People Before Profit blog

Five Things You Need To Know About Stress

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 03:22:00 +0000

11-29-05, 9:07 am

Whether it’s called stress management, relaxation training, or its newest incarnation, “Resiliancy,” it seems that the question of healthy response to the stress of daily life is on everyone’s mind. But it’s important to remember a few things about stress that are rarely discussed—if known at all!

1) Stress won’t hurt you. Hans Selye, the “father of stress” was a polylinguist, whose first language was not English. Before he died, he said that had his command of English been more precise, he would have been known as the “Father of Strain” rather than stress. What’s the difference? Enormous, from an engineering standpoint. Stress is pressure divided by unit area, whereas strain is measured in deformation per unit length. In other words, while strain speaks to the load you are carrying, strain deals with the degree to which that load warps you out of true. In other words, it is NOT stress that hurts you. It is strain.

2) Stress is necessary for life and growth. Far from being something you avoid, when healthy, the body and mind respond to environmental stress by becoming stronger. Look at this in the arena of physical fitness. Imagine a triangle with each of the three corners having a different designation: Stress, nutrition, and rest. Stress equals exercise, nutrition equals the foods taken in before and after the exercise, and rest equals…well, rest. If you have either too much or too little of any of these, the body breaks down. Note that astronauts in orbit must be very careful to stress their bodies daily with stationary bicycles and other apparatus: zero gravity decreases stress to the point that the bones literally begin to lose calcium. The truth is that, in life, we are rewarded largely for how much stress we can take without breaking. The intelligent approach is to both reduce unnecessary stress and to increase our ability to handle healthy stress without straining. We must also learn to nurture ourselves properly, and to recreate with joy. 3) Come of the best research comes from our former 'enemies!' Russian research into the body-mind dynamic has produced valuable results. They hold it that that any physical technique has three aspects: Breath, Motion, and Structure, and that these three are dependant upon one another. Stress “dis-integrates” this structure as it morphs into strain. The first to be disturbed is almost always breathing. This is the reason that martial arts, yoga, Sufi Dancing and so many other disciplines teach breath control, and why they can use the physical as a vehicle for spiritual transformation. As we learn to handle greater and greater amounts of stress with grace, we naturally evolve to higher levels of integration and performance. It is our birthright.

4) It doesn’t take years to learn proper breathing techniques. Seek out a Chi Gung, yoga, or Tai Chi teacher and say you want to learn proper belly breathing. A good teacher can convey the basics of this critical skill in an hour or less.

5) You don’t have to meditate for an hour a day to get the benefits. While it’s fabulous to spend two twenty minute sessions a day, massive benefits can be gained with just five minutes a day. Here’s the trick: it’s not five minutes all at one time, it’s five one minute sessions spaced through the day. At every hour divisible by 3: 9, 12, 3, 6, and 9, simply stop and breathe properly for sixty seconds. You can do this while walking down the street, or sitting in a business meeting. The important thing is to learn a proper technique, and to practice it briefly, and correctly. This single act will improve posture, energy, digestion, and turn stress into high performance. How can you remember? Get a digital watch with a countdown timer, and set it for three hours! Five minutes a day…it will seem a pain at first, but once you’ve got the hang of it, it’s the best 300 second investment you’ll ever make!

From

--Steven Barnes is a NY Times bestselling author, personal performance coach, and martial artist who has written for The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, and Stargate SG-1. He has lectured on story and human consciousness at UCLA, Mensa, the Smithsonian Institute, and USC. Steve created the Lifewriting system of high-performance living for writers and readers. www.lifewrite.com.

British Communists Slam Blair Faction of Labour Party for 'Moral Bankruptcy'

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 03:14:00 +0000

11-29-05, 8:59 am

'British troops should be withdrawn from Iraq before the 100th soldier dies', Martin Levy told the Communist Party of Britain political committee on Wednesday evening.

'It is a sign of New Labour's moral bankruptcy that British and Iraqi lives are regarded so cheaply, while the British government colludes in the CIA's programme to fly detainees to torture centres around the world', he added.

Mr Levy welcomed the change of policy and leadership in the Israeli Labour Party, but warned that any future government under Ariel Sharon would seek to maintain Israel's occupation of large parts of the West Bank. The political committee reaffirmed Communist Party support for the 'two-state' solution whereby viable and secure Palestinian and Israeli states co-exist in accordance with pre-1967 international borders.

Mr Levy, convenor of the party's Science, Technology and the Environment advisory committee, also restated opposition to a new nuclear power programme for Britain.

'The environmental, security and financial costs would far outweigh any benefits', he argued, 'while our transport systems continues to pump massive carbon emissions into the atmosphere'.

The political committee drew attention to the likely link between Prime Minister Blair's support for a big expansion of plutonium-producing nuclear power and his desire to manufacture a new generation of plutonium-consuming nuclear weapons.

It also warned unions against New Labour manouevres to cut the trade union share of the vote at Labour Party conferences.

'It's an old trick – Alan Johnson proposes a reduction to just 15 per cent, so that a later proposal to chop the union voice to 30 or 40 per cent looks reasonable', Mr Levy warned, 'when in fact all reductions in the trade union vote have been used to erode party democracy and ram through right-wing policies'.

CAPITALISM KILLS: Wal-Mart and Amerada Hess

Wed, 30 Nov 2005 03:10:00 +0000

11-29-05, 8:54 am

The free enterprise system, AKA the free market, AKA capitalism, is an economic system, as we all know, that is dedicated to maximizing profits at any cost. Neither ethics, morality, honor, the environment, nor human life itself will be spared by this system and its quest to put profits before people (and everything else). Here are some more case studies of the system at work. The previous three case studies in this series can be found here.

CASE 4. One of the duties of the Labor Department is to protect children from exploitation by American corporations. We know from history that the business class will ruthlessly seize upon children to exploit every last cent they can out of them in order to increase their corporate wealth. The Bushites represent the business class to exclusion of almost every other segment of society. So you can expect these ultra-right Republicans, with the President in the forefront hypocritically masking his greed behind the pieties of a 'born again' Christian, to see to it that no child is left behind unexploited.

A perfect example is revealed in the New York Times for 11-1-05: 'Labor Dept. Is Rebuked Over Pact With Wal-Mart: Agreement Addressed Child Labor Rules,' by Steven Greenhouse.

Wal-Mart is famous for violating labor laws. The article quotes Representative George Miller (Dem Calif.) who says, 'The Bush Labor Department chose to do an unprecedented favor for Wal-Mart, despite the fact it is well known for violating labor laws. The sweetheart deal put Wal-Mart employees at risk, undermined government effectiveness, and further undermined public confidence that the government is acting on its behalf.'

So, what is all this about? The Labor Department found 85 violations of the child labor law (for children 17 and younger) in Wal-Mart stores in Arkansas, New Hampshire and Connecticut. Wal-Mart, among other things, was having the children work with dangerous machinery such as cardboard balers and chain saws.

Wal-Mart had to settle with the Feds -- not the Feds of old, who were not so hot themselves, but the new Bush Feds. It seems that there is a big Republican donor at Wal-Mart and the donor's interests, not those of the children, are what the Labor Department wants to protect. Here is what they did. 1. Wal-Mart paid a cosmetic fine of $135,540 (peanuts for this multibillion dollar corporate criminal). 2. The Labor Department agreed to give the company 15 days advance notice before they inspect again! It is not likely they will find future violations. 3. Even if Wal-Mart is too stupid to clean up its act in the 15 days before the 'inspection' and they get caught violating the law, there will be no citations or fines if they clean up their act in the next 10 days. 4. It gets better! This settlement agreement was largely written by Wal-Mart's own lawyers and the Labor Department left its 'own legal division out of the settlement process.' Sweet! And finally, 5. The Labor Department agreed to 'to let Wal-Mart jointly develop news releases' with it about the violations and the settlement.

The foxes are indeed watching the hen house.

CASE 5. This is from the 'Metro Briefing' in the New York Times of 11-23-05 ('Oil Company Settles Gouging Complaint') Acting under the maxim that it is an ill wind that blows nobody any good, certain oil companies seemingly could not resist breaking the law in order to price gouge and make extra profits from the human tragedy of Hurricane Katrina. They wouldn't be capitalist corporations if they didn't follow their own version of 'seize the day.' So what did they do? This story is only about one state, New Jersey (but don't think this behavior was not more widespread). New Jersey accused Amerada Hess of gouging 'drivers with higher gas prices' due to the storm. Hess and others (Motiva/Shell, Sunoco, and independent sellers) were charged with having 'artificially inflated prices and increased prices more than once every 24 hours, the state limit.' It is evidently okay to do this once every 24 hours but not more than once. Anyway – it’s stealing.

The result? Hess, which of course admitted no wrongdoing, agreed to pay the state $372,391 for its court costs. Some of this will go to the poor. Hess also agreed to obey the law in the future -- big of them. The capitalist state is appeased. Why doesn't Hess have to turn over all the money it gouged to a fund to help the poor? No, it gets to keep its ill-gotten profits. You only end up on Riker's Island for petty-theft it seems (Hess is NYC-based). Cases against the other culprits are still pending. If the Hess settlement is any indication, we can affirm that crime (corporate crime, that is) pays.

--Thomas Riggins is the book review editor of Political Affairs and can be reached at pabooks@politicalaffairs.net.

Brazilian President Lula: Remove FTAA talks from the “ideological field”

Tue, 29 Nov 2005 05:02:00 +0000

11-28-05, 10:46 am

Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said that discussions for a Free Trade Areas of the Americas, FTAA, must be removed from the “ideological field” and ratified his interest in addressing the more sensitive issues in the framework of the World Trade Organization, WTO.

“FTAA has become an ideological debate with those against it figuring as left wing and those in favour right-wing. It’s a maddening situation”, said President Lula da Silva in Rio Do Janeiro.

“Some went as far as saying that if Brazil didn’t join FTAA as fast as possible we would have problems with United States”, added the president addressing a forum for the promotion of foreign trade.

Brazil argues that the US sponsored FTAA talks must firstly address some of the more controversial issues such as agriculture and the end to rich countries farm subsidies, in the framework of the WTO.

“United States has a strong and lasting foreign trade strategy and will only move when the conditions are favourable to its interests”, explained Mr. Lula da Silva who nevertheless did not discard resumption of negotiations with Washington for the Alaska to Tierra del Fuego free trade initiative.

“All the sensitive issues we address them in the WTO and those which are not we sit and negotiate. When the time is ripe we’ll sit with our proposals at each side, and that’s when agreements can be reached” he forecasted.

Brazil is undergoing a boom in exports helped by world conditions but also by an aggressive trade policy promoted by the Lula administration and headed by the president who regularly tours other countries and continents.

“We must realize that before protecting the interests of other countries we must defend our own trade interests, the interests of our corporations and of our jobs. That’s the base from which to advance, to sit and talk”, highlighted the Brazilian president.

“Foreign trade policy is permanent and needs to constantly advance”.

Brazilian exports are heading for another record year estimated in 115 billion US dollars and a surplus of 40 billion US dollars.

“There’s no turning around with foreign trade and we are going to continue with our commitment to open new markets”, added President Lula da Silva.

Trade and Industry minister Luiz Fenando Furlan revealed during the forum that Brazilian exports have grown 22% above world trade expansion with sales to countries identified as new markets jumping 100%.

“It’s almost certain we’ll overtake our 117 billion US dollars exports target which originally was scheduled for 2006”, revealed Mr. Furlan.

