Truthout Stories Sun, 25 Jan 2015 09:27:32 -0500 en-gb US Army Special Forces Officially Recruit for "Mission for God"

(Image Copyright 2015, Military Religious Freedom Foundation.)(Image Copyright 2015, Military Religious Freedom Foundation.) "That the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who, being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world and through all time."

(2nd paragraph, Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom, composed by Thomas Jefferson in 1777, enacted into Virginia law on January 16, 1786)

"Get this U.S. Army and get it well: The United States armed forces may surely fight and kill "for Country" and our legitimate national security interests. But our troops do NOT fight and kill for ANYONE'S "God" or related supernatural deity. In the preparation of this Op Ed, I exposed a number of senior active duty U.S. military leaders to the photo of this poster, including several active duty chaplains. To a man and woman, they were collectively ALL aghast that it was actually real and being used to lure young Americans into the Army's special forces."

C'mon, seriously? That freaking picture just says it ALL.

What an abysmal affront to "National Religious Freedom Day" which is to be celebrated tomorrow, January 16, 2015.

Having headed the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF) for nearly a decade, we've been exposed to all sorts of unholy, unconstitutional cocktails inextricably mixing the intoxicating aroma of fundamentalist religion (almost always a wretched thing called "Dominion Christianity") with the dense and deep-pocketed foundations of the State. However, even WE at MRFF were hardly prepared for the stunning, unconstitutional disgrace we confirmed from client reports as recently as yesterday.

There it was; an in-your-face, proselytizing, U.S. Army officially-approved ( recruiting poster on prominent display at an Armed Forces Career Center in Phoenix, Arizona. That outrageously ghastly graphic encapsulates precisely that which we've been ceaselessly calling the attention of the American people to for all this time. The poster astoundingly displays the shoulder tabs of the U.S. Special Forces (i.e. Green Berets), Rangers and Airborne troopers accompanied by the seethingly sectarian slogan "ON A MISSION FOR BOTH GOD AND COUNTRY."

(Wait a damn minute. Phoenix? Arizona? Army Special Forces? "Mission For......God"? My first thoughts were of Pat Tillman.)

Excuse me? "GOD and country?" Ahem, well, just WHOSE "god" might that be, U.S. Army?

Let me fairly go out on a limb here and gamble that it is neither the god of Islam nor the god(s) of Hinduism? No way it's Buddhist, Sikh, Shinto, Native American Spiritualist or The Flying Spaghetti Monster. I believe it's a very safe bet to presume that the Army is pretending to refer to the "Judeo-Christian" god, and by THAT worn out and duplicitously deceptive label, of course, I really mean what the Army REALLY means; only the "Christian" god, Jesus. Unfortunately, as the experts will tell you, there are literally multiple tens of thousands of distinctly separate denominations of Christianity in existence. So, once again, the question is begged as to exactly WHICH "God" the U.S. Army Special Forces are boldly, publicly and eagerly recruiting for?

The military chaplaincy's motto is "Pro Deo et Patria" (Latin, meaning "For God and Country") but, hey, that's for noncombatant chaplains. THIS revolting Army recruiting poster is VERY specifically designed for the elite Special Forces universe of Green Berets, Rangers, Delta Force, Airborne etc. These recruiting targets populate the far, far end of the Army universe, indeed light years away, from the recruitment of non-weapons carrying chaplains.

It has consistently been MRFF's experience through the many years that there is always a greater population of Constitution-breaching, fundamentalist/Dominionist Christians in the special forces of the DoD; Navy SEALs, Air Force PJs, USMC Force Recon and the Army's designated recruiting targets of this very poster. (Remember the international controversy about those VERY same words being spoken by the Navy SEAL who shot Bin Laden in conjunction with "Geronimo, Geronimo"?)

Even the Pope himself has decried on multiple occasions the reprehensible, medieval idea that one can kill in God's name – even going so far as to say that the concept, "simply, is blasphemy". Yet here we have the most lethal killing machine devised in the history of humankind proudly extolling the virtue of what can only be described as "Holy Wars."

This unconstitutional catastrophe comes at a time, no less, when world leaders as diverse as Mahmoud Abbas and Benjamin Netanyahu are marching together, arm in arm, in Paris and uniting behind the values of secular respect, religious tolerance, freedom of the press and all related basic civil rights. However, this incomprehensibly STUPID, and brazenly sectarian poster of American religious dominance at Marine Corps Recruiting Substation Paradise Valley universally destroys any credibility that the United States government is wholly devoted to these very basic democratic and human values.

Get this U.S. Army and get it well: The United States armed forces may surely fight and kill "for Country" and our legitimate national security interests. But our troops do NOT fight and kill for ANYONE'S "God" or related supernatural deity. In the preparation of this Op Ed, I exposed a number of senior active duty U.S. military leaders to the photo of this poster, including several active duty chaplains. To a man and woman, they were collectively ALL aghast that it was actually real and being used to lure young Americans into the Army's special forces.

In fact, this Poster of Shame lends incredible and irrefutable credence to what MRFF has been insisting from our very inception, which is that there exists a brutal, sectarian, Christian fundamentalist reign exercised within the United States Armed Forces, constituting a de facto Dominionist fifth column. In fact, it's often so brazen that it's not even very "fifth columny" anymore. Facts have borne out this assertion, in absolute spades. For example, we've seen the distribution of millenarian Left Behind video games to active-duty troops serving in Iraq. We've heard the anguished cries of servicemembers forced to attend hokey "Christian Rock" concerts on pain of "lockdown" and other forms of military retribution. We've seen the so-called "Jesus Rifles" which MRFF blew the whistle on, where Trijicon riflescopes were inscribed with specific New Testament Bible references engraved into the metal casings on nearly a million high-powered rifle sights. Oh, and if "Jesus Rifles" isn't enough of a bafflingly bizarre and contemptible example, there was the "Jesus Loves Nukes" mandatory indoctrination course that was used to train USAF nuclear missile launch officers at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. Time and time again, we've been forced to go toe-to-toe with the United States Air Force Academy administration over its practically countless, savage offenses against the United States Constitution. Likewise, a recurring battle of ours has been one waged against the persistent usage of "Crusader" symbolism, evoking the brutal Western Christian colonization and merciless subjugation of Muslim nations during the Middle Ages. Our foundation submitted a very comprehensive accompanying document when I testified before the House Armed Services Committee in the United States Congress this past November. Our MRFF testimony unequivocally shows that all of the unconstitutional wickedness above is just a mere taste, indeed only the nuanced tip of a very large and exceedingly precarious iceberg of colossal, national security dangers.

Does our aggressive fight against fundamentalist Christian extremism, triumphalism and supremacy in our nation's armed forces, as so vividly displayed in this official Army recruiting poster, infuriate those who promote such bloody rancor and discord? Always and of course. Comes with the territory. You can decide whether it's worth it because we at MRFF already have decided that it most assuredly IS.

Yet here we find ourselves, ignominiously once again, faced with a disgracefully sectarian message of religious exceptionalism bearing the official U.S. Army stamp of approval. This painfully pathetic poster will no doubt serve, generally, as a red flag of limitless propaganda and, more specifically, as a recruiting bonanza of unbridled proportions for precisely those villains whom the world has united against in Paris, i.e. the Salafi-Jihadists such as Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Islamic State, and myriad other backwards fundamentalists. As if immeasurably emboldening our Islamic enemies wasn't bad enough, this deplorable poster will enrage our Islamic allies and eviscerate our own service members' unit cohesion, good order, morale, discipline and military readiness.

Long story short, the poster at the Phoenix armed forces recruitment hub is an absolutely abominable slap in the face of everyone who's ever taken the time to digest, understand, and swear the servicemembers' sacred oath to protect and defend the United States Constitution, let alone those who made the ultimate sacrifice for the values, rights, and protections contained therein.

And speaking of "ultimate sacrifice," I wonder what Pat Tillman would have said about that stinking poster of unconstitutional malfeasance in his beloved city and state of Phoenix, Arizona? Somehow, I don't think he'd agree that he was on a "Mission For God" when he courageously gave his life for his country in combat as a proud member of the U.S. Army's Special Forces.

Unfortunately, on the other hand, what might another Arizonan do about this; Senator John McCain, the brand new Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee? Don't hold your breath for him to lift a finger of even tepid protest against this recruiting poster. If anything, he'd likely applaud.

The world trembles in shock over the horrific crimes of murderous, fundamentalist, Islamic religiosity in one part of the globe. What of our own House here in America? Here in the States, we should spare no effort to aggressively investigate and ferociously uproot the vast legions of fundamentalist (Dominionist), Christian extremists who seek to smother our OWN secular, constitutional, American republic in the blood-drenched, theocratic "Crusader" memes of a once dark and distant era.

Sadly today, given our enormous arsenal of WMDs, even darker. And not so "distant" anymore.

Opinion Sat, 24 Jan 2015 13:44:12 -0500
Fighting Extremism With Schools, Not Guns

Karachi - As a wave of outrage, crossing Pakistan's national borders, continues a month after the Dec. 16 attack on a school in the northern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, some citizens are turning away from collective expressions of anger, and beginning the hard work of building grassroots alternatives to terrorism and militancy.

While many millions of people are lashing out at the Taliban for going on a bloody rampage in a school in the province's capital, Peshawar, killing 141 people including 132 uniformed children in what is being billed as the group's single deadliest attack to date, The Citizens Foundation (TFC), a local non-profit, has reacted quite differently.

