to raise both consciousness and funds. Vegan food provided by the Groovy Baker, live music, and guest speakers. Register at 10 a.m.; walk through Central Park begins at noon from Merchant's Gate, Columbus Circle (59th St.). Information and advance registration, http://www.firstgiving.org/farmsanctuary, nyc@walkforfarmanimals.org.

Sunday, Sept. 28, BEACON: Clearwater's Annual Gathering from 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m. at the former University Settlement Camp, 724 Wolcott Ave. (Rt. 9D). Information, (845) 454-7673 and http://www.clearwater.org.

Wednesday-Sunday, Oct. 1-5, WOODSTOCK, RHINEBECK AND ROSENDALE: The annual five–day Woodstock Film Festival will be held on these days at several locations. A full schedule of events and all the information you need is at this website: http://www.woodstockfilmfestival.com/festival2008/films_all.php. We will mention only one of the many films of interest to residents of the Hudson Valley, especially the Mid-Hudson region, who have experienced (or may soon experience) Lyme Disease from a deer tick bite. The title is "Under Our Skin," directed by Andy Abrahams Wilson and released this year. It will be at Upstate Films in Rhinebeck Oct. 4 at 3:30 p.m. It is described on the website, along with scores of other most interesting films.

Friday, Oct. 3, POUGHKEEPSIE: The wonderful 2007 documentary, "Pete Seeger: The Power of Song," will be shown tonight at 7:30 p.m. at The Muddy Cup, 305 Main St. It's public and free, sponsored by he Dutchess Peace Coalition. Information, (845) 876-7906,
http://www.dutchesspeace.org.

Sunday, Oct. 5, NEW PALTZ: Brian Becker, the founder and leader of the nationwide ANSWER peace coalition, will speak tonight on the topic of sharply increasing world tensions, the U.S. elections and the American antiwar movement tonight at 6 p.m. Becker, who was arrested Sept. 12 at an event in front of the White House, has organized most of the largest peace protests during the Iraq-Afghan war period. The meeting will take place at New Paltz Village Hall on Plattekill Ave., one block south of Main St. (Rt. 299), a mile or so west of Thruway exit 18. (When you reach Starbucks corner, Plattekill Ave., turn south one block. It’s just past the firehouse on the right.) Park in the Village Hall parking lot. All are invited and it’s free. A potluck dinner begins at 5 p.m. for those who wish to partake. The meeting is sponsored by the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project, and strongly recommended by the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter. Information and directions, (845) 255-5779 or email jacdon@earthlink.net.

Saturday, Oct. 11, BEACON: The third annual Dissident Folk & Arts Festival will hold forth tonight, 6-11 p.m. at The Howland Cultural Center, 477 Main St. The event "will feature a wide array of topical musicians, protest poets, radical theatre artists," including Bev Grant and the Dissident Daughters; alternative protest song group The Flames of Discontent; Michael Strong's Tribute to Bertolt Brecht; musician/activist Chris Ruhe and the vocalist Alvin Bell; and many others. Admission $8. Information, 845-831-4988, leftmus@earthlink.net, http://www.flamesofdiscontent.org/calendar.html.

Saturday, Oct. 11, WOODSTOCK: Palestinian "Nakba" vigil 2:30-4 p.m.Village Green at 12 Tinker St. Sponsored by: Middle East Crisis Response. Information 845 876-7906. Information, fred@acornfilm.com, http://www.mideastcrisis.org.

Saturday, Oct. 18, YONKERS: A discussion on "Rethinking Race, Power and
Politics in Westchester County Through the Lens of Civil
Liberties" will take place 10:30 a.m.-3 p.m. at Yonkers Riverfront Library, 1 Larkin Center. Speakers David Billings and Ron Chisom will discuss the analysis of racism
developed by New Orleans-based People's Institute for Survival and
Beyond. There will be a light lunch.
Registration is required. Call (914) 682-4690. Information, info@wespac.org
.

Saturday, Oct. 18, PITTSFIELD, MA: A day-long conference on "How To Prevent War On Iran AND On The U.S. Constitution" will be held at the Susan B. Anthony Lounge of Berkshire Community College. Pittsfield is only a few miles from New York's Colombia County, and a few more from Rensselaer County. There are two main speakers, among many others: (1) UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter, the man who insisted before the U.S. invasion that Iraq already got rid of its weapons of mass destruction. He will have just returned from a long trip to Iran. (2) Joseph Gerson, Program Director for the American Friends Service Committee in Cambridge, MA, who has written numerous books on global affairs and has traveled widely in the Middle East. There will be workshops and various small-group discussions throughout the day as well as plenary meetings. Admission for the day is $10, Seniors $8, Students $5. Registration takes place between 8:30-9 a.m. The sessions last from 9 a.m.-5 p.m. The event is sponsored by Global Issues Resource Organization of Berkshire Community College, Berkshire Citizens for Peace and Justice and Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace. Lunch may be purchased in the cafeteria. Full details and directions, http://www.endusmilitarism.org/how_to_prevent_war_101808.html. Information, Don Lathrop (518) 781-4681, dlathrop@berkshirecc.edu, George Desnoyers, (413) 443-4298, and gdesnoye@berkshire.rr.com.

———————

Here's a link to a brief video of Gov. Sarah Palin's first rehearsal of the speech she made at the GOP Convention. It's titled "The Logic of Change'" and may be accessed at http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=SskwK7mjKQw

ACTIVIST CALENDAR, July 20, 2008
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter

Information and updates about the following events became available after publication of the latest issue of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter/Calendar and will take place before the new edition. Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net Subscribe at the same address. Previous newsletters and calendars may be located at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.

—————————————————

EDITOR’S NOTE

We're off soon for two weeks of camping and biking, so the next H.V. Activist Newsletter and Calendar will appear in later August. Enjoy your summer.

—————————————————

ANNIE KATZ R.I.P

A well known Mid-Hudson activist, Annie B. Katz, 55, died July 11 after a several-month struggle against cancer. A graphic designer, Annie was the coordinator of the Hudson Valley Contingent of Code Pink, the antiwar group, and a member of Veterans for Peace. According to a message from one of her activist friends: "You'll recall Annie at our antiwar demonstrations, dressed in pink from head to toe and armed with a truckload of signs for the taking. Annie's spirit and commitment were inspiring to all of us; she was a one-of-a-kind lady."

Annie Katz, presente!

—————————————————

ACTIVIST CALENDAR

Monday, July 21, ALL OVER: Today is a nationwide call-in day for peace activists to inform their members of Congress that they oppose any moves toward a war with Iran. The action was initiated by United For Peace and Justice, which says: "Now, before any irreversible steps are taken, is the time for us to speak out against any U.S./Israeli military attack on Iran…. Pressure on Congress is critical right now as it considers H.Con.Res. 362. 102 House Democrats and 117 Republicans have cosponsored a resolution against Iran that demands President Bush 'initiate an international effort' to impose a land, sea, and air blockade on Iran to prevent it from importing gasoline and to inspect all cargo entering or leaving Iran. Imposing such a blockade without UN authority could be widely construed as an act of war." To obtain Washington and local office information for Senate and House members go to http://capwiz.com/fconl/directory/congdir.tt.

Tuesday, July 22, NEW PALTZ: (Updated) What would the people of the Hudson Valley do if, say, 80% of their gas and oil supply was cut off for a decade until substitute energy resources were developed? A free public showing of the 53-minute documentary, "The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil," will provide an idea about how to survive such a crisis. Virtually all Cuba's petroleum and fertilizer came from the Soviet Union on a barter basis. When the USSR imploded in 1990, Cuba's supply was cut off, and the U.S. trade embargo compounded the crisis. Cubans managed by becoming one of the most energy efficient societies in the world. And their 10-year experience turned them into the global leader in organic farming. The 7-9 p.m. event will take place at the Elting Library, 93 Main St. (Rt. 299) at the corner of North Front St. (diagonally across the street from Starbucks). Sponsored by the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project and endorsed by the Activist Newsletter. Information, (845) 255-5779, jacdon@earthlink.net. About the film: http://www.communitysolution.org/poc.html.

Thursday, July 24, PLEASANTVILLE: The Fellowship of Reconciliation and WESPAC Foundation are sponsoring a mixed-media "Drug War Roadshow" at 7 p.m. FoR's Liza Smith appears with skits, puppets, humor and digital images that examine the human impact of U.S. drug policy at home and in Colombia. (Volunteers needed at 4 p.m. to help with the presentation.) The event will be at WESPAC's Pleasantville office, 17 Marble Ave. Information and/or to volunteer, (914) 449-6514, info@wespac.org, http://www.forcolombia.org/dwr.

Saturday, July. 26, KINGSTON: This is a reminder there is a weekly peace vigil 12 noon-2 p.m. Saturday's at the Kings Mall by the U.S. Army Recruitment Center, 1200 Ulster Ave. Information, Jay Wenk, (845) 679-6970, jaywenk@verizon.net.

Wednesday, July 30, to Sunday, Aug. 3, HIGH FALLS: A "Northeast Climate Confluence" will be held at the Epworth Camp and Methodist Retreat Center (8 Epworth Lane) for the purpose of "organizing for climate action." There will be workshops, music, discussion of public issues and strategy sessions. For full information, http://climateconfluence.org/.

Friday, Aug. 1, POUGHKEEPSIE: A showing of the film "Das Boot," followed by a discussion, will begin at 7:30 p.m. at The Muddy Cup, 305 Main St. The movie's about 42 raw German U-boat recruits, caught up in a war they didn't understand, and the captain who must lead them in their struggle to survive. The showing is part of the Dutchess Peace Coalition's "Give Peace a Film" series. Information, http://www.dutchesspeace.org, fnagel@earthlink.net, Fred Nagel (845) 876-7906.

Saturday, Aug. 2, MIDDLETOWN: A demonstration against U.S. or other military aggression toward Iran will take place at the Galleria Mall. It is part of a series of nationwide actions today on the same issue (see below). The Middletown event is sponsored by the Democratic Alliance of Orange County and Orange County Peace & Justice. Activists will protest, starting at 11 a.m., at the median strip off Rt. 211 close to the train and Lowe's and near Sam's Club. Information, mauryck@aol.com.

Saturday, Aug. 2, NEW YORK CITY: A mass march to "Stop a War on Iran" will leave from Times Sq, 43rd St. and Broadway. Activists will assemble there at 12 noon. It is one of more than 50 actions in 21 states and Washington DC seeking to head off a possible unjust war against Iran. The mobilization is backed by a number of groups including American-Iranian Friendship Committee, International Action Center, Stop War on Iran, Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran, Mobilization Against War and Occupation, and Iranian Community Against War. Information about NYC and the entire campaign, http://stopwaroniran.org/, stopwaroniran@safewebmail.com.

Saturday, August 2, POUGHKEEPSIE: Today is the Dutchess Community College Music School's Annual Sing Along/Play Along at Dutchess Community College on Creek Rd. The public is invited to this 2-5 p.m. benefit for the MusicLink Scholarship Fund for low income students. Performers of all ages and levels are invited to take part. No connection to the college is necessary. Admission is free. Information, Julie Wenger at (845) 431-8916, wenger@sunydutchess.edu.

Wednesday, August 6, NEW PALTZ: Today is Hiroshima Day. A memorial to mark the 63rd anniversary of the first nuclear bombing of a human habitation will be held at Peace Park 5-6 p.m. The park is next to Village Hall on Plattekill Ave. just south of Main St. There will be music, dance and poetry. Sponsored by Arts for Peace. Information, Julie Wegener: yo-mom@earthlink.net.

Wednesday, Aug. 6, ALBANY: A reading of John Hersey's "Hiroshima" will commemorate the bombing of Hiroshima Aug. 6, 1945, and of Nagasaki on Aug. 9, 1945. Community members are signing up to read portions of the text. The 11 a.m.-3:30 p.m. event will be held at the Swan St. Steps of West Capitol Park, S. Swan St. and Washington Ave. The sponsor is Poetry Motel Foundation. Information, (518) 482-0262, dwlcx@earthlink.net.

Thursday, Aug. 7, DELMAR: A presentation on "The Middle East and a Closer Look at Hezbollah and Hamas," including a slide presentation and a Q&A will take place 7-8:30 p.m. at the Bethlehem Public Library, 451 Delaware Ave. Speaking will be John Amidon, a member of Veterans for Peace who last May participated in the U.S. Academics For Peace Delegation to the Mideast. The group visited Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, meeting with academics, religious leaders and representatives of both Hezbollah and Hamas. Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace is the sponsor. Information (518) 466-1192, tquaif@yahoo.com, and http://www.BethlehemforPeace.org.

Saturday, Aug. 9, MONTGOMERY: Orange County peace and justice groups have scheduled an afternoon of activities at the Day Camp pavilion of Thomas Bull Park (Route 416) to honor Beth Quinn, a newspaper reporter and columnist who was fired recently by the daily Times Herald-Record after 27 years with the publication. Several other employees were also let go in an economy move. "Beth Quinn Day," which takes place from 12 noon to dusk, was organized "to show our community appreciation for all Beth has done and meant to us." There will be hot dogs, hamburgers and soft drinks. Entertainment is planned. Sponsors include Orange County Peace and Justice Coalition, Democratic Alliance, and National Alliance on Mental Illness in Orange County. Information, Mauryck@aol.com.

Saturday, August 9, WOODSTOCK: A 2:30-4 p.m. Palestinian "Nakba" vigil will be held at the Village Green on Tinker St. The vigil is held on the second Saturday of each month to commemorate the 1948 forced exodus of over 700,000 Palestinians from their homeland coincident with the establishment of Israel. Sponsored by Middle East Crisis Response. Information, (845) 876-7906, http://www.mideastcrisis.org, fred@acornfilm.com.

Friday, Aug. 15, to Monday, Aug. 18, PINE BUSH: The annual conference of the Union for Radical Political Economics will take place at Camp Deer Run on these days. Topics include papers and workshops on "Poverty and Unemployment Abroad and at Home: How Much and Why?," "Guns and Butter Once Again?," and "Strengthening the Power of the Working Class:
What Works and What Doesn't?" Information, (413) 577-0806, urpe@labornet.org, http://www.urpe.org.

Friday, August 22, CHATHAM: The film "King Corn" will be shown at the Chatham Farmers' Market, 15 Church St. starting at 7 p.m. It's about "two friends growing an acre of corn in Iowa who uncover the devastating impact that corn is having on the environment, public health and family farms." Public invited, donations accepted. Information, (518) 392-3353.

JULY 1, 2008, ISSUE #138 ACTIVIST CALENDAR
PART 2 of HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER
jacdon@earthlink.net
——————————————
[Editor's Note: There are far fewer progressive events in July and August than the rest of the year, which explains the relatively smaller size of this edition.]
——————————————

Thursday, July 3, DELMAR: Documentary — "Orwell Rolls in His Grave" at Bethlehem Public Library, 451 Delaware Ave. from 6:45-8:45 p.m. Intellectuals examine and discuss the mix of business, politics and ideology, that constitutes the U.S. mainstream media. Information, tqaif@yahoo.com, (518) 391-2830, http://www.Bethlehemforpeace.org.

Friday, July 4, ELLENVILLE: This year's Ellenville Independence Day parade will include the Catskill Peace Alliance and Rondout Valley Patriots for Peace, among those taking part. Marchers will gather at 11 a.m. at the parking lot of the High School at 28 Maple Ave. off Rt. 209. The word is, "All marchers with signs, placards, flags and banners are welcome. The theme is social justice: peace, health care for all, funding education and human needs, alternative energy, affordable housing, rebuilding infrastructure, stopping the war machine and war profiteering. We will have live music as we march. Bring your guitars and favorite marching songs." Information, underhval@hvi.net.

Saturday, July 5 to July 26, KINGSTON: "Unseen America New York State" will open here today until July 26. Tonight, 5-8 p.m. there will be an opening reception and viewing. This famed labor exhibit will be on display at the Kingston Museum of Contemporary Arts, 103 Abeel St. Workers tell their stories in pictures and words. Everyone who supports workers and their unions should check this out. Sponsored by NYS AFL-CIO, Bread & Roses 1199SEIU, Workforce Development Institute (WDI), and the WDI Hudson Valley Regional Office. Information, http://www.kmoca.org, eshannon@wdiny.org, Erin Shannon at (518) 272-3500, ext. 119.

Monday, July 7, NEW PALTZ: Arts for Peace and Liberty View Farm are cosponsoring a free film tonight, outdoors on the grass, at the Water Street Market, 10 Main St., a stone's throw from the Wallkill River bridge. It's free, popcorn too. Tonight's documentary is King Corn, about "two friends growing an acre of corn in Iowa who uncover the devastating impact that corn is having on the environment, public health and family farms." Information, including time, (845) 255-1403.

Monday, July 7, POUGHKEEPSIE: The Dutchess Peace Coalition is meeting at Unitarian Fellowship, 67 South Randolph Ave. 7-8:30 p.m. Planning antiwar and anti-recruitment activities. Meets the first Monday of each month. Information, http://www.dutchesspeace.org, fnagel@earthlink.net, (845) 876-7906.

Tuesday, July 8, SAUGERTIES: Greene County resident Paul Rehm will discuss the Palestine-Israel conflict 7-9 p.m. at the Frank Greco Senior Center, 207 Market St. Rehm, a member of Christian Peacemaker Team, witnessed dramatic events this spring in the town of Hebron in the occupied Palestinian territories. He will describe his experiences and offer an analysis of the situation. Sponsored by Middle East Crisis Response. Information, gale@mideastcrisis.org, (845) 679-9140, http://mideastcrisis.org.

Wednesday, July 9, NATIONWIDE: Supporters of the website MoveOn.org, who are largely antiwar Democrats, will hold rallies in front of local gas stations in many cities and towns today for an "Oil-Free President," presumably Barack Obama. From the organizers: "Big Oil is making billions in profits as Americans are squeezed by soaring gas prices. Now Big Oil has a new candidate for president, their friend John McCain, has accepted over $1 million from the oil and gas industry." Information, (518) 583-4326, joe.seeman@yahoo.com.

Thursday, July 10 and 24, WOODSTOCK: The Middle East Crisis Response group meets both Thursdays at 7-8:30 p.m. at the Woodstock Public Library, 5 Library Lane. All are welcome. Information, Fred Nagel, (845) 876-7906, http://www.mideastcrisis.org.

Saturday, July 12, WOODSTOCK: Concert/Sing-Along: "Second Annual Woodstock Woody Guthrie Birthday Hoot" at the Colony Cafe, 232 Rock City Rd., 7-9:30 p.m., featuring The Flames of Discontent, Hope Machine, Mancini and Martin, Chris Ruhe and others. Celebrate the life of the people's singer who wrote "This Land is your land," the song that should become our national anthem, and hundreds of other tunes in support of the working class and the poor against their oppressors. Access the Woody Guthrie website at http://www.woodyguthrie.org/ and the first thing that greets you is the famous photo of Woody holding the guitar upon which he emblazoned the statement "This machine kills fascists!" Admission, $5. Information, (845) 679-5342, http://www.flamesofdiscontent.org.

Saturday, July 12 POUGHKEEPSIE: "Born on the Fourth of July," director Oliver Stone's important film about the life of Ron Kovic, the paralyzed Vietnam Marine veteran who was staunchly against the war, will be shown at the Muddy Cup Coffee House, 305 Main St., 7:30-9:30 p.m. A discussion will follow this free, public film. Sponsored by Dutchess Peace Coalition. Information, (845) 876-7906, fred@acornfilm.com, http://www.dutchesspeace.org.

Sunday, July 13, SAUGERTIES: Rep. Maurice Hinchey will talk on the topic of The Economy, The Energy Crisis and The Future of Our Nation, at a town meeting 3-5 p.m. at the Frank D. Greco Memorial Senior Citizens Center, Cantine Field Complex, 207 Market St. Information, mharkavy@hvc.rr.com.

Sunday, July 13, POUGHKEEPSIE: There will be a free 2 p.m. screening and discussion of the 2006 HBO documentary "Hacking Democracy" at the Muddy Cup, 305 Main St. We're informed this film "exposes the dangers of voting machines used during America's midterm and presidential elections." Andi Novick and Joanne Lukacher, members of the Election Transparency Coalition, will lead a discussion. About the film: http://www.HackingDemocracy.com.

Monday, July 14, PLEASANTVILLE: "One Small Thing We Can Do," a film about the Iraqi refugee crisis, will begin at 7 p.m. at WESPAC Foundation, 17 Marble Ave. Gabe Huck and Theresa Kubasak will discuss the conditions for Iraqi refugees with a particular emphasis on the status of young Iraqis and their interrupted education. Discussion to follow. Information, (914) 449-6514, http://www.wespac.org.

Monday, July 14, NEW PALTZ: Here's another free evening outdoor documentary at the Water Street Market, 10 Main St. It's The Future of Food, which "offers an in-depth investigation into the disturbing truth behind the unlabeled, patented, genetically engineered foods that have quietly filled U.S. grocery store shelves for the past decade." Information, including time, (845) 255-1403.

Friday, July 18, CHATHAM: Real Food Film Series, featuring "The Real Dirt on Farmer John" at the Chatham Real Food Market Co-op, 15 Church St. at 7 p.m. An unconventional farmer transforms his farm into a new form of agriculture. Information, (518) 392-3353, realfoodnetwork@taconic.net.

Sunday, July 20, WOODSTOCK: Several local peace and justice groups are sponsoring an evening with performance artist Margo Lee Sherman in "What Do I Know About War?" It begins at 7 p.m. at the Kleinert/James Art Center on 34 Tinker St. We're told, "What Do I Know About War?" is an internationally acclaimed one-woman show which tells actual stories about our men and women stationed in Iraq. This unflinching look at the human cost of war was described by The New York Times as 'Brilliant… surreal… the experience is like eavesdropping on a small sorrowful town.'" Admission, $10. Sponsored by Arts for Peace, International Women's Peace Service, Middle East Crisis Response, New Paltz Women in Black, Peace Action Network, Woodstock Veterans for Peace, and Woodstock Women in Black. Information, (845) 876-7906.

Tuesday, July 22, NEW PALTZ: Here's a free public film showing we recommend. It's a documentary titled, "The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil." What would the people of the Hudson Valley do if, say, 80% of their gas and oil supply was cut off for a decade or two until (and if) substitute energy resources were developed? Given worldwide fears that the demand for oil may outpace supply, this is not an impossible situation.
Well, it happened to the Cuban people starting in 1990. Virtually all Cuba's petroleum and fertilizer came from the Soviet Union on barter basis. When the USSR imploded in 1990, Cuba's supply was cut off, and the U.S. trade embargo compounded the crisis. Cubans had to figure out how to survive with only a small percentage of the gas and oil that fueled transportation, factories, agriculture — everything. They managed by becoming one of the most energy efficient societies in the world. Even though they now get oil from Venezuela, they have continued to be energy savers. And their 10-year experience of having little gas for tractors and no chemical fertilizer for crops over a decade of extreme shortages turned them into a global leader in organic farming.
The 53-minute documentary was produced by a U.S. nonprofit called The Community Solution, a group that urges Americans to work as a community to find alternatives to petroleum because of the inevitable reduction in oil supplies. It's a lively and upbeat film showing that when people work together as a community they can solve complex problems. The 7-9 p.m. event will take place at the Elting Library, 93 Main St. (Rt. 299) at the corner of North Front St. (diagonally across the street from Starbucks). This is the first offering of a documentary series organized by the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project and endorsed by the Activist Newsletter. Information, (835) 255-5779, jacdon@earthlink.net. About the film: http://www.communitysolution.org/poc.html.

Tuesday, July 29, NEWBURGH: SUNY New Paltz Professor Irwin Sperber will discuss the response by environmental organizations to the "junk science" denial of global warming at 7 p.m. tonight at the It’s All Good Restaurant, 374 Washington St. Doors open at 6 p.m. Sponsored by the Hudson Valley Science Café and Mid-Hudson Chapter of American Chemical Society. Cost is $3. Information, toby.rossman@nyumc.org.

June 30, 2008, Issue #138
HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER/CALENDAR
jacdon@earthlink.net , http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/

This newsletter/calendar, published in New Paltz, N.Y., appears once a month, supplemented by additional listings of new activist events, usually sent to Valley readers only. Editor, Jack A. Smith (who writes all the news articles that appear without a byline or credit to other publications). Copy Editor, Donna Goodman. Calendar Editor, Rocco Rizzo. If you know someone who may benefit from this newsletter, ask them to subscribe at jacdon@earthlink.net . If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, unsubscribe at the same address. Please send event listings to the above email address.

—————————————————

EDITOR'S NOTE

Part 2, the Activist Events Calendar, will be emailed tomorrow to Hudson Valley readers only.

To ensure that the Activist Newsletter reaches your inbox and is not treated as junk mail by your email provider, please add jacdon@earthlink.net to your address book or list of approved senders.

—————————————————

CONTENTS

1. THE COLLATERAL DAMAGE OF WAR — A brief excerpt from an outstanding article by a prize-winning war correspondent about the nature of war and its victims.

2. WHAT'S UP WITH THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS? — During June Congress funded the Iraq war deep into next year, approved a version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that endangers civil liberties, and, in effect, eliminated the possibility of impeaching President Bush. Why are progressives and the left not particularly surprised?

3. EDITORIAL: DYING FOR AN EDUCATION — The recent legislative upgrading of the GI Bill to provide a free four-year college education to post-9/11 Bush era enlistees in the military seems to have met with popular approval. But it raises some big questions.

4. CREATING A NEW PROGRESSIVE ERA — Under what conditions might it be possible to bring about a period of significant progressive change and reform that would adequately address our country's major social problems? That's the question this magazine-size article investigates with an excursion into the history of progressive reform in the United States. Much of its content is devoted to examining three eras our history noted for important reform legislation, and juxtaposing them to the last four conservative decades where new social programs for the working class, lower middle class and the poor have been virtually nonexistent. This is the last of six articles on economic inequality and poverty in America.

5. CHECK IT OUT — Our latest collection of new articles of more than usual interest to progressive people, with websites for access.

—————————————————

1. THE COLLATERAL DAMAGE OF WAR

[Editor's Note: The following few paragraphs about the nature of war are outstanding. They are excerpted from a 5,000-word article by Pulitzer Prize-winner Chris Hedges, the former Middle East Bureau Chief of the New York Times. Earlier in the article, Hedges notes that "The war in Iraq is now primarily about murder…. American Marines and soldiers have become socialized to atrocity." Details about accessing the full article on the internet are at the end, plus information concerning the important new book about Iraq — titled "Collateral Damage" — that Hedges wrote with journalist Laila Al-Arian.]

The vanquished know war. They see through the empty jingoism of those who use the abstract words of "glory," "honor," and "patriotism" to mask the cries of the wounded, the brutal killing, war profiteering, and chest-pounding grief. They know the lies the victors often do not acknowledge, the lies covered up in stately war memorials and mythic war narratives, filled with stories of courage and comradeship. They know the lies that permeate the thick, self-important memoirs by amoral statesmen who make wars but do not know war.

The vanquished know the essence of war — death. They grasp that war is necrophilia. They see that war is a state of almost pure sin, with its goals of hatred and destruction. They know how war fosters alienation, leads inevitably to nihilism, and is a turning away from the sanctity and preservation of life. All other narratives about war too easily fall prey to the allure and seductiveness of violence as well as the attraction of the godlike power that comes with the license to kill with impunity.

But the words of the vanquished come later, sometimes long after the war, when grown men and women unpack the suffering they endured as children: what it was like to see their mother or father killed or taken away, or what it was like to lose their homes, their community, their security, and to be discarded as human refuse. But by then few listen. The truth about war comes out, but usually too late. We are assured by the war-makers that these stories have no bearing on the glorious violent enterprise the nation is about to inaugurate. And, lapping up the myth of war and its sense of empowerment, we prefer not to look.

We are trapped in a doomed war of attrition in Iraq…. We have become tyrants to others weaker than ourselves. And we believe, falsely, that because we have the capacity to wage war we have the right to wage war.

We make our heroes out of clay. We laud their gallant deeds and give them uniforms with colored ribbons on their chests for the acts of violence they committed or endured. They are our false repositories of glory and honor, of power, of self-righteousness, of patriotism and self-worship, all that we want to believe about ourselves. They are our plaster saints of war, the icons we cheer to defend us and make us and our nation great. They are the props of our civic religion, our love of power and force, our belief in our right as a chosen nation to wield this force against the weak, and rule. This is our nation's idolatry of itself. And this idolatry has corrupted religious institutions, not only here but in most nations, making it impossible for us to separate the will of God from the will of the state.
——
These excerpts are part of an article Hedges adapted from the introduction to the book titled "Collateral Damage: America’s War Against Iraqi Civilians" which he wrote in collaboration with journalist Laila Al-Arian. It's based on interviews with 50 U.S. combat veterans of the Iraq war and was published by Nation Books this month. The article is available online at http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174939/chris_hedges_war_and_occupation_american_style. Also, Hedges and Al-Arian were interviewed by Amy Goodman on the Democracy Now radio program June 10. The text (or broadcast if you wish to listen) is at http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/10/chris_hedges_and_laila_al_arian.

—————————————————

2. WHAT'S UP WITH THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS?

During the month of June the Democratic-controlled Congress voted to fund the Iraq war deep into next year, to support a compromise version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that endangers civil liberties, and, in effect, eliminated the possibility of impeaching President George W. Bush.

Why are progressives and the left not particularly surprised? Because it is consistent with the timidity, compromise, and opportunism that has come to characterize many of the actions and inactions of the Democratic Congress since it took power in January 2007. This is especially the case regarding the question of ending the Iraq War, the raison d'etre for its victory in the elections of November 2006.

We're not suggesting the Democrats are the same as the Republicans. Their centrism is an improvement over neoconservatism. But what consolation is that to liberal and antiwar voters when the Democrats just shoveled $162.5 billion into the furnace of war in Iraq and Afghanistan to last until August 2009 when Bush originally only sought $108 Billion to last until October? Or when the House has essentially legalized some the Bush Administration's domestic spying operations? Or when the Democrats voted "in favor" of liberal Rep. Dennis Kucinich's impeachment resolution by sending it to a Judiciary Committee that intends to bury it alive on instructions of the House majority leadership?

[Editor's Note for Hudson Valley Readers: Valley Congressmen Rep. Maurice Hinchey (22 CD) and Rep. John Hall (19 CD) both voted against the war funding proposal and the compromise FISA bill. In addition, Hinchey has now joined as a co-sponsor of Rep. Kucinich's call for the impeachment of President Bush.]

It seems to us that the Democratic Party's congressional leadership rather cavalierly decided to alienate its own rank-and-file constituency that wants the troops out of Iraq next year, that opposes the FISA legislation on civil liberties grounds, and that believes the high crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush Administration deserve impeachment.

Fortunately for the party's politicians they will not suffer more than trace desertions by the faithful at the polls in November due to the cloak of immunity protecting them by virtue of being the "lesser evil." It's a powerful magnet, and rarely fails to pull in the disgruntled liberals and progressives. But even so, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Majority Whip James Clyburn and Caucus Chair Rahm Emanuel agreed on a rather deceptive approach to the war funding vote.

Rep. Pelosi and her colleagues worked out a way to split the funding bill into three separate sections to please the various Democratic House factions, but present the results to the Senate as a single proposal. This allowed the representative to be recorded as voting up or down on each measure. They were: (1) war funding, (2) a withdrawal provision, and (3) spending not related to Iraq and Afghanistan.