From Mercosur

An American Scam: The Disaster Of Relief

Tue, 29 Nov 2005 04:59:00 +0000

11-28-05, 10:43 am

HOW quickly and easily those in power manage to divert our attention from the real issues of the day, and from the questions that are more inconvenient for themselves. Consider, for example, the extraordinary fallout of the Volcker report, the peculiar result of an exercise which was stage-managed from beginning to end by a US government that has shown its complete contempt for both international law and the UN itself. RAMPANT LOOTING OF IRAQ Quite apart from its other effects, this has completely diverted the attention of national and international media from the huge and ongoing corruption in Iraq. Currently the real scam is happening there, whereby the Iraqi people are not only under daily physical attack but are also deprived of even basic reconstruction because of the pervasive corruption of the American military contractors so beloved of the Bush administration. This has meant that, even while tens of billions of dollars are supposedly spent by the US on 'reconstruction' and American companies rake in the profits on such activity, Iraqi citizens continue to be denied basic services, the infrastructure continues to be in shambles (and even more is destroyed by the day) and even workers for such companies are denied their due wages. Yet none of this is documented, much less advertised and disseminated in the international press and other media, which maintains a veil of silence and allows the rampant looting of Iraq by its current rulers — both US and local — to persist. And because so much of what happens in Iraq now is explicitly hidden and non-transparent, it is extremely difficult to get any real sense of the actual extent of what is acknowledged to be widespread corruption. NEGLECTED RELIEF WORK IN NEW ORLEANS We may still get some idea, though, from the instructive yet sorry example provided by relief work within the US — in the areas like New Orleans that were hit by Hurricane Katrina. The enormous damage caused by Katrina — and the complete failure of local and national governments to look after the citizens — are now well known. But the bleeding of the region continues, and is now being extended, by the manner of the post-disaster reconstruction and relief work. The recovery of the city of New Orleans has been slow, especially because the city of New Orleans is now so impoverished and without federal support that it has been forced to lay off thousands of workers who could have played a crucial role in the much-needed reconstruction. But there were other areas that were affected, where it was expected that the US government would take a much more pro-active role in ensuring a rapid recovery. For example, among the destruction caused by Katrina, a number of US military bases along the Gulf Coast of the US were affected, with the buildings destroyed and streets and other infrastructure badly in need of cleanup of the human and other debris. Since these were military installations, it was expected that the Bush regime would spare no expense in a rapid reconstruction, given both the current importance of the military and the close association of the Bush administration with a range of military contractors. PRO CORPORATES AND ANTI-WORKER MEASURES But the sleaziness of the subsequent deals is already having its effect. Immediately after Katrina, as part of 'emergency measures,' president Bush suspended the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires employers to pay 'prevailing wages' for labour used to fulfil government contracts. The administration also waived the requirement for contractors rebuilding the Gulf Coast to provide valid employment eligibility forms (I-9 forms) completed by their workers. These measures operated to increase the profitability of the contractors who were brought in for the reconstruction of the military bases. The foremost among these was Halliburton — the company which has recently benefited from so many US governments in the United States, Iraq and Guantánamo Bay. The company here appeared in the form of its subsidiary, Kellogg Brown Root, now known simply as KBR. The 'emergency' labour market deregulation measures allowed Halliburton/KBR and its subcontractors to hire undocumented workers (usually migrants from Mexico and other countries in Central America) and pay them very low wages well below the legal minimum wage. Usually these migrants were brought in on promises of much higher wages, but their illegal status meant that they had no bargaining power and could not register any complaints, even with non-payment. Intense political pressure has forced a reversal of these labour market measures — president Bush reinstated the Davis-Bacon Act in early November, while the Department of Homeland Security reinstated the I-9 requirements in late October. But these policies have already allowed extensive profiteering by these favoured companies beneath layers of legal and political cover. EXPLOITATION OF MIGRANT WORKERS There are documented cases of very young workers — often as young as 15 or 16 years old — being brought in from Mexican villages (especially poor regions such as Oaxaca) by subcontractors, made to work for weeks, and then not even paid at all, forced to sleep on the streets of New Orleans because they have nowhere else to go. The subcontracting companies in turn claim that they have let the workers go because they have not been paid for months by KBR, which meanwhile has continuously been receiving payment for the reconstruction work from the US government. So the migrant workers are exploited and denied their dues, while local workers have not only lost all their material possessions as well as sometimes their family members, but even their jobs. And these local workers are not being used for the reconstruction work because they would have to be paid the minimum wages and be given basic workers’ rights. If this is happening to 'relief work' within the US, imagine the scale of worker oppression and corruption in countries like Iraq. And yet all of us in the rest of the world still allow representatives of such regimes to preach to us about corruption and supposedly murky deals.

From People's Democracy

Japanese government backs away from the promise of nuclear weapons abolition

Tue, 29 Nov 2005 04:53:00 +0000

11-28-05, 10:31 am

A weakened Japanese government resolution calling for nuclear disarmament was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly First Committee with 166 votes for and 2 votes against (the United States and India), with 7 abstentions. The resolution states renewed determination to abolish nuclear weapons on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and calls for the implementation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty obligations, nuclear weapons reductions, and for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) to come into force.

This year marks the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As the world's only A-bombed country, Japan in the UNGA should have expressed its fresh determination to achieve the abolition of nuclear weapons. However, the government resolution is a setback from its 2003 resolution that included a call for the elimination of nuclear weapons.

Japan uncritically follows U.S. nuclear policy

In 2003 and 2004 Japan's resolution included the call on nuclear powers to implement the 'unequivocal undertaking' to 'accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals' as agreed at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference in May, 2000, even though it placed emphasis on the promotion of the NPT system. It 'welcomed' the Final Document which the United States had supported, and emphasized the importance of implementing its conclusion.' It stated that the 'unequivocal undertaking' by nuclear weapons states to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals, leading to nuclear disarmament, is of crucial importance as practical measures.

Nuclear-weapon states' promise of an 'unequivocal undertaking' to eliminate their nuclear arsenals is the fruit of the anti-nuclear movements in Japan and the rest of the world. It is important that the government resolution referred to it, even though briefly.

This year's government resolution, however, deleted from the text the pivotal 'unequivocal undertaking,' and inserted in the preamble an abstract statement recalling the final document of the 2000 NPT Review Conference.

The Japanese government is boasting about the largest amount of support given to this year's Japanese resolution. The fact is that this increase in support was because the New Agenda Coalition that calls for the abolition of nuclear weapons shifted to vote in favor of Hiroshima Nagasaki, taking into account that this year marks the 60th anniversary of the atomic bombings. The New Agenda Coalition has been scrutinizing Japan's ambivalent position on the 'unequivocal undertaking.' It criticizes this year's resolution for deleting the language.

The New Agenda Coalition has submitted to this year's UNGA First Committee a resolution calling on nuclear-possessing countries to swiftly implement the promise to eliminate their nuclear weapons, and on all U.N. member states to comply with this promise. This is in stark contrast with the Koizumi government position that has watered down the call for the elimination of nuclear weapons.

This is another example of the Koizumi government's subservience to the U.S.

Nuclear weapons are the core of the Bush administration's preemptive attack strategy. The U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff's new nuclear weapons operational plan is nearing completion. Koizumi stated that any armaments are largely capable of working as deterrents (May 20).

Although the Japanese resolution refers to the CTBT, which the U.S. opposes, the Japanese government policy of following the U.S. pro-nuclear policy makes it impossible to put forward the abolition of nuclear weapons as the main call to be included in the resolution.

Even though Japan, the only nuclear bombed country in the world, should be at the forefront of the effort to abolish nuclear weapons, the Japanese government is only following the U.S. Bush administration's lead and thus distorting its basic foreign policy.

A new leap forward

El Baradei, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director, stated that the only option is to create a nuclear-free world. The world's peace and security cannot be maintained without eliminating nuclear weapons. We are seeing a new advance in the tide calling for eliminating nuclear weapons from the face of the earth.

International public opinion and movements calling for nuclear disarmament to take a further radical step are increasing.

From Akahata

Top Medical Group: Katrina Shows U.S. Public Health Care in Danger

Tue, 29 Nov 2005 03:27:00 +0000

11-28-05, 9:11 am

WASHINGTON (PAI)–Hurricane Katrina shows the U.S. public health care system, which in the widest sense of the words is supposed to handle milllions of people in event of a calamity, is in great danger, a top medical group leader says. Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association and a former Maryland Secretary of Public Health, issued dire warning at a health care symposium sponsored by the AFL-CIO Department for Professional Employees on Nov. 9. And he challenged unions–and indeed the entire country–to do something about it.

Katrina’s devastation left millions of people homeless, jobless or both, literally wrecked Louisiana’s public hospital system, actually leveled at least one New Orleans hospital and left tens of thousands of residents of Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama without basic health care services and with few ways to get them.

There was a failure beforehand” to plan for catastrophes, Benjamin said. There was a failure of implementation” of those plans that had been created. And there was a failure in environmental planning” which resulted in many toxic waste sites in the New Orleans area, whose poisonous chemicals were loosed by Katrina’s floods.

Add a hurricane and a flood” to those failures and you have a real fundamental failure in public health. And this is just the tip of the iceberg in the U.S.,” he warned.

The other panelists–Fire Fighters Occupational Safety and Health Director Patrick Morrison, AFSCME industrial hygienist Denise Bland-Bowles, AFGGE communications specialist Adele Stan and AFT/UFT industrial hygienist Ellie Engler–discussed the specific hazards they found in New Orleans after Katrina.

They ranged from the dangers of water-borne disease to first responders, which Morrison cited, to widespread structural deterioration through toxic mold, which AFSCME workers had to battle in their government buildings after the flood waters receded, to schools so dangerous that they may need to be torn down and rebuilt.

A lot of our bus drivers had to come back in” after the water receded, Bland-Bowles said, referring to school district bus drivers AFSCME represents in the Gulf Coast area. They’re not trained to deal with sludge, slurry and mold.”

But health problems in the wake of Katrina were even more basic than that, Benjamin noted. Were people even safe? Were those still in the city (New Orleans) getting health services? Could you even walk through the communities and could people move back into their homes, given all the toxins?” he asked.

But there were other problems the panelists described, and they warned that such problems could recur in other disasters, including hurricanes and terror attacks:

* Communications breakdowns. Morrison said that even now, four years after 9/11–where his union lost 343 New York City Fire Fighters plus their priest when the World Trade Center towers collapsed–telecommmunications systems between first responders crashed in Katrina. That failure must be fixed, he warned.

The National Incident Response System” created after 9/11 looked great on paper, but it wasn’t there” when Katrina hit, Morrison said.

* A second facet of the communications breakdown was failure to get the word to the most-vulnerable groups, particularly the poor, and to convince them to move away from danger. At least one panelist pinpointed a failure of trust” for that result.

“I don’t know where FEMA was. They’re still trying to get organized,” Morrison said of GOP President Bush’s heavily criticized Federal Emergency Management Agency.

* The public health system–its hospitals and clinics, which were damaged or destroyed by Katrina–is the entire health system, in fact, for the poor inn areas such as New Orleans’ Lower Ninth Ward and Cook County, Ill. (Chicago), Benjamin’s hometown. But public policy in terms of aiding that system and equipping it to treat massive numbers of people in a disaster does not recognize that fact, he noted. In the Katrina-hit area, Bland-Bowles said, the public health system needs to be completely reconstructed. That would hold true for other disasters, too, panelists said.

* When a major city is evacuated and smashed, as New Orleans was, it needs basic public health workers–sanitarians, restaurant inspectors, environmental health specialists–to help ensure it is habitable again. But its own empployees are scattered all over the country, the panelists noted. That leaves inspection often in the hands of private industry, which may be unable or unsuited for the job.

* The key decision of whether to restore, or rip mold-devastated buildings down as completely uninhabitable and build again from scratch. Bland-Bowles said many area insurers are resisting findings that buildings must be condemned due to mold devastation not just of their plaster walls but of their basic structural supports.

The panelists said that given federal budget cuts, and the Bush administration’s attitudes towards the poor, unions may be left with task of stepping in and ensuring public health care in future disasters. They also have to stand up and defend public services, which people rely on when disaster hits. We need to be brave enough to fight for those services, despite the catcalls,” Stan concluded.

From International Labor Communications Association

--Mark Gruenberg is a staff writer for Press Associates, Inc.

December 2005

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 07:02:00 +0000

Short Story: Men and Women

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:43:00 +0000

11-27-05, 2:00 pm

Salbenblatt had had something to drink and didn’t want to make a noise. He bolted the door of the flat and checked the gas tap, as he did every evening; he heard the siren of a car down in the street, and then, behind the opened door, his wife who had woken with a fright. He could see her on the broad, foam rubber couch in the neon glimmer which came through the curtains, the dark patch of her hair on the pillow. “Only an ambulance, or the police,” he said. “Perhaps a drunken motorcyclist, looking for his brains somewhere. Go to sleep.” They both listened to the wailing double tone, getting fainter and then finally fading away.

“Please, don’t turn on the light,” she said and stirred. “How late is it?”

“Just after twelve.” She remarked that the last time she had been awake it had been about one, but he didn’t answer; he undressed cautiously. He thought he ought to take his bedclothes to the next room. Probably the sour smell of alcohol was unpleasant to abstemious women. He seldom drank, so it must be especially disagreeable to her.

She turned abruptly to the wall. “Where did you go then?”

“All over the place.” He didn’t feel a bit drunk now as he stood in his pyjamas by the table and smoked, though he knew she couldn’t bear the smell. He thought, you wouldn’t believe it anyway. All at once he shivered and looked at the couch on which a thin ray of light fell.

Impossible to say now that he had walked half the night through the town, through the narrow old alleys, under the crooked, celebrated red brick gables, beneath the moon which shone through the filigree stonework of the town hall facade; and how he had felt as he heard the clocks in the towers strike the hours, while he had sent love-like messages back home, to the one now lying face to the wall; and how he had thought that it was actually quite easy, if you only looked at it in the right way. What sentimentality, he thought now, as he stood here like the perennial miscreant.