Rather than join the chorus calling for stiff penalties for the attackers, it busied itself with a pledge to build 141 Schools for Peace, one in the name of each person who lost their life on that terrible day.

"We dedicate this effort to the children of Pakistan, their right to education and their dreams of a peaceful future," Syed Asaad Ayub Ahmad, CEO of TCF, said in an email launching the campaign.

"With the formidable challenges facing the nation, we passionately believe that only education has the power to enlighten minds, instil citizenship and unleash the potential of every Pakistani," he added.

In their war against western, secular education, which the group has denounced as "un-Islamic", the Pakistan Taliban have destroyed over 838 schools between 2009 and 2012, claimed responsibility for the near-fatal shooting of teenaged education advocate Malala Yousafzai and issued numerous edicts against the right of women and girls to receive proper schooling.

In their latest assault on education, nine militants went on an eight-hour-long killing spree, throwing hand grenades into the teeming school premises and firing indiscriminately at any moving target. They claim the attack was a response to the military operation aimed at rooting out the Taliban currently underway in North Waziristan, a tribal region bordering Afghanistan.

While armed groups and government forces answer violence with more of the same, the active citizens who comprise TCF want to shift focus away from bloodshed and onto longer-term solutions for the future of this deeply troubled country.

The charity, which began in 1995, has completed 1,000 school 'units', typically a primary or secondary institution capable of accommodating up to 180 pupils, all built from scratch in the most impoverished areas of some 100 towns and cities across Pakistan.

The 7,700 teachers employed by the NGO go through a rigorous training programme before placement, and the organisation maintains a strict 50:50 male-female ratio for the 145,000 students who are now benefitting from a free education, according to TCF Vice President Zia Akhter Abbas.

In a country where 25.02 million school-aged children – of which 13.7 million (55 percent) are girls – do not receive any form of education, experts say TCF's initiative may well act as a game changer in the years to come, especially given that the government spends just 2.1 percent of its GDP on education.

"Our job is to ensure that wherever we have our schools, there are no out-of-school children, especially girls," Abbas told IPS. "We believe the change in society will come automatically once these educated and enlightened children grow up into responsible adults."

He added that the schools are designed to "serve as a beacon of light restricting the advance of extremism in our society."

The project has received widespread support from a broad spectrum of Pakistani society. Twenty-four-year-old Usman Riaz, a student at the Berklee College of Music in Boston who recently donated the proceeds of his jam-packed concerts in Karachi to TCF's efforts, says the Schools for Peace are a "wonderful way to honor the innocent victims".

But it will take more than one-off charitable donations to make the scheme a reality. It costs about 15 million rupees (148,000 dollars) to build and equip each new school, so the total bill for all 141 institutions stands at some 21 million dollars.

With a track record of building 40-50 schools a year, however, the NGO is confident that it will honor its pledge within three years.

Combating extremism

Besides immortalizing the victims of the Taliban's attack, experts here say that shifting the focus away from terrorism and onto education will help combat a growing pulse of religious extremism.

The prominent Pakistani educationist and rights activist A.H. Nayyar told IPS that it is crucial for the country to begin educating children who would otherwise be turned into "fodder for extremists".

In fact, part of the government's 20-point National Action Plan – agreed upon by all political parties dedicated to completely eradicating terrorism – includes plans to register and regulate all seminaries, known here as madrassas, in a bid to combat extremism at its root.

With thousands of such religious institutions springing up across the country to fill a void in the school systems, policy-makers are concerned about the indoctrination of children at a young age, with distorted interpretations of religious texts and the teaching of intolerance playing a major role in these schools.

Some sources say that between two and three million students are enrolled at the nearly 20,000 madrassas spread across Pakistan; others say this is a conservative estimate.

While there is some talk about bringing these institutions under the umbrella of the public school system, experts like Nayyar believe this will do little to combat the "forcible teaching of [...] false and distorted history, excessive emphasis on Islamic teachings to the extent of including them in textbooks of all the subjects, explicit teaching of jihad and militancy, hate material against other nations, peoples of other faiths, etc, [and] excessive glorification of the military and wars."

Nayyar and other independent scholars have been at the forefront of calling for an overhaul of the public school curriculum, which they believe is at odds with the goals of a modern, progressive nation.

But until policy-makers and politicians jump on the bandwagon, independent efforts like the work of TCF will lead the way.

News Sat, 24 Jan 2015 13:22:16 -0500
Global Blackness

The following remarks were read at the Black Life Matters conference in Tucson, Arizona, on January 15, 2015.

Good morning, everyone. I'm sorry I couldn't be with you in person but am very glad to be part of this conversation.

My message here today is a message to the Black grassroots. I know there was some discussion about why this conference is taking place in the halls of a university or in Arizona. It may not be the best place to deliver a message to the Black grassroots but circumstances created this space and I know the organizers are committed to the conversations going beyond the halls of academia, so I share these comments in the hope that they reach Black people on a move.

Plainly, what I want to say is that we, Black people everywhere, see you and we are with you in the struggle.

It has been, for Africans outside of the U.S, significant and joyful to see the movement for Black life and dignity take hold, grow and capture the imagination in this moment there. The most recent uprisings and mass actions across the U.S have been the culmination, as I see it, of mobilizations and organizing that has been ongoing for decades and that were visible in response to the lack of government action to the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, to the case of the Jena 6, of Troy Davis, of Trayvon Martin, and now of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, as well as in the attempts to build viable alternatives as in Cooperation Jackson. This moment in the movement has been triggered by the revolts in Ferguson but the movement is a movement for Black lives, Black life[i], Black dignity and Black self-determination in the tradition of Black liberation struggles. Understood in this continuum, it has been wonderful to hear Assata Shakur present in the chants in Ferguson "it is our duty to fight for our freedom, it is our duty to win," and indeed in this movement we must call out the names and organize to secure the freedom of the political prisoners that remain captive in U.S prisons for also demanding and defending Black life and dignity: Sundiata Acoli, Mutulu Shakur, Robert Seth Hayes, Albert Woodfox, Mumia Abu Jamal, Herman Bell, among too many others.

There has been an outpouring of global solidarity for the Black movement in the U.S by Black people in, to name but a few, South Africa, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Colombia, Brazil, the UK, France and from non-Black people who are also fighting against imperialism the world over, including in Palestine, where the historic solidarity between African and Palestinian peoples continues. Black people globally are claiming 'we are Ferguson' as an understanding of our linked fate and common oppression and in many cases because the manifestations of global anti-Black violence are so similar. In South Africa, for example, a booming prison industrial complex and accompanying State and non-State so-called 'security' apparatus is being established to protect capital from economically oppressed Black people (rather than protecting the masses of Black people from the violence of capitalism). In the U.S., a Black person is killed every 28 hours, and in Brazil approximately 118 Black people are murdered every day in what Afro-Brazilians are calling a silent genocide. One hundred and eighteen Black people are murdered every day!

The outpouring has highlighted not only the linked fate between us but also the asymmetry of how far the cries of indignation of les damnés carry. We have heard the cries of Ferguson echo across the globe. And yet, wherever we are we must listen hard to hear the resistance in Burkina Faso, in Guinea, in Colombia, in Sudan, in the DRC. To remix CLR James, the only place where Black people do not revolt is in the pages of the capitalist media. Just as anti-Black oppression is global and takes many forms that are embedded in systems of white supremacist, hetero-patriarchal, ableist, capitalism, resistance by Black people is also global and it is all of our duties to ensure that we are seeing, listening, being inspired by one another and living our solidarity with one another.

In Colombia, Black women have been in permanent assembly in the offices of the Ministry of Interior of Giralda since November 27 as part of their fight to protect their lands and territories from mining, to end the war on their bodies and to resist displacement. In Madagascar, peasants and farmers resisted massive land grabs, their uprisings leading to an overturn of government. However, their gains are being reversed in the name of liberal democracy. More broadly, the fight against land grab in Africa is a fight for Black life and survival, for self-determined development and is a global fight for the future that we all need to be paying attention to. With the collaboration of African governments and elites, about 20 million hectares of farmland has been grabbed since 2008, using the all too familiar justification that the land is unoccupied or unused. The land claims of pastoralists, women, peasants and small-scale farmers are marginalized from formal land rights processes and access to law and institutions by the colonial framework of land ownership that favors markets and businesses. Land use that is non-commercial, including medicinal, spiritual or grazing for pasture, is ignored to make way for large-scale, high-yield 'production.' Biodiversity is being patented, flora and fauna commodified, and water grabbed – this is no longer the prediction of great writers like Octavia Butler but the terrifying reality. Significant public relations efforts, by, amongst others, Bill Gates in partnership with Monsanto, to persuade governments and farmers that GMOs offer the solution to food insecurity are obscuring the market-dependency that this and mono-cropping would create for already market-marginalized small scale farmers on the continent. The sustainable future that global capitalism is envisioning and aggressively creating is one in which technology beats nature to maintain the luxury of a few. Black lives and lands remain commodities and disposable. Despite the threat, communities across Africa have been resisting land grab, and women have been organizing beyond borders to claim 'we are the solution' to sustainable food production.