First it must be understood that the Democratic Party and Congressional leadership has no intention of halting war spending, particularly in an election year, but sought to convey the impression that it did in order to satisfy Democratic voters.

In this regard, President Bush earlier in the year presented a request for a supplemental appropriation of $108 billion through September. In discussions between the two parties, however, it was agreed to boost the war funding to $162.5 billion and extend the time until August 2009. The purpose was to achieve two objectives: (1) Eliminate having to vote on a new appropriation just weeks before Election Day. (2) Insure that the next president can wait until next summer before requesting more money for the wars.

The Democratic House leaders understood before the vote that the funding bill would pass since about a third of the Democratic members were going to vote in favor anyhow, and many more were prepared to vote "Yes" if their votes were absolutely necessary for passage. The money measure was approved June 19 with 268 votes in favor, including those of 80 Democrats, while 155 representatives, mostly from antiwar districts, voted against. Pelosi, from a strongly antiwar San Francisco district, voted "No," although the Democratic leadership has actually worked quietly to approve funding for the last 18 months. Hoyer, Clyburn and Emanuel voted "Yes."

Progressive Democrats such as Rep. Jim McGovern (Mass.) were angry about the funding verdict, knowing that their party could have fought much harder. "For me," he was quoted as saying by the New York Times June 20, "this is one compromise too many, one cave-in too many."

In justification, Pelosi complained that "The president simply will not sign such legislation. Our troops are in harm's way. They need to be taken care of." This has been the leadership's line from the beginning, ignoring the alternatives: Passing a limited money bill with a strong withdrawal proviso, or a bill with money specifically for bringing the troops home in three or six months — and standing firm in the face of Bush vetoes, sending it back to him every time. He'd eventually have to relent or take the blame since the Democrats would be offering money to remove the troops from "harm's way," and he would be seen as rejecting it.

The second vote in the funding package was a proposal for removing all combat troops by December 2009, which passed 227-196. It was for show. The measure was non-binding, so it didn't amount to much more than allowing the Democrats to go on record favoring withdrawal even as they facilitated war funding. It was understood the this part of the funding package would be eliminated in the Senate.

The third vote was on domestic spending add-ons, primarily a popular measure updating the GI Bill to bill to provide free college education to enlistees who joined after the 9/11 terror attacks and remained at least three years. It passed 416-12 as both sides of the aisle competed to show how passionately they supported the troops. (See our editorial below, "Dying For An Education.")

The Senate passed the funding package June 26, minus the withdrawal proposal by vote of 92-6. All Democratic senators voted in favor. The "No" votes were from Republicans that objected to the domestic add-on spending.

The funding bill might have passed a month earlier but for a droll contretemps that took place on May 17, the day of the first vote. The Republicans were perturbed because the House majority leadership did not consult them when this complex three-part bill was put together, and also because they understood the real meaning of the bill was to approve the war money but to make it appear that the Democrats were mounting a serious opposition. Pelosi had 85 Democrats lined up to vote in favor, enough to pass the measure with the expected Republican votes.

But the GOP minority pulled a fast one. By last-minute prearrangement unknown to the Democrats, 132 Republicans didn't vote but answered "present," resulting in the defeat of the war funding bill 149-141. This pseudo "victory" for the antiwar side did not amuse the Democratic leadership. Hoyer accused the Republicans of not supporting the troops. Rahm told them, "Explain that to the troops." Pelosi took note that "House Republicans refused to pay for a war they support." GOP Minority Leader John Boehner commented: "It was a political scheme. We wanted to expose it, and we did."

On June 20, the House voted 293-129, with 105 Democrats joining the Republicans in supporting an updated "compromise" version of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which was introduced 30 years ago to prevent the government's ongoing abuses of electronic surveillance allegedly intended to strengthen national security.

The compromise was the product of lengthy discussions between Democratic and Republican leaderships. The Democrats gave away so much that Republican chief negotiator Sen. Christopher S. Bond of Missouri told the press: “I think the White House got a better deal than even they had hoped to get."

The New York Times revealed two years ago that the Bush Administration had been engaged in violating the terms of the act starting after the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington. Bush then argued that the requirements of national security during the "War on Terrorism" provided him with the right to override aspects of the 1978 law. The compromise was intended to make improvements, but the new version of the act failed to close certain loopholes, let the White House off the hook, and provided no penalties for those who had violated the law.

In evaluating the updated proposal after its passage, the Times wrote that the compromise strengthened "the government’s powers to spy on terrorism suspects in some major respects… [and] would strengthen the ability of intelligence officials to eavesdrop on foreign targets. It would also allow them to conduct emergency wiretaps without court orders on American targets for a week if it is determined that important national security information would otherwise be lost. If approved by the Senate, as appears likely, the agreement would be the most significant revision of surveillance law in 30 years."

The bill also provided immunity to several telecommunications giants such as Verizon and AT&T, which cooperated with the government's illegal program. This means the dismissal of dozens of pending lawsuits against the companies for engaging in unlawful surveillance.

Civil libertarians and some Congressional Democrats were sharply critical of the compromise and House passage of the bill. New York Rep. Jerrold Nadler, chair of the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, charged that the bill “abandons the Constitution’s protections and insulates lawless behavior from legal scrutiny." Liberal Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold said the bill "is not a compromise; it is a capitulation."

A sense of the reactionary nature of this legislation was provided by Caroline Fredrickson, director of the American Civil Liberties Union Washington Legislative Office: This bill, she declared June 20, "is not a meaningful compromise, except of our constitutional rights. The bill allows for mass, untargeted and unwarranted surveillance of all communications coming in to and out of the United States. The courts’ role is superficial at best, as the government can continue spying on our communications even after the FISA court has objected. Democratic leaders turned what should have been an easy FISA fix into the wholesale giveaway of our Fourth Amendment rights."

The party leadership, stung by the deluge of criticism, is evidently seeking to repair its reputation by promising to seek modifications in the Senate bill after the Independence Day holiday. They are also concerned about deflecting criticism from both left and right directed at Sen. Barack Obama, their presidential candidate. The left is aghast that Obama declared last week that he approved of the compromise, and the Republicans are mocking him for his "flip-flops," given that just a couple of months ago he sharply opposed granting immunity to the implicated telephone companies.

According to an article in the June 28 Chicago Tribune, Senate Democratic leader's are "giving the presidential candidate a chance to save face" by seeking to jettison "the lawsuit protection from the bill. While the amendment is expected to fail, it would allow Obama to vote against immunity and then vote later in favor of the FISA bill with the immunity provision intact."

The Tribune then quoted the ACLU's Fredrickson as saying, "Clearly there's that kind of maneuvering" going on, suggesting that a Senate amendment will "allow him [Obama] to vote, even if it's not in a meaningful way. Then he can claim he tried his best and move on."

The Democratic leadership has opposed impeaching President Bush ever since Speaker Pelosi announced two years ago that the issue has been taken "off the table," but Democratic voters and some liberal members of Congress have been agitating for the party to initiate impeachment proceedings. Their argument has two main points. (1) It's absolutely justified on the basis of the Bush Administration's known lies and illegal actions, particularly the unjust war in Iraq. (2) If Bush and his cohorts are allowed to escape the Constitutional remedy for "high crimes and misdemeanors," a dangerous precedent will be established for future administrations.

Rep. Kucinich, whose resolution now has five co-sponsors, has been arguing for impeachment for several years. On June 9 he spent hours reading the text of his entire bill in the House. He then introduced a motion with 35 Articles of Impeachment against President Bush. Each article is accompanied by a very brief description, such as Article I: "Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign to Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq." There are also lengthy explanations and evidence. The full text is available in PDF format online. The first three pages of the 65-page document contain the brief descriptions. The rest is the text Kucinich read. It may be accessed at http://chun.afterdowningstreet.org/amomentoftruth.pdf.

As soon as the impeachment resolution was submitted all Democratic members "supported" the measure by sending it to the House Judiciary Committee headed by Rep. John Conyers, who is expected to keep it bottled up indefinitely. The vote was 251-166, with 24 Republicans voting with the Democrats. Most of the Republicans who voted against the bill did so because they wanted an immediate debate and vote on its merits, knowing that the majority of Democrats, following their leadership, would vote against impeachment. This would have been a big embarrassment for the Democrats.

Kucinich himself voted to send the motion to committee, knowing that it had little chance of ever reaching the House floor for debate and a vote. He remained publicly optimistic, however, pledging to bring the matter up again with additional Articles of Impeachment. He can do this because impeachment is a privileged resolution under House rules, and if it is not voted on quickly, the motion can be reintroduced. "The leadership wants to bury it," the Ohio Congressman said, "but this is one resolution that will be coming back from the dead. Thirty days from now, if there is no action, I will be bringing the resolution up again, and I won't be the only one reading it."

The chances of obtaining and winning an impeachment vote seem impossible. But the occasion presents Kucinich with an opportunity to keep the issue before the public.

————————————————

3. EDITORIAL: DYING FOR AN EDUCATION

We think that progressives should have qualms about the Democratic Party initiative to upgrade the GI Bill to provide a free four-year state college education, including housing and books, for military veterans who signed up for at least a three-year active duty military enlistment after 9/11. The measure was approved by both houses of Congress in June as part of the war funding bill to finance fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Democratic politicians pushed this bill from the beginning. Their purpose was to display before the American electorate just who it is that really and truly supports the troops, in case their party's "antiwar" stance is misconstrued as meaning they are not patriotic or lacking gratitude for what the U.S. Army of Occupation is accomplishing on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. One Democratic lawmaker described the bill as the way "a grateful nation can repay its heroes," the implication being that Americans are grateful for the war as well as those who volunteer to fight it.

Our reason for questioning the bill has nothing to do with the opportunism and posturing surrounding its introduction. That's routine. Nor is it because the educational commitment is also intended to solve the Army's serious recruitment problems. It will undoubtedly help, though the Pentagon is worried college-bound GIs won't sign up for reenlistments, so it evidently will continue its generous bonuses and other benefits to attract and retain recruits.

What bothers us is this: It's a fact that one of the best ways to avoid a lifetime of low-wage work in today's America is to obtain a college education. But millions of qualified young Americans from working class, lower-middle class and poor families are not going to be able to afford college educations, even if they have jobs. Why then is it that the only youths to whom the government will provide a free higher education are those who serve in the military?

We do not begrudge anyone a free education. Our view is that ALL young people in our country who cannot afford to attend college but wish to do so, and maintain a reasonable grade average, should be able to obtain an education paid for by the government, not just those who join the military and serve in unjust wars.

America is already a class society split between "haves" and "have nots." It's unfair to further split youthful "have nots" into two groups, offering a free education to the minority who enlist to serve the dictates of militarism, and a majority who do not, and usually get little but low wage employment because they cannot afford college.

The United States has the funds to pay for college education for all low-income youth. But Washington spends its money in the wrong places, such as the incredibly expensive and unnecessary wars in the Middle East that it is now contriving to portray as a ticket to the middle class for enlistees lucky enough not to get maimed or killed in the process of striving for a college education.

————————————————

4. CREATING A NEW PROGRESSIVE ERA
[Sixth and last of a series on Poverty and Inequality in America]

How can poverty and grave economic inequality be significantly reduced in the United States? Under what conditions might it be possible to bring about a period of significant progressive reform that would address our country's major social problems?

These are obvious questions to pose in the last of six articles we have written over the year detailing the increasing economic plight of the poor, the working class and a significant sector of the middle class in our country.

As the income and living standards of the majority of Americans have declined, a quite small portion of the population — the upper class — has become wealthier and more powerful than ever. One would have to revisit the Gilded Age of the late 1800s or the Roaring Twenties just before the 1929 Great Depression to locate comparable contradictions between the rich and the rest of the American people.

If you've been reading this series, you know the distressing statistics. So we we'll just quote one of the most illustrative of them and go on:

The top 20% of wealthy families in the U.S. now possess 84.7% of all assets and wealth. The top 5% alone control 58.9%, and the richest 1% command 34.3%. The "bottom" 80% possess of 15.3% of the nation's wealth. The bottom 40% within this total have accumulated 0.2%. That's two-tenths of one percent owned by 120 million Americans, while 34.3% is possessed by 3 million.

According to progressive economist William K. Tabb, writing in Monthly Review (July-August 2006), the Bush Administration's economic policies "carry echoes which have been heard down through our nation’s history and have taken on resonance analogous to the Gilded Age and the Roaring Twenties, other periods when conservative ideology and politics held sway and rapid increases in inequalities were produced by deregulation and variants of laissez faire policy and Social Darwinist thinking. But in all periods, we have had a government of the rich that has acted in the interests of the rich."

Columnist and Princeton economist Paul Krugman, writing in the N.Y. Times April 27, 2007, argued that "Income inequality… is now fully back to Gilded Age levels…. Last year... a hedge fund manager took home $1.7 billion, more than 38,000 times the average income. Two other hedge fund managers also made more than $1 billion, and the top 25 combined made $14 billion…. The hedge fund billionaires are simply extreme examples of a much bigger phenomenon: every available measure of income concentration shows that we’ve gone back to levels of inequality not seen since the 1920s."

We have noted in our series that there is a clear cause and effect when the "upper" classes get richer and the "lower" classes get poorer. It often derives from the ability of those with power and wealth to manipulate government policy regarding taxes, regulations, and programs to further benefit themselves at the expense of those lacking power and wealth.

This is hardly unique in American history, but more prevalent at certain periods, such as the present moment when economic inequality and poverty are at high levels. We will focus upon three comparable periods in the past that generated a progressive response ultimately resulting in major social and economic reforms.

The United States advertises itself as the world's outstanding example of democracy. But how can a democracy function properly and fully in conditions of gross economic disequilibrium, especially when class inequality is compounded by racial and gender inequities as well?

President Franklin D. Roosevelt recognized this contradiction when he declared in 1944, that "true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence."

Economist Lester Thurow, in his 1999 book about the income gap titled Shifting Fortunes, asked: "How does one put together a democracy based on the concept of equality while running an economy with ever greater degrees of economic inequality."

American progressives of an earlier era understood this as well. Historian Richard C. Wade, writing about the reform struggle of the early 1900s, noted: "Progressives agreed that the central question of their times was how to control the power of concentrated wealth in a democracy."

No wonder increasing comparisons are made between America in the early 2000s and the Gilded Age — a period of enormous wealth and opulence for the few and exploitation and oppression for the many.

An important difference between this earlier period and now is that in the late 1800s/early 1900s, there was a substantial fight back against the machinations of wealth and power, while in comparison today's response has largely been confined to the wringing of hands.

Progressive movements arose in opposition in several past situations of extreme inequality and flaunted wealth. There were people's organizations out in the streets; unions were marching; there were sizable left groups organizing and leading struggles. At times, popular pressure obliged the ruling parties to put some restraints on the corporations, investors, financiers, and their hangers-on, and even to pass legislation favorable to working people.

But now, after a quarter-century of stagnating wages, with a recession looming over the country as prices are rising and incomes are falling, as workers are losing their jobs and homes, Washington is spending trillions on aggressive wars and a relative pittance on new programs to help the masses of people.

There's a class war going on, initiated and led by wealth and power. Various administrations in Washington in recent decades offer a perfect example of our government's penchant for coddling the rich and ignoring the needs of working families. But aside from small left organizations and reform groups, some unions and a few politicians, what forces in our society are truly fighting for the poor, the working class and lower middle class majority of the American people? It is certainly not the two ruling parties.

There's an election going and neither Democrat Barack Obama nor Republican John McCain has put forward a worthwhile immediate program to counter high prices for food and fuel, increasing unemployment, and depressed incomes. Neither offers a strategic program to greatly reduce poverty and inequality in America, to create good new jobs and affordable housing. Neither will contemplate big cuts in the military budget nor sharply increasing taxes for the rich to pay for these programs.

For over 200 years in America, virtually every decisively important government program or law that benefited the masses of people was the product of persistent, hard-fought struggle led by progressive and left social or political or labor movements, or all in combination. This was true at various points in history in the attainment of an eight-hour day, vacations, and a minimum wage; the right of women to vote and to work in jobs previously held by men only; the granting of Social Security pensions, Medicare and Medicaid; the end to lynch laws, the poll tax and formal racial segregation — and just about every other advance that has taken place in our society.

None of it was a gift. All of it was a struggle. And it's the only way poverty and inequality — and all comparable abuses — can be reduced significantly.

The last period of relatively progressive governance in America lasted a few years and ended four decades ago when President Lyndon B. Johnson left office. LBJ is accurately remembered as the president who led the U.S. into the quagmire of the imperialist Vietnam War. But his extensive and fruitful "Great Society" domestic program was the final attempt to continue New Deal-type reforms initiated by President Roosevelt during the Great Depression when masses of people were demanding relief and reform.

The great obstacle to progressive social change in America today is that we have been living in conservative political times for decades. The nation is just emerging from eight years of George W. Bush's hard core ribald neoconservatism and preemptive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; preceded by eight years of Bill Clinton's centrist compromise with the rightists, killer sanctions against Iraq and the unjust war in Yugoslavia; four years of George H. W. Bush's conservatism and the first war against Iraq; and eight years of Ronald Reagan's reactionary Cold War policies, subversion throughout Central America, and right wing economic programs.

The 2008 election offers the U.S. people a choice between centrism and neoconservatism — all in the name of an ambiguous mantra of undefined "change." This means that the right and center — the political tendencies least willing and able to end gross economic inequality and banish poverty in the U.S. — will dictate national policy through the next four years as they have in the past.

It doesn't have to be this way. There were periods in American history when conservative times did transform into progressive times. When this happened it was almost invariably a consequence of popular mass struggle for affirmative political reform.

Today, the U.S. left — from left-liberalism and progressivism to social democracy, socialism and communism — is weak and without meaningful influence. And our critically important union movement is weak as well, with a leadership that remains wedded to the "lesser evil" centrism of the Democratic Party in return for token political compensation.

When the American left revives, as it certainly will, and popular mass struggle resumes, the conditions will exist to bring about a new period of substantive social, economic, and political reform.

Lately there have been some reports of an incipient progressive upsurge within the Democratic Party that might seriously address matters of poverty and economic inequality, among others.

Undoubtedly there are many left-liberal and progressive Democrats who are justly disappointed by the cautious performance of their party's majority in Congress and by the refusal of the leadership to venture even a trifle to the left of center. Groups such as Democrats.com and MoveOn.org, among others, are cited as evidence of a progressive resurgence and even a possible harbinger of an effort to seize party leadership "from the bottom up."

Our country would benefit if the center/center-right Democratic Party moved to the center-left in the next few years on the basis of agitation within its ranks. But it is far-fetched to think it will do so after the party leadership's diligent and successful efforts over the decades to bury liberalism and completely reject the hint of social democracy implicit in the first few years of FDR's New Deal.

At some point there will be another period of progressive advance, such as several earlier times in America's history. When that happens it probably will be generated from outside the Democratic Party and consist of mass movements with progressive and left leadership around such key issues as economic reform, peace, inequality, poverty, jobs, housing, militarism, imperialism, union rights, and so on.

Such circumstances might influence the Democrats to take some action. Or it could lead to another Progressive Party, as it has done thrice before on the national level (1912, 1924, and 1948) and four times on the state level, not to mention many other left third parties.
Let's briefly look back to some earlier periods of progressive reform in our history. While there were active reform movements in the years before the Civil War (abolition and women's rights), a broad major reform struggle began in the 1870s and lasted with varying levels of intensity about 40 years. It took place during two historic periods: the Gilded Age and the Progressive Era.

The name Gilded Age was taken from a 1873 book of that title penned by Mark Twain and Charles Dudley Warner. Their use of "gilded" derived from Shakespeare's King John: "To gild refined gold, to paint the lily... is wasteful and ridiculous excess."

The Gilded Age officially began with the end of Reconstruction in 1877. It was weakened by the decimating depression of 1893-97 and declined at century's end, though many of its conditions continued into the Progressive Era, which lasted between 1900 and World War I.

During the later 1800s America changed from a rural agrarian society into a mixture with urban industrial development that greatly accelerated the Industrial Revolution and created fabulous fortunes for the wealthy, and extreme exploitation for working class men, women and children. Long hours, low pay, and miserable living conditions painfully afflicted multimillions of American workers as unrestrained capitalism ran amuck.

Simultaneously, as the U.S. was adjusting to a post-Civil War, post-Reconstruction period of booms and busts (there were three depressions in the Gilded Age), the great majority of former slaves were forced into a new type of oppression under Jim Crow segregation laws (the model for pre-liberation South Africa's apartheid system.) It took 90 years, the civil rights movement, and the 1960s reform period to end formal racial segregation, though racist inequality still exists in America.

The Gilded Age, according to author Steve Fraser in an article for TomDispatch.com April 28, was characterized by "crony capitalism, inequality, extravagance, Social Darwinian self-justification, blame-the-victim callousness, [and] free-market hypocrisy."

In response, he wrote, "Irate farmers mobilized in cooperative alliances and in the Populist Party. Farmer-labor parties in states and cities from coast to coast challenged the dominion of the two-party system. Rolling waves of strikes, captained by warriors from the Knights of Labor, enveloped whole communities as new allegiances extended across previously unbridgeable barriers of craft, ethnicity, even race and gender."

The strikes were militant and massive, and included the Great Railroad Strike of 1877; the 1886 railroad strike; the 1892 Homestead Strike; the Great Uprising of 1886 composed of nationwide strikes and demonstrations for an eight-hour work day, which led to the legal lynching of four anarchists on trumped up changes after the Haymarket Riots; and the 1894 Pullman Strike conducted by the American Railroad Union and led by socialist Eugene Debs.

The new labor movements were the only protection most American workers had against unbridled capitalist greed. The Knights of Labor, one of America's first great unions, was formed in 1869 and played an important role in the working class fight back during the Gilded Age. It faded in the late 1880s. The more restrained American Federation of Labor was formed in 1889. The militant Western Federation of Miners was organized in 1893, and the revolutionary International Workers of the World, the Wobblies, came about in 1905.

The Populist (Peoples) Party was founded in 1890 to put forward demands ignored by the two ruling parties. It received over a million votes in the 1892 presidential elections on a platform calling for direct election of U.S. Senators, a secret ballot, referendums, recall of elected officials, direct primary balloting and opposition to the gold standard. A number of its candidates became governors and members of Congress.

By the next presidential election in 1896, the Democratic Party had adopted a number of the populist demands which it had earlier opposed. The Populist Party then supported Democratic candidate William Jennings Bryan, who lost to Republican William McKinley. That was the beginning of the end for the populists. Their party quickly declined and dissolved in 1908.

The excesses of capitalism were mainly addressed by reforms during the Progressive Era, but some took place in the 1890s, such as the Sherman Antitrust Act (1890), which outlawed business monopolies; The Interstate Commerce Act (1887), which protected small shippers against powerful railroads; and the Civil Service Act (1883), aimed at ending corruption, which substituted the merit system for the spoils system in filling government jobs.

The Progressive Era was a period of great reform in response to the extreme exploitation of working families that accompanied swift industrialization and the growth of cities at a time when millions of poor immigrants were pouring into our country. The working people benefited from these reforms, but so did capitalism, of course, the regulation of which was essential to rationalize and strengthen the system, not replace it.

According to a superb college textbook on American history, Who Built America? (vol. 2): "Scholars [of the Progressive Era] have been unable to agree on exactly what Progressivism was. In fact, Progressivism encompassed many distinct, overlapping and sometimes contradictory movements: it was working people battling for better pay and control over their working lives; it was women campaigning for more equality and the right to vote at the same time as African Americans were being disfranchised in the South. It was corporations and their allies pushing to make city governments more businesslike; it was middle class reformers closing saloons and prohibiting the sale of alcohol; it was politicians and presidents extending the power of government to 'bust trusts' and regulate corporate activity.

"Sometimes these various reform forces worked together, sometimes they fought each other. Each responded in some way to the profound economic and social changes of the Gilded Age, but they differed in their interpretation of problems and solutions. As coalitions shifted, these diverse campaigns laid the foundation for modern American politics."

The progressive movement had a number of concerns: the terrible conditions of working class life, from child labor to poor housing and ill health; the abuses of robber barons and business owners; the lack of government regulation of the marketplace; women's suffrage; prohibition; race oppression; direct elections (to the Senate); electoral reform; and anti-monopoly reform.

There was another concern as well, according to the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers: "Fear of the expansion of socialism and Marxism provoked many in the upper class to support more moderate reform efforts as a means to ease the growing tensions between rich and poor and head off more extreme threats to their privileged role in society."

President Theodore Roosevelt, who as vice president entered the White House in 1901 after President McKinley was assassinated, was the foremost reform politician during the Progressive Era. Although a man of wealth, an open imperialist, and staunch advocate of capitalism, he opposed the excesses of the Gilded Age as counter-productive to the interests of the United States and to his own vision of America as a burgeoning world power. TR, as he was known, believed that "the man of great wealth owes a peculiar obligation to the state because he derives special advantages from the mere existence of government."

Republican Roosevelt left office in 1908 after presiding over the passage of a number of reforms demanded by the progressive movement and the expansion of federal authority. He was succeeded by his own vice president, William H. Taft. Out of office but still riding the progressive wave in 1910, TR outraged his own class be declaring: "I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and… a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes."

Convinced that Taft and the Republican Party had turned against progressivism, Roosevelt unsuccessfully sought to obtain the party's nomination in the 1912 presidential election. He then bolted the Republican Party and, with support from the progressive movement, formed the Progressive Party (known also as the Bull Moose Party) with an extensive reform agenda, the purpose being "to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics." With the GOP split, the Democratic Party's Woodrow Wilson won the election. Roosevelt was second and Taft last. Union leader Debs, running at the candidate of the Socialist Party, came in fourth with 6% of the vote. The Progressive Party collapsed in 1916.

Among the federal reforms of the Progressive Era were the following:

The Newlands Reclamation Act (1902) a conservationist measure; the Elkins Act, the Pure Food and Drug Act (1906 and 1911), making sure that companies label ingredients; the Meat Inspection Act (thanks to writer Upton Sinclair's exposé in his novel The Jungle); the Federal Reserve Act; the Clayton Antitrust Act, opposing monopolies and ruling that labor unions did not fall under antitrust laws; and the Federal Trade Act that established the Federal Trade Commission that is supposed to investigate "unfair business practices."

In addition, laws were passed regulating the drug industry, establishing federal controls over the banking industry, and improving working conditions. Further, two progressive constitutional amendments — the power to tax income and the direct election of Senators were approved in 1913. Another progressive cause, women's suffrage, was passed in 1919.

The Roaring Twenties were hardly progressive. It was a period of extreme Republican laissez faire economics, until the stock market crashed in 1929, plunging America and the world into the Great Depression.

There were radical moments in the 1920s, however, including the resurrection of the Progressive Party, which fielded Wisconsin progressive Republican Sen. Robert M. LaFollette Sr. as its 1924 presidential nominee against conservative candidates from both the Democratic and Republican Parties. LaFollette, whose program included nationalization of large industries including railroads, higher taxes for the rich and lower taxes for working people, and collective bargaining for workers, was supported by labor, socialists and liberals. With nearly five million votes — 16.6% — La Follette came in third. The Progressive Party dissolved in 1946, long after it ceased activity on the national level. During these years in its Wisconsin stronghold the party elected a governor and six members of the House of Representatives.

By the second half of the conservative 1920s the rich-poor gap was reaching Gilded Age proportions. Herbert Hoover, who defeated liberal Democrat Al Smith in the 1928 election, was the third Republican elected to the presidency during the decade. In accepting nomination, Hoover declared: "We in America today are nearer to the final triumph over poverty than ever before in the history of any land. We shall soon… be in sight of the day when poverty will be banished from this nation."

Hoover assumed office in March 1929. The Great Depression began seven months later, catapulting most of the working class and middle class into exceptionally hard times. Consistent with his conservative ideology of waiting for the "market" to cure itself, Hoover did practically nothing as the economy crumbled in the three years until the 1932 election, which gave rise to the greatest period of progressive reform in U.S. history.

The Democrats nominated New York Gov. Franklin D. Roosevelt, a fifth cousin to Theodore Roosevelt. He declared in his acceptance speech, "I pledge myself to a new deal for the American people," and his program became known as the New Deal. FDR, as he was universally known, captured 57.4% of the vote against 39.7 for Hoover, and remained in office to four terms. He delivered the famous line, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself," in his first inaugural address in 1933.

Roosevelt was under extreme pressure when he entered the White House. Unemployment reached its peak that year — 25.2% — meaning one in four workers was jobless and many others were working for reduced pay and waiting for their jobs to disappear. Millions of families were suffering great distress and relief from Washington barely existed.

From the day he entered the White House, Roosevelt understood that his principal task was to preserve capitalism in America at a time when private enterprise systems around the world were experiencing economic disasters. There were two threats. One was that the downward economic spiral in the U.S. might lead to a total collapse. The other was the fear that the working class might seek to replace capitalism with socialist or revolutionary communist alternatives. At the time, these were quite rational speculations.

The political left had been organizing since the day the stock market crashed. For instance, according to Who Built America?, just weeks after the market crash "the Communist Party organized the first of what was soon a nationwide network of 'Unemployed Councils.' These Communist-led neighborhood groups worked to aid the unemployed with immediate problems of rent and food, to apply pressure for improved relief programs, and finally to recruit new members to join the party. On March 6, 1930, the communists held a series of rallies on what it dubbed International Unemployment Day,' demanding government action. In city after city, the turnout far exceeded expectations."

The Communist Party was active throughout the 1930s, in all the major cities, in the unions, in the South among poor black sharecroppers, in Harlem stopping evictions and fighting for unemployed workers. Near the end of the 1930s CP membership rose to its highest number ever, 100,000. Many other progressive and left groups, including populist farmers, were organizing as well, but the communists were the most energetic.

Unions were active but did not come into their own until late 1935 with the formation of the CIO (Congress of Industrial Organizations). In little more than a year union membership in the U.S. rose from four million to seven million. Confrontations between labor and management sharply increased as companies resisted collective bargaining, often engaging in redbaiting in the process. Many in the wealthy class and their minions in corporate management viewed unionization as a red plot.

Company brutality, exercised through local police and private security thugs, increased as labor became stronger. Police shot and killed 10 striking workers outside a Chicago steel factory in May 1937. In the same month, a Ford company guard viciously beat leaders of the CIO's United Automobile Workers union.

The less activist American Federation of Labor (AFL) was founded 46 years earlier as a craft union, organizing each craft — such as plumbers, sheet metal workers or carpenters — into separate unions. The CIO organized workers around entire industries — auto, steel, coal, and so on, conveying to each member a sense of mass and solidarity.

The CIO was known for its militancy and spectacular sit-down strikes. Many leftists including communists were CIO organizers and union militants at the time — often the most dedicated and hardest fighters for the union — even as a number of union leaders expressed anticommunist views in response to criticism from the owners. (The CIO purged most of its left militants in the late 1940s when it took a right turn in response to the Washington's anticommunist campaign accompanying the start of the Cold War against the Soviet Union. It subsequently merged with the AFL and has generally supported some of the worst aspects of U.S. foreign policy ever since.)

The new president understood that the desperation afflicting American workers and their families, combined with the determination of the political, social, and union organizations demanding that Washington alleviate their plight, obligated him to proceed swiftly, decisively, and in tune with the progressive assumptions of the day.

