Commie Curmudgeon

THIS BLOG HAS MOVED

2007-03-03T13:28:00.000-08:00

There is now a Commie Curmudgeon (II): http://commiecurmudgeon.wordpress.com. That's where I'm writing posts now.

If you've got a link to Commie Curmudgeon (aka No More Big Wheels), and you want to keep linking to Commie Curmudgeon, please change your link to the new address.

Thanks...

New Posts at the New (Version of the) Blog

2007-02-14T00:23:00.000-08:00

I'm starting to post things at the WordPress blog. I've still got things to learn there, but I like it much more over there now, so unless something goes really wrong, that's probably where I'll be posting. So, people might want to start thinking about changing their links to Commie Curmudgeon if they have time.

These are two recent posts at the WordPress blog:

A Welcome Victory for Jeff Luers

Political Compass Score

Bird Flu

2007-02-11T16:03:00.000-08:00

No, I don’t want to talk about the recent scare in England or that
depressing book by Mike Davis. I want to talk about the new song from M.I.A.! With my antique computer, I actually managed to view a choppy copy of the video… The song is very good, no surprise there. It goes much more to her South Asian roots than much of her other material – the closest that M.I.A. has come so far to sounding like Transglobal Underground. Of the three songs that she’s put on the Internet so far, this is actually my least favorite. (My favorite is that extremely short mystery song being referred to (probably just tentatively) as "Talk About Moi." And I think "XR2" also has an edge over "Bird Flu" - though I might be the only one who thinks that.) Still, it’s damn good and damn danceable. And the video is certainly fun to watch…

These are a couple of other things I’ve been listening to this week:

Dubstep Allstars, Volume IV – For a long time I had no desire to hear this and then, tonight, for some reason, I was just in the right mood. The music is like drum and bass and bass and bass and bass. It is quite different, and sometimes even musical, but I also think, at least in this compilation, that the dubstep can be very funny too. In fact, sometimes it’s a Skream!

Sister Nancy – One, Two... - I don’t like the way people overuse this word, but once again, I have to use it… I can’t begin to describe how COOL this music is. Sister Nancy is the true queen of the dancehall. (Oops, there goes another cliche. But be assured that Sister Nancy is not a cliche!)

DJ /Rupture and now Thievery Corporation have mixed, featured, and sampled Nancy's stuff. But this is one case when it’s definitely worthwhile to go right to the source.

Forced to Move to New Blogger and Google

2007-02-09T07:38:00.000-08:00

Just a technical note. Blogger forced me to switch to New Blogger, which meant opening up a Google account. Earlier, it had given me the option to do this another time, but this time it gave me no choice. Or maybe I couldn't find the choice this time because I was about to go to sleep. (And now I'm up much longer than I'd planned to be. I was simply planning to make a couple of changes in my profile, just for fun...and then I was bothered with all this crap.) I'm not crazy about being forced to open a Google account, and I didn't want to do this right now. (I didn't feel like making any changes - for various reasons - until I get another compuer, which I'm hoping to do within the next month or two.) That makes me wonder about whether I want to continue with Blogger, especially now that there's no escaping the fact that Blogger is Google. Open to other options now...

It's Bob Marley's Birthday - Tell The Children The Truth!

2007-02-06T21:00:00.000-08:00

Looking for the best blog to visit on Bob Marley's birthday and, not surprisingly, I found that it was Wayne&Wax. Very nice post there... I love the song that Wayne quoted, too. I should add that I'm not exactly a proponent of Rastafarianism, but I think that Bob's criticisms of "Babylon" always held a lot of truth. The Babylon that Bob Marley spoke of is not just a religious idea; it's a scathing (and so true) picture of capitalism, of empire, of a world ruled through social injustice and oppression. I love these lyrics that Wayne quoted:

Babylon system is the vampire, yeah (vampire)
Suckin the children day by day, yeah
Me say, the Babylon system is the vampire, falling empire,
Suckin the blood of the sufferahs, yea-ea-ea-ea-e-ah!
Building church and university, wo-o-ooh, yeah! –
Deceiving the people continually, yea-ea!
Me say them graduatin thieves and murderers
Look out now: they suckin the blood of the sufferahs (sufferahs)
Yea-ea-ea! (sufferahs)

Tell the children the truth
Tell the children the truth
Tell the children the truth right now!
Come on and tell the children the truth...

Radio - Part I(?)

2007-02-04T07:30:00.000-08:00

I originally wrote a post that attempted to describe some of my impressions of a few commercial radio stations on the FM dial, before getting into the noncommercial stations. But then I realized that I might have gotten some of the stations confused. For instance, was the "underground" hip-hop show that I actually kind of liked on Friday night Hot 97 or Z-100? It's all a blur to me. In general, I can say just a few things about commercial radio on the FM dial:

First of all, I don't even listen to the commercial FM rock stations anymore, because they're so conservative and so dreary. Sometimes, I listen to the dance stations, because they're not quite as bad, but I can't get too excited about them. When I do hear music that I like on commercial radio, usually, these days, it's hip-hop. That's not to say I like most of the hip-hop on commercial radio; most of it is bad. But some of it is kind of good, and at least I find this music a little more fresh (no pun intended) than all the same old fucking rock music.

For a while, I was enjoying the reggaeton station, La Kalle, at 105.9, but I really got tired of it... Not because I got tired of reggaeton, but because La Kalle was playing the same few tunes over and over again, like any commercial radio station, and there simply wasn't enough variety. Plus, as with much commercial radio, the commercials really stank. So, that's the end of my honeymoon with La Kalle...

Radio has always been, and remains, a rewarding medium for me, but for the most part, it's noncommercial radio. I can't do a comprehensive post on radio in general, because the only stations I really pay attention to are the noncommercial ones. So, scrap the more general post about New York radio here; let's just say I'd like to mention a few shows and stations that I've been listening to. (And then, sometime later, maybe, I'll mention some more...)

**************

For well over 20 years, I have gotten a great deal of pleasure and muscial education from WFMU (91.1). In fact, most of the people I know feel the same way. If the general public at all resembled my own set of acquaintances throughout the years, then WFMU would be, by far, the most popular and most famous radio station in the whole New York metropolitan area, if not the nation. Of course, this is not the case. As far as I know, it is just a little college station (although, from what I understand, it severed ties with the college that it once belonged to, though I don’t completely know all the details). I suppose that WFMU is popular among my acquaintances because it is popular among struggling musicians and radical left political people, two sets of people whom I’ve been acquainted with quite a lot over the years (that is, relatively speaking – because, as everyone knows, I don’t exactly hang out with a lot of people in general). Also, strangely enough, I’ve been proofreading fairly often with someone who was once a WFMU DJ. But, then, that shouldn’t be surprising if you know anything about night shift proofreaders (i.e., rather unusual characters much of the time)...

If anyone were to ask me what kind of music, exactly, WFMU plays, it would be difficult to name all the genres, because the station goes all over the place, especially along the edges of popular music. Over the years, I’ve learned a lot from WFMU about rockabilly and psychedelic music as well as hearing a lot of the best, edgiest stuff being played in the rock clubs. I used to love a show on WFMU that focused almost exclusively on guitar-heavy girl pop. At the same time, I’ve also found WFMU to be a very good source for hip-hop, and I’ve been listening a lot lately to the Wednesday (late) night hip-hop show. I also like the world music show on Saturday afternoons. (And, by the way, I’m not going to name and link to all this stuff (although I have linked to the hip-hop show before). Go to the main site and you’ll find it – it’s all very easy to navigate.)

**************

Last night, I listened to the Saturday night reggae shows on WHCR (90.3). I don't know much about this station except that it is a small station connected to City College (CUNY) and that it bills itself as "The Voice of Harlem." I don't think I would have gotten it in Staten Island or even Brooklyn, but it comes in nice and clear here in the South Bronx. I've found some hip-hop on this station and some jazz. But mainly, I tune in for the reggae, especially the Saturday night reggae (though there are also a couple of other reggaae shows, on Thursday and Friday); this has been a sort of staple for me.

The first show, from midnight to 3am, covers a wide variety of reggae music, most of it good, some of it a little difficult to listen to. Although, of course, “difficult to listen to” is a subjective matter. A lot of people I’ve spoken to find dancehall music to be the most difficult to listen to, but this is actually my favorite kind of reggae music. Admittedly, the social content of dancehall sometimes leaves something to be desired (although sometimes it has been quite good, especially in recent years); however, I appreciate the heavy beat, much of the MC’ing and the stripped-down quality. I also like the old DJ-toasting music that I hear on this station, and I do like the classic reggae, especially for the social content. (I do find Rastafarianism as unbelievable as any other religion, but the old Rastas also have conveyed the best egalitarian and revolutionary social messages.) The only thing in reggae that I really find difficult to listen to is the slow, quasi-soul-like love-ballad singing that can creep into any of the sub-genres. Frankly, I just don't like that “romantic” kind crooning. But overall, it is very nice to hear such an eclectic reggae show.

From 3 am to 6 am, there’s a show that often starts off with a few different singers of classic reggae (unless that's just the prior show running late sometimes) but always moves into a long stretch of Bob Marley, mostly concerts recorded way-back-when. Come to think of it, it seems that the DJ here plays the same exact lengthy tape of live Bob Marley music every weekend while he goes off and sleeps somewhere. (I don’t want to make any unfair accusations here; I’m just saying, this is what it seems like to me.) Sometimes, it’s very nice to hear old Bob the Rastaman for a long stretch of time; sometimes, I’m not in the mood for it, especially if it’s the same stuff every time. But I've got to say, it does set the right mellow tone for me for those Saturday nights when I'm lucky enough to be going to sleep by 6 am, and in that situation, the repetition doesn't bother me so much.