Globally, women and queer folk are resisting and building alternatives at the intersections of patriarchy and capitalism. In the U.S, I have been dismayed by the erasure of Black cis and trans women's lives even within the Black Lives Matter movement. Where was the mass mobilization when Tanisha Anderson was murdered by the police? Where was the mass mobilization when Deshawnda Bradley was killed? Where is the movement for the sixty four thousand Black women that are missing in the U.S? On the continent of Africa, we witness the attempt to disappear Black women and queer lives and life from the very narrative of African identity. Armed with imported religious fundamentalisms, the promise of capitalist prosperity and the necessity for diversion and division, an alliance has formed to enshrine patriarchy, heteropatriarchy and transphobia into the fabric of Africa. It's important that we not fall into the trap of asserting that oppression and oppressive practices are a manifestation of African culture or tradition. As Amilcar Cabral reminds us, culture is dynamic and perpetually being made. Culture can be used as a tool for liberation or for the purposes of domination: the choice sits with us. Patriarchy is not my culture even if the system of patriarchy dominates the practices of those around me. I choose the traditions of freedom, respect, love and self-determination that are just as much embedded in the history and practices of my people. Women and Queer Africans are choosing and creating an Africa outside of the bounds of patriarchy by mobilizing in Soweto for Pride, through hundreds of people taking to the streets of Nairobi in miniskirts when a woman was stripped naked for being indecently dressed and by demanding an end to violence against sex workers under the banner of Black lives matter.

Black people came out globally to 'Bring Back our Girls' after over three hundred children were abducted from school in Chibok, Nigeria in May. The response of the Chibok community and the Nigerian women's movement sounded the alarm and spurred global solidarity from Philadelphia to London, Cairo to Dakar and Johannesburg. But our girls are still missing eight months later and many more Black lives have since been lost to the proxy battlegrounds of a global war that has been raging in a barrage of silence. When the demand rang out that our three hundred abducted Black girls be brought back, the outcome was more U.S troops with 'boots on the ground' in Africa. Militarized responses from the U.S are not new, but the humanitarian justification for U.S military infiltration into Africa is nonetheless duplicitous, be it in the response to 'Bring Back our Girls' or to the Ebola epidemic that has taken nearly eight thousand lives in Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia. Ebola became an epidemic in Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia and not in Spain, the United States or the UK, where there were also cases, because of systemic and entrenched impoverishment and inequalities: in other words, the differential effects of Ebola are directly tied to capitalist systems of exploitation. And it is capitalist interests that have maintained the attention of pharmaceutical corporations backed by the U.S military in the Ebola crisis, not human solidarity. Because Black lives matter we must build ways of being that disrupt imperialism, patriarchy, militarism, disrupt the entire system and sustain Black life.

Despite the unprecedented Black presence in the U.S administration, the murder, mass incarceration and impoverishment of Black people continues. Similarly, for the last fifty years, African states have had African administrations that do not serve the interests of African peoples. When there is no justice, there is just us. In this moment when the attention of so many is on the Black liberation movement in the U.S., there is significant political mileage in claiming ally-ship with the movement – the woodworks will be full. But genuine solidarity requires 'fighting on different terrains toward the same objectives'[ii], co-conspiracy rather than empty declarations of ally-ship. Co-conspiracy will require long-term commitment, introspection, and practice. It might start with a hashtag or wearing a t-shirt, it certainly can't end there.

I have seen, admittedly with some glee, consternation amongst sections of the Black community in the U.S around the organizing tactics and methods of the mobilizations for Black life and lives. During the uprisings in Tunisia, a communist comrade recounted that every evening he wrote an analysis of what was happening and how it was happening. Every morning he tore up his analysis. In only a few hours, what he understood felt no longer applicable, relevant or even enough to understand what was happening. The people were creating revolution. Not from a text book, the red book or any other book, but from their own experience and knowledge. Learning in action was the order of the day and a leaderfull[iii] not leaderless, movement was being created in the image of the aspirations of the people involved. It was definitely not a perfect uprising, there have been significant losses over the last four years but revolution is a process and without a doubt the uprisings changed Tunisia, Africa and the rest of the world in significant ways. The uprisings in the U.S feel similar in that they are grounded on years of organizing and part of a transformative process, they are leaderfull not leaderless and they have swept the old guard to the side to make room for the articulation of the peoples' aspirations. In Tunisia, the call was for 'bread and dignity,' in the U.S it is for Black lives. Both have clear affirmations and both affirmations challenge the economic, social, and political global order in their demand.

The systems of oppression that we challenge locally are global and we have a global Black village. We have a duty not only to indict the system, to shut it down, but to build new ways of being, doing and sustaining. We must become, in the words of Assata, weapons of mass construction. Indeed, we have nothing to lose but our chains.


[i] Fred Moten makes an important distinction here on Black lives and Black life: "We need to understand what the state is defending itself from and I think that in this respect, the particular instances of Michael Brown's murder and Eric Garner's murder are worth paying some attention to. Because what the drone, Darren Wilson, shot into that day was insurgent Black life walking down the street. I don't think he meant to violate the individual personhood of Michael Brown, he was shooting at mobile Black sociality walking down the street in a way that he understood implicitly constituted a threat to the order he represents and that he is sworn to protect. Eric Garner on the every day basis initiated a new alternative kind of market place, another mode of social life. That's what they killed, ok? So when we say that Black lives matter I think what we do sometimes is obscure the fact that it's in fact Black life that matters. That insurgent Black social life still constitutes a profound threat to the already existing order of things." See more:

[ii] Samora Machel

[iii] "The only leadership I can respect is one that enables every man and woman to be his and her own leader" June Jordan, Civil Wars

Opinion Sat, 24 Jan 2015 12:25:56 -0500
Obama Tips His Hat to FDR

Whatever happens over the next two years, you can bet that 22nd century school children will know more about President Barack Obama than kids learn today about, say, Calvin Coolidge. He made history just by being the first non-white man to occupy the White House.

What else will tomorrow's kids learn about Obama?

Sure, the Affordable Care Act has delivered health coverage to millions of Americans who needed it, shrinking the uninsured rate to less than 13 percent. Yet that law didn't heal enough of what ails the nation's health care system. Compared with Social Security, one of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's greatest achievements, it's no big deal.

The ACA's shortcomings are symptomatic of the first six years of Obama's presidency. He doled out one concession after another to ungrateful Republican lawmakers.

Then the drubbing Democrats took in November's midterm elections knocked some sense into him. Or he realized that he had nothing to lose. Or maybe he traveled in a time machine.

For now, Obama is channeling his inner FDR. What would FDR say about today's growing inequality and stagnant wages? Something like this:

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much," Roosevelt declared during his second inaugural address. "It is whether we provide enough for those who have too little."

Sound familiar? Obama echoed that sentiment in his State of the Union address when he asked:

"Will we accept an economy where only a few of us do spectacularly well, or will we commit ourselves to an economy that generates rising incomes and chances for everyone who makes the effort?"

As FDR declared in 1937: "Government is competent when all who compose it work as trustees for the whole people."

Obama's says this more conversationally: "This country does best when everyone gets their fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules."

With his bundle of proposed tax tweaks slated to raise an estimated $320 billion in revenue and bring relief to millions of exhausted American families, Obama's "middle class economics" is forcing GOP lawmakers into an awkward corner.

Take Mitt Romney. He derided the public's growing concern about inequality as "envy" and "class warfare" during his losing 2012 presidential campaign.

Now that he's mulling another White House bid, Romney sounds different.

"Under President Obama, the rich have gotten richer, income inequality has gotten worse, and there are more people in poverty in American than ever before," the once and future candidate declared at a recent Republican gathering in San Diego.

It will take more than mouthing the word "inequality" to rebrand Mr. 47 percent.

Meanwhile, ponder FDR's words: "In our personal ambitions we are individualists. But in our seeking for economic and political progress as a nation, we all go up, or else we all go down, as one people."

And another thing Obama just said:

"Will we allow ourselves to be sorted into factions and turned against one another  —  or will we recapture the sense of common purpose that has always propelled America forward?"

As a progressive, I'm still disappointed. I can't stomach Obama's addiction to drones, domestic snooping, and crummy trade deals. I wish he'd spoken more directly about enacting stronger gun laws and locking up fewer Americans  —  and uttered the word "racism."

As an environmentalist, I appreciate his tough climate talk. But I wish he'd fall out of love with fracking and start opposing the construction of new nuclear reactors.

Yet most modern progressives revere Roosevelt despite the creation of nuclear bombs and the internment of Japanese Americans on his watch.

And instead of being remembered for being the first president in a wheelchair, FDR is that guy who left the Depression in the dust.

That's why it's good to see that after years of riling his base instead of rallying it, Obama is rising above Washington's gridlock.

He has nothing to fear except...well, you know.

Opinion Sat, 24 Jan 2015 12:05:26 -0500
The Spectacle of Illiteracy and the Crisis of Democracy

C. Wright Mills argued 50 years ago that one important measure of the demise of vibrant democracy and the corresponding impoverishment of political life can be found in the increasing inability of a society to translate private troubles to broader public issues.

The collapse of journalistic standards finds its counterpart in the rise of civic illiteracy. (Photo: Steve Rhodes)The collapse of journalistic standards finds its counterpart in the rise of civic illiteracy. (Photo: Steve Rhodes)

Want to challenge injustice and make real change happen? That’s Truthout’s goal - support our work with a donation today!

This is an excerpt from Zombie Politics and Culture in the Age of Casino Capitalism, by Henry Giroux.

