Bernie Sanders campaign is what democracy looks like


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

bernie nh abelIt was a cold night in Concord, probably 15 degrees with a light, damp breeze that numbed my fingers and toes, my nose, then my legs. I was running in place to keep warm. South Kingstown Town Council President Abel Collins and I had been waiting for an hour outside of a local high school, where Bernie Sanders was to give his speech after the New Hampshire presidential primary elections.

While a few dozen supporters waited outside of the main entrance, ticket holders slipped through the crowd and into the warmth and light of the school, where they passed through metal detectors and faced pat-downs by the Secret Service. From the frigid dark outside, we could see through the large cafeteria windows, ringed with steam and frost, where the national media gathered with their laptops, and a big screen projected the live feeds of CNN, MSNBC, CBS, and FOX.

Despite the cold, everyone outside was ecstatic that Bernie was approaching victory.

However, it still felt jilting to be stuck out in the cold after we’d spent a day canvassing for Sanders, and nobody knew how to get tickets. Young campaigners, frustrated at being locked out of the rally, decried the campaign as readily as they supported it earlier in the day, but I knew better. Abel suggested that certain donors probably got tickets, and I realized that fire codes would prevent a large raucous crowd from entering the school at will. The frustrated supporters gradually trickled back to their cars as the temperature continued to fall, and I watched a middle-aged woman storm away from the school after tossing her white “Bernie 2016” sign to the salty, icy concrete. I picked it up before it could get wet—my first piece of Sanders campaign swag. The next day, we found out that the Secret Service had used tickets as a crowd control measure.

bernie nhAbel and I had just spoken to three different reporters, two of whom work for our local TV news in Rhode Island and one for Scientific American. We told them that we came to New Hampshire to help out and take part in a movement, even though we couldn’t vote here. We had spent the day knocking on doors in Hudson, an effort coordinated by local volunteers, and we told the reporters that the incredible energy and organized efforts of the volunteers we worked with made us want to return to our home state and help support Sanders.

We told them that it was inspiring to see so many different kinds of people working together to build a political revolution. In Hudson, our canvassing activity centered around a “mothership” of a single-family home in a quiet neighborhood that devoted their entire first floor and garage to campaign work. Teenage kids sat around with laptops and headsets, making calls to voters and supporters. Older men and women scanned through sheaves of paper to consolidate the data gleaned from the rounds of canvassing while younger folks, like me, hit the streets to knock on doors.

Jim led training sessions in the garage for each new batch of canvassers. Howard, a veteran 10-month campaigner who sported a white “Bernie 2016” shirt and a black peacoat bedecked with blue and white Bernie buttons, told us his story and how far the campaign had come in such a short time. All told, I probably saw fifty different people come and go from that house on that cold and sunny Tuesday, and everyone buzzed with nervous energy at the possibility of Sanders’s first campaign victory after the “virtual tie” in Iowa.

I told the reporters that that was just one house of supporters—a house that had the energy and organization of an official campaign office. Imagine how many other well-organized volunteers are out there, doing the work needed for Sanders to succeed.

We made the eleven o’clock news that night on Rhode Island affiliates of NBC and FOX. They reported that we were shut out in the cold outside of Concord High School, where Sanders would deliver his victory speech after a landslide victory over Hillary Clinton, but I had a feeling that if we waited, they’d probably let us in. After an hour and a half of shivering and wiping our running noses, they did, and there was a bum rush for the doors.

Those of us who waited grinned with satisfaction, eager to get inside not just to see Bernie, but to be out of the frigid night. After passing through security, we entered the packed, brightly lit gymnasium where grandstands of supporters waved blue and white placards that read “A Future to Believe In,” the same slogan that hung on a banner behind the stage. A whole bleacher full of reporters and camera crews and garish lighting stood directly opposite the stage, and I recognized Sanders’s campaign manager while he gave an interview to CNN. I had never been so close to the national media before, and their presence added to the bright energy that streaked through the room. I was so happy to finally get a chance to see Bernie speak, but to be part of such an electrified and inspired crowd made me feel politically empowered for the first time in years.

A large screen hung over the crowd, and we watched live coverage of the election. When CNN called the election in favor of Sanders after a nearly 60-40 split with 70 percent of precincts reporting, the crowd erupted in cheers. And when Bernie came out for his speech, people clapped and stamped and jumped up and down, waving those rally signs in a blue wave of thunderous celebration as he raised his arms in victory and waved to the crowd. Chants broke out: “Ber-NIE! Ber-NIE!”; “We don’t need to Super PACs, Bernie Sanders got our backs!”; and the most popular, “Feel the Bern! Feel the Bern!” Every time he said “huge,” we all yelled “yuuuuuuge!” And during his speech, we took every opportunity to cheer the candidate that had finally found the pulsing vein of progressive, populist, working-class voters who grew tired and frustrated with established politicians that serve special interests and party concerns instead of their electorates. We took every opportunity to feel the energy, the Bern, that jolted through the crowd, and we felt like we were part of the movement, part of a potential revolution.

Cusp millennials feel the Bern too

I’m 29, a cusp millennial, and in my 11 years of voting and my fifteen or so years of political awareness, I had never felt anything as empowering as this rally. I had never been part of a presidential campaign before—I had mostly supported and worked for Abel, who once ran for Congress and now serves as the town council president in South Kingstown, RI. I always read the news and pried my way through different analyses and opinions to learn the truth as well as I could so that I could vote accordingly. I even developed my tendency toward progressive politics before I was old enough to vote because I grew up with George W. Bush as president for nearly all of my adolescence. And when I became old enough to vote, I relished the opportunity to vote against him.

It felt real good to cast that first vote. It felt real good to cast the second for Barack Obama when he took the presidency. But that soon became a problem for me, as I didn’t see the ethical merit in voting for a Democratic Party candidate just so a Republican Party candidate wouldn’t be elected as president. It felt like negative, dark energy—a vote cast merely to prevent the opposition from victory, not a vote cast to ensure the victory of the candidate I truly believe in.

Of course, I voted for John Kerry and Obama in 2004 and 2008, respectively, but once I discovered that not only did those politicians serve their party’s interests (influenced by donors) instead of their voters, but that they also continued many controversial policies borne from the Bush administration (i.e. drone warfare and other military actions and policies) and abdicated their leftward promises for centrist policies, I became politically apathetic. I began to vote for third-party presidential candidates such as Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate in 2012, because instead of voting against the opposition, I intentionally voted for politicians who actually represented the kind of governance and policies that I hoped to see. It was also my act of protest against the two-party system.

During all of this time, I followed Senator Bernie Sanders. After studying his voting record—a successful civil rights progressive who is not, and never was, beholden to special interests—and after watching many of his speeches on the Senate floor, I began to believe that he was the only Washington politician that I can actually trust. Unlike most in Congress, Sanders was honest and had integrity. Senator Elizabeth Warren soon joined Sanders in my trust when she joined Congress. But I also understood that he, and Warren, were lone progressives in Congress and that most of their colleagues did not support the progressive legislation that they put forth, at least not publicly. I knew that Congress was so gridlocked along party lines that even the most useful and necessary legislation, such as the federal budget, either faced dismissal or indefinite delay and argument.

But I knew that Sanders and Warren were still in there, fighting the good fight and raising awareness to dire issues such as the reality and danger of climate change, the disenfranchisement that voters face from unethical campaign spending, the economic perils of banks that are “too big to fail,” the potentially lifelong burden of massive student debt, and the necessity of universal health care. I took heart in the fact that somebody was doing something, even if futile, about the most important issues that we face as a nation.

But after years of Congressional gridlock and stall, I became more and more apathetic, and soon I began to stop following any politicians, even Bernie.

Bernie can win, and should

It wasn’t until Sanders announced his candidacy for president that I started paying attention again. I didn’t actually contribute in any way, but I started talking to friends more and more about the election in 2016. Once Sanders gained traction and picked up in the polls, those conversations became more and more hopeful and serious about the idea of a Sanders presidency—one that represented the people, not the party and its donors. Soon, my parents and my friends’ parents, all middle-aged, started asking me about Sanders, even if they didn’t believe he could win or didn’t necessarily support his progressive politics. And once the Democratic leadership attempted to permanently cut off Sanders’s campaign from their voter information files (data which became useful and absolutely necessary to me and others as canvassers), I knew that I wanted to get involved again, and my arguments for Sanders grew more passionate and detailed.

I told them what I knew about his voting record and about the progressive policies he supports. I told them about his history as a civil rights activist. I told them how I thought he was a candidate of integrity that refused to play the games that Washington politicians play—that he chose to serve his constituents first. Most often, these arguments for Sanders were met with dismissal, their counter-argument being that Sanders couldn’t get elected, even though he represents the kind of progress that many voters want to see in government, including voters from my parents’ generation. They argued that he was “unelectable” as a septuagenarian Jewish guy from Brooklyn who is a self-proclaimed democratic socialist. They argued, almost always, that we should just support Hillary Clinton because we can’t let the Republicans get the presidency, especially not with Donald Trump as the GOP front-runner.