**************

I heard some different Bob Marley recordings on the reggae show over on WBAI (99.5 - Pacifica radio) late on Friday night, while I was proofreading. This reggae show was pretty good, and it also contained some interesting, socially conscious chatter (mostly centered on Black History Month and, well, black history). This was also the station that reminded me that Tuesday is Bob Marley’s birthday, an event that’s apparently being celebrated in a lot of places. (Happy birthday, Bob! Wish you were still with us...)

WBAI probably requires a post all by itself sometime. Though it would be a chore to write it... I’ve heard people lament that BAI is playing more music than it should these days and not enough talk. But most of my best memories of WBAI are of the music. Back in 1998 through 2000, I regularly listened to a DJ there named Delphine Blue, whose tastes I really appreciated. On her show, I got to hear a lot of the latest stuff coming out of the Asian Underground. But I think she left at some point during the fateful year of 2001. (She did move on to other stations and other projects, and I did hear her elsewhere, though not very often. But more on that another time - I should write another whole post just on Delphine Blue.)

Then sometime in 2002, I completely stopped listening to WBAI. They'd had some really nasty internal political shakeups there. At first it seemed as though there was a sort of evil group completely taking the station over at the expense of the good people, but then I realized that the “good” people were for the most part just as annoying and authoritarian as the "evil" group. (Which isn’t that unusual where internal leftist disputes are concerned...) The battles involving WBAI - as well as the overseeing network, Pacifica - were also a point of obsession for some people in the New York City activist “community.” Some people talked about WBAI as though it was the most important subject in the world – especially when they got to their ambitious ideas about somehow making WBAI more democratic and responsive to the listeners... Which talk, now that I think about it, I probably should have walked away from much more quickly.

So, by sometime in 2002, I got so sick of hearing about WBAI, I blocked most of that information out of my head and didn't tune into the station for a very long time. Now, I tune in once in a while, but I have no strong feelings about it one way or the other. Nonetheless, I am still glad that there are a few noncommercial stations like WBAI on the radio dial. I'm sure that noncommercial leftist stations can become disappointing too, but I can't imagine them getting as dreary as regular commercial stations. With all the crap out there, it becomes difficult to love this medium called radio. But I still do, I think...

Notes from the “Avant-Garde of Post-Fordism"

2007-01-30T05:30:00.000-08:00

Thanks to Wood’s Lot for pointing me to this very interesting article in Eurozine, The art of not becoming accustomed to anything - Precarious employment in flexible capitalism. The first paragraph certainly drew me in:

Interns, temporary agency workers, people on job creation schemes, and pseudo-freelances make up the vast reserve army of workers in precarious employment. For the majority, standards such as productivity or flexibility have become second nature. In this respect, they are the avant-garde of post-Fordism, constantly opening up new avenues of self-exploitation.

It's nice to know that I belong to an avant-garde that is "constantly opening up new avenues of self-exploitation." Actually, I don't know if that is nice, really. But it's always satisfying to read these critiques from Europe that recognize the existence of the (sub-)class and class struggle to which I personally belong. Of course, in the U.S., where this situation is far worse than in most of Western Europe, there is a real dearth of awareness about these developments.

Anyway, there are a few excellent passages worth quoting here. I particularly like the following:

According to Dorre, the existence of workers in precarious employment also creates a "zone of vulnerability." In contrast to the long-term unemployed, people in precarious employment work in the immediate vicinity of the core staff. The "integrated" always see, before their very eyes, the reality of the world of work as experienced by temporary agency workers or the self-employed, which at the same time means they are also constantly confronted with their own potential substitutability. A secure full-time job thus becomes a threatened privilege.

In somewhat less academic language, I like this old joke by George Carlin: "The poor are there to scare the shit out of the middle class. Keep 'em showing up at those jobs."

Only now, another group of people whose function is scaring the shit out of the middle class are also showing up at those jobs, at least for the day, or a few hours.

But do we count as "the poor"? For many of us, the answer is, well, sometimes. And sometimes, we can just be frightened by being right on the edge of poverty. We can be doubly frightened every time we become ill and realize that there isn't any health coverage – a worry that most of the Western Europeans really don't have, not at least in the same way. But they are the ones having all this dialogue about precarity, while we're generally not.

The article delves a little into some interesting thoughts while discussing the "cultural sector." This is a point that I actually have seen discussed for a number of years by some people in the U.S., in zines such as The Baffler:

Values such as autonomy and self-realisation, along with feelings, experiences, creativity, which once were deployed to counter capitalist commoditisation, have now become significant raw material salvaged for economic ends.

The emphasis should probably be placed on that term "raw material," because it means that these "values" and "feelings" are really reprocessed into something else, a fake sort of autonomy and self-realization – which is, of course, the major basis for self-exploitation.

The closing lines of the paragraph couldn't be sharper; they sum it up well:

However, whilst management literature now lauds non-conformism as the key to professional success - almost as a glamour model for obedience to the imperatives of flexibilisation - the Berlin band Britta ask in the light of their increasingly precarious situation: "Is that bohemian or underclass?"

Finally Doing a Meme: Reveal Five Things About Yourself

2007-01-25T01:00:00.000-08:00

OK, I’m finally taking on one of these blogging memes. Asfo_del passed this one on to me: Reveal five things about yourself. How could I resist? I think I’m going to say a few things about my cultural identity, background, and tastes. And within those five things that I’m revealing about myself, I guess I’m also revealing a few other things…

1. I am supposedly Jewish. I’ve mentioned this a couple of times on this blog, but not often. I was never brought up with much Jewish religion, and I rejected anybody’s attempt to educate me in that area from early on. (I refused to go for a bar mitzvah, even though I was told it would bring me lots of presents.) My father was a pretty strong atheist, because he had rebelled against my grandmother, who was a superstitious Jewish peasant from the Ukraine. My mother went down a different path - she became a big Shakespeare nut and an Anglophile, and I think she would have liked to have more of an opportunity to join the Anglican church. I’ve never felt partial to any church, synagogue, mosque, temple, etc. And I find it peculiar to be identified in a way that connects me to a religion I couldn’t possibly believe in, because I don’t believe in God. But, of course, there is a fine, long tradition of atheist Jews: Karl Marx, Rosa Luxemburg, Emma Goldman... (Not only atheists, but also different kinds of communists!)

2. I grew up on an international diet of takeout and restaurant food. (A family tradition that I proudly continue, no matter how broke I am.) My mother cooked once in a while and was actually a pretty good cook back in the day, but she worked full-time as a high school teacher and was essentially the steady breadwinner (while my father tried various kinds of employment in business, some briefly successful, many not), so there was really no time for my sister and me to be treated to much home-cooked fare. But we got to enjoy all the foods of the world, from Italian to Chinese, to Caribbean, to my favorite, Indian food.

3. I used to be a pretty big Desiphile; that is, I had a particular fondness for things (and some people) originating from, or descended from, the cultures of the Indian Subcontinent. I still have some of that tendency now, but it was much bigger during the 1990s. It probably peaked in the mid-late ‘90s, around that period of several months when I had a Pakistani girlfriend. I’ve always really liked Indian food, music and clothing, some of the art and many aspects of the culture, both the Hindu and Muslim sides. (Though I never had any interest whatsoever in the actual religions of Hinduism or Islam, or Buddhism, for that matter.) I’ve also been fascinated by certain social innovations found in India, such as the workers' co-ops in Kerala. Of course, some friends reading this already know all this about me, but some people don’t. I have usually tried to avoid admitting this to South Asian acquaintances (especially to certain people I know from the anarchist organizing scene). Anyway, the tendency isn’t as strong as it once was. For instance, I don’t listen to Indian music or Asian Underground as much. I’ve moved much more toward Caribbean sounds (which I also liked a lot back in the ‘80s), especially since I became a fan of M.I.A. (Oh, but wait a minute...)

P.S. I also still like to check out this rather interesting and very popular Desi blog. And I like this other one, from a Desi Londoner, especially for the food recipes (not that there’s much of a chance I’ll ever stay home and cook any of this – though I have made some pretty good biryanis in the past few years).

4. I used to absolutely love to go out dancing, and I was very uninhibited about it. People who knew how introverted I usually was couldn’t believe how much I opened up when I went out dancing. But, of course, this was at punk and new wave clubs, and then at acid house and techno events (clubs, mostly – I’ve been to very few raves). So I was never a disco dancing fiend a la “Saturday Night Fever”... And I was very selective about what I danced to. I had a girlfriend throughout my 20s who loved the fact that I liked to go dancing so much; that’s probably one of the things that caused us to stay together much longer than we should have. But she sometimes got annoyed because she wanted to dance to anything, and there were a lot of things that they played in the clubs that I just refused to dance to. That caused a few arguments but, then, so did everything else.

5. I tend to like television much more than movies. I don’t see much TV these days because I don’t want to pay for cable and I have crappy reception and I spend too much “spare” time already looking at the computer screen. But when I have access to a TV with decent reception, I’ll definitely watch it much more than I’ll ever go to the movies. Part of the reason is economic; movies in New York City just cost too much. But I think most movies are overhyped and overrated. I can’t think of the last time I saw a movie at the cinema and actually thought it was worth the price of admission. Although, I probably haven’t gone to the movies in at least a year... There are some TV shows that I got to see this year that I would watch regularly if I had the chance. I was quite impressed by the one episode of The Wire that I saw. And I confess that I like CSI – just the original one, the one that takes place in Las Vegas. I like most of the characters (my favorite one is Brass – yes, I like the cop more than anyone else on the show – because he’s such a good curmudgeon). And, of course, there’s the music – they’ve actually played both Dead Can Dance and Portishead... Right now, I do like to watch our New York public television station, WNYC/Channel 25 (where I still can get good reception). I like to catch Globe Trekker and Secrets of New York, and I've also caught some great concert footage on the Summer Stage show (hoping I'll get to see the M.I.A. performance again sometime).