C. Wright Mills argued 50 years ago that one important measure of the demise of vibrant democracy and the corresponding impoverishment of political life can be found in the increasing inability of a society to translate private troubles to broader public issues. [1] This is an issue that both characterizes and threatens any viable notion of democracy in the United States in the current historical moment. In an alleged post-racist democracy, the image of the public sphere with its appeal to dialogue and shared responsibility has given way to the spectacle of unbridled intolerance, ignorance, seething private fears, unchecked anger and the decoupling of reason from freedom. Increasingly, as witnessed in the utter disrespect and not-so-latent racism expressed by Joe Wilson, the Republican congressman from South Carolina, who shouted "you lie!" during President Obama's address on health care, the obligation to listen, respect the views of others and engage in a literate exchange is increasingly reduced to the highly spectacular wed embrace of an infantile emotionalism. This is an emotionalism that is made for television. It is perfectly suited for emptying the language of public life of all substantive content, reduced in the end to a playground for hawking commodities, promoting celebrity culture and enacting the spectacle of right-wing fantasies fueled by the fear that the public sphere as an exclusive club for white male Christians is in danger of collapsing. For some critics, those who carry guns to rallies or claim Obama is a Muslim and not a bona fide citizen of the United States are simply representative of an extremist fringe, that gets far more publicity from the mainstream media than they deserve. Of course this is understandable, given that the media's desire for balance and objective news is not just disingenuous but relinquishes any sense of ethical responsibility by failing to make a distinction between an informed argument and an unsubstantiated opinion. Witness the racist hysteria unleashed by so many Americans and the media over the building of an Islamic cultural center near ground zero.

The collapse of journalistic standards finds its counterpart in the rise of civic illiteracy. An African-American president certainly makes the Rush Limbaughs of the world even more irrational than they already are, just as the lunatic fringe seems to be able to define itself only through a mode of thought whose first principle is to disclaim logic itself. But I think this dismissal is too easy. What this decline in civility, the emergence of mob behavior and the utter blurring in the media between a truth and a lie suggest is that we have become one of the most illiterate nations on the planet. I don't mean illiterate in the sense of not being able to read, though we have far too many people who are functionally illiterate in a so-called advanced democracy, a point that writers such as Chris Hedges, Susan Jacoby and the late Richard Hofstadter made clear in their informative books on the rise of anti-intellectualism in American life. [2] I am talking about a different species of ignorance and anti-intellectualism. Illiterate in this instance refers to the inability on the part of much of the American public to grasp private troubles and the meaning of the self in relation to larger public problems and social relations. It is a form of illiteracy that points less to the lack of technical skills and the absence of certain competencies than to a deficit in the realms of politics — one that subverts both critical thinking and the notion of literacy as both critical interpretation and the possibility of intervention in the world. This type of illiteracy is not only incapable of dealing with complex and contested questions, it is also an excuse for glorifying the principle of self-interest as a paradigm for understanding politics. This is a form of illiteracy marked by the inability to see outside of the realm of the privatized self, an illiteracy in which the act of translation withers, reduced to a relic of another age. The United States is a country that is increasingly defined by a civic deficit, a chronic and deadly form of civic illiteracy that points to the failure of both its educational system and the growing ability of anti-democratic forces to use the educational force of the culture to promote the new illiteracy. As this widespread illiteracy has come to dominate American culture, we have moved from a culture of questioning to a culture of shouting and in doing so have restaged politics and power in both unproductive and anti-democratic ways.

Think of the forces at work in the larger culture that work overtime to situate us within a privatized world of fantasy, spectacle and resentment that is entirely removed from larger social problems and public concerns. For instance, corporate culture, with its unrelenting commercials, carpet-bombs our audio and visual fields with the message that the only viable way to define ourselves is to shop and consume in an orgy of private pursuits. Popular culture traps us in the privatized universe of celebrity culture, urging us to define ourselves through the often empty and trivialized and highly individualized interests of celebrities. Pharmaceutical companies urge us to deal with our problems, largely produced by economic and political forces out of our control, by taking a drug, one that will both chill us out and increase their profit margins. (This has now become an educational measure applied increasingly and indiscriminately to children in our schools.) Pop psychologists urge us to simply think positively, give each other hugs and pull ourselves up by the bootstraps while also insisting that those who confront reality and its mix of complex social issues are, as Chris Hedges points out, defeatists, a negative force that inhibits "our inner essence and power." [3] There is also the culture of militarization, which permeates all aspects of our lives — from our classrooms and the screen culture of reality television to the barrage of violent video games and the blood letting in sports such as popular wrestling — endlessly at work in developing modes of masculinity that celebrate toughness, violence, cruelty, moral indifference and misogyny.

All of these forces, whose educational influence should never be underestimated, constitute a new type of illiteracy, a kind of civic illiteracy in which it becomes increasingly impossible to connect the everyday problems that people face with larger social forces — thus depoliticizing their own sense of agency and making politics itself an empty gesture. Is it any wonder that politics is now mediated through a spectacle of anger, violence, humiliation and rage that mimics the likes of The Jerry Springer Show? It is not that we have become a society of the spectacle — though that is partly true — but that we have fallen prey to a new kind of illiteracy in which the distinction between illusion and reality is lost, just as the ability to experience our feelings of discontent and our fears of uncertainty are reduced to private troubles, paralyzing us in a sea of resentment waiting to be manipulated by extremists extending from religious fanatics to right-wing radio hosts. This is a prescription for a kind of rage that looks for easy answers, demands a heightened emotional release and resents any attempts to think through the connection between our individual woes and any number of larger social forces. A short list of such forces would include an unchecked system of finance, the anti-democratic power of the corporate state, the rise of multinationals and the destruction of the manufacturing base and the privatization of public schooling along with its devaluing of education as a public good. As the public collapses into the personal, the personal becomes "the only politics there is, the only politics with a tangible referent or emotional valence," [4] the formative educational and political conditions that make a democracy possible begin to disappear. Under such circumstances, the language of the social is either devalued, pathologized or ignored and all dreams of the future are now modeled around the narcissistic, privatized and self-indulgent needs of consumer and celebrity culture and the dictates of the allegedly free market. How else to explain the rage against big government but barely a peep against the rule of big corporations who increasingly control not only the government but almost every vital aspect of our lives from health care to the quality of our environment?
Stripped of its ethical and political importance, the public has been largely reduced to a space where private interests are displayed and the social order increasingly mimics a giant Dr. Phil show where notions of the public register as simply a conglomeration of private woes, tasks, conversations and problems. Most importantly, as the very idea of the social collapses into an utterly privatized discourse, everyday politics is decoupled from its democratic moorings and it becomes more difficult for people to develop a vocabulary for understanding how private problems and public issues constitute the very lifeblood of a vibrant politics and democracy itself. This is worth repeating. Emptied of any substantial content, democracy appears imperiled as individuals are unable to translate their privately suffered misery into genuine public debate, social concerns and collective action. This is a form of illiteracy that is no longer marginal to American society but is increasingly becoming one of its defining and more frightening features.

The raging narcissism that seems to shape every ad, film, television program and appeal now mediated through the power of the corporate state and consumer society is not merely a clinical and individual problem. It is the basis for a new kind of mass illiteracy that is endlessly reproduced through the venues of a number of anti-democratic institutions and forces that eschew critical debate, self-reflection, critical analysis and certainly modes of dissent that call the totality of a society into question. As American society becomes incapable of questioning itself, the new illiteracy parades as just its opposite. We are told that education is about learning how to take tests rather than learning how to think critically. We are told that anything that does not make us feel good is not worth bothering with. We are told that character is the only measure of how to judge people who are the victims of larger social forces that are mostly out of their control. When millions of people are unemployed, tossed out of their homes, homeless or living in poverty, the language of character, pop psychology, consumerism and celebrity culture are more than a diversion: they are fundamental to the misdirected anger, mob rule and illiteracy that frames the screaming, racism, lack of civility and often sheer and legitimate desperation.

Authoritarianism is often abetted by an inability of the public to grasp how questions of power, politics, history and public consciousness are mediated at the interface of private issues and public concerns. The ability to translate private problems into social considerations is fundamental to what it means to reactivate political sensibilities and conceive of ourselves as critical citizens, engaged public intellectuals and social agents. Just as an obsession with the private is at odds with a politics informed by public consciousness, it also burdens politics by stripping it of the kind of political imagination and collective hope necessary for a viable notion of meaning, hope and political agency.

Civic literacy is about more than enlarging the realm of critique and affirming the social. It is also about public responsibility, the struggle over democratic public life and the importance of critical education in a democratic society. The US government is more than willing to invest billions in wars, lead the world in arms sales and give trillions in tax cuts to the ultra-rich but barely acknowledges the need to invest in those educational and civic institutions from schools to the arts to a massive jobs creation program — that enable individuals to be border crossers, capable of connecting the private and the public as part of a more vibrant understanding of politics, identity, agency and governance. The new illiteracy is not the cause of our problems, which are deeply rooted in larger social, economic and political forces that have marked the emergence of the corporate state, a deadly form of racism parading as color blindness and a ruthless market fundamentalism since the 1970s, but it is a precondition for locking individuals into a system in which they are complicitous in their own exploitation, disposability and potential death.

The new illiteracy is about more than not knowing how to read the book or the word; it is about not knowing how to read the world. The challenge it poses in a democracy is one of both learning how to reclaim literacy so as to be able to narrate oneself and the world from a position of agency. But it is also about unlearning those modes of learning that internalize modes of ignorance based on the concerted refusal to know, be self-reflective and act with principled dignity. It is a problem as serious as any we have ever faced in the United States. At the core of any viable democratic politics is the ability to question the assumptions central to an imagined democracy. This is not merely a political issue but an educational issue, one that points to the need for modes of civic education that provide the knowledge and competencies for young and old alike to raise important questions about what education and literacy itself should accomplish in a democracy. [5] This is not an issue we can ignore too much longer.