I chafed at those ideas, and I told them that we, as an electorate, have been faced with a pair of bad choices in every presidential election in recent history, and that we’ve often chosen the candidate that is the “lesser of two evils.” I told them that that, to me, is a defeatist viewpoint that surrenders all individual political power, and that to do so feeds the prevalence of negative campaigns and stokes the idea that we should simply vote against the opposition, which is essentially a pessimistic position to take. And I told them that, because of Sanders’s candidacy, we now have a more positive, optimistic choice for a Democratic candidate for president. I told them that Clinton’s policies are an echo of her husband’s, whose economic policies have often exploited people of color across the world and whose support of the “three strikes” rule led to the mass incarceration of black men in America, and her tendency toward favoring militaristic intervention abroad is simply not a pragmatic position to take in a time where we are faced with massive unrest in the Middle East, especially with a fatigued American military that has been at war for nearly fifteen years. I told them that Clinton often adjusts her politics to suit the political climate and times, especially on progressive issues such as gay marriage, whereas Sanders has been fighting for the same progressive policies for decades. I even told them that he once marched with Dr. Martin Luther King, even if that fact is purely symbolic of Sanders’s commitment to civil rights.

However, it also occurred to me that we of the Sanders campaign, unlike any other campaign in recent history, are actively proving that through an internet-supported grassroots campaign fueled by small individual donations, his candidacy, and by virtue his movement, our movement, can prove that a healthy democracy is possible in this America. Our movement can prove that the established rules of the nomination process serve the major parties and their wealthy donors, not everyday voters. Our movement can prove that the process of giving power to appointed superdelegates–those unelected party officials and politicians who have preemptively pledged their votes to nominate Clinton–diminishes the importance and value of a single vote, which is a value that is constantly and hypocritically emphasized by establishment politicians. Our movement, through sheer numbers, can prove at last that we can take control of our government and pressure our government to serve the people first. And if our movement fails, we will at least have tried—because why not try to guarantee a better future than any other candidate or campaign can offer?

If Sanders maintains the momentum and energy that his campaign sparked in New Hampshire, the energy that Abel and I contributed to and felt a part of, then Sanders can win. Clinton represents a centrist status quo, one that implies that to fight for progressive ideals is pie-in-the-sky and not worth fighting for, while Sanders represents a dynamic change in government to serve the people first. The newest voting bloc—young voters like myself—is likely to side with Sanders, and, in New Hampshire, he took every demographic except for older wealthy people. Voters age 18-24, a demographic that is gaining power and will become the future leaders of our country, supported Sanders over Clinton nearly 9 to 1. Those erstwhile Clinton supporters of all demographics are beginning to see the error in Clinton’s ways and are beginning to trickle over to Sanders’s side.

After Bernie’s electrifying speech in which he said the word “we” more than any other word—he always termed it “our candidacy,” an incredibly empowering piece of oratory—Abel and I weaved our way out of the packed gymnasium. I ran into a Sanders field organizer that I met in Hudson, a young man from Kansas who has traveled all over the country working to get Sanders elected, and we high-fived and hugged, ecstatic at the win. I didn’t even get his name, but I got his energy, a positive energy that is contagious. We wished each other good luck and said that we hoped to cross paths again on the campaign trail—a trail that I hope to follow, as a volunteer for Sanders, to victory. And as Abel and I walked out into the cold quiet New Hampshire night, we could hear the people at Concord High School chanting, “This is what democracy looks like!”

Christopher Dollard is a Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer who holds an MFA in Creative Writing from Syracuse University. He writes poetry and nonfiction. For volunteer opportunities, you can contact him at cjdollard@gmail.com.

Frances Fox Piven on voter suppression and movements


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Frances Fox Piven 01
Frances Fox Piven

Frances Fox Piven is a legend. Her work was instrumental in the creation of the welfare rights movement and the war on poverty.  Last night, Piven gave a talk entitled Strategic Voter Disenfranchisement: How Political Party Competition Shrinks the Electorate at the RI Center for Justice (in collaboration with the Swearer Center for Public Service at Brown.)

With Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton neck and neck in the polls, said Piven, starting her talk, “I thought, I’ll talk about voter disenfranchisement, but I want to talk about that in the context of this election… I actually think this is an important election.

“The strangeness of this election. It’s really kind of amazing… Things are happening that can’t be explained by the truisms that political scientists repeat to each other.”

For instance, asked Piven, who has served on the board of the Democratic Socialists of America, how can Bernie Sanders get away with calling himself a socialist? What has changed?

For Piven, the answer is that America today is a land of broken promises. “People rise up when the promises that have been made… have been broken. Life is very uncertain and insecure. You’re earning less money, your pension may be at risk. There is soaring inequality. Some people are getting so rich.”

The system is rigged and not in our favor. A very few are very rich and the rest of us are doomed to live lives in poorer and meaner circumstances than our parents. Yet there is a counter to this, said Piven, and that counter is electoral democracy.

“Many activists are skeptical of electoral democracy,” said Piven, yet, “political institutions nevertheless create a realm of equality. At least in principle, everyone has one vote. Those votes, when aggregated, can depose rulers. You can kick the sons of bitches out!”

Frances Fox Piven 02Since it is well known that “when electoral rights expand people do better,” said Piven, democracy becomes a threat to the status quo. Therefore, it behooves the rich and powerful to fight back. “The threat of democracy is met by manipulating electoral procedures.”

Some of the manipulations of electoral procedures were built into the country’s structure by the Founding Fathers, said Piven. The Senate, for instance, guarantees two Senators from every state, even if no one lives in the state. The Supreme Court is another example. The Court is only marginally influenced by voters, being nominated by the President to lifelong positions. “Walling off certain parts of the government and saying this part of the government is not exposed to the electorate” circumvents the power of democracy said Piven.

And of course the final way of challenging the power of electoral democracy is by “suppressing votes and voters.”

“In Political Science we have a ‘faith’ and one of the axioms is that competing parties expand voter engagement,” said Piven, but, “Competing parties exert themselves to make it hard for voters that may vote for their opponents. That’s just as logical, but you won’t find that in any textbooks, but it has happened in American history.

“At the turn of the 20th Century, immigrants became the constituency of the machine bosses. These machines traded voter allegiance and voter loyalty for favors. Businessmen had a problem with that arrangement because they wanted efficient services. [Political] machines are not good at providing the kinds of services that lead to business expansion. Municipal reform organizations were business organizations,” said Piven. The machines used voter registration, literacy tests, poll taxes and other methods of voter suppression to drive down immigrant voter turnout significantly.

And this is happening today, with voter suppression laws being enacted across the country.


“Every presidential election turns out to be the most expensive in history because of the concentration of wealth spilling over” into the political arena, said Piven. “There is no wall” between money and politics. “Inequalities outside the electoral arena spillover.” Today we conduct polls to see how voters are thinking but we also track political contributions. Dollars and votes seem to be equally important.

This money, and the voter suppression we are seeing in politics, is aimed squarely at the “new electorate.” This rising block of voters tend to be more progressive. Black voter turnout has increased, immigrant groups continue to expand, the youth vote jumped in 2008 and 2012 and there’s been a “shift in the women’s vote since 1980 and the Reagan elections,” said Piven.

Given the shift in voters, “Conservatives shouldn’t be able to get elected,” said Piven. But through the manipulation of voter eligibility, they do.

And it isn’t ending, said Piven. Right now there’s an effort underway to change the formula for representation from the number of members in the population to the number of active voters. This is a vicious circle, and it’s by design.

Taking away “our ability to influence government” is another broken promise.


“Broken Promises in the economy and politics probably accounts for the surge in movements over the last few years,” said Piven. “This was the beginning of a new movement era.”

She noted three in particular:

“First there was Occupy, the press mocked them at the beginning. Then everyone started using Occupy’s slogans and language. Then there was the Fight for $15. SEIU had a significant role in promoting $15 as the goal. They wanted to build the union. That didn’t happen. What happened instead was that a movement took off that has been affecting local politics,” and then of course there’s Black Lives Matter.

There are also movements on the right, but these are “not among low wage workers or immigrants. [These movements] are occurring among middle class people, a little older, above the median income. Donald Trump is speaking to those people and their imaginary past…” There are “strong currents of religious fundamentalism and macho culture, gun culture, imaginary pioneers… We’ve got to live with that.”

“Movements are not majorities,” said Piven, “movements are spearheads…

“Movements have played a key role in shaping the United States since the revolutionary period.” Piven mentioned three movements in particular that had gigantic political implications.

The abolitionists freed the slaves, FDR became a radical due to the rise of the labor movement, which brought social security, labor rights, welfare policy, and public housing policy, and the civil rights movement which finally did emancipate blacks, shattered Jim Crow in the South.

“The troubles caused by movements become troubles for politicians and governments,” said Piven, “Movements communicate issues politicians wanted to avoid – showing people they could become defiant and shut things down.”

Too often “activists dismiss elections but there’s an interplay,” said Piven, but, “movements nourish electoral politics. Sanders couldn’t have run without Occupy.”

“Movements made Sanders possible,” said Piven, wrapping up her talk, “I think Sanders could win the nomination. But I don’t know what will happen in a general election. It’s amazing. There’s no precedent…

“What really worries me is Sanders as President. He would be in the White House surrounded by politicians determined to block him at every move. Movements at that juncture will become very essential to a Sanders presidency because movements can shut things down. That is the kind of popular weapon that could be equal to the gridlock Sanders could be facing.”

Patreon

#NoNewRoads: How Bernie Sanders Should Preempt Michael Bloomberg


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

New YorkRumors have been floating that former Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg, might run for president. Bloomberg has presented his potential run as a middle-ground between rightwing candidates like Donald Trump and progressive leaders like Bernie Sanders. Whatever critiques there might be of Bloomberg, the fact is that he’s led on some issues. Bernie Sanders should work hard to undermine Bloomberg’s base of support on a key issue where the Bloomberg administration led: transportation.