Anyway, now that I’ve played this game, I guess I’m supposed to pass it on to a few other people. I’m going to try Dru Blood (assuming that nobody has sent her this already), ChuckO and the Inveresk Street Ingrate. (Although I have no idea whether or not any of them will want to do this - it's up to them.)

Good Words on Healthcare from the Attitude Adjustor

2007-01-21T19:00:00.000-08:00

Chris Carlsson has been writing some great posts lately in his blog Attitude Adjustor. I was going to discuss the points made in his last post about property rights and property, but I’m even more impressed by the discussion of healthcare. For instance, it was nice to see somebody pointing out how fishy the politicians’ recent ideas about “universal” healthcare really are. As Carlsson makes clear, these plans generally stink:

In summary, these so-called "universal health care" systems are designed to make sure we are individually forced to buy private insurance, unless we're so poor as determined by a needs-assessment by state bureaucrats that we get subsidized private insurance. The whole impossible edifice of administrative for-profit waste not only is not chopped down, but expanded by law!

And, regarding another person's discussion of the “greed” of the healthcare industry:

I hate the argument that "greed" is the cause here, because the phenomenon is much more structural than psychological. These private companies are bidden to make profits. That's what they do and to expect anything else without social pressure to restrict that basic purpose is naive at best. They do not exist to do anything useful or nice or helpful. If a company meets any actual human needs during its existence, it's an accident, a mere side effect of its single-minded pursuit of profit.

…A statement, I might add, that can be made about many things. I, too, am tired of the liberal left’s moralistic tsk-tsking and finger-shaking about “greed,” as though everything would be so much better if only those greedy people were not in charge. That kind of thinking won’t take us out of this nightmare. It’s the system, stupid!

And I really like this paragraph:

The most common lefty solution to this mess is to propose a government-run single-payer system. Like Medicare, but for everyone (and it's pointed out that Medicare only spends 3% on administration, compared to about 30% by the rest of the ass-backwards sickness industry). That would probably be better in general. But another piece of the problem that doesn't come up much is what we tried to touch on in our Talk last Wednesday, the idea of the "therapy society" wherein more and more of our lives are medicalized... as Adrienne put it, childhood is now a disease that must be treated with Ritalin, pregnancy requires medical specialization, even menstruation is increasingly being framed as a "treatable condition." The disconnection between life and nature proceeds apace, and this kind of alienated distancing imposed by medicalization is an ignored part of it. Even the alternative paradigms fail to address this problem adequately, since everyone from body workers to acupuncturists need steady clients and income...

I would emphasize that last point to anyone who thinks that the best route to better healthcare is to uncritically grant legitimacy to all kinds of new age shamen, homeopathic/herbalist potion peddlers, quasi-religious preachers of healing through prayer and meditation, etc. There are all kinds of snake oil salespeople who are eager to make a profit just like any old-fashioned doctor or licensed specialist. And by saying this, I don’t mean to morally condemn them; it’s the system that drives people this way.

CC gets right to the point when he writes:

Not to say that most of us don't feel like there's a lot going wrong, from body pain and ailments to persistent nagging depression and a profound sense that things aren't right. But treating it with professional services or drugs, our most common non-"solutions", might be recipes for ongoing dependence and profound misapprehension of what's really wrong with our lives.

To which I’d like to add...

I’ve seen quite a few friends and comrades talk about depression, a problem that I’m no stranger to myself. But I would encourage everyone not to fall too deeply into the trap of thinking that their depression is simply an illness that needs to be medically treated and cured (by qualified professionals, of course, who will charge for these miraculous services accordingly). I’m fond of the idea, which I’ve seen stated in a few different ways, that if the world is completely screwed up and you get depressed about it, that’s a perfectly normal reaction. The sicker person is the one who seems happy and comfortable with a sick world.

We need to encourage more people to ask the bigger social questions about why more and more people are suffering in certain ways. And we need to do that while we address the more immediate problem that so many people don’t have adequate access to the most basic, proven forms of medicine and treatment.

This Week, I’m Listening To (and sometimes dancing to, in my little room)…

2007-01-20T03:13:00.000-08:00

Nina Simone – Remixed & Reimagined – Why the growing need on my part to hear Nina Simone? Maybe because I had heard a few more things by her lately that I really liked. Or maybe it has something to do with the event and commemoration noted in the last post. Anyway, I went out and got this compilation of contemporary DJ remixes of songs that Nina recorded in the late '60s and early '70s. And I do like most of them, particularly “Obeah Woman” (DJ Logic Remix), “Funkier Than A Mosquito’s Tweeter” (Jazzeem’s All Styles Remix) and “Here Comes the Sun” (Francois K. Remix) (and I must confess that I like this so much more than The Beatles’ version…but maybe we can blame that on long-ago Beatles Burnout). I don’t really care for the inclusion of a couple of songs, such as “O-o-h Child” (which actually brings to mind bad childhood memories, because of the time when this song was a hit, and things did not get much brighter) or, especially, that embarrassing song from the Hair soundtrack. (Why would anyone want to remember that corny play, Hair?) I would much rather someone had done a mix of Mississippi Goddamn, which has lyrics that can be applied to the present situation in many ways...

Oh but this whole country is full of lies
You're all gonna die and die like flies
I don't trust you any more
You keep on saying "Go slow!"
"Go slow!"

But that's just the trouble
"do it slow"
Desegregation
"do it slow"
Mass participation
"do it slow"
Reunification
"do it slow"
Do things gradually
"do it slow"
But bring more tragedy
"do it slow"
Why don't you see it
Why don't you feel it
I don't know
I don't know

The Coup – Pick a Bigger Weapon – Yeah, this is growing on me. I think my favorite song on the album is “My Favorite Mutiny” – mainly because I like the music on this one best, and it’s got good rapping by a couple of other guys, Black Thought and Talib Kweli. But it’s also got hard-hitting lyrics just like most of the other songs on the album, more ways that Boots says “Goddamn” to the present system. (“Death to the pigs is my basic statement” – can’t get more direct than that!)

Portishead – Portishead – I find myself drifting back to the old Portishead (in this particular case, from 1997). Not sure why; maybe it’s because singer Beth Gibbons can sound a lot like a trip-hop Eartha Kitt, nicely complementing that remixed Nina Simone. Or maybe it’s because I’m a little depressed lately (for a change). I like Portishead’s heavy, gloomy lyrics. They do almost always center on loneliness and romantic longing and other personal feelings - at least on the surface - but there’s also always a little something else involved here, a reference to a broader kind of dread and angst that goes way beyond the typical pop song about love and heartbreak. (One of my favorite lines is from “Over”: “Oh, this uncertainty is taking me over.” Seems to be a song about ending a personal relationship(?), but it kind of describes a bigger situation that many of us are in - it's like a theme song for precarity!) Plus, I just deeply enjoy the music, which so beautifully combines hip-hop, discordant rock and the jazzy-torch-song kind of stuff that one might hear in a very old spy movie (though there are no overt James Bond references here the way there were in the 1994 album, Dummy). Also, hearing this album, I can understand why some people are saying that dubstep is so much like revived trip-hop... Portishead liked to excavate old sounds while calling attention to their aged quality (with the crackling of conspicously worn out vinyl and/or some more subtle sound-engineering effects), which is something they may have gotten from hip-hop but which also now reminds me a lot of, say, Burial. And, as with more advanced sounds from the present British scene, there was a good amount of experimentation on Portishead’s part - more than we might have expected at first (because Portishead actually had a little mainstream pop appeal) and more, especially, on this album.

MLK: The Red Reverend

2007-01-14T22:34:00.000-08:00

I quoted from this two years ago; it’s worth getting back to. From the site MLK: The Red Reverend?, focusing on the book I May Not Get There With You: The True Martin Luther King, Jr., by Michael Eric Dyson:

Less than a month before he died, King went to Memphis, Tennessee to publicize the plight of striking sanitation workers, most of whom were poor black men.

"It is criminal to have people working on a full-time basis and a full-time job getting part-time income," King says. "One day our society will come to respect the sanitation worker, if it is to survive. For the person who picks up our garbage, in the final analysis, is as significant as the physician, for if he doesn't do his job diseases are rampant."
…
Michael Dyson writes, "What is especially striking about [this] occasion is that King is documented in full transition from fighting segregation to opposing class oppression.
…
When Jesse Helms labeled King as "an action-oriented Marxist," he was closer to King's beliefs than many of King's friends and allies would like to admit, Dyson writes.

King was soon facing an unfamiliar problem. His own organization was putting up strong resistance to his "increasingly class-based analysis of racial suffering."
…
In 1967, King urged his organization to develop a program that would "compel the nation to have a guaranteed annual income and full employment, thus abolishing poverty."
…
In Dyson's notes (p 331), we have more info on Helms labelling King as a Marxist.

"Helms's remark is based on supposed records in the possession of the FBI. As David Garrow writes, the FBI's 'still "Top Secret" quotation of King saying "I am a Marxist" probably would be discounted by most observers as something King could never have said.' But Garrow contends that it might not be surprising after all for King to make such a remark in the light of King's 'distaste of the American economic order' dating back to the 1950s. Garrow says that in private 'he made it clear to close friends that economically speaking he considered himself what he termed a Marxist' (Garrow, The FBI and Martin Luther King, Jr., pp.213-213)."

