By Michael Corey, November 14th, 2011 
On November 11th at 11 Am and 11 seconds of 2011, I was meeting with a group of 6th graders as part of a Veterans Day event at an excellent middle school in a small town frequently characterized as affluent, but much more economically diverse than this term suggests.
I was impressed by the program. It was organized and run by the students at the town’s middle school with the help of school personnel. I gave some brief remarks about the Vietnam War, shared some remembrances of my service with them, and answered as many of their questions as I could.
At the beginning of my portion of the program, I was presented a thoughtful certificate of appreciation by one of the students who escorted me to the library where I met with other students. I think that a couple of dozen other veterans participated in the program. Each had his own story to tell.
The United States Department of Veterans Affairs explains that Veterans Day is observed on November 11th regardless of what day of the week on which it falls.
“The restoration of the observance of Veterans Day to November 11 not only preserves the historical significance of the date, but helps focus attention on the important purpose of Veterans Day: A celebration to honor America’s veterans for their patriotism, love of country, and willingness to serve and sacrifice for the common good.”
The origins of Veterans Day (previously known as Armistice Day, and in some parts of the world as Remembrance Day) is traceable back towards the end of World War I when on November 11, 1918 at 11 AM a temporary cessation of hostilities between the Allied Nations and Germany went into effect. The “Great War,” actually ended when the Treaty of Versailles was signed on June 28, 1919. It was the hopeful thinking at the time to think that World War I would be “the war to end all wars.”
President Woodrow Wilson proclaimed the commemoration as Armistice Day. As . . .
Read more: Remembering 11.11.11
By Jeffrey C. Goldfarb, November 11th, 2011 
What do these people want? What are they advocating? In the opinion of many, including Gary Alan Fine in his last post, it is easy to discern what OWS is against, but unclear what they are for. They know how to say no, he knows, but he wonders if they can say yes. He thinks this both about OWS and The Tea Party, as a detached but sympathetic observer of both.
Looking at OWS up close, taking part in a small but significant activity, I think the positive commitments of OWS are actually quite clear, and in marked contrast to The Tea Party. As I maintained in The Politics of Small Things, the democracy is in the details. I had an opportunity to look at some details in a corner of Zuccotti Park, joining the OWS Think Tank.
Many of the OWS activists who have taken part in The Flying Seminar sessions are active in the Think Tank. We started working together at The New School teach in. They have been among the active members of the seminar. I have visited them a couple of times in Zuccotti Park, and earlier this week, on Monday, I joined them in their work there. It was an illuminating afternoon.
From noon to 6:00, the Think Tank conducts discussion sessions of a special sort on a variety of topics. Many different people facilitate the discussions. I responded to an email call for help and volunteered to do my part. The workshop topics range from the quite general, to the immediate and practical. They hope to inform decision-making in the park and to further understanding of problems of broad public concern, and even contribute to the formulation of policy positions and recommendations. It’s one of the spaces where the big questions about the occupation are being answered in daily practice, a striking case of the politics of small things. It confirmed for me that in politics the means are a significant part of its . . .
Read more: The Clear, Present and Positive Goals of Occupy Wall Street
By Kei Nakagawa, November 9th, 2011 
Contingency is of the essence for creativity. The Flying Seminar session with members from Shiroto no Ran (Amateur Revolt), an anti-nuclear and counter cultural social movement group from Japan, and Occupy Wall Street, I think, was not an exception. What started as a rash decision by the Shiroto no Ran to come to New York to show their support to the OWS protest and to experience the heart of the occupation first-hand took an unplanned change after a chance meeting. Through a New School effort to create the time and space for deeper and meaningful dialogue, a valuable Japanese – American encounter occurred.
I heard the news about Shiroto no Ran’s visit just a day before their arrival. During their short stay at the Liberty Square, we met and talked about OWS. From our conversations, I began to realize how difficult it was for them to actually get the opportunity to really meet and get to know the people who are most engaged in the OWS movement. The activists in Zuccotti Park were too busy and things were changing too rapidly there. I realized that there was a need for creating a space that would facilitate a dialogue between these two groups of activists. A teach-in session organized by two New School professors, Jeffrey Goldfarb and Elzbieta Matynia, not only opened a door of opportunity, but also gave a concrete structure to my vague idea. From listening to their ideas about the Flying Seminar, I realized that we could have a serious conversation between these movements from different cultures. Just two days after I proposed the event, we all met, and my sense that it could be worthwhile, proved to be correct.