Michael Bloomberg was a big proponent of stop-and-frisk policies, which should be a concern for any progressive voter. Stop-and-frisk did recover caches of weapons, perhaps preventing some crimes, but only by harassing large numbers of people of color with an indiscriminate dragnet. The vast majority of people stopped-and-frisked were found to have committed no crime whatsoever, and federal courts found that the policy systematically violated the rights of people of color. Bloomberg’s candidacy would certainly be considerably better than any of the Republican candidates, but in an election year when voters have the ability to choose a candidate like Bernie Sanders, it shouldn’t be hard for progressives to make the choice: Sanders has led on issues of mass-imprisonment, ending the drug war, and restoring respect for people of color in a way that few American candidates, and no mainstream American candidate, ever has. Alongside Bloomberg’s iffy positions on civil rights stand some genuine achievements in transportation and land use. Bloomberg’s New York became a leader on environmental issues related to transportation, and the Sanders’ campaign needs to sharpen its messaging on this subject in order to undermine that leg of support.

A signature advantage for Bloomberg is that his administration smartly approached transportation policy to augment environmental and social benefits for New Yorkers. This Streetfilms video shows the almost magical transformation of many New York intersections under the tutelage of Janette Sadik-Kahn and Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Even for someone like me who “Feels the Bern”, and who doesn’t fully trust Michael Bloomberg on a range of other issues, it’s hard to not be impressed:

Sanders’ campaign has called for infrastructure investment as a major plank of his get-people-back-to-work message. I have disagreements with Sanders’ approach. I think that transportation funding should come from user fees. None of the candidates–Sanders included–has taken this position. But even as Sanders approaches the funding mechanisms differently than most urbanist voters would like, he can still draw from his past experience and speak to the need to economize on what the country spends on out of that funding.

The United States spends more money on expansion of its road system than on maintenance, and despite some hopeful examples to the contrary, has often maintained design mistakes like urban highways into their second lifecycle, often at the behest of corporate giants like Microsoft and against the wishes of local voters and small businesses. Sanders, who was a four-term mayor of a leading urbanist place, Burlington Vermont, doesn’t need to stretch himself into any pretzels to speak eloquently to why this is a mistake. But at present, Sanders is not doing enough through his campaign to explain how America’s infrastructure crisis is one of overspending. His campaign needs to say clearly: #NoNewRoads.

As a mayor, Bernie Sanders ‘out-Republicaned Republicans‘. He did so by introducing radical concepts like competitive bidding, by successfully lowering property taxes, and by successfully guiding the city towards new development while also protecting the rights of poor people in public housing. Sanders inspires people like me not just with his social-democratic approach to some issues, but his genuine understanding of when free markets work well. Transportation is an opportunity for Sanders to bring that cost-saving approach into focus.

Sanders wants a new single-payer healthcare system, but has also spoken eloquently to the fact that Americans spend more on healthcare than any other industrialized nation. Just as we waste money on healthcare procedures that bring poor results, we also are wasting precious resources on transportation boondoggles that do not add up to longterm economic growth. It’s time for the Sanders campaign to speak more forthrightly on this. In the second Democratic debate, Sanders again stuck to this spending issue:

…[W]hy do we remain the only major country on earth that does not guarantee health care to all people as a right? Why do we continue to get ripped off by the drug companies who can charge us any prices they want? Why is it that we are spending per capita far, far more than Canada, which is 100 miles away from my door, that guarantees health care to all people?

It will not happen tomorrow. But when millions of people stand up and are prepared to take on the insurance companies and the drug companies, it will happen, and I will lead that effort.

Medicare for all, single-payer system is the way we should go.

On imprisonment, the focus on fiscal conservatism has been mixed into Sanders boldly progressive message. From the second Democratic debate:

We’re spending $80 billion locking people up disproportionately, Latino and African American. We need very clearly major, major reform in a broken criminal justice system from top to bottom. And that means when police officers out in a community do illegal activity, kill people who are unarmed, who should not be killed, they must be held accountable. It means that we end minimum sentencing for those people (UNINTEL). And it means that we take marijuana out of the federal law as a crime and give space for freedom to go forward with legalizing marijuana.

Sanders has even brought his hawk-eyed approach to spending to military waste. From the second debate, again:

This nation is the most powerful military in the world. We’re spending over $600 billion a year on the military. And yet significantly less than 10% of that money is used to be fighting international terrorism.

We are spending hundreds of billions of dollars (UNINTEL), 5,000 nuclear weapons. I think we need major reform in the military making it more cost effective but also focusing on the real crisis that faces us. The Cold War is over and our focus has got to be on intelligence, increased manpower, fighting international terrorism.

A “no new roads” approach, sometimes called a “fix-it first” approach, would also be surprisingly within the mainstream. In a recent interview, Urban Cincy blog author Randy Simes points out that even fairly conservative and car-oriented DOTs like Ohio’s ODOT are looking to “fix it first” for financial reasons. Part of what worries transportation advocates about Bernie Sanders’ messaging on transportation funding is that this fix-it-first way of doing things might evaporate at the state level if more money became available. Sanders should make it clear to the transportation community that his focus on transportation funding does not mean a return to business-as-usual for road expansions, and that DOTs still need to start prioritizing and limiting their spending to bring the U.S. back on track.

Talking about the true roots of America’s transportation crisis–overspending on bad projects–should hone close to an attitude about public finance that Bernie Sanders has already embraced his entire life. It will clearly energize existing, young, liberal voters, while also reaching out to moderates who are concerned about costs. It takes away the false choice of progressive vs. practical, and puts them in one candidate together. Supporting the #NoNewRoads campaign will also bring Sanders close to a group of people the Clinton campaign has been attempting to separate him from: Obama lovers. Sanders has supported many of the positive achievements of the Obama era while also criticizing the president from the left, but on this issue he would be in line with our current president: President Obama invited Strong Towns, the organization that coined #NoNewRoads, to the White House to speak on rural development issues. Sanders can demonstrate that he’s able to work with fiscal conservatives, champion climate change action, and shore up support from supporters of President Obama, all at once. Win-win-win.