"Anti-war groups and scholars say..." Bullshit.

2007-01-12T06:00:00.000-08:00

I tend to leave the anti-war reporting to other bloggers, since there are many out there who do that well, and try to focus on other issues and ideas that maybe aren't getting enough coverage these days. But once in a while some reporting about the anti-war "movement" catches my attention and annoys me enough that I feel compelled to say something about it.

This morning on Yahoo News (AP), I found something to particularly annoy me in the article, Anti-War Activists Rush to Hold Protests. It was these two paragraphs, which together, as far as I'm concerned, give a line of bullshit:

Anti-war activists have marshaled more than 100,000 protesters at U.S. rallies on a few occasions since the run-up to the Iraq invasion. But the vast majority of demonstrations have been far smaller than those of the Vietnam era.

Anti-war groups and scholars say that's because the draft has been eliminated and because protesters appear more willing to work within the political system — a sharp contrast from the 1960s, when many protesters regarded the system as corrupt.

Now, usually, I wouldn't even pretend to know what's on the mind of most people in the U.S. Time and again, for years on end, I was utterly puzzled by the number of people who actually seemed to believe our government, and who seemed even to support Bush's wars. But I do think I have some understanding regarding the issue of whether or not people today think the system is corrupt. Especially now that people everywhere seem to realize how much they have been lied to by George W. Bush and his entourage, I think it's fair to say that the vast majority of people think that the political system is very corrupt. (Though some of us would say that it's more than corrupt, because it's so flawed and rotten right from the get-go that it doesn't need to be corrupted to bring us horrifying results.)

BUT... The second paragraph that I quoted above says that people don't go to demos as much today because they are in "sharp contrast" to the people in the '60s who "regarded the system as corrupt." To which I can only say, "Say what?"

I would like to know who these "anti-war groups and scholars" are who've made the claims above. It seems to me that the reasons given kind of skirt the most likely explanation. Which is:

People today think the system is corrupt. But they don't think that joining the marches of the present will have any effect on anything. A good number might have thought it would during those couple of demos in 2003 when there were millions of people protesting the war worldwide, but they saw with their own eyes that these marches had no effect whatsoever on the actions of the U.S. and U.K. governments. People today do not believe in working within the system; in fact, most people don't do anything political within the system; a majority don't even vote. But they don't see how they could have any effect by doing anything outside of the system, either, especially if being "outside of the system" amounts to attending these same old marches, which seem to be following a very old script. (Though I also think it's kind of odd to say that doing that is outside of the system, since such activity fits within the most conservative interpretation of our basic right to assembly. But maybe some people have already forgotten that such a right is actually supposed to be part of our system?)

A number of people whom I know who've stopped going to these marches not only think the system is corrupt; they actually want to overthrow the system altogether. They are the complete opposite of all the people who these "anti-war groups and scholars" supposedly see as wanting to work inside the system. But those people whom I know (which group often includes myself) don't see these grand, tame, quiet strolls in the sunlight and/or penned-in rallies as having all that much effect on anything.

The "anti-war groups" quoted in the Yahoo article seem not to have recognized those other possible reasons for the lack of attendance at their rallies and marches. Maybe it's because that would be admitting some failure on the part of the anit-war groups. Or maybe the author of the article really only spoke to the scholars or even just made the whole thing up.

Remembering That Dirty Old Trick Called “Volunteerism”

2007-01-10T02:00:00.000-08:00

As some readers of this blog know, I first got into revolutionary political organizing (or whatever has passed for such in New York City) through the anarchist “movement.” That happened a little under ten years ago. I’d been hovering around classes and meetings (yes, we’ve gone full circle) since 1994: Brecht Forum, the Learning Alliance (now defunct) and, depending on the month, the Workers Solidarity Alliance or the Socialist Party... But my first full involvement with a revolutionary-minded group came into being in the spring of 1997, when I went on a bus ride advertised on a flyer in an old anarchist bookstore called Blackout, heading to a protest against a Clintonian summit in Philadelphia on “volunteerism.” It was there, on that bus, that I met a bunch of people from the Atlantic Anarchist Circle, the anarchist group that successfully recruited me.

The anti-"volunteerism" protest was a curious sight for me particularly because I had never seen such a visible anarchist presence at a demo before. That presence was not very large and, in general, it paled compared to what I would see at "anti-globalization" protests a couple of years later, but it was noteworthy back in 1997 to see any small group of protesters with anarchist signs and symbols (big circled-As and so forth) and, especially, the red-and-black flag. And those symbols and flags were definitely present at the demonstration against the "volunteerism" summit, showing that this "volunteerism" did not at all sit well with the anarchists.

Some people who hear this story might wonder for a minute why anarchists would be so eager to protest a "volunteerism" summit. Isn’t anarchism about doing things on a voluntary basis, that is, through voluntary cooperation, rather than depending on decisions and directives made by the state? But, while I may have a few complaints about anarchists these days, I do think most anarchists are wise enough not to be fooled by such a question. They know that “volunteerism” does not mean that the state will relinquish its command over anything that it might deem important in order to give the people direct power over such matters. (In fact, such a concept is so absurd, it is laughable, or maybe too absurd even to laugh at.) What “volunteerism” really means is that the state will create some propaganda that will help it to withdraw public funding from vital programs that would actually allow the people to have greater power, in order to redirect those funds to the enrichment of the ruling class and the military and police forces that protect it, as well as to fund wars and other missions of mass slaughter to ensure that the ruling class maintains global control. The state will continue to collect the same taxes from most of the people (though maybe not from the wealthy) and will continue to enforce a system through which people are coerced to work hard to create wealth for others without ever seeing the full rewards that their labor could bring if someone else didn’t own all the companies and the means of production. (This is assuming such people are lucky enough to find sufficient opportunities to work for someone else; otherwise, if they survive, they can look forward to a thoroughly degraded and inadequate existence.) In fact, when the state withdraws funding from the public realm and then asks the people to compensate through “volunteerism,” this will inevitably lead to a more HIERARCHICAL society, since, as we have seen, there will be greater gaps in income, wealth and access to services and thus many more people completely at the mercy of bosses or other higher-ups to meet their most basic needs.

That’s why it actually makes a lot of sense that I was recruited by an anarchist group, which advocated a future system based on voluntary cooperation, during my trip to a protest against “volunteerism.”

I was reminded of all of this by an article, Using Volunteerism to Privatize Society, by Bill Willers over at Dissident Voice. Willers does not dwell on how volunteerism actually works against the goals of those who would like to put an end to the state, or even just the bourgeois state. This is not his focus, as he seems most intent in protecting old left-liberal functions within the existing government (not the worst goal, if at all possible now (big if), considering the alternative that is being offered). But Willers does obviously understand how “volunteerism” is the justification for the shifting of funds collected from the public to more directly benefit the ruling class:

The justification to privatize all aspects of society has been advanced since the Reagan Era by a stepwise and systematic reduction in governmental funding of social services and of agencies that oversee public lands, this in the name of "trimming governmental spending." As part of this grand strategy, citizens are urged to take up the slack by becoming volunteers...

If one bears in mind that governmental funding of the public domain and of social services consumes tax money that could otherwise be directed toward the defense industry, corporate interests and tax cuts for the rich, the arrangement becomes transparent for anyone who looks closely. But one must indeed pay attention, because the package comes to us with friendly face and spun so as to pass "under our radar," so to speak.

Willers is also very good at articulating just how “volunteerism” leads people to work toward goals completely opposite those that they probably had in mind when they set out to volunteer in the first place:

What is so insidious about this setup is that it exploits those most humanitarian impulses that lead to volunteer activities. To the extent that volunteers can fill voids left by the defunding of governmental programs, the corporate and political forces wishing to drown government in their bathtub can use the work of volunteers to justify further shrinking of government. What results is a procedure that forces government "of, by and for the people" into an ever downward spiral.

All of this puts volunteers who operate from altruistic motives into an ethical dilemma, because in the face of slashed budgets, they know that much charitable work won't get done if they don't do it themselves. At the same time though, the savvy understand that the success of their volunteer work is being exploited by those intent on the overthrow of traditional society.

Of course, some of us might want the “overthrow of traditional society” in a different way, if we can overthrow the class system and capitalism. In a way, the promoters of “volunteerism” are actually aiming to bring us to a more traditional society, meaning one that less resembles the post-World War II era, at least in terms of economics and class relations, than it resembles the good old days of the 19th Century. But even if he uses different terms and frames the situation in a politically different manner, Willers obviously agrees that “volunteerism” really is just a dirty old trick.

This Week’s Listening List

2007-01-10T01:45:00.000-08:00

The Coup – Pick a Bigger Weapon (see last post)
Diplo – Favela on Blast (Diplo's balie funk mix, copied onto CD-R; I filled in the remaining space with some old Beastie Boys tunes, which actually segued very nicely, somewhat to my surprise)
Shockout (wild dub, dancehall and breakcore comp on Tigerbeat, with Wayne Lonesome, DJ /Rupture, Rootsman, Strategy)
DJ Spooky – Rhythm Science (CD accompanying a book of the same title, bought at discount from Labyrinth – theory, poetry and electronics, highly esoteric but interesting, and sometimes fun to listen to)
Leftfield – Rhythm and Stealth (a great neo-electro oldie from 1999; I think I’ve listed this before)
Lady Sovereign – Public Warning (yeah, it’s grime/hip-hop, but I’m hearing some old new wave ska; she raps and toasts nicely though the lyrics aren’t always the most profound; something relatively cheery to listen to while I wait for the next thing from M.I.A.)