Roosevelt was not a leftist by any means, but his program of relief and reform was vast, with social democratic implications never before introduced in America. "The test of our progress," he once said, "is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."

Eleanor Roosevelt, FDR's wife, was to his political left, and she encouraged him with words and observations from her many fact-finding trips throughout the country to follow a progressive line. It didn't always work, but she never relented.

The right wing and many capitalist ideologues hated Roosevelt for his "socialist" programs. The left was generally supportive but critical when he fell short. The masses appreciated his helping hand. In the end his actions contributed to the preservation of capitalism but it took beginning of World War II to fully end the Great Depression in the United States.

FDR proceeded in two stages, known as the First and Second New Deal, mainly in the six years between 1933-38. The initial New Deal took place in the first two years of Roosevelt's Administration. Hundreds of programs, some quite innovative and most of them welcomed by a grateful nation, took place during the first hundred days. Many of these programs were of an emergency nature to keep the system and its people afloat. The second New Deal, from 1935-38, tended to be more to the left and supportive of workers and their unions.

The Roosevelt Administration's list of programs and legislation implemented during this period was extraordinary, even though some were phased out over the years. Following is a short list of some of the Roosevelt team's key accomplishments, compiled from Wikipedia:

• United States bank holiday, 1933: closed all banks until they became certified by federal reviewers.
• Abandonment of gold standard, 1933: gold reserves no longer backed currency; still exists.
• Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), 1933: employed young men to perform unskilled work in rural areas; under United States Army supervision; separate program for Native Americans.
• Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), 1933: effort to modernize very poor region (most of Tennessee), centered on dams that generated electricity on the Tennessee River; still exists.
• Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA), 1933: raised farm prices by cutting total farm output of major crops and livestock.
• National Recovery Act (NRA), 1933: industries set up codes to reduce unfair competition, raise wages and prices.
• Public Works Administration (PWA), 1933: built large public works projects; used private contractors (did not directly hire unemployed).
• Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) / Glass-Steagall Act: insures deposits in banks in order to restore public confidence in banks; still exists.
• Securities Act of 1933, created the SEC, 1933: codified standards for sale and purchase of stock, required risk of investments to be accurately disclosed; still exists.
• Civil Works Administration (CWA), 1933-34: provided temporary jobs to millions of unemployed.
• Indian Reorganization Act, 1934: moved away from assimilation.
• Social Security Act (SSA), 1935: provided financial assistance to: elderly, handicapped, paid for by employee and employer payroll contributions; required years of contributions, so first payouts were in 1942; still exists.
• Works Progress Administration (WPA), 1935: a national labor program for more than 2 million unemployed; created useful construction work for unskilled men; also sewing projects for women and arts projects for unemployed artists, musicians and writers.
• National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) / Wagner Act, 1935: set up National Labor Relations Board to supervise labor-management relations; In the 1930s, it strongly favored labor unions. Modified by the Taft-Hartley Act (1947); still exists.
• Judicial Reorganization Bill, 1937: gave the President power to appoint a new Supreme Court judge for every judge 70 years or older; failed to pass Congress.
• Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S. Code Chapter 8), 1938: established a maximum normal work week of 40 hours and a minimum wage of 40 cents an hour and outlawed most forms of child labor; still exists

From 1941 through 1945 the Roosevelt Administration was totally absorbed with winning the war in Europe and Asia, and many new progressive domestic programs were backlogged until peace returned.

Vice President Harry S. Truman, a former Senator from Missouri, became president when Roosevelt died in April 1945, three weeks before Germany surrendered. Japan surrendered four months later, days after Truman ordered the destruction of two Japanese cities with nuclear bombs. (It subsequently was determined that Japan would have given up relatively quickly without the annihilation of the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.)

Six months after Roosevelt’s death, Truman loyally put forward FDR's progressive peacetime program — a 21-point legislative proposal calling for an Economic Bill of Rights. The program advocated universal healthcare, full “living-wage” employment, adequate unemployment benefits, affordable housing, public works funding for the construction of airports and highways, an increase in the minimum wage, and establishing a Fair Employment Practices Committee on a permanent basis — all “regardless of station, race, or creed.”

By now, however, the political tide was rapidly turning and progressives soon became isolated. Conservatism was making a big comeback in Washington. The government was launching a Cold War against its former Soviet ally that went on to preoccupy the United States for 45 years. The right wing, supported by big business, most liberals, and the leaders of the AFL and CIO, began a noisy, bullying red-hunting crusade against "domestic communism" that lasted deep into the 1950s, continued at a lower level throughout the Cold War, and in certain ways still goes on today. One of the many casualties of this turn to the right was Roosevelt's economic program. Some its progressive provisions, including universal healthcare, remain unfulfilled 60 years later.

Given the growth of postwar conservatism, the Progressive Party idea was revived again in time for the 1948 elections. Its candidate was Henry Wallace, who had been Roosevelt's vice president since 1941-44, but was not renominated at the 1944 Democratic convention. Anticipating that FDR might not live throughout his fourth term, four key urban Democratic party leaders, backed by the party's Southern racist politicians, conspired to dump Wallace because they considered him too progressive, friendly to the Soviet Union, and an avowed opponent of racial segregation.

The four leaders decided on Truman after their first two choices declined. They then convinced Roosevelt, who personally selected Wallace in the 1940 election, to remain neutral and allow the convention to select the next nominee for vice president. The plan almost backfired when Wallace received great support from the delegates after his 1944 convention speech. The party leaders managed to delay the voting to the next day. Throughout the night they set about informing the delegations that Roosevelt was neutral and that leftist Wallace as president would be a disaster for the party.

Truman was elected. Roosevelt named Wallace Secretary of Commerce as compensation. Truman fired him in 1946. Wallace then decided to run as the Progressive Party nominee. It is interesting to contemplate how history may have changed had Wallace, not Truman, succeeded FDR in the spring of 1945.

Most of the left backed Wallace, largely to halt the developing Cold War and to continue the progressive aspects of the New Deal. The Communist Party also supported Wallace's candidacy. The CP did not control either Wallace or the Progressive Party, though it had some influence within the organization. But most Democrats, Northern liberals and Southern segregationists alike, relentlessly redbaited the third-party campaign, charging it was a communist front. Wallace was neither a socialist nor communist, though accused of being both.

Wallace's program was quite progressive. He campaigned strenuously for an end to Jim Crow segregation and for full equality for African Americans at a time when open racism permeated America. He also called for a continuation of the wartime alliance between the U.S. and USSR, which made him a "subversive" by the standards of 1948, in addition to being a "race mixer."

On Election Day, Truman defeated Republican New York Gov. Thomas E. Dewey with almost 50% of the vote. Wallace received 1,157,057 votes, 2.38%. He broke with the Progressive Party two years later when the party leadership did not join him in condemning North Korea for the Korean War. The party dissolved in 1955, and Wallace died 10 years later.

The conservative 1950s gave way to the "Sixties," a decade in which a substantial and diverse sector of Americans rose up against racism, war, stultifying conformity and outdated conventions, taking to the streets and demanding change — not today's quaint "change you can believe in" but a concrete reordering of society.

The Civil Rights movement, with Martin Luther King at the forefront, led the struggle against racism starting in the mid-1950s, then exploding in the early 1960s into dramatic sit-ins, mass marches and demonstrations to end segregation NOW! The movement was also influenced by the important political example of Malcolm X, and by such organizational exponents of black power as the Black Panther Party.

As this historic uprising was unfolding, a huge peace movement developed in opposition to Washington's unjust war against Vietnam. At the same time the left and various communist groups revived and expanded, a radical student movement quickly spread throughout the country, the women's movement erupted in protest, and the gay rights movement was launched.

Today, when the media look back to the 1960s it's often with an emphasis upon the hippies, the music of the time, pot-smoking, long hair, unusual modes of dress, and "dropping out," as though all this was the principal aspect of the decade. Actually, the counter-cultural movement was a relevant expression of dissent against bourgeois conventions, but it was the historic, progressive protest movements and their intense political struggles for change that continued into the 1970s that characterized the era known as the Sixties.

This political uprising created the progressive context for another round of reforms, which brings us to President Lyndon Baines Johnson. His administration was the last in which the Democratic Party really embraced liberalism and thought of itself as an extension of the New Deal.

Johnson was a New Dealer as a young Texas politician in the 1930s/40s and one of the most effective majority leaders in Senate history when he became John F. Kennedy's vice president in the 1960 election. He assumed the presidency when Kennedy was assassinated in 1963 and won reelection on his own in 1964. Mass opposition to his escalation of the unjust and brutal war against Vietnam deflected him from seeking reelection in 1968.

LBJ's social reforms were part of his "Great Society" program. His most important achievement was in civil rights, the legislative reflection of the movement's sharp struggle against racial segregation. With his way paved by this mass nonviolent rebellion, Johnson used his formidable political skills to bring into law the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, '65, and '68 that in total ended job discrimination and segregation in public accommodations; that safeguarded minority voting against unfair qualification tests; that ended poll taxes; appointed government voting examiners; banned housing discrimination; halted national quotas in immigration; and provided legal protection for Native Americans living on reservations.

Johnson also waged a War on Poverty to end hunger and deprivation. Progress was made, though in the end the "war" was lost. Its main element was embodied in the Economic Opportunity Act (1964), creating the Office of Economic Opportunity. The OEO coordinated a network of local antipoverty programs. The campaign also brought about Food Stamps, Head Start, VISTA, the Neighborhood Youth Corps, the Job Corps, and Model Cities program.

Healthcare was helped immeasurably by the administration's championing of Medicare (1965) and Medicaid (1966).

In terms of education, the Johnson Administration was responsible for the Higher Education Act and the Secondary Education Act, both in 1965, and the Bilingual Education Act in '68.

In consumer protection, Johnson brought to fruition the Cigarette Labeling Act of 1965, the Child Safety Act and Vehicle Safety Act, both of 1966, the Flammable Fabrics Act and Wholesome Meat Act, both 1967.

The environment was a big winner as well: The Clean air, Water Quality and Clear Water Restoration Acts, Wilderness Act, Endangered Species Preservation Act, National Trails System Act, Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, Land and Water conservation Act, Solid Waste disposal Act, Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act., National Historic Preservation Act, Aircraft Noise Abatement Act and National Environmental Policy Act.

Johnson left office in January 1969. Since that time nearly 40 years ago very little else of a progressive nature has taken place in American national politics. It's been a long essentially conservative era to this day.

(As an editor of the leftist Guardian newsweekly during the 1960s, this writer — along with much of the left — was so preoccupied with opposing Johnson's imperialist war that his domestic accomplishments were virtually drowned out amid the shouts of "LBJ, LBJ, How Many Kids Did You Kill Today?" In compiling the facts for this article, after almost four politically dreary decades of the Nixon-Ford-Carter-Reagan-Bush-Clinton-Bush administrations, it was impossible not to be quite impressed by Johnson's progressive legislative achievements.)

Some Democrats point to certain initiatives emanating from the eight years Bill Clinton occupied the White House (1993-2001) to suggest he was a liberal, but the record shows an administration that was virtually indifferent to strengthening or generating social service programs for the people. Clinton's few accomplishments over two terms do not amount to much more than the Family Medical Leave Act (1993), providing unpaid leave to take care of a newborn infant or sick family member; the AmeriCorps public service program (1993); an increase in the minimum wage in 1996; and his support for the Republican welfare "reform" legislation in 1996, which ended the federal welfare system that was put in place when the Democratic Party was liberal. The party has now moved so deeply into the center it considers "ending welfare as we know it" to be a major accomplishment of the Clinton presidency.

After this excursion into America's progressive past, we repeat the question at the beginning of this article: "How can poverty and grave economic inequality be reduced significantly in the United States? Under what conditions might it be possible to bring about a period of significant progressive reform that would address our country's major social problems?"

There are short term and long term responses to this question. We will deal only with the short term foreseeable future and leave matters of social revolution and the complete restructuring of society for another forum.

It seems to us, from the past history of social reform in American, that it's going to take a lot more to greatly reduce poverty and inequality than crossing one's fingers and voting for a centrist politician to lead the country, backed by a largely centrist and rightist Congress. The U.S. has experienced alternating centrist and rightist governments for decades, and they have been the cause of increasing poverty and the widening rich-poor gap,.

We have talked to a number of progressives who are investing hopes for a better America in their ability to work internally to transform the Democratic Party into a replica of its liberal periods of 40 and 70 years ago.

We have mentioned to them that to accomplish this would require the near takeover of a party that is now held in the iron grip of a centrist leadership. This leadership is supported by a solid majority of its elected politicians, the Democratic Leadership Council, the Blue Dogs, the party apparatus, the fundraisers, and the big donors. Then there's the powerful beneficiaries of great corporate, financial and inherited riches — the 5% who control 58.9% of the nation's wealth and assets — who have a huge stake in keeping the two-party system in what their self-interest dictates is the correct political alignment. And they are probably content with the center-right polarities in America today. To put it mildly, they have considerable influence.

We respect the left Democrats who are trying to transform the Party from within, but do not think they will succeed.

In our opinion, to provide a serious antidote to the plague of poverty and inequality — among other grave shortcomings in our society — requires a resurgence of both the political left in America and the emergence of progressive mass movements of people demanding real social change.

Can such a combination of circumstances move the Democrats sufficiently to the left to achieve the objective of implementing high quality social programs? Maybe. It did in the 1930s and '60s. But today's Democratic Party seems quite comfortable occupying the political center, functioning as a barrier to the left in national politics, and prospering as the only "lesser evil" in town, effortlessly capturing millions of progressive votes from people who feel they have no other choice.

A resurgent left could offer other choices, not only in the social movements for change but party politics as well.

Suppose there was to be a revival of the Progressive Party idea — not as a quickly organized national alternative that makes a small dent and fades away. Many advanced capitalist societies have a few mass political parties (not just two) and several smaller but viable parties as well, and at least one of the big parties to one degree or another seeks to represent the interests of the working people. This is why such countries, all within the capitalist orbit, have done a better job than ours in serving their people — from longer vacations to lower infant mortality, from universal healthcare to adequate welfare programs. And in many ways they are more democratic, too, and far less warlike and hegemonic.

Building such a new mass party would take a long time, but if the progressive sector of the labor movement got behind the idea it wouldn't take as long, especially if it was joined by movements for peace and justice, for racial, gender and economic equality, for environmental survival, for cutting the war budget and eliminating nuclear weapons, for immigrant and gay rights, and for ending militarism and imperialism.

There are already a number of small left third parties, some of which might benefit by association with an up and coming, all-embracing Progressive Party (of whatever name) that was seeking to become a viable mainstream party.

Given the awesome complexity of attempting to convince the fractious U.S. left to get behind a major progressive third party will make the expression about "the devil in the details" sound like the understatement of the century.

But the existence of a viable left third party, coupled with progressive social movements in motion, would create a national political environment conducive to the growth of all sectors of the left and their respective parties, clearing the way for further progress.

Liberal economist Paul Krugman, whom we quoted earlier, also speculated in the same article that "it’s much too soon to declare the march toward a New Gilded Age over," meaning things will get worse before they get better, but he concluded: "If history is any guide, one of these days we’ll see the emergence of a New Progressive Era, maybe even a new New Deal. But it may be a long wait."

Or maybe not so long, depending mainly on the future status of America's left and progressive forces, the revival of mass activist movements, and objective economic and social conditions within the U.S., plus on the final disposition of the Democratic Party and on what the progressives within that party will do when they cannot move it toward a new progressive era.

—————————————————

5. CHECK IT OUT

A DIFFERENT KIND OF GENDER WAR: Susan Faludi, author of the important 1991 book "Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women," has written a most interesting Op-Ed for the June 15 New York Times concerning the contest between John McCain, who quite consciously projects himself as a super macho male, and Barack Obama, who quite consciously and emphatically does not — much to his credit, in our opinion. Faludi traces the history of the macho myth in male supremacist America and its impact on presidential politics. "The attacks are already under way," Faludi says, "as is evident if one enters the words 'Obama' and 'effeminate' into a search engine." In this election, she concludes, "choosing between Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain in the general election, Americans will pass a referendum on 200 years of bedrock gender mythology." The article is titled, "Think the Gender War Is Over? Think Again." Don't miss it at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/opinion/15faludi.html?ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=print

GOING STRONG FOR PEACE AT 89: The New York Times printed a feature article June 22 about topical singer Pete Seeger's frequent appearance at the weekly antiwar vigil in Wappingers Falls, Dutchess County. Pete, who lives in Beacon is almost 90, has been fighting unjust wars his whole life. For many progressives in the Hudson Valley, he is considered the region's most precious resource. The article's at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/22/nyregion/22seeger.html?_r=2&scp=2&sq=pete+seeger&st=nyt&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

"McCAIN SHOULD KNOW BETTER": That was the context of a nearly 12 minute video excoriation of Republican candidate Sen. John McCain by Keith Olbermann on his MSNBC program June 12. He was following up on McCain's comment that it's "not too important" when the U.S. Army of Occupation finally leaves Iraq. The senator claimed his words were taken out of context. Olbermann then showed exactly what McCain's words were on this and in many other statements about Iraq over the years, including his declaration six months before the U.S. invasion that "I believe that we can win an overwhelming victory in a very short period of time." The video is available at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25126582/.

INVESTIGATION OF U.S. ABUSE OF PRISONERS: The McClatchy Newspapers group has produced some of the best critical reporting out of Iraq and Afghanistan since the wars began. Now McClatchy has just completed an eight month investigation into U.S. military abuse of prisoners in Afghanistan and those held at Guantanamo. They have just started publishing articles every several days about their findings. A table of contents with links to these articles, plus background material, interviews for former prisoners, videos, and must more may be accessed at http://www.mcclatchydc.com/detainees/story/40334.html. An introductory four minute video about the series is at http://videos.mcclatchydc.com/vmix_hosted_apps/p/media?id=1927337

BLACKWATER'S DOING QUITE WELL: The company that rents mercenary fighters to the U.S. government got a lot of bad publicity last year for shooting first in Iraq and not even asking questions later, but it's doing better than ever, says Jeremy Scahill, the author of "Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army." Writing an Op-Ed in the Los Angeles Times June 16, Scahill notes that "From California to Iraq, business has never been better for the controversial private security firm." Read why, despite its "deadly record in Iraq and troubled reputation at home,… Blackwater knows its future is bright no matter who next takes up residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue." It's at http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-scahill16-2008jun16,0,461221.story.

June 8, 2008, Issue #137 Part 1
HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER/CALENDAR
jacdon@earthlink.net, http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/

This newsletter/calendar, published in New Paltz, N.Y., appears once a month, supplemented by additional listings of new activist events, usually sent to Valley readers only. Editor, Jack A. Smith (who writes all the news articles that appear without a byline or credit to other publications). Copy Editor, Donna Goodman. Calendar Editor, Rocco Rizzo. If you know someone who may benefit from this newsletter, ask them to subscribe at jacdon@earthlink.net. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, unsubscribe at the same address. Please send event listings to the above email address.

—————————————————

EDITOR'S NOTE

There will be more articles in a second part to this newsletter in a week. There were just too many stories to send in one packet this time. The activist events calendar was emailed only to Hudson Valley residents a few days ago. The calendar plus back issues of the newsletter may be accessed at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/. Sometimes long transmissions get fouled up in the sending; if so, read the newsletter on line.

A number of criticisms of China have been expressed in the U.S. in recent months, some of them intended to embarrass the Beijing government before the Olympics. We examine the nature of such evaluations below — first with an article about China in relation to Tibet and Darfur, second regarding charges that China's trade practices amount to "stealing American jobs" and unfairly increasing the U.S. trade deficit.

To ensure that the Activist Newsletter reaches your inbox and is not treated as junk mail by your email provider, please add jacdon@earthlink.net to your address book or list of approved senders.

—————————————————

CONTENTS

1. Editorial: A TIP OF THE HAT TO OBAMA AND CLINTON — Americans should be proud of the Democratic Party's selection of an African American candidate for president, and its near selection of a woman for the same post. But there's a lot more to it than that.

2. THE MAIN CAUSES OF THE OIL PRICE HIKES — There are several factors in the doubling of oil prices in the last 10 months. One factor stands out as primary, and contrary to the Bush Administration, it doesn't seem to be supply and demand.

3. ADDRESSING AMERICA'S CHINA SYNDROME — There seems to a revival of China bashing among some U.S. politicians around the issues of Tibet and Darfur. We look into it.

4. THE REALITIES OF CHINA-U.S. TRADE — A number of politicians, unionists and others charge that China's trade policies are responsible for the loss of jobs in America and for our country's huge trade deficit. What are the facts?

5. THE PERSISTENT FEMALE-MALE WAGE GAP — The 23.5% gap in women's pay for equal work done by men effects professional and retired women as well as women workers who are semi-skilled or unskilled, according to AFL-CIO statistics.

6. CHECK IT OUT — From "Barack the Red" to "Hamas on the Holocaust," here are this issue's descriptions and sources for obtaining our latest collection of interesting articles and brief news videos we think will interest our readers. There's even a charming audio-video moment on how to pronounce the name of Russia's new president, and a good little satire on the wealthy.

7. Editorial: THE ABDUCTED TEXAS CHILDREN — We applaud the decision of Texas courts to return 460 state-abducted children to their parents at the Yearning for Zion Ranch.

—————————————————

1. Editorial:
A TIP OF THE HAT TO OBAMA AND CLINTON

We Americans have something to be proud of today.

After slavery, Jim Crow, and the historic struggle for civil rights, an African American has been selected for the first time by one of our two ruling parties to be its candidate for the presidency of the United States.

Within a matter of months it is entirely possible that Sen. Barack Obama — who waged a brilliant primary campaign — will be elected to occupy the White House. This represents a important victory for the African American people who have been oppressed in our land since the 1600s, and for our entire country as well.

There's another reason to be proud, too.

After being forced into subordinate status as second class human beings and citizens throughout history, after struggling over a hundred years just for the right to vote, and then contesting sexism ever since for basic human rights, a woman very nearly became that party's candidate for president.

During the course of the campaign Sen. Hillary Clinton was as an indefatigable contender for the post of America's first woman president. Her campaign has inspired many people, women in particular, and as she neared the end of her quest Clinton came into her own as an advocate for women's rights.

As we recognize the progress that has just been made, it is even more necessary to recognize that African Americans and women still have a long way to go for genuine equality in our society. Racism and male supremacy remain deeply embedded in the fabric of our country economically, politically, socially, and culturally.

The struggle must continue to destroy both inequalities root and branch. And there is another great and far-reaching inequality in our society as well. This is class inequality, where a small minority on top lord it over a huge majority on the bottom, and essentially rule the country. Until all three — race, gender and class inequality — are eliminated, it will never be possible to construct a genuine democracy in America.

We are proud of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for breaking barriers. But, from our perspective, that's about as far as it goes. Elections are political affairs first and foremost. Politically, both are centrists, tilting to center-right from time to time. As such, neither is capable of solving the great problems that beset our society.

What does "change" mean? It worries us that this overarching theme of the election — ultimately championed not just by its originator, Obama, but eventually by Clinton and John McCain as the race wore on — has never been explained. Why? Because it is an empty and deceptive slogan, promising everything and nothing. The voters just fill in the blank space with their own hopes, with no guarantee it's what the candidates mean by change.

Both Obama and Clinton support a foreign policy based upon American "leadership" in a world that is not asking to be led by the United States, and it is becoming clearer every day it would prefer not to be. Many European allied countries, as well as China, Russia and others, are known to prefer multipolar world leadership to Washington's "my way or the highway" unipolarity. Experience has proven this policy is based on the utilization of unequaled military power to pave the way for expanding American hegemony.

What is the Democratic Party candidate's program for ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? All we hear are plans to remove some, not all, troops in Iraq and for sending more troops to Afghanistan. The fact is that the U.S. Armed Forces will remain in those countries for many years to come and the candidate knows it. What is the program for truly tackling poverty in America, and for ending the increasing rich-poor gap, and for closing the wide chasm between the income of white families and that of black, Latino and Native American families? Nothing of real substance.

What is the program for significantly reducing America's bloated parasite of a military budget? The program of both the Democratic and Republican candidates is to expand the number of troops and shovel even more of our nation's wealth into the Pentagon's bottomless pit.

And whatever happened to single-payer healthcare? And far, we have not heard of a realistic program for swiftly developing alternative energy sources. Nor has there been word of a serious crash program to meet the gathering environmental storm. What about a program to provide equal rights for gay, lesbian and transgender people? And how about immigration, and education, mass transportation, re-regulating the markets, and overturning all anti-labor laws — not just quickly forgotten campaign promises but concrete programs that Obama will fight for and be held accountable?

Yes it will be relief to get rid of George W. Bush and the entire madhouse of reactionary scoundrels that came with him. And yes, opportunist Republican warhawk McCain is to Obama's right, which makes the Democrat one more in a long line of "lesser evils." But every politically progressive person in the U.S. knows, or should know by now, that while the political center is better than the right, only the left can offer a program that comes near to actually bringing substantive change to our people and country.

So, with a tip of the hat to both Obama and Clinton for their breakthrough achievements, we think its best to remain committed to real change, progressive change, not the illusion of change, and to working harder to bring it about.

—————————————————

2. THE MAIN CAUSES OF THE OIL PRICE HIKES

What is the cause of the extraordinary increase in the price of petroleum in 10 years from $11 a barrel in 1998 to up to $135 a barrel this year? The price has doubled from $65 last August. It's possible prices will go down, but not much, and the future trend is upward.

And what will be the ramifications of this new era of exceptionally high oil prices, not just the increase of U.S. gasoline to a startling $4 a gallon and climbing, but in the inevitable restructuring of the geopolitical chessboard? For one thing, countries with abundant energy resources will become more powerful. Russia, for instance, is the only member of the G8 wealthy nations that is not only energy independent but is awash in oil and natural gas for export.

So far there have been many different and often contradictory explanations for the recent upsurge in the price of petroleum resources.

President Bush argues predictably that it is a matter of supply and demand. He's backed by Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman who claims there is a "decline in global inventories" of crude oil. Many observers think demand is outstripping supply. Various analysts point to other causes, five of which are most prominent: The sharp decline in Federal Reserve Board interest rates, the weak dollar, the proximity of anticipated peak oil (the extraction of half the world reserves, after which there will be continual reductions in supply), oil company profiteering, and speculation on oil and gas in the commodities market.

All of these explanations have a relationship to the current price increases but some — and one in particular — seem to have greater influence at this time than others. Undoubtedly, supply and demand is a major factor in the long run, as is a peak decline in reserves. But the past decade and immediate decades ahead are in the relative short run. And while interest rates, the strength of the dollar, and record oil industry profiteering all bear upon the current situation, it seems to us — as we will explain below — that market speculation played a major role in the extreme increases of the last 10 months.

This is not to suggest that supply shortages are impossible at this stage, particularly with increasing world demand. Some oil fields are drying up. Some produce poor quality. Some fields won't come on line for years. Iraq and Iran are underperforming (the former because of the U.S. war, the latter partly due to Washington's sanctions and threats), and conflict has reduced Nigeria's output, among other dislocations around the globe. But these are temporary problems and the means exist to solve them. Of course if the U.S. launched a war against Iran, which we still continue to doubt, all bets are off if the narrow Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf — through which up to 60% of world's oil must pass to reach its destination — was made impassable.

There's probably enough petroleum under ground for at least 40 years, during which time humankind will face three choices: 1. There can be wars over energy resources. 2. There can be scientific breakthroughs and solutions in the richer countries while the poorer countries are left to decline. 3. There can be collective worldwide emergency efforts to develop and share sufficient renewable energy alternatives and changes in infrastructure and lifestyle to survive at an advanced level, possibly avoiding the impending environmental calamity if greenhouse gases are largely eliminated in the process.

In the price increases of the last year, supply and demand does not appear to be a major factor, despite the Bush Administration's contention. Actually, demand slowed and reserves increased during this period due to high prices but they remained high.

Writing in Business Week April 1, automotive expert Ed Wallace points out that "There is no shortage. Gasoline reserves on hand are at the highest levels since the early 1990s." He noted that gas and oil prices have been skyrocketing in the U.S at precisely the moment when demand has been declining. In January, for instance, American demand was down 4% compared to January 2007 but prices just kept zooming upward at a time of increased world supplies. Throughout this year of intense price elevation, U.S. stockpiles of oil have been increasing by millions of barrels a month while consumption in May dropped 6%.

In March, Associated Press quoted oil analyst Victor Shum as stating: "Gasoline inventories are higher than the historical average at this time of the year so there is really no need to worry about supply being too tight." In April, Royal Dutch Shell CEO Jeroen van der Veer noted as prices were approaching $130 a barrel that the supply-demand ratio was "the same as when oil was selling for $60 a barrel [in August 2007], which is in itself quite a unique phenomenon." In May, David Kelly, chief market strategist for J.P. Morgan Funds, told The Washington Post that "the growth in the world oil consumption is not that strong." Business Week's Wallace notes that "the consensus of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists and the energy executives" is that "no supply crisis justifies the way the world's oil is being priced today."

If there is adequate supply and a bit less than normal demand, why have prices of gas and oil doubled in less than a year, causing extreme hardship for working people in many countries, including in America at a time of ever-higher food prices and the onset of a recession? The evidence points to speculation.

In early March, for instance, ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson stated that "the record run in oil prices is related more to speculation and a weakening dollar than supply and demand in the market…. [F]ear of supply reliability is overblown." Six months ago, oil analyst Fadel Gheit told a Congressional committee that "The current high oil prices are inflated by as much as 100%. The price surge is a result of excessive speculation."

What is speculation, or in this case futures speculation? One definition is investing as a gamble, based on informed guesswork, on an anticipated future price movement of a particular type of stock, bond, or commodity, usually with a higher risk to obtain a greater profit before pulling out. If enough money is bet on future price hikes in commodities such as petroleum or foodstuffs, this can artificially increase the paper price way above its actual value but determine real prices just the same.

In the year 2000 some $9 billion was invested in oil futures. By this year it is about $250 billion, a factor that has greatly inflated the anticipated price of oil even though the actual cost of extraction, transportation, refining and delivery has remained fairly stable. Goldman Sachs, a major Wall Street investment bank and the largest energy commodities trader in the world, predicted in mid-May that the cost of oil may jump to $200 a barrel within the next couple of years, and that the era of inexpensive petroleum has ended. This kind of news invites mounting speculation on future prices, thus driving up the price unnecessarily.

Speaking May 26 on the Between the Lines radio newsmagazine, Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's Energy Program, declared: "Speculators have been moving steadily into the oil futures market, where the prices of oil and gas are actually set. And these markets are not in Saudi Arabia or any OPEC member nation, but rather in places like New York, where energy traders trade contracts for these products. And increasingly, because of the lack of adequate regulation over these markets, we feel that there is the potential for anti-competitive practices in the industry for market manipulation and other nefarious activities."

F. William Engdahl, author of "A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order," wrote in May for Global Research: "At least 60% of today’s $128 per barrel price of crude oil comes from unregulated futures speculation by hedge funds, banks and financial groups using the London ICE Futures and New York NYMEX futures exchanges and uncontrolled inter-bank or Over-The-Counter trading to avoid scrutiny.