Donald Trump may think that we can slap a billion dollars on anything and make it better, but Bernie Sanders has shown on a range of issues that he’s much smarter. Sanders is a “man of the people” says one article: he walks to work and takes the middle seat on planes. The Sanders campaign should speak smartly on transportation so as to draw on the approach he’s taken in the past. Let’s #FeelTheBern for #NoNewRoads.

~~~~

 

The Bernie Sanders audio documentary about Eugene V. Debs


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Screen Shot 2016-01-23 at 2.31.30 PMBack in 1979, Bernie Sanders, well before he was elected as Mayor of Burlington that launched his political career, produced with the Smithsonian Folkways label an audio documentary about Prisoner Number 9563 himself, Eugene V. Debs. Some folks have kindly uploaded the material to YouTube and so we are proud to feature it here, along with the liner notes.

Debs was a monumental figure whose life continues to define the American Left. His famous railroad strike was described as such by one website:

The Pullman Strike of 1894 was the first national strike in United States history. Before coming to an end, it involved over 150,000 persons and twenty-seven states and territories and would paralyze the nations railway system. The entire rail labor force of the nation would walk away from their jobs. In supporting the capital side of this strike President Cleveland for the first time in the Nation’s history would send in federal troops, who would fire on and kill United States Citizens, against the wishes of the states. The federal courts of the nation would outlaw striking by the passing of the Omnibus indictment. This blow to unionized labor would not be struck down until the passing of the Wagner act in 1935. This all began in the little town of Pullman, Illinois, just south of Chicago.

Upon the outbreak of World War I, he decried the imperialist carnage and agitated despite the use of the espionage act to silence the anti-war movement that was telling the proletariat that they had nothing to gain from serving in an army that obeyed the whims of the capitalist class. His imprisonment for this agitation made it hard for him to keep abreast of the exciting and divisive events that happened in the American Left following the Bolshevik Revolution and the rise of the Communist movement across the globe. Debs wished for socialist unity despite the schism between pro- and anti-Leninist currents in the Left but also found a great deal of agreement with the Bolshevik calls for peace, land, and bread. Arguably no greater socialist has followed in his footsteps in the century since this climactic period of his life.

For a good selection of primary sources related to Debs, visit the Marxist Internet Archive.

kaGh5_patreon_name_and_message

Help RI voters have a real choice in the Democratic primary


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Bernie SandersTo be on the Rhode Island ballot, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders needs to collect 1,000 certified signatures by February 4. Collecting signatures is not that easy. The forms only became available Thursday and they are due in two weeks. Also, many signatures may be challenged, so some say he should collect at least 2,500.

In addition, the person collecting signatures must be “physically in the presence of every person signing the nomination papers,” sign an affidavit on the back of the collection form, get it notarized and turn it in to the canvassing office of a specific town or city that matches the residence of the signers. So, if you want a chance to vote for Bernie in the Rhode Island Democratic primary in April, find a Bernie signature collection event now at www.berniesanders.com.

Moreover, although people from any party can sign Bernie’s nominating petition, only Democratic or unaffiliated voters may vote in the Rhode Island Democratic primary on April 26. Moderate Party and “other” voters cannot. Please note: You only have until Jan. 27 to change your affiliation.

To check your party affiliation or change it, go to the Rhode Island secretary of state’s website, www.sos.ri.gov, or call 222-2340; or call your local board of canvassers.

I hope this letter helps Rhode Island voters secure a better choice in the next presidential election.

Help get Bernie Sanders on the ballot tomorrow night at Ogie’s


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

white-button-aug2015_1024x1024Those interested in helping to get Bernie Sanders on the presidential ballot here in Rhode Island should consider heading out to Ogie’s Trailer Park tomorrow night. The campaign will be handing out nomination papers for people to canvass in their own area to get signatures.  Signatures can be from any registered Rhode island voter.  To get Sanders on the ballot here in Rhode Island the campaign needs 3000-5000 signatures in two weeks. Nomination papers have to be returned by February 4 and 1000 validated signatures are needed.

Kevin Keefe, of Bernie’s Ballot Brigade, will provide a national perspective of the campaign as the primary season rapidly approaches.

This will be a chance meet fellow supporters from across the state and talk politics. There will be some free appetizers, but the campaign will also be soliciting donations and signing people up for the campaign.

The event is free but there is an official signup form available here.



Other Bernie Sanders events:

Bernie Sanders’ Livestream

Saturday, January 23 – Cumberland Public Safety Union Hall –  5:00pm – 8:00pm- 7 Cray Street Cumberland
Live Streaming a message from Bernie updating people on his campaign

Rhode Island Rocks for Bernie

Sunday, January 31  –  Ocean Mist – 4:00pm – 10:00pm – 895 Matunuck Beach Rd, Matunuck

Join South County for Bernie for this great fundraiser. Bernie’s Ballot Brigade organizer Kevin Keefe will be giving an update on the campaign and there will be great music from The Copacetics, The Jungle Dogs and the Silks. This is an all ages show. Suggested donation is $15.00.

Dr. John Geyman explains why we need single-payer healthcare


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Geymans bookHave you been unimpressed with the recent claims in the presidential campaign that a single-payer “Medicare for all” healthcare plan would be untenable? Do you think Hillary Clinton is being disingenuous in arguing that the Affordable Care Act is the best Americans should expect in terms of health insurance?

You are not alone.

I recently sat down for an hour conversation with Dr. John Geyman, author of How Obamacare is Unsustainable: Why We Need a Single-Payer Solution For All Americans. He is a retired practitioner and professor emeritus of family medicine at the University of Washington School of Medicine in Seattle, where he served as chairman of the Department of Family Medicine from 1976 to 1990. He has written several books on a variety of topics related to the medical field and also writes occasionally for the Huffington Post.

During our conversation, we talked about the flaws in the AFA, how the medical-industrial complex has fundamentally warped the practice of medicine and how doctors are intended to relate to their patients, and what a single-payer system would look like. We also briefly touched on political campaign rhetoric and whether the Clinton, Sanders, and Republican campaigns are being honest when they criticize or defend the AFA.

kaGh5_patreon_name_and_message

Wingmen talk Trump and Sanders


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Wingmen LogoRI Future’s Bob Plain was on Wingmen discussing the Presidential race with John Brien and Bill Rappleye.

Plain says Donald Trump sounds like a fourth grader and that if everyone who likes Bernie Sanders‘ message but won’t vote for him because “he can’t win” just voted for Sanders, then Sanders would win, and by a “landslide” in the primary and the general.

John Brien feels that Trump suffers from a lack of nuance and that as a free market supporter he just can’t get past the socialist label and support Sanders.

Nobody talked about Hilary Clinton all that much.

Improved Medicare For All: A talk with Oliver Fein, MD


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
2016-01-07 Fein 01
J. Mark Ryan of PNHP-RI and Dr. Oliver Fein

A single payer system could save the country over $400 billion a year says Dr. Oliver Fein, but he would prefer we call it “Improved Medicare For All.” Fein says that a system based on private insurance programs, like the one we have now, will not lead to universal coverage and will not create affordable coverage, whereas a Medicare for All system can lead to universal comprehensive coverage without costing more money.

In concert with Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP-RI), gave a talk to a class of med students at Brown University’s Warren Alpert Medical School in Providence.

Bernie Sanders has been a strong advocate for a Medicare for All approach to our health care, including the idea among his campaign issues. “The United States is the only major nation in the industrialized world that does not guarantee health care as a right to its people,” Sanders said. “Meanwhile, we spend far more per capita on health care with worse results than other countries. It is time that we bring about a fundamental transformation of the American health care system.”

What Fein does in the lecture below is explain how our present healthcare system fails us, how a Medicare for All system will improve health care outcomes, and outline a possible path from our present system to universal health care for everyone.

[Adam Miner provided additional reporting, video and photographs.]

Steve Ahlquist on Bernie TV discussing the Worcester rally


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Ahlquist BernieTVBernie TV had Steve Ahlquist on to discuss some video he took of Bernie Sanders arriving at his rally in Worcester, Mass. Sanders can be seen shaking hands and greeting his way through and the line of people waiting to get in for over six minutes, solidifying his reputation as a man of the people.

The appearance lasts about four minutes. Steve talks about his impressions of the rally and his impressions of Sanders as well.

You can see Steve’s appearance in the video below:

https://youtu.be/BjDTfCs6H9M?t=12m53s

You can read Steve’s original coverage of the event and watch the unedited video here.

Bernie Sanders brings his political revolution to Worcester


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 260Bernie Sanders spoke to an overflow crowd of hundreds in Worcester, Massachusetts Saturday afternoon. The crowd was enthusiastic, and rocked the gymnasium of North High School with thunderous applause. Sanders delivered a populist message, telling the crowd that in his  “political revolution” will not “allow Donald Trump and these other people to” divide working people. There will be no more living in fear and desperation.

Contrary to what people are saying, Sanders says he’s not a “fringe candidate.” The campaign, says Sanders, is “in striking distance of winning Iowa… ahead in New Hampshire” and “we’re going to win in Massachusetts.

The people I traveled with, all Sanders supporters from Rhode Island, were impressed with the speech. There were some small caveats: he doesn’t address foreign policy much and his timeline on a $15 minimum wage seems unnecessarily long. But the dynamism of Sanders’ message and his ability to bring a populist message in support of working families and against the “billionaire class” clearly resonates.

No cuts to Medicaid. Ending “grotesque” levels of income and wealth inequality. Ending corporate welfare and overturning Citizens United. Investing in infrastructure and education. “If a bank is too big to fail, it is too big to exist.” Black Lives Matter. Expand funding for Planned Parenthood. Raise the minimum wage. Climate Change is real. Single payer health care.

As Sanders said, “It’s for us to determine what the issues are, not some billionaire corporation.”

And the man knows how to make an entrance. As the crowd waited in line outside in the cold, Sanders walked up the line, warmly greeting supporters with hugs, handshakes and kind words. His attention was on the people, not the media. You can watch it here:

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 031

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 037

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 053

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 057

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 065

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 073

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 074

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 085

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 094

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 095

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 098

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 121

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 127

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 130

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 194

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 207

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 208

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 225

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 246

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 253

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 260

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 269

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 278

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 282

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 286

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 294

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 302

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 306

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 309

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 324

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 334

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 364

2016-01-02 Bernie Sanders 370

Patreon

Debbie Wasserman Schultz is impeding democracy


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz

This country has a problem, and it’s a big one. Our democracy is being corrupted by those who are supposed to champion it. Sadly, it is a problem that has been exacerbated by the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. And it is killing the party.

This year’s presidential primary campaign is case in point. The debates are meant to showcase the Democratic candidates, and the Democratic Party. Wasserman-Schultz’s obvious allegiance to front runner Hillary Clinton is preventing the American people from getting an opportunity to really hear all of the candidates.

To put it bluntly, the debate schedule is a complete farce. Never have there been debates scheduled at such inappropriate times. Democrats should want to showcase our candidates. The contrast with the Republicans are stunning. Why would the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee not want people to see these debates? The only reason that Wasserman-Schultz could possibly have for doing this is to prevent candidates Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley from having a truly national forum to promote their issues, viewpoints, and differences with the other candidate.

The proof is in the numbers. The Republican debates, which have been shown in the middle of the week, have averaged 18.3 million viewers, while the three Democratic Debates have averaged just 10.7 million viewers. Even Tulsi Gabbard (D., Hawaii), a vice chairwoman of the DNC questioned Wasserman-Schultz about the lack of debates and was subsequently disinvited to attend the second debate. If the goal of Wasserman-Schultz is to prevent the American people from learning about the candidates, then she is doing a bang up job!

Along with the debate times, there is the threat that Wasserman-Schultz has placed on the candidates who participate in more debates not sanctioned by the DNC. If they take part in any other debates, they will be banned from participating in future Democratic debates. This of course hurts the campaigns of Sanders and O’Malley the most. This is not how a democracy should work.

And then there is the drama of the “untimely accidental breach” by the DNC’s campaign data management company NGP VAN. Instead of doing the right thing, Wasserman-Schultz again attempted to circumvent democracy. The contract, which is signed by the candidates and the DNC, allows the candidate accused of breaching voter information 10 days to investigate, report, and resolve any issues. Bernie Sanders and his campaign were more than willing to abide by that, and they emailed the DNC with their intent to perform a full investigation. But instead of working with Sanders, Wasserman-Schultz went nuclear. She shut off the Sanders campaign’s access to the most fundamental tool of any campaign–the voter file. Think about that for a second. She prevented the Sanders campaign from accessing their own data, data they paid for. Because this was illegal, the Sanders campaign had no choice but to sue. Soon after the lawsuit was filed, the DNC caved and restored the voter file.

In the latest news, the DNC and DWS has awarded Kroll Industries, which is owned by Altegrity, which is owned by our very own Providence Equity Firm, which was bought for over a billion dollars back in June 2010, the honor of doing the “independent” investigation. [Note: Providence Equity Partners no longer owns Altegrity or Altegrity’s subsidiary Kroll, because Altegrity went bankrupt this year. The new name for Altegrity is Corporate Risk Holdings, and it still owns Kroll but is now independent from Providence Equity Partners. See here and here.] Kroll’s history is one of dubious distinction. They have been described as a sort of “private CIA for the Powerful” and they have Goldman Sachs and Chevron  written all over them. With a history of falsifying data and illegal wiretapping, Kroll’s is exactly the agency who should not be doing the investigation, hardly independent.  There are also direct ties to the  Democratic National Committee. The former Deputy Finance Chair for the DNC, Betsy Blumenthal, is now the Senior Managing Director for Kroll Industries.  This in itself may be a conflict of interest.

Additional information can be found with the below links.

This whole debacle undermines the Democratic Party. People are sick and tired of the antics of the Chairwoman. In a Moveon.org petition over 55,000 people have signed asking for Wasserman-Schultz’’s resignation. She is alienating new voters and those who are voting for Sanders. And she has definitely put a wedge between the party establishment and its liberal base. This is not what makes a healthy primary campaign or a healthy party. For the sake of both, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz needs to be replaced as soon as possible.

Group Reviewing Sanders Data Breach Has History Of Illegal Wiretapping, Falsifying Data, And More
Curious Choice of Auditor for Democratic Database Flap
Kroll, hired by DNC to investigate Sanders campaign, doesn’t seem very independent from the DNC

Eric Loomis on Bernie vs. Hillary: not as critical as defeating GOP

loomis2Bernie Sanders would only be a slightly more progressive president than Hillary Clinton, said Erik Loomis when I asked him which candidate he was supporting in 2016.

“I don’t think it matters very much,” said the URI history professor who will be discussing his new book Out of Sight next week – Wednesday, Nov. 18 from 5:30 to 7:30 at AS220. Earlier this week, RI Future interviewed Loomis about his book, and the TPP.

“This is out of no love for Hillary Clinton that I’m saying this,” Loomis explained. “My guess is that a Bernie Sanders presidency for progressives is about 10 percent better than a Hillary Clinton presidency because of the limitations and structure of American politics.”

Though he said a Sanders presidency would be more likely to oppose a trade deal like TPP than Clinton, he said the two Democratic candidates will likely be facing the same conservative Congress and courts.

“We have to stop thinking strictly through presidential politics as the answer,” he explained. “We’re never going to elect the right person. That’s not how power works. That’s not how the world changes. It’s not how it’s ever changed. It changes from below. It has to come through from people organizing on the ground.”

He said it was was more important to focus on defeating the Republican Party than which Democrat to nominate. “Where the rubber meets the road in 2015 is defeating the Republican Party who actually wants to literally bring us back to the era of the 1890’s and we don’t want that,” he said.

out_of_sight

Media misses metaphor of Bernie Sanders’ political revolution


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Bernie_Sanders_2016Bernie Sanders gave calm, reasonable answers to the questions he faced on the Today Show this morning, explaining the fundamentals of his campaign. His responses were quiet and measured. He even failed to take a bait on whether Hillary Clinton is “expedient” for suddenly accepting a range of issues she’s opposed (gay marriage, peace, criminal justice reform, death penalty abolition and so on) for decades–issues that Sanders has supported all along.

Then came the big question.

Senator Sanders, you have all of us reaching into our high school textbooks to look up the definition of socialism, versus ‘democratic socialism’, versus capitalism. You call yourself a democratic socialist. In our last poll, 60% of our respondents said they were comfortable or very comfortable with capitalism. I see those signs at your rallies. They say ‘join the revolution’. What about those voters who don’t think a revolution sounds exciting, they think it sounds scary?

On the one hand, asking this question is understandable. Revolutions vary greatly in scope and meaning. The term can be used for anything from the American War of Independence, to the non-violent Civil Rights Movement; from Robespierre to Napoleon; from industrialization to the internet. The word “revolution” inspires feelings of warmth or revulsion across the political spectrum, but much like Beethoven’s 9th Symphony (Ode to Joy), has no distinct ideological flavor.

The question is, why do media outlets repeatedly plant the idea that Sanders is calling for something violent or destructive in his campaign (“scary”), when he’s repeatedly explained that the “revolution” is an electoral one involving–gasp–free public college tuition and universal healthcare?

The media have a responsibility not to support Bernie Sanders politics, but to help voters understand what his politics are, so that they can either accept or reject him at the polls. Asking such leading questions when, by the questioner’s own admission, many people are “reaching into textbooks” to try to understand basic economic concepts is irresponsible.

Being the resident transportation writer, I wanted to offer some examples of “revolution” that have been less outrageously received by our media.

U.S. auto maker Chevrolet was not the only car company to use the metaphor of “revolution” to describe their product. Fiat, complete with Halloween-ready sexy-Betsy Ross*, reminded us in 2014 that “The Italians are coming!” in its revolutionary ad:

Though the most touching to me when used as a promotional accessory to cars, “revolution” is used to sell other things that we all find non-threatening. Steve Jobs “kicked off 2010” by introducing “a truly magical and revolutionary product.” He was referring to the IPad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KN-5zmvjAo

I’m not even suggesting that the use of the word revolution for these products is a bad thing. It seems a bit overwrought for my tastes, but on the other hand, IPads are kinda’ cool.

The largest blind spot for media outlets is not necessarily ideological. It may be that some journalists or news outlets actively disagree with Sanders’ program, or want to red-bait him. But more often, I would suspect that the bias is totally outside of the political spectrum. What it’s really about is sound bites. Media outlets are most successful with their audiences when they can instigate a short-term buzz over an issue, with relatively little effort into depth or clarity of thought. If the political buzz suddenly said Sanders was twenty points ahead, the media would oblige with a scattering of stories about how Hillary Clinton is in free-fall. It would sell. It also sells to constantly follow the drool trail of Donald Trump as he wallops his way across the country saying absurdly racist things (Extra! Extra!). The bias is in offering a poor platform for ideas, whatever their ideological origin.

Whatever the coverage of Sanders’ politics, sharp questions about “revolution” should not be part of the package. It would be perfectly acceptable, as some have, to launch into detailed analyses of Sanders’ platform and whether he’s the best choice. Picking on the candidate for using a metaphor that is common in American parlance is shallow, thoughtless journalism. You would expect that when so many of the advertisements on television refer to “revolution”, that this would be an easier lesson to learn.