As a participant in both movements, I see my contribution in creating a space for dialogue as a modest one. But on the other hand, as a researcher who is working on the Japanese 1968 movement from a transnational perspective, I am especially interested. I am fascinated how such a dialogue is now possible in . . .
Read more: Toward Sustainable Occupations by Amateurs: Reflections on the OWS – Shiroto no Ran Flying Seminar
By David Howell, November 7th, 2011 
Not so long ago, during the first several decades of the post-war era, the American dream of a broad and growing middle class was a significant reality. But since the 1970s the shape of the American distribution of income has steadily become more like an hourglass: as the middle has collapsed, large numbers of workers earn very low wages and at the other end of the scale, very few take home gigantic sums.
Figure 1 shows the extraordinary reallocation of national resources from the bottom 80 percent of the population to the top 1 percent, while those in between (81st-99th) have, as a group, shown no change in their share of total income.
FIGURE 1
Source: CBO Report “Trends in the Distribution of Household Income Between 1979 and 2007”
Not surprisingly, over the last three decades many households in the bottom 80 percent have faced sharp declines in their standard of living as the costs of health care, higher education, food and energy have risen far faster than the wage check. The result has been the accumulation of unprecedented levels of mortgage, credit card, and student debt.
I have argued that the roots of the economic crisis can be found in the shift in economic thinking and public policy toward free market fundamentalism in the 1970-80s, which fueled the rise in debt, financial instability, and extreme inequality. We’ve seen a toxic mix of financial deregulation, evisceration of protective labor market institutions (like collective bargaining and the minimum wage), a political system corrupted by campaign contributions, and an increasingly polarized education system that performs poorly for most of those in the 80 percent and terribly for the most disadvantaged communities.
But this is not at all the conventional wisdom. Rather, it has become widely accepted that the government is the root cause of the economic crisis of 2008-11 and the decline in living standards for the vast majority. The problem in this conservative vision is too much regulation, too much taxation, too much encouragement of home . . .
Read more: The Metrics of Protest: Extreme Inequality and the Payoff to College Degrees
By Gary Alan Fine, November 4th, 2011 
 Grievance is the electricity of the powerless. It energizes masses. Yet, lacking bright vision, cursing the overlords cannot become a political program. Cures need calm confidence. Complaint awakens protest, but it is insufficient for transformation. Escaping dark plagues begins collective action; spying Canaan must follow.
In our dour moment in which citizens of all stripes are taking to the streets, the plazas, and the parks, we see accusing placards, but no persuasive manifestos. As sociologist William Gamson has pointed out, the first step is to demonstrate an “injustice frame” as a precursor to action. Point taken, but it is a start.
Despite their manifold and manifest differences, the polyester Tea Party and the scruffy Occupy Wall Street protests have at least this in common: palpable anger and resentment. We feel at the mercy of distant puppet masters, and elites in pinstripes and in gowns have much to answer for.
Neither the Partiers nor the Occupiers are wrong to recognize the sway of elites, even if they are not sufficiently aware of those powers that stand behind their own movements: David Koch, the Alliance for Global Justice, and FreedomWorks. Anti-elites are the playthings of the powerful.
Yet, despite their backers, both the Partiers and the Occupiers are solidly 99%’ers. Both radicals of the left and upstarts of the right think that there is not so much difference between the Bush Administration and the Obama Administration. The oil establishment and the financial services establishment could share breakfast of caviar and champagne, discussing whether their interests are better served by this president or the last one. Peasants with pitchforks are on no guest lists, whether they dress in denim or dacron. Despite partisan bickering, it is easy to feel that on the basic issues of security and capital the gap between competing establishments is small. I am struck by how little fundamental restructuring, hope and change has brought. The same powers will control health care, energy development, and financial services.
The fatal illusion of the Tea Party Movement is that America could . . .
Read more: The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street: Unhappy Warriors
By Minas Samatas, November 3rd, 2011 
The crisis here in Greece is not just financial, but also social and moral. People suffer, while the political elite and the establishment survive, untouched, although they are responsible for the current state bankruptcy. Given the history of the recent past, after the bloody civil war (1947-1949), during the police state (1949-1967) and the military dictatorship (1967-1974), and especially after the dictatorship up to the present, the crisis is not surprising. Greek tragedy has returned.
After the end of the dictatorship, democracy was restored and Greece joined the European Union (EU) and eventually the Euro-zone for political reasons, not based on economic fiscal criteria. As a consequence, the Greek people enjoyed thirty five years of stable democratic life and relative prosperity, albeit a false one. The state apparatus, dominated by the two political parties, the conservative “New Democracy” and the socialist “PASOK,” was thoroughly corrupt and mismanaged with a highly elaborate system of patronage. There was little real economic development. The economy was based on tourism, EU agricultural subsidies and other EU funds. Many Greek citizens, based on their political connections, were employed in the inflated public sector, and avoided their tax obligations, violated building regulations, and received permits and easy loans from the state controlled banks.