Salbenblatt stubbed his cigarette out and carried the ashtray into the kitchen. He ran some water over his forehead and neck and drank a few gulps, which tasted nauseously of chlorine. After drying himself he returned and lay down next to his wife under the blanket, breathing as lightly as possible and stretching out his hand towards her, but he felt, despite her drowsy warmth, the coldness, the tension, which for weeks he had melodramatically called the sword between them.

He lay there for some while, staring upwards, where occasionally reflections from the cars moved along the walls, illuminating sharply the colors which they themselves had painted, ultramarine and chrome yellow, reputed to be restful; and from her breathing he knew that she was wide awake. He said into the half dark, “Has anything moved?”

She gave no answer, jerked her head irritably pushing his hand away from her rather bony shoulder blade.

“I asked you something,” he said, sniffing at her hair. “Been to the hairdresser’s?

“Well, what of it, isn’t it allowed?”

“My God, I only remarked that you had been to the hairdresser.” He lay now with eyes closed and felt the alcohol rise to his head, just enough to make him feel enlightened. All right, you hold your hand out time and again, so that it can be slapped. He was indeed his own martyr. Patting the blanket he said, “Stinks nicely of this spray. “Yes, really nice,” she said against the wall.

He was silent for a while. He rubbed his toes against each other, then said: “Bergson’s things arrived today, extra with the Swedish motor transport. Five tons of art.”

“Then your museum will collapse. Was that this chap with the numbers from last year?”

“That’s right. Warning One to Four. Anatomy Twentysix and so on, the whole show composed out of tin and old cog wheels. We are solemnly going to exhibit it all, let the people have a guess and Father Realism will turn a blind eye, all for the sake of peaceful neighbourliness.”

“I know, I know,” she said, “if you were to be minister, you’d do a mighty clearance to the lampposts or the mines!” She turned over irritably. “You and your homemade revolution, your tough talk, as though you were the strong man I had been waiting for. Doesn’t fit you at all.”

“There you are!” thought Salbenblatt. He was almost satisfied. You go on probing until you’ve found the sensitive spot. No violence, no poison; you simply do it with words. The effect is dead sure. You only have to watch out that you don’t forget the argument with which it all started. Well, what was it?

“What was it?” he said out loud.

“In case you’re interested,” she said, “tomorrow I’ve got my examination on the sine theorem. Don’t you ever want to go to sleep?”

“No, want to talk to you. Always exams, always this idiotic math. We want to talk to each other now. Nobody told me that one night I would find a calculating machine in my bed. I can’t remember it.”

“Just move out.” She pulled the blanket over, so that he lay half uncovered and she tensed her muscles as he, sighing, moved over towards her, his chin on her neck, where it scratched her, while his hand did something that she had never found unpleasant before. She tried not to think of before. He removed his hand quickly and moved away. “Funny bed,” he said, “funny room. Completely new frigidaire feeling.”

“You’re off your head,” she cried.

“Only drunk, darling.” He stared at the reflections of a car passing by. “Are you quite sure that nothing has moved? No mistake in your reckoning, some sort of crack in your calendar, like before?” She did not say anything.

“Sorry, of course, then everything was different. Even the air we breathed. Go on, sing the song of that time or start howling straightaway.” He nudged her roughly with his elbow. “Do you remember how we couldn’t wait for it. The everlasting unsureness, the separations, the farewells, our cold feet outside the front door, because upstairs your landlady spied on us, until we bribed her with coffee and two pounds of chocolates, and the wretched creaking of the floor boards in the long mouldy smelling hall, when I crept along in my stockinged feet, and even in the holidays they wouldn’t give us a double room, because they were all so moral there, except of course when we wandered around out of doors. Then it would have been a disaster perhaps, if we had waited for the right date in vain. But do you know what?” he said, “I don’t give tuppence for those times.”

“Now stop it,” she said sleepily. “And please stop fussing as though it were really worrying you. Who’s going to have it, you or I?”

“Aha, father not required, we are so extremely modern. Have it your own way.” He jumped up and stalked furiously through the room, snatched his things tidily folded from the back of the armchair, then knocked his knee against a sharp object, which fell over noisily. He cursed and stamped cross the carpet in his faded pyjamas and gradually felt ridiculous. Been waiting for the storm too long; now when refreshing rain should fall, the loveydovey-do with which their quarrels had usually been resolved was no longer there. Not even real anger. The best thing would be to retreat to the museum, perhaps the tin skeletons of this progressive Swede, goggling expectantly out of their packing cases would suggest something to him. After that he could sleep on the desk in the office, white coat as cover, at least it would look as though he had worked through the night.

He was already at the door, when suddenly came that soft sniffing and calling which he hadn’t heard for ages and which used to remind him of some woebegone little animal, and he turned back hastily. “It’s all right,” he said, “my poor darling, I’m not running away. There now, be quiet.” She lay still and let him stroke her car and neck and the loose tangle of her hair, while he balanced on the edge of the couch, noticing that his movements functioned automatically. He said, “It’s only the adjustment your body has to get used to. Soon you’ll feel fine, you’ll see.”

“Yes,” she said, “my belly as the elixir of life. You know it by heart, like a book on marriage. And of course, now you’ll be considerate, as expected. Absolutely intolerable.”

“And you’ll stop being fed up and change your touch-me-not attitude, as though I had ever wanted to push you against the wall.” He had forgotten to go on stroking her and lay down sideways making a hollow, but his wife stayed stretched out stiffly, and he thought that she was thinking about the thing they couldn’t imagine, but which was already beginning to establish itself. He said, “Perfect case of neurosis for two, if we go on letting ourselves slip like this, really.”

“All right,” she said, “let’s not talk about it any more.” As she reached over him grunting for the light cord, her breasts brushed against him, and all at once they seemed to him to be heavy; she put the light on and looked at the clock. It grew darker and they heard the noise of the cord as it knocked against the stem of the lamp.

He turned onto his back and said, “Couldn’t we behave as though we had always wanted it? Perhaps one day really.”

“Please don’t let’s talk about it any more.”

“Yes, “ he said, “the more we talk, the worse it gets, even for careers. Especially at night. Are you asleep?”

She murmured something that he didn’t understand, and down below another car went by.

He watched the trail of lights hurriedly sliding past and he said, “Only others, they have it quite normally. Apparently without fuss.”

“Please,” she said. “Please, once and for all, be quiet.”

Salbenblatt lay there quietly, he was tired, at the same time sober, and he thought about his things strewn over the carpet, then about Bergson’s Anatomy, and later on about the crooked streets in the moonlight. “The absurd thing about it is, I love you, you see.” But that she couldn’t hear, because she had just fallen asleep.

Onderka, the carpenter, was frightened for the first time in his life as he stood waiting for the wailing of the emergency siren twenty kilometres away and which still didn’t turn up in the woods near the old tollhouse on the main road where he lived. An hour ago Anna had woken him, grey with distress, because she had suddenly started to bleed, and for a while they had hoped that it would pass, but then he remembered what the doctor had said, and he rushed off on his bike to the village and roused the mayor out of his sleep in order to telephone. It was only afterwards that the anger rose in him and he grew more and more apprehensive.

For the tenth time he went outside the house and stared at the lake through the bare trees; on the other side the road came out of the hills and crossed the railway line, where nothing was to be seen but the lights of the level crossing house and their reflections in the water; he recalled how he had once got caught in the safety net at a hundred yards, just a few inches from hell; trifling to what was happening to his wife behind the door. All at once he heard her, and gritting his teeth he ran back.

“It’s nothing,” she said as he came in. “It’s already gone. Only it was like a knife.” She lay on the bed half-dressed, between towels and cotton wool and attempted to get up; with his broad hand he gently pressed her back on the pillow. “I wanted something to drink,” she said. “I’m so thirsty.”

“I could have got you something long ago,” said Onderka. He fetched a lemon and water from the kitchen. He halved the lemon and squeezed one half over the glass and she watched as it dropped in. “No sugar.” “But pips in it,” he said handing it to her. He supported her head while she drank, then she pushed the glass away.

She groaned and drew in her breath quickly; he held her shoulders tightly, casting a furtive look at the clock.

“This time they’ve turned it round inside,” she said in a flat voice, and he watched her face, that looked gaunt and transparent against the white bedclothes. He thought that he would smash something if it should come again before the ambulance arrived. Now he felt very alarmed and listened: it was the Transit express, the rumbling of the two-hundreddiesel engine across the water, going north. “Of course, the level crossing, otherwise it would have been here already.” He gave her some more to drink and stroked the back of her neck; her skin felt cold and wet with perspiration. “Bit better? You must lie quietly.”

She tried to smile but only managed a grimace. “I’m so ashamed. Again I can’t manage it.”

“Stay quiet,” Onderka said, while skillfully changing things for her. Too damned much, he thought, and wished that the ambulance would come. He must stop it. He must stop it at once.

“Don’t look,” said Anna, “please don’t.”

“Don’t say another word,” he said furiously.

“They’ll manage to stop it, they’ll fatten you up all right, you half portion.”

“Onderka, they are proper contractions, you know it yourself.”

“They’ve got incubators there,” he said, “whole floors of them. They can cope with anything.” He went and washed his hands, returning quickly. “If you cry, it will get worse,” and he comforted her again but he knew just as well as she did that it was simply too early and that it couldn’t live. So that was why he had always worked like a horse, that was why he had planted towers and chimney stacks all over the country, higher and higher, fool that he was. “It’s so hot,” she said, “and I’m freezing at the same time, I’m sorry.”

“It’s all right!” he said and put the window ajar while he listened intensely and started hating his house – he had raised the beams and the door frames himself, enlarged the windowpanes, but he thought he would have to go into the shed, do something, smash the cradle which he had secretly nailed together. He stood there waiting and cursing the stillness. Then he thought of the beer barrel he would have rolled onto the building site, where they were to have sung together with him. He ought to telegraph now, you couldn’t go onto the scaffolding with nerves like his, not even speak through intercom to the men on the crane, where he would have hoisted a little flag. As it was, he would return in the morning to a grey homecoming, clear up a bit, and on the pillow there would be nothing but an impression.

He heard Anna gasp. “Perhaps you dragged something heavy in your shop,” he said, “perhaps you fell.”

“No,” she said and straightened her back because just then she felt it just enough to know that it was still there. “You should have married someone else,” she said exhausted.

“Oh, of course” he said, “right away, tomorrow mornng early. Only wait for the ambulance. Please think of the ambulance, think of the doctor who will help you. No nonsense now.”

“We were quite beside ourselves for joy,” she said, making a wry face.

Not at this price, though, he thought and full of anxiety watched the white on white that was his wife.

“You mustn’t talk. You mustn’t get excited. They sent it off immediately, they understood at once.”

He didn’t tell her about the tussle he had had on the telephone, but at the same time he wished he could do it again. He squeezed the other half of the lemon and mixed it, thinking of the snappy voice that he couldn’t throttle. “First the pleasure, then call for help,” till he roared, “Listen, you snottynosed, you half-baked idiot of a midwife, it’s happened to us for the third time in 10 years, much worse than before. Blood group apparently, something to do with monkeys, and they’ve got more sense than you have,” until the mayor, in his dressing gown, put his hand on his shoulder, shocked – and how he had telephoned again and apologised and the voice had said, “All right, you sod, they’re on their way.” That was thirty-five minutes ago.

Too long for a man who loved his wife. Others filled up with drink, or ran around groaning, as though they were having it themselves. Bollbock, the mechanic for lifting the sliding casings, an old fox who worked to the millimeter and with whom he bunks during the week in the caravan, had told him how he had had to be put to bed when his wife had her first-born 18 years before. At least they had it. He fished the pits out of the glass and said, “You only have to nod, if you want to drink!”

Anna made no reply, she kept her eyes shut and he readied for felt her wrist for the place where her pulse should have been but he didn’t feel anything, then he felt his own, and thought hazily of first-aid help. He couldn’t remember a single name, since relationships had been broken off during the war. She looked at him suddenly and he heard her whisper, “Everything is so far away. . .”

“Don’t worry,” he said loudly, “I’m looking after you.” He started to count the seconds, thought of bends, level crossings, trees, bad roads, skidding tires. “They won’t forget us, that I can swear.”

Thought it all out in vain, that at least he would have been as well-off as they were. Perhaps they would have named him Robert, he would have built him a catapult for the magpies. A girl, maybe, only more difficult with a name. Would have run around in the woods, unrestricted, lots of fresh air; perhaps they would have bought a motorbike, or even a car if Anna didn’t feel well in a sidecar; they would have driven all over the place, he would have shown them the chimney stacks, masts and television towers, everything that was high, and it was a bare twenty minutes to school along the little path. Well, it was not to be. Unimportant, while here his wife was slipping away through his fingers.

He sat on the edge of the bed and looked after her. “We can have one all the same, if you like. We’ll fetch one from the Home.” He hadn’t thought of that before at all, and suddenly it seemed quite simple.