1. C. Wright Mills, The Sociological Imagination (New York: Oxford University Press, 1959). See also the brilliant Richard Sennett, The Fall of Public Man (New York; W.W. Norton, 1992).

2. Richard Hofstadter, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life (New York: Vintage, 1966); Susan Jacoby, The Age of American Unreason (New York: Vintage, 2009); Chris Hedges, Empire of Illusion (Toronto: Knopf Canada, 2009).

3. Chris Hedges, "Celebrity Culture and the Obama Brand," Tikkun (January/February 2010).

4. Jean Comaroff and John L. Comaroff, "Millennial Capitalism: First Thoughts on a Second Coming," Public Culture 12:2 (2000), pp. 305-306.

5. Zygmunt Bauman, "Introduction," Society under Siege (Maiden, MA: Blackwell, 2002), p. 170.

Opinion Sat, 24 Jan 2015 11:48:22 -0500
EPA Sued Over Disclosure Rules for Toxic Pollution From Drilling and Fracking

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has been sued over toxic chemicals released into the air, water and land by the oil and gas industry, a coalition of nine environmental and open government groups announced recently.

The extraction of oil and gas releases more toxic pollution than any other industry except for power plants, according to the EPA's own estimates, the coalition, which filed the lawsuit this morning in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, noted.

But the industry has thus far escaped federal rules that, for over the past two decades, have required other major polluters to disclose the type and amount of toxic chemicals they release or dispose. The Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) is a federal pollution database, established under the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act, and can be used by first-responders in the event of a crisis as well as members of the general public.

"People deserve to know what toxic chemicals are being used near their homes, schools and hospitals," said Matthew McFeeley, staff attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council.

"For too long, the oil and gas industry has been exempt from rules that require other industries to disclose the chemicals they are using, so communities and workers can better understand the risks. It's high time for EPA to stop giving the oil and gas industry special treatment."

Roughly one in four Americans live within a mile of an oil or gas well, making the air emissions from the industry a matter of local concern to a fast-growing number of families.

Adam Kron, lead attorney in the lawsuit, told DeSmog that, given emerging evidence linking proximity to gas wells to health issues like respiratory disorders or skin conditions, residents in shale fields could find TRI data useful. "For those people, they might not know what's causing it, they might not know what's being released," he said. "You can bring the print-out to your doctor," he added.

"The information is just vital to people who live near those sites," Mr. Kron added.

The lawsuit follows a petition that the coalition of groups filed in October 2012, requesting that EPA require the oil and gas industry to participate in the TRI.

"In 2012," the groups, noted, "EPA estimated that the oil and gas extraction industry emits at least 127,000 tons of hazardous air pollutants every year, all of which are TRI-listed toxic chemicals. These include benzene (a carcinogen), xylenes (which can cause headaches, fatigue, and cardiovascular problems), and hydrogen sulfide (which can cause nausea, coughing, and in high concentrations, rapid death)."

There are signs that the true levels of toxic releases are higher than EPA's official estimates. Air emission data, gathered by the Environmental Integrity Project from six major drilling states (Colorado, Louisiana, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wyoming) showed a combined 8.5 million tons of TRI-listed toxic chemicals released annually, a report by the group released in January 2014 concluded.

That review focused on 395 oil and gas extraction facilities, which each released over 10,000 pounds of at least one toxic chemical. Roughly half of those sites had emitted over 10,000 pounds, the normal threshold for TRI reporting, for two or more years in a row, and over half were in Texas. These high-polluting sites included compressor stations for natural gas pipelines, processing plants, wastewater processing facilities, and emissions also spew from drilling and fracking operations, the groups found.

"Our research shows that many of these oil and gas plants emit tens of thousands of pounds of toxic pollutants every year, but that data was hard to get and incomplete," said Eric Schaeffer, executive director of the Environmental Integrity Project when research results were announced last year. "We need this industry to report that pollution to the Toxics Release Inventory where everyone can see it –– just like chemical plants and other facilities have done for more than 20 years."

Even using the EPA's more conservative estimates, the amount of toxic pollution emitted by the oil and gas industry is enormous. "EPA estimates that the industry emits at least 127,000 tons of hazardous air pollutants every year, including benzene, xylenes, and hydrogen sulfide," noted a 2012 EPA fact sheet. "This is more than any TRI-reporting industry except electric utilities, and equivalent to thirty percent of the total release of hazardous air pollutants reported to the TRI for 2010."

The organizations the Environmental Integrity Project is representing in the lawsuit include the Center for Effective Government (formerly known as OMB Watch), the Natural Resources Defense Council, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future (PennFuture), the Clean Air Council, Delaware Riverkeeper Network, the Responsible Drilling Alliance, and Texas Campaign for the Environment.

Congress established the TRI in 1986 to inform the public about the release of sometimes carcinogenic chemicals from industries in the wake of the deadly 1984 Bhopal disaster in India, in which toxic gases killed thousands of local residents.

The lawsuit, if sucessful, would not directly limit pollution from oil and gas extraction facilities, but it would require information to be made public.

"If knowledge is power, as the proverb goes, then the EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) is a powerful tool indeed," science writer Nancy Bazilchuk noted in a 2006 Environmental Health Perspectives paper. "Firefighters and first responders used this nearly 20-year-old public database of toxic chemical emissions to identify potential contamination hot spots after the floods of Hurricane Katrina. Residents have used it to find out what kinds of pollutants are being emitted by nearby industries. Investment companies use it to evaluate whether or not to purchase a company's stocks. Even the Internal Revenue Service uses it to collect a pollution tax from companies that release ozone-damaging chlorofluorocarbons."

In 1996, the EPA decided to "defer" any decision about including oil and gas extraction in the TRI, in part because of a dispute about whether the emissions from each individual well and piece of equipment should be considered separately, or whether all of the fumes from a single well pad should be tallied together. "This was kind of a different industry back then, you didn't have these major industrialized sites," Mr. Kron explained.

A similar legal distinction has kept the oil and gas industry exempt from hazardous air pollution regulations under the Clean Air Act, drawing the ire of environmentalists and many who live near well pads who suspect the fumes from fracking and drilling have caused health problems.

As the shale drilling boom has spread across the U.S., those concerns have grown.

"Those living or working closest to wells are at the highest risk," the NRDC concluded last month after reviewing scientific research. "In addition to the aforementioned health threats, they can also be exposed to diesel particulate matter and other toxics, including carcinogens. As a result, they are also at risk for eye, nose and throat irritation, brain and nervous system problems including headaches, lightheadedness and disorientation, blood and bone marrow damage leading to anemia and immunological problems, reproductive system effects, birth defects and harm to the developing fetus, and cancer."

Advocates now hope to prod the EPA to require drillers to make basic information about chemical releases available.

"The public disclosures in the Toxic Release Inventory have spurred companies across an array of industries to significantly reduce the toxic wastes they produce," said Sean Moulton, a director at the Center for Effective Government. "There is no reasonable rationale for exempting the oil and gas industry from these reporting requirements. Citizens have a right to know what wastes are being released in their communities."

News Sat, 24 Jan 2015 11:24:22 -0500
New Study Shows More Than Half of Abortion Clinics Face Threats

(Photo: Priya Deonarain)(Photo: Priya Deonarain)

Truthout needs your help to publish grassroots investigative journalism and to share visions for a brighter future. Contribute now by clicking here!

Today marks 42 years since the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, which made abortion legal. Despite the long-ago ruling, anti-abortion lawmakers and extremists continue to target abortion access—both in the halls of Congress and on the ground at clinics.

New research from the Feminist Majority Foundation (publisher of Ms.) reveals that clinics and doctors are faced with daily threats and intimidation, reducing women's access to critical reproductive care and putting doctors' and clinic workers' lives on the line.

Says Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority Foundation:

More than four decades after the Supreme Court ruled abortion legal, doctors and clinic workers should not have to fear extremists' attacks as they provide critical women's health care.

Below is an excerpt from the forthcoming Winter 2015 issue of Ms. highlighting some of FMF's most startling findings. Subscribe to Ms. to read more and never miss an issue!

Before Dr. George Tiller, an abortion provider in Wichita, Kansas, was shot to death by an anti-abortion extremist in 2009, he faced persistent threats and intimidation. Anti-abortion radicals stalked him and his family, harassed him at home and at his church (where he was eventually killed) and plastered "wanted" posters—featuring his name, photo and address—all over town.

At that time, a little more than one-quarter of abortion clinics reported similar kinds of threats and intimidation by anti-abortion extremists. But now, according to data from the Feminist Majority Foundation's 2014 National Clinic Violence Survey, those numbers have shot up to nearly 52 percent of clinics.

"The spike in serious threats and coordinated intimidation by extremists is of grave concern," says duVergne Gaines, director of the Feminist Majority Foundation's National Clinic Access Project. "We know there is a connection between threats like wanted-style posters, residential targeting of physicians and serious violence, because these types of threats preceded the murders of doctors in the '90s and Dr. Tiller in 2009."

The survey of 242 clinics by FMF (publisher of Ms.) shows that nearly 18 percent of clinics found that their doctors' pictures and personal information had been posted online, while 8.7 percent of clinics reported that doctors had been stalked.
Twenty-eight percent of responding clinics reported that pamphlets featuring photos of their doctors and clinic staff had been distributed, including some titled "TheKillers Among Us," and the use of wanted-style posters was reported by7.7 percent of clinics.