~~~~

*Although, it’s probably not Betsy Ross if she’s hanging out with Paul Revere, but then again, I don’t think that would be the most historically inaccurate thing in this commercial. Where are the hand-stitched bunny ears we all read about in elementary school?

Green Party’s Jill Stein puts ‘people, planet and peace over profit’


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Jill Stein
Jill Stein

The Green Party of Rhode Island welcomed presidential candidate Jill Stein to their 2015 Green Gathering held at the Warwick campus of CCRI. Stein spoke for about 35 minutes about her campaign, her vision for the future of America, and the need for a new political party that represents ‘people, planet and peace over profit.’

Stein praised the Rhode Island Green Party for their environmental effort against fracked gas. “You’ve all been an incredible inspiration,’ she said. “With the sustainability leadership that’s been coming out of Rhode Island and your amazing leadership on the pipeline resistance and starting the five state coalition of Green parties to fight pipelines together.”

This is, said Stein, “a moment of crisis, but also a moment of potential for deep systemic change… Half of Americans don’t identify as Democrats or Republicans right now.”

Stein feels that the success of Bernie Sanders is a sign of America’s dissatisfaction with the two party system, but she feels Sanders’ campaign for the presidency is doomed to fail. “What they are not counting on is the basic structure of the Democratic party… the Democratic party has a built in structure for sabotaging that revolt.”

As examples, Stein brought up the presidential campaigns of Howard Dean, Jesse Jackson and Dennis Kucinich who were all sabotaged from within the Democratic Party.

Also, says Stein, there’s Super Tuesday, a big money primary that requires a huge amount of cash to win, since a candidate has to cover 25 states with advertising. Sanders will be hopelessly outspent here. But even if Sanders were to get through these hurdles, he still has to face the super delegates, created after George McGovern won the nomination, and they control half of the Democratic Party’s votes.

Sanders has promised to support the winner of the Democratic primary, so he’s taking all that positive radical energy and either giving it to the Democrats or destroying it. The Greens, on the other hand, won’t disappear come November. “We are building a permanent force for people planning for peace over profit,” says Stein, “We are here to develop a political party that supports that agenda.”

“As Bernie begins to run into trouble there are going to be a lot of unhappy campers…” says Stein, and as Sanders brings his people into the Democratic party presidential campaign of someone like Hillary Clinton, he’ll be working against his own agenda.

The Democratic Party will combat the agenda of the rebels who want to keep the party from shifting to the right. Democrats in the Sanders camp will need a Plan B if Sanders doesn’t win. Plan B for Sanders supporters is the Green party, says Stein.

“We are facing an unprecedented crisis right now across the spectrum of economy, ecology, peace and democracy,” said Stein. During the last economic crisis, with a Democratic president and both houses controlled by Democrats, the priority was Wall St. Homeowners didn’t get a bailout. Wall St. did.

“Enough with the lesser evil, it’s time to stand up for the greater good.” The Greens, Stein said, “really do represent basic American values and basic American sentiment…

“When we go into debates, we usually win them… That’s why they work so darn hard to keep us out of the debates.” Stein went on to talk about how when she was running for governor of Massachusetts, she had to fight to get on the televised debate, and afterwards the “instant online viewer polling” said that she had won. She was not allowed in the debates after that.

The Greens, teaming with the Libertarian Party, are trying to get into the debates this year. They have two court cases pending, they’re working on a petition to change the rules about who can participate in the debates and they’re planning to boycott the sponsors of the  Commission on Presidential Debates. This is a real attempt to change the political climate, and the two big parties are fighting against this.