"U.S. margin rules of the government’s Commodity Futures Trading Commission allow speculators to buy a crude oil futures contract on the NYMEX, by having to pay only 6% of the value of the contract. At today's price of $128 per barrel, that means a futures trader only has to put up about $8 for every barrel. He borrows the other $120. This extreme “leverage” of 16 to 1 helps drive prices to wildly unrealistic levels and offset bank losses in sub-prime and other disasters at the expense of the overall population."

Engdahl points out that nearly two years ago, a U.S. Senate committee report titled, "The Role of Market Speculation in Rising Oil and Gas Prices," argued: "There's a few hedge fund managers out there who are masters at knowing how to exploit the peak oil theories and hot buttons of supply and demand, and by making bold predictions of shocking price advancements to come, they only add more fuel to the bullish fire in a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy."

Journalist Mike Whitney wrote May 30 that the record price hike in oil and gas "is a hoax cooked up by the investment banks and hedge funds who are trying to dig their way out of the trillion dollar mortgage-backed securities mess that they created by turning garbage loans into securities. That scam blew up in their face last August and left them scrounging for handouts from the Federal Reserve. Now the billions of dollars they're getting from the Fed is being diverted into commodities which is destabilizing the world economy; driving gas prices to the moon, and triggering food riots across the planet."

Writers Hossein Askari and Noureddine Krichene, in articles May 29 and 31 in Asia Times Online, charge that "The U.S. Federal Reserve was in large part responsible for the oil price explosion and its volatility…. In response to the collapse of the credit and speculation boom, the Fed has set a deliberate re-inflationary objective in order to reverse falling asset prices…. A depreciating dollar and rising oil prices have gone hand-in-hand. Oil prices are quoted in dollars; a falling dollar results in an increasing dollar price for oil."

"Since the Fed in August 2007 aggressively resumed the inflationary policy it had followed during 2001-2006, oil prices have been rising at an accelerating pace…, food prices have increased at an unprecedented rate causing riots around the globe, and the dollar has been sinking. Each interest rate cut has been immediately followed by an inflationary spike in oil and food prices and a falling dollar; and in turn accompanied by a rapid fall in real incomes of the working classes and pensioners."

Responding to reports critical of the Federal Reserve, Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, addressing the International Monetary Conference in Barcelona, Spain, June 3, seemed principally to blame the present crisis in financial markets on East Asian exporters, mainly China, for creating a global "savings glut" and "large buildups in foreign exchange reserves." (See article below, The Realities of U.S.-China Trade.)

Writing in The Times (UK) May 22, economist Anatole Kaletsky noted that demand for oil was declining at today's prices but there are "plenty of buyers for pieces of paper linked to the price of oil next month and next year. This situation is exactly analogous to the bubble in credit markets a year ago, where nobody wanted to buy sub-prime mortgage bonds, but there was plenty of demand for 'financial derivatives' that allowed investors to bet on the future value of these bonds…. Rip up your textbooks, the doubling of oil prices has little to do with China's appetite."

Public Citizen's Slocum was critical of the fact that despite record profits big oil companies continue to receive an estimated at $8 billion a year in taxpayer subsidies. Here's what should be done, he said:

"End subsidies to fossil fuels, increase subsidies for renewable energy and energy efficiency, particularly for households…. Second, we've got to have better functioning markets…. Companies are allowed to engage in all sorts of behavior behind closed doors. That's not the way a modern economy is supposed to function. We've got to have stronger regulations…. Third, I think a congressional investigation [is needed] into potentially anti-competitive practices by the oil industry and whether or not we need to strengthen our anti-trust laws to ensure that oil companies are playing fair and aren't colluding with one another to jack up prices."

There is a positive aspect to the oil price fiasco for a country that consumes 25% of the world's energy resources even though it only has 5% of the population: It will finally rivet public and even possibly governmental attention on the urgent need for greatly expanded mass transportation options including an improved rail system, high-mileage fuels for cars and trucks, and the decisive development and production of alternative energy sources that do not contribute to global warming and which are equal to our advanced country's great needs.

The need for all this has been known by the U.S. government for many years, but it has done little to nothing. Between 1990 and 2004, even after dire environmental concerns began infiltrating world consciousness, the U.S. increased its daily use of petroleum 24% — from 17 million to 24 million barrels. Increasing auto travel in low mileage vehicles was the main reason. Needless to say, minimum attention has been paid by candidates of the ruling political parties in the current presidential elections to the requirement for massive government-directed programs to deal with these matters adequately and swiftly. The big U.S. automakers knew it too, but it took until this June 3 for GM to finally decide to phase out its gas guzzling SUVs.

The one biofuel alternative that the Bush Administration has promoted — corn-based ethanol — may be creating more problems than it solves. According to the April 30 New York Times, ethanol "is now blamed for driving up food prices while emitting more carbon dioxide and providing a third less energy per gallon than gasoline. It is no panacea either. Even if oil companies can meet the federal requirement to use 36 billion gallons of ethanol by 2022, which many say will be impossible, it would only amount to 10% of the country’s current oil demand."

The geopolitical implications of expensive oil are legion. Michael T. Klare, a progressive Hampshire College professor, author and oil expert, writing in TomDispatch May 8, declared: The U.S. "lost its claim to superpower status when a barrel of crude oil roared past $110 on the international market, gasoline prices crossed the $3.50 threshold at American pumps, and diesel fuel topped $4. America's wealth and power has long rested on the abundance of cheap petroleum….When it came to reliance on [oil] imports, the United States crossed the 50% threshold in 1998 and now has passed 65%. Though few fully realized it, this represented a significant erosion of sovereign independence…. By now, we are transferring such staggering sums yearly to foreign oil producers, who are using it to gobble up valuable American assets, that, whether we know it or not, we have essentially abandoned our claim to superpowerdom."

Mainstream geopolitical strategist George Friedman, founder of Stratfor.com, wrote May 27 that "The rise in the price of oil is triggering shifts in economic power that are in turn creating changes in the international order. Obviously, the winners in this game are those who export oil, and the losers are those who import it…. The real winners are countries that can export and generate cash in excess of what they need domestically….The big losers are countries that not only have to import oil but also are heavily industrialized relative to their economy [such as China]. Countries in which service makes up a larger sector than manufacturing obviously use less oil for critical economic functions than do countries that are heavily manufacturing-oriented. Certainly, consumers in countries such as the United States are hurt by rising prices. And these countries’ economies might slow…. Russia is the big winner. Russia is an exporter of natural gas and oil. It also could be a massive exporter of grains if prices were attractive enough and if it had the infrastructure…. The biggest winners are the countries of the Arabian Peninsula."

————————————————

3. ADDRESSING AMERICA'S CHINA SYNDROME

As the People's Republic of China (PRC) deals with the catastrophic Sichuan earthquake and prepares for the historic Olympics this summer, the U.S. corporate mass media have focused much of America's attention in recent months on criticism of Beijing's policies in Tibet and the Darfur region of Sudan. In addition, American China bashers are hopping mad about the loss of U.S. jobs and the trade deficit, which they also blame on Beijing.

What's it all about? In this article we will focus on Tibet and Darfur. In a second article below we will discuss China-U.S. trade and the argument about jobs and the deficit.

First, we must express our sympathy and solidarity to the Chinese people and government at this moment of recovery and rebuilding from the devastating May 12 earthquake in Sichuan Province.

Beijing is to be praised for its swift action in responding to the crisis and to the needs of the survivors. The decisiveness of President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao in handling this tragedy stands in stark contrast to the dismal, virtually indifferent response to Hurricane Katrina in September 2005 by the government of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

The destruction caused by the earthquake is many times the magnitude of Katrina, leaving in its aftermath some 70,000 dead, at least 360,000 injured, a minimum of 4,000 orphaned children, more than 3 million homes destroyed and four times that number damaged. Some 12 million people were made homeless and many millions of people have been relocated to other parts of China from quake-affected areas. Serious relief work began within hours, ultimately bolstered by 130,000 members of the People's Liberation Army (PLA). Beijing has launched a reconstruction program with a three-year completion date.

By comparison, Katrina killed 1,557 people in Louisiana and another 279 in several other Southern states while about 275,000 homes were destroyed. To this day, portions of New Orleans remain a ruin; permanent new housing within that city has not been built for the remaining refugees — usually people of low income and color — who are scattered, isolated, and mostly forgotten. Thousands of homeless people, a great many of whom are physically or mentally disabled, roam New Orleans, as the New York Times reported May 28. Mayor C. Ray Nagin recently "joked" by suggesting that "a way to reduce this city’s post-Katrina homeless population was to give them one-way bus tickets out of town."

In August, a great international event will take place in China — the Olympics — that will help ease the national sorrow felt by China's 1.3 billion people. It will also focus world attention on the country's material progress and enlarged role in world affairs.

We opposed efforts by anti-China groups to interfere with the running of the Olympic torch in the U.S. and elsewhere, and deplore suggestions — particularly those from American politicians — to boycott or devalue these games of friendly international competition.

China bashers in the U.S. are doing their best to undermine the summer games in order to discredit the Beijing government. These American detractors — led by an informal coalition of some members of Congress from both parties, a few celebrities and union leaders, human rights groups, neocons, and Cold War anticommunists — have lately been focusing on Tibet and Darfur, and so shall we here, beginning with Tibet.

American critics of China charge the PRC with taking over Tibet in 1950 and causing grave hardship to the Tibetan people in subsequent years. We've heard some reports that Tibet was a virtual Buddhist Shangri-La until the Han nonbelievers took over with their red flags. Numerous histories of the region, however, suggest that China has exercised a loose sovereignty in Tibet for over 600 years. (See footnote 1.) And we believe there is ample evidence that the lives of the working people of Tibet have been greatly enhanced since the 1949 Chinese revolution.

For example, until the revolution over 90% of the people in Tibet had been poor, landless serfs ruled by a feudal theocracy which kept them in bondage and illiteracy. About 5% were actually slaves to the ruling elite. Everything in the country of value was owned by about 100 noble families and the abbots of an equal number of big monasteries. There were no public schools, except for feudal monasteries where a handful of young boys studied religious chants. Several hundred wealthy boys attended a private school. Education for women did not exist in 1950. There was no health care at all for the masses of people. (Footnote 2.)

Feudalism and slavery were terminated by the Chinese revolution, and the people of the Autonomous Region of Tibet are now living in a developing society with education, healthcare, and all the basics of life.

Washington's Cold War response to the Chinese revolution and the entrance of the PLA into Tibet was to instruct the CIA to secretly encourage and help finance the Tibetan elite's quest for independence, and eventually to funnel funds to the Tibet "Government in Exile" in Dharamsala, India, at least until the early '70s. (Footnote 3.) This type of subversion evidently ended due to the U.S.-China rapprochement, though Washington still confers political blessings, and perhaps more than that, upon the Dalai Lama and the former ruling class which leads the Dharamsala formation.

The Chinese state has made errors in Tibet. They include, at one time or another, a certain degree of Han chauvinism, heavy-handedness in administering the territory, and a lack of sensitivity to cultural mores. On the other hand, Beijing's positive accomplishments in Tibet have far exceeded its mistakes.

The U.S. has recognized Tibet as part of China's territory for almost 100 years. In 2003, the Bush Administration reiterated that Tibet was a territory of China, but then advocated that the PRC enter talks with the Dalai Lama to bring about considerably more autonomy for Tibet than now exists. This would result in the transfer of greater political authority to the traditional elite and theocratic religious leaders.

Beijing is convinced that a sector of the exile leadership actually seeks secession from China, though the Dalai Lama himself — who is not without more radical opponents in his circle and within different strains of the Tibetan Buddhist community — speaks only of autonomy.

The Chinese government blamed the Dalai Lama for the riots in Lhasa, the Tibet capital, last March when mobs, according to the Guardian (UK), "attacked Han Chinese, Muslim Hui and other ethnic minorities," killing several and burning down a number of stores. The religious leader, who is an advocate of nonviolence, denied fostering the kind of eruption that took place, and it may well have been carried out by a faction out of his control. Limited disturbances took place in several other locations but quickly ended. The exile government" claims up to 200 people were killed in the riots; Beijing says 20, about half of them by the rioters.

The brief clashes this spring, which Dharamsala probably initiated but evidently got out of hand, were intended to embarrass Beijing before the Olympics and focus world opinion on the Dalai Lama's call for greater autonomy. The U.S. mass media practically made it appear there was a major uprising, which was not the case. And during the running of the Olympic torch in various countries, nightly TV coverage created a sense that there was a mass world outcry to "free Tibet," when only quite small numbers were involved.

Beijing seeks "harmony" in Tibet as it does throughout all China in response to rising protests in recent years by workers and peasants dissatisfied about economic and social inequities, and official corruption. Increasingly, it has been pouring money and resources into Tibet, building infrastructure, a rail connection for the first time, educational and social services, and tourism facilities. Following the riots, in our view, Beijing probably will take steps to ease tensions and increase its commitment to development. The government will continue to hold occasional discussions with representatives of the Dalai Lama, but there will be no major expansion in existing regional autonomy in the foreseeable future.

The situation in Sudan's Darfur province is another issue for which China is blamed in certain quarters. Some U.S. political figures and an organization called the Save Darfur Coalition accuse People's China for the dreadful plight of refugees in Darfur because Beijing is the Khartoum government's biggest trading partner, foreign investor, oil extractor, and small arms provider. (Actually 90% of such arms derive from other countries, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.)

The critics seem to suggest that all China need do is crack the Big Power whip and the Sudan government will be brought to heel. This is very simplistic. Khartoum bears a portion of responsibility for the Darfur tragedy. But to leave it at that is to ignore the complex political, economic, social and religious complications that have existed during the decades of continuous civil war and strife that have followed Sudan's release from colonial subjugation. And China is, in fact, using its good offices to help resolve the crisis and improve the conditions of the refugees.

The Save Darfur Coalition insists that the Khartoum government is guilty of genocide. Congress passed a resolution charging genocide in 2004 and President Bush began using the term to describe the Darfur situation. No other government leader has done so. After an examination of the facts the United Nations reported that there is great suffering in the region but that genocide was a mischaracterization. Jimmy Carter, after his own investigation last year, likewise stated it was not genocide.

Save Darfur was the subject of considerable criticism earlier this year from several other aid organizations working in the region for spending much of its large budget on full-page political advertisements targeting China and not "on aid for the long-suffering citizens of the region." (Footnote 4.)

On May 28, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain issued a joint statement through the coalition pledging to focus on Darfur in the next administration. The New York Times reported that "the statement is largely symbolic because the three are not proposing any specific Congressional action against Sudan. Nor are they calling for tangible steps by the United States to put pressure on the Sudanese government. For instance, the statement is silent about whether the Bush administration should use its turn as president of the United Nations Security Council in June to seek further ways to press Sudan."

Actually, the United States has done little regarding the crisis in Sudan, a country that has experienced American economic sanctions for 11 years (unrelated to Darfur) and which was the object of an unjustified U.S. cruise missile attack in 1998 that destroyed the country's only pharmaceutical factory.

For its part, the Chinese government for many decades has followed a strict policy of non-intervention in the internal affairs of other countries. An official Beijing statement reports, however, that "China has, on the basis of mutual respect and equality, given constructive advice to Sudan on the Darfur issue."

China's recent statement noted it had been "working closely with the United Nations to resolve the Darfur crisis through political means." It "helped push forward the Sudanese, African Union and UN consensus on sending a hybrid [peacekeeping] force to Darfur, and actively participated in the peacekeeping efforts." Beijing further "made proposals to Sudan and the UN for a peaceful settlement of the Darfur issue and worked to persuade Khartoum to accept the UN resolution." In addition it was "the first non-African country to send peacekeeping troops to the Darfur region" and also has sent construction brigades to UN peacekeeping camps. (See footnote 5.)

Even Save Darfur has grudgingly acknowledged that China used its influence for the good, but it demands that Beijing do far more, and its criticism continues, almost as though disparaging China was an end in itself. But without exception Beijing does not and will not issue orders and threats to other countries. Would that the Washington government intervened far less in the affairs of other nations — but on this subject China's critics usually remain less than vocal. (See footnote 6 regarding China "Five Principles of Coexistence.")

UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs John Holmes, who also is coordinator of the world body's emergency relief program, declared a year ago that the situation in nearby Somalia — which is indirectly controlled by the U.S. through its Ethiopian military surrogates who invaded at Washington's command — is "a worse crisis than Darfur or Chad or anywhere else this year." The U.S. even bombs Somalia from time to time, but the response from the U.S. humanitarian and peace community is minuscule.

What accounts for China bashing? It goes a long way back. Extreme racism toward Chinese immigrants to the U.S. in the 1800s and first part of the next century set the tone. The political bashing started with the triumph of the communist revolution in 1949. China was thoroughly demonized and ostracized by the U.S. government for a quarter-century until the two countries entered into a tacit alliance directed against the USSR in the mid-1970s. Although Washington largely ended its worst anti-Chinese propaganda since then, suspicion and criticism of Beijing has been an undertone in U.S. relations and policy ever since, despite diplomatic cordiality and the advantageous economic relationship it continues to cultivate.

In fact, as we pointed out in a series of articles in 2006, the U.S. launched a virtual new cold war against China some years ago and it is still in effect under the surface. Indeed, China — which has no military bases outside its own territory and armed forces quite weak compared to Washington's military colossus — is surrounded by American military bases, Navy fleets and submarines, Air Force landing fields, nuclear-armed intercontinental missiles aimed at its cities, spy satellites, sophisticated eavesdropping stations, and countries with which Washington enjoys mutual security alliances.

For nearly 60 years now, in one way or another, the American people have been taught by their government and most politicians to be either afraid, distrustful or antagonistic toward China. One reason is that despite China's ingestion of a large dose of capitalism it is still a country led by a Communist Party, and Washington's 90-year demonization of communism has affected the thinking of generations of Americans.

There are other reasons as well. China is becoming a powerful nation and probably will in a few decades surpass the U.S. in economic prowess. Many American politicians resent China's rise as an affront to U.S. national interests. Beijing, although accommodating and trying to avoid conflict, stands up to Uncle Sam when he gets pushy.

China also gives Washington a body blow to its geopolitical solar plexus when it criticizes imperialism, albeit mildly, and America's unipolar domination of the world by calling for a multipolar global order, or when it refuses to support the U.S. in an unjust war or won't trounce Iran. Also, since China is not an America-type democracy, it is a convenient target to be bashed by any politician looking for a round of applause.

In a sense, the 2008 summer Olympics in Beijing will signify the importance of China as a major global power. Recognizing that China is in the midst of an historic century-long and longer political, economic and social transition, and that the outcome has not yet been finally determined, we think the emergence of this important society with a preference for peace and equality among nations, along with its Five Principles of Coexistence in foreign affairs, can make a positive contribution to a better world in the years to come.

—
[Editor's Note: Our 12,000-word two-part series on "Where is China Headed?" (January 2007) addressed positive and negative elements the Beijing government's policies from the Chinese revolution until last year. If you are a new reader or want to review the articles again, email a request to us at jacdon@earthlink.net and we will send them to you.]

1. A good book about Tibet's history from an academic source is “The Making of Modern Tibet,” by State University of New York Professor A. Tom Grunfeld, published in 1996 by M. E. Sharpe.

2. An article of interest about Tibet was written last year by progressive author Michael Parenti titled "Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth." It is available online at http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html.

3. Richard M. Bennett's recent article on "Tibet, the 'great game' and the CIA" is at http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8442

4. There are several informative articles about the Save Darfur Coalition.
New York Times, June 2, 2007: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/02/world/africa/02darfur.html
Democracy Now, June 4, 2007:
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/6/4/mahmood_mamdani_on_darfur_the_politics
MRZine April 28, 2006:
http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/furuhashi280406.html

5. For China's reply to allegations of misconduct in Darfur, see http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-02/16/content_6460400.htm.

6. China's attitude toward Sudan regarding Darfur is based on its approach to foreign affairs since 1953 embodied in its Five Principles of Coexistence, which were incorporated into the constitution in 1982. They are: (1) mutual respect for each other's sovereignty and territorial integrity, (2) mutual non-aggression, (3) mutual non-interference in each others internal affairs, (4) equality and mutual benefit and (5) peaceful co-existence.

—————————————————

4. THE REALITIES OF CHINA-U.S. TRADE

China is being blamed by members of Congress and some labor leaders among others for the loss of good jobs in the United States and our country's enormous balance of payments (trade) deficit.

Much of the mass media uncritically echoes the views of the economic China bashers on these matters. But the business press, which is more inclined to level with its readers because their money is involved, is more nuanced on the question of jobs, the trade deficit, and the value of China's currency (see footnote 1).

U.S.-China trade is taking place within an economic construct championed and enforced by the United States through the World Trade Organization. China thus plays by American rules, or it would not be allowed in the game.

The rules are based on neoliberal globalization, the contemporary modus operandi of American corporate capitalism and its bodyguard, the U.S. government. Neoliberalism prefers a free trade orientation, deregulation of markets, privatization, and government noninterference. Globalization facilitates the current unprecedented internationalization of business. This is not to say Washington practices what it preaches about neoliberalism: it is quite interventionist on behalf of big business and protective of its trade when thought necessary.

Corporate and financial wealth in the U.S. has one overriding objective: the acquisition of more wealth. Reducing the cost of labor is a key means of increasing profits. Many years ago, owners of factories in New England closed shop and moved to the poorer, non-union South. In the current era, corporate leaders are moving throughout world to take advantage of the lower wages paid in the post-colonial economies of developing Asia, Latin America and Africa. This window of opportunity will not last forever because workers in time are going to demand increasingly better compensation.

American multinationals operate in many such countries in quest of higher profits, and threaten to move elsewhere if wages rise. The largest number have been investing, building production facilities, and subcontracting to thousands of factories in China for over 20 years, all with Washington's encouragement and understanding that a byproduct of this policy would be an increase in the trade deficit. The move to China, and the great profits that the corporations earn there, was considered worth the higher deficit. As Foreign Affairs magazine commented in 2002:

"U.S. multinational corporations are using China as an export platform in the face of unrelenting global competition. An increasing percentage of the products these affiliates export from China is destined for the U.S. market. These goods count as Chinese exports to the United States — even though they are shipped by U.S.-owned entities — and they contribute to the ever-widening American trade deficit. European and Japanese multinationals are following a similar strategy of manufacturing in China for export, further adding to America's import bill from that country. Together, the delivery of U.S. goods through affiliates and the increasing use of the mainland as an export base by the world's leading multinational corporations could inhibit any significant improvement in the American trade deficit with China."

And of course it has. Last year, the total U.S. trade deficit was $738.6 billion, a 9% decline from 2006 due to the weaker dollar (which increases demand for lower-priced American exports) and slowing economy. Some U.S. politicians convey the impression that China causes the entire deficit but about $400 billion of the 2007 total was because of ever increasing oil imports. By comparison, America's petroleum import bill was only $48 billion a decade ago. China accounted for $256.3 billion of the U.S. trade deficit in 2007.

At least 30% the "Made in China" goods exported from that country to the U.S. actually is produced by subsidiaries of American multinational companies — and this accounts for a considerable portion of the deficit. (If American companies stayed in the U.S., and paid a decent wage, there wouldn't be a big China deficit, and many jobs would have remained back home, but corporate profits would be smaller.) Another chunk of the China deficit is from imports of goods manufactured by subsidiaries of corporations from other advanced capitalist economies.

These U.S. and foreign corporations make the big bucks. American consumers of modest income tend to get cheaper prices from items imported from China, in many cases to partially compensate for lower wages or joblessness. China benefits, but gets the blame in Congress and from some unions for "stealing" American jobs and causing the deficit. The China bashers act as though our country's runaway corporations and a complicit Washington are innocent bystanders, and that it was not in the ingrained nature of capitalism to put profits before the needs of the people.

The anti-Beijing coterie suggests China doesn't buy American goods, but Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez recently called China America's "fastest growing market for U.S. exports." China would import more, but the de-industrializing U.S. now produces far fewer goods than yesteryear, and many of them made in America are simply not competitive. Look at how the mighty U.S. auto industry deflated its own tires. In addition, a range of costly high technology items that Chinese buyers want to purchase are withheld for "national security" reasons.

China's critics attribute some of the deficit to Beijing's undervalued currency, the yuan. According to Ramapo College (NJ) Professor Behzad Yaghmaian in early May: "Conceding to American pressures, China relinquished its decade-long policy of pegging the yuan to the dollar in July 2005. The yuan rose by more than 5% in the first year, 12% by the end of 2007, and 14.13% by March 2008. Meanwhile, the trade deficit with China continued to swell by more than 15 percent."

The U.S. wants China to increasingly strengthen the yuan, but Beijing responds that it must proceed gradually lest its own economy stumble. The stronger the yuan, the tighter the profit margins for a multitude of small and medium export-oriented Chinese companies, causing reductions in wages and layoffs at a time when the Communist Party is already concerned about worker protests.

On June 5, the PRC Customs Administration reported that for the first time in five years "China's trade surplus is likely to shrink in 2008." It fell 7.9% in the first four months of this year against a similar period in 2007. One of the factors was a "clear acceleration" in the value of the yuan against the dollar, plus increased global protectionism and a reduction in exports to the U.S. due to the apparent recession. The agency also forecast China's "imports will keep picking up speed. This will result in a reversal of the swift growth in the trade surplus and in the trade imbalances." In the wake of the American financial downturn, the European Union has now become China's largest export market.

A significant problem behind the trade deficit is that the U.S. is simply spending much more money on imports than it has in the bank, and its trading partners (China and Japan mainly) have been lending Washington great sums of money for deficit financing. Much of America's consumer and government spending is based on debt as well, and it is one of the symptoms of our country's decline.

As far as jobs and wages for American workers are concerned, big business for the last few decades, has been carrying out a campaign to eviscerate the labor movement, to deprive workers of the fruits of increased productivity, to lower wages and benefits, and to oppose government intervention on the side of the working class/lower middle class and the poor. Shifting jobs overseas and turning the screw ever tighter on American workers at home is what's causing job loss, not China.

As Business Week wrote a few years ago, "One reason politicians are whipping themselves into a frenzy over China is because it's an easy way to explain the constant din of layoff announcements that show little sign of slowing."

Much of America's industrial base that has not gone abroad for superprofits has failed to keep up with the foreign competition (except in the production and export of weapons of war, where the U.S. is without peer). As progressive writer James Petras wrote a couple of years ago, "China bashing is merely a response to the loss of competitiveness. Nationalist demagogy in a declining global power is a compensatory mechanism."

Contrary to many of the arguments seeking to blame China for some of the problems afflicting the U.S. economy and American workers, we think such difficulties were generated within our country's capitalist system itself, compounded by the policies of neoliberalism and corporate globalization.
—

1. Although there are many more recent pieces on the question of job loss and the trade deficit, we think Business Week's article of Oct. 2, 2003 — "Is the Job Drain China's Fault?" — touches lots of bases and holds up quite well. It's at http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/03_41/b3853053.htm?chan=mz.

—————————————————

5. THE PERSISTENT FEMALE-MALE WAGE GAP

Following is an extract from important statistics compiled by the AFL-CIO last year about the wage gap between female and male workers, showing that women earn just 76.5% as much as men, and that this includes professional women and retired women as well as workers who are semi-skilled or unskilled. Access to the full fact sheet about women workers is contained in the "Check It Out" column below, under the headline "Ask a Working Women."

In 2006, median weekly earnings for women were 80.8% those of men. For most women of color, the earnings gap was even larger.

• African American women earned just 70 cents for every dollar earned by men in 2006.
• Hispanic and Latina women earned just 59 cents for every dollar men earned.
• Only Asian American women’s earnings were closer to parity with men’s: in 2006, they earned 94% that of all men. However, they earned 79% as much as Asian American men.

The wage gap is also more pronounced for older women: in 2006, women over 25 earned 79% that of men in the same age group while women aged 16-24 earned 95% as much as their male peers.

Equal pay is a problem in every occupational category, even in occupations where women considerably outnumber men. In 2006, certain professions showed a significant gap.

• Women in professional and related occupations earned over 27% less than their male counterparts, while women in sales and office occupations earned 23% less than similarly employed men.
• Female elementary and middle school teachers earned more than 10% less than similarly employed men, despite comprising 82% of the field.
• Female registered nurses earned nearly 10% less than their male colleagues, despite the fact that 90% of nurses are women.
• Female physicians and surgeons earned a whopping 38% less than their male counterparts.
• Female college and university teachers earned over 25% less than those who were male.
• Female lawyers earned 30% less than male lawyers.

Women also earn less at every level of education. For full-time workers aged 18 and older in 2005:

• The median annual earnings of a female high school graduate was more than 34% less than that of her male counterpart;
• The median annual earnings of a woman with a bachelor’s degree was almost 31% (or $15,911) less than that of a similarly qualified man;
• Women are more likely to complete graduate education. A woman with a master’s degree earned 32% (or $21,374) less than a man with a master’s degree;
• The median annual earnings for a woman with a professional degree were $65,941 while men earned over $100,000.
• A woman with a doctoral degree earned more than 29% (or $22,824) less than a similarly qualified man.

• According to a recent report by the American Association of University Women, women who attended highly selective colleges earn less than men from either highly or moderately selective colleges and about the same as men from minimally selective colleges.
• Men and women remain segregated by college major, with women making up 79% of education majors and men making up 82% of engineering majors. This segregation is found in the workplace as well, where women make up 74% of the education field and men make up 84% of the engineering and architecture fields.

Because women are paid less when they work, they receive smaller Social Security benefits when they retire:

• Women represent 58% of all Social Security beneficiaries age 62 and older and approximately 70% of beneficiaries age 85 and older.
• In 2005, the average Social Security retirement benefit was 32% smaller for women than men. 72.3% of women receive a monthly benefit of under $1,000 while 67.8% of men receive more than $1,000 per month.
• Only 29.2% of women 65 and older received any form of pension or annuity income and the median amount was $6,420. For men, 43.8% received pensions or annuity income and the median amount was $12,000.
• The benefit structure disproportionately benefits married women. For unmarried women over 65, Social Security comprises 52% of their total income, while it is only 38% of that of an unmarried elderly man.
• In 2004, 46% of all elderly unmarried females receiving Social Security benefits relied on Social Security for 90% or more of their income.

—————————————————

6. CHECK IT OUT

SUPER-RICH LOOK DOWN ON MERELY RICH: The rich have truly become the disenfranchised of American society, while the super-rich are living it up and mocking the conventionally wealthy. View the news report about this veritable tragedy at http://www.theonion.com/content/video/in_the_know_are_americas_rich.

THE GREAT IMMIGRATION PANIC: That's the title of an editorial in the June 3 New York Times that we wish were printed in every newspaper in America. If you haven't read it, do so at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/03/opinion/03tue1.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin.

BARACK THE RED: We may view Barack Obama as a cautious political centrist who will implement a program entirely acceptable to the ruling elite, but the right wing "swiftboating" kooks will attempt to depict the Democratic presidential nominee as a disloyal leftist who is a virtual front for communists and terrorists, writes Dana Milbank in the Washington Post. After reading the article, we're sure you will want to pin the flag to your lapel, denounce your minister and join a proper church, and shake your fist when you hear the word "Fidel." The article is at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/22/AR2008052203905.html

PRONOUNCE MEDVEDEV: How should Americans correctly pronounce the last name of Russian President Dmitry Medvedev? Written down it's Med-vee'-ah-div, but it's worthwhile checking out the audio pronunciation in this 1 minute and 24 second video, to the very end:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dLfBtPlkyng

SPEND LIKE THERE'S NO TOMORROW: This under two minute video shows what several people purchased when each was sent on a $3 trillion shopping spree. What would you buy? Here are some options: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgq5suMXCV8.