There's some heartening news, though: The survey found that the number of clinics experiencing the most severe types of anti-abortion violence—blockades, invasions, bombings, arson, chemical attacks, gunfire and more—decreased from 23.5 per-cent in 2010 to 19.7 percent in 2014.

Additionally, the survey found that a positive relationship with local law enforcement correlated with lower rates of violence and harassment. Of the surveyed clinics that highly rated their relationship with local law enforcement, 55 percent said they'd experienced no incidents of anti-abortion violence and harassment, while just 41 percent of clinics with a "fair" or "poor" police relationship said the same.

Still, nearly 1 in 5 clinics experienced severe anti-abortion violence, which is why Gaines says there's a "clear need" for law enforcement to vigorously prosecute criminal threats. She says, "Stopping the threat of violence before it becomes actual violence is critical."

News Sat, 24 Jan 2015 09:31:59 -0500
ALEC Forces the Question: Will Labor Really Go Local?

ALEC targets counties for Right to Work laws(Image: Jared Rodriguez / Truthout)

Truthout needs your help to publish grassroots investigative journalism and to share visions for a brighter future. Contribute now by clicking here!

Workplace struggles are getting difficult to predict. Conventional organizing isn't working like it used to. Unions are suffering. One culprit is the success of "Right-to-Work" (RTW) laws, which allow workers at unionized workplaces to opt out of union membership and free ride, without paying union dues.

With twenty-four states now living under this law, which lets non-dues-paying "right to work" employees work through strikes and sabotage the solidarity needed to powerfully bargain, RTW is going local - fueling a fight over what role local governments will play in labor regulation in the 21st century.

The "right to work" principle has been pervasive in the South for decades, and since December 2014, local RTW laws have been passed in five Kentucky counties. They are the only local governments in the country to pass RTW. Amy Milliken, attorney for the pioneering Warren County, tells Truthout that dozens more in Kentucky and elsewhere are expected to follow.

But the RTW movement is not alone in its use of local governments to make labor-related policy changes. Across the country, activists are wielding local governments to raise the minimum wage, win paid sick leave for workers and protect part time workers.

Though the two movements share an advocacy for local governments, they are - clearly - distinguishable by their conflicting visions of what it means for a local government to improve state and federal labor law. While one views the attraction of business and the cutting of "costs" as an improvement, the other uses workers' protections as its litmus.

The conflicting approaches to local governance of ACCE and ALEC are "completely hypocritical."

A fierce champion of RTW is the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a "model legislation"-drafting, neoliberal, corporate lobbying network. Contrary to its support of local RTW law-making, ALEC typically uses state legislatures to diminish the power of local governments; local minimum wage hikes, local GMO bans and local paid sick leave ordinances have all been quashed recently by ALEC-encouraged model state legislation. But, with the launch of ALEC's locally focused American City County Exchange (ACCE), which has catalyzed the local RTW efforts in Kentucky, these corporate boys now find themselves defending local law-making.

The conflicting approaches to local governance of ACCE and ALEC are "completely hypocritical," Brendan Fischer of PR Watch and ALEC Exposed told me. It's "hypocrisy," says Lynn Rhinehart, co-general council for AFL-CIO. Adds Fischer: they're "extremely selective about what policies local governments should have power to enact."

And the legality of the local RTW laws is uncertain, at best.

"The federal government preempts state and local labor relations," Rhinehart tellsme. As she points out, an Illinois law barring employers from hiring replacement workers during strikes was preempted in 2006. And California's modest effort to stop its own money from directly funding anti-union campaigns was nixed by the Supreme Court in 2008. Rhinehart describes this form of federal preemption as "sweeping."

Sonn argues that, unlike what is happening today, local governments should be able to improve federal and state law, but they "can't role back baseline [state or federal] protections."

But there are notable exceptions to the Feds' preemption. States can pass RTW, thanks to a clause in the Labor Management Relations (Taft-Hartley) Act of 1947. And forty-nine states have passed "At-Will" legislation that - absent a labor contract that says otherwise - allows employers to lay off workers for no particular reason, to fire "at-will."

If states can pass RTW, can counties?

For Rhinehart, local RTW is a "legal nonstarter." Pointing to the Taft-Hartley Act's exemption that allows states to pass RTW legislation, she says, "state means state." Paul Sonn, general counsel for the National Employment Law Project adds: "Cities and counties do not have the power to enact 'right-to-work.'"

But that doesn't mean localities have no role in law-making - Sonn would be the first to defend local governments. Given federal and state gridlock, he says, "Cities have a bigger role to play in public policy than they ever have before." However, this role is conditional, he says, and by no means includes efforts like Warren County's. Sonn argues that, unlike what is happening today, local governments should be able to improve federal and state law, but they "can't role back baseline [state or federal] protections."

What does it mean to "improve"?

It's helpful to think of federal and state powers in terms of floors and ceilings. The federal minimum wage and other minimum standards like paid sick leave are floors states can raise. But the feds claim complete - ceiling-like - authority over other pro-worker regulations, like those proposed by Illinois and California.

Is attracting business the purpose of regulating employer-employee relations? Is that the role of local governments?

However, when you move to the state level, the story gets more complex. In some states, minimum wages and minimum standards are floors local governments can raise, while in others they are ceilings cities and counties can't touch. Seattle can raise the minimum wage, New York City cannot; Newark can pass a paid sick leave ordinance, Memphis cannot.

But labor regulations, like the Illinois and California laws, don't fit as nicely into this metaphor. Rhinehart says: "What is a floor? What does a floor mean? It's much clearer with minimum wage…but it's not clear with labor relations." Improving protections for striking workers is not as straightforward as improving a minimum wage. If local, and state, governments want to engage in improving labor regulations, they'll need the political will to define what that means while fighting for the authority to do so. Meanwhile, those fighting to raise the minimum wage need only fight for the authority, as what it means to improve a minimum wage is more clear-cut.

Fighting to raise the floor.

However, the minimum wage is not that simple. In states that don't allow cities to raise the minimum, or don't say one way or another, efforts to raise it locally confront similar questions faced by local RTW advocates. They bothask: If the state can "improve" a federal law, shouldn't localities be able to as well?

Chicago and Louisville's recent wage increases fall in this category, as both were passed amid ambiguity over the cities' authority to do so - similar to the ambiguity surrounding local RTW laws. Neither Illinois nor Kentucky define their minimum wages as a floor or a ceiling - they're silent on the subject. Should Chicago or Louisville's laws be challenged, as looks likely, these cities will be fighting for the authority to weigh in on something the Feds have given states agency over.

For cities to be the influential policymakers that Sonn envisions, they'll need the power to improve federal and state protections.

But such pro-local advocacy takes on a different flavor when pushing RTW. In a letter to a Warren County judge defending Warren's RTW law, a local law firm points out Kentucky counties' "Home Rule," state-sanctioned, powers to promote "economic development." As the ordinance "would promote economic development within Warren County," it argues, RTW falls within the county's Home Rule powers. Milliken adds, in her own letter, that "because the Ordinance is being enacted to attract business to Warren County, it falls squarely" within the county's authority. This argument is backed by a detailed Heritage Foundation report and a national non-profit offering pro bono legal counsel to any US locality that passes RTW.

Is attracting business the purpose of regulating employer-employee relations? Is that the role of local governments? Sonn doesn't think so. He says, that among the pro-labor lawyers keeping track of events, "The expectation is that [local RTW ordinances] will be quickly litigated and blocked by federal courts." Others, however, think the issue could make it to the Supreme Court.

Regardless, with the tactic, ALEC/ACCE and company find themselves on the opposite side of a familiar argument.

Confronting state power.

ALEC/ACCE and the Heritage Foundation support and actively promote the local RTW tactic, and yet hedge this local support. They admit that local RTW can be preempted if a state so chooses, just as they believe states can preempt localities on minimum wage and paid sick leave. They'd never question this authority.

A hesitancy to challenge these forms of preemption also pervades swaths of the labor movement. But in states where local pro-worker laws have been preempted, the issue of preemption is not as easily avoided. In these instances, or when labor wants to pass novel protections, workers necessarily push the very boundaries of local governance.

By fighting for the power to pass pro-worker legislation, such localities not only demand state and federal laws be defined as floors, they also weigh in on what that floor is and what it means to raise it.

For cities to be the influential policymakers that Sonn envisions, they'll need the power to improve federal and state protections. This historical moment is well explained in a 2005 paper by Darin Dalmat titled "Bringing Economic Justice Closer to Home: The Legal Viability of Local Minimum Wage Laws Under Home Rule" from the Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems:


"The history of minimum wage regulation has come full circle. States led the charge early in the twentieth century. The federal government protected workers across the country during the middle of the century, but abandoned this role as the century reached its closing decades. Today, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, progressive economic reform must come from states and local governments...[But] local governments often face the additional burden of demonstrating that they enjoy sufficient authority." [My emphasis]

In a way, the powers of local governments have not yet caught up with their importance.

The community organization Envision Spokane recognizes this. Based in Spokane, Washington and with the support of multiple union locals and the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, the group has taken to the initiative process to push a "Community Bill of Rights" to establish constitutional rights for workers in the workplace. (As the US Constitution only protects citizens from government intrusion - not other private actors, like an employer - employees in the United States surrender the Constitution when they go to work.) After losing at the ballot by some 1,000 votes in 2011, Envision Spokane's third attempt to pass the initiative was removed from the ballot in 2013 after local realty corporations filed a pre-election challenge. The group is now taking steps to introduce a "Worker Bill of Rights" that would nullify "At-Will," establish rights to a "Family Wage" and "Equal Pay for Equal Work," and protect workers' constitutional rights.

