Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
marmar
marmar's Journal
marmar's Journal
June 4, 2013
from In These Times:
The Problem Is Capitalism
Only radical reforms will solve neoliberalism’s crisis of democracy.
BY Joseph M. Schwartz and Maria Svart
In “Lean Socialist: Why Liberalism Needs Socialism—and Vice Versa” (May 2013), Bhaskar Sunkara calls for the rebirth of a socialist movement that would work alongside liberals for immediate gains for working people, while simultaneously offering a vision of a socialist society that would extend democracy into the economic sphere. And, at the same time, that movement would fight for the structural reforms most likely to lead towards that goal. We at Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), including our founding co-chair Michael Harrington, have always embraced this strategy. The problem? Socialists became indistinguishable from liberals because the liberals and a strong labor movement disappeared, swept away when “the tides of neoliberalism moved in.” As Barbara Ehrenreich frequently noted in the 1990s, with liberals and social democrats endorsing Clinton’s and Blair’s “kinder, gentler” dismantling of the welfare state, socialists were often the last defenders of the liberal gains of the 1930s and 1960s. But to go beyond liberalism, we absolutely agree with Sunkara that work must be done alongside movement activists, rather than so-called liberal technocrats. Socialists need to teach the liberals to fight once again. But how?
First, we must remind liberals of history. Before social democracy retreated, socialists foresaw the dangers of insufficiently radical reforms. In the 1970s and 1980s, European socialist theorists such as Nicos Poulantzas and Andre Gorz joined Harrington in warning that if the Left failed to socialize control over investment, the corporate drive for profit would lead capital to abandon the “social contract” compromise of the welfare state. Socialist governments in France, Sweden and elsewhere pushed for democratizing investment. But capital immediately fought back, beginning with the CIA-aided overthrow of the Allende regime in Chile in 1973 and continuing with French capital’s strike of the early 1980s. In the face of the onslaught, democracy and old-style liberalism began to crumble. This time around, liberals must recognize the true enemy and embrace radical reforms. Socialists will be there to push them to do so.
Second, we must remind liberals that racism and the center and Right’s use of a racialized politics played a central role in the rise of neoliberal capitalism. Thatcher’s and Reagan’s opportunistic attack on income-based child support for single mothers (aka “welfare”) played a major role in constructing a right-wing majority. Though the main beneficiaries of means-tested “welfare” were white, Clinton passed “welfare reform” to rein in mythical, non-white “welfare queens.” This distracted the public from Corporate America’s job-killing deindustrialization and outsourcing policies. So, since conscious socialists are but a small part of the American public, how do we build the revived Left that Sunkara calls for? Clearly, we need an anti-racist radical movement capable of refuting pervasive myths about the U.S. welfare state. The emergence of a militant immigrant rights movement and low-wage workers movement will be central to a Left and labor revival, as will the resistance of underemployed and indebted college graduates.
We take heart along with Sunkara that younger people are favorable (or at least open) in their attitudes toward socialism. But 30 years of neoliberal capitalist state policies have fostered a deep skepticism about politics. Many find it hard to envision mass movements winning reforms in state policy that would improve their lives. Sunkara is right to issue his impassioned plea to “Lean Socialist,” and young people are joining the socialist movement, in part due to the invaluable intellectual work that he and his colleagues carry out at Jacobin magazine. .....................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://inthesetimes.com/article/15005/the_problem_is_capitalism
The Problem Is Capitalism: Only radical reforms will solve neoliberalism’s crisis of democracy
from In These Times:
The Problem Is Capitalism
Only radical reforms will solve neoliberalism’s crisis of democracy.
BY Joseph M. Schwartz and Maria Svart
In “Lean Socialist: Why Liberalism Needs Socialism—and Vice Versa” (May 2013), Bhaskar Sunkara calls for the rebirth of a socialist movement that would work alongside liberals for immediate gains for working people, while simultaneously offering a vision of a socialist society that would extend democracy into the economic sphere. And, at the same time, that movement would fight for the structural reforms most likely to lead towards that goal. We at Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), including our founding co-chair Michael Harrington, have always embraced this strategy. The problem? Socialists became indistinguishable from liberals because the liberals and a strong labor movement disappeared, swept away when “the tides of neoliberalism moved in.” As Barbara Ehrenreich frequently noted in the 1990s, with liberals and social democrats endorsing Clinton’s and Blair’s “kinder, gentler” dismantling of the welfare state, socialists were often the last defenders of the liberal gains of the 1930s and 1960s. But to go beyond liberalism, we absolutely agree with Sunkara that work must be done alongside movement activists, rather than so-called liberal technocrats. Socialists need to teach the liberals to fight once again. But how?