Now, These Are Liner Notes!

2007-01-07T16:11:00.000-08:00

Finally picked up a copy of Pick a Bigger Weapon by The Coup, doing my tiny part for them after the bus crash, wanting to help them recoup. The music’s pretty good sometimes; sometimes it’s more laid back than I want it to be; I like hip-hop more than ever these days, but personally, I tend to like the stuff that’s a little more experimental musically, or more global, or a little rougher edged. Still, it is enjoyable, very decent soul and funk music a lot of the time, and it might grow on me.

But the lyrics are what make The Coup. It’s refreshing to hear an honest and direct revolutionary message in all of the songs. There are lots of good lines worth quoting; my favorite is from Head (Of State):

War aint about one land against the next,
It's po people dyin' so the rich cash checks.

That's a fact that many people need to be reminded of, including many people on the left.

But I was going to say something about the liner notes. As I said, now THESE are liner notes:

We are in a daily struggle against a soulless system. For many of us, that struggle is a solitary one - with the never ending rent race as a tactic, daily survival as a strategy, and guaranteed food, clothes and shelter as a long-term goal. Our weapons in this war are usually pitiful paychecks, hope-drenched hustles, mind-numbing medications, or frustrated fury that crashes and burns. We wage these battles individually, all the while understanding that most of the human beings in the known universe are going through this struggle and have a common enemy. The Ruling Class: That group of wealth-and-power-mongers who are able to command decisions on such varied things as how many people the U.S. military will kill in the Middle East, to the price of coffee beans in South America, to how many hours you're going to have to work to put food in your family's bellies.

We all have to up the ante. These individual daily struggles need to be fought collectively. Then we can win. Until then we will choose inadequate weapons, tactics and strategies...

A Treacherous Time for Radical Magazines – And I'm Looking Forward to Working On a New One!

2007-01-02T04:20:00.000-08:00

Readers will have to excuse my dark humor here. But I got into a nice e-mail conversation with ChuckO toward the end of 2006 regarding both the demise of Clamor Magazine and the Infoshop/Aleternative Media Project collective's plans to launch a new magazine. On the one hand the plan makes sense; with Clamor gone, there will be an even greater need for a new radical print magazine with an anti-authoritarian bent; on the other hand, the demise of Clamor is a symptom of the dire state of all radical print magazines at the moment.

The messages that I received from Chuck became even more dire when Chuck informed me (and the rest of the collective) of further legal problems between Clamor and its bank, i.e., the unexpected freezing of the bank account that belonged to an infoshop that Clamor had started, which might result in funds being denied to Infoshop/AMP and a number of other groups and projects, as well as the cutting off of a channel of distribution. I understand that this might not be all that dire a problem for Infoshop, but it still is a potential problem, for a number of publications.

I found some good details regarding the demise of Clamor, the bank situation, and the way this might affect other publications, over at Josh Breitbart's blog. Josh was a consulting editor at Clamor, but he forwarded e-mails from editors Jason and Jen, including a nice fundraising pitch that they wrote for all the publications that might be affected by this mess. Josh added his own fundraising efforts too, which was very decent of him. And it's nice that he didn't neglect to mention both Infoshop and Practical Anarchy.

...Which brings me back to more encouraging thoughts. Practical Anarchy has been put aside for the most part, but the efforts that might have gone into that one are going into the new magazine instead, and this does look a bit more promising to me. Tentatively called Infoshop News & Views, it looks as though it's going to be quite eclectic, focusing on both politics (or anti-politics) and culture, without the anarchist-specific kind of title or focus that would make this libertarian Marxist, and sort of ex-anarchist, a little less comfortable.

I had wondered whether I was really going to continue to be considered part of the Infoshop/AMP collective, not only because I've done so little for the Web site (I've sort of been waiting to work more on the print publications), but also because of the differences that I've had with Chuck and others who are more enthusiastic about waving the anarchist flag. Chuck and I have been talking and corresponding for more than ten years now, and we've both been through some disillusioning shit. But whereas Chuck seems more enthusiastic than ever about anarchism, I've been driven away by much of it. For me, the turn-off has had as much to do with dissatisfaction with anarchist writings (especially in recent times) as it has to do with experiences in the anarchist scene (which experiences are all already several years old for me, considering my recent involvements or lack thereof). On the other hand, whenever I'm faced with the dogmatism and controlling tendencies of many scattered Marxists, you'll see my anti-authoritarian side emerge pretty fast. Which is not to say that anarchists can't be dogmatic and controlling, even authoritarian; but anarchists with those tendencies don't have as much in the way of theoretical excuses to fall back upon. While Marxists and Marxians can offer much more satisfying critiques based on material circumstances, class relationships, and concrete historical conditions (as opposed to the runaway romanticism that characterizes a good number of anarchists, at least from what I've seen), I guess that anarchism in the ideal sense will always be a part of my outlook because I'll always have this incorrigible anti-authoritarian streak.

Anyway, given the fact that Chuck and the collective can still be so welcoming to such a Marxist (i.e., me), I hope that this signals the likelihood of a lot of openness and eclecticism. While I am happy to have contributed to publications from, say, the ICC, with a specific Marxist critique, I am quite happy to work on something a little broader, and I think that the Infoshop sort of publication might reach a larger variety of people, which is probably a good thing.

My main quarrel with Infoshop and other sites centered in the anarchist community is that they sometimes get too wrapped up in their own little scene. In that sense, Indymedia is even worse, especially in parts of the U.S. Too much energy is focused on protests or events that are assumed to be familiar territory for the readers, and the stuff involving people who specifically call themselves anarchists is blown way out of proportion compared to other things going on. But Chuck keeps telling me that he, too, is eager to avoid the typical scene-based insularity and the sectarian disputes.

And, finally, another thing that helps me to look forward to working with the Infoshop/AMP collective is that I might be paid a little something here and there. I've already received one small check as an encouragement, and this does help a lot. (I should add that in the fall of 2004, Chuck also supplied me with a used computer for my future contributions to the collective, which was very nice. However, instead of using it to contribute directly to Infoshop, I used it to start this blog. But nobody seemed to mind...)

In the past, I've broken my ass at many projects for nothing or virtually nothing; this started long before I was involved in radical politics, when I was just an arty writer fresh out of college and worked endlessly for the privilege of seeing my name in nice-looking journals that paid "copies" even to writers with well-known names. (The one small press book that I edited, that speculative fiction and poetry project called Air Fish, actually paid a few cents a word - though, as I recall, I didn't receive more than a couple of hundred dollars for all my efforts, which came to pennies or some fraction of a penny per hour, when all was said and done.) I used to think that it was somehow nobler to be eager and willing to do this kind of work for nothing, but now I realize that that kind of approach is better suited for someone who really is a noble. As Chuck and other Infoshop/AMP collective members realize, the rest of us can't afford to be quite so noble - not all the time, anyway - because we're struggling to survive.

The Last Day of the Year, and I Read the First Post of the Year That Made Me Cry (maybe because it's not about people...)

2006-12-31T09:15:00.000-08:00

I was very moved by a post written over at A Few Words Before We Go, a blog by a socialist, EJH (I believe the full name is Ed Justin Horton), who's also a team member of Lenin's Tomb. I think it was so moving for me because it wasn't about a person, it was about a cat, whose life is in peril right now. EJH says some very touching things in particular, but I won't quote them here; you have to read the whole story to really appreciate this. However, I will quote the final paragraph, because I feel Exactly the same way:

I love cats, and I have realised, as time passes, how much I identify with them, with their distrust of people, with their need to be alone. That is why I look, and why I need to look, into their eyes, to tell them I am with them, to tell them that they are a part of me and I a part of them. That some of what they feel is what I feel. I did not know, before, what I know about Ichy now, but now I do, and I am closer than before. I share, I feel what she feels. And sharing feelings is another term for love.

And, I think this is worth repeating - this is EXACTLY how I feel.

Maybe sometime after the revolution, when people are socialized differently and life is very different, I'll feel differently about people. But right now, I'll probably be less likely to relate to you, identify with you, and love you if you don't have four legs and a set of whiskers and you don't instinctively purr and meow.

And that might be my closing thought for 2006. Though maybe not... I might write another blog post or two if I don't get called in for work tonight, because I don't know of any New Years plans so far, and it's likely I'll just be sitting here in the house while all the people are away... Just me and the cats.

Rethinking My Obituary of James Brown (and related thoughts about "black capitalism")

2006-12-29T06:15:00.000-08:00

On December 25, while most people in the U.S. were busy observing a quasi-religious holiday (giving each other presents bought in celebration of a major religion known as Consumer Capitalism), I happened to be sitting by myself at a computer without any human distractions, only the company of a quiet and mellow cat. So it was a perfect time for me to do some blogging, and I thought I’d take the opportunity to blog about the death of the “Godfather of Soul,” James Brown. I thought it was a nice opportunity because people who were actually obligated to celebrate Christmas would not have the chance to post about James Brown in such a timely way. But ultimately, I scrapped that post (within a day) because it wasn’t very good. For one thing, I myself needed a little more refreshing and reminding about the details of Brown’s life story. And another reason why I wasn’t too satisfied with what I’d written is that I had made only one objection to making a sort of hero out of James Brown, and after I wrote this, I began to realize and remember a few other objections that I had.