Similarly, Cliff Willmeng of the Colorado Community Right Network (CCRN) and Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund says, "In Colorado, local communities are preempted from enacting local living wages in the same way that municipalities are prevented from banning harmful industrial projects like fracking. The result is that billion-dollar businesses are sheltered by the state, and working people are made to do more with less. With nearly one in five Colorado children living under the poverty level, creation of a living wage is paramount to our fundamental rights and well-being."

The CCRN is now looking to pass a Worker Bills of Rights to challenge the State's wage preemption and establish constitutional rights in the workplace.

As the federal and state governments stagnate, the structure of law that stops local governments from protecting workers - as Dalmat's paper alludes - has to be questioned.

With this in mind, the Bills of Rights in Spokane and Colorado include clauses that elevate a "right to local self-government" above state preemption that blocks localities from improving state and federal worker protections, as well as corporate "rights" that pose a direct challenge to workers' rights.

By fighting for the power to pass pro-worker legislation, such localities not only demand state and federal laws be defined as floors, they also weigh in on what that floor is and what it means to raise it. This is the conversation raised by the local RTW tactic.

But ALEC and ACCE's commitment to this end of the debate might be brief. They've only gone local in Kentucky because they can't get RTW at the state level. They're hoping the county-level efforts scale up - and indications suggest that might be happening soon. They have not abandoned their preemptive ways.

Though pro-worker organizers, too, want their local laws to scale up (who wouldn't), if Dalmat and Sonn are right about the importance of local governments for the 21st century, workers should be coupling their efforts to a long-term debate over how to ethically and consciously devolve some power to localities. And at a time when workers increasingly turn to local law-making to make gains and the Supreme Court makes moves to nationalize RTW, this doesn't seem so far-fetched.

On the plus side, maybe innovative ideas like establishing union organizing as a civil right will start locally. Maybe they'll have to.

News Sun, 25 Jan 2015 00:00:00 -0500
Peter McLaren: Putting Radical Life in Schools

Peter McLaren's Life in Schools: An Introduction to Critical Pedagogy and the Foundations of Education argues that schools can and must become zones of popular de-indoctrination, democratic re-imagination, and resistance to capital, where teachers instill students with confidence, hope and capacity for resistance and solidarity.

Radical life in schools(Image: Jared Rodriguez / Truthout)Do you want to see more stories like this published? Click here to help Truthout continue doing this work!

Peter McLaren, Life in Schools: An Introduction to Critical Pedagogy and the Foundations of Education, 6th Edition (Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2014)

"School reform" has a very bad reputation among left thinkers and activists for some very good reasons in the neoliberal era. Captive to corporate-backed school privatization activists, contemporary "school reform" sets public schools, teachers, and teacher unions up to fail by blaming them for low student standardized test scores that are all-too unmentionably the product of students' low socioeconomic status and related racial and ethnic oppression. Its obsession with test scores assaults imagination and critical thinking, narrowing curriculum and classroom experience around the lifeless task of filling in the correct bubbles beneath droves of authoritarian multiple-"choice" questions crafted in distant, sociopathic corporate cubicles. Students become passive recipients of strictly limited information deposited into their brains by teachers who "are prevented from taking risks and designing their own lessons as the pressure to produce high test scores produces highly scripted and regimented" pedagogy, wherein "worksheets become a substitute for critical teaching and rote memorization takes the place of in-depth thinking" (Henry Giroux). Pupils are rendered incapable of morally and politically challenging – and envisaging alternatives to – the terrible conditions they face under contemporary state capitalism and related oppression structures outside and inside schools.

Much if not most of what passes for school reform is really about public school destruction, corporate takeover, slashing teachers' salaries and benefits, and undermining students and citizens' ability to question a system that has been concentrating ever more wealth and power into elite hands for more than a generation. It is deeply (and by no means just coincidentally) consistent with the late comedian George Carlin's 2005 rant about what "the big wealthy business interests that control everything…don't want. They don't want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking." As Carlin elaborated:

"They don't want well-informed, well-educated people…who are smart enough to, figure out how badly they're getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago. You know what they want? Obedient workers people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork but just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, reduced benefits, the end of overtime and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it."

But what if "school reform" meant the empowerment of radically democratic educators who sought the opposite what Carlin's business owners want – and more? What if those teachers were dedicated to helping future citizens and workers become sufficiently smart, inspired, confident, courageous, loving and solidaristic, not only to understand what the capitalist owners and their coordinators are doing to society and life itself, but also to resist those elites and to create an egalitarian, democratic, sustainable, peaceful, and truly human world turned upside down? Such teachers wouldn't think that schools could bring about such a revolutionary transformation on their own. They would, however, understand "how," in the leading left educational and social critic Peter McLaren's words, "schools are implicated in social reproduction…how schools perpetuate or reproduce the social relationships and attitudes needed to sustain the existing dominant economic and class relations of the larger society." Determined to interrupt and overturn that deadly reproduction, they would grasp the "partial autonomy of the school culture" and the necessity of occupying that space as "a vehicle for political activism and creating a praxis of social equality, economic justice, and gender equality" (Life in Schools, 150).

That is the goal behind McLaren's classic text Life in Schools: An Introduction to Critical Pedagogy and the Foundations of Education, recently updated for the Obama era in a sixth edition. "We are living," McLaren writes near the end of Life in Schools:

"…in what Antonio Gramsci called a war of position – a struggle to unify diverse social movements in our collective efforts to resist global capitalism – in order to wage what he called a war of maneuver (a concerted effort to challenge and transform the state, to create an alternative matrix for society other than value). Part of our war of position is taking place in our schools. Schools form part of Gramsci's integral state as a government-coercive apparatus and an apparatus of political and cultural hegemony that continually needs to be renewed in order to secure the assent of the dominant group's agenda." (Life in Schools, 245-46).

Life in Schools is (among other things) a sprawling, many-sided, and brilliant manual of theory, history, and practice for teachers, teachers-in-training, and current and future education professors ready to enlist in that "war of position." The stakes, McLaren reminds us (like his colleague and ally Giroux [1]), are not small:

"Today, amidst the most powerful conglomeration of cultural, political, and economic power aver assembled in history…we have seen our humanity swept away like a child's sigh in a tornado…The marble pillars of democracy have crashed around our heads, leaving us ensepulchered in a graveyard of empty dreams… The omnicidal regimes of our Anthropocene Era have brutalized our planet to the point of bringing ecosystems and the energies of evolution and speciation to the point of devastation and Homo Sapiens to the brink of extinction….Time is running out quickly. We are being chased to by the hounds of both heaven and hell 'with all deliberate speed' and we are being continually outflanked." (xxi, 259, 261)

 Building on stories from his early years as what he considers a rather naïve liberal teacher in an inner-city Toronto school, McLaren takes his readers on a long and loving trip from his years in the classroom (Life in Schools contains a previously published journal [titled Cries From the Corridor] in which McLaren recorded his teaching experience prior to his engagement with radical theory) through the theory of revolutionary critical pedagogy; the roles that mainstream schools and educational doctrine play in subjugating working class and minority students; the structures and ideologies of contemporary oppression and inequality (class, race, gender, ethnicity, and empire); and methods for teachers to instill students with confidence, hope and capacity for resistance and solidarity.

Like the leading critical education theorists Henry Giroux and Paulo Friere, McLaren argues that educators have a duty to – in Friere's words – "engage in politics when we educate." The dominant methods and paradigms of North American education are richly political and ideological beneath their (false) claims of value-free objectivity and balance. Whereas those methods and paradigms covertly advance the predatory capitalist (neoliberal) project beneath the pretense of impartial neutrality (so that "being educated today constitutes a form of historically conditioned estrangement and alienation" [280]), critical pedagogy openly advances a liberating and participatory democratic socialism beyond both state capitalism and authoritarian socialism.

McLaren does not pretend that schools alone can rescue and re-energize democracy and justice in the United States. Still, he argues that schools can and must become zones of popular de-indoctrination, democratic re-imagination, and resistance to capital, whose giant transnational corporations are "taking hacksaws to the web of planetary ecosystems" and to "the covenant that once defined (however tenuously) the social commons." The task is essential in an era of escalating empire, inequality, and authoritarianism, when millions are forced into long-term "structural unemployment," prison, poverty, hopelessness and depression. The "rich are getting drunk on the tears of the poor" (233) while an "antiwar" US president kills Muslim civilians and even assassinates US citizens with arrogant impunity, and the Superpower shamelessly liquidates long-cherished civil liberties.

While Life in Schools seems directed primarily at academic departments of education, it deserves an audience far beyond the ivory tower. It is loaded with deeply informed radical perspectives that should interest progressive thinkers and activists in all spheres of life under contemporary capitalism. Especially relevant in light of recent events is McLaren's critique of academic theories that "'race,' not class is the major form of oppression in society." A dedicated anti-racist and anti-sexist, McLaren nonetheless reminds us that:

"Class exploitation…[is] the material armature material basis or material conditions of possibility for other forms of oppression within capitalist society… class exploitation is not simply one form of oppression among others; rather, it constitutes the ground on which other 'isms' of oppression are sustained within capitalist societies. When we claim that class antagonism….is [just] one in a series of social antagonisms – race, class, gender, and so on – we often forget the fact that class sustains the conditions that produce and reproduce the other antagonisms,…[whose] material basis can be traced to the means and relations of production within capitalist society – to the social division of labor that occurs when workers sell their labor power for a wage to the capitalist (Life in Schools, 217-18) ….Class as a social relation sets the conditions of possibility for many other social antagonisms, such as racism and sexism, thought it cannot be reduced to them" (125).