Speaking of Libertarians, Stein says they are a “work in progress.”

“The more they learn about politics, the more the they’re converting from Libertarians to Greens… Libertarians are often people who get that there’s a problem but they haven’t quite discovered what the solution is yet… we have many things in common around foreign policy, the drug wars here at home and protecting our civil liberties.”

The Greens will be the only party on the ballot saying, “Not only do young people deserve free public higher education, that should be a birth right, but we’re saying, ‘we bailed out the friggin’ bankers, who got us into this mess… isn’t it time to bail out the students who were the victims of that waste, fraud and abuse?’” says Stein, “Forty million millennials who are mobilized to come out and vote to abolish debt…that can actually win the election.”

Stein also talked about the environment, and the terrible threat of climate change. She referenced the new study from James Hanson, which shows that sea level rise by 2050 may reach ten feet, effectively putting large parts of the world under water. (What this means for the Ocean State, as we plan heavy investments into fracked gas over the next thirty years, is disaster.)

“What this means is stop what you’re doing,” says Stein, “Let’s join the team to stop this, immediately… In stopping this, we can actually start a whole new way forward. A new way forward based on peace, justice, democracy and sustainability.

“These things go together. We put them together in the phrase, ‘People, planet and peace over profit.’”

Stein praised the growing movements for human rights and climate justice, such as Black Lives Matter, but she wants these various movements to unite into a powerful political force. “They want us to be divided into our separate issues… but by coming together around a unified agenda of ‘People, planet and peace over profit,’ then we are unstoppable.”

The Republican Party is a radical, fringe movement, says Stein. The Democrats aren’t much better. People want something new. “People are actually supporting a Green New Deal, spending half a trillion dollars a year to make the emergency transition” from fossil fuels.

The Green Party has popular support for its policies. “We have the Green New Deal, we’ve got health care as a human right, we have the right to a job, we have living wages, we have cutting the military…”

Speaking of the military, Stein makes the point that it’s American imperialism, fueled by an addiction to oil and the sale of arms, that keeps us in the Middle was, spending trillions and killing hundreds of thousands while we create the next Al Qaeda or ISIS. “How about an arms boycott to the Middle East?’ asked Stein, to applause.

“We could put twenty million people to work right now… to transition us to one hundred percent clean renewable energy by 2030. We are the only campaign that is calling for a specific ‘time over.’” said Stein, “We can’t really address the climate crisis without addressing the economic crisis.”

Action on the climate will have immediate and positive health effects, the savings from which will pay for the transition itself.

“This is our moment. This is what we have been preparing a lifetime for. The solutions are in our hands. There is a political vacuum that is waiting to be filled. Democracy is in our hands. Justice is in our hands. A survivable climate is in our hands. It’s up to us, so join the team, I look forward to working with you and having the campaign of a lifetime. We have all of our lives to change, and to change the course of history. So let’s do it together.”

Patreon

Bernie Sanders is no socialist


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Bernie_Sanders_2016I want to talk to you about a socialist from Vermont. Born in New York, he was active in the anti-Vietnam and civil rights movements in the 1960’s before moving to the town of Burlington, where he spent the next several decades creating a new set of socio-political ideas that combined the basic outlines of old European socialist ideology with the harsh realities of modern industrial capitalism, as well as a powerful critique of the ecological havoc wrought by the global hegemony of greenhouse gas pollution.

But wait! If you thought this was the beginning of a stump speech for Senator Bernie Sanders, you are dead wrong. In fact I am referring to the late Murray Bookchin, a man who, in many ways, was the striking opposite of what Bernie Sanders is in every way. Bookchin was a scholar, activist, and writer whose polemics against capitalism but also cultish politicking on the far left and opportunism by people like Bernie Sanders make for great reading nine years after the man died in 2006.

I have previously written that I have a sense of respect for those who support Sanders in his quest for the Democratic Party nomination. Or rather, I did. What has made me change my mind is the reaction of Sanders supporters to the direct action techniques of #BlackLivesMatter protestors in recent weeks, which seemed to gravitate between condescending and racist to religiously fanatical and racist. “Don’t these people realize Bernie is the best thing going for them in this campaign?” “Don’t they know that Bernie marched with Martin Luther King Jr.?” In my own praxis (a socialist term referring to the combination of philosophy with action), I have a very simple rule: if someone is not going to do any real harm, I let them stick to their beliefs. It is not my place as a reporter to break the news story about how there is no Santa Claus because that would only hurt those who believe in Santa, individuals who have no capacity to cause serious damage to others.

But with the level of condescending, self-important, prejudiced nonsense coming from Sanders supporters, I do see a real threat. I can imagine in very concrete terms a moment in the near future where, should Sanders not topple the Clinton machine, his disillusioned supporters will point out the #BlackLivesMatter zap as the moment that did him in and the anti-black animus will soon follow. And in a technical sense, they would have some concrete grounds to stand on. Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight.com recently carried a story by Harry Enten titled THE BERNIE SANDERS SURGE APPEARS TO BE OVER, where Enten shows with mathematical precision that Bernie has reached his crescendo:

Not long ago, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders was surging. In just a few months, the Vermont senator halved Hillary Clinton’s lead in Iowa and moved to within shouting distance of her in New Hampshire. But it’s probably time to change the verb tense. No longer is Sanders surging. He has surged. From now on, picking up additional support will be more of a slog… Support for Sanders rocketed up in Iowa but has leveled off since June. The story is nearly the same in New Hampshire. Sanders rose from June to July in the Granite State, but his ascent slowed.

Eneten points out several possible reasons that could have contributed to this. Part of it has to do with the fact Bernie was the newcomer when he announced his candidacy at the end of May as compared to Hillary Clinton, who seems to have been running for office since the day after the 2012 inauguration. At the beginning of the summer, the Run Warren Run PAC was dissolved when the Senator from Massachusetts announced she would not make a Presidential bid. As a result, the Warren supporters combined forces with the Sanders supporters, based in part on politics and in part because of their mutual dislike of the Clintons. Of course, this is nothing new, it happens every election cycle, the Democrats roll out a seemingly radical candidate who has a great opening sprint but cannot maintain pace throughout the race. Do the names Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich sound familiar? But for those who are Feeling the Bern of Sanders fever, the coincidental occurrence of the #BlackLivesMatter protest with his sluggish poll performance just breeds conspiratorial fever dreams that it was those pesky blacks who killed Bernie’s chance.

But besides that, there is also the fact that Sanders, for all his bluster, has never been serious about this. Just look at the Issues page on BernieSanders.com:

Screen Shot 2015-08-20 at 10.15.09 PM
What, you think they said ‘OOPS, we forgot!’?

Those are all great phrases and I do not doubt that there are serious people in the general population who are earnest about those topics. But there is one phrase that every serious presidential candidate always puts on their website, without fail: FOREIGN POLICY. For all that can be said about candidate Obama, one thing that can be said without a doubt is that he had foreign policy in his campaign literature from day one. Just look at his page from September 12, 2007, as archived by the Wayback Machine on the Internet Archive:

First thing on the list was a foreign policy goal.
First thing on the list was a foreign policy goal.
Obama Closeup
STRENGTHENING AMERICA OVERSEAS and PLAN TO END THE IRAQ WAR, before anything else.

Now look at Hillary Clinton’s website. It’s a huge, in-depth page that has multiple paragraphs dedicated to foreign policy alone. Granted, as Secretary of State she basically committed a bunch of war crimes and let Joe Biden handle the Iraq withdrawal, but at least she is trying.

Screen Shot 2015-08-21 at 1.06.12 PM
She knows how to say “Crimes Against Humanity” in 40 different languages!

This is not even hard work! And that brings me to my second point, the real Bernie Sanders. He makes some great speeches, but behind the verbiage is a pretty repellent record.

Since we are on the topic of race and Bernie, let’s talk about his supposedly great record as a young man. Everybody right now is in love with the pictures of him organizing in the Civil Rights era, and that’s a respectable feat. But what they are not talking about is what turned him on to socialism, his time in Israel living on a kibbutz. For the goyim, the kibbutz is sold as a sort of Israeli utopian experiment, a state-sponsored socialist collective where the children are cared for in a communal fashion, everyone eats and works together for the benefit for all, and the socialist dream is realized. But what they do not tell you is the bitter and painful truth about the kibbutz as an apparatus of state violence by the Israeli government against the Palestinians. Some are built in Israel proper while others are built in the Occupied Territories, which displaces the native indigenous inhabitants of the land. And, for all the socialist fluff, Arabs are strictly forbidden from joining in the effort. In fact, Noam Chomsky and the late Tony Judt, both adamant critics of Israeli policy, cite their time as kibbutzniks as one of the reasons they rejected Zionism. By contrast, Sanders thinks of this as the ideal.

When Sanders moved to Vermont, Murray Bookchin was already at work on a serious corpus of anti-authoritarian socialist literature tinged with environmental ethos that were spot-on way before being “green” was a trendy thing. When he saw Sanders, he gave him a chance but quickly came to see him as an opportunist and showboat, writing an article called SOCIALISM IN ONE CITY? THE BERNIE SANDERS PARADOX: WHEN SOCIALISM GROWS OLD for the January 5, 1986 issue of Socialist Review magazine. It is extremely difficult to locate the original article, but someone did print a quote in a thesis for Cornell University, which I replicate here:

To spoof him for his unadorned speech and macho manner is to ignore the fact that his notions of a “class analysis” are narrowly productivist and would embarrass a Lenin, not to mention a Marx…The tragedy is that Sanders did not live out his life between 1870 and 1940, and the paradox that faces him is: why does a constellation of ideas that seemed so rebellious fifty years ago appear to be so conservative today?