As I wrote in my prior post, there is no disputing, at least as far as I’m concerned, that James Brown made some great music, that he especially did incredible things with beats and rhythms, and that he had a great voice and was a tremendous performer. There’s also no disputing that he extensively influenced much of the music that's been made since the 1960s and especially since the '70s, most especially music originating from the African American communities, but also going beyond that. He most obviously influenced funk music, which people say he “invented.” I would be reluctant to use the word “invent,” but I believe he was the man who gave this form of music its popular name and his performances and recordings overshadowed every other influence for a long time. He also was an obvious influence on hip-hop – extremely obvious, considering that there are probably hundreds of recorded hip-hop songs out there that actually sample him. And he made a big contribution, at least culturally, to the development of black power in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s, most obviously with his slogan, “Say it loud, I’m black and I’m proud!”

But on the down side… As I mentioned in version number one of this obit, James Brown’s ultimate idea of black power turned out to be “black capitalism,” which also, somewhat perversely, eventually made him sort of a hero for some conservatives and Republicans. Unlike most Republicans or conservatives, he actually did want to destroy racism and he supported helping the poor through food stamps and other publicly funded means. But, more like many an annoying liberal, he believed that the main problem to overcome in the present economic system was the fact that, because of racism and other forms of prejudice, not everyone was given an equal opportunity to succeed. And this is a common idea that I find to be very flawed in at least a couple of big ways.

One is that even if, hypothetically, all identity-based biases such as racism could be knocked down, there would still be extreme inequality under capitalism, because a system inherently based on exploitation and competition (not to mention alienation and all those other wonderful things) will always result in the success of the few at the expense of the many, and most of the few who do succeed do so because of advantages connected directly to specific, elite kinds of knowledge and/or already existing wealth. Thus, identity-based biases and bigotry based on things like race or ethnicity do not by any means comprise all of the barriers to most people's success.

Besides – getting to the second flaw here – capitalist relations will always also guarantee that some people will try to keep others down through bigotry based on identity groups. Racism, sexism and other identity-based prejudices and forms of social oppression function as major tools used by the ruling class to keep themselves in power and keep that power from being shared. Not only do these forms of bigotry directly help the ruling class to keep certain groups down socially and economically; they also help to divide the working class, keeping the focus on antagonisms between racial or ethnic identity groups, thus preventing unity based on economic/class interest. I think there is room for debate regarding how much racism - or sexism, for that matter - might exist, as we know this kind of oppression, separate from the existence of capitalism, but I don’t think anybody who thinks about it can argue that there has ever been evidence of capitalism surviving and developing without the support of racism, sexism, etc.

The ruling class will always know instinctively that they cannot depend simply on the mythical “invisible hand” of the marketplace to maintain the status quo – that is, maintain their own power and wealth. So, the kind of thing that James Brown sort of talked about when he talked about “black capitalism” and giving people an equal opportunity to pursue the American Dream is, as far as I can tell, impossible.

Thus, when some news bulletins reminded me that there was a strong element of the black power movement that became very critical of James Brown for being counterrevolutionary, I could only think how right all those black power people were - even if the “movement” really consisted of so many different ideologies, some of which I couldn’t possibly agree with either.

Subsequent to the first James Brown obit that I put up, in which I did voice the above objection (though somewhat less extensively), I also began to be reminded that James Brown was at many times kind of a violent bully - not only was there that notorious incident in which he threatened people with a gun when he thought they'd been using his bathroom (mentioned in the prior version/post); he also was an admitted wife beater and was known to be a tyrant toward other members of his band.

It was very impressive that James Brown ascended so far from being in such a low place economically and socially (he came from some very real poverty) to become so wealthy and famous and, most importantly, such a major influence on so much good stuff – that is, so much good music and good culture. As I said before, if anyone had a moral right to talk about how people could come up from nothing to achieve the “American Dream,” James Brown did, because he'd made that kind of progress himself, unlike so many politicians who might promote the same idea but who actually started with lots of wealth and privilege right from birth. But I can’t help wondering whether a big part of James Brown’s success was due to the pure aggression and the unstoppable egotism that also influenced some of his worst behaviors. Of course he worked very hard and he had a lot of this quality that we call “talent” (whether that sort of thing is inborn or whether it is more a product of social influences , etc.), and he was also very socially concerned in some ways and generous, but maybe he had to have a lot of negative crap in his personality too in order to succeed in capitalism the way that he did.

James Brown’s legacy, and my attempts to write about it, also made me think a little more about eulogies and obituaries in general and how these sorts of things should be written... I think that if we appreciate someone for a particular thing that he did, a contribution that he made, we should probably be very specific about praising him for that particular thing. Too often, we end up trying to praise some cultural icon as an all-around hero when the individual whom we’re discussing actually had an awful lot of flaws. It is certainly possible to have a lot of admiration for something that somebody did in his lifetime without necessarily thinking or pretending that he was great in all ways. And this is a far more honest way to remember someone, too.

CDs Bought at the East Village Tower Records’ Next-to-Last-Day 90-Percent-Off Sale

2006-12-22T23:45:00.000-08:00

Yeah, I was able to make one last stop at Tower Records, where they had all their CDs at 90 percent off…because Tower is going out of business tonight. Whooha! We’re supposed to shed tears about this? Tower Records, if you picked a corporate strategy that ultmately backfired, you have only yourselves to blame. But I’ve got to be grateful that I got a few decent CDs there at 10 percent the price (everything cost somewhere between $1.60 and $1.90). I had only half an hour to shop before going to work (yeah, I got a shift last night too – whooha, again!); if I had longer, I might have gotten more. This is what I got:

Heavenly Grooves – This is really nice stuff. Going back to 1996, described accurately on the inside cover as “A very special selection of female ethereal vocals in modern electronic music compiled by Oli Rosch of Hyperium Records.” Yes, it is heavenly; I would have been happy with this even if I’d paid full price for it.

Lycia – Compilation of Appearances Vol. 2 – I saw this group at the Projekt Records Goth festival at Irving Plaza in 1999 or so (a freebie that I got from being on an old CD reviewer’s list)… Next to Black Tape for a Blue Girl, they were probably the most interesting thing there. A few years ago, I was looking for them at full price. Right now, I’m not in the mood for this heavy, heavy darkwave/ethereal material, but sometime soon I will listen through the whole CD, and I’m glad I have it. And the picture on the CD cover is probably the best takeoff on Grant Wood’s American Gothic that I’ve ever seen (American Gothic, indeed!).

Distance to Goa 2 – Yep, psychedelic Goa trance, from 1995. Nothing spectacular here; I would have liked it more in 1995. But not bad for the background, and speedy enough. It kind of kept me awake during a proofreading job. Only complaint is that all the songs are too long. I guess people don’t notice when they’re on Ecstacy.

Dzihan & Kamien – Refreaked – Decent mixture of Latin beats and some Middle Eastern sounds, along the drum’n’bass continuum. It will take a few listens to decide if I love any of this. But so far, not bad.
-------------------
P.S. Nothing, of course, like getting music for free. Many thanks to Durruti at Love & Rage for sending me some very nice Brazilian electronic lounge music and drum’n’bass. Tomorrow or the next day, I’m off to asfo_del’s to sit for an old cat and maybe download some mp3s on the Living on Less computer. If I get a little more work in, maybe I’ll get a better computer and start doing this at home. (Though how long have I been saying that?) Then, if/when that happens, I might start a music blog too. A thought – that’s where I’m gong right now. (Of course, I will keep the commie blog going, but it might be nice to have something else out there.)

"Jingle Jangle with the Po"

2006-12-22T16:00:00.000-08:00

It's not like me to post holiday/Christmas material, but the other day, I got to hear a great old song, "Santa's Rap" by the Treacherous Three, on the WFMU hip-hop show, and I had to get those lyrics. Now, this is my kind of Christmas song. Here are some excerpts, thanks to ElectroEmipire.com:

Kool Moe Dee:
Ho Ho Ho
Open up ya do
I'm Santa Claus and guess what y'all
I got something to show
I came to bring some Christmas Spirit
I got a big bag now guess what's in it
Something for the rich and something for the po
So Merry Christmas and ho ho ho

L.A. Sunshine:
Ho Ho Ho Merry Christmas my foot
I'ma tell you what Santa really put
Under my so-called tree but in reality
Looked like nothin but a decorated pole to me

Special K:
Man, you talk about a tree it makes me wonder
Cause I never had a tree to put anything under
If I ever did luck up and get a tree
There was never anything under it for me

Kool Moe Dee:
Man I don't know what y'all talking about
Cause when I come to your town I just get chased out
I thought you would be happy to see Santa Claus
But all y'all say is stick 'em up and give me yours

L.A. Sunshine:
You lucky all you did was get ripped off
The next time just keep your big fat ass up north
Because after my last few Christmas nights
If I see you around my neighborhood I'm shooting on sight

Special K:
And I ain't even got a chimney for you to come down
So ain't no need for you to be coming around
Cause the last so called Santa that came in with a sack
Wasn't giving out presents he was taking them back

Kool Moe Dee:
Man y'all should be glad that I didn't quit
Cause I'm getting too old for this Santa Claus shit
Y'all thinking I'm getting presents made for free
I gotta' pay them elves and ain't nobody paying me

L.A. Sunshine:
You big fat whale you might as well quit
Cause I can name a hundred presents that I didn't get
And if I did get a present it would be a hand-me-down
Yo I got this for Christmas now how that sound

Special K:
It sounds good to me cause I'm about to freeze
You wanna see something look at the bottom of these
Me and my brothers can't go out at the same time
Cause a coat that's theirs is a coat that's mine

...