First, we must remind liberals of history. Before social democracy retreated, socialists foresaw the dangers of insufficiently radical reforms. In the 1970s and 1980s, European socialist theorists such as Nicos Poulantzas and Andre Gorz joined Harrington in warning that if the Left failed to socialize control over investment, the corporate drive for profit would lead capital to abandon the “social contract” compromise of the welfare state. Socialist governments in France, Sweden and elsewhere pushed for democratizing investment. But capital immediately fought back, beginning with the CIA-aided overthrow of the Allende regime in Chile in 1973 and continuing with French capital’s strike of the early 1980s. In the face of the onslaught, democracy and old-style liberalism began to crumble. This time around, liberals must recognize the true enemy and embrace radical reforms. Socialists will be there to push them to do so.
Second, we must remind liberals that racism and the center and Right’s use of a racialized politics played a central role in the rise of neoliberal capitalism. Thatcher’s and Reagan’s opportunistic attack on income-based child support for single mothers (aka “welfare”) played a major role in constructing a right-wing majority. Though the main beneficiaries of means-tested “welfare” were white, Clinton passed “welfare reform” to rein in mythical, non-white “welfare queens.” This distracted the public from Corporate America’s job-killing deindustrialization and outsourcing policies. So, since conscious socialists are but a small part of the American public, how do we build the revived Left that Sunkara calls for? Clearly, we need an anti-racist radical movement capable of refuting pervasive myths about the U.S. welfare state. The emergence of a militant immigrant rights movement and low-wage workers movement will be central to a Left and labor revival, as will the resistance of underemployed and indebted college graduates.
We take heart along with Sunkara that younger people are favorable (or at least open) in their attitudes toward socialism. But 30 years of neoliberal capitalist state policies have fostered a deep skepticism about politics. Many find it hard to envision mass movements winning reforms in state policy that would improve their lives. Sunkara is right to issue his impassioned plea to “Lean Socialist,” and young people are joining the socialist movement, in part due to the invaluable intellectual work that he and his colleagues carry out at Jacobin magazine. .....................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://inthesetimes.com/article/15005/the_problem_is_capitalism
June 4, 2013
from In These Times:
Out of the Pen and Unrepentant
Environmentalist Tim DeChristopher on the future of climate activism.
BY Rebecca Burns
When climate activist Tim DeChristopher was released from federal prison on April 21, he emerged to find a movement transformed. The action that landed DeChristopher in prison—posing as a bidder in order to disrupt an oil and gas lease auction in 2008—came at a time when the environmental movement typically shied away from such acts of civil disobedience.
Then a college student at the University of Utah, DeChristopher went on to found the group Peaceful Uprising, a climate-justice group that trains volunteers in nonviolent direct action.
The auction that DeChristopher interrupted—which would have seen the drilling rights to thousands of acres of Utah wilderness sold off to corporations—was eventually invalidated by the Obama administration. But that didn’t stop the U.S. attorney’s office from pressing charges against DeChristopher. In March 2011, he was convicted of two felonies and sentenced that July to two years in prison. But far from dampening the spirits of other activists, DeChristopher’s example helped create a groundswell of popular resistance to the fossil fuel industry. Now that he’s a free man, DeChristopher, 31, has rejoined the movement and resumed his work to help embolden others “to take the actions we know need to be taken.” He spoke to In These Times from his home in Salt Lake City.
Before you went to prison, you gave a speech where you said that we’re being pushed closer to climate catastrophe not only by the fossil fuel lobbies, but by “the cowardice of the environmental movement.” Do you feel this way now?
We’re moving in the right direction now. Grassroots climate-justice groups have grown to the point where they’re no longer waiting for the Big Green groups to take action. As a result, we’re also starting to see some of those big groups start to move a little bit—the Sierra Club engaging in civil disobedience (for the first time in its history) during a February demonstration against the Keystone XL pipeline, for example. .....................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://inthesetimes.com/article/15081/out_of_the_pen_and_unrepentant/
Tim DeChristopher: Out of the Pen and Unrepentant
from In These Times:
Out of the Pen and Unrepentant
Environmentalist Tim DeChristopher on the future of climate activism.