For the rest of his life, Bookchin would propose what he alternatively called ‘post-scarcity anarchism’ and ‘communalism’, a system of direct democratic governance that could be implemented in real time for Burlington. In reply, Sanders dismissed him as a kook.

After serving in state politics, Sanders went national in 1992 and remained in his seat thanks to a hushed-up alliance with the Vermont Democratic Party, an arrangement where the man with funny hair spouts off populist rhetoric while voting the party line and then some, such as his opposition to gun control, his vote against the Brady Bill, and . I had no idea the mothers of Sandy Hook victims were so offensive to his working-class hero ethos. For all his yapping about the Patriot Act, he voted for the 1996 Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, which expanded the racist capital punishment system and created the basic structures that the Patriot Act was hinged upon.

And just so we are clear, Bernie is certainly not making moves to stand in socialist fraternity with actual socialist countries. He voted in favor of bombing the socialist nations of Libya and Yugoslavia at the behest of NATO. And for those who forget, the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia included an instance where an American missile “accidentally” landed on the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, which qualifies as sovereign Chinese land. He’s voted for the various restrictions against Cuba when that was the national policy. He also supported the institution of the regime in the Ukraine, which most mature analysts describe as openly neo-Nazi, and has worked hand-in-hand with John Kerry to de-legitimize the Eastern Ukrainian Donbas, which democratically voted to break away from Kiev and has operated since under a policy of Leninist War Communism.

When asked in 1988 on his cable access TV show about his thoughts regarding the non-violent civil disobedience campaign of Palestinians, the First Intifada, overseen by the Soviet-backed and socialist-leaning Palestine Liberation Organization, he was more emphatic about Arab responsibility than anything else. In the clip, he does condemn a scene of brutality that had been caught on camera, but he does it in a way where it would seem that this type of thing was an exceptional case of soldiers getting out of hand as opposed to an example of continuous and systemic brutalization. When confronted about Israel’s siege of Gaza last year, he tried to claim that Hamas was somehow aligned with ISIS (they aren’t), ergo killing children is fine.

As for this idea of ‘Scandinavian social democracy’, let’s be serious. Scandinavia has a military budget that is far smaller than ours, hence the reason that they can fund healthcare and free college studies. But even then, they are not all that great. Scandinavia, like the rest of Western Europe, is in the midst of a refugee immigration deluge caused by American adventures in the Levant and North Africa. As a result, a right wing movement that is arguably more racist than ours, if that is possible, has found a resurgence among the voters.

By aligning with the Democrats, Sanders is giving tacit approval to the very party that launched the less-remembered 1918 First Red Scare, overseen by Woodrow Wilson, as well as the 1947 Red Scare, begun by Harry Truman. This is the same Democratic Party that jailed Socialist Party Presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs (allegedly Bernie’s hero), red-baited the living daylights out of Henry Wallace’s Progressive Party campaign in 1948, revoked Paul Robeson’s passport in 1950, gave final allowance for the Bay of Pigs invasion, and brought American terror to Korea and Vietnam.

One of the polemics that ended up being one of Murray Bookchin’s best was titled LISTEN MARXIST!, written in 1969. Bookchin had been involved in the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and saw way before anyone else that the independent spirit of the counterculture was going to fizzle out, that the glory days of Paris 1968 were flashes in the pan and the New Left was selling its soul to a type of Marxist dogmatism that can only called one thing, a cult. Bookchin was involved in revolutionary politics because he wanted to talk about socialism as a living, breathing, modern system of emancipatory liberation politics. Instead, he saw his comrades falling into a morass of Stalinist, Trotskyist, and Maoist locker room scuffles.

That is exactly my feeling about the whole Bernie Sanders thing. I am far too jaded by the Democratic Party to fall into formation and join in the chorus line. Now, if Bernie Sanders was doing something intellectually stimulating, like issuing an anthology of his favorite socialist writings as a sort of AUDACITY OF HOPE with a little more punch, and trying to have a conversation about socialism, that would be respectable. I would be on board and a full-time volunteer for a Quixotic campaign where, knowing full well he is going to lose, Bernie encouraged letting a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred schools of thought contend so to foster a national dialogue about Marxism, the Industrial Workers of the World, Leninism, and other varieties of social democracy. But instead we get this personality cult:

Chairman Sanders says fight self!
Chairman Sanders says fight self!

This is not a political campaign, it is a corralling action for Hillary in the form of a faux-leftist folk music concert. The Democrats needed a distraction to keep the masses in line because they know that people are not feeling inclined by destiny to vote for Hilary in the same way that I felt proud to vote for the first black president. They understand very well that people are sick to death of the Clintons. They also know they look like complete hypocrites for essentially installing a dynasty after agitating against the exact same thing with the Bush family. So who do they throw into the ring but Lincoln Chaffee to shore up the right and Bernie Sanders to pull in the left.

Personally, I have remained somewhat hopeful for Jim Webb, who very well could at some point pull a Hail Mary and steal the show in the last minute. A populist, moderate Southern governor sneaking in under the radar and stealing the race from the establishment Democrat, where have I heard of that before? Oh, right, that’s what happened in 1992 with Bill Clinton!

I do have a wisp of sympathy for those disillusioned Sanders supporters, honestly, I was a very religious Catholic and parting ways with Mother Church had its harsh moments. But here’s the rub, American electoral politics at the national level are simply far too corrupt to affect real change. We have not had a legitimate election probably since Richard Nixon put in the fix in 1968. By the time Ronald Reagan came around, everything was stage managed. Obama, for all his achievements, was less of a political scientist and more of a rock star, and that primary contest in 2008 against Hillary Clinton was closer to American Idol than American democracy.

If you want to see real change in our world, you need to do it the old-fashioned way, by working in collaboration with others to create structures that might be able to stand in for the corrupt old ways of the world, you can’t affect change from the voting booth, FaceBook, or the internet. This is about solidarity and forging cross-cultural alliances.

Perhaps one place to begin would be with the #BlackLivesMatter folks. They have just unveiled a platform with a series of tenable, real policy solutions to curb police violence. And the perfect group to promote that platform are the progressives now flocked around Bernie Sanders, they have the resources, the finances, and the sense of morality that can help BLM flourish.

Only then, united as one, could perhaps a real revolutionary movement come about to change things. But that would require something akin to rewriting the American Constitution itself.

The next POTUS very well might be a Republican


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

August 6, 2015 marked two historic events in television history. On Comedy Central was the final episode of Jon Stewart as anchor of The Daily Show, while Fox News held a Republican debate featuring (literally) front and center Donald Trump. It was a true challenge to attempt to discern what to watch, on the one hand you have one of the funniest human beings in the history of news media and on the other you have Jon Stewart. But lost in the flurry of self-congratulation is an important fact. This election could very well end with a Republican victory. That may go against conventional wisdom, but there are some very disturbing facts to consider.

First, as emphasized by a recent New York Times Magazine article, two major provisions of the historic Voting Rights Act, which turned 50 this week, Sections 4 and 5, were gutted in the 2013 Supreme Court case Shelby County v. Holder, provisions which provided federal oversight to voting districts with a history of disenfranchisement. As a result, these problematic sections of the country, some in key battleground states, are rolling out all types of ridiculous registration requirements that were abolished five decades ago, like literacy tests or voter identification laws. In another haunting development, the window of time for early voting has been decreased significantly, making submission of absentee ballots more difficult.

Already we have seen efforts to heighten voter registration by the Democrats, including Hillary Clinton’s push for enrollment on the campaign trail and David Cicilline’s proposed bill to automatically register people when they go to the DMV, but these are steps that may prove to be too little too late. The disenfranchisement movement has been hard at work for years now and already has one victory under their belt. The supposed default nominee of the Republicans, Jeb Bush, ran a test-run of voter purging as governor of Florida in 2000 that handed his brother those key electoral college votes and thus the election. In 2004, the state of Ohio was handed to Bush with a margin later found by a congressional report to have been rigged. There are now 34 states, including Rhode Island, that require identification at the polling place, cards which are hard to obtain for elder and minority voters who lack transport or time to get to the DMV.

But another fact that people need to consider is what will happen when people Feel The Bern-Out. I can respect the enthusiasm of those supporting Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, but there are no promises that he will gain the nomination, especially with key endorsements from labor and other groups having been sold to Hillary Clinton years ago. If Sanders loses the nomination, he has promised to direct his supporters to Clinton. But what is to guarantee they will follow his directions?

In 2000, traditional Democratic voters, disgusted with the Clintons and unimpressed by Al Gore, defected to the Green Party and cast ballots for Ralph Nader. This time around, the Greens are pushing an alternative first female president, Dr. Jill Stein, a woman of tremendous courage, intellect, and insight who lacks the finances necessary to buy this election. Some have even gone as far to argue that Nader votes were the reason traditional blue states went red in 2000. In our faux-democratic two-party plutocracy, there are not many things that differentiate neoliberals and neoconservatives. But in the minor places they do differ, such as in cases of choice, Affirmative Action, the environment, and labor, there is a dramatic impact to be seen. Already women’s rights are yet again on the chopping block, this time thanks to a series of deceptively edited undercover videos filmed by disciples of James O’Keefe, the ACORN video guru who successfully destroyed a non-profit whose only sin was holding voter registration drives. The entire field of Republican candidates knows that these videos are fake, but they are using them as talking points to boost their campaigns.