But then it began again, and she tried to sit up and it was tearing her apart and Onderka, who was now lying half over her with his weight and didn’t notice how she dug her fingernails into his arm, kept saying, “Scream, just scream, if it helps.” When it finally left off, he heard the siren outside and the ambulance.

“Bit out of the way, for such excursions,” said one of the two men as they came in, with something like clinical confidence all over their white coats, and lifted Anna onto the stretcher. Onderka leaned against the wall and looked at his hands - he had never seen them tremble before. “Yes,” he said, “maybe you’re right.”

Just at that moment Donath noticed that he wasn’t the only one awake, eleven storeys above the street that led to the hospital, just at that moment the emergency siren stopped, and he heard clearly the ticking of the alarm clock on the shelf above his head, and he waited and hoped that his wife would fall asleep again.

She made no movement, although he could hear her breathing, and for a moment he thought it would be premature, but then she would have alarmed him long ago. He recalled tenderly how she had looked at herself in the mirror in the evening and had said that she seemed to be growing gradually into a walking elephant, and later, whatever happened, she wanted to go to Paris or Arles, but especially to Arles, perhaps to see if Van Gogh’s bridge was still there, hanging as it does today in every respectable flat, and then she had embraced him, because he got a bit vexed.

He turned cautiously to the window, through which a part of Orion was visible, bordered by the cornice of the hyperbola roof, a glass honeycomb, where one floated lightly between the stars, with city heating and pleasantly housed, and he was reminded of Jesus de Santiago, with whom he had discussed deviations a whole night long, and who would probably think this the beginnings of the counterrevolution. Possibly somewhere he was right but now his thoughts slid downwards, like a lift, somewhere southerly, where among the slag, the birches and the dwarf pines the caravan trailer which he had hired, was standing; where it smelled of heather and soft coal, at the edge of the flooded open-cast mine with its sails and fishermen; where one evening he had gone outside the door, while she undressed inside and climbed into his pyjamas, and he had then lain next to her for hours, not daring to pull his arm away from under her, while he listened to the night-clear noises of the briquette factory on the other side of the water, half intoxicated by her sweet self lying there, and where he had told her about it the next morning.

At that moment Donath started. He was properly awake now and knew that his wife had lain there the whole time, sleepless and, rigid, and as always when he was agitated, he suddenly felt his stomach. He thought fleetingly of cancer and resolved from tomorrow onwards at the latest, he would cut down on coffee and tobacco, at the same time he had a yearning for a cigarette, yet didn’t get up.

He moved his hand tentatively sideways, along her shoulder, her throat, wet with perspiration, felt her body stiff and cramped under the blanket of discomfort or fear. “What’s the matter?” he asked, while he sat up and peered into her face, shining palely in the darkness. “Is anything wrong? Would you like half a sleeping pill?'

She gave no answer, but kept her eyes open and stared upwards, where for him there was nothing but ceiling, nothing but the calm grey of the new housing block wallpaper over the otherwise reliable plains of sleep. He shook her slightly. “Does anything hurt? Can you hear me?”

Finally she turned onto her side and gripped his arm, so that he moved nearer to her. “It mustn’t come again,” she said. “I’m frightened of falling asleep. It is terrible it’s still there, it’s everywhere. Can’t you see it?”

“You’ve been dreaming,” he said. “Everybody dreams sometimes, but now you are awake, and I’m with you. Shall I put the light on?” His voice seemed to him much too jovial, and he wondered what psychology there was for the seventh month but could not think of anything. He left the light off.

“It was probably an ambulance you heard, it’s just gone past. Try not to think of it any more, if it was bad. Just think of Phoebe.”

She clung to him when he mentioned the name; she didn’t tell him what she was thinking now.

“At least six and a half pounds,” said Donath. “That was what we agreed, and of course your eyes, I hope she has your eyes, if you can ‘arrange it - the hundreds of blues and greens of the ground swell over the sandbanks in the rising sun. No wonder I was first smitten by them.”

“Yes,” she said bewildered. “But the sun which I saw was receding over the horizon, a red-hot ball of clay, and the stars were tumbling about in the middle of the day, in the rumbling gloaming and I was standing there in the blistering wind with something shrieking in my arms, that was long since dead, and that fell to nothing before my eyes.”

Hiroshima, thought Donath and slipped his hand under her head, under the strands of hair matted with fear which he would have liked to caress away. Called it lightning from the sun, more than twenty years ago. He said, “Don’t go on, if it distresses you,” and he wondered what she had last read, heard or seen, as though dreams were just mere photos of the world, although not a lot was said about megatons and megadead in our country. It didn’t lead anywhere. Where from then?

“I’m frightened,” she said still clinging to him.

“But it’s past,” he said. “You’ll see – a few hours, then the sun will rise, the right one, the only one for us, then you will have forgotten it, or at the most, laugh about it. Just hold on tight. And no more nightmares!”

“You don’t understand,” she said, quite differently from the woman he had known up till now and had loved. “One day I will really wake up, because somebody has pressed the red button, some smart general or some senile madman, and I’ll futilely hope to stuff my child back where it came from, until I’ve vanished into smoke myself.”

“That’s enough now,” cried Donath, as he shook her again, “wake up, now, wake up!” He thought, it’s the same old story, the old bogyman, the paper tiger, which doesn’t even stop at your own wife. Simultaneously he thought, there you are, it will presumably be just as everyone had been instructed, and all you had to do was to watch out that you were lying properly with your feet in the direction of zero behind an indefinite number of undulations. He pressed her hand to his cheek. He caressed her and said, “At least try to feel that I am there.”

“Perhaps it has already happened,” she said. “Perhaps we are the only ones left over and don’t know it.” She scratched his temple weakly with her fingernails and stared out the window like him: no comfort of glass honeycomb, of sleepiness any longer, only the turgid undercurrent, on which one was carried away into emptiness, more thorough than any radiation.

I dreamt of the caravan,” Donath said. He tried some breathing exercises to quiet his stomach, and to think out arguments, theories of hope and of reason, as a revolutionary should do, but what did one do really? God knows it was easier to discuss deviations with Jesus de Santiago or with painters and poets who misinterpret a Plenary Session of the Party.

“The trailer stood in the old place,” he said. “Do you remember? The trouble it was to tow it there, near the bank. Only the roof had suddenly turned yellow. A lemon yellow roof under the pines.”

“Yes,” she said. And as he was about to describe the inside of the trailer, the hard upholstery which you could pull out until everywhere was bed, she suddenly gripped his hand and pushed it under the bulging blanket. He could feel it kicking and he felt quite glad when she started to cry.

How the Right Recruits, and What the Left can Learn

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:36:00 +0000

11-27-05, 2:00 pm

Right-wing psychologist, author and media personality Dr. James Dobson and his national organization, Focus on the Family, have risen in recent decades from obscurity to national prominence. Dobson and his followers now seem poised to wield the degree of national political clout once enjoyed by Jerry Falwell and his “Moral Majority.”

However, unlike Falwell, whose constituency largely consisted of older rural or southern white evangelicals, Dobson has managed to attract a younger, more educated suburban following that may soon be larger and more politically powerful than Falwell’s ever was. Focus on the Family (FoF) now employs hundreds of workers at its headquarters in Colorado, broadcasts on religious and secular radio stations nationwide and around the world, and receives so much correspondence that the Postal Service has issued the organization its own zip code, 80995. Fiercely antigay, antifeminist, pro-war and pro-Republican, the organization has become one of the major players in Washington as much because of its immense constituency and perceived mass support as for its not inconsiderable financial resources and strong connections with Bible-bangers within the Bush administration.

Is Dobson’s success in pushing rightwing politics on America solely due to the virtually unlimited material resources (money, broadcasting networks, ink and paper and presses and video studios) available to the political right? Do great masses of younger, suburban Americans really loathe gays and lesbians, want environmental laws gutted, crave more tax cuts for the superrich and want women’s place to be limited to the kitchen, the nursery and the bedroom? And if not, how do groups like Dobson’s recruit mass support among younger, educated working people? And most importantly, what (if anything) can the left, liberals and progressives learn from their success?

Unlike Falwell, Pat Robertson and the past generation of televangelists, Dobson has carefully tailored his outreach to contemporary suburban and urban tastes. Dobson himself holds an earned PhD in psychology and is a prolific author, silver-tongued speaker and master of contemporary media. Perhaps his greatest claim to fame is that he is the original popularizer of the now-universal expression “tough love.” The phrase was featured in his book, Love Must be Tough, written toward the end of the Vietnam War era, (earlier editions of the book contained fulminating blasts against student protesters and antiwar activists), a work that is still in print and selling well today.

In notable contrast to televangelists of the 1980’s, Dobson lacks a perceptible southern drawl, and his on-the-air style is more like that of a wise, friendly professor than that of a preacher. And, very much unlike many previous media-driven religious figures, his “ministry” has not yet been tarnished with significant financial corruption. Occasional personnel “scandals” within Dobson’s organization, such as the notorious case of a “cured” gay man whose “deliverance” into the straight life proved surprisingly temporary, have had little long-term impact on Dobson’s or his group’s reputation and public influence.

Yet, it is not Dobson’s undeniable brilliance and personal charisma alone that has driven the success of Focus on the Family. Dobson’s success story is one of “giving people what they want,” or in the case of FoF, creating what appears to be a gigantic public constituency by expertly and “caringly” addressing people’s most immediate personal and social pain, and tagging on the right wing’s political agenda as a sort of fine print.

The vastly greater part of Dobson’s public outreach does not deal explicitly with politics, but rather with toddlers’ tantrums, shaky marriages, baby blues and bedroom issues. A review of Dobson’s “Top 100 Broadcasts” listed on the FoF website shows the majority of the programs feature psychological advice on problems such as interpersonal communication, fatigue, selfesteem and addiction. Other frequent themes include child abuse, recovery from rape or childhood trauma, parenting issues and dating, marriage and relationship crises. About one out of every 10 programs is about sex. Although every broadcast has a clear religious orientation, only a small minority (less than 20 percent) of the programs could be called preaching or sermonizing. And, of the “Top 100,” only three or four programs on anti-abortion or antigay themes can be described as explicitly promoting the right-wing political agenda as such.

This is not to say that FoF goes under false colors. Dobson is always amply clear on where he stands, and on the organization’s Internet homepage a prominent link asks visitors to “Contact California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and urge him to stand firm in

his resolve to veto a gay marriage bill.” Another link, “Cultural Issues,” found on a pull-down menu within the FoF website, offers books and pamphlets that make the organization’s core ideology clear. Available “resources” (most not written by Dobson himself) include “The ACLU vs. America,” “Coming Out of Homosexuality,” “How the Supreme Court Is Destroying America,” “The New Tolerance: How A Cultural Movement Threatens To Destroy You, Your Faith, And Your Children,” and even the blasphemously titled “When God Says War is Right.”

One may draw two conclusions from FoF’s public presence: The first is that the overwhelming majority of Dobson’s admittedly vast following tunes in or writes seeking personal or relationship advice, not to express their support for the war in Iraq or opposition to women’s equality. The second and more immediately relevant lesson for left and progressive forces is that the right builds strength by appearing to address people’s immediate human needs, and then, once the hook is set, introducing the most palatable aspects of their own profoundly antihuman ideology as logical and even necessary for human happiness.

It is indeed ironic that a great part of the suffering that the religious right claims to be concerned about (loneliness, social and family disintegration, child abuse, mental and emotional illness, the commodification of sex and the coarsening of American culture) is a result of either the capitalist system itself, or of conscious political choices not to devote available public resources to pressing human needs. However, the day is past when the religious right would respond to people’s needs by declaring “You’ll get pie in the sky when you die” or “Offer it up.” In fact, some of what FoF does is genuinely helpful, and a few of their standpoints (against addiction, consumer debt slavery, child abuse, neo-Malthusianism, the porn industry, and family/household violence and against financing state budgets with lotteries and gambling) could and should be shared wholeheartedly by the left. It is a grave strategic error to dismiss the 21st century religious right as the same old gang of crooks, cornballs, fundamentalists and lechers as always. Yet, any left response to the right-wing challenge that ignores the real needs that “ministries” like FoF purport to address is even more deeply flawed.
So what can left and progressive forces do to counter the religious right’s (very effective) appeal to those who are hurting, lonely and in personal pain? How can leftists grab back the initiative from groups like FoF and address immediate issues that occupy ordinary people’s lives here and now (despair, relationship problems, child-raising, sex, aging, death), while still remaining faithful to our core struggle for working-class power and human material and political liberation? Arguably, Marxism has precious little that is unique to say about phobias, dating, intimate satisfaction, sibling rivalry, grandparenting or the horrors of the tantrum. Nor, one may suggest, should it. Past utopian attempts at left “cultural revolution” or building the new world in the “belly of the old” have generally had dismal results, and “the new socialist man and woman” can hardly be expected to emerge independent of a long-established new socialist reality. Most activists are not and cannot become therapists, and even the best-intentioned efforts to forge a coherent left ideology of emotional health, child-raising or sexuality (viz. Wilhelm Reich) seem inevitably to shatter into dust against the very material wall of capitalism. Lenin compares leftists who spend their time obsessed with such matters to navel-gazers.

