Wednesday, July 29, 2009

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF POLITICAL VIOLENCE

Photobucket

"Compared with the wholesale violence of capital and government, political acts of violence are but a drop in the ocean. That so few resist is the strongest proof how terrible must be the conflict between their souls and unbearable social iniquities."

By Emma Goldman

Anarchism and Other Essays. Second Revised Edition. New York & London: Mother Earth Publishing Association, 1911. pp. 85-114.

TO ANALYZE the psychology of political violence is not only extremely difficult, but also very dangerous. If such acts are treated with understanding, one is immediately accused of eulogizing them. If, on the other hand, human sympathy is expressed with the Attentäter, 1 one risks being considered a possible accomplice. Yet it is only intelligence and sympathy that can bring us closer to the source of human suffering, and teach us the ultimate way out of it.

The primitive man, ignorant of natural forces, dreaded their approach, hiding from the perils they threatened. As man learned to understand Nature's phenomena, he realized that though these may destroy life and cause great loss, they also bring relief. To the earnest student it must be apparent that the accumulated forces in our social and economic life, culminating in a political act of violence, are similar to the terrors of the atmosphere, manifested in storm and lightning.

To thoroughly appreciate the truth of this view, one must feel intensely the indignity of our social wrongs; one's very being must throb with the pain, the sorrow, the despair millions of people are daily made to endure. Indeed, unless we have become a part of humanity, we cannot even faintly understand the just indignation that accumulates in a human soul, the burning, surging passion that makes the storm inevitable.

The ignorant mass looks upon the man who makes a violent protest against our social and economic iniquities as upon a wild beast, a cruel, heartless monster, whose joy it is to destroy life and bathe in blood; or at best, as upon an irresponsible lunatic. Yet nothing is further from the truth. As a matter of fact, those who have studied the character and personality of these men, or who have come in close contact with them, are agreed that it is their super-sensitiveness to the wrong and injustice surrounding them which compels them to pay the toll of our social crimes. The most noted writers and poets, discussing the psychology of political offenders, have paid them the highest tribute. Could anyone assume that these men had advised violence, or even approved of the acts? Certainly not. Theirs was the attitude of the social student, of the man who knows that beyond every violent act there is a vital cause.



Björnstjerne Björnson, in the second part of Beyond Human Power, emphasizes the fact that it is among the Anarchists that we must look for the modern martyrs who pay for their faith with their blood, and who welcome death with a smile, because they believe, as truly as Christ did, that their martyrdom will redeem humanity.

François Coppé, the French novelist, thus expresses himself regarding the psychology of the Attentäter:

"The reading of the details of Vaillant's execution left me in a thoughtful mood. I imagined him expanding his chest under the ropes, marching with firm step, stiffening his will, concentrating all his energy, and, with eyes fixed upon the knife, hurling finally at society his cry of malediction. And, in spite of me, another spectacle rose suddenly before my mind. I saw a group of men and women pressing against each other in the middle of the oblong arena of the circus, under the gaze of thousands of eyes, while from all the steps of the immense amphitheatre went up the terrible cry, Ad leones! and, below, the opening cages of the wild beasts.

"I did not believe the execution would take place. In the first place, no victim had been struck with death, and it had long been the custom not to punish an abortive crime with the last degree of severity. Then, this crime, however terrible in intention, was disinterested, born of an abstract idea. The man's past, his abandoned childhood, his life of hardship, pleaded also in his favor. In the independent press generous voices were raised in his behalf, very loud and eloquent. 'A purely literary current of opinion' some have said, with no little scorn. It is, on the contrary, an honor to the men of art and thought to have expressed once more their disgust at the scaffold."

Again Zola, in Germinal and Paris, describes the tenderness and kindness, the deep sympathy with human suffering, of these men who close the chapter of their lives with a violent outbreak against our system.

Last, but not least, the man who probably better than anyone else understands the psychology of the Attentäter is M. Hamon, the author of the brilliant work Une Psychologie du Militaire Professionnel, who has arrived at these suggestive conclusions:

"The positive method confirmed by the rational method enables us to establish an ideal type of Anarchist, whose mentality is the aggregate of common psychic characteristics. Every Anarchist partakes sufficiently of this ideal type to make it possible to differentiate him from other men. The typical Anarchist, then, may be defined as follows: A man perceptible by the spirit of revolt under one or more of its forms,--opposition, investigation, criticism, innovation,--endowed with a strong love of liberty, egoistic or individualistic, and possessed of great curiosity, a keen desire to know. These traits are supplemented by an ardent love of others, a highly developed moral sensitiveness, a profound sentiment of justice, and imbued with missionary zeal."

To the above characteristics, says Alvin F. Sanborn, must be added these sterling qualities: a rare love of animals, surpassing sweetness in all the ordinary relations of life, exceptional sobriety of demeanor, frugality and regularity, austerity, even, of living, and courage beyond compare.2

"There is a truism that the man in the street seems always to forget, when he is abusing the Anarchists, or whatever party happens to be his bête noire for the moment, as the cause of some outrage just perpetrated. This indisputable fact is that homicidal outrages have, from time immemorial, been the reply of goaded and desperate classes, and goaded and desperate individuals, to wrongs from their fellowmen, which they felt to be intolerable. Such acts are the violent recoil from violence, whether aggressive or repressive; they are the last desperate struggle of outraged and exasperated human nature for breathing space and life. And their cause lies not in any special conviction, but in the depths of that human nature itself. The whole course of history, political and social, is strewn with evidence of this fact. To go no further, take the three most notorious examples of political parties goaded into violence during the last fifty years: the Mazzinians in Italy, the Fenians in Ireland, and the Terrorists in Russia. Were these people Anarchists? No. Did they all three even hold the same political opinions? No. The Mazzinians were Republicans, the Fenians political separatists, the Russians Social Democrats or Constitutionalists. But all were driven by desperate circumstances into this terrible form of revolt. And when we turn from parties to individuals who have acted in like manner, we stand appalled by the number of human beings goaded and driven by sheer desperation into conduct obviously violently opposed to their social instincts.

"Now that Anarchism has become a living force in society, such deeds have been sometimes committed by Anarchists, as well as by others. For no new faith, even the most essentially peaceable and humane the mind of man has yet accepted, but at its first coming has brought upon earth not peace, but a sword; not because of anything violent or anti-social in the doctrine itself; simply because of the ferment any new and creative idea excites in men's minds, whether they accept or reject it. And a conception of Anarchism, which, on one hand, threatens every vested interest, and, on the other, holds out a vision of a free and noble life to be won by a struggle against existing wrongs, is certain to rouse the fiercest opposition, and bring the whole repressive force of ancient evil into violent contact with the tumultuous outburst of a new hope.

"Under miserable conditions of life, any vision of the possibility of better things makes the present misery more intolerable, and spurs those who suffer to the most energetic struggles to improve their lot, and if these struggles only immediately result in sharper misery, the outcome is sheer desperation. In our present society, for instance, an exploited wage worker, who catches a glimpse of what work and life might and ought to be, finds the toilsome routine and the squalor of his existence almost intolerable; and even when he has the resolution and courage to continue steadily working his best, and waiting until new ideas have so permeated society as to pave the way for better times, the mere fact that he has such ideas and tries to spread them, brings him into difficulties with his employers. How many thousands of Socialists, and above all Anarchists, have lost work and even the chance of work, solely on the ground of their opinions. It is only the specially gifted craftsman, who, if he be a zealous propagandist, can hope to retain permanent employment. And what happens to a man with his brain working actively with a ferment of new ideas, with a vision before his eyes of a new hope dawning for toiling and agonizing men, with the knowledge that his suffering and that of his fellows in misery is not caused by the cruelty of fate, but by the injustice of other human beings,--what happens to such a man when he sees those dear to him starving, when he himself is starved? Some natures in such a plight, and those by no means the least social or the least sensitive, will become violent, and will even feel that their violence is social and not anti-social, that in striking when and how they can, they are striking, not for themselves, but for human nature, outraged and despoiled in their persons and in those of their fellow sufferers. And are we, who ourselves are not in this horrible predicament, to stand by and coldly condemn these piteous victims of the Furies and Fates? Are we to decry as miscreants these human beings who act with heroic self-devotion, sacrificing their lives in protest, where less social and less energetic natures would lie down and grovel in abject submission to injustice and wrong? Are we to join the ignorant and brutal outcry which stigmatizes such men as monsters of wickedness, gratuitously running amuck in a harmonious and innocently peaceful society? No! We hate murder with a hatred that may seem absurdly exaggerated to apologists for Matabele massacres, to callous acquiescers in hangings and bombardments, but we decline in such cases of homicide, or attempted homicide, as those of which we are treating, to be guilty of the cruel injustice of flinging the whole responsibility of the deed upon the immediate perpetrator. The guilt of these homicides lies upon every man and woman who, intentionally or by cold indifference, helps to keep up social conditions that drive human beings to despair. The man who flings his whole life into the attempt, at the cost of his own life, to protest against the wrongs of his fellow men, is a saint compared to the active and passive upholders of cruelty and injustice, even if his protest destroy other lives besides his own. Let him who is without sin in society cast the first stone at such an one."3

That every act of political violence should nowadays be attributed to Anarchists is not at all surprising. Yet it is a fact known to almost everyone familiar with the Anarchist movement that a great number of acts, for which Anarchists had to suffer, either originated with the capitalist press or were instigated, if not directly perpetrated, by the police.

For a number of years acts of violence had been committed in Spain, for which the Anarchists were held responsible, hounded like wild beasts, and thrown into prison. Later it was disclosed that the perpetrators of these acts were not Anarchists, but members of the police department. The scandal became so widespread that the conservative Spanish papers demanded the apprehension and punishment of the gang-leader, Juan Rull, who was subsequently condemned to death and executed. The sensational evidence, brought to light during the trial, forced Police Inspector Momento to exonerate completely the Anarchists from any connection with the acts committed during a long period. This resulted in the dismissal of a number of police officials, among them Inspector Tressols, who, in revenge, disclosed the fact that behind the gang of police bomb throwers were others of far higher position, who provided them with funds and protected them.

This is one of the many striking examples of how Anarchist conspiracies are manufactured.

That the American police can perjure themselves with the same ease, that they are just as merciless, just as brutal and cunning as their European colleagues, has been proven on more than one occasion. We need only recall the tragedy of the eleventh of November, 1887, known as the Haymarket Riot.

No one who is at all familiar with the case can possibly doubt that the Anarchists, judicially murdered in Chicago, died as victims of a lying, blood-thirsty press and of a cruel police conspiracy. Has not Judge Gary himself said: "Not because you have caused the Haymarket bomb, but because you are Anarchists, you are on trial."

The impartial and thorough analysis by Governor Altgeld of that blotch on the American escutcheon verified the brutal frankness of Judge Gary. It was this that induced Altgeld to pardon the three Anarchists, thereby earning the lasting esteem of every liberty-loving man and woman in the world.

When we approach the tragedy of September sixth, 1901, we are confronted by one of the most striking examples of how little social theories are responsible for an act of political violence. "Leon Czolgosz, an Anarchist, incited to commit the act by Emma Goldman." To be sure, has she not incited violence even before her birth, and will she not continue to do so beyond death? Everything is possible with the Anarchists.

Today, even, nine years after the tragedy, after it was proven a hundred times that Emma Goldman had nothing to do with the event, that no evidence whatsoever exists to indicate that Czolgosz ever called himself an Anarchist, we are confronted with the same lie, fabricated by the police and perpetuated by the press. No living soul ever heard Czolgosz make that statement, nor is there a single written word to prove that the boy ever breathed the accusation. Nothing but ignorance and insane hysteria, which have never yet been able to solve the simplest problem of cause and effect.

The President of a free Republic killed! What else can be the cause, except that the Attentäter must have been insane, or that he was incited to the act.

A free Republic! How a myth will maintain itself, how it will continue to deceive, to dupe, and blind even the comparatively intelligent to its monstrous absurdities. A free Republic! And yet within a little over thirty years a small band of parasites have successfully robbed the American people, and trampled upon the fundamental principles, laid down by the fathers of this country, guaranteeing to every man, woman, and child "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." For thirty years they have been increasing their wealth and power at the expense of the vast mass of workers, thereby enlarging the army of the unemployed, the hungry, homeless, and friendless portion of humanity, who are tramping the country from east to west, from north to south, in a vain search for work. For many years the home has been left to the care of the little ones, while the parents are exhausting their life and strength for a mere pittance. For thirty years the sturdy sons of America have been sacrificed on the battlefield of industrial war, and the daughters outraged in corrupt factory surroundings. For long and weary years this process of undermining the nation's health, vigor, and pride, without much protest from the disinherited and oppressed, has been going on. Maddened by success and victory, the money powers of this "free land of ours" became more and more audacious in their heartless, cruel efforts to compete with the rotten and decayed European tyrannies for supremacy of power.

In vain did a lying press repudiate Leon Czolgosz as a foreigner. The boy was a product of our own free American soil, that lulled him to sleep with,

My country, 'tis of thee,
Sweet land of liberty.

Who can tell how many times this American child had gloried in the celebration of the Fourth of July, or of Decoration Day, when he faithfully honored the Nation's dead? Who knows but that he, too, was willing to "fight for his country and die for her liberty," until it dawned upon him that those he belonged to have no country, because they have been robbed of all that they have produced; until he realized that the liberty and independence of his youthful dreams were but a farce. Poor Leon Czolgosz, your crime consisted of too sensitive a social consciousness. Unlike your idealless and brainless American brothers, your ideals soared above the belly and the bank account. No wonder you impressed the one human being among all the infuriated mob at your trial--a newspaper woman--as a visionary, totally oblivious to your surroundings. Your large, dreamy eyes must have beheld a new and glorious dawn.

Now, to a recent instance of police-manufactured Anarchist plots. In that bloodstained city Chicago, the life of Chief of Police Shippy was attempted by a young man named Averbuch. Immediately the cry was sent to the four corners of the world that Averbuch was an Anarchist, and that Anarchists were responsible for the act. Everyone who was at all known to entertain Anarchist ideas was closely watched, a number of people arrested, the library of an Anarchist group confiscated, and all meetings made impossible. It goes without saying that, as on various previous occasions, I must needs be held responsible for the act. Evidently the American police credit me with occult powers. I did not know Averbuch; in fact, had never before heard his name, and the only way I could have possibly "conspired" with him was in my astral body. But, then, the police are not concerned with logic or justice. What they seek is a target, to mask their absolute ignorance of the cause, of the psychology of a political act. Was Averbuch an Anarchist? There is no positive proof of it. He had been but three months in the country, did not know the language, and, as far as I could ascertain, was quite unknown to the Anarchists of Chicago.

What led to his act? Averbuch, like most young Russian immigrants, undoubtedly believed in the mythical liberty of America. He received his first baptism by the policeman's club during the brutal dispersement of the unemployed parade. He further experienced American equality and opportunity in the vain efforts to find an economic master. In short, a three months' sojourn in the glorious land brought him face to face with the fact that the disinherited are in the same position the world over. In his native land he probably learned that necessity knows no law--there was no difference between a Russian and an American policeman.

The question to the intelligent social student is not whether the acts of Czolgosz or Averbuch were practical, any more than whether the thunderstorm is practical. The thing that will inevitably impress itself on the thinking and feeling man and woman is that the sight of brutal clubbing of innocent victims in a so-called free Republic, and the degrading, soul-destroying economic struggle, furnish the spark that kindles the dynamic force in the overwrought, outraged souls of men like Czolgosz or Averbuch. No amount of persecution, of hounding, of repression, can stay this social phenomenon.

But, it is often asked, have not acknowledged Anarchists committed acts of violence? Certainly they have, always however ready to shoulder the responsibility. My contention is that they were impelled, not by the teachings of Anarchism, but by the tremendous pressure of conditions, making life unbearable to their sensitive natures. Obviously, Anarchism, or any other social theory, making man a conscious social unit, will act as a leaven for rebellion. This is not a mere assertion, but a fact verified by all experience. A close examination of the circumstances bearing upon this question will further clarify my position.

Let us consider some of the most important Anarchist acts within the last two decades. Strange as it may seem, one of the most significant deeds of political violence occurred here in America, in connection with the Homestead strike of 1892.

Photobucket

During that memorable time the Carnegie Steel Company organized a conspiracy to crush the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers. Henry Clay Frick, then Chairman of the Company, was intrusted with that democratic task. He lost no time in carrying out the policy of breaking the Union, the policy which he had so successfully practiced during his reign of terror in the coke regions. Secretly, and while peace negotiations were being purposely prolonged, Frick supervised the military preparations, the fortification of the Homestead Steel Works, the erection of a high board fence, capped with barbed wire and provided with loopholes for sharpshooters. And then, in the dead of night, he attempted to smuggle his army of hired Pinkerton thugs into Homestead, which act precipitated the terrible carnage of the steel workers. Not content with the death of eleven victims, killed in the Pinkerton skirmish, Henry Clay Frick, good Christian and free American, straightway began the hounding down of the helpless wives and orphans, by ordering them out of the wretched Company houses.