MOYERS ON DEMOCRACY: That's the title of Bill Moyers new book, published by Doubleday this May at 416 pages. He's one of the very best and most honest of the diminishing camp of American liberalism. His weekly PBS program is perhaps the most important and consistently informative on TV today. "Democracy in America," he writes, "is a series of narrow escapes, and we may be running out of luck. The reigning presumption about the American experience... is grounded in the idea of progress, the conviction that the present is 'better' than the past and the future will bring even more improvement. For all of its shortcomings, we keep telling ourselves, 'The system works.' Now all bets are off. We have fallen under the spell of money, faction, and fear, and the great American experience in creating a different future together has been subjugated to individual cunning in the pursuit of wealth and power — and to the claims of empire, with its ravenous demands and stuporous distractions." A 1,600 word excerpt is available at http://www.alternet.org/story/85521/

HAMAS ON THE HOLOCAUST: There seems to be considerable misunderstanding about the position of the political leadership in Gaza regarding the Holocaust. This article from the May 12 issue of the Guardian (UK) clears up any confusion. It was written by Bassem Naeem, minister of health and information in Gaza. It is available at http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/bassem_naeem/2008/05/hamas_condemns_the_holocaust.html.

MCCAIN: A REAL TOUGH SOB: This brief news video will show you a side of the GOP candidate that you may only have suspected before: http://www.theonion.com/content/video/mccain_vows_to_replace_secret

ASK A WORKING WOMAN: The AFL-CIO is in the midst of taking its important biannual "Ask A Working Woman Survey," based on responses to the union federation's online questions about pay equity, health care coverage, family and medical leave, and the like. Results from previous surveys plus other facts about working women show that, for instance, "Women also are disproportionately at risk in the current foreclosure crisis, since women are 32% more likely than men to have subprime mortgages. Women have significantly fewer savings to fall back on in a time of economic hardship. Non-married women have a net worth that’s 48% lower than non-married men, and women are less likely than men to participate in employer-sponsored retirement savings programs." To access a brief article which will guide our working women readers to the survey questions, visit http://www.alternet.org/blogs/reproductivejustice/85520/. To view the AFL-CIO's revealing fact sheet about women workers in general, plus vital job statistics regarding professional women, go to http://www.dpeaflcio.org/programs/factsheets/fs_2007_Professional_Women.htm.

—————————————————

7. Editorial
THE ABDUCTED TEXAS CHILDREN

We applaud the unexpected decision of two Texas courts to return 460 children to their parents at the Yearning for Zion Ranch compound of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS).

It was a miscarriage of justice and abuse of state power to abduct these children early last April at the behest of the state's Department of Family and Protective Services on the basis of an anonymous telephone call charging that the children were being abused. The caller never came forward, and the department never presented any evidence of abuse before or after the children were forcibly taken from their parents and placed in various temporary facilities throughout the state.

In a unanimous nine-page ruling by the 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin May 22, the three-judge panel said the Department of Family and Protective Services' case was legally and factually insufficient, and that 51st District Judge Barbara Walther acted improperly in April hearings when she ordered the children to remain in state custody. The state had claimed that the sect's polygamy, communal households, and underage marriages put every child in the community "in urgent" danger.

The ruling held: "There is simply no evidence specific to children at all except that they exist, they were taken into custody at the Yearning for Zion Ranch, and they were living with people who share a 'pervasive belief system' that condones underage marriage and underage pregnancy." This decision was subsequently upheld by the state Supreme Court, which decided 6-3 that "removal of the children was not warranted." The children, some of who have been traumatized by the state's action, began coming home in early June.

A chastened Department of Family and Protective Services will continue its investigation, and that is proper if it acts with sensitivity and within a liberal interpretation of the law. If one or more children are being abused at the compound, they should be protected, and if just laws are being broken the practice must stop. But there has to be proof in each individual case.

(end)

June 5, 2008, Issue #137
ACTIVIST CALENDAR
PART 2 of HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER

——————————————

Editor’s Note: THIS IS THE CALENDAR ONLY. Part 2, The Activist Newsletter,
will follow in several days. The last newsletter and additional postings are at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/.
Send listing to jacdon@earthlink.net.

——————————————

Friday, June 6, ALBANY: A vigil for Israeli and Palestinian children killed in the fighting since 2000 will take place 5:30-6:30 p.m. on the east steps of the New York State Capitol at Washington Ave., State and Eagle Sts. Attendees are asked to bring a flower, if possible. This is the sixth year that the Children's Memorial Day Flower Vigil will be held. The names of the Israeli and Palestinian children will be read. The vigilers will be holding flowers "that symbolize both the fragility and beauty of life." There is metered parking nearby. The sponsor is the Palestinian Rights Committee. Information, pei1996@verizon.net, (518) 453-8874.

Friday, June 6, NEW YORK CITY: An emergency demonstration to protest a June 4 Federal Appeals Court decision upholding the unjust conviction of the Cuban Five prisoners will begin at 5 p.m. at 26 Federal Plaza in lower Manhattan on Broadway between Duane and Reade Sts. (Take the N or R subway trains to City Hall, or the 4 or 5 to Brooklyn Bridge). The event is sponsored by the July 26 Coalition of many progressive and left organizations. The five Cuban nationals, who are considered heroes in their homeland where their case is a cause celebre, had infiltrated hard-line reactionary exile groups in Florida to learn when they were planning terrorist activities against Cuba, then reported the plans to Havana, which then took precautions. They were anti-terrorists who were not involved in spying against the U.S. Havana, in fact, informed Washington of terrorist plans — and Washington promptly arrested the five Cubans, convicted them and all were sentenced to long terms in American prisons. Full information about this important case is at http://www.freethefive.org. Information about the protest is available at (718) 601-4751 or (212) 694-8720.

Friday, June 6, POUGHKEEPSIE: Film: King of Hearts, at the Muddy Cup, 305 Main St. at 7:30 p.m. A classic antiwar film features Pvt. Charles Plumpick (Alan Bates) who becomes, against his will, the mock king of a group of asylum escapees who take possession of a deserted town in Northern France between the front lines in WW I. Part of the "Give Peace a Film" series, sponsored by the Dutchess Peace Coalition. Information, http://www.dutchesspeace.org

Friday, June 6, TROY: A documentary about the U.S.-caused refugee crisis in Iraq titled, "The Lost Generation," followed by a discussion led by filmmaker Sharmeen Obaid-Chenoy, begins at 7 p.m. at the Sanctuary for Independent Media, 3361 6th Ave. At 27, Obaid-Chinoy is the youngest ever nominee for the Broadcast Journalist of the Year Award. Five of her films concern her native Pakistan, but she has also made documentaries about women in Saudi Arabia, Native American women in Canada, illegal abortions in the Philippines, Muslims in Sweden and the ill-treatment of Zimbabwean migrants in South Africa. Her latest film focuses on Iraq's more than four million refugees. Suggested donation, $10. Sponsored by Sanctuary for Independent Media, and Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace. Information, tquaif@yahoo.com, (518) 439-8262, http://www.thesanctuaryforindependentmedia.org/node/158

Saturday, June 7, PLATTEKILL: The annual IFCO/Pastors for Peace Caravan to Cuba will get underway soon in a number of U.S. cities. The caravan travels throughout the U.S before entering Mexico, then flying to Cuba with gifts for the Cuban people — an act of protest against the embargo and travel restrictions aimed at our Caribbean Island neighbors. A private residence in this town, 10 minutes from the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge, is the venue for a "packing party" to prepare locally collected good-will gifts for transportation. During the 4-8 p.m. event, John Waller, representing the sponsoring group, will discuss "Cuba After Fidel: How Will It Remain Socially, Economically, and Environmentally Sustainable?" There will be Cuban food and a potluck. For directions, information about attending, or if you wish to donate to Cuba, call (845) 542-0557 or (845) 542-0481.

Sunday, June 8, NEW YORK CITY: This is going to be a most interesting 1-3 p.m. debate on the topic, "Dialogue on the Israel/Palestine Dilemma." The speakers are Morton Klein, president of Zionist Organization of America, and Joel Kovel, author of "Overcoming Zionism" and a member of the Woodstock-based Middle East Crisis Response (MECR) group. They will focus on peace prospects for Israel and Palestine. It takes place at the Community Church of New York Assembly Hall, 40 East 35th St between Park and Madison Aves. in Manhattan. Public and free. Sponsored by Community Church Action for Justice Committee. Information, (212) 683-4988, (212) 777-7499, threecatshoover@rcn.com, christiejeffers@earthlink.net, http://www.aria-aperta.org/AriaAperta/Projects/ResistanceCinema.html.

Monday, June 9, PLEASANTVILLE: Talk: "What We Can Do To Encourage Peace and Environmental Justice by Helping Stop or Mitigate Global Warming and Climate Change" with John L Cusack, environmental educator and sustainability management consultant. At WESPAC Pleasantville office, 17 Marble St., at 4 p.m. Sponsored by WESPAC. Information, (914) 449-6514, http://www.wespac.org.

Monday, June 9, NEW YORK CITY: Animal rights activists will be interested in this: A seminar on learning to lobby for animals. The speaker is Andrew Page of the Humane Society of the U.S. "Learn the most effective ways to lobby for protection of animals in N.Y. State at a time when the state legislature and Congress are considering legislation to protect animals by strengthening dog fighting laws, prohibiting canned shoots and other means. Bring friends." It will be held 6:30-8 p.m. at NYU Law School, Vanderbilt Hall, Greenberg Lounge, 40 Washington Sq. South (between MacDougal and Sullivan Sts.). Public and free. Sponsored by NYU Student Animal Legal Defense Fund and the Humane Society. RSVP is required. Contact and information, jea281@nyu.edu, https://community.hsus.org/humane/notice-description.tcl?newsletter_id=24158109

Tuesday, June 10, ROSENDALE: A public meeting on Floodplain Mapping and Management will be held 6-9 p.m. at the Community Center on Rt. 32. Bill Necheman from NYS Department of Environmental Conservation will speak on this topic and related local municipal regulations. Ira Stern will talk on the Army Corps of Engineers report on Reconnaissance Studies of Rondout/Wallkill and Esopus Creeks. There will also be a special guest on wetlands and riparian buffers in flood mitigation followed by a Q&A. People who live or have a business near a creek or stream or in a floodplain will be particularly interested in attending. Public and free. Sponsored by Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Rondout Creek Watershed Council, Lower Esopus Watershed Partnership (LEWP), Wallkill River Task Force and others. Information, victor@clearwater.org, (845) 454-7673 x112.

Tuesday, June 10, PLEASANTVILLE: A 7 p.m. meeting to hear local activist groups discuss their work will take place at the WESPAC office, 17 Marble St. Groups include YouthPAC, WESPAC's Middle East Committee, Free Mumia Coalition, Center for Racial Justice, No War Westchester, WESPAC's Environmental Committee, Women's Circle, and Friends of Turtle Island. Information, (914) 449-6514, nirainjana@yahoo.com and http://www.wespac.org.

Thursday June 12 and 26, WOODSTOCK: The Middle East Crisis Response group meets both Thursdays at 6:30-8:30 p.m. at the Woodstock Public Library, 5 Library Lane. All are welcome. Information, Fred Nagel (845) 876-7906, http://www.mideastcrisis.org.

Thursday, June 12, POUGHKEEPSIE: New time slot for "Activist Radio" on WVKR, 91.3 FM with Fred Nagel and Gary Kenton. It's now every Thursday from 5-6 p.m., and on the Internet at http://classwars.org. On air calls at (845) 437-7178. Sponsored by Dutchess Greens and Dutchess Peace. Information, Fred Nagel at (845) 876-7906, info@classwars.org, http://www.claswars.org.

Friday, June 13, POUGHKEEPSIE: Celebrate "Juneteenth" at the Sadie Peterson Delaney African Roots Library at the Family Partnership Center, 29 N. Hamilton St. from 5:30-8 p.m. Juneteenth is the oldest nationally celebrated commemoration of the end of slavery on the United States. "Join others to learn and listen, refresh the drive to achieve." Speakers include SUNY Professor A. J. Williams-Myers, music with The ReadNex Poetry Squad, a short film on Juneteenth, community discussion, and refreshments. Information, call (845) 454-6088 x3343.

Saturday, June 14, NEW YORK CITY: A day-long conference on the topic "Free the Cuban Five" will take place at Hostos Community College, 149th St., and Grand Concourse, The Bronx (2, 4 or 5 train to 149th). This is a tri-state area working conference with attorney Leonard Weinglass of the Cuban Five legal team, a representative from Cuban Mission to the UN, plenary and workshop speakers. Register at 8 a.m. for the 9:30 a.m.-5 p.m. session. Sponsors include the National Committee to Free the Cuban 5, IFCO-Pastors for Peace, Venceremos Brigade, Bolivarian Circles, Peoples Organization for Progress, Fuerzas de la Revolucion Dominicana, many more. Pre-register: http://www.freethecuban5conference.com/id2.html. Information, freethecubanfive@hotmail.com. Full information about this important case (see June 6 emergency demonstration event above) is at http://www.freethefive.org.

Monday, June 16, SCHENECTADY: Supporters of a grassroots effort to end violence against women meet tonight and the third Monday of every month at 7 p.m. at the Unitarian Church's Waters House 1221 Wendall Ave. The group is open to both men and women. From the organizers: "We are asking you not to be just a sympathetic bystander or angry with no place to put it. We are asking you to take it personally, join us and make a difference. Our goal is to make Schenectady's response to domestic and sexual violence the model for NYS. It will only happen when we all decide that enough is enough and that it is a personal responsibility that we do something more constructive." Sponsored by Elephant In The Living Room, a local organization working to end violence against women, and Schenectady Stand Up Guys. Information: (518) 399-4242, midline911@aol.com.

Friday, June 18, NEW PALTZ: First Aid, CPR and Wilderness First Aid instructor Ron Fields will share his knowledge with the public during Mid-Hudson Sierra Club’s free "Third Wednesday" Speaker Social at 7 p.m., at the Jewish Community Center, North Chestnut St. (32N). Fields is a certified EMT on the New Paltz Rescue Squad, as well as a certified instructor, and will do a hour-and-a-half presentation on Wilderness First Aid. This free orientation would make it easier for anyone wanting to continue with a certified course in the future. Information, (845) 255-5528.

Thursday-Sunday, June 19-22, HUDSON: The film "Up the Yangtze" will be showing at 7 p.m. at Time and Space Limited, 434 Columbia St. The documentary describes the changes wrought by the Three Gorges Dam, the world's largest hydroelectric project, and its effects on the landscape and the people of the region. Yung Chang returns to the land of his grandfather's youth on a "farewell cruise." Admission $7, $5 for students. Information, (518) 822-8100 (events), (518) 822-8448 (office), http://www.timeandspace.org

Friday, June 20, CHATHAM: Real Food Film Series: "Ancient Futures: Learning from Ladakh," at 7 p.m., 15 Church St (Rt. 203). A film about the Ladakh of the Himalayan foothills, which was a model for sustainable living until the Western influences eroded the region's ecological and social harmony. Donations accepted. This summer, the Chatham Real Food Market Co-op will be presenting films concerning local and global food systems, at the location of the future home of the Co-op. Information, (518) 392-3353.

Saturday and Sunday, June 21 and 22, CROTON ON HUDSON: The Hudson River Sloop Clearwater's Annual Great Hudson River Revival. From 10 a.m. to dusk at Croton Point Park, a river peninsula with sandy beaches and majestic views of the Hudson River. Celebrate the Hudson with music, dance, storytelling, crafts, international food, environmental education, political activists, and more. Performers on six solar power stages include: R. Carlos Nakai, The Felice Brothers, Kevin So, Gandalf Murphy and The Slambovian Circus of Dreams, Skatalites, Cheryl Wheeler, Happy and Artie Traum, David Amram, The Bluerunners, Steve Charney, Cheres, The Earth Tones, Entrain, Raging Grannies, Pete Seeger, the Strangelings and many others. Admission $35/day, $50/weekend for members; $40/day, $55/weekend non-members in advance; admission at the gate, $45/day, $60/weekend; limited income, $40/day, $55/weekend. For tickets call (800) 677-5667, (845) 454-7673 until June 19, 5 p.m. Information: http://www.clearwaterfestival.org .

Sunday, June 22 to Sunday, June 29, NEW YORK CITY: Gay Pride Events:
SUNDAY, JUNE 22, Gay Pride Rally, 2-6 p.m. at Bryant Park in Manhattan, W. 42nd St. and 6th Ave. Free and public. Information, http://www.nycpride.org/.
SATURDAY, JUNE 28, there are two events. First, from 5-8 p.m., the 16th Annual NYC Dyke March, which departs Bryant Park, 42nd St. and 6th Ave. Information, info@nycdykemarch.org, http://www.nycdykemarch.org/aHome.html, (212) 479-8520. Second, Rapture on the River at Pier 54, 6-11 p.m. Admission $20 in advance, $25 at the door, $40 "VIP." Call (800) 494-8497 for tickets, or visit website, http://www.nycpride.org/.
SUNDAY, JUNE 29, there are three events. The Gay Pride March on 5th Ave. from 52nd St. to Christopher and Greenwich Sts. from 12 noon until it ends. Then, Pridefest is happening the same day at Hudson St. between Abington Square and W. 14th St. from 11 a.m.-7 p.m. Free and public. Third, after the parade, is Dance on the Pier at Pier 54 on W. 13th St., 4-10:30 p.m., culminating in fireworks. Admission $55 or $150 for "VIP," call (800) 494-8497 for tickets, or visit website. Information, http://www.nycpride.org.

Friday, June 27, HIGHLAND: Environmental talk by Laura Conner, environmental educator of the Minnewaska State Park Preserve and Cara Lee, The Nature Conservancy director of the Shawangunk Ridge Program during closing reception of Marlene Wiedenbaum exhibit. Pritzker Studio and Gallery. 257 S. Riverside Rd. at 7 p.m. Information, (845) 691-5506 http://www.pritzkerstudio.com .

Saturday, June 28, ROSENDALE: Mikhail Horowitz and Gilles Malkine will perform at the Rosendale Theatre on Main St. at 8 p.m. "These entertaining self-proclaimed members of Actor's Iniquity celebrate their 'Single-Prayer Health Plan' plus more music and hilarity." Advance tickets $12, $15 at the door. Reservations and information, (845) 943-8633

Saturday, June 28 and Sunday, June 29, CLEVELAND, OHIO. A national assembly to end the Iraq War and occupation is taking place at the behest of a number of peace activists and groups who believe that there needs to be more activism in the streets to demand an immediate end to the war. Activists plan to attend from all over the U.S. In addition to workshops and discussions throughout the weekend there will be speakers from a number of antiwar organizations, including Brian Becker (ANSWER), Cindy Sheehan (by satellite), Leslie Cagan (UFPJ), Jonathan Hutto (Navy petty officer, author of Antiwar Soldier), Donna Dewitt of South Carolina AFL-CIO, Fred Mason of Maryland AFL-CIO and Metro Washington DC Central Labor Council, and Jeremy Scahill (author, Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army). Information about attending and all else: (216) 736-4704, natassembly@aol.com and http://www.natassembly.org.

INTERIM ACTIVIST CALENDAR, May 28, 2008
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter

Information and updates about the following events became available after publication of the latest issue of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter/Calendar and will take place before the new edition. Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net. Subscribe at the same address. Previous newsletters and calendars may be located at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com.
—————————————————

EDITOR’S NOTE

1. If there are transmission problems, a readable copy is included as an attachment.

2. The next Activist Newsletter will be sent in a week or so. Articles include:
What's REALLY behind the oil and gas price hikes?
The persistent male-female wage gap.
What will end inequality and poverty in America?
The earthquake, Olympics, Tibet, Darfur, and the China bashers.
Congress will pass the war funding bill, as it will next year, and next, and….
Bolivia — the struggle intensifies.
Barack Obama's unfortunate perspective on Latin America.
And lot's more.

—————————————————

FEATURED EVENT

DEMONSTRATE FOR PEACE OUTSIDE WEST POINT

Saturday, May 31, HIGHLAND FALLS: A peace rally and march will be held here today to protest the appearance of Army Secretary Pete Geren — a former Republican member of Congress from Texas — at graduation ceremonies in adjacent West Point Military Academy.

Members of the peace movement from Orange and surrounding counties will meet for a rally at 9:30 a.m. at the Highland Falls Memorial Park on Main St. (Rt. 218) a few miles north of the Bear Mt. Bridge on the west side of the Hudson River. After the rally, protestors will march to the West Point Gates to express their opposition to the unjust Iraq war, then return to the park to resume the rally.

The event, which has been taking place annually during the war, is being organized by the Democratic Alliance in cooperation with other antiwar groups. For information, contact Bennett Weiss at (845) 569-8662 or benweiss@aol.com. Plan extra time to get to the event because Rt. 9W (north or south) gets busy with cars going to the graduation ceremonies.

——————————————

NEW EVENTS

Thursday, May 29, to Sunday, June 1, HUDSON: We wish every American could view this film. For those of us who oppose the war, it's a must-see. The title is "Taxi to the Dark Side," and it won this year's Academy Award for best documentary. The film is about the tormented death of a young Afghan worker, a cab driver, at the hands of U.S. soldiers and interrogators. The documentary is being shown each evening at 7 p.m. at Time and Space Ltd., at 434 Columbia St. Admission is $7, and $5 for students and members. Information, (518) 822-8100 (events), (518) 822-8448 (office), http://www.timeandspace.org. There are a number of political and ideological differences between the Vietnam conflict and the wars Washington is waging today, but in certain respects there are real similarities — such as the brutality and racism that permeates the attitude of the U.S. military toward the people of these “enemy” countries. Addressing revelations of viciousness toward civilians by U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, the New York Times editorialized three years ago that such ill behavior had reached the point where torture and abuses are “no aberration but part of a widespread pattern,” and referred to some of them as being “clearly out of bounds for a civilized army.” One such incident is the subject of "Taxi to the Dark Side." (An excerpt from the Times article bringing the episode to light after it was suppressed for over two years is included at the end of this calendar.)

Sunday, June 1, NEW PALTZ: A public meeting on the topic of NAFTA and other U.S.-proposed trade agreements in the Americas will take place at New Paltz Village Hall today. The speaker will be Jim Mays, a member of the NYC People's Referendum on Trade, a grassroots coalition critical of free trade agreements modeled after the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the U.S., Canada and Mexico. Mays will discuss the positions on trade pacts put forward by the candidates for this year's presidential nomination, the impact of NAFTA and similar agreements in stimulating migration to the U.S., and the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) — the latest U.S.-Canada-Mexico accord that has earned the title, "NAFTA on Steroids." The meeting, sponsored by the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project (CLASP), begins at 7 p.m. at New Paltz Village Hall on Plattekill Ave., one block south of Main St. (Rt. 299), a mile or so west of Thruway exit 18. (When you reach Starbucks corner, Plattekill Ave., turn south one block. It’s just past the firehouse on the right.) Park in the Village Hall parking lot. All are invited and it’s free. A potluck dinner begins at 6 p.m. for those who wish to partake. Information and directions, (845) 255-5779 or email jacdon@earthlink.net.

Sunday, June 1, KINGSTON: "Extraordinary Rendition: the use of torture as part of our national security policy" is the topic of a 6 p.m. meeting featuring antiwar activist and writer Frida Berrigan. She will speak after a showing of the award-winning 30-minute film titled, "Extraordinary Rendition, Torture and Disappearances in the 'War on Terror'." Sponsored by the Mid-Hudson chapter of the Episcopal Peace Fellowship, the event will be held St. John’s Episcopal Church, 207 Albany Ave. Information, (845) 331-5575.

Sunday, June 1, HUDSON: The film "Harlan County U.S.A. is showing today at 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. at Time & Space Limited, 434 Columbia St. This 1976 Academy Award-winning documentary describes the efforts of 180 coal miners on strike against the Duke Power Company in Harlan County, Kentucky, in 1973. Directed by Barbara Kopple, 1976. Admission is $7, and $5 for students and members. Information, (518) 822-8100 (events), (518) 822-8448 (office), http://www.timeandspace.org.

Monday, June 2, POUGHKEEPSIE: The Dutchess Peace Coalition will meet 7-8:30 p.m. at the Unitarian Fellowship, 67 South Randolph Ave. All who oppose the war are invited to attend. Information, http://www.dutchesspeace.org.

Monday, June 2, ALBANY: The Northeast Peace and Justice Action Coalition (NEPAJAC) is sponsoring a planning meeting of Capital Region peace and justice organizations and individuals to create more antiwar events. Particularly under consideration is a July 4th action in downtown Albany. The two-hour meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. at the Albany Public Library, 161 Washington Ave. Free parking after 6 p.m., and a parking lot is also available behind the library. Information, (518) 391-2830, tquaif@yahoo.com, http://www.nepajac.org/.

Thursday, June 5, DELMAR: There will be a free public showing at 6:45 p.m. of the 2006 documentary "BAM 6.6: Humanity Has No Borders," followed by speaker Leila Zand, the Iran Program Director for the Fellowship of Reconciliation. The title of this 55-minute film refers to the 2003 earthquake measuring 6.6 magnitudes that struck the Iranian city of Bam, killing over 50,000 people, and leaving more than 60,000 citizens homeless. According to the program notes, "Bam 6.6 is the story of the human condition. The film weaves together stories of survival, loss, and healing, as we explore the humanity of the Iranian people through the prism of the disaster that struck the heart of Bam. Our subjects come from different walks of life — A Jewish-American woman, an American businessman, and the Iranian residents of Bam. Through their experiences, viewers will witness how a natural disaster can overcome religious and political barriers, dispel stereotypes, and unite disparate members of the human family." Sponsored by Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace, the event takes place at Bethlehem Public Library, 451 Delaware Ave. Information, (51) 439-1968, tquaif@yahoo.com, http://www.BethlehemforPeace.org. The film webpage is at http://www.essenceofiran.com/html/home.html.

——————————————

THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE THAT BROKE THE
STORY THAT BECAME 'TAXI TO THE DARK SIDE'

It was an exclusive article by reporter Tim Golden that appeared on the front page of the May 20, 2005, New York Times. Here is an excerpt:

“Even as the young Afghan man was dying before them, his American jailers continued to torment him.

"The prisoner, a slight, 22-year-old taxi driver known only as Dilawar, was hauled from his cell at the detention center in Bagram, Afghanistan, at around 2 a.m. to answer questions about a rocket attack on an American base. When he arrived in the interrogation room, an interpreter who was present said, his legs were bouncing uncontrollably in the plastic chair and his hands were numb. He had been chained by the wrists to the top of his cell for much of the previous four days.

Mr. Dilawar asked for a drink of water, and one of the two interrogators, Specialist Joshua R. Claus, 21, picked up a large plastic bottle. But first he punched a hole in the bottom, the interpreter said, so as the prisoner fumbled weakly with the cap, the water poured out over his orange prison scrubs. The soldier then grabbed the bottle back and began squirting the water forcefully into Mr. Dilawar's face.

“’Come on, drink!’ the interpreter said Specialist Claus had shouted, as the prisoner gagged on the spray. ‘Drink!’

“At the interrogators' behest, a guard tried to force the young man to his knees. But his legs, which had been pummeled by guards for several days, could no longer bend. An interrogator told Mr. Dilawar that he could see a doctor after they finished with him. When he was finally sent back to his cell, though, the guards were instructed only to chain the prisoner back to the ceiling.

“’Leave him up,’ one of the guards quoted Specialist Claus as saying.

“Several hours passed before an emergency room doctor finally saw Mr. Dilawar. By then he was dead, his body beginning to stiffen. It would be many months before Army investigators learned a final horrific detail: Most of the interrogators had believed Mr. Dilawar was an innocent man who simply drove his taxi past the American base at the wrong time.

“The story of Mr. Dilawar's brutal death at the Bagram Collection Point — and that of another detainee, Habibullah, who died there six days earlier in December 2002 — emerge from a nearly 2,000-page confidential file of the Army's criminal investigation into the case, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times.

“Like a narrative counterpart to the digital images from Abu Ghraib, the Bagram file depicts young, poorly trained soldiers in repeated incidents of abuse. The harsh treatment, which has resulted in criminal charges against seven soldiers, went well beyond the two deaths.

“In some instances, testimony shows, it was directed or carried out by interrogators to extract information. In others, it was punishment meted out by military police guards. Sometimes, the torment seems to have been driven by little more than boredom or cruelty, or both. . . .”
—
[Editor's note: Upon reading this entire long story the day it was printed, we could not help but think repeatedly of Dilawar, and still do on occasion. An innocent worker, shy and dutiful, a slight youth who rarely left his family or village, he is a metaphor for all the victims of U.S. imperialism and militarism in recent decades.

[This tragic account is only a fraction of the pain our Armed Forces, our troops, have been inflicting in Iraq and Afghanistan. America’s political and military leaders are by far the most culpable in this regard and as a consequence are virtually our exclusive target. But in the all too frequent daily occurrences where wartime civilians are humiliated, beaten, tortured and killed, our troops must bear an individual culpability as well.

[Let us never forget the memory of this poor Afghani cab driver, tormented by racist thugs in American uniforms as he died. We owe it to our many victims to end this unjust war now!]

INTERIM ACTIVIST CALENDAR, APRIL 29, 2008
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter

Information and updates about the following events became available after publication of the latest issue of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter/Calendar and will take place before the new edition. Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net. Subscribe at the same address. Previous newsletters and calendars may be located at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com.

—————————————————

EDITOR’S NOTE

Since the text of our last mass mailing was garbled in places due to computer program problems, we are also including this text as an attachment and it will also be placed on our webpage.

—————————————————

FEATURED EVENT

NEW PALTZ MEETING MAY 4 ON PROGRESSIVE
GOVERNMENTS IN PARAGUAY AND BOLIVIA

Another country in Latin America has elected a leftist leader — Paraguay’s former Roman Catholic Bishop Fernando Lugo, who won the presidency on April 20. Next door, in Bolivia, is leftist President Evo Morales, who assumed office in 2006. Other left or social democratic regimes now exist in Nicaragua, Ecuador, Venezuela, Chile, Brazil, Argentina and Cuba.

A public meeting in New Paltz Village Hall Sunday, May 4, will discuss the significance of Lugo’s election, coupled with an analysis of recent developments in Bolivia. The speaker will be journalist Ben Dangl — who authored the book "The Price of Fire: Resource Wars and Social Movements in Bolivia." He also has received a Project Censored Award for coverage of the U.S. military presence in Paraguay. Dangl is editor of the website http://www.UpsideDownWorld.org..

Dengl will also comment upon Morales — a friend of both Cuba and Venezuela — who has been walking on a political high wire since he took office two years ago. While supported by the majority of Bolivians, including virtually all the country's indigenous people, he has incurred the wrath of the wealthier sector of Bolivia. Washington is known to be concerned about some of the reform projects Morales is seeking to implement.