McLaren also offers trenchant insights on the reactionary role of the Obama administration. As portrayed (accurately by my estimation) in Life in Schools, the current US president is an abject "war criminal"(6-7, 274), a deadly enemy of civil liberties (232), a toady to Wall Street (6-7), a stealth agent of neoliberal so-called post-racial white supremacy (193-94), and a stalwart instrument of the corporate-neoliberal educational agenda, with its deadly testing obsession (16).

Equally instructive are McLaren's reflections on how much of what passes for resistance today is actually an expression of capitalist hegemony, and on the central role of corporate-manufactured hopelessness in the ruling class's intensifying destruction of justice, democracy, and life itself. "We have accommodated ourselves to the [contemporary state-capitalist and imperial] Deep State, and have routinized and ritualized our responses to it," McLaren's writes (xxi). The major barrier to the radical and democratic changes required, McLaren feels, has to do with hope and confidence: "The biggest prohibitive obstacle to organizing the Left is [a lack of] confidence that an alternative to capitalism can be made viable."

As McLaren acknowledges, it's not easy to answer the question of how to develop a widespread faith in socialism's viability. "But," he adds, "it's not easy to live in the world as presently fashioned, either, so we'd best get to work on finding some solutions" (257). Wise words.


1. Giroux's latest book begins with the observation that "America is descending into madness. The stories it now tells are filled with cruelty, deceit, lies, and legitimate all manner of corruption and mayhem. The mainstream media spin stories that are largely racist, violent, and irresponsible – stories that celebrate power and demonize victims…under the glossy veneer of entertainment…A predatory culture celebrates a narcissistic hyper-individualism that radiates a near-sociopathic lack of interest in – or compassion and responsibility for – others. Anti-public intellectuals …urge us to spend more, indulge more, and make a virtue out of personal gain, while producing a depoliticized culture of consumerism. Undermining life-affirming social solidarities and any viable notion of the public good, politicians trade in forms of idiocy and superstition that seem to mesmerize the undereducated and render the thoughtful cynical and disengaged. Militarized police forces armed with the latest weapons tested in Afghanistan and Iraq play out their fantasies on the home front…[while] defense contractors…market military-grade surveillance tools and weapons to a full range of clients, from gated communities to privately owned for-profit prisons." Henry Giroux, The Violence of Organized Forgetting: Thinking Beyond America's Disimagination Machine (San Francisco: City Lights, 2014), 9-10.

Opinion Sun, 25 Jan 2015 00:00:00 -0500
"Guantanamo of the Pacific": Australian Asylum Seekers Wage Hunger Strike at Offshore Detention Site

A massive hunger strike is underway at what some are calling "the Guantánamo Bay of the Pacific." The Manus Island detention center is paid for by the Australian government and run by an Australian contractor, Transfield Services, but located offshore on Papua New Guinea’s soil. The inmates are not accused of any crimes — they are asylum seekers from war-ravaged countries who are waiting indefinitely for their refugee status determinations. They are asking the United Nations to intervene against the Australian federal government’s plan to resettle them in Papua New Guinea, where they say they could face persecution. Some have barricaded themselves behind the detention center’s high wire fences; others have resorted to increasingly drastic measures such as drinking washing detergent, swallowing razor blades, and even sewing their mouths shut to protest their confinement. We speak with Australian human rights lawyer Jennifer Robinson and Alex Kelly, a social justice filmmaker who organized a New York City vigil in solidarity with the Manus Island detainees.


This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: A massive hunger strike is underway at what some are calling "the Guantánamo Bay of the Pacific." The Manus Island detention center is paid for by the Australian government and run by an Australian contractor, Transfield Services, but located offshore on Papua New Guinea’s soil. The inmates are not accused of any crimes; they are asylum seekers from war-ravaged countries who are waiting indefinitely for their refugee status determinations.

Eighty detainees recently signed a letter to the Australian government, saying, in part, quote, "Here a disaster is about to happen, please prevent this disaster." They are asking the United Nations to intervene against the Australian federal government’s plan to resettle them in Papua New Guinea, where they say they could face persecution. Some have barricaded themselves behind the detention center’s high wire fences; others have resorted to increasingly drastic measures, such as drinking washing detergent, swallowing razor blades, and even sewing their mouths shut to protest their confinement.

AMY GOODMAN: For more, we’re joined by two guests. Alex Kelly, a social justice filmmaker, on Wednesday she organized a protest outside the Australian Consulate here in New York City. And Jennifer Robinson is with us, an Australian human rights lawyer, director of legal advocacy for the Bertha Foundation, also co-founder of International Lawyers for West Papua.

Alex and Jennifer, we welcome you to Democracy Now! Jennifer, explain why you were outside the Australian Consulate last night and what’s going on, for what many in the United States may never have heard of, at Manus Island.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: Well, the description that this is the Pacific’s Guantánamo is apt. As an Australian, I feel a moral obligation to stand up and say, "Not in my name." The Australian government is indefinitely detaining asylum seekers, sending them to conditions that the U.N. has found to amount to inhuman and degrading treatment, in breach of our international obligations. Consecutive Australian governments on both sides of the political divide have continued this practice. And it’s time that Australians stand up and say, "Enough. This is enough."

NERMEEN SHAIKH: But could you explain, what is the status of Manus Island? Why are they—why does Australia keep potential asylum seekers in detention there?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: Australia intercepts people arriving by boat seeking asylum in Australia. They are insisting on their international right to seek asylum. Australia is concerned about the number of asylum seekers coming to Australia, and is therefore intercepting them, sending them to PNG for process and resettlement there so they’ll never get to Australia. This is in clear breach of our international obligations.

AMY GOODMAN: Alex, explain who these asylum seekers are, how many are packed into this prison, and what’s the response in Australia.

ALEX KELLY: There’s over a thousand people currently being detained at the Manus Island detention center. We’ve got people there from Syria, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia. And these people have been in there—some people have been in there for up to 18 months. It’s indefinite detention. They don’t know when they’re going to be processed. In fact, there’s been no one that’s been processed and resettled.

So this latest protest is in response to the idea that they’re going to be resettled in Papua New Guinea. Among some of the detainees, we know that there are people who are homosexual, who have actually fled their home countries because of persecution, and now they’re very frightened of being resettled in Papua New Guinea, where homosexuality is illegal. There’s been huge conflicts between PNG locals and detainees. And we’re just seeing that it’s been ongoing violence, a huge number of incidents of self-harm, hunger-striking—

AMY GOODMAN: How long are people held?

ALEX KELLY: It’s indefinite. In some detention centers in Australia—we have some other offshore and onshore detention centers—there’s people who have been in there for up to four years.

AMY GOODMAN: And evidence of the hunger strike going on?

ALEX KELLY: The hunger strike is still continuing. The Australian government is saying that the hunger strike is over, but we’ve been seeing images today, and I’ve had messages from advocates and people inside today saying it’s continuing within the compounds.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: And, Alex, you mentioned the conflict between the locals, PNG locals, and the detainees. Could you explain what happened? There have been two detainees who have been killed or who died within that detention facility at Manus Island. What happened to Reza Berati, his name is?

ALEX KELLY: Yes. There’s been ongoing tensions since the detention center was established. Manus Island, a lot of the community there are living in poverty. And it appears that there’s been a lot of incitement over tensions from people operating the center, so spreading rumors within and without about the tensions. But last February, there was a tragic incident where there was—guards attacked detainees, and there was one detainee who died. We still haven’t actually seen any prosecutions in response to the death of Reza Berati. There’s been two people arrested, but there’s allegations that Australians were involved.

AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer Robinson, you’re an international human rights attorney. What’s the law here? You’ve been to PNG. You’ve been to this area.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: I’ve been to PNG, and I’ve spent times in West Papuan refugee settlement camps, so I can speak with first-hand experience that PNG is not a state that is capable of accepting our asylum seekers and refugees. Ninety percent of these people who come by boat to Australia have been determined to be refugees in the past. The conditions in PNG are terrible. Australia is—it is unlawful for Australia to be continuing to send asylum seekers to conditions the U.N. has found to amount to inhuman, degrading treatment. We are in breach of our international obligations.

The problem is enforcement. Australia’s domestic law—the High Court of Australia has continually found that offshore detention is permitted under the terms of Australian law. When we had the Malaysian Solution under the Gillard government, it was challenged before the High Court and found to be inappropriate, because we had a provision in our law that you couldn’t send asylum seekers to a country that didn’t meet certain human rights standards. In response to that, the Australian government amended that to remove that from our domestic law, which means we are no longer constrained, and they upheld the constitutionality of offshore processing. This is a clear breach of our international obligations, but what we can do as a matter of law within Australia’s courts is limited.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Very quickly, Jennifer, what are the implications of the fact that this detention facility is run by an Australian company or private contractor?

AMY GOODMAN: You have five seconds.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: Australia is clearly liable, as is its corporation, for the human rights obligations taking place.

AMY GOODMAN: Jennifer Robinson and Alex Kelly, thank you so much.

News Fri, 23 Jan 2015 13:21:30 -0500