The whole country was aroused over these inhuman outrages. Hundreds of voices were raised in protest, calling on Frick to desist, not to go too far. Yes, hundreds of people protested,--as one objects to annoying flies. Only one there was who actively responded to the outrage at Homestead,--Alexander Berkman. Yes, he was an Anarchist. He gloried in that fact, because it was the only force that made the discord between his spiritual longing and the world without at all bearable. Yet not Anarchism, as such, but the brutal slaughter of the eleven steel workers was the urge for Alexander Berkman's act, his attempt on the life of Henry Clay Frick.

The record of European acts of political violence affords numerous and striking instances of the influence of environment upon sensitive human beings.

The court speech of Vaillant, who, in 1894, exploded a bomb in the Paris Chamber of Deputies, strikes the true keynote of the psychology of such acts:

"Gentlemen, in a few minutes you are to deal your blow, but in receiving your verdict I shall have at least the satisfaction of having wounded the existing society, that cursed society in which one may see a single man spending, uselessly, enough to feed thousands of families; an infamous society which permits a few individuals to monopolize all the social wealth, while there are hundreds of thousands of unfortunates who have not even the bread that is not refused to dogs, and while entire families are committing suicide for want of the necessities of life.

"Ah, gentlemen, if the governing classes could go down among the unfortunates! But no, they prefer to remain deaf to their appeals. It seems that a fatality impels them, like the royalty of the eighteenth century, toward the precipice which will engulf them, for woe be to those who remain deaf to the cries of the starving, woe to those who, believing themselves of superior essence, assume the right to exploit those beneath them! There comes a time when the people no longer reason; they rise like a hurricane, and pass away like a torrent. Then we see bleeding heads impaled on pikes.

"Among the exploited, gentlemen, there are two classes of individuals. Those of one class, not realizing what they are and what they might be, take life as it comes, believe that they are born to be slaves, and content themselves with the little that is given them in exchange for their labor. But there are others, on the contrary, who think, who study, and who, looking about them, discover social iniquities. Is it their fault if they see clearly and suffer at seeing others suffer? Then they throw themselves into the struggle, and make themselves the bearers of the popular claims.

"Gentlemen, I am one of these last. Wherever I have gone, I have seen unfortunates bent beneath the yoke of capital. Everywhere I have seen the same wounds causing tears of blood to flow, even in the remoter parts of the inhabited districts of South America, where I had the right to believe that he who was weary of the pains of civilization might rest in the shade of the palm trees and there study nature. Well, there even, more than elsewhere, I have seen capital come, like a vampire, to suck the last drop of blood of the unfortunate pariahs.

"Then I came back to France, where it was reserved for me to see my family suffer atrociously. This was the last drop in the cup of my sorrow. Tired of leading this life of suffering and cowardice, I carried this bomb to those who are primarily responsible for social misery.

"I am reproached with the wounds of those who were hit by my projectiles. Permit me to point out in passing that, if the bourgeois had not massacred or caused massacres during the Revolution, it is probable that they would still be under the yoke of the nobility. On the other hand, figure up the dead and wounded on Tonquin, Madagascar, Dahomey, adding thereto the thousands, yes, millions of unfortunates who die in the factories, the mines, and wherever the grinding power of capital is felt. Add also those who die of hunger, and all this with the assent of our Deputies. Beside all this, of how little weight are the reproaches now brought against me!

"It is true that one does not efface the other; but, after all, are we not acting on the defensive when we respond to the blows which we receive from above? I know very well that I shall be told that I ought to have confined myself to speech for the vindication of the people's claims. But what can you expect! It takes a loud voice to make the deaf hear. Too long have they answered our voices by imprisonment, the rope, rifle volleys. Make no mistake; the explosion of my bomb is not only the cry of the rebel Vaillant, but the cry of an entire class which vindicates its rights, and which will soon add acts to words. For, be sure of it, in vain will they pass laws. The ideas of the thinkers will not halt; just as, in the last century, all the governmental forces could not prevent the Diderots and the Voltaires from spreading emancipating ideas among the people, so all the existing governmental forces will not prevent the Reclus, the Darwins, the Spencers, the Ibsens, the Mirbeaus, from spreading the ideas of justice and liberty which will annihilate the prejudices that hold the mass in ignorance. And these ideas, welcomed by the unfortunate, will flower in acts of revolt as they have done in me, until the day when the disappearance of authority shall permit all men to organize freely according to their choice, when everyone shall be able to enjoy the product of his labor, and when those moral maladies called prejudices shall vanish, permitting human beings to live in harmony, having no other desire than to study the sciences and love their fellows.

"I conclude, gentlemen, by saying that a society in which one sees such social inequalities as we see all about us, in which we see every day suicides caused by poverty, prostitution flaring at every street corner,--a society whose principal monuments are barracks and prisons,--such a society must be transformed as soon as possible, on pain of being eliminated, and that speedily, from the human race. Hail to him who labors, by no matter what means, for this transformation! It is this idea that has guided me in my duel with authority, but as in this duel I have only wounded my adversary, it is now its turn to strike me.

"Now, gentlemen, to me it matters little what penalty you may inflict, for, looking at this assembly with the eyes of reason, I can not help smiling to see you, atoms lost in matter, and reasoning only because you possess a prolongation of the spinal marrow, assume the right to judge one of your fellows.

"Ah! gentlemen, how little a thing is your assembly and your verdict in the history of humanity; and human history, in its turn, is likewise a very little thing in the whirlwind which bears it through immensity, and which is destined to disappear, or at least to be transformed, in order to begin again the same history and the same facts, a veritably perpetual play of cosmic forces renewing and transferring themselves forever."

Will anyone say that Vaillant was an ignorant, vicious man, or a lunatic? Was not his mind singularly clear and analytic? No wonder that the best intellectual forces of France spoke in his behalf, and signed the petition to President Carnot, asking him to commute Vaillant's death sentence.

Carnot would listen to no entreaty; he insisted on more than a pound of flesh, he wanted Vaillant's life, and then--the inevitable happened: President Carnot was killed. On the handle of the stiletto used by the Attentäter was engraved, significantly,

VAILLANT!

Santa Caserio was an Anarchist. He could have gotten away, saved himself; but he remained, he stood the consequences.

His reasons for the act are set forth in so simple, dignified, and childlike manner that one is reminded of the touching tribute paid Caserio by his teacher of the little village school, Ada Negri, the Italian poet, who spoke of him as a sweet, tender plant, of too fine and sensitive texture to stand the cruel strain of the world.

"Gentlemen of the Jury! I do not propose to make a defense, but only an explanation of my deed.

"Since my early youth I began to learn that present society is badly organized, so badly that every day many wretched men commit suicide, leaving women and children in the most terrible distress. Workers, by thousands, seek for work and can not find it. Poor families beg for food and shiver with cold; they suffer the greatest misery; the little ones ask their miserable mothers for food, and the mothers cannot give it to them, because they have nothing. The few things which the home contained have already been sold or pawned. All they can do is beg alms; often they are arrested as vagabonds.

Photobucket

"I went away from my native place because I was frequently moved to tears at seeing little girls of eight or ten years obliged to work fifteen hours a day for the paltry pay of twenty centimes. Young women of eighteen or twenty also work fifteen hours daily, for a mockery of remuneration. And that happens not only to my fellow countrymen, but to all the workers, who sweat the whole day long for a crust of bread, while their labor produces wealth in abundance. The workers are obliged to live under the most wretched conditions, and their food consists of a little bread, a few spoonfuls of rice, and water; so by the time they are thirty or forty years old, they are exhausted, and go to die in the hospitals. Besides, in consequence of bad food and overwork, these unhappy creatures are, by hundreds, devoured by pellagra--a disease that, in my country, attacks, as the physicians say, those who are badly fed and lead a life of toil and privation.

"I have observed that there are a great many people who are hungry, and many children who suffer, whilst bread and clothes abound in the towns. I saw many and large shops full of clothing and woolen stuffs, and I also saw warehouses full of wheat and Indian corn, suitable for those who are in want. And, on the other hand, I saw thousands of people who do not work, who produce nothing and live on the labor of others; who spend every day thousands of francs for their amusement; who debauch the daughters of the workers; who own dwellings of forty or fifty rooms; twenty or thirty horses, many servants; in a word, all the pleasures of life.

"I believed in God; but when I saw so great an inequality between men, I acknowledged that it was not God who created man, but man who created God. And I discovered that those who want their property to be respected, have an interest in preaching the existence of paradise and hell, and in keeping the people in ignorance.

"Not long ago, Vaillant threw a bomb in the Chamber of Deputies, to protest against the present system of society. He killed no one, only wounded some persons; yet bourgeois justice sentenced him to death. And not satisfied with the condemnation of the guilty man, they began to pursue the Anarchists, and arrest not only those who had known Vaillant, but even those who had merely been present at any Anarchist lecture.

"The government did not think of their wives and children. It did not consider that the men kept in prison were not the only ones who suffered, and that their little ones cried for bread. Bourgeois justice did not trouble itself about these innocent ones, who do not yet know what society is. It is no fault of theirs that their fathers are in prison; they only want to eat.

"The government went on searching private houses, opening private letters, forbidding lectures and meetings, and practicing the most infamous oppressions against us. Even now, hundreds of Anarchists are arrested for having written an article in a newspaper, or for having expressed an opinion in public.

"Gentlemen of the Jury, you are representatives of bourgeois society. If you want my head, take it; but do not believe that in so doing you will stop the Anarchist propaganda. Take care, for men reap what they have sown."

During a religious procession in 1896, at Barcelona, a bomb was thrown. Immediately three hundred men and women were arrested. Some were Anarchists, but the majority were trade-unionists and Socialists. They were thrown into that terrible bastille Montjuich, and subjected to most horrible tortures. After a number had been killed, or had gone insane, their cases were taken up by the liberal press of Europe, resulting in the release of a few survivors.

The man primarily responsible for this revival of the Inquisition was Canovas del Castillo, Prime Minister of Spain. It was he who ordered the torturing of the victims, their flesh burned, their bones crushed, their tongues cut out. Practiced in the art of brutality during his r gime in Cuba, Canovas remained absolutely deaf to the appeals and protests of the awakened civilized conscience.

In 1897 Canovas del Castillo was shot to death by a young Italian, Angiolillo. The latter was an editor in his native land, and his bold utterances soon attracted the attention of the authorities. Persecution began, and Angiolillo fled from Italy to Spain, thence to France and Belgium, finally settling in England. While there he found employment as a compositor, and immediately became the friend of all his colleagues. One of the latter thus described Angiolillo: "His appearance suggested the journalist rather than the disciple of Guttenberg. His delicate hands, moreover, betrayed the fact that he had not grown up at the 'case.' With his handsome frank face, his soft dark hair, his alert expression, he looked the very type of the vivacious Southerner. Angiolillo spoke Italian, Spanish, and French, but no English; the little French I knew was not sufficient to carry on a prolonged conversation. However, Angiolillo soon began to acquire the English idiom; he learned rapidly, playfully, and it was not long until he became very popular with his fellow compositors. His distinguished and yet modest manner, and his consideration towards his colleagues, won him the hearts of all the boys."

Angiolillo soon became familiar with the detailed accounts in the press. He read of the great wave of human sympathy with the helpless victims at Montjuich. On Trafalgar Square he saw with his own eyes the results of those atrocities, when the few Spaniards, who escaped Castillo's clutches, came to seek asylum in England. There, at the great meeting, these men opened their shirts and showed the horrible scars of burned flesh. Angiolillo saw, and the effect surpassed a thousand theories; the impetus was beyond words, beyond arguments, beyond himself even.

Señor Antonio Canovas del Castillo, Prime Minister of Spain, sojourned at Santa Agueda. As usual in such cases, all strangers were kept away from his exalted presence. One exception was made, however, in the case of a distinguished looking, elegantly dressed Italian--the representative, it was understood, of an important journal. The distinguished gentleman was--Angiolillo.

Señor Canovas, about to leave his house, stepped on the veranda. Suddenly Angiolillo confronted him. A shot rang out, and Canovas was a corpse.

The wife of the Prime Minister rushed upon the scene. "Murderer! Murderer!" she cried, pointing at Angiolillo. The latter bowed. "Pardon, Madame," he said, "I respect you as a lady, but I regret that you were the wife of that man."

Calmly Angiolillo faced death. Death in its most terrible form--for the man whose soul was as a child's.

He was garroted. His body lay, sun-kissed, till the day hid in twilight. And the people came, and pointing the finger of terror and fear, they said: "There--the criminal--the cruel murderer."

How stupid, how cruel is ignorance! It misunderstands always, condemns always.

A remarkable parallel to the case of Angiolillo is to be found in the act of Gaetano Bresci, whose Attentat upon King Umberto made an American city famous.

Bresci came to this country, this land of opportunity, where one has but to try to meet with golden success. Yes, he too would try to succeed. He would work hard and faithfully. Work had no terrors for him, if it would only help him to independence, manhood, self-respect.

Thus full of hope and enthusiasm he settled in Paterson, New Jersey, and there found a lucrative job at six dollars per week in one of the weaving mills of the town. Six whole dollars per week was, no doubt, a fortune for Italy, but not enough to breathe on in the new country. He loved his little home. He was a good husband and devoted father to his bambina Bianca, whom he adored. He worked and worked for a number of years. He actually managed to save one hundred dollars out of his six dollars per week.

Bresci had an ideal. Foolish, I know, for a workingman to have an ideal,--the Anarchist paper published in Paterson, La Questione Sociale.

Every week, though tired from work, he would help to set up the paper. Until later hours he would assist, and when the little pioneer had exhausted all resources and his comrades were in despair, Bresci brought cheer and hope, one hundred dollars, the entire savings of years. That would keep the paper afloat.

In his native land people were starving. The crops had been poor, and the peasants saw themselves face to face with famine. They appealed to their good King Umberto; he would help. And he did. The wives of the peasants who had gone to the palace of the King, held up in mute silence their emaciated infants. Surely that would move him. And then the soldiers fired and killed those poor fools.

Bresci, at work in the weaving mill at Paterson, read of the horrible massacre. His mental eye beheld the defenceless women and innocent infants of his native land, slaughtered right before the good King. His soul recoiled in horror. At night he heard the groans of the wounded. Some may have been his comrades, his own flesh. Why, why these foul murders?

The little meeting of the Italian Anarchist group in Paterson ended almost in a fight. Bresci had demanded his hundred dollars. His comrades begged, implored him to give them a respite. The paper would go down if they were to return him his loan. But Bresci insisted on its return.

How cruel and stupid is ignorance. Bresci got the money, but lost the good will, the confidence of his comrades. They would have nothing more to do with one whose greed was greater than his ideals.

On the twenty-ninth of July, 1900, King Umberto was shot at Monzo. The young Italian weaver of Paterson, Gaetano Bresci, had taken the life of the good King.

Paterson was placed under police surveillance, everyone known as an Anarchist hounded and persecuted, and the act of Bresci ascribed to the teachings of Anarchism. As if the teachings of Anarchism in its extremest form could equal the force of those slain women and infants, who had pilgrimed to the King for aid. As if any spoken word, ever so eloquent, could burn into a human soul with such white heat as the lifeblood trickling drop by drop from those dying forms. The ordinary man is rarely moved either by word or deed; and those whose social kinship is the greatest living force need no appeal to respond--even as does steel to the magnet--to the wrongs and horrors of society.

If a social theory is a strong factor inducing acts of political violence, how are we to account for the recent violent outbreaks in India, where Anarchism has hardly been born. More than any other old philosophy, Hindu teachings have exalted passive resistance, the drifting of life, the Nirvana, as the highest spiritual ideal. Yet the social unrest in India is daily growing, and has only recently resulted in an act of political violence, the killing of Sir Curzon Wyllie by the Hindu Madar Sol Dhingra.

If such a phenomenon can occur in a country socially and individually permeated for centuries with the spirit of passivity, can one question the tremendous, revolutionizing effect on human character exerted by great social iniquities? Can one doubt the logic, the justice of these words:

"Repression, tyranny, and indiscriminate punishment of innocent men have been the watchwords of the government of the alien domination in India ever since we began the commercial boycott of English goods. The tiger qualities of the British are much in evidence now in India. They think that by the strength of the sword they will keep down India! It is this arrogance that has brought about the bomb, and the more they tyrannize over a helpless and unarmed people, the more terrorism will grow. We may deprecate terrorism as outlandish and foreign to our culture, but it is inevitable as long as this tyranny continues, for it is not the terrorists that are to be blamed, but the tyrants who are responsible for it. It is the only resource for a helpless and unarmed people when brought to the verge of despair. It is never criminal on their part. The crime lies with the tyrant." 4

Even conservative scientists are beginning to realize that heredity is not the sole factor moulding human character. Climate, food, occupation; nay, color, light, and sound must be considered in the study of human psychology.