The meeting begins at 7 p.m. at New Paltz Village Hall on Plattekill Ave., one block south of Main St. (Rt. 299), a mile or so west of Thruway exit 18. (When you reach Starbucks corner, Plattekill Ave., turn south one block. It’s just past the firehouse on the right.) Park in the Village Hall parking lot. All are invited and it’s free. A potluck dinner begins at 6 p.m. for those who wish to partake. Information and directions, (845) 255-5779 or email jacdon@earthlink.net.

——————————————

NEW EVENTS

Wednesday, April 30, ROSENDALE — A public forum on large scale resort development in the area will begin at 7 p.m. at the Rosendale Recreation Center, 1055 Rt. 32, just south of the bridge on the west side of the road. The event has been organized by local residents "concerned about the sale and large-scale development proposed at William's Lake, which includes other Binnewater lakes and a large amount of surrounding forested land. An exclusive luxury resort/spa and gated community is planned by Canopy Corporation, and has caused a great deal of controversy in the small town." Speakers include Margery Groten of Scenic Hudson, Janet Kern of Save the Ridge. Information, petefior@verizon.net, http://www.savethelakes.us/.

Thursday, May 1, WORLD — Today is May Day, also known as International Workers Day — a day to celebrate the achievements of working people and their organizations worldwide. Exactly 50 years ago, while the Red Hunts were still going on in the U.S., Congress decided to transform May Day and its meaning into "Loyalty Day," as it is still officially titled in our country, but few Americans are even aware of it. So Happy May Day/International Workers Day!

Thursday, May 1, TROY: A May Day Festival for Workers Rights and Health Care will be held 5-9 p.m. at Prospect Park on Congress St. (up the hill on right). This 10th annual event on the international workers holiday is sponsored by the Solidarity Committee, Eighth Step, TALC, and the New York Labor History Association. The theme for this year is "Single Payer Health Care for All Americans Now." Two doctors from Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) will be keynote speakers. They are Dr. Martha Livingston, Associate Professor at SUNY Old Westbury, and Dr. Andy Coates from Albany. There will be music, food, video, exhibits, and information. It's free and public. Information, (518) 273-2759.

Thursday, May 1, HYDE PARK — Members of the Dutchess Peace Coalition will read poems written by the prisoners held at the U.S. military incarceration center in Guantanamo Bay. We're told: "Held for years without charges and subjected to torture, these poets offer an insight into an America that has lost sight of its basic humanity." This public event begins at the Hyde Park Library, 2 Main St. at 7 p.m. Information, (845) 876-7906, http://www.dutchesspeace.org.

Thursday, May 1, NEW YORK CITY — Demonstrations this afternoon will be held to support immigrant and worker rights. People will gather at 12 noon for the main event at Union Square Park on 14th St. in Manhattan. The theme will be "Stop the raids and deportations — legalization now, justice for all." A march to police headquarters at One Police Plaza will begin at 4 p.m., protesting the murder of innocent Sean Bell and last week's judicial failure to convict three police officers who killed him with a fusillade of some 50 bullets. Feeder marches will arrive at the park before the march begins. One will leave at 3 p.m. from Roosevelt Park in Chinatown. Another, organized by the IWW, will leave at 1 p.m. from Brooklyn's Cadman Plaza Park (at the foot of the Brooklyn Bridge), crossing the bridge and marching uptown to join the Roosevelt Park rally, then jointly hiking to Union Square. The rally has been organized by the May 1st Coalition for Immigrant and Worker Rights. Information http://www.may1.info. Information about the Roosevelt Park action is at info@breakthechainsnow.org, (212) 358-0295, and about the Brooklyn march, (201) 787-6035 http://www.wobblycity.org/current/news_letter.cgi.

Thursday, May 1, GOSHEN — A forum to discuss and critique the New York State budget will begin at 7:30 p.m., at the Goshen Inn, 40 Park Place. Speakers include Frank Mauro of the Fiscal Policy Institute and Assemblywoman Aileen Gunther. There will be a Q&A period. A short film on the state legislative process by Brian Keeler will be shown at 7 p.m. Refreshments will be served. Information and directions, (845) 294-3991.

Saturday, May 3. POUGHKEEPSIE — The documentary "Lebanon: July War and Beyond" will be shown at 7:30 p.m. at The Muddy Cup, 305 Main St. Award-winning independent filmmaker William Brandon Jourdan provides an in-depth look at the 2006 Lebanon War. Rare footage and exclusive interviews with key figures show viewers a side of this war that few Americans have seen. The screening will be followed by an audience discussion led by the filmmaker. From July 12 to Aug. 14, 2006, Israel dropped many thousands of bombs and sent ground troops into southern Lebanon using Hezbollah’s capture of two Israeli soldiers as a pretext. The Israeli bombardment killed 1,200 people and destroyed 145,000 homes, whole towns, and neighborhoods, leaving a landscape littered with unexploded cluster bombs in its wake. Public and free. Sponsored by the Dutchess Peace Coalition (http://www.dutchesspeace.org) and co-sponsored by Middle East Crisis Response (http://www.mideastcrisis.org).

Saturday, May 3, NEW PALTZ — "May Day Jam: A Concert for Labor, Social Change and Healthcare Reform Now!" will take place at the Muddy Cup Coffee House, 58 Main St., at 8 p.m. Artists include, The Flames of Discontent, Readnex Poetry Squad, and Zenote Sompatle. Speakers from various social justice groups and Ulster County Legislators Gary Bischoff and Susan Zimet are on the program. Information, John Pietaro (845) 520-2161, http://www.flamesofdiscontent.org.

Monday, May 5, OLD CHATHAM: "Blood and Tears," a documentary produced last year based on a study of the Arab-Israeli conflict through personal interviews, will be shown at 7 p.m. at Powell House Quaker Conference and Retreat Center, 524 Pitt Hall Rd. (off Columbia County Rt. 13). From the organizers: "'Blood and Tears' is the definitive film on the seemingly irresolvable Arab-Israeli conflict., Director Isidore Rosmarin uncovers the truth beneath the hype and the headlines through the use of extensive interviews of representatives of all affected people. 'Blood and Tears' explores the origin of the confrontation itself, and challenges many of the most deep-rooted myths we all hold about this epicenter of human conflict." Public and free. Sponsored by the Old Chatham Quaker Meeting. Information, (518) 794-0295, poetapoetus@taconic.net.

Sunday, May 11, NEW PALTZ — A Mother's Day peace vigil and street distribution of Julia Ward Howe's famous 1870 Mother's Day antiwar proclamation, with flowers, will take place 1-2 p.m. at Main and North Front Sts. Danielle Woerner's "Voices for Peace" chorus and Karen Cathers' "Activist Singers" will provide the music. Sponsored by Arts For Peace. Information, Julie Wegener at yo-mom@earthlink.net.

April 25, Issue #136 Part 1
HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER
jacdon@earthlink.net, http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/

This newsletter/calendar, published in New Paltz, N.Y., appears once a month, supplemented by additional listings of new activist events, usually sent to Valley readers only. Editor, Jack A. Smith (who writes all the news articles that appear without a byline or credit to other publications). Copy Editor, Donna Goodman. Calendar Editor, Rocco Rizzo. If you know someone who may benefit from this newsletter, ask them to subscribe at jacdon@earthlink.net. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, unsubscribe at the same address. Please send event listings to the above email address.

—————————————————

CONTENTS

1. McCAIN COULD WIN, YOU KNOW — Unless the Democrats come up with a substantial program to help working people at this time of high prices, low wages and recession after decades of government neglect, their anticipated post-Bush easy triumph may not be so easy. And while Clinton and Obama cut each other down, the Republican nominee is getting an easy ride from much of the mass media.

2. CLINTON, OBAMA AND ANTIWAR DEMOCRATS — A huge majority of Democratic voters want peace but their party remains aloof toward the antiwar movement and its two contenders for the nomination do not support swift, total withdrawal.

3. BUILD THE ANTIWAR MOVEMENT — Peace sentiment remains high in the U.S., but the movement may need a booster shot in the arm to compete with the elections.

4. THE VIETNAM ERA PEACE MOVEMENT — It had its ups and downs.

5. THE RECESSION MAKES HARD TIMES WORSE — The downturn is occurring just when increases on basic necessities are rampant, and when the standard of living for poor, low income, and middle income households has already experienced a steep decline. (Part 5 of a series on economic inequality in the U.S.)

6. WHO'S JOINING THE U.S. VOLUNTEER ARMY? — The Pentagon thinks draftees are unreliable in aggressive wars, so it seeks low-income young people, many of whom volunteer in hopes of obtaining job training and money for college tuition. They are actually economic conscripts.

7. MASSIVE RHETORICAL RETALIATION — Is Hillary Clinton actually Dr. Strangelove in disguise? Her remarks about obliterating Iran sure sound like it.

8. NEWS NOTES — Doctors support national health care; Beware of Americans bearing gifts; Debt collectors thrive in Buffalo, NY, for now; Poll: Pessimism reigns in the U.S.

9. CHECK IT OUT — A selection of articles and videos from the Internet that will be of interest to progressives.

10. CUBA'S INTERNATIONALISM — 2008 marks the 45th year that Cuba has been sending doctors and other health workers around the world to aid poor countries.

—————————————————

Editor's Note:

The Activist Calendar was sent to Hudson Valley readers April 15. They will receive an update in a couple of days, including several May Day events. Readers outside the Valley can access calendars and articles sent to that list only, along will material sent to the national list, on the web at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/.

To ensure that the Activist Newsletter reaches your inbox and is not treated as junk mail, please add jacdon@earthlink.net to your address book or list of approved senders.

—————————————————

1. McCAIN COULD WIN, YOU KNOW

It is hardly likely that reporters representing the corporate mass media will ever question John McCain as harshly and petulantly as did ABC TV's Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos when grilling Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton during their Philadelphia debate April 16.

Most readers have either watched the debate or heard the howls of protest from liberal Democrats. Can you image George Bush — perhaps the most obnoxious American political figure in modern times — being picked apart in that fashion before or during his failed presidency? He was an open target and the mass media never took aim.

The right wing still thunders disingenuously about the "liberal media," but conservatism essentially rules the air waves and printing presses, and its reportorial minions are paid to discredit the leading Democratic candidates by any foul means necessary.

In most cases this results in continually focusing on trivia, scandal, and trash in place of objective political analysis — Sen. Obama's supposedly "elite" view of the white working class, or Sen. Clinton's "Bosnia" exaggeration are just the latest examples. The media justify this by claiming it is what interests the masses, without acknowledging its role in creating such vacuous entertainments as part of the process of "dumbing down" the American people to better manipulate them.

At first Clinton was the main right wing target but it switched to Obama when he assumed the lead, replete with innuendoes about his patriotism and preposterous hints that he is a Muslim militant in mufti. And, although it seems the pre-election campaign has been going on for a century, it's still the beginning. Just wait until the right wing has a nominated Democrat to disembowel.

In truth, however, the Democrats have been making it easy for the conservatives. Look at the way they have been ripping into each other. Clinton has been somewhat worse than Obama because she is a degree to his political right and feels it proper to liberal-bait him because of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, or red-bait him for his passing acquaintance with a former member of the Weather Underground, or anti-Semite-bait him because of Louis Farrakhan's endorsement (support which Obama earlier repudiated, of course).

Although Clinton is a center-rightist and Obama is a centrist, both their broad political programs are quite similar — and in many cases their election promises will be put aside once either of them enters the White House. The war will go on, U.S. foreign policy will remain dedicated to world domination, the rich will get richer, the poor poorer. That's why we always have and always will support a left third party.

At the same time, either Clinton or Obama will be an improvement over ultra-right warmonger Bush or rightist warmonger McCain. In recent decades, we've always thought of the Democrats as Republicans Lite, and as such they will give labor a better break, though never what it deserves. They will talk about an economic program to help the workers but in the end it will be a token. They will still cater to the corporations and the rich but not to the flagrant degree of their GOP counterpart. The erosion of civil liberties will slow down though hardly stop. They will be better, but wobbly, on abortion rights and gay rights. We cannot comment on Obama's popular call for change and unity because its meaning, if any, has never been explained.

As absurd and counterintuitive as it seems after eight unforgivable years of the Bush Administration, there is a chance the Democrats may lose to Sen. McCain. He is, after all, the darling of the press corps, which reflects the view of much of the corporate media that will play so important a role in electing the next president. But that isn't the only reason an upset right wing victory is possible.

The Bush Administration, representing exclusively the interests of big business and wealth, has knocked the wind out of the great majority of the American people — the poor, the working class/lower middle class and even a sector of middle-middle (if we may so casually designate those on the lower end of the upper-middle class). But a cautious center/center-right program of Republican Lite, which both Clinton and Obama are offering the working people of our country, is completely uninspiring and inadequate to their needs at this extremely difficult period for a majority of the American people. (See the article below — "Inequality in America, The Recession Will Make it Worse.")

Working families need better jobs and a higher income; they need decent housing that isn't going to be foreclosed; they need single-payer universal healthcare; they need much better schools and the ability to send their kids to college without going bankrupt; they need more leisure time and better sick leave policies, such as European workers enjoy; they need family-oriented workplaces and paid time off to take emergency care of sick children or elderly parents; they need a much higher minimum wage; they need unions to protect their rights, and this means getting rid of onerous anti-labor laws going back to Taft-Hartley. That's for openers.

We think working people would be attracted to such a program given today's long-term economic realities, and that they would come out in droves to vote for it, even if it meant cutting back the war budget and taxing higher incomes to pay for these programs. The Democratic Party, which is almost as distant from social democracy as the Republicans, doesn't seem willing to touch such a political platform with asbestos gloves, and it could hurt them in November.

There's still a good chance the Dems will win, given that Bush's tenure in the White House has positioned the GOP deeply in the Dog House. But the lack of an economic and social program to meet the needs of working people, combined with the awesome power of the corporate media if as likely the dominant sector of big business and capital bloc with McCain, just might send the Democrats to the political Ice House instead.

—————————————————

2. CLINTON, OBAMA AND ANTIWAR DEMOCRATS

About 80% to 90% of Democratic voters seek one of several forms of withdrawal from Iraq — some partial, others complete, some quicker, some slower — and many of them identify with the U.S. antiwar movement and the immediate total withdrawal demand of several of its larger coalitions.

The Democratic Party itself has remained completely aloof from the movement since the war began, evidently from a fear of guilt by association. It has turned its back on both immediate withdrawal and total withdrawal, as have its two contenders for the party's presidential nomination. Both call for phased, partial withdrawal from Iraq, a process that in theory can retain U.S. troops in that country indefinitely.

Sen. Barack Obama does not associate with the U.S. antiwar movement in any way these days, though he spoke at rallies before he was elected a senator in the fall of 2004. He does not criticize the movement, to our knowledge, and has opposed the war from the beginning — though his opposition became far more muted since he entered the Senate.

Sen. Hillary Clinton considers antiwar Democrats to be a problem for the party, and her ambitions. She was challenged in the 2006 primaries in her home state of New York because of her staunch pro-war views, for instance, and peace demonstrators in the state have frequently showed up to picket her appearances. She adopted the semblance of an antiwar position when she began seeking the presidency.

Clinton recently expressed her negative feelings about peace Democrats in a small closed-door fundraiser after Super Tuesday, according to an April 18 article in the Huffington Post based on a tape-recorded account. Here are her words:

"MoveOn.org endorsed [Sen. Barack Obama] — which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down…. We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn didn't even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that's what we're dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of our positions, and it's primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don't agree with them. They know I don't agree with them. So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me."

Actually, MoveOn — the liberal Internet-based group with an emailing list of 3.2 million mostly Democrats — has supported the war against Afghanistan from the beginning.

Another majority of Democratic voters, though smaller, opposed the Iraq war during the 2004 elections as well, but virtually all the Democrats voted for John Kerry, who supported the war. All told 98% of the voters — Democrats, Republicans and independents — voted in favor of the two pro-war candidates in the last presidential election even though public opinion polls split about 50-50 on the war. Most of the remaining 2% voted for several third party peace candidates, and were roundly criticized by Democrats for doing so.

—————————————————

3. BUILD THE ANTIWAR MOVEMENT

The majority of the American people remain opposed to the war in Iraq, but antiwar demonstrations in mid-March on the all-important fifth anniversary of Washington's invasion were frequently smaller in size than in past years, significantly so in some cases.

This is in contrast to the expansion of peace activism throughout last fall. On Sept. 15, for example, the ANSWER Coalition brought 100,000 demonstrators to the nation's capital to demand the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq in a rousing rally and march that culminated in a civil disobedience protest resulting in 195 arrests in front of the Capitol. Various activities by other coalitions and groups continued for several weeks, reaching a climax with nationwide protests on Oct. 27.

But a half-year later, judging by anniversary week actions, it seems the antiwar movement needs a booster shot in the arm if its going to play a major role in the months leading to the November election.

There were more than one thousand peace events in the U.S. March 13-22, an impressive amount. The overwhelming majority of them, of course, were weekly and special anniversary vigils. These vigils are often unsung but they are a strong part of the movement throughout the country. Many are organized by people who have been standing every week for four or five years at a street corner holding an antiwar sign, counting how many cars or people pass by with a thumbs up or a good word, and how many vehicles honk for peace.

The vigils were as strong as ever during the anniversary period, in most cases with a dozen or even two or three dozen people at times. The activists who show up to vigil regularly for years are part of the peace movement's hard core.

But all in all, the crucial big and small city mass protests were frequently not as well attended as they were at previous anniversary marches and rallies. And while some 200 activists were arrested in scattered civil disobedience protests by small groups across the country March 19, it is essential to remember that mass numbers in legal marches and rallies are exceptionally important to building the movement, spreading the antiwar message, and pressuring the government.

The two biggest actions were organized by ANSWER in Los Angeles on March 15, and San Francisco in the late afternoon of March 19, the actual anniversary day. They drew 10,000 and 7,000 protestors respectively, and constituted the centerpiece of anniversary protests in the regrettable absence of a mass event in Washington.

Many marches and rallies took place in scores of other cities, but it seemed to us that the numbers generally were down, occasionally way down.

The March 22 linked-arm demonstration on 14th St. in New York City, organized by United For Peace and Justice (UFPJ), was far smaller than anticipated. This provided the New York Times, which frequently ignores large protests, to publish a sizable article the next day headlined, "A War Protest Falls Short in Manhattan."

Demonstrations took place in Washington all day March 19. Several organizations, including UFPJ, War Resisters League, CodePink, and Veterans for Peace, were among the participants. Police arrested 32 demonstrators in WRL's civil disobedience action outside the Internal Revenue Service building. Another 30 activists were reported arrested outside a congressional office building. In some cases, authorities ignored demonstrators who were sitting down illegally. Up two 200 veterans conducted a spirited march. All told, about a thousand activists took part in the various actions in the nation's capital — a day of some impressive events but scant numbers.

On the same day in San Francisco, hours before the big march, police arrested another 100 or so activists engaging in civil disobedience.

One of the most dramatic events of the anniversary period was the March 13-16 Winter Soldier investigation organized by Iraq Veterans Against the War along the lines of it famous predecessor — originated in 1971 by Vietnam Veterans Against the War. (They identify as "winter soldiers" in reference to Tom Paine's Revolutionary War critique of "the summer soldier and sunshine patriot" who will, "in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country.")

The four-day meeting, which took place at the National Labor College adjacent to Washington in Silver Spring (MD), brought together Iraq veterans from across the country to testify about their experiences and excesses in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hundreds of vets, especially Vietnam era, were in the audience. The Iraq vets' testimony included horrific tales of the frequent mistreatment of Iraqi civilians.

Mass media coverage of the Winter Soldier meeting was virtually nonexistent, however, despite the fact that announcements of the event were received by all the principal newspapers and TV news outlets. The media watchdog FAIR subsequently challenged the New York Times to explain why not one inch of space was devoted to this historic event — and received a deceptive reply. (They "didn't know" about it. See http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3340.)

While all the groups and individuals who participated in the many fifth anniversary protests are to be applauded for their efforts, it is clear to us from these demonstrations that the peace movement is having problems compared to its feisty performance last fall.

Not all groups agree with this. Election-oriented UFPJ issued a totally upbeat report about the anniversary demonstrations, with the coalition's national organizing coordinator Judith LeBlanc enthusing: “I think people are energized by the elections. People really think we can bring this war to an end. They want to make a statement.”

The notion that the antiwar movement's most important task in 2008 is to elect a Democratic president to end the war is clearly the view of some peace groups, despite the fact that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both refuse to commit to total withdrawal of troops and appear intent upon controlling Iraq and its government indefinitely, with the Pentagon's Iraqi troops serving as the preferred cannon fodder.

Obviously, no one objects to people voting for whom they wish during the few minutes this might take on Nov. 4, but it certainly must not become a substitute for increasingly mass and militant protests against the war throughout the election year — and not just at the Republican convention.

These are challenging times for the peace forces. Let's review some of the problems.

For one thing, a lot of people who voted for the Democrats in November 2006 in hopes they would end the war are getting discouraged because there are more U.S. troops in Iraq today than when the new Congress convened in January 2007. And Congress has done nothing but pass supplementary appropriations to continue the war, as it will do again in a month or two, after the customary rhetoric and excuses.

Mass media coverage of the war has dropped markedly over the years — especially since last fall — and much that does get mentioned routinely echoes Pentagon and White House statements. The press reported on the congressional Democrats and their call for phased, partial withdrawal for the first months of 2007, but lost interest when party leaders allowed the debate to dissipate without issue.

The antiwar movement consists of a catch-all constituency. Many are or have become dedicated peaceniks, beginning with those who took part in the massive September 2002 to March 2003 preemptive protests against a preemptive war. But many also have come to oppose the war primarily because the U.S. does not appear to be winning or because the Iraqis are not doing their part for the war effort after "we gave them the gift of freedom," as Hillary Clinton has said. And there are many others are in between.

Much of this peace community remains firm against the war and wants all the U. S. troops to leave Iraq fast. Another sector undoubtedly feels frustrated by the lack of progress in ending the war, and may tend toward passivity. A further portion is still pinning their principal hopes on Obama or Clinton, much as they did on John Kerry in 2004. And finally, an additional quotient may have been neutralized by the thought that the military "surge" is working and that victory might be possible after all.

All these factors are affecting the peace forces. And then there are the difficulties within the movement itself.

Specifically regarding the anniversary protests, the decision by a majority of groups in the short-lived Year5 coalition to call off a planned mass action in Washington for Saturday, March 15, was counter-productive. Granted they were under pressure from Iraq Veterans Against the War to cancel the protest because IVAW decided that a mass rally in Washington would detract from their four-day event just across the Potomac in Silver Spring, MD.

However, instantly capitulating to IVAW meant ditching the principal activity of the entire anniversary period. ANSWER, which was a key part of the coalition, argued in favor of the demonstration, but lost.

Had this action been permitted to take place, at least 100,000 people would have demanded immediate withdrawal from Iraq in the national capital of the aggressor state on the fifth anniversary of an illegal war. This would have been a powerful boost for the entire movement. And it would have brought more media attention to the unnoticed Winter Soldier hearings, particularly if some of the vets who testified spoke at the rally about the extraordinary meeting their comrades were attending about just across the river.

Perhaps the main problem within the movement is the continuing political split between UFPJ and ANSWER, the two major antiwar organizers of mass national protests.

Both these coalitions have more in common than not. The biggest difference, to speak directly, is that UFPJ supports the Democrats and ANSWER won't support either ruling party because they are jointly responsible for the war. Secondly, while always putting peace first, ANSWER brings in connected progressive issues, such as imperialism and racism, or Venezuela and the Palestinians, or freeing Mumia Abu-Jamal and the Cuban Five. Some like this, some don't. It certainly hasn't reduced the size of ANSWER's mass protests, which are often larger than those of UFPJ.

Both these questions — single-issue vs. multi-issue, and whether or not to support the Democrats — have been debated for several decades in our movement, and in our view they simply do not constitute a justification for refusing to cooperate in occasional mass actions.

Despite differences, ANSWER is willing to unite in action with UFPJ in organizing truly huge protests. But for the last 2 ½ years UFPJ has refused any overtures for tactical unity. If these two organizations joined together to build a spectacularly mass protest in Washington — how about 500,000 to a million people? — every peace group in the country would get behind the effort.

All these considerations, from the election to disunity, seem to be the reasons why the peace struggle seems to have slowed down. Much the same problems developed during the Vietnam war as well, and the movement at that time certainly had its ups and downs. (See the article just below, titled "The Vietnam Era Peace Movement.") In today's case, we think a few things can reinforce the struggle:

First, a good dose of movement unity in practice led by the two major coalitions would go far in strengthening the antiwar forces. They should be encouraged to hold talks about more unity in action.

Second, after five years of this unjust and illegal war, isn't it time for the entire peace movement to hold the Democratic Party's feet to the fire on this issue? Democratic politicians think they have the antiwar vote in the bag no matter what they do, so many of them don't stick their necks out for peace.

Third, all our peace groups should increase their efforts to educate the American people about the issues — the real issues. Even some who oppose the war think its just as a policy mistake, or ineptitude in conducting the occupation, or "Bush's war." Actually it's Washington's bipartisan war — the most recent of many, and the product of a dominant military power seeking to extend and maintain economic and political hegemony throughout the world. Some parts of the movement say this, but too few.

We think these three points — more unity, a demanding stance toward the Democrats, and a frank appraisal of the causes of Americas wars — will strengthen our peace movement.

————————————————

4. THE VIETNAM ERA PEACE MOVEMENT

[Editor's note: In doing research for updating a contribution to an anthology about the "underground" alternative press during the Vietnam era, I had occasion to obtain a collection of just six months of the editorials I wrote for the Guardian Newsweekly over many years. They are from the first half of 1969 — four years after the first mass protests against the Vietnam war and six years before the war ended in victory for the Vietnamese people and the reunification of north and south Vietnam. Here are a few excerpted paragraphs relating to the problems of the peace movement of the time — Jack Smith.]

January 25: "The National Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam, the coalition which has presided over the growth-to-relevance of the U.S. antiwar movement, is in serious trouble.... Where has the mass support gone? Why are so many active peace workers no longer showing up at protests? Why are radicals turning away from mobilizations?.... The organized antiwar movement began to decline when its liberal base, never politicized, withered away when the U.S. government undercut its moderate demands with moderate action [including the pledge of gradual withdrawals]. This cannot be permitted to happen again, assuming the antiwar forces grow large enough to worry about a new decline. The antiwar movement must become a consciously anti-imperialist movement. New strategies, new tactics, must be devised in coming months to achieve this objective."

March 3: "The change in administrations has changed nothing in Vietnam except that the imperialist adventure known as Johnson's War has now become Nixon's War." [President Nixon had campaigned as a peace candidate]

June 14 [Written to counteract a trend in the student movement and the broader mass movement to disengage from mass antiwar demonstrations to turn attention to "local organizing"]: "With a few laudable exceptions, the new left is failing its responsibility to Vietnamese national liberation. National SDS's indifference to serious involvement in the antiwar struggle is... reckless.... The war for independence and freedom of South Vietnam is being waged on three fronts — on the battlefields of Vietnam, across the conference table in Paris and by the movement in the U.S. These fronts must be synchronized to produce the swiftest victory possible for the people of Vietnam behind the leadership of the National Liberation Front [which led the struggle in the south]."

June 21: "Nixon has no intention of ending the war any earlier than he is forced to on the battlefield, in Paris and by opposition to the war at home. The struggle against the war at home is now central to a swift people's victory in Vietnam. Nixon thinks he can bluff it out, neutralizing antiwar opposition by engaging in meaningless troop withdrawals."

July 12 [Written in response to a movement sector that wanted to remove any emphasis on imperialism from the overall antiwar effort in order to "broaden" its appeal]: "While imperialism and racism stand, there can be no such thing as peace."

—————————————————

5. INEQUALITY IN AMERICA:
THE RECESSION MAKES HARD TIMES WORSE
Part 5 of 6 articles

The apparent recession in the United States is occurring at an unfortunate moment for the great majority of the American people. Price increases on basic necessities are rampant at a time when the standard of living for poor, low income, and middle income households —including a significant sector of the middle class — have already experienced a steep decline. Now things will get worse.

The ratio of economic inequality in America between the wealthiest 20% of the people and the bottom 80% of the population may reach a new record level as a consequence. The top 20% now possess 84.7% of all assets and wealth in the U.S. The top 5% alone control 58.9%, and the richest 1% command 34.3%. The "bottom" 80% possess of 15.3% of the nation's wealth. The bottom 40% within this total have accumulated 0.2%. That's two-tenths of one percent owned by 120 million Americans!

The number of Americans condemned to poverty — some 37 million at the end of last year — will undoubtedly expand in a downturn. The over 90 million people living in low-income households will increase as well. Poverty households, by government definition, have an annual income of $10,400 or less for a single person, and $22,200 or less for a family of four. Low income households function on an income from just above poverty to just below twice the poverty level. "Twice poverty" — about $21,000 for an individual and $45,000 for a family of four — is considered the commencement of a fair standard of living in the U.S. Middle income for a household of three people is approximately between $39,000 to $78,000.

Currently, about 130 million people in the U.S. are either poor or living between poverty and twice poverty. According to the latest polls, about 72% of Americans earning below $50,000 a year report that their incomes are already falling behind the cost of living.

Seven basic necessities of life — all now under siege — contribute to the well-being and living standards of the American people. They are, in no particular order, housing, food, gas, heating fuel, health care, education, jobs and paycheck. Today's increasing costs and diminished income — soon to be compounded by the downturn — will impact most cruelly those least able to afford higher prices and the prospect of lower income and possible unemployment. Following is a brief status report on each of these basics, after which will be an account of the present difficulties confronting the middle class.

1. HOUSING: Some 20,000 families a week are currently losing their homes due to foreclosure since the housing bubble burst a year ago. The total foreclosures since the crisis began may reach 2 million households by the end of this year, with more expected in the first six months of 2009. Congress is working on a relief package, but the Senate bill passed in April is considered inadequate and is strongly opposed by consumer groups and the labor movement, who claim it amounts to handouts for major corporations. Although house prices are falling, working people and students who rent rooms, apartments or houses are continuing to pay very high monthly charges.

2. FOOD: The price of food is skyrocketing and millions of American families are cutting back on consumption. The consumer cost for selected staple foods was in the double digits in 2007 and will continue going up this year. The Agriculture Department estimates that 28 million Americans will be receiving food stamps by October — the highest number since 1964. (It was 26.5 million in October, 2007.) At least 10 million more people who qualify for the government program will not be served this year, mainly because they are unaware they qualify. (To be eligible for food stamps an individual must earn below 130% of the poverty line and possess very few assets.) Many millions more people will frequent food kitchens for the needy in most cities, but these agencies report they are running short of food.

3. GAS AND HEATING OIL: The costs of gasoline and home heating oil have suddenly reached record high levels. The price of gas could rise to $4 a gallon this summer. Many families are reducing non-essential driving, and lowering the thermostat below the comfort level. A poll conducted in April by the Consumer Federation of America found that 60% of respondents said high gas prices caused them hardship.

4. HEALTH CARE: Costs have been rising for years at over two times the rate of inflation and this is expected to continue indefinitely because the government will not take action. Employer health insurance premiums increased by almost 7% in 2007 and increases are usually passed on to the employees. Private individual and family insurance is more expensive. A private individual policy averages around $5,000 a year; family policies often cost between $13,000-$15,000 a year. And this doesn't count co-pays and deductibles, which have been going up.