BY Rebecca Burns
When climate activist Tim DeChristopher was released from federal prison on April 21, he emerged to find a movement transformed. The action that landed DeChristopher in prison—posing as a bidder in order to disrupt an oil and gas lease auction in 2008—came at a time when the environmental movement typically shied away from such acts of civil disobedience.
Then a college student at the University of Utah, DeChristopher went on to found the group Peaceful Uprising, a climate-justice group that trains volunteers in nonviolent direct action.
The auction that DeChristopher interrupted—which would have seen the drilling rights to thousands of acres of Utah wilderness sold off to corporations—was eventually invalidated by the Obama administration. But that didn’t stop the U.S. attorney’s office from pressing charges against DeChristopher. In March 2011, he was convicted of two felonies and sentenced that July to two years in prison. But far from dampening the spirits of other activists, DeChristopher’s example helped create a groundswell of popular resistance to the fossil fuel industry. Now that he’s a free man, DeChristopher, 31, has rejoined the movement and resumed his work to help embolden others “to take the actions we know need to be taken.” He spoke to In These Times from his home in Salt Lake City.
Before you went to prison, you gave a speech where you said that we’re being pushed closer to climate catastrophe not only by the fossil fuel lobbies, but by “the cowardice of the environmental movement.” Do you feel this way now?
We’re moving in the right direction now. Grassroots climate-justice groups have grown to the point where they’re no longer waiting for the Big Green groups to take action. As a result, we’re also starting to see some of those big groups start to move a little bit—the Sierra Club engaging in civil disobedience (for the first time in its history) during a February demonstration against the Keystone XL pipeline, for example. .....................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://inthesetimes.com/article/15081/out_of_the_pen_and_unrepentant/
June 4, 2013
from Consortium News:
Manning’s ‘Secrets’ v. Over-classification
June 2, 2013
Exclusive: The U.S. government wants to lock away Pvt. Bradley Manning for life because he released hundreds of thousands of classified documents that he believes revealed war crimes and other wrongdoing. But overlooked is how much damage over-classification does to the Republic, says Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
I thought of Pvt. Bradley Manning when I recently received a response to one of my Freedom of Information Act requests to Ronald Reagan’s presidential library. I was seeking documents about President Reagan’s secret strategy of aiding Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in its war with Iran.
Reagan’s tilt to Iraq in the early 1980s – while his administration also was winking at Israeli weapons sales to Iran – was part of a clandestine U.S. approach to the region which generated huge profits for arms dealers while feeding sectarian violence and political animosities that echo to the present day. It seemed to me that it was way past time to know the full truth.
However, though many of the events in question are now more than 30 years old – and thus are commonly thought to be readily accessible under FOIA – the reality is that the U.S. government still makes seeing such documents extremely difficult.
The letter from the Reagan library said the archivists would not even begin to process my request for “128 months,” that is more than 10 years, and then the process would involve time-consuming declassification reviews in which various agencies with “equity” interests would each have to sign off, along with whoever the sitting president is. ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://consortiumnews.com/2013/06/02/mannings-secrets-v-over-classification/
Robert Parry: Manning’s ‘Secrets’ v. Over-classification
from Consortium News:
Manning’s ‘Secrets’ v. Over-classification
June 2, 2013
Exclusive: The U.S. government wants to lock away Pvt. Bradley Manning for life because he released hundreds of thousands of classified documents that he believes revealed war crimes and other wrongdoing. But overlooked is how much damage over-classification does to the Republic, says Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
I thought of Pvt. Bradley Manning when I recently received a response to one of my Freedom of Information Act requests to Ronald Reagan’s presidential library. I was seeking documents about President Reagan’s secret strategy of aiding Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in its war with Iran.
Reagan’s tilt to Iraq in the early 1980s – while his administration also was winking at Israeli weapons sales to Iran – was part of a clandestine U.S. approach to the region which generated huge profits for arms dealers while feeding sectarian violence and political animosities that echo to the present day. It seemed to me that it was way past time to know the full truth.