If that be true, how much more correct is the contention that great social abuses will and must influence different minds and temperaments in a different way. And how utterly fallacious the stereotyped notion that the teachings of Anarchism, or certain exponents of these teachings, are responsible for the acts of political violence.

Anarchism, more than any other social theory, values human life above things. All Anarchists agree with Tolstoy in this fundamental truth: if the production of any commodity necessitates the sacrifice of human life, society should do without that commodity, but it can not do without that life. That, however, nowise indicates that Anarchism teaches submission. How can it, when it knows that all suffering, all misery, all ills, result from the evil of submission?

Has not some American ancestor said, many years ago, that resistance to tyranny is obedience to God? And he was not an Anarchist even. It would say that resistance to tyranny is man's highest ideal. So long as tyranny exists, in whatever form, man's deepest aspiration must resist it as inevitably as man must breathe.

Compared with the wholesale violence of capital and government, political acts of violence are but a drop in the ocean. That so few resist is the strongest proof how terrible must be the conflict between their souls and unbearable social iniquities.

High strung, like a violin string, they weep and moan for life, so relentless, so cruel, so terribly inhuman. In a desperate moment the string breaks. Untuned ears hear nothing but discord. But those who feel the agonized cry understand its harmony; they hear in it the fulfillment of the most compelling moment of human nature.

Such is the psychology of political violence.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan.

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

The Iron Cage of Movement Bureaucracy

vick_humane_090519_mn

Humane Society Teams Up With Michael Vick: The Humane Society of the United States says Michael Vick wants to work with the group on a program aimed at eradicating dogfighting among urban teens. Society president Wayne Pacelle tells The Associated Press that he met with Vick at the federal prison in Leavenworth, Kan., and that the meeting came after Vick's legal team approached the animal-rights group.

(Photo and caption from ABC News.com May 19, 2009)

Essay by Steve Best

Republished on 7/28/09

Hegel remarks somewhere that all great, world-historical facts and personages occur, as it were, twice. He has forgotten to add: the first time as tragedy, the second as farce.” Karl Marx

The modern animal “rights” movement is only a few decades old. In a relatively short time, it has clearly made its presence felt in society. There are many promising signs of evolution in the social attitudes and treatment of animals, ranging from increased legal penalties for animal abuse to the growth of the animal law field and growing popularity of animal studies in higher education. Nonetheless, it would be a serious mistake to conclude that we are “winning” or making “progress” in a truly significant way, or that we can ride into the future on the wings of the mainstream organizations and their legislative-based tactics.

Fallacies of the Mainstream

Consider this: after over three decades of growth and advocacy, the US environmental movement has not accomplished any major goals and easily succumbed to eco-fascists such as Ronald Regan and George W. Bush. No amount of protests, demonstrations, lobbying, or mass mailings has been able to stop the mounting global ecological crisis which plays out in global warming, rainforest destruction, chemical poisoning, species extinction, and countless other ways. As Mark Dowie shows his must-read book, Losing Ground, the situation, in fact, has steadily deteriorated and has reached crisis proportions, despite the emergence of huge environmental organizations and growing popularity of the environmental cause.



Similarly, whatever PR gloss one cares to throw on the last few decades of the animal advocacy movement, one has to confront the startling facts that ever more animals die each year in slaughterhouses, vivisection labs, and animal “shelters,” while the fur industry has made a huge comeback. Similarly, after three decades of activity, the animal advocacy movement remains overwhelmingly a white, middle-class movement that has gained few supporters in communities of color or among other social justice movements.

So if we are counting the number of casualties in this war of liberation, to single out one criterion, our side is hardly winning. Over the past two decades, Americans have dropped $40 billion on animal protection issues, some $2 billion a year, as 3,000 volunteer organizations worked billions of hours. And for what? More death and bigger cages?

As activists lounge around swank hotels preaching to the choir in endless conferences and Ego Fests, the enemy is growing in number and strength. Meanwhile, the key tactics that have truly proven their worth and work where others fail – the methods of the ALF, SHAC, and direct action in general – have been rejected and reviled by vast swaths of the movement. Mainstream ideologues are under the spell of Gandhi, King, and “legalism,” the system-created ideology that urges dissenters to seek change only in and through non-violence and the pre-approved legislative channels of the state. As the opiate of the masses, legalism disempowers resistance movements and leaves corporations and governments to monopolize power, deploy violence at will, and flout the laws – created by and for them -- whenever necessary and convenient.

Many individuals and organizations – none more aggressively than the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) -- in fact have unctuously adopted the murderous voice of the corporate-state apparatus and denounced direct action as violent, terrorist, and antithetical to the values of the animal advocacy movement. The lethal virus of McCarthyism has infected our own movement. The moral purists and legalists implore direct action advocates to purge the “violent and extremist” element so that the voices of reason, compassion, and moderation can prevail. And prevail they will, we are asked to believe, with enough professionals, bureaucrats, lobbyists, and lawyers filling the hallways and chamber rooms of Congress, persuading our “elected representatives” who -- of course! -- serve only the interests of the people, and never the will of corporations.

It is unfortunate that such naiveté still impedes social movements today, for the entire history of state repression, political corruption, and corporate hegemony belies this bullshit at every turn. In the accelerating phase of ecological crisis, it is now do or die and we do not have the luxury to wait for change to unfold in the long march through the institutions.

Lessons from the Environmental Movement

The animal advocacy movement is poised for ever greater failures as it replicates the mistakes of the environmental movement. At the turn of the decade in 1970, the future of the new environmental movement seemed bright. Riding the crest of 1960s turmoil and protest, environmentalism quickly became a mass concern. The first Earth Day in 1970 drew millions of people to the streets throughout the nation. The 1970s became “the Decade of Environmentalism,” as Congress passed new laws such as the Clean Air and Water Act and the government created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Environmental organizations planted roots in Washington, DC, grew vast membership bases, spewed out expensive mass mailings, and walked side-by-side with the rich and powerful as they lobbied for a better world.

The movement’s recipe for success, however, quickly turned into a formula for disaster as large environmental groups increasingly resembled the corporations they criticized and, in fact, themselves evolved into corporations and self-interested money-making machines. Behemoth organizations such as Friends of the Earth, the Wilderness Society, and Nature Conservancy formed the “Gang of Ten.” They were distinguished by their corporate and bureaucratic structures whereby decision-making originated from the professionals at the top who neither had nor sought citizen input from the grass roots level.

The Gang of Ten hired accountants and MBAs over activists, they spent more time and energy in mass mailing campaigns that actual advocacy, and their money was squandered on sustaining their budgets and bureaucracies rather than protecting the environment. They brokered compromise deals to get votes for legislation that was watered-down, constantly revised to strengthen corporate interests, and poorly enforced. As an entrenched bureaucracy with its own interests to protect, they not only did not fund or support grass roots groups, they even fought against them at times. They formed alliances instead with corporate exploiters and legitimated greenwashing/brainwashing campaigns that presented polluters and enemies of the environment as friends of the earth – as when the Environmental Defense Fund bragged that something significant happened when they partnered with McDonalds to end plastic foam containers, as the rainforests continued to be pillaged for Big Macs and Quarter Pounders. The EPA became a farce that protected the interests of corporations over citizens and the earth, while lulling the populace into thinking that there was genuine “regulation” of corporations and environmental hazards.

The significant gains in the environmental movement came in the late 1970s and early 1980s, with the emergence of thousands of grass roots organizations not beholden to patrons, corporations, and politicians, along with the direct action tactics of Paul Watson and the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, Earth First!, and the Earth Liberation Front.

Problems in Our House

Looking back on the last two decades of environmental politics, it is clear that mainstream organizations are an impediment to the radical changes necessary in society to stop corporate ecocide. With ecological crises mounting, an ever-growing division between the world’s rich and poor, and transnational corporations gaining increasing power and control over all nations, it is clear that tactics of compromise, reform, and moderation cannot stop the juggernaut of capitalism and speciesism and that more radical and confrontational methods are necessary.

Unfortunately, the same problems and pathologies that crippled the potential power of a mass environmental movement are replicating themselves in the animal advocacy movement. As Gary Francione, Joan Dunayer, and others have complained, it is hard even to find a consistent animal rights philosophy and politics in the movement, as most campaigns in fact are corporate-compromising, welfarist campaigns dressed up in a rights language and seek a reduction in suffering rather than the abolition of the root causes of exploitation.

Through the influence of the ALF and SHAC, a militant direct action presence has entrenched itself in the animal advocacy movement (the ALF beginning in the 1980s and SHAC in the late 1990s), but in most cases direct action is either shunned or vilified for fear of state repression or losing the almighty funding and patron dollars through contamination with controversy.

The New Goliath

HSUS, in particular, has distinguished itself as a divisive force by pulling out of national and regional conferences that include direct action speakers. Rather than evince respect for diversity and debate instead of run, HSUS not only has withdrawn into its own insular conference world, it has publicly attacked the ALF and SHAC. In a recent interview, Mike Markarian, HSUS Executive Vice President of External Affairs, crossed a clear line when he demonized ALF activists as criminals and applauded the FBI for going after them (see Volume I Number 4 of the North American Animal Liberation Press Office newsletter at: http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org).

HSUS is a vast, global empire unto itself, with offices throughout the world, 10 regional offices in the US, and tentacles in a web of other organizations and affiliates. While it has no relation to local humane societies and animal shelters anywhere in the US, HSUS does control dozens of legal corporations throughout the world, such as Earthvoice, the Wildlife Land Trust, Earthkind USA, and the UK World Society for the Protection of Animals. Like other transnational corporations, the HSUS conglomerate survives through endless expansion and growth. In 2002, it took over Ark Trust, producers of the Genesis Awards for animal-friendly TV and film. It absorbed the Fund for Animals in 2004, and in 2005 it snapped up edgy activists Miyun Park and Paul Shapiro from Compassion Over Killing, a pro-open rescue group willing to break the law to rescue animals, a clear no-no for HSUS.

From its 30,000 members and annual budget of $500,000 in 1970, it has morphed into a body of 9 million members with an operating budget of nearly $100 million in 2005. Such a behemoth has a homogenization effect on the movement whereby it monopolizes donations to animal causes, commands ever more media, disseminates welfarist ideology, co-opts activists useful to its programs, and maligns direct action approaches, all the while staying disengaged from local humane societies and animal shelters as a whole (unless they are willing to pay HSUS a fee for services and advice).

Certainly, HSUS has helped animals in various ways and helped to chalk up a number of legislative victories against cockfighting, horse slaughter, and other atrocities, and under Pacelle’s leadership it progressively advocates a vegan agenda. But it also is a vast bureaucratic organization with its own interests and needs (such as paying Pacelle’s $300,000 annual salary) that has adopted many of the unfortunate characteristics of mainstream environmental movements.

No such empire and bureaucracy can be sustained without its lifeblood – money – and fundraising, patron satisfaction, and forging corporate ties thereby occupy a good deal of HSUS time and energy. In 2003, HSUS had $116,205,882.00 in total liability and net assets, yet spent around $3.5 million on the crucial problem of animal sheltering (far better than in 2002, when they gave less than $150,000 to local humane societies and shelters). They did, however, spend over $15.6 million on fundraising and accrued $6.3 million in administrative costs.

HSUS acquired over countless millions of dollars in donations to aid animals gravely affected by hurricane Katrina. They worked to save many animal lives, but also came under intense fire from activists on the ground who claimed that they were inept and inefficient. One has to wonder if a more flexible organization structure would not have been more effective. And how much of that largesse supports its bloated bureaucracy and fundraising needs, and how much goes directly to the animals? Would such funds not have been better utilized by shelters and rescue organizations at the grass roots?

In 1994, Pacelle told Animal People that his goal was to build “a National Rifle Association of the animal rights movement,” suggesting he seeks a powerful organization dominated by single-issue politics. Such an approach means in practice the kind of compromise politics that vitiated the environmental movement, such that HSUS is prepared to bargain with or support nearly any politician (however right-wing) or corporation for a vote. This was evident in their recent support for the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA, a neo-liberal economic policy modeled on NAFTA), whereby they gained tenuous support for some animal issues, but lent their support in turn for a “trade agreement” that threatens small farmers, violates the rights of workers, promotes factory farming (and thus greater meat and dairy consumption), and favors transnational corporations that grow wealthy through the plunder of Southern nations.

Do or Die

If the animal rights movement is ever to become more than just another “interest group,” if it is to achieve it goals of animal liberation, and if it is to realize its potential for radically transforming human identity and society, it will have to study past social movements and learn from their successes and failures – the environmental movement in particular -- in order to draw the right lessons and not repeat the same mistakes. Activists need to be critical of large mainstream organizations, fight to maintain philosophical and tactical diversity, and demonstrate the vital importance of grass roots, direct action, and underground approaches.

As frustrated as activists become for far greater degrees of progress, it is also true that we need patience, foresight, long-term vision and strategies, and use of non-violent tactics where these are viable. Where legal and non-violent tactics are not viable, however, where they are not enough to stop exploiters from killing innocent animals, it is our duty to use stronger tactics to bring this violence against animals to an end. As we would not argue any differently if we were defending human beings against violence and terrorism, we should apply the same arguments to animals who have equal rights to life and freedom. As with past human liberation struggles, any and all tactics that prove themselves effective in the field of battle must be used for animal liberation, thus demanding a pluralist and non-dogmatic approach.

For a long time, the direct action community has tolerated the opprobrium of mainstream organizations like HSUS, which claims that direct action approaches have discredited the values of the movement and impeded its progress. As we consider the level of radical tactics necessary to defend animals and the earth, and ponder the fallacies that have guided the animal advocacy movement for too long, maybe it’s time to turn the tables and expose the fallacies and hypocrisies of the mainstream.

The message of the animal rights/liberation movement has nothing to do with profits, corporations, and fundraising, and everything to do with a revolutionary transformation of human consciousness and all existing social institutions.

Dr. Steve Best is TPC’s associate editor. Associate professor of philosophy at UTEP, award-winning writer, noted speaker, public intellectual, and seasoned activist, Steven Best engages the issues of the day such as animal rights, ecological crisis, biotechnology, liberation politics, terrorism, mass media, globalization, and capitalist domination. Best has published 10 books, over 100 articles and reviews, spoken in over a dozen countries, interviewed with media throughout the world, appeared in numerous documentaries, and was voted by VegNews as one of the nations “25 Most Fascinating Vegetarians.” He has come under fire for his uncompromising advocacy of “total liberation” (humans, animals, and the earth) and has been banned from the UK for the power of his thoughts. From the US to Norway, from Sweden to France, from Germany to South Africa, Best shows what philosophy means in a world in crisis.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan.

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Gonzo Gastronomy: How the Food Industry Has Made Bacon a Weapon of Mass Destruction

diet coke

By Arun Gupta

Simulposted with AlterNet

7/28/09

Among my fondest childhood memories is savoring a strip of perfectly cooked bacon that had just been dragged through a puddle of maple syrup. It was an illicit pleasure; varnishing the fatty, salty, smoky bacon with sweet arboreal sap felt taboo. How could such simple ingredients produce such riotous flavors?

That was then. Today, you don't need to tax yourself applying syrup to bacon -- McDonald's does it for you with the McGriddle. It conveniently takes an egg, American cheese and pork and nestles it between pancakelike biscuits suffused with genuine fake-maple-syrup flavor.

The McGriddle is just one moment in an era of extreme food combinations -- a moment in which bacon plays a starring role, from high cuisine to low.

There is: bacon ice cream; bacon-infused vodka; deep-fried bacon; chocolate-dipped bacon; bacon-wrapped hot dogs filled with cheese (which are fried, then battered and fried again); brioche bread pudding smothered in bacon sauce; hard-boiled eggs coated in mayonnaise encased in bacon -- called, appropriately, the "heart attack snack"; bacon salt; bacon doughnuts, cupcakes and cookies; bacon mints; "baconnaise," which Jon Stewart described as "for people who want to get heart disease but [are] too lazy to actually make bacon"; Wendy's "Baconnator" -- six strips of bacon mounded atop a half-pound cheeseburger -- which sold 25 million in its first eight weeks; and the outlandish bacon explosion -- a barbecued meat brick composed of 2 pounds of bacon wrapped around 2 pounds of sausage.



It's easy to dismiss this gonzo gastronomy as typical American excess best followed with a Lipitor chaser. Behind the proliferation of bacon offerings, however, is a confluence of government policy, factory farming, the boom in fast food and manipulation of consumer taste that has turned bacon into a weapon of mass destruction.

While bacon's harmful effects were once limited to individual consumers, its production in vast porcine cities has become an environmental disaster. The system of industrialized hog (and beef and poultry) farming that has developed over the last 40 years turns out to be ideal for breeding novel strains of deadly pathogens, such as the current pandemic of swine flu. If a new killer virus appears, like the Spanish flu that killed tens of millions after World War I, factory farms will have played a central role in its genesis.

Concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) churn out cheap, but flavorless, meat. However, for the CAFOs to exist there must be demand for the product. That's where the industrial food sector comes in. Chains like McDonald's, Chili's, Taco Bell, Applebee's and Pizza Hut approach the tasteless, limp factory beef, pork and chicken as a blank canvas with which to create highly enticing, even addictive, foods by pumping it full of fat, salt, sugar and chemical flavorings.

The chains lard on bacon in particular as a high-profit method of adding an item that has a "high flavor profile," a "one-of-a-kind product that has no taste substitute." According to David Kessler, author of The End of Overeating, a standard joke in the restaurant chain industry goes, "When in doubt, throw cheese and bacon on it."

More than that, notes Kessler, the food industry uses science and marketing to try to make its products addictive. By manipulating what he calls the "three points of the compass" -- fat, sugar and salt -- the food industry creates highly processed foods that can hook us like drugs. In various countries and regions, the levels of fat, sugar and salt are even calibrated to different "bliss points" to maximize the consumers' pleasure.

Kessler talks to one scientist who studied lab mice that were willing to work nearly as hard to get doses of Ensure, a drink high in fat and sugar, as they were to get hits of cocaine. One food company executive calls his industry "the manipulator of the consumers' minds and desires."

In essence, the food industry has hit on a magic formula: Companies conjure up endless variations on the McGriddle that itself is the mass-produced version of the maple-syrup-soaked bacon strip from our childhoods.

This points to why our food system is so entrenched and why noble experiments, from food co-ops and community-supported agriculture to organic food and the locavore movement, are fleas on the industrial food elephant.

The crisis of factory farming has thus become its own solution. We know our food system is killing the planet, killing us with heart disease, diabetes and cancer and threatens to incubate a deadly global pandemic, but how can we resist when it tastes oh so good?

How CAFOS Were Created

Our current food system has its roots in the Dust Bowl and the Great Depression. With thousands of farming families fleeing the land, the Roosevelt administration dispensed credit and established price supports to stabilize the agricultural sector.

The policy worked, but it inadvertently created large grain surpluses. The problem of surpluses was temporarily alleviated by the demand created by the total mobilization of the nation during World War II. But after the war, the question of what to do with the excess product became more pressing.

The answer was to dump the surpluses, first on a devastated Europe, then during the Korean War and finally, as "humanitarian aid" to Third World countries. U.S. policy evolved to protect a national export-oriented agricultural sector.

In the name of national food security, the U.S. government subsidized farmers to produce more food than Americans could eat and to dump that surplus as a weapon in the Cold War. This policy favored economy of scale and technological innovation to increase yields, because managing overproduction was more effective if the farm sector was reduced and subsidies aimed at large-scale monoculture producers rather than farmers who produced a variety of goods or had small plots of land.

While the U.S. farm population had been shrinking since the late 18th century, when it was 90 percent of the general population, in 1940, on the eve of the U.S. entry into World War II, some 18 percent of Americans were still farmers. This would plummet to 4.6 percent of the population by 1970, because small farmers could not compete with government-subsidized agribusiness.

This agricultural system was exported to developing countries and Europe. In exchange for the right to protect large-scale food production, such as cereals, beef, milk and sugar, the European Economic Community agreed to allow in duty-free soy beans for livestock feed in the 1960s.

French farmer and anti-corporate-globalization campaigner Jose Bove notes that the arrival of U.S. soy beans into French ports signaled the start of agricultural industrialization.

Bove explains: "Cheap soya beans are very useful in intensive breeding, because they make it possible to rear herds in small areas of land close to the delivery ports."

The end result, writes sociologist Philip McMichael, was "a policy to reduce the farm population by 90 percent (eliminating, especially, polyculture and subsistence producers), and establish production quotas, hastening monocultures and farm concentration as a survival tactic."



The Livestock Revolution

It is government policy that allowed CAFOs to come into being. Karl Polanyi argued decades ago in "The Great Transformation" that "laissez-faire was planned." In other words, government regulation of land, labor and finance creates the conditions for free-market capitalism to operate.

The post-WW II period witnessed a series of agricultural revolutions that have been exported around the world, starting in the 1950s with the U.S.-led "Green Revolution" in cereal grains. In the 1970s, the "Livestock Revolution" went global. And the 1980s saw the "Blue Revolution," factory-farming of fish and seafood. Over the past few decades, global meat production has increased by more than 500 percent.

In Fast Food Nation, Eric Schlosser recounts the 1960s rise of Iowa Beef Packers, which revolutionized the beef industry. IBP came into being because it exploit heavily subsidized water, fuel, land and grain for cattle feed; a national transportation infrastructure; and anti-union laws.

IBP's innovation was to combine slaughterhouses with enormous cattle feedlots. In the slaughterhouses, IBP used Fordist production techniques to de-skill meat cutting, paid low wages and busted unions to drive prices down and rake in profits.

Faced with the relentless low-cost competition from IBP, other meatpackers had to adapt or die. By 1971, notes Schlosser, the last Chicago stockyard shut down.

The poultry revolution begins earlier, in the 1940s, but government policies once again play a key role. During WW II, the U.S. government rationed beef and pork, prioritizing them for the troops. Americans on the home front were encouraged to eat chicken, which was freely available, while the government set a price of 30 cents per pound of chicken, "well above the cost of production." The War Department also contracted to buy chicken for soldiers. All these actions spurred demand and supply.

Poultry producers like Tyson Foods, Holly Farms and Perdue Farms seize the opportunity to develop the model of vertical integration. An Associated Press report describes how "Tyson Foods embodied a new mode of agriculture that emerged in Southern states after World War II. Chicken companies were the first to absorb all the local pieces of a small-town economy and bring them under one corporate roof. Tyson owned the feed mill, the hatchery and the slaughterhouse. It paid farmers to grow its chicks, using its feed, at a price set by Tyson."

'Excremental Hell'

It is in the 1970s that Smithfield Foods revolutionizes hog production. "What we did in the pork industry is what Perdue and Tyson did in the poultry business," Joseph W. Luter III, chairman and chief executive of Smithfield, told the New York Times in 2000.

According to a Rolling Stone exposé, Smithfield "controls every stage of production, from the moment a hog is born until the day it passes through the slaughterhouse. [It] imposed a new kind of contract on farmers: The company would own the living hogs; the contractors would raise the pigs and be responsible for managing the hog shit and disposing of dead hogs. The system made it impossible for small hog farmers to survive -- those who could not handle thousands and thousands of pigs were driven out of business."

In the 1950s, there were 2.1 million hog farmers, with an average of 31 hogs each. As of 2007, there were 79,000 hog farmers left, averaging over 1,000 hogs each. A single Smithfield subsidiary in Utah holds a half-million hogs and produces more shit every day than all the residents of Manhattan.
Rolling Stone's stunning report describes the lakes of shit that surround pig factories as the color of Pepto Bismol because of the "interactions between the bacteria and blood and afterbirths and stillborn piglets and urine and excrement and chemicals and drugs."

Vegetarians who think they are unaffected by this toxic fecal frappe should think again: The sludge is often used to "fertilize" crops that end up on your table.

Beef, poultry and hog CAFOs could not exist without large-scale environmental devastation. Governments at every level exempt these operations from the laws and regulations covering air pollution, water pollution and solid-waste disposal. They are also largely free from proper bio-surveillance, that is, public monitoring to detect, observe and report on the outbreak of diseases.

Mike Davis, author of The Monster at Our Door, writes that scrutiny of the interface between human and animal diseases is "primitive, often nonexistent" because Smithfield, IBP and Tyson would have to spend money on surveillance and upgrade conditions at their hellish animal factories.

The environmental devastation is epic. In 1999, Hurricane Floyd walloped North Carolina, home to massive Smithfield hog operations. Rolling Stone described how the hurricane "washed 120 million gallons of unsheltered hog waste" -- more than 10 times the size of the Exxon Valdez spill a decade earlier -- "into the Tar, Neuse, Roanoke, Pamlico, New and Cape Fear rivers." After scouring the rivers of aquatic life, the toxic sludge oozed to the Albemarle-Pamlico Sound, one of the most important fish nurseries in the eastern Atlantic.

For Smithfield, razing the environment is just a minor cost of doing business. In Virginia, in 1997 it was slapped with a $12.6 million fine for 6,982 violations of the Clean Water Act. The judge could have hit Smithfield with a $175 million fine. For Smithfield, the smaller fine was like paying half a cent for every dollar in revenue it rang up that year.

Rolling Stone paints a grim picture of what goes on inside a hog CAFO: "Sows are artificially inseminated and fed and delivered of their piglets in cages so small they cannot turn around. Forty fully grown 250-pound male hogs often occupy a pen the size of a tiny apartment. They trample each other to death. There is no sunlight, straw, fresh air or earth. The floors are slatted to allow excrement to fall into a catchment pit under the pens, but many things besides excrement can wind up in the pits: afterbirths, piglets accidentally crushed by their mothers, old batteries, broken bottles of insecticide, antibiotic syringes, stillborn pigs …"

Manufacturing Pandemics

Factory farms are a hot spot for new infectious diseases. According to a former chief of the Centers for Disease Control's Special Pathogens Branch, "Intensive agricultural methods often mean that a single, genetically homogeneous species is raised in a limited area, creating a perfect target for emerging diseases, which proliferate happily among a large number of like animals in close proximity."

A 1998 report prepared for the then British Ministry of Agriculture paints a picture of hog factories as disease factories. "Treatment may be given to sows for metritis, mastitis and for diseases such as erysipelas and leptospirosis. In most indoor herds, antibiotic treatment starts soon after birth. Piglets will receive drugs for enteritis and for respiratory disease."

After weaning, usually at three weeks, piglets "develop post-weaning diarrhea caused by E. coli," which "is quickly followed by a range of other diseases," such as Glasser's disease at 4 weeks, "pleuropneumonia at 6-8 weeks, proliferative enteropathy from 6 weeks and spirochaetal diarrhea and colitis at any time from 6 weeks onward. ... At 8 weeks, the pigs are termed growers and moved to another house. Here they will develop enzootic pneumonia, streptococcal meningitis … and, possibly, swine dysentery. Respiratory disease may cause problems until slaughter."

In his book, Bird Flu, physician Michael Greger writes, "Factory farms are considered such breeding grounds for disease that much of the animals' metabolic energy is spent just staying alive under such filthy, crowded, stressful conditions; normal physiological processes like growth are put on the back burner. Reduced growth rates in such hostile conditions cut into profits, but so would reducing the overcrowding. Antibiotics, then, became another crutch the industry can use to cut corners and cheat nature."

But what happens when a poultry factory is doused with antivirals? According to Greger, "Say there's a one in a billion chance of an influenza virus developing resistance to amantadine [an antiviral drug]. Odds are, any virus we would come in contact with would be sensitive to the drug. But each infected bird poops out more than a billion viruses every day. The rest of their viral colleagues may be killed by the amantadine, but that one resistant strain of virus will be selected to spread and burst forth from the chicken farm, leading to widespread viral resistance and emptying our arsenal against bird flu."

To compound the problem, "the raising of swine is increasingly centralized in huge operations, often adjacent to poultry farms and migratory bird habitats," writes Mike Davis. These operations often abut cities, meaning the "superurbanization of the human population … has been paralleled by an equally dense urbanization of its meat supply." These elements have produced an interspecies blender that is spitting out new viruses at an alarming rate, like the current swine flu bug. The Frankenstein monster that is factory farming is leading to a Frankenstein monster of a deadlier kind.

Arun Gupta is a founding editor of The Indypendent newspaper. He is writing a book on the decline of American empire for Haymarket Books.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan.

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Sunday, July 26, 2009

In the face of unspeakable evil, is it even possible for me to go too far?



By Jason Miller

7/25/09

Disclaimer: I am in no way affiliated, allied, aligned, or connected with the Transformative Studies Institute, the Institute for Critical Animal Studies, Anthony Nocella II, or Richard Kahn. While I am a press officer for the North American Animal Liberation Press Office and am an associate of Jerry Vlasak and Steve Best, I am penning this piece independently of NAALPO and all of my allies. This essay is philosophical in nature and is not intended to incite or encourage illegal or violent acts.

Immersion in an emotionally intense experience impacts the human psyche in a poignant and profound way. Marginalized as we are by the war my fellow activists and I are waging against the dominant culture, it’s an elating and uplifting experience to meet and engage those fellow activists, comrades, and allies. My six days of nearly constant interaction with similar-minded individuals and the chanting, shouting, and raging at primate torturers and their enablers at the nexus of the UCLA vivisection wars in a raucous, vociferous, militant demonstration served both as a cathartic outlet and a source of potent spiritual and intellectual inspiration.

I’ve plenty of time to muse and contemplate as I journey home from those six days at the Animal Rights Conference in Los Angeles, a city that is rife with animal liberationists and vegans—at least relative to my home in Kansas City. It’s a bit disheartening to be returning to that barren outpost that’s nestled in the heart of the Bible belt and farm country, riddled of course with fundamentalist Christian churches galore, techno-hells known as factory “farms,” and numerous “meat” purveying establishments that serve seared rotting flesh slathered in spicy sauce. Hardened speciesists, hunters, and a vast array of animal enslaving and exploiting business entities and individuals abound. Yet there I shall remain, at least for a few more years, to press forward with Bite Club of KC (http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/), the grass roots activist group I founded. If we have a prayer of success with the animal liberation movement nearly every town needs at least a few zealots.

There’s little to do but reflect and bang out my thoughts on my laptop as the incessant droning of the plane’s jet engines reverberates in my ears, annoying in one sense and yet soothing in another, as the cicada-like hum provides reassurance that we’re surging toward our destination rather than hurtling toward a fiery and instantaneous death. Sifting and sorting through the collage of memories forged over the last week, it occurred to me that I’d seen, felt, heard, and generally experienced a pretty comprehensive cross-section of the groups and people whose goal it is to abolish the slavery of nonhuman animals--to liberate the billions of nonhuman animals who suffer excruciating agony at the hands of their self-absorbed, empathy deficient human exploiters and oppressors.



Most of the hundreds of people whom I met proclaimed to be passionate and dedicated vegan abolitionists. Yet despite enough professed love for nonhuman animals that Jesus and John Lennon would have experienced spasms of ecstasy simply from “feeling the vibes,” the debate over direct action and “how far is too far” raged throughout the conference. In my vernacular, love is a verb and this absurd debate was over before it started. If a bully is abusing the weak or defenseless, it’s morally laudable to knock the shit out of him—with a ball bat, a metal rod, or any weapon at hand if he’s a “bad ass.” Those of us who are truly committed to animal liberation need to employ, support, or, at the very least, respect militant direct action of virtually any kind. Billions of our nonhuman friends are shot, stabbed, eviscerated, beaten, starved, skinned alive, hunted, mutilated, electrocuted, boiled, raped, confined, cooked and eaten every year in a hideous speciesist greed and murder-fest--and those of us who claim to love them have a moral obligation to fight for them by any means necessary, “each according to his ability.”

Obviously the true enemy in this war is the system. The pitiless, soulless, murderous machine of capitalism and industrial civilization inculcates, indoctrinates, entices, bribes, and coerces nearly everyone to participate in its bloody, rapacious, and relentless assault on the Earth and its sentient inhabitants. Even those of us who recognize its malevolence and are struggling to skewer the heart of this wretched beast have to use the sociopathic master’s tools if we’ve a prayer of dismantling the master’s house of horrors.

Despite the fact that we need to direct most of our rage and actions against the system, there are those individuals within the system who are so sociopathic, such hardened speciesists, and so incorrigible that they are immune to education, persuasion, propaganda and polemics, political pressure, financial pressure, changes in laws, protests, boycotts, or any of the myriad other aboveground and legal actions that our movement utilizes. These are fine methods, and I’m not suggesting for a moment that we abandon them or that those who engage in them are wasting their time. It is essential that we wage this war holistically and contextually, but non-violent, legal means are not effective in every situation and they alone will not empty the cages and stop the intense suffering.

Philosophically speaking, if we love nonhuman animals enough and truly want to win their liberation---including their basic rights to live free of human-inflicted suffering, torture, exploitation, oppression, and murder---the most heinous and most culpable perpetrators of the nonhuman animal holocaust will need to start looking over their shoulders and fearing the wrath that nonhuman animals would rain down upon them if they had the means and the opportunity. Call it extensional self defense. Call it justifiable homicide. Call it vigilante justice. A rose is a rose by any other name and it’s time for that flower to blossom in the AR movement. One of the master’s principal tools to maintain power, domination, and affluence is violence or the threat of violence---be it physical, psychological, social, political, or economic. Why do we endow the master with the exclusive right to use one of the most powerful tools on the work bench?

Consider this. Hideous as their agenda may be to some of us, anti-abortionist activists love embryos and fetuses enough to utilize violence as a form of extensional self-defense on their behalf. The question isn’t, “Do we agree with their agenda?” The question is, “Have they been effective?” Their record speaks for itself. Assassinations of doctors who performed abortions have nearly eliminated the practice of late-term abortions in the US. Food for thought.

As a movement, we also need to give serious philosophical consideration to numerous other tactics which have been successfully implemented by radical social movements throughout history.