Yet, waiting for “advanced workers” to recruit themselves spontaneously by realizing that objective dangers and opportunities are more important than their subjective ones guarantees a microscopic cadre of “The Enlightened”, but never a mass movement. The first step toward mass-based social change is recognizing, acknowledging and working with both the subjective and the objective realities working people face every day “on the ground” in order to reach people where they are and inspire them to move forward.

We cannot be content with trying to convince masses of people that, objectively, their greatest concern must be defeating the ultraright and defending democracy if we cavalierly brush aside their biggest immediate subjective concerns about raising the next generation, making a living, family and household life, sex, paying the bills, aging and dying, not necessarily in that order. Scholarly dissertations about false consciousness aside, for the left to take the “principled” but idealistic approach of ignoring these subjective concerns virtually guarantees that organizations like Focus on the Family will continue to have their own zip codes, while left groups go on struggling for bare survival. If the left ever hopes to build a mass movement, these critical questions absolutely must be fearlessly confronted with creative solutions.

A possible way out of this dilemma is to seek to address those many immediate subjective issues that Marxism can indeed address in a unique or particularly effective way, and attempt to confront personal questions that are outside the scope of public politics with what was once called the special “plus” that Marxism can offer. As examples, recovery from childhood trauma may be a psychological, not a political issue, but cutbacks and shortfalls in community-based psychiatric services are very political indeed, an inconvenient fact that groups like Dobson’s carefully ignore. In spite of much interesting feminist theory on the subject, marital discord remains a problem that is usually more interpersonal than political in any meaningful or material sense of the word. Nonetheless, the financial, time- and workrelated pressures that underlie far too many spousal conflicts are deeply political. Though the aging process and death are part of the human biological heritage and not political, issues of health care, Social Security, retirement fund protection and real Medicare reform are core political questions. And, of course, credit card and personal debt issues bedeviling so many working families today are nothing if not political.

While Marx has little to say about sex, dating or caring for kids with colic, live, breathing Marxists have plenty to say, and even more to hear. Often (perhaps in the majority of cases), working people who are experiencing loneliness or personal, financial or family problems (and who isn’t these days?) mainly want a listening ear, or perhaps a solid shoulder to cry on. Capitalism’s relentless destruction of all interpersonal networks except those that serve its interests has left immense numbers of working people without a safety net and defenseless against the seduction of the religious right. If left groups, labor and activists can find a way to offer the kind of simple, honest human support, solidarity and comradeship that capitalism has robbed from masses of working people, the left movement can expect unprecedented mass growth. If not, the road to the future will be rough indeed. Finally, Marxists can offer a unique subjective insight that the right, religious or secular, cannot: the concept of righteous anger.

Right-wing ideologues like Dobson realize and fear this, and have bitterly fought to expunge the concept of “victimhood” from American political discourse. If each individual has only himself or herself to blame for racism, exploitation, poverty, rape and abuse, unemployment or illness, anger is self-destructive. Suicide rates, drug use and the mushrooming problem of youth “self-injury” or “self-harm” all suggest that this ruling class initiative has scored significant success. But, when the questions are transformed from “Why am I this way?” and “What did I do wrong to have this happen to me?” to “What have they done to me?” righteous anger becomes a powerful force for change, both personal and social. If there are no victims, perpetrators also conveniently vanish. But, drawing on an old Texas saying, when working people stop letting the ruling class spit in our faces and tell us it is raining (the actual saying is considerably more salty), we will begin to see the dawn of a new day.

The truly sinister aspect of groups like FoF is how they harness people in trouble, grief or mourning to pull the evil vehicle of the ultra-right agenda. Dobson and those like him have embraced with a vengeance the old 1960’s axiom that “the personal is political” and turned it on its head. Thus, a grieving parent who orders a pamphlet from FoF on how to cope with the loss of a child materially ends up doing his or her bit to help the living children of billionaires seeking repeal of the estate tax. A troubled couple wanting advice about sexual problems is automatically counted in the ranks of those who fight to enshrine homophobia in the US Constitution, and the fearful family of a senior who contact friendly, wise old Dr. Dobson to find out the symptoms of Alzheimer’s make an unknowing but effective contribution toward putting an end to Social Security as we know it. All this, if nothing else, is reason enough for the left to make a special, conscious effort to recapture the initiative from the religious right, and to be true to the promise of “a new world in birth.” The future expects no less from us.

--Owen Williamson teaches sociology at the University of Texas at El Paso.

We Charge Genocide: A Brief History of US in the Philippines

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:32:00 +0000

11-27-05, 2:00 pm

Except during the 1960’s when the Filipino-American War of 1899-1902 was referred to as “the first Vietnam,” the death of 1.4 million Filipinos has been usually accounted for as either collateral damage or victims of insurrection against the imperial authority of the United States. The first Filipino scholar to make a thorough documentation of the carnage is the late Luzviminda Francisco in her contribution to The Philippines: The End of An Illusion.

This fact is not even mentioned in the tiny paragraph or so in most US history textbooks. Stanley Karnow’s In Our Image (1989), the acclaimed history of this intervention, quotes the figure of 200,000 Filipinos killed in outright fighting. Among historians, only Howard Zinn and Gabriel Kolko have dwelt on the “genocidal” character of the catastrophe. Kolko, in his magisterial Main Currents in Modern American History(1976), reflects on the context of the mass murder: Violence reached a crescendo against the Indian after the Civil War and found a yet bloodier manifestation during the protracted conquest of the Philippines from 1898 until well into the next decade, when anywhere from 200,000 to 600,000 Filipinos were killed in an orgy of racist slaughter that evoked much congratulation and approval.

Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States cites 300,000 Filipinos killed in Batangas alone, while William Pomeroy’s American Neo-Colonialism cites 600,000 Filipinos dead in Luzon alone by 1902. The actual figure of 1.4 million covers the period from 1899 to 1905 when resistance by the Filipino revolutionary forces mutated from outright combat in battle to guerilla skirmishes; it doesn’t include the thousands of Moros (Filipino Muslims) killed in the first two decades of US colonial domination.

The first Philippine Republic led by Emilio Aguinaldo, which had already waged a successful war against the Spanish colonizers, mounted a determined nationwide opposition against US invading forces. It continued for two more decades after Aguinaldo’s capture in 1901. Several provinces resisted to the point where the US had to employ scorchedearth tactics and hamletting or “reconcentration” to quarantine the populace from the guerillas, resulting in widespread torture, disease and mass starvation. In The Specter of Genocide: Mass Murder in Historical Perspective, Gavan McCormack argues that the outright counterguerilla operations launched by the US against the Filipinos, an integral part of its violent pacification program, constitutes genocide. He refers to Jean Paul Sartre’s contention that as in Vietnam, “the only anti-guerrilla strategy which will be effective is the destruction of the people, in other words, the civilians, women and children.” That is what happened in the Philippines in the first half of the bloody 20th century.

As defined by the UN 1948 “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,” genocide means acts “committed with intention to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” It is clear that the US colonial conquest of the Philippines deliberately sought to destroy the national sovereignty of the Filipinos. The intent of the US perpetrators included the dissolution of the nationa identity of the Filipinos manifest in the rhetoric, policies and disciplinary regimes created by legislators, politicians, military personnel and others. The original supporters of the UN document on genocide saw genocide as including acts or policies aimed at “preventing the preservation or development” of “racial, national, linguistic, religious, or political groups.” That would include “all forms of propaganda tending by their systematic and hateful character to provoke genocide, or tending to make it appear as a necessary, legitimate, or excusable act.” What the UN originally had in mind, namely, genocide as cultural or social death of targeted groups, was purged from the final document due to the political interests of the nation-states that then dominated the world body.

What was deleted in the original draft of the UN document are descriptions of practices considered genocidal in their collective effect. Some of them were carried out in the Philippines by the United States from 1899 up to 1946 when the country was finally granted formal independence. As with the American Indians, US colonization involved, among other things, the destruction of the specific character of a persecuted group by forced transfer of children, forced exile, prohibition of the use of the national language, destruction of books, documents, monuments, and objects of historical, artistic or religious value. The goal of all colonialism is the cultural and social death of the conquered natives, in effect, genocide.

In her article, “Genocide and America” ( New York Review of Books, March 14, 2002), Samantha Power observes that US officials “had genuine difficulty distinguishing the deliberate massacre of civilians from the casualties incurred in conventional conflict.” It is precisely the blurring of this distinction in colonial wars through racist ways of describing the imagined “enemy” and actual practices that proves how genocide cannot be fully grasped without analyzing the way the victimizer (the colonizing state power) categorizes the victims (target populations) in ways that seem “natural” and without alternatives or exception unique perhaps to modern claims to civilization. Within the modern period, in particular, the messianic impulse to genocide springs from the imperative of capital accumulation – the imperative to reduce humans to commodified labor-power, to saleable goods/services. US “primitive accumulation” began with the early colonies in New England and Virginia, and culminated in the 19th century with the conquest and annexation of Puerto Rico, Cuba, Guam, Hawaii and the Philippines. With the historical background of the US campaigns against the American Indians in particular, and the treatment of African slaves and Chicanos in general, there is a need for future scholars and researchers to concretize this idea of genocide (as byproduct of imperial expansion) by exemplary illustrations from the US colonial adventure in the Philippines.

What happened in 1899-1903 is bound to be repeated with the increased US intervention in the Philippines (declared “the second front” in the “war against terrorism”) unless US citizens protest. Hundreds of US Special Forces are at present deployed throughout the islands presumably against “terrorist” Muslim insurgents and the left-wing New People’s Army. Both groups have been fighting for basic democratic rights for more than five decades now, since the Philippines gained nominal independence from the US in 1946. There is unfortunately abysmal ignorance about continued US involvement in this former Asian colony – except, perhaps, during the 1986 “People Power” revolt against the Marcos “martial law” regime universally condemned for stark human-rights violations.

As attested to by UNESCO and human rights monitors, the situation has worsened since then with hundreds of killings of journalists, lawyers, women activists and union organizers. The current crisis of the corrupt Arroyo regime is renewing alarm signals for Washington, hinting at a repeat of mass urban uprisings sure to threaten the comprador agents of global capital that are accomplices in the misery of millions caused by World Bank, World Trade Organization,iand International Monetary Fund policies imposed on a neocolonial government. Tenmillion of 80 million Filipinos work as domestics and contract workers abroad.

The revolutionary upsurge in the Philippines against the Marcos dictatorship (1972-1986) stirred up dogmatic cold war complacency. With the rise of a new stage in academic cultural studies in the 1990s, the historical reality of US imperialism (the genocide of Native Americans is replayed in the subjugation of the inhabitants of the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Hawaii and Cuba) is finally being dug up and re-examined. But this is, of course, a phenomenon brought about by a confluence of various events, among them: the demise of the Soviet Union as a challenger to US hegemony; attacks on the 60’s in both Fukuyama’s “end of history” and the endless “culture wars,” the Palestininan intifadas; the Zapatista revolt against Nafta; the heralding of current antiterrorism by the Persian Gulf war; and the fabled “clash of civilizations.” Despite these changes, the old frames of making sense of the world have not been modified to understand how nationalist revolutions in the colonized territories cannot be confused with nationalist patriotism in the colonial countries, or how the mode of US imperial rule in the 20th century differs in form and content from those of the British or French in the 19th century.

With few exceptions, the view of a progressive modernizing influence from the advanced industrial Western powers remains deeply entrenched here and in the Philippines. Even postcolonial and postmodern thinkers mistakenly criticize the anti-imperialist struggles because in the superior gaze of these thinkers they have been damaged or are bound to become perverted into despotic postcolonial regimes, like those in Ghana, Algeria, Vietnam, the Philippines and elsewhere. The only alternative, it seems, is to give assent to the process of globalization under the aegis of the World Bank/IMF/WTO, and hope for a kind of “benevolent assimilation.”

What remains to be carefully considered, above all, is the specific historical characteristics of each of these movements for national liberation, their class composition, historical roots, programs, ideological tendencies and political agendas within the context of colonial/imperial domination. It is not possible to make knee-jerk judgments on the character and fate of nationalist movements in colonized territories without looking at the complex relations between colonizer and colonized, the dialectical interaction between their forces as well as others caught in the conflict. Otherwise, the result would be a disingenuous ethical utopianism such as that found in US academic postmodernism which, in the end, is an apology for the ascendancy of the transnational corporations based mainly in the nation-states of the North, and for the hegemonic rule of the only remaining superpower claiming to act in the name of freedom and democracy.