The principal cause of personal bankruptcy in the U.S. is unpaid medical bills — by both the insured and uninsured. About 47 million Americans are uninsured. The urban institute recently reported that 27,000 Americans die each year from curable illnesses because they cannot afford health insurance. That's 270,000 people in the last 10 years. New statistics from the government's Health and Human Services Dept. show that that life expectancy for the rich continues to increase over that of the poor. In 1980-82, the rich lived 2.8 years longer than the poor. But in 1998-2000, figures just released show the affluent lived 4.5 years longer. This most deadly aspect of the rich-poor gap is expected to continue widening. Inferior health care is one reason.

5. EDUCATION: Nationwide average tuition costs for four-year public colleges have increased 29% between 2000 and 2006. It's higher in private colleges. The increase for both public and private institutions of higher learning has been about 6.5% a year for over 30 years. There's no letup in sight — and, again, Washington just dithers. During this same time, educational grants have been greatly reduced while educational loans have greatly increased.

The mounting cost of college for students and their families is coming at a time when the absence of a higher education now usually means considerably lower lifetime earnings. A number of jobs that now demand a college degree required no more than a high school diploma or less to be performed satisfactorily just a few decades ago. In 1970, 80% of working people with high school diplomas or less were able to earn a middle income hourly wage or annual salary. In 2006, it's only 48% and falling rapidly. This is because the historic redistribution of income from the working class to the upper class in the last three decades has mainly come at the expense of workers with a high school diploma or less. (See article 6 below: Who's Joining the Volunteer Army?)

6. JOBS: Businesses across the country are reducing work hours or laying off workers. The official unemployment rate has risen to 5.1%, which is not considered excessive in America except by those who are jobless and their families. This figure does not include millions of unemployed workers who are not counted because they have given up after many months or years of fruitlessly seeking work. Among white workers, 4.4% are officially unemployed; among Latinos, 6.3%; among African Americans, 9%. Unemployment is expected to climb measurably in the next months. At the end of March, according to government statistics, some 5 million workers were employed part time because their companies recently reduced work hours or they could not find full-time jobs despite looking.

7. PAYCHECK: In January 2007, weekly paychecks for American workers went up 2.3%. This January, says the Bureau of Labor Statistics, weekly pay went down 1.4% — the beginning of what is expected to become a trend. This amounts to a reduction of $8.31 a week — peanuts to the well off, but food for a day or two to the millions desperately poor in America. The New York Times Editorial Board Blog reported Feb. 25 that "many families face falling real wages and a worsening job market, with little or no savings and little or no spare borrowing capacity…." Many families have also maxed out their credit cards, and others are unable to pay off even a few hundred dollars in card debt. The same newspaper reported April 18 that "paychecks are diminishing just as millions of Americans are finding their access to credit constricted as well. Borrowing against the value of real estate — a crucial artery of household finance in recent years — has been pared back as home prices have plummeted and as banks have tightened lending standards."

Given the importance of the middle class in America's consumer-driven economy, as well as its symbolic value as the supposed gateway to security and the good life, the problems afflicting this broad sector of the population are receiving considerable attention from politicians and key think-tanks this election year.

The political system seeks to soften the immediate impact of the recession but shows no inclination to propose an economic program that strategically benefits working people, any more than it has for some 30 years. "Real median family income more than doubled from the late 1940s to the late ’70s," wrote New York Times columnist David Leonhardt April 9, noting that this was a deliberate government program to enlarge the middle class. "It has risen less than 25% in the three decades since…. [The] modern American economy distributes the fruits of its growth to a relatively narrow slice of the population."

The think-tanks have issued some insightful reports about the deterioration of the middle class. Most are proposing an assortment of liberal reforms, but implementation requires a genuine progressive revival in the United States — and this is not yet on the horizon.

We shall here discuss three such reports, noting that there is no one standard definition of what constitutes the middle class in the United States. (Middle income, noted above, does not necessarily correlate to middle class.) First is "By a Thread: The New Experience of America's Middle Class," issued a few months ago by Demos and the Institute for Assets and Social Policy at Brandeis Univ. Second, "Inside the Middle Class: Bad Times Hit the Good Life," from the Pew Research Center in April. Third, "Movin' On up: Reforming America's Social Contract to Provide a Bridge to the Middle Class," which came out in February from the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).

"By a Thread" notes that "The middle class is a social and economic cornerstone of the United States and a symbol of the 'American way of life.' It is also seen as a key part of the engine that drives American prosperity. The middle class provides the skilled workers and consumer purchasing power essential to a strong economy. The quality of life associated with being middle class also fuels aspirations of social mobility."

This study evaluates the household stability of the middle class on the basis of several economic factors: financial assets to provide for security in difficult times, savings, and the prospect of a comfortable retirement; sufficient education to find a good job; income enough to afford decent housing and living expenses; and comprehensive health care for all family members.

On the basis of this "Middle Class Security Index," the study found the following:

• Only 31% of families who would be considered middle class by income are financially secure. That is, "despite falling into the broad range that defines middle class 'income,' fewer than one in three families has the necessary combination of other factors to ensure middle class security."

• One in four middle class families match the profile for being at high risk of slipping out of the middle class altogether.

• More than half of middle class families have no net financial assets whatsoever. Their debts have cancelled them out. The median debt (half above, half below) for middle class families is $3,500. According to recent reports, average household credit card debt in 2004 was $9,000, up from $4,000 15 years earlier, and it is higher now. In most cases, this increase in debt was due to the higher cost of necessities such as health care, medicine, education, etc., not over-consumption and luxuries, as sometimes alleged. Many families are paying 18% of income for debt service; some are paying 40% and more.

• Only 13% of middle class families are secure in their asset levels — meaning that they have enough to cover most of their living expenses for nine months should their regular income cease; 79% are "at risk" in this category, meaning they could not cover the majority of their expenses for even three months. Another 9% are "borderline."

• About 21% of middle class families have less than $100 per week ($5,000 per year) remaining after meeting essential living expenses. These families are living from paycheck to paycheck with very little margin of security.

"Inside the Middle Class," is based on exhaustive opinion evaluation by the Pew Research Center and the Gallup organization, and demographic information from the Census Bureau. Among its key findings is the fact that "Fewer Americans now than at any time in the past half century believe they're moving forward in life. Americans feel stuck in their tracks. A majority of survey respondents say that in the past five years they either haven't moved forward in life (25%) or have fallen backwards (31%). This is the most downbeat short-term assessment of personal progress in nearly half a century of polling."

Attaining middle class status is one of the great goals of American working families, and it seems more people consider themselves in the middle class than their income, type of work or relationship to the means of production might suggest. Many working class people with fairly low incomes view themselves as middle class, as do some earning upper class incomes. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have suggested Americans with incomes just under $250,000 qualify as middle class. The report notes that "being middle class is a state of mind as well as a statement of income and wealth." This results in extreme differences in income and assets, even when bifurcated into "lower" and "upper" middle class. Here's how "Inside the Middle Class" puts it:

"Some 53% of adults in America say they are middle class. On key measures of well-being — income, wealth, health, optimism about the future — they tend to fall between those who identify with classes above and below them. But within this self-defined middle class, there are notable economic and demographic differences. For example, four-in-ten Americans with incomes below $20,000 say they are middle class, as do a third of those with incomes above $150,000. And about the same percentages of blacks (50%), Hispanics (54%) and whites (53%) self-identify as middle class, even though members of minority groups who say they are middle class have far less income and wealth than do whites who say they are middle class."

Based on opinion research, the report states: "The current economic slowdown and uptick in prices are taking a bite out of the family budget. Slightly more than half of middle class respondents say they've had to tighten their belts in the past year. Roughly the same proportion expect to make more cutbacks in the year ahead, and a quarter say they expect to have trouble paying their bills. About a quarter of those who are employed worry they could lose their job."

A large number of those interviewed (78%) recognized that economic conditions have made it more difficult to maintain a middle class standard of living compared to five years ago, but there was no consensus as to why. Asked "who is to blame?" 26% said the government, 15% said oil prices, 11% blamed "people themselves," 8% said foreign competition 5% identified private corporations, and so on down the numeric scale.

Interestingly, 68% of the respondents maintained that "having enough free time to do the things you want" is more important than "having a successful career" (59%) or 'being wealthy' (12%). Asked, "does wealth come from hard work or good connections?" 46% said it derives from "knowing the right people or born into it," while 42% asserted it was "hard work, ambition or education."

CEPR's "Movin' On Up" is mainly focused on the factors that have prevented workers from entering the middle class, noting that while worker productivity per hour increased almost 50% between 1973 and 2006, it did not contribute "to greater economic security for all, and inequality has returned to levels not seen since the years before the Great Depression."

The main reason for this, the report suggests, is a major reduction in "good jobs," i.e., "jobs that pay at least $17 per hour [inflation adjusted] and come with both employer-provided health insurance where the employer pays at least some of the premium and an employer-sponsored retirement plan or pension. A 'bad' job has none of these characteristics. Most jobs are 'in-between" jobs or jobs with a mix of good or bad characteristics."

At present, 23% of jobs are "good," 29% are "bad," and 48% are "in-between." But "even though American workers today are, on average, older and much better educated than they were at the end of the 1970s, the economy now produces 25%-30% fewer good jobs that it did 25 years ago."

The result is that "one in five Americans in working families [some 41 million people] have income below a minimum middle class budget standard for the area in which they live. Almost half of these families have income that puts them above the poverty line" but still distant from the middle class.

The report calls for a progressive renegotiation of the social contract, better labor standards, greater access to higher education for the working class, improved job training and healthcare for all "to bring some balance back to the economy and ensure that more people share in our nation's economic prosperity."
——
Next: Part 6, Conclusion: How can poverty and great income inequality in America be reduced, and the quality of life for the masses of people be improved?

—————————————————

6. WHO'S JOINING THE U.S. VOLUNTEER ARMY?

There are two principal reasons why the U.S. government no longer relies on conscription to fill the ranks of its Armed Forces when it initiates unjust, illegal wars such as the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

First, conscription for such a war — as opposed to a just war where the U.S. is defending itself and others, as in World War II — guarantees that the ranks of the peace movement would be multiplied by a huge influx of young Americans opposed to fighting an immoral war. The campuses would erupt were 18- to 22-year-olds drafted and sent to Iraq.

Second, an American military force largely composed of draftees — as in the Vietnam era — tends to rebel against fighting in an imperialist-type war, particularly against the small, poor, third-world countries that Uncle Sam frequently targets. Tens of Thousands of conscripted active duty GIs, backed by recent veterans of the war, exhibited such strong opposition to the Vietnam conflict that military officials suggested the U.S. Army was nearly mutinous and unreliable.

It was for both these reasons that the United States ended the draft in 1973 and has depended on an all-volunteer Armed Forces ever since.

True, there is also disaffection in the ranks of a volunteer force when the unjustness of a conflict finally becomes obvious — as in the present case of Iraq Veterans Against the War — but it is on a much smaller scale than would be the case in a conscript army. It's one thing to volunteer, but quite another to be dragooned into an aggressive military adventure.

Why do people volunteer? This is the subject of an article by Michael Massing in the April 3 issue of the New York Review of Books titled, "The Volunteer Army: Who Fights and Why?" Commenting about some recent writings by former volunteers in the Iraq war, Massing notes:

"In these books, the idea of joining the military to defend America or uphold its values is largely absent. Rather, these soldiers signed up to escape dead-end jobs, failed relationships, broken families, bills, toothaches, and boredom. The armed forces offered a haven from the struggles and strains of life in modern-day America, a place to gain security and skills, discipline and self-esteem."

Massing interviewed an impressive number of active duty Army volunteers and found that "over and over, I heard soldiers talk about being hard-pressed to pay the rent, of having a child and being without health care, of yearning to escape a depressing town or oppressive family, of wanting to get out and see the world." The article is replete with quotes justifying this assessment.

According to Pentagon statistics, 38.1% of 2006 volunteers said "service to country" was their main reason for joining — a substantial increase from 2002 — but Massing talked to a RAND Corporation researcher for the Defense Department who warned that "such figures should be handled with care, since new recruits, when asked, often like to give their decision an idealistic cast."

The author continued: "Furthermore, while patriotism has surged as an announced motive, it is also the case that the Army fell 8% short of its recruiting target of 80,000 in 2005 — its largest shortfall since 1979. Since then, the Army has managed to meet its targets, but only by adding more than a thousand new recruiters and increasing the size of enlistment bonuses. Clearly, the patriotic sheen of September 11 has been dimmed by the ongoing bloodshed in Iraq."

The Pentagon has significantly increased enlistment and re-enlistment bonuses over the last few years — a practice that is accelerating now that the Army and Marines have been ordered to enlarge their ranks to absorb 92,000 more effectives. "With the addition of other enticements based on job skills and education, new enlistees can earn up to $40,000 in signing bonuses," Massing says. "Overall, the average bonus paid to Army enlistees jumped from $11,100 in 2005 to $16,500 in 2007. This is one of the main reasons why the Army has been able to meet its recruiting goals in spite of the ongoing specter of serving in Iraq."

In addition, the Associated Press reported from Albany Feb. 13 that "the military is testing an incentive program that pays enlistees up to $40,000 toward a home or a startup business after their commitment. The 'Army Advantage Fund' program is being tested here and four other areas —Cleveland, Seattle, San Antonio and Montgomery, Ala. — for the next six to nine months."

The Defense Dept. has also sharply lowered admission standards to fill the ranks. Massing writes: "In 2007, 11% of all new recruits received 'moral waivers' for being in trouble with the law — double the proportion in 2003. Over that same period, the proportion of enlistees who had finished high school fell from 90% to 71%—the lowest level in 25 years."

The BBC reported Feb. 14 that "The number of people with criminal records in the United States military has doubled in the past three years [to over 100,000], according to a new study… sponsored by the American think-tank Michael D Palm Centre [at the University of California in Santa Barbara]." The study showed that "824 felons were allowed to sign up in 2004 as opposed to 1,605 in 2006 under the moral waivers scheme. Almost 59,000 drug abusers entered the military in the same period. The report also showed that 43,977 people convicted of serious misdemeanors such as assault were permitted to enlist."

Responding to a query from Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Pentagon in mid-April released specifics about lowered standards last year. Among the 511 felons admitted into the Army alone in 2007 were 106 convicted burglars, 43 perpetrators of aggravated assault, 130 who were convicted of hard drug possession ("other than marijuana"), and two recruits "convicted of making terrorist or bomb threats." He reported: "There was a rapid rise in 2007 in the number of waivers the Army and Marine Corps granted to recruits convicted of serious felonies."

Contrary to many other industrialized OECD countries (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), the U.S. is among the least willing to provide state-subsidized higher education. This means that working class, lower middle class and poor youth often cannot afford to pay for the education necessary to earn an adequate living in today's increasingly unequal America. The Pentagon views this as an fortuitous opportunity for future recruitment.

Now, according to the N.Y. Review of Books article, "the military… offers soldiers up to $73,836 in tuition credits; it will also repay up to $65,000 in college loans. These sums are likely to increase as the military moves aggressively to attract college-bound Americans."

Such a situation, the article concludes, means that "in today's America, the hunger for a college degree is so great that many young men and women are willing to kill — and risk being killed — to get one."

In this sense, much of tomorrow's volunteer military will still be largely composed of conscripts — economic conscripts, not draftees, who often cannot otherwise obtain good enough jobs to raise a family and pay the bills without constant worry. For many young people it's their only chance of avoiding a lifetime of low wage labor. The Pentagon gets a bonus, too — a voluntary military force based on economic need and thus overwhelmingly unlikely to rebel at participating in unjust wars.

—————————————————

7. MASSIVE RHETORICAL RETALIATION

We have been neutral on the question of whom to support for the Democratic Party nomination for the presidency, Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. We will remain so because in our view neither of them will quickly withdraw all aggressor troops from Iraq, promote world peace by reconfiguring domination-driven U.S. foreign policy, or propose a socioeconomic program that will substantially benefit the working people of our country.

But we cannot remain neutral about Sen. Clinton's belligerent recent remarks concerning Iran — a country that has not gratuitously attacked another country in modern history, in contrast to some of its critics in other capitals.

During Clinton's Philadelphia debate with Obama, moderator George Stephanopoulos asked: "Would you extend our deterrent to Israel?" Clinton replied: " I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States."

Technically, the Cold War threat of "massive retaliation" suggests that an attack from an aggressor would result in massive nuclear retaliation with a force disproportionate to the size of the assault.

Shortly thereafter, early on the day of the Pennsylvania primary, April 22, the New York senator was again asked during an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America," how she as president would respond to an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel. She hesitated not a nanosecond, escalating her earlier threats in these words:

"We will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them. That's a terrible thing to say but those people who run Iran need to understand that because that perhaps will deter them from doing something that would be reckless, foolish and tragic."

To "obliterate," of course, means "to destroy something so utterly that nothing is left." And coming from the only country to vaporize civilian populations with atomic weapons, it is not an idle threat.

Yes, it is a terrible thing to say, even if it was just cheap rhetoric to get a few more votes. Sen. Clinton was suggesting, in answer to a completely hypothetical question, that she wouldn't think twice about instantly retaliating to the extent of obliterating the 69 million people of Iraq — a country that does not possess a nuclear weapon, that pledges not to build nuclear weapons, and that happens to be a member of, and in general compliance with, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Non-member Israel, with its hundreds of nuclear weapons, is noncompliant.

There were many ways to respond to these questions — from refusing to answer on the grounds that they were entirely hypothetical and even provocative, or just with the simple pledge to defend Israel. Instead, Sen. Clinton deliberately resurrected the concept of massive nuclear retaliation resulting in the obliteration of a far smaller non-nuclear country that is much too sensible and mature to engage in an aggressive attack on Israel.

—————————————————

8. NEWS NOTES

• DOCTORS SUPPORT NATIONAL HEALTHCARE PLAN: A majority of American physicians now support national health insurance, according to a poll published March 31 in the prestigious medical Journal "Annals of Internal Medicine. The poll of 2,193 doctors by Indiana University researchers showed that 59% "support government legislation to establish national health insurance," 32% were opposed and 9% were neutral. In a similar study six years ago, 49% backed national insurance while 40% were opposed.

Commenting on the study, lead author Dr. Aaron Carroll, director of the university's Center for Health Policy and Professionalism Research, declared: "Many claim to speak for physicians and reflect their views. We asked doctors directly and find that, contrary to conventional wisdom, most doctors support the government creating national health insurance." Dr. Ronald Ackermann, associate director, commented: "Across the board, more physicians feel that our fragmented and for-profit insurance system is obstructing good patient care."

In a related development, the group Physicians for a National Health Program, reports that "other signs indicated that attitudes among doctors are changing. The nation's largest medical specialty group, the 124,000 member American College of Physicians, endorsed a single-payer national health insurance program for the first time last December."
—
• BEWARE OF AMERICANS BEARING GIFTS: How does Hillary Clinton describe the illegal and unjust U.S. invasion of Iraq, the killing of over a million Iraqis, the creation of 4 million civilian refugees, the destruction of the country's infrastructure, and Washington's control of the Baghdad government and armed forces?

She says it’s a gift from America to the Iraqi people. Here are her exact words in a speech March 17: "We have to make clear to the Iraqis that they have been given the greatest gift that a human being can give another human being – the gift of freedom. And it is up to them to decide how they will use that precious gift that has been paid for with the blood and sacrifice and treasure of the United States of America."

Clinton's utterly duplicitous statement came 75 years almost to the very day after the Nazis opened the Dachau concentration camp with an equally duplicitous sign posted over the main entrance: "Arbeit Macht Frei," meaning "Work Brings Freedom." At least they didn't call it a precious gift.
—
• DEBT COLLECTORS THRIVE IN BUFFALO, NY, FOR NOW: This economically depressed city with its high unemployment and poverty rates, is getting a small boost due to the apparent recession and housing foreclosures. How is this possible? Here's the sad story, from the March 21 New York Times:

"Buffalo, New York's second largest city, has long been plagued by plant closings, an exodus of residents and urban decay. But it has become one of the nation's leading hubs for debt collectors, a shaky transformation powered by the same forces crippling most cities — the nation's mortgage crisis and slumping economy, which have pushed consumers further into debt. As a result, an increasing number of banks, credit card companies and lenders are turning to the dozens of collection agencies that have proliferated here." Some 108 collection companies operate in Buffalo and vicinity, now employing over 5,200 collectors, a figure that will grow by 22% in the next six years, says the State Dept. of Labor.

How long this will last is another matter. On April 24, the Times reported that a portion of the U.S. debt collection industry dealing with telephone contacts to debtors is moving to India, where fluent English-speaking Indian collectors call thousands of Americans a day seeking debt payment. About 5% of the American collection business has been shifted to other countries with low wage workers, and more will follow. The Indian workers get paid about a quarter of what the collectors receive in the U.S.
—
• POLL: PESSIMISM REIGNS IN THE U.S.: A huge majority of Americans think that the nation is "heading in the wrong direction," according to a New York Times/CBS News poll made public April 4. Those who thought so amounted to 81% of 1,368 adults polled. Last year it was 69%; in 2002 35%. A total of 78% said the country was better off five years ago. At that time it appeared the U.S. was winning the Iraq war and was getting out of a recession instead of entering one as now. Over 65% believe the recession is already here; nearly 80% rated the national economy as bad. Only 28% thought President Bush was doing a good job; 27% said their household finances were bad; 28% were "falling behind financially" while 23% said they were getting ahead; 71% were concerned about health care costs; 30% were concerned about being able to afford their housing; 43% were worried about having enough money for retirement. The poll didn't ask what Americans thought constituted the right direction for the country and what could be done to bring it about, which might have produced some interesting results.

—————————————————

9. CHECK IT OUT

MILLIONS BEHIND BARS: With less than 5% of the world's population, the U.S. locks up more prisoners — 2.3 million — than any other nation in the world. China, with four times America's population, is the second biggest jailer with 1.6 million inmates. According to an exceptional article on the front page of April 23 New York Times, most other countries are astonished by the number of prisoners in the U.S., the length of their prison terms, and the wide variety of infractions that lead to incarceration. This was not always the case in our country. America's penchant for locking up so many citizens and keeping them imprisoned for very long terms actually began only three decades ago. To obtain this eye-opening article, access graphics and earlier articles in this series, go to this website: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/us/23prison.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin.

WOMEN AND RECESSION: The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, headed by Sen. Edward Kennedy, released a report April 18 titled: "Taking a Toll: The Effects of Recession on Women." In his brief forward to this powerful report, Kennedy points out that his committee's "findings clearly demonstrate the severe and disproportionate impact of this recession on women and their families." Access this PDF at http://now.eloqua.com/e/er.aspx?s=785&lid=3867&elq=64DCA4324E6042F199385217AFD9FE7A.

WHAT WOULD JESUS THINK OF THIS? Six activists from Catholic Schoolgirls Against the War who boldly staged a die-in during Easter Mass at Holy Name Cathedral in Chicago, Ill., have been charged rather harshly with felonies for criminal damage to property. It seems that when they spurted a packet of fake blood on themselves to dramatize the violent nature of the Iraq war during ceremonies for the Prince of Peace, some of it — heaven forefend! — stained the carpet. Cardinal Francis George claims the protest was "act of violence." It's on the PSL website at: http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr007=3mnwddx7f1.app7b&page=NewsArticle&id=8963&news_iv_ctrl=1030

THE ANGOLA 3: Two former member of the Black Panther Party have each been kept in solitary confinement in separate six-by-nine-foot cells at Louisiana's Angola Prison for over 35 years — and they may not even be guilty. A third was freed in 2001. Here's a brief article plus a video about this "cruel and unusual" situation: http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/#80252.

PEOPLE'S HISTORY: Howard Zinn, author of A People's History of the United States, has just put together "A People's History of the American Empire" — with a text illustrated in comic style by Mike Konopacki. In this brief video, Zinn's words about how he came to understand the realities of U.S. foreign policy (read by Viggo Mortensen) are accompanied by drawings from the book. Well worth watching at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arn3lF5XSUg.

THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT: The Pentagon has issued rules about how wars are to be fought, and every member of the Armed Forces is supposed to follow them. One such rule states: "Prior to any engagement, non-combatants and civilian structures are [to be] distinguished from proper military targets." At the Iraq Veterans Against the War Winter Soldier hearings March 13-16 one soldier testified: "We covered the rules of engagement in basic training…. Once we were over there [in Iraq], they literally became a joke." Here's a report on some of the testimony about how civilians are treated by the U.S. military in Iraq. http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032608J.shtml.

RAPISTS IN THE RANKS: Sectors of the U.S. Army have not only taken part in unprovoked violence against the Iraqi people but against their own comrades as well. According to an article in the Los Angeles Times March 31 by Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), the chair of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Intelligence, "about 3,000 female soldiers reported to officers that they were sexually assaulted by male counterparts in 2006 and almost that number in 2007 (many cases, of course, go unreported). Just as shocking for Harman was the "apparent inability or unwillingness to prosecute rapists in the ranks. According to DOD statistics, only 181 out of 2,212 subjects investigated for sexual assault in 2007, including 1,259 reports of rape, were referred to courts-martial, the equivalent of a criminal prosecution in the military. Another 218 were handled via non-punitive administrative action or discharge, and 201 subjects were disciplined through 'non-judicial punishment,' which means they may have been confined to quarters, assigned extra duty or received a similar slap on the wrist." Her full article is at http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-harman31mar31,0,5399612.story.

FACTORY GIRL: Here's a video of topical singer David Rovics performing his version of "The Lowell Factory Girl," accompanied by vintage photos and drawings — http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OsxZLZLlRg&feature=related.

—————————————————

10. CUBA'S INTERNATIONALISM

Cuba's socialist government considers the concept of internationalism a matter of great national responsibility. One result is that 2008 marks the 45th year that Cuba — which is developing but still poor itself — has dispatched medical personnel on a very large scale to mainly poor third world countries in Latin America, Africa and Asia. It has also sent literacy educators to many foreign countries.

At present, according to the Havana government, 36,578 Cuban doctors and other health workers are providing low-cost or free medical care in 73 countries. This figure includes 14,000 Cuban doctors who offer free treatment to Venezuela’s poor. There were only 6,000 doctors in all of Cuba at the time of the 1959 revolution that ended Yankee domination — and 3,000 quickly departed for the U.S. rather than risk a decline in income.

To mark the anniversary, it was announced April 1 that several medical brigades will now be dispatched to eight additional countries. They are Laos, Benin, Vanuatu, Tubalu, Nauru and Papua New Guinea. Since 1961, according to the Cuban newspaper Granma, "Cuba has cooperated with 154 countries around the world and has offered the services of 270,743 internationalists, 124,112 of them health professionals and technicians in 103 countries."

Despite the presence of many Cuban doctors treating patients in foreign countries, Cuba still enjoys the largest number of physicians per 100,000 people of any country in the world. It works out to one doctor for every 136 people. The U.S. doesn't come close. Thousands of patients from other countries travel to Cuba every year for medical treatment for everything from Parkinson's disease and multiple sclerosis to eye surgery.

Free universal health care is a constitutional law in Cuba. The provision reads: "Everyone has the right to health protection and care. The state guarantees this right by providing free medical and hospital care by means of the installations of the rural medical service network, polyclinics, hospitals, preventative and specialized treatment centers; by providing free dental care; by promoting the health publicity campaigns, health education, regular medical examinations, general vaccinations and other measures to prevent the outbreak of disease. All the population cooperates in these activities and plans through the social and mass organizations."

Over the last decade, according to an Associated Press report in early March, a Cuban literacy program in foreign countries has taught more than three million people to read and write.

The AP report continued: "The 'Yes, I Can!' [literacy] program, developed in Cuba nearly 12 years ago, has been praised by the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Cuba has sent about 700 educators to 28 countries." Among the beneficiaries, for example, are 83,000 poor, formerly illiterate adult Ecuadorians, the Cuban news agency ACN reported March 20.

ACN earlier reported that Havana will be the host of the Iberoamerican literacy Congress next June. The Organization of Iberoamerican States (OIS), which sponsors the Congress, is composed of 21 countries from the Caribbean and Latin American region plus Spain (which serves as the headquarters), Portugal and Equatorial Guinea in Central Africa.

OIS General Secretary Alvaro Marchesi praised Cuba's "Yes, I Can" program, which will be a topic of discussion at the Congress. Noting that nearly 35 million adults living in Latin America and the Caribbean still cannot read or write, Marchesi declared that "to eliminate the scourge of illiteracy from the region, we have to think of what has been done, particularly by Cuba."

INTERIM ACTIVIST CALENDAR, APRIL 17, 2008
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter

Information and updates about the following events became available after publication of the latest issue of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter/Calendar (04-15) and will take place before the new edition. Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net. Subscribe at the same address. Previous newsletters and calendars may be located at http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com.

—————————————————

EDITOR’S NOTE

The new events are followed by a quite informative Op-Ed article from this morning's New York Times titled "Who's Bitter Now?" We had pledged ourselves not to become involved in the trivial issues that unfortunately loom so large in the Obama-Clinton contest, but this article — which takes off from Obama's comment about "bitter" workers (which Clinton called "elitist") — provides some interesting observations into the actual views of working class Americans living in smaller towns based on an analysis of voting patterns in the 2004 presidential election.

—————————————————

NEW EVENTS

Saturday, April 19, NEW PALTZ: The annual "Take Back the Night" candlelight march from the SUNY campus through a portion of the village and back will depart from the Parker Quad at 8 p.m. This action — which protests violence against women by marching en mass in the darkness of evening — is largely a student affair but non-student supporters are very welcome. The full event lasts from 2 p.m. to 12 midnight and is described by the organizers as intended to "raise awareness about rape, domestic violence and sexual assault. The day includes music and amazing poetry by local artists (including the award winning NP slam team) and activities like raffles, tie dye and the clothes line project at and around Parker Quad. After the march through town, there will be a speakout for survivors and friends." (We usually arrive an hour or so before the march, which itself is between 30 and 60 minutes, to catch some of the events; hope to see you there — editor.) Here is the campus map (click on "select a campus location" and indicate Parker Quad): http://www.newpaltz.edu/map/.

Wednesday, April 30, PLEASANTVILLE (Pace Univ. campus): "Native Wisdom for Saving Mother Earth" is the topic of a 4:30 p.m. public lecture by botany Professor Robin Kimmerer, director of the Center for Native Peoples and the Environment at SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. This will be followed at 5:30 p.m. by refreshments and a sampling of Native American foods. A roundtable discussion starts at 6 p.m. These events take place in room 35 on the 3rd floor of Miller Hall (entrance 2). It is sponsored by the Pace English Dept. And WESPAC Foundation. Information, (914) 449-6514, http://www.wespac.org.

Monday, May 5, POUGHKEEPSIE: The Dutchess Peace Coalition meets tonight, 7-8:30 p.m., to plan antiwar and anti-recruitment activities. "All those interested in peace and social justice are invited." The gathering takes place at the Unitarian Fellowship, 67 South Randolph Ave. Information, (845) 876-7906, http://www.dutchesspeace.org.

Saturday, May 10, POUGHKEEPSIE: A new documentary about irregularities and alleged tampering during the 2004 and 2006 U.S. elections will by shown at 7 p.m. at the Friends Meeting House, 249 Hooker Ave. (at the corner of Whittier Blvd.). It is titled "Uncounted: The New Math of American Elections." (About the film: http://uncountedthemovie.com/.) Public and free. Information, (845) 454-6431, hathawar@newpaltz.edu, http://poughkeepsiequakers.org.