Hunting accidents are a beautiful manifestation of karma. Nearly every US citizen in the animal liberation movement has the same 2nd Amendment right to bear arms as hunters and probably loves the outdoors as much (if not more than) those who hunt. Wouldn’t it be unfortunate if there were a sudden epidemic of hunting accidents?



Corporate executives and politicians who are instrumental in the animal holocaust receive innocuous protest letters from animal rights protestors frequently. Presumably they smirk and casually toss them into their refuse bin, or if they’re “green” shred them for recycling. However, if said letters were contaminated with a biological warfare agent or some wicked poison like ricin, they would be much more difficult to blithely ignore.

Our beloved animal industrial complex hammers our collective psyche with the best propaganda money can buy to convince us of the safety and necessity of eating “meat,” drinking “milk,” and vivisecting nonhuman animals. Imagine the panic and economic backlash if someone countered their reprehensible mendacity with some major black propaganda. Widespread and effectively orchestrated rumors of massive quantities of BSE-infected “meat,” millions of gallons of “milk” tainted with melamine, thousands of people experiencing horrific side effects and dying as a result of taking the latest pharmaceutical that was deemed “safe” via animal testing…

Infrastructure is another vulnerability our movement could, in theory, heavily exploit. Cyber attacks on large corporate entities involved in the wholesale maiming and mutilation of our friends could put a much-deserved hurt on them. Frequent, coordinated strikes at multiple targets could seriously cripple these horrendous fiends, leaving them flailing helplessly like the “downers” they hoist into the slaughterhouses via forklift or the monkeys they bolt into chairs to “map” their brains. Flailing yet grasping for their bloody lucre to their dying gasp, much like HLS. Attacks on the utilities powering their butchery and bloodshed and on the communications systems enabling them to plot their maleficent strategies to wring more profit from the bloody carcasses of our nonhuman friends could also strike serious blows against these rotten-to-the-core serial abusers.

Lastly, but probably not least in terms of potential efficacy, a prominent figure in the animal exploitation complex in the hands of intelligent underground activists could probably fetch a significant ransom. Say perhaps the release and subsequent re-wilding (or provision for their humane guardianship) of all the nonhuman animals enslaved by the entity, or even the industry, which that person represented….

While these are hypotheticals wrested from the wandering mind of a militant vegan confined to a cramped commercial airliner full of speciesist necrovores for three hours, they could potentially become realities for our movement. Sometimes moving from the abstract to the real can be as simple as steeling one’s determination and taking Nike’s advice to “Just do it.”

As my little exercise in critical thinking unfolds here, I’m finding myself plagued and perplexed by a number of contradictions and inconsistencies that I’m struggling to reconcile.

For instance, what is preventing our movement from unifying in support of the underground direct action that is already taking place and why isn’t the animal liberation movement upping the ante in response to intensified animal exploitation?

Are we so afraid of “public perception” that we won’t engage the enemy on its own terms? As you read that question, thousands of those we profess to love so much were murdered. And we’re going to let the speciesist system have a monopoly on harming sentient beings AND imprison our fellow activists for chanting and chalking a side-walk? Maybe there’s some redneck mentality left in me, but where I come from that’s called being a pussy. Yes we’re vastly out-numbered, but that’s why those who currently engage in direct action do so anonymously and use asymmetrical tactics. Our friends in the cages, labs, and abattoirs certainly don’t give a fuck how the public perceives us--their defenders. And were they the moral agents and we the moral patients, I feel confident that they would take the fight to our abusers any way they could. My validation for this belief is that when I look into Chico’s eyes (he is the pit bull for whom I’m the guardian), I KNOW that he would die fighting for me.

Or perhaps we’re closet speciesists, thus able to psychologically minimize the overwhelmingly immense suffering our friends endure and the incalculable gallons of blood they spew? Maybe at some level of our psyches we reject our own rhetoric about the sanctity of nonhuman animal life. Do we truly believe in our own cause?

Or are we so repulsed by the dominant culture of death that we will “battle not with monsters, lest we become a monster?” How sane is it to give this concern a second thought when thus far speciesists have slaughtered trillions of our friends over the centuries and vegan militants have not killed a single sociopathic human animal?

Each of us who sincerely loves nonhuman animals and seeks their liberation needs to ask ourselves these questions and at least two others.

“In the face of unspeakable evil, is it even possible for me to go too far?”

And finally, “What am I willing to do to help stop those who are principally responsible for perpetuating the 10,000 year holocaust that has killed trillions of nonhuman sentient beings?”

Jason Miller is a relentless anti-capitalist, vegan straight edge, animal liberationist, and press officer for the North American Animal Liberation Press Office. He is also the senior editor and founder of Thomas Paine’s Corner and founder of Bite Club of KC.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan.

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Disturbing the Universe: Holocaust Denial, Revisionism, Religion, Censorship, and War



By Gary Corseri

7/23/09

“They will take evil and call it good. They will take the lie and call it truth.”

–Isaiah

“The unexamined life is not worth living.”

--Socrates

“War is always finally about betrayal.”

–Chris Hedges

“A static universe isn’t physically self-consistent. The sun can’t shine forever.”

—James Peebles, Physics Professor Emeritus, Princeton University

“Do I dare

disturb the universe?

In a minute there is time

For decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse.”

--T.S. Eliot

On July 11th, author William Blum e-mailed me a Washington Post article about Ken Meyercord. Fredrick Kunkle, a Post staff writer, described Meyercord as a 65-year old with a “high tech job at Freddie Mac, a local public-access cable television show … and a long history of writing about what he says are ‘myths’ of the Holocaust.” Meyercord, the article continued, hoped to win “an at-large seat on the board of the Reston Citizens Association, a quasi-government body … for the community of 60,000, which is not officially a municipality.” Reston is basically a D.C. suburb in Virginia.

I’d met Meyercord a few months before at a political celebration in downtown D.C. The party’s sponsors were elated over Obama’s inauguration. More cynical than most of those there, I’d latched onto Blum’s coat-tails for the invite—providing chauffeur services in my old van. I met Medea Benjamin, Meyercord and his Palestinian wife, Samira, and a few other interesting people. Nobody I met or overheard struck me as radical or dangerous. Some—not those I’ve mentioned here—struck me as naïve for believing that one election would change the direction of our latter-day Empire.

A few months later, friend Blum and I were at Eduardo Galeano’s reading at Politics and Prose, also in D.C.. We ran into Meyercord there and we decided to get some Chinese food nearby. Meyercord told me about his TV show then, but most of the conversation had more to do with Peking duck than with the sweet and sour business of contemporary, imperial politics.



Meyercord probably mentioned that he was running in the Reston election. A Maryland resident, unable to vote in Virginia, absorbed in my personal problems then, all of that sailed over my head. Conversation was mostly convivial; no one was trying to proselytize; and, in fact, nobody could have. Blum is 75 and he’s seen it all; I’m 63 and I’ve seen enough.

Four days after reading the first article on Meyercord, I was e-mailed another, also by Fredrick Kunkle at the Post. Under the headline, “Write-in Effort Blocks ‘Revisionist,” I learned: “A last-minute campaign to prevent a self-described Holocaust revisionist from serving on a civic body in Reston has succeeded with a landslide. … Ken Meyercord, who had been running unopposed for an at-large seat on the Reston Citizens Association’s 13-member volunteer board, received only 23 votes after his provocative views on Jews created a backlash.” Debra Steppel, who organized the write-in campaign, called it a “fabulous result.”

Mr. Kunkle wrote that Meyercord was “gracious in conceding,” and that he had congratulated Ms. Steppel for her efforts, although he thought her “misinformed.” Further, the article noted that Meyercord and his wife had lived in Reston since 1977, and that, in “writings and interviews,” he had expressed doubt that Nazi Germany had a “mission to annihilate European Jews, a plan known as the Final Solution.” Meyercord had also denied that Nazis used gas chambers to murder Jews, and he had “expressed skepticism that the number of Holocaust victims reached 6 million.”

By now, my interest was more than piqued, and I asked Meyercord to send me some of his writing. As a half-Jew with Zionists, anti-Zionists and the indifferent, ignorant and uniformed within my own extended family; as a fan of Paine and Thoreau, Martin Buber, Rilke and Hesse; as a man vitally interested in my world and human psychology, I wanted to know more about this tempest in a teapot in Reston and how it might relate to our confused, violent and pernicious modern macro world.

Perusing Meyercord’s work, I found him to be more apologetic than inflammatory. In “In Search of a Holocaust Denier,” he writes, “What I would like to offer here is a rationale—a plea, really—for investigating all aspects of the holocaust story in an atmosphere free of rancor, intolerance, and intimidation. I believe we can learn from history and that it will be a better world if we do. Of course, to learn from history, we have to have an accurate understanding of what happened. …”

Meyercord describes how the “goose-stepping … siegheiling” Nazis endlessly portrayed by Hollywood and the other media provided little insight into “how a man like Hitler could have risen to power in one of the most sophisticated countries on earth.” He deplores the fact that we have learned so little from the Nazi era, noting that the Foreign Minister of Israel [Avigdor Lieberman] has advocated the deportation of all Palestinians from Eretz [Greater] Israel. Those who have challenged holocaust orthodoxy have found themselves exiled to an academic wilderness—a la Norman Finkelstein in the U.S.—or imprisoned—like David Irving in Austria! And, in that same reasonable, almost apologetic mode, he asks, “Wouldn’t it be better to dispel the myths surrounding the holocaust now, while anti-Semitism is a neglibible factor in American society, than at some future date when hard times lead desperate, angry Americans to look around for a scapegoat?”

So much for the overview of Meyercord’s approach. He’s not some glib-tongued salesman for neo-Nazism. His argumentation is tightly reasoned and far less fiery and provocative than, say, Limbaugh’s, O’Reilly’s, Hannity’s or Coulter’s. He directs his readers (and directed me in a short phone interview of him) to two websites for further exploration of the issues:

www.codoh.com

and www.holocaustdenialvideos.com.

Meyercord describes himself as a “revisionist,” not a holocaust denier. He notes: “What causes revisionists to be misrepresented and slandered by the believers is their denial of three constituent parts of the holocaust story:

1. That there was a plan to exterminate the Jews, aka, “The Final Solution.”

2. That gas chambers were used in the execution of that plan; and

3. That no less than six million Jews died as a result.

He offers his own refutations of the predominant “holocaust story” and directs us to others for more detail.

The question I have to ask now is, How is this relevant to our post-9/11 world?

It is relevant because past is prelude, and those who don’t learn the lessons of the past, as Santayana said … well, you know the rest.

It’s relevant because we would rather kill each other to defend the sanctity of our myths—religious, ideological, nationalistic/patriotic—than smash the idols of our perceptions—and misperceptions.

It’s relevant because a thoughtful man’s views of history or religious dogma is irrelevant to the performance of his duties and responsibilities as a citizen in a local civic organization.

It is relevant because every tin-pot dictator who appears on the scene—a Noriega, a Saddam Hussein—who loses the favor of the U.S. imperial regime; and every populist leader—an Ahmadinejead, a Hugo Chavez, a Fidel Castro—is inevitably compared to Hitler and threatened with regime change, or having his country “wiped off the map,” or has, in fact, been invaded. Hitler has become the gold standard of evil—and that incubus colors every other form of evil. We have personalized and incarnated evil, ignorance and brutality, and exonerated the institutions, the social forms and mechanisms of control, the psychologies and hysterias still very much with us today.

It is relevant because most Americans don’t know squat about Zionism or the role that Jewish nationalism played in the run-up to World War I, the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire, the disastrous Versailles treaty, the Balfour Declaration, etc. (Meyercord, in fact, does not touch on any of this in his writing or in his interviews with me or with Fred Kunkle at the Post.)

It is relevant because whether 6 million Jews died or 1 million died—there still is no justification for the expropriation of another people’s land, resources, country. (My mother taught me as a child, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.”)

Meyercord’s little dust-up in a D.C. suburb leaves us with three big ponderables:

1. A question of censorship

2. A moral question

3. The historical record

Ms. Steppel’s write-in campaign, and the voters of Reston, attempted to censor Meyercord’s words and beliefs. They did not vote on the man’s competence, his willingness and ability to serve his local community. They voted against his convictions, at which he had arrived after carefully examining the evidence, his life and the promptings of his conscience. He lived for six months in Beirut, traveled in Israel, has had a long, fulfilling marriage to a Palestinian woman. They raised two children who attended Reston’s public schools. No doubt his unique experiences have enriched his perspective. How does censorship and expurgation serve the public interest? In our intertwined world, are we not all safer reaching out, trying to understand “the other”?

The moral question has too often reduced itself to “my suffering is better than your suffering.” Suffering employed this way has little or nothing to do with morality, much to do with religious dogma. It is suffering as justification—for outrageous reparations (against Germans,for example, no more guilty for World War I than Brits, the French, the Americans, the Russians). It is suffering employed as the ultimate rationale for “man’s inhumanity to man,” “nature red in tooth and claw,” etc. It is suffering memorialized as stasis (James Peebles here: “a static universe isn’t physically self-consistent). It is suffering as rationalization for continuing the empires of destruction, wreaking havoc and revenge on more innocents, continuing the whole ghastly process (“They will take evil and call it good. They will take the lie and call it the truth.”)

As for the historical record, it has always been a rather murky affair. In my entire lifetime, God has never spoken to me once out of the Whirlwind, and I have been waiting for 46 years to find out what really happened on November 22, 1963. Einstein said God doesn’t play dice with the Universe, and Bohr told Einstein to stop telling God what to do! God may not play dice, but He/She/It certainly keeps His/Her/Its cards close to His/Her/Its chest/bosom/ineffable mystery.

Which means I’ve got to keep digging. I have to keep disturbing the universe, checking my notes and revising my memes because in an expanding universe I don’t participate in cosmological events, but I can play my ant-like role in the evolution of awareness and consciousness. “War is finally about betrayal,” as Hedges succinctly and profoundly writes, and I need to know why and how a species that has evolved so magnificently in its technology has, when it comes to interacting with other sentient beings, stymied itself in the Age of Iron and Sky Gods. What gives? What mystery here?

Six million victims or one innocent victim—what compels us to slaughter the innocents under Herod, to crucify Christ for our sins, to burn John Hus for impiety? How shall we employ numbers to justify brutality? Did the death of 20 million Russians in the Great Patriotic War justify the rape of 2 million German women by Russian troops when the Third Reich collapsed? The ghost voices of tens of millions of native peoples of the Americas rise up and cry for justice. What reparations can we pay them? Millions of Africans, lost in the “Middle Passage” of the slave trips, sweated to death among the sugar canes of the Caribbean and the cotton and tobacco plantations of the New (old!) World—what memorials shall we build for them, what is their due?

How do we make equivalences? I suffered, my family suffered, my people suffered … therefore, I have the right to. … What? Wreak vengeance? Upon the innocents?

Probably it is too much to hope for forgiveness—either given or gotten. Humans are not, generally, constituted that way. Except for a few saints we’ve usually managed to crucify upside down, boil in oil, or murder with a thousand cuts.

But we may, possibly, hope for clarity, breaking the cycle of wrong for wrong, by excavating the truths, the hidden causes, penetrating the whirlwind of confusion and setting the record straight--because in this melange of pulsating life called Earth, it’s looking more and more like we’d better all pull on the oars together or we’re all going down together. And it looks more and more like Eugene Debs, who said so much well, said this one perfectly: “While there is one soul in prison, I am not free.”

What else but to know the true history of the human mind and heart—to extricate ourselves, to beam the searchlights in terra incognita, confront our demons, shake our wings loose from the chrysalis of so much ignorance, blood-lust, power-lusting, arrogance, fear, greed and stupidity?

Gary Corseri has published his work at hundreds of venues, including Thomas Paine's Corner, Dandelion Salad, CounterPunch, The New York Times, Village Voice and Dissident Voice. He has performed his work at the Carter Presidential Library and Museum and his dramas have been performed on Atlanta-PBS and elsewhere. He has taught in prisons and universities. His books include: Holy Grail, Holy Grail; A Fine Excess; and Manifestations (edited).

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Obamacare: A Health Care Rationing Scheme to Enrich Insurers, Drug Companies and Large Hospital Chains

141_cartoon_health_care_small

By Stephen Lendman

7/23/09

On February 24, Barack Obama told a joint session of Congress that "we must....address the crushing cost of health care....caus(ing) a bankruptcy in America every thirty seconds. By the end of the year, it could cause 1.5 million Americans to lose their homes. In (each of) the last eight years....one million....Americans have lost their health insurance....Given these facts, we can no longer afford to put health care reform on hold....health care reform cannot wait, it must not wait, and it will not wait another year."

Behind the facade of reform, Obama and leading Democrats ruled universal, single-payer coverage off the table before debate even began. Instead they've focused on taxing more, rationing care, placing profits above human need, disdaining vital change, shifting the cost burden to individuals and requiring everyone to be insured; imposing fines up to $1000 for non-compliance, and making a broken system even worse.