Through loans or from EU funding, these were good years for Greeks and their European partners, especially the Germans who took advantage of the great Greek party, i.e., Athens 2004 Olympics. Their outrageous cost and the ensuing corruption seriously contributed to the present debt crisis and the actual bankruptcy of the whole post dictatorial state and society. Beyond the Olympics, European and other multinational corporations have fully exploited Greece’s corrupt and disorganized system so as to multiply their profits in relation to other countries. The real party was in arms deals in the billions, which involved huge kickbacks. The Greek Parliament covered up the Siemens’ kickback scandal and several others. No one has been sentenced to jail. No one has been punished.
With the international fiscal crisis and aggressive international markets, the good . . .
Read more: The Crisis in Greece: Tragedy Without Catharsis
By Lisa Aslanian, November 2nd, 2011 
 This is the second of a two-part series on Eminem by Lisa Aslanian. For the first part, see White Rage: Eminem, the Bad Boy from Detroit. -Jeff
Eminem’s Relapse does not deliver a clean rise from the ashes, a smooth transition from high to sober — far from it. The album, which Eminem released after he came out of rehab for the second time, resolutely off drugs, challenges our assumptions about therapy, creativity and what exactly it means to be cured.
Eminem’s sobriety does not blunt the dark and dank isolation that characterizes the artist and his work (there is very little collaboration on the album), it sharpens it. The music and Eminem himself seem looser. The rhymes are still agile and dense, but the subject matter — child molestation, serial murder and exhausting digressions on being high — is even more profane and harder to take.
Critics tore the album apart. Many accused Eminem of trading in shock value and playing for laughs. A few called the work forgettable, the latest in nasty, a summer blockbuster. A critic for the LA Times expressed dismay that the rapper’s critique of therapy was not explicit enough (I have no idea what it means to accuse an artist of not delivering an obvious enough critique) but all critics conceded that Eminem remains an unparalleled linguistic contortionist, bending and twisting words (see reviews here, here, here, and here). He used his skill to chronicle addiction and beating addiction, including all of the filthy phantasms that haunt him along the way.
Relapse showcases his talent and his feel for unbridled truth, and — here is where you should pay attention — the album is linked to his past (immaturity, self-absorption and fear of failure) and gestures, briefly, toward his future, or a sense that maybe Eminem is, even outside of stardom, worthwhile.
As critics and listeners, we ought to say first what the album is, before we can consider what it is not. To get at (and get) the work, three . . .
Read more: White Rage and the Riffing Cure: An Analysis of Eminem’s Relapse
By Harrison Schultz, November 1st, 2011 
I first heard reports of police sending released “vagrants,” for lack of a better term, to Liberty Plaza from two protestors who showed up at my apartment early on the morning after they were arrested on 10/15/2011 at the Times Square rally. The media now seems to be aware of this phenomenon as well. Harry Siegel reported in The New York Daily News:
“And there’s the rub: The ‘model’ civilization that’s sprung up at Zuccotti is itself increasingly divided between the stakeholders in the nascent movement who feel invested in the emerging economic, social and cultural causes of ‘the 99%,’ and hangers-on, including a fast-growing contingent of lawbreakers and lowlifes, many of whom seem to have come to the park in the last week with the cynical encouragement of the NYPD.”
But why would anyone interpret the presence of “lowlifes” at Liberty Plaza as in any way representative of OWS or even as a shortcoming of OWS, when it is now common knowledge that the NYPD has been sending these people to Liberty. Like many in the general public, Siegel has been duped by the fully legal yet fully underhanded tactics of the NYPD. He criticizes OWS when he clearly should criticize the NYPD, not to mention the entire criminal justice system of this nation.
OWS is not the source of this controversial issue within OWS, our nation’s criminal justice system is. The cynical tactic on the part of the NYPD demonstrates yet again that our justice system does nothing to “reform” individuals such as these. It reveals that our justice system, contrary to its expected purposes, takes no responsibility for protecting the public from the non-reformed, seasoned “lowlifes” they send to live among the general public, as well as at Liberty Plaza.
The presence of “vagrants” and the problems that they create at Liberty Plaza are not indicative of a failure of the occupation. It clearly represents a spectacular failure of a significant part of the system the occupation is directed against.
|
Blogroll
On the Left
On the Right
|