The case of the national-democratic struggle in the Philippines may be taken as an example. Because of the historical specificity of the Philippines’ emergence as a dependent nation-state controlled by the United States in the 20th century, nationalism as a mass movement has always been defined by anti-imperialist rebellion. US conquest entailed long and sustained violent suppression of the Filipino revolutionary forces for decades.

The central founding “event” (as the philosopher Alain Badiou would define the term) is the 1896 revolution against Spain and its sequel, the Filipino-American war of 1899-1902, and the Moro resistance up to 1914 against US colonization. Another political sequence of events is the Sakdal uprising in the 1930’s during the commonwealth period followed by the Huk uprising in the 1940’s and 1950’s – a sequence that is renewed in the first quarter storm of 1970 against the neocolonial state. While the feudal oligarchy and the comprador class under US patronage used parts of the nationalist tradition formed in 1896-1898 as a tool for establishing moral-intellectual leadership, their attempts have never been successful. Propped up by the Pentagon-supported military, the Arroyo administration today, for example, uses the US slogan of democracy against terrorism and the fantasies of the neoliberal free market to legitimize its continued exploitation of workers, peasants, women and ethnic minorities. Following a long and tested tradition of grassroots mobilization, Filipino nationalism has always remained centered on the peasantry’s demand for land closely tied to the popular-democratic demand for equality and genuine sovereignty.

For over a century now, US-backed “development” has utterly failed in the Philippines. The resistance against globalized capital and its neoliberal extortions is spearheaded today by a national- democratic mass movement of various ideological persuasions. There is also a durable Marxist-led insurgency that seeks to articulate the “unfinished revolution” of 1896 in its demand for national independence against US control and social justice for the majority of citizens (80 million) 10 percent of whom are now migrant workers abroad. Meanwhile, the Muslim community in the southern part of the Philippines initiated its armed struggle for self-determination during the Marcos dictatorship (1972-1986) and continues today as a broadly based movement for autonomy, despite the Islamic ideology of its teacher-militants.

Recalling the genocidal US campaigns cited above, BangsaMoro nationalism cannot forget its Muslim character which is universalized in the principles of equality, justice and the right to self-determination. In the wake of past defeats of peasant revolts, the Filipino culture of nationalism constantly renews its anti-imperialist voice by mobilizing new forces (women and church people in the 1960’s, and the indigenous or ethnic minorities in the 1970’s and 1980’s). It is organically embedded in emancipatory social and political movements whose origin recalls the demand for sovereignty in the tradition of thirdworld nationalist movements (Gandhi, Ho Chi Minh, Mao) but are in practice the local-led mass insurgency against continued US hegemony.

The Philippines as an “imagined” and actually experienced ensemble of communities remains in a process of being built and rebuilt mainly through political and social resistance against corporate globalization and its ideologies, fashioning an appropriate culture of dissent, resistance and subversion worthy of its people’s history and its collective vision.

--E. San Juan, Jr. directs the Philippines Cultural Studies Center and his most recent book is Working Through the Contradictions (Bucknell University Press, 2004).

BRIGADES of Workers and Witnesses

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:28:00 +0000

11-27-05, 2:00 pm

Now is the time for activists across the country to take action to save New Orleans from instant gentrification. There is an unprecedented unity of perspective among progressive political people. Activists and progressives agree that the slaughter of New Orleans’ low-income communities was not backward US “incompetence” nor was it merely an act of Mother Nature. The US has more than enough technological expertise and economic resources to protect our people from hurricanes, even hurricanes exacerbated by global warming. No one doubts that massive instant aid would have been provided if the people on rooftops or in nursing homes were white people with money. And they would never have been forced to live in sports stadiums hundreds of miles from home.

We agree that the levies were intentionally “sabotaged” by the federal government’s slashing of funds for their maintenance. (There is disagreement on how much direct sabotage may or may not have been involved, but that is not important.) Informed folks know that experts – and even an article in National Geographic – had predicted this devastation for several years. So our “leaders” had plenty of time to prepare for the storm with an evacuation plan and shoring up of the levies, but instead chose to do the opposite. Since we know that this not-so-natural disaster is being used to facilitate a modern land-grab and an escalation of the war on the poor, what can we do? We know that the mass media shamelessly promoted racist distortions of the poor community’s alleged criminal response to the crisis. We’ve watched in dismay as our government arrogantly gifted no-bid contracts to monster billionaire corporations like Halliburton, Bechdel and Maximus –despite their horrible histories of fiscal corruption and human abuse. We’ve been sickened to learn that these billionaires will be allowed to pay less than prevailing wages (not even living wages) to workers rebuilding New Orleans, thanks to another blatant federal government intervention. Finally the icing on the cake of our corporate government’s blatant cannibalization of US people is the Republican Congress’ plan to make the poor pay $50 billion both for the poor survivors of Katrina and to fund yet one more tax cut for wealthy Americans.

It’s time to move beyond charity and outrage. The African American and white people in poverty who have been so violently abandoned and abused will never be able to return, reclaim and rebuild their homes and communities without support. And that support will not be coming from billionaires like Halliburton and no-sayers like Maximus. On the contrary, the corporate mission is to reclaim New Orleans, especially the miles around the French Quarter, for the wealthy white population.

I propose the creation of brigades of volunteer workers and watchers from across the US to assist New Orleans neighborhoods, organizations and individuals who want, need, and request help rebuilding – and to provide witnesses to the actions of the corporate billionaires, the military, the security forces, and the police. Political groups and churches could organize these buses of both skilled and unskilled workers, coordinating efforts with groups and churches in New Orleans. The US has a history of organizing similar brigades of volunteer workers to the south during the Civil Rights campaign. We have also sent worker brigades to Cuba and witnesses to Guatemala.

By taking action to stop the land-grab in New Orleans and stop the Maximus no-sayers of public benefits, we will also be sending a message to our leaders. They will learn that the US activist populations will take action to stop billionaire corporations from running our government and pushing our country into ugly racist warfare on poor families, the disabled, and struggling workers.

--Pat Gowens is editor of Mother Warrior's Voice.

If I Had a Hammer: Hugo Chávez and the Bolivarian Revolution

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 06:22:00 +0000

11-27-05, 2:00 pm

A revolution is presently on course in Venezuela known as the “Bolivarian revolution.” It is an antisystemic and socialist revolution, which benefits from very broad support. Since 1998, Venezuelans have repeatedly affirmed their liking for this revolution as amply evidenced by Hugo Chávez’s election to the presidency, the reform of the Constitution, the “no” vote to attempt to recall the chief of the state, and regional elections won some months later. Even earlier, in April 2002, the broad public rose up in protest against a coup supported by the oligarchy and, in December of the same year, resisted an employers’ lockout which attempted to strangle the economy.

Fundamentally, the legitimacy of the revolutionary process in this South American country lies in strict respect for the law (so as not to give a handle to reaction), and appeals to an ideal of social justice imbued with the spirit of Christianity and deeply rooted in the people’s mentality. But in the word of Chávez this ideal will be achieved only if “one gives the power to the people.”

This is exactly what Hugo Chávez, an exceptional revolutionary leader, is trying to do. In this difficult time for the left, the radicalism of Chávez’s discourse is almost surprising in its anti-imperialist firmness in bringing to the fore the vital need for humanity to search for an alternative to capitalism and find a new way to a socialism of the future. US imperialism does not make a mistake in seeing him as a major enemy.

If the Venezuelan revolution is peaceful, however, it is not unarmed. Arms have recently been imported, because “the people of Venezuela are ready to defend its territory and to fight for its revolution.” Within Venezuela, Chávez is resisting the aggressiveness of the still powerful local bourgeoisie. At the international level, he does not cease to insist on the urgency of building an anti-imperialist front in the South by uniting Latin American countries.

The solidarity of the Bolivarian revolution extends to peoples around the world. In fact, very few heads of the state like him have the courage to express opposition to Bush’s war on Iraq and solidarity with the Iraqi people. His proposal in particular is to launch a counter to the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA), by gathering together national oil companies on a regional scale to create a single continental oil company (Pétroamérica). His administration is also creating a TV channel at the service of the peoples of the South (Telesur).

Venezuela is bursting with oil wealth. Nevertheless, more than two-thirds of Venezuelans are living in poverty. For some time, however, things have begun to change, especially thanks to the “social missions” of the Bolivarian revolution launched in the second half of 2003. These social missions are organized around education, health, food supply, employment and the inalienable rights of the people.

Thanks to some 100,000 civilian and military instructors, “Robinson mission number1,” named in honor of Bolívar’s teacher, Simón Rodríguez (called Samuel Robinson during the independence war) has brought literacy to more than one million Venezuelans in only a year. Furthermore, the “Robinson mission 2” has taught 1.2 million more to read and write. At the same time 770,000 other (young and not-so-young) Venezuelans have earned a general certificate of education. This has been achieved under the auspices of the “Ribas mission” named for a general of Venezuela’s revolutionary war, José Felix Ribas. The “Sucre mission” opened the doors of the university to half a million scholarship holders. Antonio José de Sucre was the Venezuelan marshal who led the revolutionary armies to victory against the Spanish in Ayacucho in 1824 before founding the state of Bolivia.

Health indicators throughout the country have improved thanks to the “misión Barrio Adentro” (“inside-the-neighborhood mission”). Initiated in 2003, this mission has brought to life a large network of “people’s hospitals” along with medical, dental and eye care centers dedicated to the poor. This network is complemented by the implementation of social and economic reforms, culture, communication and sport. Today, 17 million poor are taken care of by this “integral general medical” program. It is, of course, fully free. In one year, the results obtained are really impressive: most health indicators are already improving, especially infant mortality rate, now below 20 percent as compared to 35 percent in the Brazil.

These efforts are further articulated by the “Mercal mission,” a plan to combat hunger which guarantees food at low prices to 10 million persons in 11,000 shops, subsidized and managed by the state. The “maximum protection plan” as well as the “Bolivarian popular canteens” distribute food, health advice, cultural events and even lodging freely to half a million poor. In a few months, the revolution cut in half the number of people without access to drinking water.

Venezuela is also implementing the people’s food program, selling food at extremely low prices to reduce malnutrition. This program has created a network of “food houses” that distribute free food along with the “program of social care,” which offers personalized medical, dental and pediatric services, as well as legal assistance. In a parallel development, infrastructure programs have been developed, such as “Plan Mosquito” (“Mosquito plan”), which provides construction materials for the building of sites prioritized by organized communities. Also along these lines the “operación Corre camino” (“running way operation”), has been established for repairing streets and pavements with cement and asphalt. Added to the list is “plan Hormiga” (“Ant plan”), which supplies construction materials to the inhabitants of working-class districts in order to enlarge and improve housing.

Special plans to promote employment along with the establishment of banks dedicated to helping the poor complete this strategy. It relies on the participation of the creative force of the people in the generation of wealth. Land, until now undeveloped or underdeveloped, has been distributed to more than 10,000 poor families in the rural areas (thanks to the land law) and in urban areas.

Much attention is paid in Chávez’s new Venezuela to the problems of indigenous peoples. The “misión Guaicaipuro” aims at improving the living and cultural conditions of indigenous peoples. Today, 33 Amerindian nationalities live in Venezuela, stretching over eight states of the country.

Finally another important mission addresses the status of immigrants in the country. The “misión Identidad” (“Identity mission”) has given citizenship to more than five million Venezuelans (that is to say to more than 20 percent of the total population) by allowing them identity cards and, as a result, the right to vote.

One could obviously exhibit impatience with the pace of change. A lot of ground remains to be covered before this country becomes “liveable” for a majority of its people. Nevertheless, it is not possible to ignore the present state of the relationship of forces, which is still uncertain, both inside as well as outside the country. Each advance of the Bolivarian revolution is of the utmost importance for all progressive and democratic forces in the world.

Obviously, success depends on internal factors and above all the capability of the revolutionaries to gain ground in the media, other institutions and in the ownership of the means of production. Much also depends on the formation of political cadres and the ability to organize and mobilize the people in support of the process. But success also depends on the decisive role the army will play in its alliance with the people. The links between Cuba and Venezuela, two revolutionary countries, are increasing.

This subject could be seen as relatively marginal, but it is really crucial for all of us, both in the United States and in Europe. It is crucial because these new relations contribute to both breaking the isolation of Cuba as well as giving a new impulse to the Cuban revolution after the difficulties of the “special period in time of peace.” It also may help the young Bolivarian revolution to transform its internal social structure progressively. It also opens avenues for alternatives, solidarity in Latin America in the face of the Free Trade Area of the Americas project’s huge dangers.