On June 10, Physicians for a National Health Program advisor Walter Tsou told the House Education and Labor Committee:

"Attempting to reconcile the dual imperatives of universal coverage and cost control through alternative methods besides single payer is an exercise in futility. When some congressional leaders declare that single payer is off the table, they are in effect saying that insurers will be protected, leaving the pain to patients, taxpayers and health care providers."

At the same hearing, the California Nurses Association and National Nurses Organizing Committee co-president Geri Jenkins said:

"The current system rations care based on an ability to pay. Right now we are the only nation on earth that barters human life for money."

The administration and lawmakers have been unresponsive in moving ahead with House and Senate legislation to enrich health insurers, Big Pharma, and large hospital chains. It will ration care, curb expensive treatments and surgeries for those who can't afford them, leave millions in the country uncovered, deny it altogether to undocumented immigrants even though they pay income, payroll and other taxes, and claim it's real reform like they always do.

On May 20, S. 1099: Patients' Choice Act was introduced "to provide comprehensive solutions for the health care system of the United States, and for other purposes." It was referred to the Senate Finance and Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committees (HELP) for consideration.

The Senate Finance Committee may craft its own version. On July 15 along party lines, HELP voted 13 - 10 to approve a $615 billion Democrat-sponsored bill that's substantially similar to House legislation with provisions that Obama wants.

On July 14, HR 3200: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 was introduced "To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes." It was referred to the following House committees for consideration: Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, Education and Labor, Oversight and Government Reform, and Budget.

House and Senate bills stress cost-containing "evidence-based" solutions with Obama appearing on a June 24 ABC News "Questions for the President: Prescription for America" infomercial touting his plan to carefully selected reporters and others invited to the White House East Room for a scripted Q & A.

Cutting costs and free-market solutions were emphasized, not real reform stressing human need with Obama saying "If we don't drive down costs, then we're not going to be able to achieve all of those other things." Which ones he didn't say before stressing the need for "evidence-based care," meaning less is better for those unable to pay so that millions will be sacrificed on the alter of cost containment while enriching private insurers, Big Pharma, and large hospital chains that will flourish as community and public ones shut down for lack of enough resources.

Obama was callous in saying "Loading up on additional tests or additional drugs" must be curbed. "Maybe (some would be) better off not having....surgery, but taking (a) painkiller" instead. He showed disdain and indifference in stating that "the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80% of the total health care bill out there" - the inference being ration their care and let 'em die to cut costs.

At the same time, he favored big insurers by saying that "One of the incentives for (them) to get involved in this process is that potentially they're going to have a whole bunch of new customers, paying customers....insurance companies will thrive" under this plan.

As for a "public option" to fill holes, Obama was receptive to alternatives but adamantly against universal single-payer coverage in saying: "For us to completely change our system, root and branch, would be hugely disruptive." Only market-based solutions will be considered along with huge cost-containment measures, mostly affecting millions of working Americans, the poor, elderly, and chronically ill.

Over the next decade, Medicare and Medicaid may lose over $600 billion in funding with recipients, of course, making up the difference or foregoing care. About $317 billion is proposed for "efficiencies" with another $313 billion in cuts for hospitals that treat the poor and uninsured. Many of them are already severely strapped as unemployment soars, charitable donations are down, expenses rise, vital services and staffs have to be cut to stay afloat, and growing numbers won't make it as economic conditions worsen.

Instead of helping to fill budget gaps, Obama plans less aid to shut them down. It will leave some areas dependent on more distant ones for treatment, and let large chains consolidate for greater dominance. Accessible quality care will be less available and affordable so, of course, patients will lose out - mostly the elderly, chronically ill, those on society's lower rungs, and all working Americans because an uncaring administration and Congress threw them overboard for profit and "efficiencies."

If "Obamacare" passes, most working people, the disadvantaged, and those singled out as less important will experience large rollbacks in quality, readily accessible coverage. For them, future health problems will be more hazardous than ever because a callous nation doesn't care.

On July 17 as expected, two of three key House committees passed HR 3200. Largely along party lines, Ways and Means voted 23 - 18. Education and Labor approved 26 - 22 with a Kucinich amendment that may not survive a floor vote or make it to the Senate.

It leaves HR 3200 intact but lets states create single-payer plans. Eight are now considering them - California, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Missouri, and Washington with perhaps more to follow.

On June 11 in Pennsylvania, HealthCare4ALLPA organized over 400 people for a state capital rally, and its Executive Director Chuck Pennachio predicts pending legislation passage later in the year because bipartisan support backs it. So do most Pennsylvanians, and Governor Ed Rendell said he'll sign what comes to his desk.

Kucinich hailed its importance in saying:

"There are many models of health care reform from which to choose around the world - the vast majority of which perform far better than ours. The one that has been the most tested here and abroad is single-payer. Under (it) everyone in the US would get a card that would allow access to any doctor at virtually any hospital. Doctors and hospitals would continue to be privately run, but the insurance payments would be in public hands. By getting rid of the for-profit insurance companies, we can save $400 billion per year and provide coverage for all medically necessary services for everyone in the US."

Tens of billions more annually could be saved if the government negotiated drug prices like it does for the Veterans Administration and Medicaid. The Congressional Budget Office estimated it would be $110 billion over 10 years for Medicare recipients alone, comprising about 15% of Americans. For the entire population, it would be much greater even though over-aged 65 people use more prescription drugs than any other age group.

A Fly in Obamacare's Ointment

One emerged on July 16 when Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Director Douglas Elmendorf told the Senate Budget Committee that health care bills under consideration will raise, not cut costs. "We do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending. On the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs" even though much of it is shifted to individuals.

Reversing its earlier opposition, the influential American Medical Association (AMA) endorsed the House bill after a new payments provision was added to halt scheduled 2010 cuts to doctors under Medicare.

AMA's president, Dr. James Rohack, said:

"We pledge to work with the House committees and leadership to build support for passage of health reform legislation to expand access to high quality affordable health care for all Americans." The AMA calls it "an important step, but one of many steps in the process," including income-increasing measures for their members and "individual responsibility for health insurance, including premium assistance for those who need it."

Opposing Obamacare are advocates for universal single-payer coverage like Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP). On July 16, it said the House health reform bill is a "proven failure" and called for an amendment to overturn it and implement a Medicare-for-all system.

PNHP's Dr. Quentin Young said similar state efforts repeatedly foundered. Citing Massachusetts' experience, he explained that "The state is dumping 30,000 legal residents off insurance, and the largest safety-net hospital is suing the state for decimating the hospital's budget to shore up reform. Meanwhile 1 in 6 (state) residents (can't) pay their medical bills, and 18% (of them) with insurance skipped care last year because they couldn't afford it. The Massachusetts model is no solution." Neither are House and Senate bills that will make a broken system worse. It will backtrack from real reform and make it harder than ever to implement. The time to do it right is now.

That's what Single Payer Action believes - "1,000,000 Strong for Single Payer, everybody in, nobody out." They're activists for "Medicare for all in our lifetimes." They're "sick that 22,000 Americans die every year from lack of health insurance; (that) health insurance companies (jack) up premiums while their....CEO's make out like bandits." They deplore pre-existing condition exclusions, "high deductibles, co-pays, and in-network, out-of-network Rube Goldberg" shenanigans in today's system. They'll keep confronting government and corporate officials until single-payer is the law of the land and America treats health care coverage like all other Western nations.

Democrats on Damage Control

After CBO Director Elmendorf's cost alert, Rep. Mike Ross (D. Ark.) said "There's no way they can pass this bill (as is) on the House floor. Not even close." Other House and Senate Democrats also expressed unease. Damage control followed.

Speaker Pelosi said a bill is on track for a floor vote before the House and Senate August 10 through Labor Day weekend recess. "We're in excellent shape," she told reporters in response to questions about growing breaks in the ranks.

Obama was just as positive in saying "Those who are betting against this happening this year are badly mistaken." In a lengthy prepared statement, he cited "unprecedented progress" so far "that will finally lower costs, guarantee coverage, and provide more choice....Let me repeat: Health insurance reform cannot add to our deficit over the next decade and I mean it....eventually this is going to happen."

Perhaps so with New York Times backing. A March 7 editorial said "President Obama has shown both courage and sound judgment pressing for quick action on comprehensive health care reform, even in the midst of the country's deep economic crisis. He has rightly stressed the urgency of reining in skyrocketing health care costs that are straining the budgets of families, businesses, and federal and state governments." Unmentioned was that insurance and drug company profiteers cause the problem or that universal single-payer coverage is the obvious, fairest, and only solution.

In a July 6 editorial, The Times referred to the "bloated, inefficient health care system," but stressed cost control on the backs of recipients, not providers, and perhaps raising taxes.

"The first task is to find savings. Some respected analysts suggest that as much as 30 percent of all health care spending in this country - some $700 billion a year - may be wasted on tests and treatments that do not improve the health of the recipients."

Unconsidered was the right of doctors and patients to assess problems and choose treatments, not elected officials, bureaucrats, unnamed analysts, or Times editorial writers. Yet the paper stressed the importance of "reallocating hundreds of billions of dollars from projected spending on Medicare and Medicaid (and) impos(ing) additional cuts after a few years if savings are less than projected." Again, The Times and other media sources stress market-based solutions and are mindless to the harm that Obama's plan will cause.

Possible Intrusive Provisions in Obamacare

On July 16, CNSNews.com's Editor-in-Chief Terence Jeffrey covered another concern that needs watching. He cited the "official summary" of the approved Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee's version of S. 1099 that:

"Authorizes a demonstration program to improve immunization coverage. Under this program, CDC will provide grants to states to improve immunization coverage of children, adolescents, and adults through the use of evidence-based interventions." The word "interventions" causes concern. "States may use funds to implement interventions that are recommended (or perhaps mandated) by the Community Preventive Services Task Force, such as reminders or recalls for patients or providers, or home visits." Including "home visits" suggests that perhaps immunization teams will intervene at personal residences to assure everyone is vaccinated if federal mandates order it.

S. 1099's Title III is also worrisome: "Improving the Health of the American People." Under Subtitle C: "Creating Healthier Communities," the Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary may "establish a demonstration program to award grants to states to improve the provision of recommended immunizations for children, adolescents, and adults through the use of evidence-based, population-based interventions for high-risk populations."

Under one of Title III's provisions, grant money may be used for home visit immunization "interventions." Specifically:

"Funds received under a grant under this subsection (Title III, Method E) shall be used to implement interventions that are recommended by the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (as established by the secretary, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) or other evidence-based interventions, including:"

"(A) providing immunization reminders or recalls for target populations of clients, patients, and consumers; (B) educating target populations and health care providers concerning immunizations in combination with one or more other interventions; (C) reducing out-of-pocket costs for families for vaccines and their administration; (D) carrying out immunization-promoting strategies for participants or clients of public programs, including assessments of immunization status, referrals to health care providers, education, provision of on-site immunizations, or incentives for immunization; (E) providing for home visits that promote (or perhaps mandate) immunization through education, assessments of need, referrals, provision of immunizations, or other services; (F) providing reminders or recalls for immunization providers; (G) conducting assessments of, and providing feedback to, immunization providers; or (H) any combination of one or more interventions described in this paragraph."

All Vaccines Are Hazardous

In three recent articles, this writer cited scientific evidence of hidden dangers in all vaccines. They contain squalene-based adjuvants that cause a host of annoying to life-threatening autoimmune diseases and must be avoided, even if mandated. It's also known that vaccines don't protect against diseases they're designed to prevent and often cause them.

Currently at issue is concern over Swine Flu and WHO's June 11 declaration of a global pandemic even though no forensic evidence links any deaths to H1N1. Yet experimental, untested, toxic and extremely dangerous vaccines are being rushed to market for potentially mandated immunizations globally as the fall flu season approaches. If enacted in time, Obamacare may provide cover, and if not, other US laws empower the HHS and Defense secretaries to declare a national emergency and compel everyone in the country to be vaccinated, even though submitting risks serious health consequences.

Staying alert is essential as Obamacare's passage will shift more of the health care burden on those who can least afford it and prepare Americans for hazardous mandatory Swine Flu vaccinations in the fall. Grassroots opposition to both schemes is vital to the health and well-being of everyone.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Wicked Witch Descends on the Animal Rights Conference 2009



By Dave Warwak

7/22/09

Our movement is represented by welfarists like Karen Dawn who are ruining the movement. Listening to their welfare bullshit during talks caused abolitionists within earshot to feel ill.

“Welfare is hurting the movement” Dr Will Tuttle, Animal Rights Conference 2009 Opening Plenary

Bob Linden gave a great talk at the Saturday session Engaging Media (news releases, letters to the editor, talk shows, feeding and care, dramatizing events) - Kuipers, Smith, Linden, Dawn

Linden wisely used a portion of his allotted 10-12 minutes and bashed the Humane Society of the United States’ Wayne Pacelle for his plans to sustain the corpse-munching status quo in his recent interview with Drovers rag---a pro-animal agriculture nightmare---with consequences so horrific and bizarre, not even a science fiction writer could dream this shit up.



Bob Linden is correct in that any rational vegan would admit, Wayne Pacelle’s comment, “We’re not telling people to become vegetarians  — we’re urging them to exhibit greater decency” reflects a disturbing philosophy to promote when ice caps are melting and a silent holocaust is going on three times a day.

Excerpts from Pacelle’s latest damage with Drovers:

Pacelle: We at the Humane Society of the United States don’t talk about animal rights, but human responsibility. That places us more with the comments that you represent from the agriculture community. I don’t think anyone can reasonably claim that our work is moving in the direction of eliminating animal agriculture as some of the folks in the industry keep repeating.

Adams: So your intent is not to shut down the livestock industry? Is that what you are saying?

Pacelle: Yes, that is correct. I don’t think in any kind of practical way one can say we are trying to eliminate animal agriculture. We support certified humane programs, we support other farmers, we work with farmers, we think farming is a noble profession

Full interview here: http://www.cattlenetwork.com/Content.asp?contentid=327066
During Linden’s talk, Karen Dawn (who was sitting next to Linden and about to speak next) was heard grunting, groaning and gasping in disgust as Linden used his time to bash Pacelle and the HSUS message/media engagement. Have no fear Dawn fans, she got the last word following Linden, instructing the audience that Linden’s remarks painted a bogus picture and to see her after the talk if they would like the real scoop. Yes, Karen Dawn invited people to speak with her later about the Pacelle comments and further explained the Engaging Media session was better suited to brag about her scrawny ass photographed in some New York rag inferring Bob Linden is misguided in his use/place/voice. I guess that is how we engage the media when we have no brains …we use our asses to peddle popular animal confinement, torture, and murder preservationist views.

Not one to talk behind people’s backs, I approached the moldy blood and pus munching Karen Dawn (Dawn was seen eating cheese at an upscale LA restaurant and explained, “I didn’t want to waste it”) later at her invite to discuss the Drovers interview. Dawn told me Bob Linden is a liar and that Wayne Pacelle didn’t say those things. As she spoke I could smell the wretched stench of happy meat permeating her words and had to inform her that I am an abolitionist and that I feel she is hurting the movement with her campaign for Prop 2 and refusal to use the word vegan. Dawn then claimed to be an abolitionist and a welfarist. I told her you can’t be both. This bitch is really confused about the state of things when she thinks the two can coexist in harmony. I’m not buying it.

I then asked Dawn if she lived during slavery and then were to describe her legacy to her great grand-children, would she want to tell them that she fought for better living conditions for the slaves or that she fought for their freedom? This question struck a nerve with Dawn who responded, “This isn’t about me, me, me!” raising her arms in a flapping motion with each “Me!” like some prehistoric giant lizard. Two more “Me’s!” would have sent the wicked witch of the west air-born like a cage-free chicken flailing for freedom. The exhibit hall grew quiet as everyone listened. Karen Dawn then cried out in a loud screech, “I might be wrong, you might be wrong” and stormed off effectively escaping any responsibility.

It would be nice if we could talk about/examine our beliefs without fear they might fall apart. Maybe in a better world we would all know what we are preaching to others about … the welfare of animals. I guess these things don’t deserve further examination when, Karen “I might be wrong” Dawn is at the helm. There is nothing well or fare about evil sorts munching on animals, so let’s call it what it is, “animal confinement, torture, and murder preservation.” And promoting the acceptability of these practices as an ideal is truly an evil pursuit. Are the animal agriculture industries funding Karen “I might be wrong” Dawn?

Anyways, feeling bad that I upset the bitch so much, I approached her at the bar later that night to apologize and show her a print-out of the Pacelle interview so she would realize that Bob Linden was telling the truth. Dawn wasn’t interested in my apology or the knowledge that she is the one who is full of happy meat. Dawn informed me in no uncertain terms that she knows the interview very well and that she doesn’t need the transcripts. I then asked her if she agreed with Pacelle’s views in the Drovers interview and she said, “Yes.” Shocked I backed up---careful as to not breathe her evil reptilian exhales and asked her again … to make sure I wasn’t caught in some sort of twisted time warp, “Do you agree with Wayne’s words?” Dawn responded, “Yes, I agree with everything Wayne said.”