—————————————————

ARTICLE OF INTEREST

The New York Times, April 17, 2008
By LARRY M. BARTELS

[The author is the director of the Center for the Study of Democratic Politics at Princeton, and author of 'Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age.']

PRINCETON, NJ: During Wednesday night’s Democratic presidential debate in Philadelphia, Barack Obama once more tried to explain what he meant when he suggested earlier this month that small-town people of modest means “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them” out of frustration with their place in a changing American economy. Mr. Obama acknowledged that his wording offended some voters, but he also reiterated his impression that “wedge issues take prominence” when voters are frustrated by “difficult times.”

Last week in Terre Haute, Ind., Mr. Obama explained that the people he had in mind “don’t vote on economic issues, because they don’t expect anybody’s going to help them.” He added: “So people end up, you know, voting on issues like guns, and are they going to have the right to bear arms. They vote on issues like gay marriage. And they take refuge in their faith and their community and their families and things they can count on. But they don’t believe they can count on Washington.”

This is a remarkably detailed and vivid account of the political sociology of the American electorate. What is even more remarkable is that it is wrong on virtually every count.

Small-town people of modest means and limited education are not fixated on cultural issues. Rather, it is affluent, college-educated people living in cities and suburbs who are most exercised by guns and religion. In contemporary American politics, social issues are the opiate of the elites.

For the sake of concreteness, let’s define the people Mr. Obama had in mind as people whose family incomes are less than $60,000 (an amount that divides the electorate roughly in half), who do not have college degrees and who live in small towns or rural areas. For the sake of convenience, let’s call these people the small-town working class, though that term is inevitably imprecise. In 2004, they were about 18 percent of the population and about 16 percent of voters.

For purposes of comparison, consider the people who are their demographic opposites: people whose family incomes are $60,000 or more, who are college graduates and who live in cities or suburbs. These (again, conveniently labeled) cosmopolitan voters were about 11 percent of the population in 2004 and about 13 percent of voters. While admittedly crude, these definitions provide a systematic basis for assessing the accuracy of Mr. Obama’s view of contemporary class politics.

Small-town, working-class people are more likely than their cosmopolitan counterparts, not less, to say they trust the government to do what’s right. In the 2004 National Election Study conducted by the University of Michigan, 54 percent of these people said that the government in Washington can be trusted to do what is right most of the time or just about always. Only 38 percent of cosmopolitan people expressed a similar level of trust in the federal government.

Do small-town, working-class voters cast ballots on the basis of social issues? Yes, but less than other voters do. Among these voters, those who are anti-abortion were only 6 percentage points more likely than those who favor abortion rights to vote for President Bush in 2004. The corresponding difference for the rest of the electorate was 27 points, and for cosmopolitan voters it was a remarkable 58 points. Similarly, the votes cast by the cosmopolitan crowd in 2004 were much more likely to reflect voters’ positions on gun control and gay marriage.

Small-town, working-class voters were also less likely to connect religion and politics. Support for President Bush was only 5 percentage points higher among the 39 percent of small-town voters who said they attended religious services every week or almost every week than among those who seldom or never attended religious services. The corresponding difference among cosmopolitan voters (34 percent of whom said they attended religious services regularly) was 29 percentage points.

It is true that American voters attach significantly more weight to social issues than they did 20 years ago. It is also true that church attendance has become a stronger predictor of voting behavior. But both of those changes are concentrated primarily among people who are affluent and well educated, not among the working class.

Mr. Obama’s comments are supposed to be significant because of the popular perception that rural, working-class voters have abandoned the Democratic Party in recent decades and that the only way for Democrats to win them back is to cater to their cultural concerns. The reality is that John Kerry received a slender plurality of their votes in 2004, while John F. Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey, in the close elections of 1960 and 1968, lost them narrowly.

Mr. Obama should do as well or better among these voters if he is the Democratic candidate in November. If he doesn’t, it won’t be because he has offended the tender sensitivities of small-town Americans. It will be because he has embraced a misleading stereotype of who they are and what they care about.

ACTIVIST CALENDAR
April 15, 2008, Issue #136
PART 2 of HUDSON VALLEY ACTIVIST NEWSLETTER

——————————————
Editor’s Note: This is the Calendar only. Part 1, the Activist Newsletter, will follow in several days.
——————————————

Tuesday, April 15 to Thursday, April 17, RHINEBECK, HUDSON, ALBANY: A remarkable new documentary about what is termed "an emerging global catastrophe" — the unnecessary disappearance of clean water for human consumption and use — will be shown in each of these locations, followed by a discussion with director Irena Salinas and local environmental speakers. The title is an acronym, "FLOW — For the Love of Water." Here's the schedule: April 15, RHINEBECK, Upstate Films, 8 p.m., $10, information (845) 876-2515; April 16, HUDSON, Time & Space Limited, 434 Columbia St., 7:30 p.m., $10, $7.50 members/students, information, (518) 822-8448, http://www.timeandspace.org; April 17, ALBANY, The Linda WAMC’s Performing Arts Studio, 339 Central Ave., 7 p.m., $6, Information, (518) 465-5233 ext. 4, http://www.wamcarts.org/. Details about the film are at http://www.hvpg.org/.

Wednesday, April 16, NEW PALTZ — A film and panel discussion titled "Resorting to Madness" will be presented at the Jewish Community Center on North Chestnut St. (north of Rt. 299) at 7 p.m. The meeting concerns the overdevelopment of resorts in rural areas. The panel will focus on the development of Williams Lake in Rosendale, and Belleayre Mountain in Highmount, the Catskills. The panel of speakers will include Tim Trompeter, a member of the Save the Lakes; Dave Porter, co-author of "Megamall on the Hudson"; Paul Rubin, president of HydroQuest; Rich Shaedle, chair of the Catskill Heritage Alliance; and Julie McQuain, founding member of "Save the Mountain." The event is sponsored by the Mid-Hudson Sierra Club. Free and public. Information, Bibi Sandstrom, (845) 255-5528.

Wednesday, April 16, WASHINGTON, DC — There will be a protest today at the Mortgage Bankers Association Annual Conference which will be held at Washington Court Hotel, 525 New Jersey Ave. NW. Demonstrators will be coming for a number of locations in the East. The slogan is, "Foreclose the War, Not People's Homes!" The 3 p.m. action is sponsored by the Ad Hoc National Network Against Home Foreclosures and Evections. Demonstrators will demand a moratorium on foreclosures and evictions at the largest assembly of mortgage bankers in the nation. Information and sponsor list is at http://www.stopforeclosuresandevictions.org.

Thursday, April 17, NEW PALTZ (SUNY campus): The award winning documentary “Who Killed the Electric Car?” — a film "about the conspiracy to prevent the adoption of electric vehicle technology" — will be shown at 7:30 p.m. in Lecture Center 102. It's free and public, sponsored by the Environmental Task Force, along with Synthesis and NYPIRG. Information, obachb@newpaltz.edu.

Saturday, April 19, PHILADELPHIA: An eastern region-wide demonstration in support of Mumia Abu-Jamal begins at 11 a.m. at the Federal Building, 6th and Market Sts. The event is a protest against the March 27 court ruling against a new trial or freedom for the African-American journalist who is foremost political prisoner in the U.S. Information about the ruling, and background on the death sentence imposed on a man who is considered innocent by millions of people around the world is at http://www.freemumia.com/. The website also contains information about buses from New York City. Activists are organizing a bus from 33rd St. and Eighth Ave. at 8 a.m. Information, (212) 330-8029 or (212) 633-6646. A bus will also leave from 179th St. and Amsterdam Ave., at 8 a.m. Information, Carlito Rovira, (347) 387-5459. Free Mumia! Driving by passenger car from, say, New Paltz to Philadelphia on a Saturday usually takes 3 ½ to 4 hours.

SUNDAY, April 20, BEACON: The Beacon Sloop Club is sponsoring an Earth Day Festival at the Riverfront (just west of the Metro-North station). This free public outdoor event (12 noon-4:30 p.m.) will be educational and entertaining — rain or shine. Food will be available. The leaflet says there will be displays regarding "Solar, Geothermal, Composting, Recycling, Wind Technologies, Hybrid & Electric Cars from local dealers, Biodiesel, Food & Crafts, Children's Area, River Life Display Tanks, and Tours of Sloop Clearwater." Information, (845) 542-0721, http://www.beaconsloop.org

Sunday, April 20, ROSENDALE — A benefit concert for Utah Phillips will be held at the Rosendale Cafe, 434 Main St. at 2 p.m. The legendary folk/labor song artist, and lifelong activist, Utah Phillips has become ill recently and is unable to perform. Performers will include Pete Seeger, Dar Williams, Redwood Moose, Sarah Underhill with the High Meadow Larks, the Flames of Discontent, and Norm Wennet. Tickets are $20 available only at the door. No reservations. Information, (845) 658-9048, http://www.rosendalecafe.com, http://www.flamesofdiscontent.org, leftmus@earthlink.net.

Tuesday, April 22, MIDDLETOWN (SUNY Orange campus): A panel discussion of how climate change and peak oil impact Orange County and how the community can work toward a sustainable future will take place 7-8:30 p.m. at the Learning Resource Center on South St. It's free and public, and sponsored by Orange Environment and SUNY Orange Biology Club to mark Earth Day. Information, (845) 665-1540, http://www.sunyorange.edu/biology/agassiz/index.shtml.

Tuesday, April 22, NEWBURGH: The Hudson Valley Science Café is sponsoring a 7 p.m. talk on global warming by Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory associate research scientist Juerg Michael Matter. It takes place at the All Good Restaurant, 374 Washington St. Cost is $3. Information, Rossman@env.med.nyu.edu.

Wednesday, April 23, WOODSTOCK — Author Ghada Karmi, a Palestinian writer and academic living in London, will discuss her 2002 book and memoir, "In Search of Fatima: A Palestinian Story," at the Woodstock Community Center, 56 Rock City Road at 7 p.m. Sponsored by Middle East Crisis Response. Information, contact fnagel@earthlink.net, http://www.mideastcrisis.org

Wednesday, April 23, NEW PALTZ (SUNY campus) — The college's Student Christian Center, Muslim Student Association and Hillel Jewish student group will host "Breaking the Cycle: An evening on nonviolent conflict resolution and forgiveness" at the Studley Theater at 8 p.m. From the organizers: "Conceived in the wake of the 1999 Columbine High School massacre, 'Breaking the Cycle' brings its message to tens of thousands of students each year, with the goal of proactively addressing the roots of school violence. The event will feature Bruderhof author and counselor J. Christoph Arnold and former gang-member turned motivational speaker, Sergio Argueta. Also offering remarks will be Dr. L. David Rooney, vice president of Student Affairs, and members of local law enforcement. Audience participation will be encouraged during the assembly. A reception will follow in the Old Main Building 1907 Room where additional resources on nonviolent conflict resolution and forgiveness will be available." Free and public. Information, hochst23@newpaltz.edu.

Thursday, April 24, NEW PALTZ (SUNY campus): The college Sociology Dept. is sponsoring a 7-9 p.m. presentation on the environment by Michael Ignatowski of the Hudson Valley Humanists entitled “Sustainability or Apocalypse?” in Lecture Center 100. He will discuss the fact that "In the next few decades humankind is facing a 'perfect storm' of challenges, including with peak oil, global climate change, major resource depletion, demographic changes, and the potential for a major economic disruption brought on by an unsustainable American national debt and trade imbalance…. Depending on how we manage them we could usher in a long term era of increased prosperity and sustainability or face an environmental collapse and major social disruption." Public and free. Information, Professor Irwin Sperber, sperberi@newpaltz.edu, (845) 257-2772. Campus map, http://www.newpaltz.edu/map/.

Sunday, April 27, NEW PALTZ: An Earth Day Fair will be held 11:30 a.m.–3 p.m. at and outside the Reformed Church, 92 Huguenot St. (site of the famous stone houses). There will be talk, displays, "food and fun." Information, cherylalloway@gmail.com, (845) 255-6340.

Sunday, April 27, NEW PALTZ (SUNY CAMPUS) — The annual "Rock Against Racism" musical and political event will be held 12 noon-10 p.m. at the Old Main Quad (enter at 49 Plattekill Ave.). The music ranges from hip hop to spoken word and from rock to soul. The sponsor is the National Organization for the Legalization of Marijuana Laws (NORML). From the organizer: "It's an amazing time and brings together people both in and outside the New Paltz community to a huge political platform through the medium of music. Though we are undoubtedly rockin' against racism, that is not the only thing we are concerned with. We are trying to send a variety of messages including: ending the drug war, ending the war on terrorism, environmental issues, anti-consumerism, and just simply trying to promote consciousness, unity, and empowerment within the community. Rock Against Racism involves people of all cultures taking a stand together as one." A number of bands will perform, and there will be speakers, poets, dancers and political figures (even David Soares the Albany District Attorney). Information, (862) 266-2911, selby38@newpaltz.edu, http://www.myspace.com/nprockagainstracism. Campus map, http://www.newpaltz.edu/map/.

Monday, April 28, WHITE PLAINS: "The Impact of Gender Inequality on Global Poverty and AIDS" is the topic of a talk by Letty Chiwara, of UN Development Fund for Women-UNIFEM, and Positive Women's Network of Southern Africa. The talk starts at 7 p.m. at Thomas H. Slater Center, 2 Fisher Court. The Westchester Coalition on Global Poverty and AIDS is the sponsor. Information, Ron Mitchell, (914) 576-8473, hapny@hotmail.com.

Tuesday, April 29, ALBANY —Today is the annual "Reform New York Day" in the Capital Concourse, 10:30 a.m.-4 p.m., and charter buses will be leaving for the event from Kingston, Westchester and New York City, as well as other locations in the state. Much of the day involves lobbying by activists demanding that legislators put public interests before special interests. On the agenda are redistricting, campaign finance reform, ethics reform and public financing and control of elections. The event is sponsored by Common Cause, Citizen Action, League of Women Voters, NYPIRG, Citizen's Union Metro Justice, Long Island Progressive Coalition, Democracy for NYC, Democracy for the Hudson Mohawk Region, Citizens for Better Government, Women's City Club, Democracy Matters, and others. Information, Jessica Wisneski at (845) 901-0264, http://www.commoncause.org/ny/reformday2008.

Thursday, May 1, WOODSTOCK: Hudson Valley Humanists is sponsoring a public and free workshop titled “Let’s Talk About… Karl Marx,” 7 p.m. at the library. The workshop leader is Michael Strong, who will explore "the life and legacy" of the philosopher, historian, economist and, with Frederick Engels, the trenchant critic of capitalism and advocate of revolutionary socialism. Information, Ed Pell (845) 247-0098, hvhumans@yahoo.com, http://hudsonvalley.humanists.net/.

Thursday, May 1, NEW YORK CITY — Today, on this working-class holiday, members of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union and others are conducting a West Coast work stoppage to protest the Iraq/Afghanistan war. In Manhattan at Hunter College, East 68th St. and Lexington Ave., there will be a teach-in against the war in solidarity with the progressive union's action. The NYC event is sponsored by Hunter PSC-CUNY. Information and time, contact Sandor John (Abram) at (917) 591-5368, s_an@msn.com.

Thursday, May 1, NEW YORK CITY — Rally and march for immigrant rights. Meet at Union Square, East 14th St, and Broadway in Manhattan at 4 p.m. Sponsored by N.Y. May 1st Coalition. Information, teresa@wwpublish.com or panamaablaba2@yahoo.com.

Thursday, May 1, through Sunday, May 11, HUDSON — On selected days and different times between May 1-11, the extraordinary Bread and Puppet Theatre brings two new shows to Time and Space Limited, 434 Columbia St. Showing will be "Photographs of My Corpse: A Puppet Service for Guantanamo," and "The Divine Reality Comedy Circus." For specific times and shows, see http://timeandspace.org/tsl/calendar/event.php?id=449. Bread and Puppet is one of the oldest noncommercial, self-supporting theaters in the country. It has created politically and socially aware performances since 1963. Their shows are always against war and critical of globalization and capitalism. (Volunteer performing positions available for all ages and all experience levels, for a limited time.) Tickets are $10 for TSL members, $5 for students and $12.50 all others. Information, michael@timeandspace.org, (518) 822-8448, http://timeandspace.org/tsl/calendar/event.php?id=449.

Saturday, May 3, NEW PALTZ — "May Day Jam: A Concert for Labor, Social Change and Healthcare Reform Now!" will take place at the Muddy Cup Coffee House, 58 Main St., at 8 p.m. Artists include, The Flames of Discontent, Readnex Poetry Squad, and Zenote Sompatle. Speakers from various social justice groups and Ulster County Legislators Gary Bischoff and Susan Zimet are on the program. Information, John Pietaro (845) 520-2161, http://www.flamesofdiscontent.org.

Saturday, May 3, ROSENDALE — "Rosendale Earthfest and Energy Expo" will be held 9 a.m.-5 p.m. at the Community Center on Rt. 32, about 1/4th mile south of Rt. 213. Admission is $5 individual, $10 family. The expo will feature environmental experts, community leaders, and green building and energy professionals who will address the challenge of global climate change and pose practical measures to meet this essential concern. Rosendale Town Supervisor Patrick McDonough states, "We hope this year's Earthfest and Energy Expo will spur efforts to tackle this problem for the sake of our children, our children's children, and generations beyond." The Rosendale Environmental Commission will present Rep. Maurice Hinchey with its Green Energy Leadership Award. Speakers include Patty Goodwin, board chair of Sustainable Hudson Valley (SHV), and James Porter, program coordinator for SHV’s Low Carbon Initiative. Performers include Arm-of-the-Sea Theatre, and Big Sky Ensemble. Falconer and wildlife educator Bill Robinson will be in attendance with his animals. Attendees can speak with local organic farmers, explore life in the streams, and its ecosystem, learn about the importance of bees, take part in a bike clinic, show, and bike-decorating, and make nature crafts from recycled materials. Information, Jennifer Metzger at (845) 658-8967.

May 4, 2008, NEW PALTZ: Leftist Bolivian President Juan Evo Morales, who has close relations with socialist President Hugo Chavez in neighboring Venezuela, and is considered a friend of Cuba, has been walking on a political high wire since he took office two years ago. While supported by the majority of Bolivians, including virtually all the country's indigenous people, he has incurred the wrath of a sector of the smaller but powerful bourgeoisie and its supporters. Uncle Sam is also concerned, of course, and the possibility of a future U.S. destabilization effort cannot be ruled out. Journalist and website editor (UpsideDownWorld.org) Ben Dangl — who authored the book "The Price of Fire: Resource Wars and Social Movements in Bolivia" — will discuss the political situation in Bolivia and future prospects. He will also comment on the results of the impending April 20 elections in Bolivia's other neighbor, Paraguay. (Dengl received a Project Censored Award for coverage of the U.S. military presence in Paraguay.) The meeting begins at 7 p.m. at New Paltz Village Hall on Plattekill Ave., one block south of Main St. (Rt. 299), a mile or so west of Thruway exit 18. (When you reach Starbucks corner, Plattekill Ave., turn south one block. It’s just past the firehouse on the right.) Park in the Village Hall parking lot. All are invited and it’s free. A potluck dinner begins at 6 p.m. for those who wish to partake. Information and directions, (845) 255-5779 or email jacdon@earthlink.net.

Saturday, May 10, WOODSTOCK — A vigil to remember the Palestinian "Day of the catastrophe," known as Nakba Day, will take place on the Village Green, 5 Tinker St., 2:30-4 p.m. The vigil, held on the second Saturday of each month in this 60th anniversary year, commemorates the beginning of the Palestinian exodus from their homeland as a consequence of the Arab-Israeli war. By 1951, according to the UN, it is estimated 711,000 Palestinians had fled. Today Palestinian refugees and their descendants number about 4,000,000. Event sponsored by Middle East Crisis Response. Information, (845) 876-7906, fnagel@earthlink.net, http://www.mideastcrisis.org.

Saturday, May 10, WHITE PLAINS — Walkabout Clearwater Coffeehouse will be hosting a Celebration of the Songs of Phil Ochs featuring John Flynn, Greg Greenway, Kim and Reggie Harris, Magpie and Pat Wictor at Memorial United Methodist Church, 250 Bryant Ave. at 7:30 p.m. An informal audience songfest begins at 6:45 p. m. Tickets are $17.50 in advance and $20 at the door. Walkabout Clearwater is a sloop club that supports the mission of the Poughkeepsie-based Hudson River sloop Clearwater. Information and tickets call (914) 242-0374, http://www.walkaboutclearwater.org, http://www.brownpapertickets.com/producer/5602.

EXTINGUISHING THE TAINTED TORCH
From the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter, April 10, 2008
http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com

By Jack A. Smith, editor

We are concerned that the next time the Olympics take place in the United States those who are now calling for a full or partial boycott of this summer's games in China — or who wax enthusiastic about attempts to disrupt the running of the Olympic Torch — may also feel impelled to disrupt the American Olympics.

This would look bad for Uncle Sam, however, and we could not ourselves participate.

But, after all, some people are disturbed because the human rights of the million or more Iraqi civilians who have died as a result of Washington's humanitarian intervention haven't simply been violated, they've been erased. And the campaign for human rights may be thought to have some connection to the four million Iraqi refugees, the social disruption, the hunger and the humiliation in the country that may never be put back together again.

Such alleged violations of human rights just might induce today's Olympic protestors to attempt to extinguish the torch associated with the future American games when it is carried through, say, San Francisco.

If further incentive is needed, then add the 1.5 million Iraqis who died as a result of U.S.-inspired UN sanctions and frequent Pentagon bombing attacks against Iraq from 1991 to 2003. Still not enough? How about the 3 million citizens of Vietnam whose human rights died with they did as a result of Washington's war? For openers we can point to hundreds of more incidents, of course, from organizing the overthrow of democracy in Iran in 1953, to backing overthrow of democracy in Chile in 1973, and the attempted overthrow of democracy in Venezuela in 2002.

We ourselves happen to oppose disruptions and boycotts of the Olympics and cling perhaps idealistically to a remnant of the Olympic spirit. But we can understand that the passionate convictions driving Americans who are now seeking to disrupt the China Olympics — such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi or Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, for example —will logically impel them to protest at the next American games as well. We wish them Godspeed on their continuing efforts to eliminate human rights violations from the world, but think they should just opt for boycotting the opening ceremonies of the next U.S. Olympics and call it a day.

Actually, no American Olympic Games are scheduled for quite a while, but how about the London games in 2012? Great Britain has marched in lockstep with the U.S. in both Iraq and Vietnam, not to mention Afghanistan, Yugoslavia and other humanitarian interventions. Some day they may even come with us into Darfur in Western Sudan, not far from the oil wells.

Although we would oppose a boycott or disruption of the London games, we can certainly understand why both the Democratic and Republican parties would feel compelled to shun the games and why our most prominent political leaders may have no alternative but to seize and extinguish the damnable Tainted Torch when it passes through Washington, the undisputed capital of human rights hypocrisy.

INTERIM ACTIVIST CALENDAR, APRIL 7, 2008
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter

Information and updates about the following events became available after publication of the latest issue of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter/Calendar and will take place before the new edition. Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net. Subscribe at the same address. The last newsletters and calendars may be located at
http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com.

—————————————————

EDITOR’S NOTE

So much misinformation is circulating about both Darfur and Tibet these days that progressive-thinking people had best delve deeper than the New York Times and NPR. This will start you off:

1. An extremely eye-opening article on the Darfur situation has been published by Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR), an organization noted for its principled and prescient criticism of the corporate media. Find it at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3259.

2. A good left analysis of the Tibet-China situation, with some interesting history of Tibet and fascinating information about the "Free Tibet" movement is available at http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=8845&news_iv_ctrl=1261

—————————————————

Wednesday, April 9, WOODSTOCK — Today is the 60th anniversary of the massacre of Deir Yassin, a Palestinian village near Jerusalem which was the object of a terror attack by a Jewish commando force, resulting in the slaughter of some 120 people. Other villagers fled. This attack was an important contribution to the Palestinian Arab exodus. A meeting, "Remembering Deir Yassin," will start at 7 p.m. in the Woodstock Community Center, 56 Rock City Rd. The speaker will be Bard Professor Joel Kovel, a prolific author whose most recent book is "Overcoming Zionism." His talk will focus on the origins of the Israel/Palestine conflict, using original footage from 1948. This free public event, sponsored by Middle East Crisis Response. Information, fnagel@earthlink.net, http://www.mideastcrisis.org.

Thursday, April 10, NEW ROCHELLE (Iona College campus) — A forum and teach-in on the topic "Keeping War and Occupation on the Agenda: Only We the People Can Stop the War" will start at 7 p.m. in Ryan Lecture Hall, 715 North Ave., on campus. Featured will be actor/writer Malachy McCourt; Robin Anderson, director of Peace and Justice Studies at Fordham Univ.; Arlene Flaherty, who lead delegations to Iraq in 1999 and 2008; Chris N. Miller, an Iraq veteran and war resister; and Chuck Bell of No War Westchester. Sponsored by Westchester Peace and Action Coalition. Information, Ted DeSoyza at (914) 235-1744, ceilie@aol.com.

Thursday, April 10, WOODSTOCK — Meeting of "Middle East Crisis Response" at the Public Library, 5 Library Lane, 6:30-8:30 p.m. The Middle East Crisis Response is a group of Hudson Valley residents joined in protest against policies of Israel and the United States. Information. gale@mideastcrisis.org, http://www.mideastcrisis.org, (845) 876-7906.

Friday, April 11, NEW YORK CITY —A Rally to defend and support Venezuela's Bolivarian Revolution will take place at the Venezuelan Consulate at 7 E. 51 St. in Manhattan. 3:30-6:30 p.m. From the organizer: "April 11 is the anniversary of the failed attempt by the Venezuelan opposition in 2002 to overthrow Venezuela's democratically elected President Hugo Chavez, who was almost immediately brought back to power by the will of the Venezuelan people. On April 11 this year, the Venezuelan opposition is calling for a global day against Hugo Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution. Progressive movements from Venezuela to New York must unite to send a strong response! Remember & Resist!" Organized by The Albert Lovera Bolivarian Circle of NY, in partnership with a coalition of organizations. This event is endorsed by virtually the entire New York City left: Alliance for Global Justice; ANSWER Coalition; Brecht Forum; Caribbean and Latin America Support Project (New Paltz); Casa de las Americas; Cuba Solidarity NY; Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism; December 12th Movement; FIST--Fight Imperialism, Stand Together; Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Coalition, NYC; Freedom Socialist Party; Frente Socialista; Pro-Libertad; Frente Unido de Inmigrantes Ecuatorianos; Fuerza de la Revolución; Haiti Support Network; Iglesia San Romero de las Americas; International Action Center; La Peña del Bronx; Las Hijas de la Rebeldía; New York Black Radical Congress; New York Committee to Free the Cuban Five; Nicaragua Network; NYC Hands Off Venezuela; People's Organization for Progress; Proletariat Productions; Radical Women; Troops Out Now Coalition; Venceremos Brigade; Venezuela Solidarity Network; Workers World Party; Partido Nacionalista NY; Pam Africa, International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal; Pro Libertad; Elombe Brath, Patrice Lumumba Coalition; Fred Magdoff, professor and author; Jane Franklyn, author; Norman Thomas Marshall, author and actor and others. Information, cbalbertolovera@gmail.com.

Friday, April 11, YONKERS — Talk: "From Poverty to Prosperity: A National Strategy to Cut Poverty in Half," featuring David Billings of the People's Institute for Survival and Beyond, and Meizhu Lui from The Color of Wealth. It lasts 10 a.m.-1 p.m. at Yonkers Riverfront Library, 1 Larkin Center. Public and free. Sponsored by Alliance for Just Solutions, Anti-Racist Alliance, Fordham University Graduate School of Social Service, WESPAC, Westchester Martin Luther King Jr. Institute for Nonviolence, and others. RSVP: Sandy Bernabei, ssbernabei@aol.com.

Friday, April 11, TROY — A concert featuring Grammy-nominated kora master Mamadou Diabate (kora: stringed musical instrument) with his ensemble, from the West African country Mali, will begin at 8 p.m. at the AME Zion Church at 189 Fifth Ave. Tickets are $10. Because the sponsoring Sanctuary for Independent Media has been egregiously shut down by the City of Troy in an action currently under investigation by the New York Civil Liberties Union, the church has offered its sanctuary to the Sanctuary. Sponsored by The Sanctuary for Independent Media and AME Zion Church. Information, (518) 272-2390, http://www.mediasanctuary.org, info@mediasanctuary.org.

Friday and Saturday, April 11 and 12, ALBANY — A two-day "Peace and Sustainability Conference" with peace activist Cindy Sheehan and , Victor Sidel, a founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility, will take place at First Unitarian Universalist Church of Albany, 405 Washington Ave. The Friday event is from 7:30-9:30 p.m. Donation, $10 or more. Pre-payment reservations are requested. Sponsored by Northeast Peace and Justice Action Coalition (NEPAJAC), Physicians for Social Responsibility, Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace, Peace Action, Veterans for Peace, Women Against War, Interhelp Network. Information, reservations, http://www.bethlenemforpeace.org, (518) 391-2830, taqaif@yahoo.com.

Saturday, April 12, NEW YORK CITY — A benefit for Pastors for Peace as it prepares its 19th Friendship Caravan to Cuba, starts at 7 p.m. at St. Mary's Church, 521 W 126th St. in Manhattan. Music, snacks and drinks, dance contest, solidarity and fun. Music by DJ Carlito: Salsa, Mambo, Meringue, Reggation, Hip-Hop and more. Cost, $10/$5 for students with identification. Information, IFCO (212) 926-5757

Saturday, April 12, WHITE PLAINS — A benefit to support the Poughkeepsie-based Hudson River sloop Clearwater and its environmental programs will begin at 7 p.m. at Memorial United Methodist Church, 250 Bryant Ave. The Ebony Hillbillies, a black string band consisting of fiddle, banjo, washboard and bass fiddle (one of the last in the U.S.), will provide the entertainment. It's sponsored the Walkabout Clearwater Coffeehouse. Admission is $17.50 in advance, $20 at the door. Information, tickets (914) 242-0374, http://www.walkaboutclearwater.org, http://www.brownpapertickets.com/producer/5602.

Saturday, April 12, WOODSTOCK — A vigil to remember the Palestinian "Day of the catastrophe," known as Nakba Day, will take place on the Village Green, 5 Tinker St., 2:30-4 p.m. The vigil, held on the second Saturday of each month in this 60th anniversary year, commemorates the beginning of the Palestinian exodus from their homeland as a consequence of the Arab-Israeli war. By 1951, according to the UN, it is estimated 711,000 Palestinians had fled. Today Palestinian refugees and their descendants number about 4,000,000. Sponsored by Middle East Crisis Response. Information, (845) 876-7906, fnagel@earthlink.net, http://www.mideastcrisis.org.

Tuesday, April 15, NEW YORK CITY — Leafleting and vigil to protest war funding on Tax Day, at the Internal Revenue Service Office, 110 W. 44th St. in Manhattan from 12 noon — 2 p.m. March to GPO. Sponsored by War Resisters League, NYC War Tax Resistance. For information, (718) 768-7306, nycwrl@att.net, http://www.nycwtr.org.