However, though many of the events in question are now more than 30 years old – and thus are commonly thought to be readily accessible under FOIA – the reality is that the U.S. government still makes seeing such documents extremely difficult.
The letter from the Reagan library said the archivists would not even begin to process my request for “128 months,” that is more than 10 years, and then the process would involve time-consuming declassification reviews in which various agencies with “equity” interests would each have to sign off, along with whoever the sitting president is. ..................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://consortiumnews.com/2013/06/02/mannings-secrets-v-over-classification/
June 4, 2013
from the Transport Politic blog:
To Immediate Controversy, Toronto Region Unveils Potential Revenue Sources to Promote $34 Billion in New Transit
The Toronto region* already has one of the continent’s largest funded transit expansions under construction. By the early 2020s, Greater Toronto, Canada’s largest metropolitan area, will have four new light rail lines running on 52 kilometers of track; an 8.6-kilometer extension of an existing subway line; an airport express line; an improved central station; several bus rapid transit lines; and improved all-day commuter rail service. For a growing region with serious congestion problems, it’s a big expansion that will provide more rapid transit more quickly than any city on the continent.
Those improvements, however, hardly satisfy regional officials, who have plans for more than C$34 billion additional new transit lines. But the primary sources of funding for the current projects — Ontario Province and the Canadian federal government — aren’t yet ready to commit to such a significant investment. Thus the regional transit coordinating body, Metrolinx, developed an investment strategy released last month that recommended a variety of new funding sources that could provide the needed revenues to pay for these transit expansions.
Metrolinx’s investment strategy is notable in two ways: First, it takes responsibility for articulating clear new funding streams that would cover the cost of the transportation program. The report provides a compelling argument, founded on international comparisons, that the region must find new ways to sponsor transportation spending or it will suffer from increased congestion and reduced economic activity. It thus offers strong rhetoric for why new revenues must be established, and it documents why certain revenue sources are more effective than others.
Second, in line with the province’s “Big Move” transportation proposal, the investment strategy articulates a bold vision for the future of the Toronto region. Rejecting a car-focused approach, the strategy suggests that almost all new revenues be directed towards new public transportation capacity. Its goals including reducing the average automobile commute distance, reducing the percentage of commutes by car, and increasing the mode share of transit by more than doubling annual transit rides. Though the Toronto region’s transit mode share is currently higher than that of any U.S. city other than New York, less than five percent of employees working in its suburban areas take public transportation to work. There’s a lot of improvement to be made. .......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2013/06/03/to-immediate-controversy-toronto-region-unveils-potential-revenue-sources-to-promote-34-billion-in-new-transit/
To Immediate Controversy, Toronto Unveils Potential Revenue Sources for $34 Billion in New Transit
from the Transport Politic blog:
To Immediate Controversy, Toronto Region Unveils Potential Revenue Sources to Promote $34 Billion in New Transit
The Toronto region* already has one of the continent’s largest funded transit expansions under construction. By the early 2020s, Greater Toronto, Canada’s largest metropolitan area, will have four new light rail lines running on 52 kilometers of track; an 8.6-kilometer extension of an existing subway line; an airport express line; an improved central station; several bus rapid transit lines; and improved all-day commuter rail service. For a growing region with serious congestion problems, it’s a big expansion that will provide more rapid transit more quickly than any city on the continent.
Those improvements, however, hardly satisfy regional officials, who have plans for more than C$34 billion additional new transit lines. But the primary sources of funding for the current projects — Ontario Province and the Canadian federal government — aren’t yet ready to commit to such a significant investment. Thus the regional transit coordinating body, Metrolinx, developed an investment strategy released last month that recommended a variety of new funding sources that could provide the needed revenues to pay for these transit expansions.
Metrolinx’s investment strategy is notable in two ways: First, it takes responsibility for articulating clear new funding streams that would cover the cost of the transportation program. The report provides a compelling argument, founded on international comparisons, that the region must find new ways to sponsor transportation spending or it will suffer from increased congestion and reduced economic activity. It thus offers strong rhetoric for why new revenues must be established, and it documents why certain revenue sources are more effective than others.