As a matter of fact, a new kind of relationship is developing with Cuba. The role of the socialist island in deepening the Venezuelan revolution is quite important and wonderful. Cuba is now helping Chávez’s revolutionary government to put into practice its social missions to the poor. More than 18,500 Cuban physicians have volunteered for the “misión Barrio Adentro,” from the shantytowns of Caracas to the farthest regions of the Andean mountains in the West, the Amazonian forests in the South and the Guyana plateau in the East.

Some Venezuelan doctors, recently graduated from the Latin American medical school (Escuela Latinoamericana de Ciencias Médicas) have joined these medical teams. Opened at the end of 1999, this school will soon have more than 10,000 students. Two thousand scholarships are granted each year by Cuba to Venezuelan students in medicine. Moreover, the “misión Milagro” (“miracle mission”) performed operations in Cuba on more than 10,700 Venezuelan patients affected by cataracts without any cost.

Even the educational literacy missions referred to above must give thanks to the Cuban learning method (“Yo si puedo,” “Yes, I can”). Although still modest, the program against hunger applied today in Venezuela (“misión Mercal”) looks a little bit like the Cuban “libreta” system of free distribution of food.

In exchange for Cuban solidarity is the supplying of the island with oil by means of “compensated trade.” (Even if oil was discovered in Cuba and even if Cuba is now guaranteeing a good price in dollars per barrel to Venezuela.) This oil for social services, material/immaterial, win/win exchange between the two parts is extremely important in breaking their isolation.

Beyond this crucial bilateral cooperation between Cuba and Venezuela, the strategic alliance is also opening new perspectives for change on a global scale. A first step in this direction is the signing of the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas and the Caribbean (ALBA) on December 14, 2004. It was conceived as an effective alternative to Bush-sponsored FTAA, and is a plan for regional integration based on solidarity in order to create an area free of poverty, illiteracy, malnutrition and unemployment for the benefit of the poor.

According to the ALBA treaty, enlarging the 2000 cooperation pact between Cuba and Venezuela now includes a wide range of economic agreements on technological transfers in the energy sector and telecommunications (including the use of satellites by Cuba), the financing of productive and infrastructural projects in agriculture transport and tourism. One of ALBA’s main points is the creation of a “compensatory fund for structural convergence,” whose goal is to secure preferential treatment to poor countries of the region and grant financial aid to infrastructural and social investments or support local production and exports.

At the same time, the two countries signed agreements with China. The agreements with Cuba covered various fields, such as exporting 4,000 tons of nickel to China every year, but also agreements on mixed companies, tourism, telecommunications, railway and biotechnology. Cuba, like China, is carrying out a de-dollarization process with the November 2004 decision to prohibit the circulation of dollars on the island, replaced by the convertible peso.

In a parallel development Venezuela has engaged in negotiations with the Andean countries trying to apply its anti-FTAA strategy. As one can see things seem to be really changing in Latin America. A new world is standing up on this continent, and it will not give up the fight.

As an expression of solidarity with these developments in the United States as well as in Europe, our goals are clear:

1. to fight to lift the blockade against Cuba;

2. to reject the FTAA and the bilateral free trade treaties between the US and Latin American countries;

3. to mobilize all progressive and democratic forces in solidarity with the Cuban revolution and with the Bolivarian revolution.

The victory of anti-imperialist forces is possible. Without reliable sources in his time, Marx did not know how to take real measure of Bolivar’s stature, nor to understand the deeply revolutionary nature of his action.

Today, we, Marxists of the 21st century, should not make the same mistake about the Bolivarian revolution inspired by the Libertador’s dreams of union and universality. For all of us solidarity with the Venezuelan people and its revolutionary government is an imperative, urgent duty.

--Remy Herrera is a researcher with the National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) of France and a professor at the Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne.

US prepares for war from Australian soil

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 05:19:00 +0000

11-27-05,11.05am

The announcement that the United States will start sending long range B-52 and B-51 bomber aircraft as well as stealth bombers for training exercises — including bombing practice — in the Northern Territory signals the latest stage in preparation for US aggression in the region. The decision was revealed during last week’s visit by US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld at a joint press conference with Australia’s Defence Minister Robert Hill. US Deputy Secretary of State Robert B Zoellick was also in Adelaide for the annual Australia-US Ministerial Consultations (AUSMIN) held there last week.

The massive planes will fly from their US base in Guam to the Delamere Weapons Range in the Northern Territory, which has been especially developed for bombing exercises. The testing of US weapons on Australian territory was first publicly mooted 12 months ago with an agreement between the Bush administration and the Howard Government to allow the US to test a new generation weapons at Shoalwater Bay in Queensland and two training areas in the Northern Territory.

The weapons to be tested have not been specified but the US has a policy of using plutonium and uranium depleted weapons. That would be in addition to the threat to the local residents and the ecosystem, and the arrogant dismissal by the Howard Government of the rights of the traditional Indigenous owners of the area.

Add to the new base the US set up last year, the 20,000 US troops who will descend on Shoalwater Bay in 2007 in the Talisman Sabre joint exercises for warfare training and weapons experimentation, and a clear strategy emerges of a build up to war.

This is confirmed in the evasive language in the joint US-Australia communiqué following the AUSMIN meeting. 'The United States welcomed Australia’s contribution to the stability and security of the Pacific Island countries [read ‘thanks deputy sheriff’]. Australia reaffirmed its support for proposed changes in the United States’ regional force posture [read ‘war preparations’] and welcomed progress by the United States and Japan in their alliance transformation [read ‘aggression pact’].'

The communiqué speaks of a 'US Global Peace Operations Initiative' in the Asia-Pacific region [read ‘interference in the internal affairs of Asia-Pacific nations, including invasion and occupation’]. The Howard Government has 'agreed to explore opportunities for partnership in helping build the capacity of regional countries in this area' [read ‘strategic manoeuvres converging on China as the central target’].

The ALP has come out in support of the latest move to turn Australia into a bombing range and stepping off point for US aggression. Labor defence spokesman Robert McClelland rationalised it this way: 'If … instead of the United States resources you require Australia to develop these resources it is a massive drain on the budget …'

Ross Babbage, head of strategic and defence studies at the Australian National University, incidentally highlighted the lackey’s role to be played by the Howard Government in the launching of any war: 'The Americans using only their own territory wouldn’t provide Australia with the edge we need to operate effectively with these US forces', he told ABC radio.

Greens leader Bob Brown, labelling the decision 'shocking', said, 'We are not the 51st state of America. It would be better if the US found a bombing range near Crawford, Texas [the location of George W Bush’s ranch] for their exercises.'

And outside Parliament, while Downer and Hill were bending the knee to Rumsfeld and Zoellick, protestors sent a very different message to the warmongers.

Cuba now has 71,000 doctors

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 05:07:00 +0000

11-27-05,10:50am

ON November 14 the Ministry of Public Health, in the name of the Cuban people, presented certificates of recognition to the first doctors and dentists who graduated thanks to the Revolution 40 years ago, during a ceremony at the Aula Magna of the University of Havana, presided over by members of the Political Bureau Ramón Machado Ventura and José Ramón Balaguer Cabrera, also minister of public health.

On November 14, 1965, on Pico Turquino and in the presence of President Fidel Castro, the historic graduation took place of the 426 men and women who inaugurated, with their practice, a new stage in health services for the Cubans people. The oath taken by that group included renouncing private medicine, the duty to expand rural medical services, to promote preventive health care among the population and to providing selfless aid to needy peoples, among other commitments.

The minister of public health – after describing that day with the same words used at the time by Fidel: 'A victorious day for our medicine' – reflected on the importance of that oath for the Cuban Revolution, people and healthcare system.

Renouncing private medicine, he emphasized, offered a different road to the practice of medicine, that which was dreamed of by Fidel and the Revolution. Four decades later, he affirmed, Cuba has a healthcare system that could not exist anywhere else in the world, given that public health is a policy of our socialist state, foundation and essence of the Revolution.

During his speech, Balaguer noted that in 1959, the country had 6,000 doctors, with an average of 1 doctor per 1,000 inhabitants. Half of those professionals emigrated. Today, Cuba has 71,000 doctors, he said, and that figure shows what the Revolution has meant for this sector.

He also commented on how the history of healthcare workers during these years has been associated with selfless service and commitment to the peoples of other nations.

During the ceremony, tribute was paid to the professors who trained the first group, and to those who fell during missions in Angola and Guinea Bissau. Doctor Angel Fernández, who spoke on behalf of his colleagues, also honored Pedro Borrás, the first medical student who died defending the Revolution during the Bay of Pigs battles, and a symbol of his generation.

Of this group of doctors and dentists, 96% have qualified as first or second-grade specialists; 71% have qualified as teachers, and 20% as researchers.

More than half have completed one or more internationalist missions, while 6% have attained the level of scientist.

Hillary, You're Not Listening: '2005 Critical National Issues Survey.'

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 04:45:00 +0000

11-27-05,10:29am

'Part of my job is being a good listener,' Hillary Clinton wrote, in the first line of her letter received today. As a New Yorker, I'm represented by Hillary in the U.S. Senate. Along with her two-page fundraising letter, I received a four-page '2005 Critical National Issues Survey.'

But something was missing -- something Hillary obviously doesn't want to hear about: IRAQ. Nowhere in the letter or the questionnaire was that four-letter word.

Hillary's first question asked me to rank nine issues in their 'order of importance.' Iraq wasn't on the list. Nor was there a place I could add an issue she'd somehow forgotten about.

The problem is she hadn't forgotten the war. She simply doesn't want to hear about one of the biggest issues dividing our country, draining the federal budget, destabilizing the Middle East, undermining international law and institutions, and spreading fear and hatred of our country. When national polls show that 54% or more of Americans want our troops withdrawn promptly from Iraq, and 60% believe it was a mistake to have sent troops in the first place, imagine how huge the majorities are for those propositions in Hillary's home state of New York.

Hillary's letter said that she enclosed the questionnaire to help gauge concern about 'the extreme Bush agenda.' But on the central foreign policy initiative of Bush's agenda, she has been complicit. When she voted to authorize the Iraq war, and today when she echoes White House talking points in criticizing advocates of withdrawal.

Hillary's letter closes by appealing to Americans who believe 'no one's listening to me.' I'm not one of those Americans: Progressive members of Congress have been listening to their constituents, and speaking out loudly and bravely to end the destabilizing US occupation of Iraq. Now even a hawk like John Murtha is listening. It's Hillary who isn't listening.

What I want this Christmas season is an antiwar Democrat to step forward to challenge Hillary Clinton in New York's upcoming primary for senate. And I want a powerful antiwar Democrat to oppose her for the presidential nomination in 2008.

Pollster John Zogby believes that a credible progressive Democrat will challenge Hillary for the presidency in 2008: 'There will be an antiwar candidate,' predicts Zogby. 'That's what the base demands.'

Hillary's letter ended with a P.S.: 'Please return your completed survey with a generous contribution within 10 days.'

I immediately returned the survey...with the word 'IRAQ' scrawled across it in marker. But there was no 'generous contribution.' I'm keeping my checkbook open for candidates ready to challenge Bush's extreme agenda, at home and in Iraq -- and to challenge Hillary as well.

Jeff Cohen (www.jeffcohen.org) is a writer, lecturer and media critic who founded the media watch group FAIR in 1986. In the mid-1990s, he co-wrote the nationally syndicated 'Media Beat' column (with Norman Solomon). In 2003, he was the communications director of the Kucinich for President campaign.

Israeli nuclear whistle-blower Vanunu speaks about his November 18th arrest

Mon, 28 Nov 2005 04:14:00 +0000

11-27-05,10:00am

Mordechai Vanunu, often dubbed the 'Israeli nuclear whistle-blower,' was arrested on Friday 18th November for traveling to the East Jerusalem suburb al-Ram. Vanunu, 51, was released on the following day and returned to his de facto house arrest at St. George's Cathedral in Jerusalem, where he has sought refuge since being released from his 18-year detention and torture under Israeli authorities.

The former nuclear technician made international headlines in 1986 when he revealed to the world that Israel had undertaken a covert nuclear weapons program at the Dimona nuclear facility. His revelations led independent experts to confirm that Israel has 100 to 200 nuclear bombs. Since his release, Israel has kept Vanunu under close watch, fearing that he might rally further criticism of the regime's illicit conduct. This tactic has produced the opposite effect as Vanunu remains resilient in his efforts to publicize the systematic repression of Palestinians and their censorship of critical thought. In addition to his anti-nuclear campaigning, Vanunu has repeatedly called for the dismantlement of Israel's racist policies, and the fundamental right of return for Palestinian refugees.

'Last Friday, the Israeli authorities abused their power yet again to arrest me. Although I remained in prison for only two days, I was visited by the cruel memories of my 18 years in isolation.

The reason for my arrest this time was that I came very close to the checkpoint near the wall in al-Ram, a small Palestinian neighborhood in East Jerusalem where they have not yet decided where the Apartheid Wall is going to continue.