Posers like Karen Dawn and Wayne Pacelle are hurting the movement when they are to busy fighting for cages that are 2 inches bigger as a path to guilt-free menstrual slurping---pleasing the bad man to no end---instead of fighting for veganism. And somehow Alex Hershaft believes moldy blood munching posers like Karen “I might be wrong” Dawn deserve prime speaking time at his annual conference.

Dave Warwak, TPC’s senior editor of radical veganism, is a meditator, philosopher, poet, humanitarian, artist, musician, and author of “Peep Show for Children Only”. Formerly a tenured middle school art teacher, he became an animal rights activist after he was notoriously fired for teaching kindness (veganism) to his students. Warwak’s mission has since been to tell children the truth about our world. He also publishes and edits Vegan School 101.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Friday, July 17, 2009

Communique Received: Animal Liberation Front Visits UC Irvine Vivisector Michael Selsted‏

Photobucket

July 16, 2009

Simulposted with NAALPO

Los Angeles: In a communique received by the North American Animal Liberation Press Office, members of the Animal Liberation Front claim to have sabotaged the property of a UC Irvine vivisector, who turns out to be Michael Selsted, involved in the killing of not only mice and rats, but non-human primates including baboons and macaques. Selsted recently took a leave of absence from UCI to work at the University of Southern California, but continues to reside in the University Hills area of Irvine. The action was confirmed by the UCI police department.

The communique, by an anonymous author:

On July 10, 2009 3 vehicles and the home of a UC Irvine vivisector were hit by the ALF.
1 of his cars (the fanciest of the 4 in front) was doused with paint stripper. 2 others had red paint poured all over them. More red paint was splattered across his driveway, and "KILLER" was spray painted in huge red letters across his garage door so that all his neighbors could see what a cruel, sick person they live near.


To the vivisector:

The red paint on your cars and home is a reminder that these things were purchased with the blood of tortured, innocent animals that are subjected to your sadistic experiments. We know this action was just a minor inconvenience for you, but we hope it makes you realize that your actions have consequences. We can only hope that one day someone will make you suffer as much as the animals in the laboratories you work in. Make the ethical decision (if not for the innocent animals, than for your own good.) Stop vivisection. --ALF

The Animal Liberation Front is a clandestine group of animal liberationists who utilize economic sabotage in addition to the direct liberation of animals from conditions of abuse and imprisonment. By making it more expensive to trade in the lives of innocent beings, the ALF maintains the atrocities are likely to occur in smaller numbers; their goal is to abolish the exploitation, imprisonment, torture and killing of innocent, non-human animals.

Vivisection, or experimentation on animals, is not only an evil that is perpetrated on millions of innocent animals, but is also scientifically fraudulent. While 20,000 children worldwide die every month from lack of access to clean water, vivisectors in University of California laboratories are wasting money addicting primates to crystal methamphetamines, gluing coils to the globes of their eyes and doing other inhumane and painful experiments on other species of animals, including cats, dogs, pigs, mice and birds.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Taking Shorter Showers Doesn't Cut It: Why Personal Change Does Not Equal Political Change

Photobucket

By Derrick Jensen

This article was first published in the July/August 2009 issue of Orion Magazine.

We can follow the example of those who remembered that the role of an activist is not to navigate systems of oppressive power with as much integrity as possible, but rather to confront and take down those systems.

Would any sane person think dumpster diving would have stopped Hitler, or that composting would have ended slavery or brought about the eight-hour workday, or that chopping wood and carrying water would have gotten people out of Tsarist prisons, or that dancing naked around a fire would have helped put in place the Voting Rights Act of 1957 or the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Then why now, with all the world at stake, do so many people retreat into these entirely personal “solutions”?

Part of the problem is that we’ve been victims of a campaign of systematic misdirection. Consumer culture and the capitalist mindset have taught us to substitute acts of personal consumption (or enlightenment) for organized political resistance. An Inconvenient Truth helped raise consciousness about global warming. But did you notice that all of the solutions presented had to do with personal consumption—changing light bulbs, inflating tires, driving half as much—and had nothing to do with shifting power away from corporations, or stopping the growth economy that is destroying the planet? Even if every person in the United States did everything the movie suggested, U.S. carbon emissions would fall by only 22 percent. Scientific consensus is that emissions must be reduced by at least 75 percent worldwide.



Or let’s talk water. We so often hear that the world is running out of water. People are dying from lack of water. Rivers are dewatered from lack of water. Because of this we need to take shorter showers. See the disconnect? Because I take showers, I’m responsible for drawing down aquifers? Well, no. More than 90 percent of the water used by humans is used by agriculture and industry. The remaining 10 percent is split between municipalities and actual living breathing individual humans. Collectively, municipal golf courses use as much water as municipal human beings. People (both human people and fish people) aren’t dying because the world is running out of water. They’re dying because the water is being stolen.

Or let’s talk energy. Kirkpatrick Sale summarized it well: “For the past 15 years the story has been the same every year: individual consumption—residential, by private car, and so on—is never more than about a quarter of all consumption; the vast majority is commercial, industrial, corporate, by agribusiness and government [he forgot military]. So, even if we all took up cycling and wood stoves it would have a negligible impact on energy use, global warming and atmospheric pollution.”

Or let’s talk waste. In 2005, per-capita municipal waste production (basically everything that’s put out at the curb) in the U.S. was about 1,660 pounds. Let’s say you’re a die-hard simple-living activist, and you reduce this to zero. You recycle everything. You bring cloth bags shopping. You fix your toaster. Your toes poke out of old tennis shoes. You’re not done yet, though. Since municipal waste includes not just residential waste, but also waste from government offices and businesses, you march to those offices, waste reduction pamphlets in hand, and convince them to cut down on their waste enough to eliminate your share of it. Uh, I’ve got some bad news. Municipal waste accounts for only 3 percent of total waste production in the United States.

I want to be clear. I’m not saying we shouldn’t live simply. I live reasonably simply myself, but I don’t pretend that not buying much (or not driving much, or not having kids) is a powerful political act, or that it’s deeply revolutionary. It’s not. Personal change doesn’t equal social change.

So how, then, and especially with all the world at stake, have we come to accept these utterly insufficient responses? I think part of it is that we’re in a double bind. A double bind is where you’re given multiple options, but no matter what option you choose, you lose, and withdrawal is not an option. At this point, it should be pretty easy to recognize that every action involving the industrial economy is destructive (and we shouldn’t pretend that solar photovoltaics, for example, exempt us from this: they still require mining and transportation infrastructures at every point in the production processes; the same can be said for every other so-called green technology). So if we choose option one—if we avidly participate in the industrial economy—we may in the short term think we win because we may accumulate wealth, the marker of “success” in this culture. But we lose, because in doing so we give up our empathy, our animal humanity. And we really lose because industrial civilization is killing the planet, which means everyone loses. If we choose the “alternative” option of living more simply, thus causing less harm, but still not stopping the industrial economy from killing the planet, we may in the short term think we win because we get to feel pure, and we didn’t even have to give up all of our empathy (just enough to justify not stopping the horrors), but once again we really lose because industrial civilization is still killing the planet, which means everyone still loses. The third option, acting decisively to stop the industrial economy, is very scary for a number of reasons, including but not restricted to the fact that we’d lose some of the luxuries (like electricity) to which we’ve grown accustomed, and the fact that those in power might try to kill us if we seriously impede their ability to exploit the world—none of which alters the fact that it’s a better option than a dead planet. Any option is a better option than a dead planet.

Besides being ineffective at causing the sorts of changes necessary to stop this culture from killing the planet, there are at least four other problems with perceiving simple living as a political act (as opposed to living simply because that’s what you want to do). The first is that it’s predicated on the flawed notion that humans inevitably harm their landbase. Simple living as a political act consists solely of harm reduction, ignoring the fact that humans can help the Earth as well as harm it. We can rehabilitate streams, we can get rid of noxious invasives, we can remove dams, we can disrupt a political system tilted toward the rich as well as an extractive economic system, we can destroy the industrial economy that is destroying the real, physical world.

The second problem—and this is another big one—is that it incorrectly assigns blame to the individual (and most especially to individuals who are particularly powerless) instead of to those who actually wield power in this system and to the system itself. Kirkpatrick Sale again: “The whole individualist what-you-can-do-to-save-the-earth guilt trip is a myth. We, as individuals, are not creating the crises, and we can’t solve them.”

The third problem is that it accepts capitalism’s redefinition of us from citizens to consumers. By accepting this redefinition, we reduce our potential forms of resistance to consuming and not consuming. Citizens have a much wider range of available resistance tactics, including voting, not voting, running for office, pamphleting, boycotting, organizing, lobbying, protesting, and, when a government becomes destructive of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we have the right to alter or abolish it.

The fourth problem is that the endpoint of the logic behind simple living as a political act is suicide. If every act within an industrial economy is destructive, and if we want to stop this destruction, and if we are unwilling (or unable) to question (much less destroy) the intellectual, moral, economic, and physical infrastructures that cause every act within an industrial economy to be destructive, then we can easily come to believe that we will cause the least destruction possible if we are dead.

The good news is that there are other options. We can follow the examples of brave activists who lived through the difficult times I mentioned—Nazi Germany, Tsarist Russia, antebellum United States—who did far more than manifest a form of moral purity; they actively opposed the injustices that surrounded them. We can follow the example of those who remembered that the role of an activist is not to navigate systems of oppressive power with as much integrity as possible, but rather to confront and take down those systems.

© 2009 Orion

Derrick Jensen is an activist and the author of many books, most recently What We Leave Behind and Songs of the Dead.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Terrorism Act 2000 urgent alert to all activists coming into the UK

dscn396326150001

By Lynn Sawyer

Stopped at Birmingham International airport

7/1/09

Terrorism Act 2000 urgent alert to all activists coming into the UK

As far as I know this law has been used to detain and question activists only once before at a sea port. So has rarely been used by police against activists. Two of us were detained last night on flying back from Oslo and arriving at Birmingham. And I feel that it is important that other activists are aware of these extraordinary police powers and how to avoid them intruding where they really should not. My companion and I were released after a few hours of what they called “examination.” We did talk to lawyers and there was a bit of comedy value to the whole farce, so it was not all bad. BUT they can stop and question ANYONE they want, so be prepared all who wish to enter the UK--whatever your beliefs are and whatever your activism entails.

We walked through the passport bit and were stopped by a Detective Constable called Jack 3876 and a woman 1245 from West Midlands police who wanted to know our names and addresses and occupations, where we had been, what we had done, who we had met etc. A little bemused by the questioning I stopped answering at “occupation” (let alone who, what why, where...) and lo and behold they decided that they had suspicions and that they wanted a more cosy little chat. We were taken to a desk and told to fill in cards which included information about name, address, date of birth etc. We filled in what we could (i.e. not a lot) and then came questions about how we paid for flights. They then looked at my credit card which is a Visa and has for many years paid some small amount to Amnesty International and has the AI logo on it. They really did not like this, saying that caring about human rights was suspicious. We were detained under the Terrorism Act 2000 and separated for questioning.

For those who are not aware, PACE does not apply in this instance. It appears (as this has not been challenged in court) that the detained person commits an offence under this act if s/he refuses to answer any questions, and they were getting quite cross with me when I did not “cooperate” almost shouting “you HAVE to answer”. For those who utter the mantra “if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about” the questions included asking about my parents details, if I had any children, work, colleagues, friends, if I had a partner, any drug addictions, religious beliefs-- all in all far beyond the remit of preventing terrorism and well into the realms of a gigantic fishing expedition coupled with threats of prolonged incarceration. I was under the distinct impression that if I did answer a question about my mother, for example, that it would lead to many more questions of a personal nature. So I refused to play that little game.



First they tried to intimidate by saying that if I did not answer questions that they would hold me for 9 hours, arrest me under the Terrorism Act, hold me for 48 hours, and then apply to a magistrate and hold me for 7 days. This was followed by an emphasis on the fact that unlike under PACE I was not entitled to free legal advice with them implying that it would cost a fortune to access a lawyer. I demanded one anyway (and would advise others to do the same-- money can be raised afterwards) and spoke to a good human rights lawyer who helped me as much as he was able. They can (if a Superintendant believes it is appropriate) refuse ANY access to a lawyer or 48 hours, I was apparently not entitled to a private conversation with my lawyer. Police were present at all times and if PACE applied it would have been breached. As the attempts at intimidation did not work and Gene Hunt declined an appearance, it was then on to sympathising with animal rights (ohh I HATE fur etc etc ad infinitum). This then went on to trying to provoke anger which consisted of getting out all my T shirts and taking the piss out of some of the sentiments written on them. For example, “What’s wrong with angling?” using a rather mocking tone and then writing down all the slogans. They seemed to like the SPEAK T-shirt especially and were going to keep it at one point. Runners up were the WARN hoodie and a CAFT T shirt, which I admit has a naughty word on it! This was rather amusing, I must say.

They were interested in who I knew, who the organisers of the organisation are (what organisation? you may ask dear reader and no I don’t know either), religion, philosophy, who I had met and lots of other stuff. None of this was taped. Our little chum Jack just wrote down his questions, my “no comments”, silences and occasional answers to questions which I believed harmed no one (i.e. “no I am not a drug addict, no I do not have any bombs or stuff.”) Now those who enjoy a good rant could have all sorts of fun if careful pertaining to beliefs and obsessions, such as being a Jedi or something, but I was good and did not indulge in this sort of fun; it would have been cruel. I was ever more conscious that answering any questions about others was not only utterly unethical (i.e. grassing) but would lead to many more questions. For example, had I answered “Bill” in response to the question “whom did you meet?,” they would have had a whole new avenue of questioning about Bill, his Mum, his Mum’s goldfish and what they have for dinner, what time and all his associates, and all their associates and so on and so on. Logic decreed that they were probably pushing their boundaries to the legal limits and that if I wanted to get out that giving the police the infinite boring details about my life and everyone else I know was not the sensible way to do it.

The police have kept my mobile phone. They have also photocopied every piece of paper I had, including credit card receipts, notebook and diary. In retrospect it was not too clever to have such things so easily accessible but I am sure that it is possible that if my sim card was hidden that they might have gone looking for it. I should imagine that they would have got really excited if I had a laptop on me. I was given a pat down search and not strip searched. I was only held for a couple of hours and a file might be going to the CPS to say that I was uncooperative, which might be an offence.

The information given to me is retyped word for word below:

“THE TERRORISM ACT 2000

Notice of Examination

General

This notice is to inform you that you are being questioned under the provisions of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 as someone whose presence at the port of Birmingham is believed to be connected with entering or leaving Great Britain or Northern Ireland or travelling by air within Northern Ireland or Great Britain. This in itself does not necessarily mean that the examining officer who is questioning you suspects that you are a person who is, or has been, concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism. The purpose of the questioning is to enable him to determine whether you appear to be such a person.

Your duties

You have a duty to be truthful and to give the examining officer all the information in your possession which the officer requests. You must also give to him, if he so requests, a valid passport, or other document which establishes your identity. You must also declare whether you have with you any documents o a kind specified by the officers, and if he so requests, give them to him. The Examining officer may also search your luggage.

The examining officer may, for the purpose of examination, detain any document which you have given to him, or anything found during a search of your luggage, for a period not exceeding 7 days (beginning with the day on which the detention commenced).

You may also be asked, or have been asked, to complete and hand to the officer an arrival or embarkation card. If so you have a duty to comply with that request.

If you deliberately fail to comply with any of these duties, you could be prosecuted under paragraph 18(1) of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000.

Your Rights

You may, if you so request, have someone close to you, or known to you or likely to take an interest in your welfare informed that you are being questioned and where you are. You can do this at public expense. You may also consult a solicitor, wither in person, in writing or by telephone. If you do not wish to make a request now you can still do so later at any time.

Detention

The examining officer also has the authority to detain you, if necessary, for up to 9 hours from the time your examination began.

The Terrorism Act 2000

Notice of Detention

To ...........

You have been detained under the provisions of Schedule 7 paragraph 6 of the Terrorism Act 2000, so that an Examining Officer may exercise his power under paragraph 2 to determine if you are a person who has been involved in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.

Do you want someone informed?

You may, if you wish at public expense, have a friend, a relative, a person who is known to you, or is likely to take an interest in your welfare, informed that you are being detained here. Under the provisions of Schedule 8, para 8 of the Terrorism Act 2000 or Schedule 8, para 16 in Scotland, an officer of at least the rank of Superintendent may delay this right for up to 48 hours.

Do you want to contact a solicitor?

You may consult either in person, in writing or on the telephone, privately with a solicitor. If you do not wish to do so now, you may do so later and at any time while you are detained. Under the provisions of Schedule 8 para 8 of the Terrorism Act 2000 or Schedule 8, para 16 in Scotland, an officer of at least the rank of Superintendant may delay this right for up to 48 hours.”