Second, in line with the province’s “Big Move” transportation proposal, the investment strategy articulates a bold vision for the future of the Toronto region. Rejecting a car-focused approach, the strategy suggests that almost all new revenues be directed towards new public transportation capacity. Its goals including reducing the average automobile commute distance, reducing the percentage of commutes by car, and increasing the mode share of transit by more than doubling annual transit rides. Though the Toronto region’s transit mode share is currently higher than that of any U.S. city other than New York, less than five percent of employees working in its suburban areas take public transportation to work. There’s a lot of improvement to be made. .......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2013/06/03/to-immediate-controversy-toronto-region-unveils-potential-revenue-sources-to-promote-34-billion-in-new-transit/
June 4, 2013
&feature=player_embedded
Fox Business Network has rejected a television ad created by a women's rights group that calls for pundits Lou Dobbs, Erick Erickson and Juan Williams to be fired for negative remarks they made on the network last week about women who work outside the home.
UltraViolet, an online community that advocates for women's equality, created the ad using Fox Business' own footage of Dobbs, Williams and Erickson complaining that the rise of female breadwinners in families could ruin society, hurt children and "undermine our social order."
"Lou Dobbs has a problem," a voiceover says in the ad. "Women are winning the bread. Even his own network isn't safe from this source of lady breadwinners. Tell Fox to retire Lou Dobbs, Erick Erickson, and Juan Williams and spare them the pain of equality." ...................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/04/fox-news-ultraviolet-ad_n_3380824.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037&ir=Politics
Fox Business Refuses To Air Ultraviolet Ad Slamming Pundits For Sexist Comments
&feature=player_embedded
Fox Business Network has rejected a television ad created by a women's rights group that calls for pundits Lou Dobbs, Erick Erickson and Juan Williams to be fired for negative remarks they made on the network last week about women who work outside the home.
UltraViolet, an online community that advocates for women's equality, created the ad using Fox Business' own footage of Dobbs, Williams and Erickson complaining that the rise of female breadwinners in families could ruin society, hurt children and "undermine our social order."
"Lou Dobbs has a problem," a voiceover says in the ad. "Women are winning the bread. Even his own network isn't safe from this source of lady breadwinners. Tell Fox to retire Lou Dobbs, Erick Erickson, and Juan Williams and spare them the pain of equality." ...................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/04/fox-news-ultraviolet-ad_n_3380824.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037&ir=Politics
June 4, 2013
Published on Jun 3, 2013
The trial of the American whistleblower Bradley Manning, who handed classified military data to Wikileaks, takes place on Monday in Maryland. The army private faces a list of charges - among them aiding the enemy - which could land him in prison for the rest of his life.
Wikileaks spokesman, Kristinn Hrafnsson, says the clampdown on freedom of speech in US, will not stop people from blowing the whistle on the government's wrongdoings.
'Manning trial exposes attack on press freedom'
Published on Jun 3, 2013
The trial of the American whistleblower Bradley Manning, who handed classified military data to Wikileaks, takes place on Monday in Maryland. The army private faces a list of charges - among them aiding the enemy - which could land him in prison for the rest of his life.
Wikileaks spokesman, Kristinn Hrafnsson, says the clampdown on freedom of speech in US, will not stop people from blowing the whistle on the government's wrongdoings.
June 4, 2013
Cooperative Economics: Replacing a Capitalism in Collapse
Sunday, 02 June 2013 09:40
By Carl Gibson, Occupy.com | Op-Ed
I live in a co-op house with 30 other people in Madison, Wisconsin. While we pay rent to the nonprofit organization that manages Madison’s co-op properties, our only landlords are each other. We have weekly meetings to discuss house business and make decisions in a democratic process, using a consensus model. We agree to not buy any food or products for the house that come from detestable companies like Monsanto, Koch Industries and Tyson, and get most of the ingredients for house meals from the farmer’s market and a local food co-op. We all actively take part in our own residence by making sure things are kept (relatively) clean, problems are solved quickly, and the house remains a thriving community.
As 30 people all living in one big house, sharing expenses, growing our own food in rooftop gardens and recycling/composting as much we can, our environmental footprints are much smaller as a whole. Also, I only pay $500 a month in rent, utilities, washer/dryer, internet, and even food. And this is in a house within walking distance of the downtown area, right on the lakefront.
This made me wonder - why did I ever allow myself to live alone with no community and pay a landlord who doesn't make decisions with tenants in a democratic process? And why did I do it considering that form of living cost twice as much as my current housing situation? It's just one example of cooperative economics replacing the outdated corporate capitalist model.