This is a foreshadowing of things yet to come should a Republican steal this election, something I worry could very well happen. And part of the fault will lie with the Democrats. Instead of relying on the old methods of gaining electoral victories, such as by hitting the pavement and going door-to-door to register voters, they are obsessing with the wonders of the internet and the myriad of ways they can shovel money into the trough of the Democrats. Lewis Black once had a brilliant comedy routine where he described the Republicans as the party of bad ideas and the Democrats as the party of no ideas. That seems to be coming true as we move towards election day. Instead of #FeelTheBern, it should be #FeelTheRegistrationForm.

kaGh5_patreon_name_and_message

Rhode Island joins Bernie Sanders nationwide event


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
20150729_190140
Lauren Niedel

About 40 of the estimated 100,000 people across the country at house parties for Bernie Sanders were crammed into the standing room only function room at Pinewood Pub and Pizza in Chepachet, Rhode Island last night in hopes of electing the independent Vermont senator, who identifies as a socialist, president of the United States.

This was Sanders’ largest organizing event in a grassroots campaign that has surprised pundits.

Lauren Niedel of the Progressive Democrats of Rhode Island, coordinated this event. She welcomed the crowd to what she called “the official launch of the Bernie Sanders Campaign.”

“RI is not the epicenter of Presidential politics,” said Niedel, “but New Hampshire is, and we’re not too far away.” She discussed Sanders’ 12 point plan, his strong stance on climate change and the environment, his call for a $15 minimum wage, and getting money out of politics by overturning Citizen’s United.

In answer to a concern about Sanders on guns and gun control, Niedel pointed out that Sanders has a D- rating from the NRA (National Rifle Association).

An Internet slowdown at the restaurant combined with overloaded servers made it difficult to start the livestream of Sanders’ talk. The room devolved into a couple dozen conversations when suddenly Sanders voice could be heard from the speakers saying, “We have to combat institutional racism in this country.”

That’s not a bad place to start the stream.

Sanders’ mantra in this speech was “enough is enough.” He called for a path to citizenship and comprehensive immigration reform. He called for Medicare for all – a single payer system. “The only way we can take on the billionaire class is when we put together a strong grass roots movement,” he said. “That’s what I mean by political revolution.”

Sanders’ simple message and blunt delivery resonated with those in the room. There was applause and cheers throughout.

“When we stand together there is nothing, nothing, nothing we cannot accomplish,” said Sanders, towards the end. A woman from off camera gave Sanders a photograph of Gandhi, but the room is so loud and energized I couldn’t hear what she said. The earlier conversations had resumed, with more animation and at a higher volume.

Niedel got the room under control, and asked people to rise one at a time, to explain what it is about Sanders that’s captured their imagination and makes them want to work for his underdog campaign. The answers are revealing.

“When I heard Bernie Sanders speak, it rang true. Here’s my voice.”

“I think Bernie is probably our last shot, to be honest. A man with integrity. I figure I’ll throw my weight behind him and hope for the best.”

‘I’m for the people. I want to keep power away from corporations.”

“We have a 15 year old going to college in a few years and we’re still paying off student loans for us.”

“He’s real. I like what he says. It’s about time somebody stood up for the middle class and those that can’t stand up for themselves.”

“He’s one of the first to talk about ending hunger and ending income inequality.”

“I saw the filibuster in 2010 and it moved my heart, moved my spirit.”

“My grandson asked me what I was doing. I said I was researching Bernie Sanders. He asked me why I don’t just watch it on the news? And that smacked me in the head. How do you explain to a 12 year old that the media is bought?”

“He speaks to the values that most people in this country believe in.”

“Bernie is saying all the things that I want to hear.”

“I’m a recovering Republican. After the bank crisis I had an awakening. The system had been corrupted by big money. I really like Bernie’s message. He’s not selling himself.”

“In my life I have mostly voted for the lesser of two evils. I like what Bernie is saying.”

“He’s our last chance.”

On the subject of Hillary, people were sure of one thing. They don’t really trust her.

“We need an alternative to Hillary.”

“I would love to have a woman for President, but I just can’t trust Hillary.”

“When I learned about Hillary and Monsanto, that totally turned me off.”

“Sometimes you make a few too many compromises, and I think that’s the case with Hillary.”

“Hillary has Wall St. written all over her.”

An interesting series of comments turned into a conversation about Sanders’ identification as a socialist.

“I’m a long time socialist, first time socialist voter. If Bernie could lean a little further to the left, I’d be stoked.”

“Bernie needs to find another word (besides Socialism). Like Humanity. Humanist.”

“Socialist is a negative tag. He’s a Humanist.”

“What it really means is that he wants everybody to have a living wage. This is what socialism is.”

“The biggest socialism in this country is the biggest rip off: corporate welfare.”

Patreon

Building an independent left workers’ movement


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
20150721_185057
James Patin and Alex Rothfelder

James Patin, of Worcester Socialist Alternative and recently returned from Seattle, delivered his impressions of the reelection campaign of socialist city councillor Kshama Sawant as she fights to retain her seat after having been instrumental in passing a $15 minimum wage in that city, something critics claimed could not be done. Patin spoke in the Worcester Public Library at a public discussion on the rise of socialist candidates in the United States and the possible impact of a Bernie Sanders campaign on building an independent left workers’ movement separate from the Democratic Party.

Patin explained that in all of her campaigns, Sawant accepted no corporate donations. The average donation to Sawant runs between $40 and $50, as opposed to an average of more than twice that for other city council candidates in Seattle. Candidate Sawant has the highest number of individual donations in the state of Washington. Sawant has accepted a salary for her elected position of only $40,000 a year, an “average worker’s salary,” and gives the rest to charity.

20150721_185137During her first two years in office Sawant has lead the successful fight to raise the minimum wage to $15 in Seattle, fought to stop evictions and institute rent controls with an eye towards affordable housing for all, and helped pass a resolution to change Columbus Day to Indigenous People’s Day.

For her next term in office Sawant is seeking to bring municipally funded broadband to the entire city, deliver on rent control and increase taxes on the rich. One of her opponents has already spent $60,000, in one week, to beat her. The “two corporate parties” said Patin, are campaigning hard against Sawant, and they seem to have unlimited money to do so.

The two party system is the problem, said Patin, and no one candidate, not Sawant, not Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein, and not even socialist-independent turned Democrat Bernie Sanders is going to be able to challenge the system in a meaningful way by themselves. The accomplishments of independent candidates are temporary and limited, said Patin, state and federal forces will overturn or sidestep gains made by independent candidates.

The key to change, Patin believes, is not about electing an individual but about creating a mass movement. Democrats, like Republicans, are owned by the billionaire class. Sanders is calling for a political revolution against the billionaire class, but he’s doing so from within the two party system controlled by billionaires. It seems a recipe for failure.

Kshama_Sawant_at_University_Commons_Groundbreaking
Kshama Sawant (from Wikipedia)

It is the position of Socialist Alternative that Sanders cannot win the Democratic primary. Many in the room foresee a Jesse Jackson moment where Sanders will take his grassroots mass movement and hand it over to Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton after the primary. This is one reason why Socialist Alternative is not endorsing Sanders. They want him to run as an independent, free of the two-party system.

Patin was no more hopeful for the prospects of Green Party candidate Jill Stein. Stein, like Sawant, has declined corporate donations (though the Green Party accepts them) but Stein, says, Patin, is “boring.”

[Note: Tony Affigne, of the Green Party of Rhode Island, contests this. He sent me the following note:

To the contrary, the Green Party does not accept corporate donations, and never has.

“From the Green Party of Rhode Island’s donations page:

“‘The Green Party really is different- we don’t accept corporate money. In Rhode Island, where money seems to dominate politics, the Greens are the only party that accepts no contributions at all from corporations or corporate PACs. We rely entirely on small donations from people like you. Please make a donation today!’

“From the national Green Party’s donations page:

“‘Corporations are not people. The Green Party of the United States and its candidates only accept individual contributions from real people. People like you. Please donate today.'”]

In the discussion that followed Patin’s talk, moderated by Socialist Alternative member Alex Rothfelder, the consensus of the room was that it’s not about the candidate, it’s about the movement. So for now, they are not drinking the Sander’s Kool-Aid. For these socialists, elections are not about effecting political change, they are opportunities for mobilizing large numbers of workers towards the goal of enacting meaningful socialist reforms.

Then again, there’s no denying the force of the personality of Kshama Sawant. As much as it’s “not about the candidate,” Sawant is a powerful speaker who exudes a charisma that makes it very much about her, as much as she might try to deflect it.


I wrote about Kshama Sawant when she spoke ahead of last years climate march here:

Fighting climate change will require radical economic solutions

Patreon

An interview with Providence NAACP President Jim Vincent


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

11329821_1571480333112100_8538127039472428906_nOn July 21 I had the opportunity to sit down with Jim Vincent of the Providence NAACP and discussed a variety of topics.  Mr. Vincent is a graduate of the 1973 Dartmouth College Urban Studies and Government program and hold an McP in City Planning from the University of Pennsylvania.  Our conversation covered a variety of topics, including the prison and judicial reform Gov. Raimondo recently enacted, police recruitment policies, and the national election.

The NAACP is one of the oldest still-extant civil rights groups in America.  Founded on February 12, 1909, it has been a major advocate for the rights of black and brown people since its inception, working to abolish Jim Crow and promote desegregation.  It has been especially active in support for LGBTQQI rights and AIDS activism.  This was especially prominent when Julian Bond, former Chairman, boycotted the 2006 funeral of Coretta Scott King, wife of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. because the family had chosen a church that opposed gay rights.

kaGh5_patreon_name_and_message


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387