L.A. Sunshine:
To top Christmas off I had no loving in a while
I love to have sex but I can't afford a child
My girl wants a baby but I had to chill
She said if you don't want a baby then you take the pill

Special K:
What is Christmas for? Huh
What is Christmas for?

L.A. Sunshine:
What is Christmas for?

L.A. Sunshine & Special K:
Yeah! What is Christmas for?

Kool Moe Dee:
Wind up toys that don't wind up
Talking dolls that don't shut up
This is the type of present that you buy when you're poor
So that's what you have to settle for
And it ain't no secret that everything's sunny
If you're living in Palm Springs with all that money
Americanomics works and I won't argue that is true
But if the economy is getting better, getting better for who?
Well if you ask me I'm doing much worse than before
With the welfare cuts I don't eat no more
So if I did wanna' go out I couldn't go no where
Cause I ate every last one of them reindeer
Rudolph first I went down the list
I got so hungry I just couldn't resist
I ate Dasher, Dancer, Prancer, Dixon
Fried'em up and then started to mix'em
And before you knew it they were all gone
I wonder what y'all gonna do about my reindeer song

L.A. Sunshine & Special K:
We'll sing silent night and jingle bells
And all those christmas rhymes
Cause nobody gives a shit
About your reindeer and hard times
You just Jingle and Jangle and hang out with the po
and when you get your welfare check
You can rent them by the sto

...

Chorus:
Jingle, Jangle, Jingle for the po
Don't take us for granted cause you may never know
One day when you least expect it
We could even up the sco
So just jingle, jangle, jingle with the po
Sing!
Jingle, jangle, a jingle jangle with the po
Jingle, jangle, jingle with the po

--------------------
P.S. Looking at this a couple more times, I found a few missing words here and there that I filled in. I believe these were genuine mistakes, not just an effort to preserve the lingo. But many thanks to Electro Empire for having the words at all; they weren't that easy to find, not at least in such a complete version - as other people are finding out now, as evidenced by the hits I'm getting from searches for these lyrics.

Solidarity to M.I.A. in Liberia

2006-12-17T06:10:00.000-08:00

There’s some mean-spirited article at Pitchfork Media called M.I.A. Goes Crazy on MySpace, which disses M.I.A. for a few of the more rant-like things that she darted on her blog – like some comments about her ex-boyfriend (presumably Diplo?) that some people didn't like, and a few other words of hers. At the end of the article, the writer admits, "...we clipped some of the almost-not-quite-as crazy quotes (and possibly lyrics?), so be sure to check out both full blog posts on MIA’s Myspace.” Which I did...and by the way, let me provide a link, which Pitchfork didn’t bother doing...and also provide some quotes from one of those posts (which certainly doesn’t look crazy to me - though maybe I would have used more apostrophes and fewer exclamation points, but read it for the content):

IN LIBERIA I WAS INTRODUCED TO A YOUNG LEADER KIMMIE WEEKS, WHO WAS DOING A LOT TO HELP THE PEOPLE. WOMEN , CHILDREN , CHILD SOLDIERS ETC. I WAS FILMED AS PART OF A SHOW TO HUMBLE CELEBRITIES IN THE MAINSTREAM WHO SPEND ALL DAY SHAKING IT WITH PARIS HILTON AND SINGING ABOUT CLOUDS AND LIVING IT UP IN A GLASS HOUSE.

THE UN R THERE!!!! AND THE GOVERNMENT PEOPLE R
THERE, AND THEY HAVE ELECTED IN THE FIRST LADY LEADER EVER IN AFRICA, SHE HAD A HARD JOB JUST TO COVER THE BASICS!!!!!!!!

FOR THE U.S DAY TO DAY RUNNING OF IRAQ
IT COST APPROX 85 MILLION PER DAY.

5 OF THOSE DAYS CAN REBUILD BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE FOR LIBERIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4EVA

FOOD , WATER, ELECTRICITY R STILL MISSING BECAUSE EVERYTHING HAS BEEN LOOTED AND SOLD TO OTHER AFRICAN COUNTRIES, LIKE THE TRAIN TRACKS PAVEMENT THE CABLES FOR ELECTRICITY TO PASS THROUGH, EVERYTHING IS CLEANED OUT.

NOTE TO ANYONE READING THIS!!!!!!!
PLEASE LOOK OVER THERE, THEY HAVE BLOCKED THE ROADS TO JAFFNA WHERE I COME FROM . 500, 000 PEOPLE ARE BEING STARVED SYSTEMATICALLY TO DEATH. NO FOOD ALLOWED IN, I CANT EVEN BEGIN TO TALK ABOUT WHY THATS HAPPENING, BUT MAYBE U CAN. IT MAKES ME FREEZE , IT TOO CLOSE TO HOME.

I LIKE LIBERIA BECAUSE IT LOOKS GOOD TOO!!! I FELT ITS MY PLACE TO BE HAPPY ABOUT IT.

I DIDNT CRY WHEN I SAW STUFF. I WAS HAPPY. I SAW PEOPLE LIVING IN THE WORST CONDITIONS AND I WAS HAPPY BECAUSE PEOPLE STILL WANTED MUSIC, FILMS, DANCING, POP STARS. SO I PUT ON SOME LIP STICK AND TOLD THEM I LIKED THEIR HAIR. I DIDNT WANT TO TREAT THEM LIKE THEY ARE VICTIMS!!!!! AND FEEL SORRY FOR THEM….

I WANTED TO SAY

THIS ISNT A BLACK WHITE THING!
THIS ISNT AFRICA AGAINST THE WORLD THING
MAYBE NOT EVEN
RICH / POOR THING
WAR THING

ITS 1ST WORLD....MEDIA VS 3 WORLD MESSAGE THING.

"I NEED TOOLS
SHOW ME HOW TO USE TOOLS
ILL DO IT MY FUCKIN SELF AND SELL IT TO YOU!!"

-----------------
P.S. You'll also notice a more recent post about men in hip-hop making money off of women's booty, etc. - most of it sounds reasonable enough to me (and most of it is a pretty familiar complaint too), but the Pitchfork people seem to think that's all crazy too, from what I gather...

Solidarity and Support to The Coup

2006-12-17T06:00:00.000-08:00

I meant to post this a few days ago, but I had a trackball failure. (Fortunately, it wasn’t the whole computer…yet. And a new trackball cost only $20.) Anyway, I learned from Our Man Flint that the "raptivist" group known as The Coup got into a bus crash and is presently looking for support from whoever can provide it. I’ve written before about the vocalist Boots Riley, who is a dedicated communist rapper. (Though, admittedly, he did at least once belong to a Maoist gorup that I could quibble with, but from what I've seen, that certainly hasn't hurt the good social-Marxist message in his rap...) And, though I haven’t heard as much of The Coup as I would like (why isn’t anybody playing them – not even that good rap show on WFMU?), my impression is that they are a very worthy hip-hop group too...

But it seems right now that these are going to be pretty hard times for The Coup. As Boots says over on their Myspace blog:

We lost everything in that crash and fire. We were packed to live and do shows on that bus for a month. Most of us had every stitch of clothing we owned on there. We lost clothes, computers, recording equipment, cameras, IDs, phones, keys to cars and homes. We lost cash.We lost all our damn instruments and equipment to perform with. We were and are happy to walk away with our lives. But now we're home. Most of the band touring with The Coup has kids, rent that won't quit, bills, and holiday expenses coming. We need money, because like I said the band doesn't have the tools that they make a living with. Not only did we lose cash and material things on the bus, but we also were depending on this tour for money to make it through. It may take a year for us to see any money from the insurance company.

I have set up a Paypal account so people can make donations for The Coup. The money will be split between Me (Boots Riley), Silk E, Q, Steve Wyreman (guitar), and Riccol. Mr. Lif is setting one up on his site and when I have that info, we'll let you know.

And look at the blog to see the rest of those directions, to anyone who actually has money to spare...though I guess that category wouldn't include most of the readers of this blog, or fans of The Coup (why would people with a lot of money want to be fans of The Coup?), but you never know...
---------
P.S. By the way, I don’t understand anything about MySpace and this "friends" business and what that means in terms of access. I’m assuming that any links I put up on this blog will work...and that it’s OK to put them up here...

A Sharp Article on Creative (Anti-)Commons and the Fraud of Intellectual Property

2006-12-13T04:30:00.000-08:00

Thanks to Recording Surface for referring us to a fascinating (and very true, IMO) article on Copyright, Copyleft and the Creative Anti-Commons. To repeat a good quote from Eric (quoting from the words of Anna Nimus – though maybe it would be appropriate to add here, not born ex nihilo in the mind of Anna Nimus, but resulting from many influences, some of which are named at the end of the article)...

In an uncanny repetition of the copyright struggles that first emerged during the period of Romanticism, the excesses of the capitalist form of intellectual property are opposed, but using its own language and presuppositions. Creative Commons preserves Romanticism's ideas of originality, creativity and property rights, and similarly considers "free culture" to be a separate sphere existing in splendid isolation from the world of material production. Ever since the 18th century, the ideas of "creativity" and "originality" have been inextricably linked to an anti-commons of knowledge. Creative Commons is no exception.

If this statement confuses anyone, it’s worth backtracking to the beginning:

The author has not always existed. The image of the author as a wellspring of originality, a genius guided by some secret compulsion to create works of art out of a spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings, is an 18th century invention. This image continues to influence how people speak about the "great artists" of history, and it also trickles down to the more modest claims of the intellectual property regime that authors have original ideas that express their unique personality, and therefore have a natural right to own their works - or to sell their rights, if they should choose. Although these ideas appear self-evident today, they were an anomaly during their own time.