We’re witnessing capitalism’s death throes right now. The stock market surges to new highs on a regular basis, corporate profits soar every quarter, and taxes on corporations as a percentage of GDP are lower than they’ve ever been in decades. Despite all the success of corporations, they’re actually squeezing more productivity out of their workers by laying off their coworkers. .....................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/16718-cooperative-economics-replacing-a-capitalism-in-collapse
Cooperative Economics: Replacing a Capitalism in Collapse
Cooperative Economics: Replacing a Capitalism in Collapse
Sunday, 02 June 2013 09:40
By Carl Gibson, Occupy.com | Op-Ed
I live in a co-op house with 30 other people in Madison, Wisconsin. While we pay rent to the nonprofit organization that manages Madison’s co-op properties, our only landlords are each other. We have weekly meetings to discuss house business and make decisions in a democratic process, using a consensus model. We agree to not buy any food or products for the house that come from detestable companies like Monsanto, Koch Industries and Tyson, and get most of the ingredients for house meals from the farmer’s market and a local food co-op. We all actively take part in our own residence by making sure things are kept (relatively) clean, problems are solved quickly, and the house remains a thriving community.
As 30 people all living in one big house, sharing expenses, growing our own food in rooftop gardens and recycling/composting as much we can, our environmental footprints are much smaller as a whole. Also, I only pay $500 a month in rent, utilities, washer/dryer, internet, and even food. And this is in a house within walking distance of the downtown area, right on the lakefront.
This made me wonder - why did I ever allow myself to live alone with no community and pay a landlord who doesn't make decisions with tenants in a democratic process? And why did I do it considering that form of living cost twice as much as my current housing situation? It's just one example of cooperative economics replacing the outdated corporate capitalist model.
We’re witnessing capitalism’s death throes right now. The stock market surges to new highs on a regular basis, corporate profits soar every quarter, and taxes on corporations as a percentage of GDP are lower than they’ve ever been in decades. Despite all the success of corporations, they’re actually squeezing more productivity out of their workers by laying off their coworkers. .....................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/16718-cooperative-economics-replacing-a-capitalism-in-collapse
June 4, 2013
Cooperative Economics: Replacing a Capitalism in Collapse
Sunday, 02 June 2013 09:40
By Carl Gibson, Occupy.com | Op-Ed
I live in a co-op house with 30 other people in Madison, Wisconsin. While we pay rent to the nonprofit organization that manages Madison’s co-op properties, our only landlords are each other. We have weekly meetings to discuss house business and make decisions in a democratic process, using a consensus model. We agree to not buy any food or products for the house that come from detestable companies like Monsanto, Koch Industries and Tyson, and get most of the ingredients for house meals from the farmer’s market and a local food co-op. We all actively take part in our own residence by making sure things are kept (relatively) clean, problems are solved quickly, and the house remains a thriving community.
As 30 people all living in one big house, sharing expenses, growing our own food in rooftop gardens and recycling/composting as much we can, our environmental footprints are much smaller as a whole. Also, I only pay $500 a month in rent, utilities, washer/dryer, internet, and even food. And this is in a house within walking distance of the downtown area, right on the lakefront.
This made me wonder - why did I ever allow myself to live alone with no community and pay a landlord who doesn't make decisions with tenants in a democratic process? And why did I do it considering that form of living cost twice as much as my current housing situation? It's just one example of cooperative economics replacing the outdated corporate capitalist model.
We’re witnessing capitalism’s death throes right now. The stock market surges to new highs on a regular basis, corporate profits soar every quarter, and taxes on corporations as a percentage of GDP are lower than they’ve ever been in decades. Despite all the success of corporations, they’re actually squeezing more productivity out of their workers by laying off their coworkers. .....................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/16718-cooperative-economics-replacing-a-capitalism-in-collapse
Cooperative Economics: Replacing a Capitalism in Collapse
Cooperative Economics: Replacing a Capitalism in Collapse
Sunday, 02 June 2013 09:40
By Carl Gibson, Occupy.com | Op-Ed
I live in a co-op house with 30 other people in Madison, Wisconsin. While we pay rent to the nonprofit organization that manages Madison’s co-op properties, our only landlords are each other. We have weekly meetings to discuss house business and make decisions in a democratic process, using a consensus model. We agree to not buy any food or products for the house that come from detestable companies like Monsanto, Koch Industries and Tyson, and get most of the ingredients for house meals from the farmer’s market and a local food co-op. We all actively take part in our own residence by making sure things are kept (relatively) clean, problems are solved quickly, and the house remains a thriving community.