I took a bus from the station in East Jerusalem and traveled to al-Ram without incident, but as the bus returned to Jerusalem, they inspected it at the checkpoint. At the checkpoint, they took my ID card and the soldiers received orders to arrest me. They confiscated my camera and mobile phone, and took me to the nearest police station, where I waited for the special police unit to come from Tel Aviv and take me in for questioning.

Meanwhile, the police themselves invited the Israeli television media to come and take as many photos as they wanted and to report my arrest as one against a man who was going to the occupied territories where the 'enemies' were 'fighting' against them. They did this because they want the Israeli public to regard me as equal to terrorists.

I told the Israeli media: 'They arrested me because I went to see the al-Ram checkpoint, the Apartheid Wall and the Palestinian ghettos.'

In Tel Aviv they questioned me about why I wanted to enter the occupied territories. They wanted to know what I was doing there and why I was not following the Army's general orders. I told them that al-Ram is still part of Palestine East Jerusalem, and that I was not interested in visiting the occupied territories, but that I wanted to see the Apartheid Wall and how it affects this village -- it is not yet clear where the borders of Jerusalem are. They wanted to know with whom I was traveling, their names, why I was with foreigners, and they wanted to see the photos I took.

The police decided to release me under court orders. However, there is no court on the Jewish Sabbath day, so they had to wait until Saturday night. They imprisoned me in Tel Aviv, in a cell without any thing but a mattress and a blanket.

On Saturday morning, my lawyers, Feldman and Sfard, came to hear what happened and to represent me in court. In the evening, the police took me back to the court and the judge heard my case at 20:30. Feldman did not agree with the terms of my release. They wanted two weeks of house arrest, and 50,000 shekels. Feldman convinced the judge and the police that this arrest was a big mistake because I did not violate the terms of my release, since it is not yet clear where Israel wants to put its Apartheid Wall. Before the judge made her decision the police capitulated and agreed for immediate release without conditions other than my signature.

This was a small victory for Feldman in defending me, and my friend Gideon took me back to St. George Cathedral in Jerusalem, where we shared a glass of beer.

But the police and the Israeli spies couldn't go without something. They demanded that I give them my camera and mobile phone so that they could examine them. I am now deprived of a telephone connection until these items are returned.

So that was another incident of harassment in this new series of cruelty since my release. They will not give up and let me go — to leave Israel. If they could put me back in prison they would.

My conclusion: The world continues to ignore my situation and is not doing anything to help me gain freedom in the same way it did during the 18 years of my imprisonment. Nobody will intervene to demand my release. The world stands by and allows Israel to do as it pleases. The world will let them commit more crimes such as kidnapping, injustice and cruelty.'

AFL-CIO Rolls Out Solidarity Charter Program to Reunite Local Labor Movements

Sun, 27 Nov 2005 07:04:00 +0000

11-26-05,12:50pm

While discussions with the recently disaffiliated national unions continue, the AFL-CIO is moving forward with a Solidarity Charter program that will unite the labor movement at the local level. The program reflects changes made in discussions with the Change to Win national unions. “We are now ready to roll out the program and get about the work of building strong, united state and local labor movements,” said AFL-CIO President John Sweeney. Noting that while discussions on some issues continue, Sweeney said, “No other differences remain that would prevent the Solidarity Charter program’s implementation.”

Solidarity Charters offer a way to reunite state and local labor movements by bringing locals of recently disaffiliated national unions back into the AFL-CIO’s state and local organizations.

“Solidarity Charters will enable the labor movement to remain united at the local level where everyone wanted to stick together,” said Sweeney. “Local unions will be able to continue working together to advance the interests of working families in organizing campaigns, strikes, boycotts and political activities, and that’s a real plus for our movement.” Change to Win local unions that are given Solidarity Charters will make per capita tax payments based on their membership to local and state AFL-CIO organizations at the rates applicable to other affiliated local unions. They will have the same rights and obligations as other affiliated local unions, including participation in governance and affairs of the state or local body, eligibility of their members to run for and hold office in the state or local body and the status and treatment of their members within the state and local body.

Discussions are continuing on the specific amount and mechanism for a solidarity fee to be paid by the Change to Win unions to help the national AFL-CIO cover administrative overhead and costs of supporting its state federations and central labor councils. If AFL-CIO trade and industrial departments request them, Solidarity Charters with the same or similar requirements will allow Change to Win unions to join their local or regional councils.

“The heart and soul of the union movement is at the local level, in union halls across this nation,” said Sweeney. “The Solidarity Charter program unites our local labor movements to be the strongest fight-back machines possible against anti-worker corporations and politicians.”

Under Solidarity Charters, Change to Win local unions will:

Participate fully in the federation’s member mobilization and political programs, including granting access to membership lists via a mechanism mutually agreed upon by the AFL-CIO and Change to Win, and be bound by whatever actions or decisions of the federation that are binding on all affiliated local unions;

Agree not to raid or support raiding of any other local union participating in the state or local central body;

Support the regular struggles of unions in their jurisdiction, including organizing campaigns, strikes, boycotts and other activities;

Recognize that local unions of national unions not affiliated with the national AFL-CIO may not participate in any governing body or convention of the national AFL-CIO. Application Process for Solidarity Charters click here

Media Watch: Drowning the Hard Questions- A Nova Special

Sun, 27 Nov 2005 06:48:00 +0000

11-26-05,12:33pm

Since Bill Moyers retired, I watch PBS pretty rarely. I remembered why when I saw the NOVA special on New Orleans, 'The Storm that Drowned a City.' It gave some useful chronology, but in an hour-long program on the genesis and history of the storm, they avoided raising even the possibility that the Bush administration may have contributed to the disaster.

I waited and waited for discussion of global warming's potential role in fueling Katrina's ferocity. Finally, near the end, this science-focused show spent maybe a minute quoting a scientist suggesting a possible link, and then quickly undermined his words by having the prime expert they kept coming back to dismiss the connection. They didn't even try to link Katrina to the broader pattern of global climate change-related disasters, like increases in tornadoes, floods, droughts, and forest fires. (A year before Katrina, Swiss the world's second largest reinsurance company, warned of a potential $150 billion annual toll from these kinds of disasters). The NOVA show just kept repeating the same loop of scientists saying, we dodged the bullet before, but it's headed for us now. The program also made no mention, despite a lengthy discussion of the New Orleans levees, of the Bush administration's $71 million cuts to the budget of the Louisiana Corps of Engineers, even after FEMA had flagged a hurricane swamping the city as one of America's three most likely national disasters. They talked about the erosion of wetlands that once formed a critical hurricane buffer, but blamed it all on channelized rivers no longer depositing silt, while ignoring the additional impact of Bush reversing a Clinton era directive that protected the wetlands from commercial development. Saying nothing that might even remotely challenge this president, they took a critical issue and rendered it innocuous.

On some level, this didn't surprise me. It's a cliché to say that PBS has become nothing but Big Bird, Brit imports, and home repair shows. But it's true. There's not much to challenge us, aside from the odd documentary and the occasional Frontline show. (One on the history of FEMA that followed the NOVA program was actually pretty good, including footage of Bush Senior saying 'I'm not going to play the blame game' after his own political appointees left FEMA wholly unprepared when Hurricane Andrew devastated large parts of South Florida in 1992. But in endless interviews with Michael Brown it never did mention the International Arabian Horse Association connection, perhaps for fear raising that history would be viewed as unseemly, or needlessly provoke the Suadis). I still urge my Senators to keep supporting PBS just to keep this potential public commons open for the future. But for now, the network increasingly seems the bought and paid for subsidiary of WalMart, ExxonMobil, and Archer Daniels Midland. A resource that once helped us think about real questions has now become largely a civilized distraction.

Paul Rogat Loeb is the author of 'The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A Citizen's Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear', named the #3 political book of 2004 by the History Channel and the American Book Association, and winner of the Nautilus Award for best social change book of the year. His previous books include 'Soul of a Citizen: Living With Conviction in a Cynical Time'.

Open Letter to George

Sun, 27 Nov 2005 06:34:00 +0000

11-26-05,12:21pm

George,

My family is spending our 2nd Thanksgiving without Casey thanks to you and your lies. I am spending the day crying on a plane on my way to come to Crawford to again ask you for a meeting.

I had been to Crawford for three weeks in the summer and to DC several times asking for a meeting with you and now I am returning to our vacation home to once again try and meet with you. I don't know why you like Crawford so much, but I love it because of the Camp Casey Peace Community that arose during August this year when you wouldn't meet with me. When I arrived back here at the Peace House I felt a sense of coming home and belonging to something that is far greater than any of us: a community that is filled with love, acceptance and peace. Is this what you feel when you return frequently to Crawford? Also, the beautiful Texas sunset stirred memories of our days at Camp Casey when we would close our activities each day with ex-Marine, Jeff Key playing taps among the crosses that honored our fallen. August was a miraculous time. Since August, when I wanted to ask you the question: For what noble cause did you kill Casey and the others, over 200 more of our brave young men and women have been killed in the charade of Iraq. We can only guess how many innocent Iraqis have been slaughtered. You still have not answered my question. Many people in our country who have had sons or daughters killed, who have sons and daughters serving, and many concerned Americans want to know that answer to that question, also.

Also, since August we have discovered that American forces are using chemical weapons in Iraq . The Army admitted that white phosphorous was used as an offensive weapon against 'enemy combatants.' Oh really, George, since when did a weapon fired from a distance distinguish between enemies and innocents? Especially when it is so hard for soldiers on the ground to differentiate between enemies and innocents? It is hard for one to ignore if not look away from the grisly pictures of the burned citizens of Fallujah.

By the way, George, isn't the use of chemical weapons prohibited? Don't you always say that 'Saddam is a bad man' for using chemical weapons on his own people? So is it okay for you to use chemical weapons in Iraq because the citizens of Iraq are not 'your people?' Saddam should be on trial for killing so many innocent people. Bombing cities where innocent civilians live and using chemical weapons are war crimes. Does that make you an alleged war criminal? Move over, Saddam. There is a new bad guy in town.

George, for the sake of the Iraqi people, don't you think it is time to bring our military forces home from Iraq? It is time to stop hypocritically and callously killing them to spread your brand of freedom and democracy. You know the kind of freedom and democracy you like? Where no open dissent is allowed; no one is able to petition the government for redress of wrongs; where our emails can be read and our library reading materials checked up on and analyzed? Your kind of freedom and democracy smears brave patriots as cowards and traitors for daring to speak out against your murderous policies. A majority of Americans don't even want your brand of freedom and democracy. What makes you think the Iraqi people want it?

George, also for the sake of our wonderful, brave, and very young people who proudly wear the uniform of the USA: it is time to bring them home. They have done everything you have asked of them. They have also done things that make at least one quarter of them very sick in their hearts and souls. Some of them have been so needlessly and avoidably killed and some of them are coming home with pieces of them missing. For what George? What noble cause?

George, you had everything handed to you on a silver platter. I don't blame you for using your family influence to get out of serving in Vietnam. I don't blame anyone for trying to get out of that disastrous and totally evil war. What I do blame you for is killing my son in another disastrous and evil war. Casey had nothing handed to him on a silver platter. He was willing to serve his country and to even die to save his buddy's lives. You should be ashamed of yourself for exploiting Casey's honor and the honor of everyone in our armed forces of which the post of Commander in Chief was also handed to you on a silver platter. Ask your Vice President if he thinks that Casey may have had other 'priorities' besides dying at 24. Ask you mama if her 'beautiful mind' is bothered yet. Mine is.

Did you have the sacred luxury of having your two daughters at home with you today for Thanksgiving dinner? Did you proudly tease with them during the meal like my family used to do? Did you tell old funny family stories and laugh about old times? Did you, George? Our family did share a meal together and we tried to be merry, but you know what? It's not the same with a very valuable family member gone forever. Casey's premature death puts a damper on all of our days, but the holidays are especially hard.

Are you and Laura going to hit the sack tonight and toss and turn or stare out of the window worried that Jenna or Barbara may be killed in Iraq? Are you going to jump at every single ringing of the telephone, or hearts beating wildly run to every knock at the door; fearing the Angel of Death in an Army uniform? I didn't think so. Two soldiers were killed today in Iraq, George. I hope to God their families aren't just sitting down to enjoy their meal when the grim reapers come to tell them their holidays are ruined for ever. There is no good time for such horrendous news.

I ask you to again do the right thing.

Bring our troops home from Iraq. Don't kill others because your murderous policies have already killed so many. How many deaths do you think will be enough before Casey's is 'justified?' 58,000? One was too many.

I will tell you what noble cause Casey died for, George: true and lasting peace. Please dignify all of the deaths by finally stopping the barbaric killing: before you ruin too many more holidays for way too many more people.

Cindy Sheehan

Camp Casey Peace Mom

Founder of Gold Star Families for Peace

Founder of Camp Casey Peace Foundation