And some excellent lines later on:

Intellectual property is a meaningless concept - ideas don't behave like land and cannot be possessed or alienated....

Artistic creation is not born ex nihilo from the brains of individuals as a private language; it has always been a social practice. Ideas are not original, they are built upon layers of knowledge accumulated throughout history. Out of these common layers, artists create works that have their unmistakable specificities and innovations. All creative works reassemble ideas, words and images from history and their contemporary context.

...Intellectual property is fraud - a legal privilege to falsely represent oneself as the sole "owner" of an idea, expression or technique and to charge a tax to all who want to perceive, express or apply this "property" in their own production. It is not plagiarism that dispossesses an "owner" of the use of an idea; it is intellectual property, backed by the invasive violence of the state, that dispossesses everyone else from using their common culture.

The article goes on later to the point referred to by Eric, that the new idea of "Creative Commons" does not go nearly far enough in the "revolt against intellectual property" in terms of taking us away from this whole "intellectual property" idea.

I strongly recommend reading the article to get a better idea about Creative Commons and its development from the "copyleft." But I'll stick to quoting from the more basic outline about the nature of intellectual property, because I think that this is the most important information discussed in the article, as well as being basic stuff that a lot of people don't know or haven't realized.

And This Is What the Talk Really Was About

2006-12-10T02:00:00.000-08:00

Now, what the talk last night at 16 Beaver Street really was about was the thoughts that my friend Eve brought up regarding the personal and political, the 1960s and the present day, focusing on her experiences with the New York Radical Women and her close affiliation with Up Against the Wall Motherfucker, as well as some things more recently… And it was a good talk. It was also nice to have the Motherfuckers’ founder Ben Morea there, contributing his own unique perspective.

Ben also was the one who launched us into the discussion on the Middle East (by saying that Hamas and/or Hezbollah were both “spiritual and revolutionary” – which statement I simply had to argue with), but I wasn’t even really aiming my criticisms in the last post at him, either (I think he was pretty precise and measured in his follow-up argument); rather there were other people who annoyed me more, who more closely inspired my rebuttal here. I was thinking most about certain young people in the group. The people running the space drifted a little into the area that I was talking about, but there was one young woman in particular whose comments rang all those familiar bells. And I don’t mind how she disagreed with me, nor do I have any ill feelings about it; it’s just that she gave me some arguments that I do find very frustrating these days.

But once again, the real center of the talk was those ideas about the personal and political and how these perspectives might be weighed, intermingled, etc.

Eve also talked about the general “project” of the ‘60s and the idea that it was never really “finished.” Ben discussed what he and his group did in the ‘60s in relation to the idea of addressing revolution not only as the political revolution that many people strived for but a complete social revolution from within the self.

Personally, I don’t have these connections to the 1960s and spent much of my life trying to get away from people who would talk too much about the ‘60s, because many such people were, for a long time, dismissive of people like myself who had come of age after the ‘60s and wanted to try to effect some social change. (General attitude: “Oh, too bad you were just a child back then, when people were really thinking that way - we’ve been there, done that, you were too young to be involved when these ideas were really important to people.” Unfortunately, the old friend whom I've referred to in this blog as “M” gave me a bit too much of that attitude back in the ‘80s.) But in more recent times, I’ve gotten to know more of those older people - such as the ones I've just mentioned - who were quite generous in their attitudes and their willingness to share with, and even learn from, people of newer generations. (Besides, in the past ten years or so, if I got any ageism from the revolutionary minded, it wasn’t from the older people of the ‘60s but from the younger people involved in the “anti-globalization” movement who saw me as being out of place for being far too old.)

Overall, this was a good event, and I am glad that I got out to it, annoying moments notwithstanding.

Another Encounter with Left “Anti-Imperialism” and its Uncritical Champions of HezBollocks, Etc.

2006-12-09T21:34:00.000-08:00

I guess that by sticking to the atmosphere of my blog and the good company of left communists/ultra-leftists and genuinely anti-nationalist anarchists, I’ve become insulated from all the bad leftism that is out there, especially “anti-imperialism.” The ironic thing is that here in my corner of the blogosphere, I might get criticized for showing too much sympathy for the attitude, at least, of some people who would advocate for the militancy of fundamentalists or show some sympathy for same. In the case of pop/rock/rap stars, I have had to point out sometimes that I was not really defending the fundamentalists or the suicide bombers, because I would grant some artistic license to someone like Fun-Da-Mental when they choose to dramatize the frustration and outrage of a suicide bomber by depicting such a character in character sometimes. I don’t think, as I’ve said before, that Fun-Da-Mental overtly advocated for these tactics; had I thought that, I would not have supported them.

And I’ve got my thing for M.I.A., whom some would accuse of advocating for the tactics of Sri Lankan suicide bombers. Though quite the contrary, I think M.I.A.’s main purpose in delving into that area is to show that the people whom the U.S. government and other western powers would collectively condemn as one big bunch of terrorists are very real human beings dealing with their own feelings of hopelessness and frustration. The only overt politics of M.I.A. that I’ve seen so far is advocating for empowerment of the poor (which I have realized is a serious aspect to her lyrics), opposition to western government control, censorship, and propaganda, and more general opposition to the idea of following leaders who happily send their followers out to be killed. (From the song actually called “M.I.A.”: “You can be a follower, but who’s your leader? Break that cycle or it will kill ya.”)

But, of course, you can oppose authoritarian tactics and still feel sympathy for the people who feel that they have no one left to stand up for them but an authoritarian group; you can be opposed to suicide bombings and other means through which regular working people and the poor are killed and still feel great sympathy for the group of ordinary people in whose name such terrorism is ostensibly being waged (you can even feel strong solidarity for them, while strongly opposing these tactics or the leaders who direct them). These, to me, are fairly obvious differences. They do not fit into a simplistic scenario, a picture that is simply black and white, but they are not difficult nuances to navigate, either...

Unless you’re on the “anti-imperialist” left. I don’t mean to disrespect people who would still be comrades in many cases, but I find myself getting terribly frustrated with a group of people who would praise groups like Hamas or, especially, Hezbollah (whom the Class War Federation once brilliantly dubbed “HezBollocks”) as great “revolutionary” groups when, in fact, these Middle Eastern groups are socially regressive as well as being inclined to resort to tactics that follow the exact same principles as those of the imperialists whom they oppose: the indiscriminate killing of non-combatants/civilians/poor and working people, in order to satisfy the agenda of powerful leaders wrapped up in their own self-aggrandizing rivalries. The leaders of most of these terrorist groups obviously have no concern for the fates of “ordinary” people when their own power and status are at stake. If they did, they would pursue tactics other than deliberately targeting civilians, especially those civilians who are least able to shelter or protect themselves.

But it seems to me that whenever I step out there, into the real world of leftist groups, I am bound to encounter people who actually want to praise the tactics of suicide bombers, who actually want to champion these regressive terrorist groups, and who won’t even recognize the nuances that I’ve described above. Last night, when I went to a radical/leftist presentation (more on that shortly), I encountered some people who didn’t seem to get what I was saying when I said that the terrorists who would kill civilians indiscriminately (or even target workers, laborers, poor people, etc., deliberately, which often happens) follow the same principles as the greater powers who bomb civilians with tanks and airplanes. Last night, during this discussion, someone gave me the same tired lines on how you can’t equate suicide bombers from Hamas with the Israeli government going in and attacking people with tanks, when I never even implied to begin with that these are equal forces or that the combatants in such a situation come from the same position. But I did say that they follow many of the same principles, and there are many people out there who can’t seem to make the distinction.

Someone also gave me the tired line that we should not be telling other people how to defend themselves, that we should not be imposing our values upon them and that sort of thing, that it is not our position to interfere with them in that way. The funny thing is, though, that the people most likely to give me that tired old speech are the same people who will obsess over the plight of some oppressed people in another land without being willing or able to focus adequately on the plight of people being crushed by the oppressive class war being waged right here at home. The logical question to ask such people is that, if we are not in a position to spend our time critiquing the struggles that are happening on the other side of the world, then why don’t we spend a little more of our time trying to do something about the struggles right here at home?

Personally, I am all for international solidarity, even though I think we need to focus more than we are doing right now on the struggles that we must face personally and the things that are happening closest to us, and even though I also think people will almost always become more personally committed when they are involved in a situation that they can see as directly affecting their own lives. However, I would never support the opinion that we have no right or place to hold the people of a foreign land to universal ideas about ethics, equality, democracy and freedom as we understand these principles. There are universal principles that everyone can follow if they want to live in a more free, equal and humane society, and these should be clear in any language.

If you want to disagree with me about these principles and how to pursue them, that’s one thing (for instance, maybe you don't want to be as Marxian or class-struggle-oriented as I am; I've had some very good debates with people on that front), but don’t tell me that I’m not qualified to discuss such principles when talking about a situation halfway around the world simply because I’m culturally or tribally different from the people involved in that other situation. If there’s ever going to be another, better world, then we’re going to have to do that internationally, which means pursuing the same things internationally (whether we’re thinking globally and acting locally or just acting globally or thinking and acting both), based on ideas that we can all understand.

For good articles on some of the things that I’ve talked about above (and, by the way, I have used some of these links before), see:

Class War Federation: HezBollocks and IsRabies

International Communist Current:
War in Lebanon and Iraq: There is an alternative to capitalist barbarism (Editorial)

ICC: Middle East: Against the slide into war, the international class struggle is the only answer

Turn the World Upside Down: What Would it Look Like if Hamas and Hezbollah Fought a Class War?