As 30 people all living in one big house, sharing expenses, growing our own food in rooftop gardens and recycling/composting as much we can, our environmental footprints are much smaller as a whole. Also, I only pay $500 a month in rent, utilities, washer/dryer, internet, and even food. And this is in a house within walking distance of the downtown area, right on the lakefront.
This made me wonder - why did I ever allow myself to live alone with no community and pay a landlord who doesn't make decisions with tenants in a democratic process? And why did I do it considering that form of living cost twice as much as my current housing situation? It's just one example of cooperative economics replacing the outdated corporate capitalist model.
We’re witnessing capitalism’s death throes right now. The stock market surges to new highs on a regular basis, corporate profits soar every quarter, and taxes on corporations as a percentage of GDP are lower than they’ve ever been in decades. Despite all the success of corporations, they’re actually squeezing more productivity out of their workers by laying off their coworkers. .....................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/16718-cooperative-economics-replacing-a-capitalism-in-collapse
June 4, 2013
Bradley Manning's Legal Duty to Expose War Crimes
Monday, 03 June 2013 09:29
By Marjorie Cohn, Truthout | News Analysis
The court-martial of Bradley Manning, the most significant whistleblower case since Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers, has begun. Although Manning pled guilty earlier this year to 10 offenses that will garner him 20 years in custody, military prosecutors insist on pursuing charges of aiding the enemy and violation of the Espionage Act, carrying life in prison. The Obama administration, which has prosecuted more whistleblowers under the Espionage Act than all prior presidencies combined, seeks to send a strong message to would-be whistleblowers to keep their mouths shut.
A legal duty to report war crimes
Manning is charged with crimes for sending hundreds of thousands of classified files, documents and videos, including the "Collateral Murder" video, the "Iraq War Logs," the "Afghan War Logs" and State Department cables to Wikileaks. Many of the things he transmitted contain evidence of war crimes.
The "Collateral Murder" video depicts a US Apache attack helicopter killing 12 civilians and wounding two children on the ground in Baghdad in 2007. The helicopter then fired on and killed the people trying to rescue the wounded. Finally, a US tank drove over one of the bodies, cutting the man in half. These acts constitute three separate war crimes.
Manning fulfilled his legal duty to report war crimes. He complied with his legal duty to obey lawful orders but also his legal duty to disobey unlawful orders. ...........................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/16731-bradley-mannings-legal-duty-to-expose-war-crimes
Bradley Manning's Legal Duty to Expose War Crimes
Bradley Manning's Legal Duty to Expose War Crimes
Monday, 03 June 2013 09:29
By Marjorie Cohn, Truthout | News Analysis
The court-martial of Bradley Manning, the most significant whistleblower case since Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon Papers, has begun. Although Manning pled guilty earlier this year to 10 offenses that will garner him 20 years in custody, military prosecutors insist on pursuing charges of aiding the enemy and violation of the Espionage Act, carrying life in prison. The Obama administration, which has prosecuted more whistleblowers under the Espionage Act than all prior presidencies combined, seeks to send a strong message to would-be whistleblowers to keep their mouths shut.
A legal duty to report war crimes
Manning is charged with crimes for sending hundreds of thousands of classified files, documents and videos, including the "Collateral Murder" video, the "Iraq War Logs," the "Afghan War Logs" and State Department cables to Wikileaks. Many of the things he transmitted contain evidence of war crimes.
The "Collateral Murder" video depicts a US Apache attack helicopter killing 12 civilians and wounding two children on the ground in Baghdad in 2007. The helicopter then fired on and killed the people trying to rescue the wounded. Finally, a US tank drove over one of the bodies, cutting the man in half. These acts constitute three separate war crimes.
Manning fulfilled his legal duty to report war crimes. He complied with his legal duty to obey lawful orders but also his legal duty to disobey unlawful orders. ...........................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/16731-bradley-mannings-legal-duty-to-expose-war-crimes
June 4, 2013
from the Detroit Metro Times:
10 Most Absurd Sex Tips from the Christian Right
By Amanda Marcotte
Modern conservative Christianity is obsessed with marriage, relationships, and sexuality to the point where these concerns crowd pretty much everything else out. Here are ten examples of evangelical advice that show how far adrift the Christian right advice industry is from the real world:
1) BE A BETTER HOUSEKEEPER to prevent cheating. Recently, Pat Robertson addressed a question that haunts many a woman who has a husband with a wandering eye: How to get past his cheating? Robertson all but told women not to worry their pretty little heads about their husband’s infidelities, suggesting that male infidelity in nigh-inevitable. He did, however, make some suggestions on how to minimize the straying: “What you want to do is make a home so wonderful that he doesn’t want to wander.”
2) WOMEN NEED TO SUBMIT to their husbands. Throughout fundamentalist Christianity, one piece of advice rings out above all others, which is that marriage only works if wives submit to their husbands. When speaking to outsiders, they often play it off like “submission” is just a bit of Biblical-language goofiness isn’t to be meant in the secular sense, but in practice “submit to your husbands” means exactly what it sounds like. Michelle Duggar, right wing Christian icon and reality TV star, summarized some of the points of practicing wifely submission. She specifically singled out financial independence as something women should never have, saying, “Love is killed by self-sufficiency.” Sheryl Sandberg’s loving husband would be surprised to hear that!
3) HOW TO MAKE SEX interesting in a Christian marriage. Conservative Christians are expected to abstain from sex until marriage, but for evangelicals, at least, as soon as you get married, you’re supposed to immediately drop years of prudish sexual avoidance and throw yourself completely into your intimate relationship. (Indeed, many proponents of wifely submission come down hard on women who are reluctant to have sex as often as their husbands want to.) In an attempt to overcome the obvious problems with these expectations, some Christians have created sex advice websites like Christian Nymphos, to get their readers in touch with those sexual desires they spent years repressing. ........................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://metrotimes.com/news/news-features/10-most-absurd-sex-tips-from-the-christian-right-1.1496846
10 Most Absurd Sex Tips from the Christian Right
from the Detroit Metro Times:
10 Most Absurd Sex Tips from the Christian Right
By Amanda Marcotte
Modern conservative Christianity is obsessed with marriage, relationships, and sexuality to the point where these concerns crowd pretty much everything else out. Here are ten examples of evangelical advice that show how far adrift the Christian right advice industry is from the real world:
1) BE A BETTER HOUSEKEEPER to prevent cheating. Recently, Pat Robertson addressed a question that haunts many a woman who has a husband with a wandering eye: How to get past his cheating? Robertson all but told women not to worry their pretty little heads about their husband’s infidelities, suggesting that male infidelity in nigh-inevitable. He did, however, make some suggestions on how to minimize the straying: “What you want to do is make a home so wonderful that he doesn’t want to wander.”
2) WOMEN NEED TO SUBMIT to their husbands. Throughout fundamentalist Christianity, one piece of advice rings out above all others, which is that marriage only works if wives submit to their husbands. When speaking to outsiders, they often play it off like “submission” is just a bit of Biblical-language goofiness isn’t to be meant in the secular sense, but in practice “submit to your husbands” means exactly what it sounds like. Michelle Duggar, right wing Christian icon and reality TV star, summarized some of the points of practicing wifely submission. She specifically singled out financial independence as something women should never have, saying, “Love is killed by self-sufficiency.” Sheryl Sandberg’s loving husband would be surprised to hear that!
3) HOW TO MAKE SEX interesting in a Christian marriage. Conservative Christians are expected to abstain from sex until marriage, but for evangelicals, at least, as soon as you get married, you’re supposed to immediately drop years of prudish sexual avoidance and throw yourself completely into your intimate relationship. (Indeed, many proponents of wifely submission come down hard on women who are reluctant to have sex as often as their husbands want to.) In an attempt to overcome the obvious problems with these expectations, some Christians have created sex advice websites like Christian Nymphos, to get their readers in touch with those sexual desires they spent years repressing. ........................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://metrotimes.com/news/news-features/10-most-absurd-sex-tips-from-the-christian-right-1.1496846
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: Detroit, MI
Member since: Fri Oct 29, 2004, 12:18 AM
Number of posts: 77,091