So there we are a nice little loophole for the police to exploit away from the watchful eye of PACE to bully and harass those they decree are subversives. The main issue is that no activist should endanger themselves or another to escape what would appear to be a minor charge as it is summary with a maximum sentence of 3 months. I suspect few have been stopped like this but a strategy is needed and activists either returning to the UK or visiting need not to be frightened or paranoid but mentally prepared. Comments, advice, feedback etc would be most welcome.

In Oslo FIT were present and working with Norwegian police (i.e. Sergeant Sully from the Met’ CO996 and a South Yorkshire cop from Barnsley police station 1818). Both are well known to animal rights activists and have been on many other demos, like Climate Camp. The police state is ever more oppressive.

Oh by the way, DC 1245 was absolutely right; I have put this up on the internet. Sorry to be so predictable but there you are. It is only fair to warn people that first of all, the police do have extraordinary powers at ports, secondly that these powers appear not yet to have been fully challenged, and thirdly that however grim this may appear that there is no reason to furnish the police with information which is beyond their remit. There is no reason to give the police personal information about self or anything at all about other people.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Saturday, July 11, 2009

The Continued Fleecing Of America And Its Citizens By The Financial Elites

bail_dees

Overview:

Is the USA turning into a plutocratic, oligarchical or fascist nation? A growing body of evidence seems to suggest that the answer is affirmative. Especially this is likely the case while the country and its citizens continue to be plundered by greedy affluent lawmakers, banksters and entrepreneurs for personal gain. Meanwhile, it would be well for them and us to note Justice Louis D. Brandeis's implicit warning that "we can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both."

By Emily Spence

7/11/2009

Many people are raised with an orientation, indeed an imperative sense, that puts compassion and ethics -- ones values and principles -- as central to their dealings with others. This foundation becomes part of their identities and shapes the directions that their lives take.

One does not have to look only at charitable institutions to find this to be the case. One can see it in the teacher who works day after day against daunting odds to uplift materially disadvantaged children living in extreme slums. Further, the Girl Scouts, who devise a special project at a senior center, exemplify this mind set when they earnestly strive to bring joy to the elderly of whom many are on their last legs. Likewise, the social workers tirelessly toiling to help families whose homes have been foreclosed and the countless volunteers who gather supplies for victims of disasters typify this focus.



Therefore, one has to wonder about the morality of numerous U.S. government and business leaders, especially the ones who routinely put their own limitless self-gain above the needs of others. What sorts of people are these? Just how did their families and society in general fail them in matters of conscience?

In considering the answers, one often winds up incredulous and outraged by their actions. After all, what kinds of individuals lie about their underlying motives while they systematically destroy the people, the culture and the country of Iraq primarily in order to wrestle control of their oil for companies that favor American interests? What sort of individuals condone torture as their nation's covert plan to help ensure that domination of the Middle East can be better assured? What sort of individuals publicly talk of service to society and change in which we can all believe while expanding resource wars in order to secure geo-political supremacy over regions rich in fossil fuels at a time during which scientific evidence inarguably points to the need to direct national focus on benign forms of energy?

Certainly, they are aware that this redirection of plans is a necessary precondition for future generations to not face a living hell on Earth due to climate change effects. Surely they must know that they have no moral or legal right to invade other lands for coveted war spoils regardless of the degree that they seem essential to have. Do they?

It is especially worthwhile to ponder the responses to these kinds of questions as one, also, considers that these same individuals, of whom many are U.S. Congressmen, annually allocate fifty-four percent of the federal budget to military related endeavors. Simultaneously, they are mandated to hand over nineteen percent further to the ongoing payment of interest on monies currently owed to maintain their present scale of funding for armed service, bailouts and other reckless ventures.

These circumstances leave a whopping twenty-seven percent left for ALL other U.S. programs unless, of course, further loans beyond the ongoing intended ones are taken out, i.e., to purchase Swine Flu vaccines. With these additional costs in mind, one can anticipate that legislators will continue in arrangements to borrow staggering sums of money to sustain their disastrous spending patterns, as is mentioned in "The U.S. Federal Budget Pipeline: Where Do The Dollars Drain?" All the while that individual States, like California, and individuals continue to be devastated by the indirect consequences.

In a similar vein, one questions about the morality of people who keep supporting big business practices and amassing wealth for themselves [1] like modern duplicates of mad King Midas while an increasing number of their fellow Americans wind up jobless and homeless. Meanwhile, a backdrop like this leads Ramsey Clark to suggest, "But we're not a democracy. It’s a terrible misunderstanding and a slander to the idea of democracy to call us that. In reality, we're a plutocracy: a government by the wealthy."

Accordingly, U.S. employment positions continue to transfer to offshore sites to bolster a plan for maximum profits for the already grossly enriched at the expense of the populace at large. Analogously for companies on U.S. soil, cutbacks and closures have a similarly deleterious effect in terms of under and unemployment.

In relation, the public, obviously, cannot make lots of purchases while an inadequate supply of money is coming into households during which time store shelves are overstocked due to past practices wherein the market became saturated with far too many items for a wide variety of products. Consequently, the manufacture of goods grinds to an almost complete halt and the economy continues to tumble.

Yet no Works Progress Administration (WPA) and extended Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) programs are put in place to make up for the financial deficits that average people are experiencing even though the move could, indirectly, jumpstart spending. Further, the groups that stand to fabulously benefit from the status quo remaining as is continue to do so even as the masses flounder.

As Paul Kane points out in "Lawmakers Reveal Health-Care Investments" [2]:

"The list of [lawmakers] who have personal investments in the corporations that will be affected by the [health-care] legislation -- which President Obama has called this year's highest domestic priority -- includes Congress's most powerful leaders and a bipartisan collection of lawmakers in key committee posts. Their total health-care holdings could be worth $27 million, because congressional financial disclosure forms released yesterday require reporting of only broad ranges of holdings rather than precise values of assets."

"Health care is not the only industry that is both heavily regulated by Congress and heavily invested in by lawmakers. As The Washington Post reported Thursday, more than 20 members of the House leadership and the House Financial Services Committee hold investments in companies that received more than $200 billion in federal bailouts."

"On the Senate banking committee, at least a half-dozen senators had significant investments in companies that benefited from the $700 billion bailout legislation that the panel helped draft last fall. Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) reported $18,000 to $95,000 in investments in Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae bonds, and also that he sold at least $15,000 in Fannie 'step-up' bonds at the end of last year. The committee's ranking Republican, Sen. Richard C. Shelby (Miss.), reported holding $260,000 to $850,000 in money market and retirement accounts with Countrywide, Citigroup and Wachovia."

Now contrast their bounty with these stark facts of which all were derived from Michael Moore's investigations. [3] (One can agree with his overall perceptions or not. Either way, it does not change the basic actualities.)

"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention actually reported that 54.5 million people were uninsured for at least part of the year. Health Insurance Coverage: Early Release of Estimates from the National Health Interview Survey, 2006. Centers for Disease Control. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/insur200706.pdf"

"According to the most recent estimate from the Congressional Budget Office issued in January of this year [2007], for the ten-year period, 2006 through 2016, the projected spending [for medical purposes] is $848 billion.”The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2008 to 2017," Congressional Budget Office, January 2007. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/77xx/doc7731/01-24-BudgetOutlook.pdf"

"At one point, Moore notes where the U.S. ranks in terms of health care around the world.’The United States slipped to No. 37 in health care around the world, just slightly ahead of Slovenia,' he said. That ranking is based on a 2000 report from the World Health Organization..."

Meanwhile, the healthcare industry lobbyists are trying their utmost to guarantee that there are no major shifts in US medical policies. Why would they press for alternatives when it has proven to be such a boon for them and many legislators to keep everything the same? Therefore, they throw almost a million and a half dollars per day at the effort to shape Congressional opinion while sometimes bribing or threatening government officials in the process. [4]

Concurrently, let's not forget that these tempted lawmakers are the very same ones who vote on war and black ops budgets for which, if they make certain choices, they'll be lavishly compensated with money for their reelection campaigns, as well as receive stock option tips and other perks, such as highly lucrative job offers after they leave public office. All considered, what a boon such alluring plans en toto have been!

For example, "members of Congress invested nearly 196 million dollars of their own money in companies that receive hundreds of millions of dollars a day from Pentagon."[5] At the same time, the heads of companies that receive favorable legislation pertaining to subsidies and bailout cash do not make out poorly either. As such, the salaries for directors of certain organizations and their bonus payments are considerable and, for the ones who don't get direct funding, they still make out well due to favorable deals made relative to resources (i.e., the petrol, minerals, metals, etc.) indirectly obtained through U.S. military assaults.

As such, they can do well for themselves even when they do not make out as well as the banking/oil Rockefeller family or the Rothschilds, with their respective holdings equaling roughly (US) $11 trillion and (U.S.) $100 trillion according to Gaylon Ross Sr., author of Who's Who of the Global Elite. [6] Correspondingly, Bank of America chief Ken Lewis made a mere $24.8 million in 2007 while performance bonuses were lavishly paid out in this banksters' paradise, one managed so poorly that it has taken in at least $25 billion in bailout funds. [7]

This sort of happening being more the norm than not, it is apparent that no importance has been attached to Abraham Lincoln's counsel: "I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country; corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in High Places will follow, and the Money Power of the Country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the People, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war."

With the beefed up surveillance of private citizens by operatives in assorted government agencies and the above sorts of disasters, some researchers are understandably questioning whether the U.S. is slipping towards a permanent plutocratic, oligarchical and/or fascist state. If so for the latter condition, the opinions of Naomi Wolf and Laurence Britt, as well as this following description from the Wikipedia anti-capitalism section, [8] might have an uncomfortable ring of familiarity.

"...Fascism protected the land-owning elites and is regarded as a reaction against the rising power of the working class...

"Adolf Hitler stated in Mein Kampf that 'the attitude of the State towards capital would be comparatively simple and clear. Its only object would be to make sure that capital remained subservient to the State'. Hitler made a clear distinction between 'capital which is purely the product of creative labour and ... capital which is exclusively the result of financial speculation.'...

"Marxists argue that fascism is a form of state capitalism that emerges when laissez-faire capitalism is in crisis and in need of rescue by government intervention. Fascists have operated from a Social Darwinist view of human relations. Their aim has been to promote 'superior' individuals and weed out the weak. In terms of economic practice, this meant promoting the interests of successful businessmen while destroying trade unions and other organizations of the working class. Lawrence Britt suggests that protection of corporate power is an essential part of fascism. Historian Gaetano Salvemini argued in 1936 that fascism makes taxpayers responsible to private enterprise, because 'the State pays for the blunders of private enterprise... Profit is private and individual. Loss is public and social.'

"Classical liberal economist Ludwig von Mises argued that fascism was collectivist and anti-capitalistic. According to Mises, fascism maintained an illusion of respecting private property, since individuals could not use their property how they wished because the government frequently enacted regulations (on behalf of government allies in the business sector) that were not in line with the functioning of a free market.

"Historian Robert Paxton contends that fascists' anti-capitalism was highly selective; the socialism that the fascists wanted was National Socialism, which denied only foreign or enemy property rights (including that of internal enemies). They did, however, cherish national producers."

One might add that they particularly cherish fiscal producers, wizards that magically pull a seemingly endless stream of money out of the air for their favorite recipients. As H. L. Birum, Sr., suggests, "The Federal Reserve Bank is nothing but a banking fraud and an unlawful crime against civilization. Why? Because they 'create' the money made out of nothing, and our Uncle Sap Government issues their 'Federal Reserve Notes' and stamps our Government approval with NO obligation whatever from these Federal Reserve Banks, Individual Banks or National Banks, etc."

Moreover, one can easily supplement his views with those of John Adams: "Banks have done more injury to the religion, morality, tranquility, prosperity, and even wealth of the nation than they can have done or ever will do good." (Can you imagine the comments that John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin and other founders of the nation would make were they to observe a number of contemporary Congressional activities in relation to banks and other organizations?)

At the same time, it's not all that hard to conclude that, for some time, U.S. government policy has been one typically called "last man standing." In other words, it is to throw the majority of federal funds into an effort to commandeer the last amounts of nonrenewable (and, in some cases, renewable, although depleting) critical material goods (through global resource battles, programs like NAFTA and so forth) with a sort of survival of the fittest (a modernized Social Darwinian derivative) model in mind.

As Henry Kissinger quipped, "Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy" and "control oil and you control nations; control food and you control the people." In other words, let's use the troops to enforce hegemony everywhere!

With such a Machiavellian frame of reference for expert guidance, the majority of US federal funds, of course, will continue to be slated for such endeavors as broadening wars, interest payments on further borrowed money and ongoing bailouts. In a similar vein, the fittest do not include the looted American middle and poor classes. They are immaterial and, as such, are mostly ignored or, if in terribly dire straits, pushed out of homes to live in city streets (90,000 in L.A. alone), tent cities (updated Hoovervilles) and car parks if they are fortunate enough to still have a vehicle in which to live after their domiciles are foreclosed and their jobs are removed. (Meanwhile, such loss is simply another program to enhance the monetary advancement by the elites -- the ones fittest to survive in the ever worsening environmental and financial downturns brought on by draconian economic growth policies.)

In the end, one has to ask whether practices that are aimed at government and business leaders mutually servicing each other represent the best interests of Americans and other peoples of the world. Assuming that this is not the case, great accountability must be demanded of these so-called leaders.

If they cannot be made to conform to reasonable moral codes of conduct, the USA will surely become a terrible place to be a citizen for the majority of people who find that, while conditions in their personal lives deteriorate, the wealthy elites make out just fine due to self-enriching agendas, like deficient public health-care programs, that put everyone else in jeopardy. Put another way, "we can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." - Justice Louis D. Brandeis

Emily Spence is an author living in Massachusetts. She has spent many years involved in human rights, environmental and social services efforts.

References:

[1] Google Answers: average income of members of the u.s. congress (http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=85943)

and The Congressional Millionaires Club (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11104.htm).

[2] Lawmakers Reveal Health-Care Investments (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/12/AR2009061204075.html?sid=ST2009061204093).

[3] MichaelMoore.com : SiCKO : 'SiCKO' News : AP vs. THE ... (http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/news/article.php?id=9990).

[4] Health-care industry spending over $1.4 million per day on lobbying (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/05/AR2009070502770.html),

Ethics Panel Rebukes DeLay (washingtonpost.com) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63387-2004Sep30.html),

DownWithTyranny!: Has The Heath Care Industry Bribed Enough ... (http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2009/03/has-heath-care-industry-bribed-enough.html),

MEDIGATE (http://lautenberg.senate.gov/documents/domestic/medicare/medigate.pdf),

Econbrowser: Fiscal Exposure and Medicare Part D (http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2006/01/fiscal_exposure.html),

Lies, bribes and hidden costs - Salon.com (http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/04/05/medicare/)

and Who tried to bribe Rep. Smith? - By Timothy Noah - Slate Magazine (http://www.slate.com/id/2091787/).

[5] FINANCE: U.S. Lawmakers Invested in Iraq, Afghanistan Wars - ... (www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41893).

[6] The True Evil Doers (http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archives/2009/06/the_true_evil_d.html).

[7] Obama talks tough on CEO pay - Feb. 4, 2009 (http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/04/news/obama.exec.pay.fortune/index.htm),

Executive PayWatch Database (http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/ceou/database.cfm),

Bank Of America To Get Billions More In Bailout ... (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/14/bank-of-america-to-get-bi_n_158034.html),

BANK OF AMERICA HAS YET TO REPAY BAILOUT FUNDS TO TARP - New ... (http://www.nypost.com/seven/06182009/business/bailout_bonus_at_bofa_174854.htm)

and BofA receives another $20 billion from U.S. bailout fund - ... (http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/16/news/companies/bofa_new_bailout/index.htm).

[8] Naomi Wolf: Fascist America, in 10 easy steps | World news | ... (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment),

George W Bush and the 14 points of fascism - Project for the ... (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm),

and Anti-capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-capitalism).

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Places of refuge for non-performers in a performance-based culture....

hillside

Submitted by Alison Banville

7/11/09

The statement below was up on display at various places around Hillside Sanctuary which I visited last week. It is their second site, a horse sanctuary that could no longer be run by its elderly owners, which was taken over, and rescued farm animals given homes there too.

It's a fabulous place and organization. Hillside's undercover work is second to none and their footage has been used on many tv programmes over here exposing factory farming conditions. It is them I am working with on the Freedom Food campaign I was telling you about. I met lovely sheep and pigs there, chickens, rabbits, goats, horses, llama, geese, turkeys, donkeys. All saved from horrors and safe for the rest of their lives!

The Meaning of Sanctuary

Beth is the kind of animal that meets no current social criteria that would justify her continued existence. She has a scarred face from past serious eye problems which douses any romantic thoughts of a 'beautiful equine'. She constantly requires special attention and a very understanding and patient farrier. Beth just doesn't make the grade in any way that would make her 'useable' again. In her slow-gaited existence, she represents the epitome of the unuseable, unproductive and therefore disposable life form. But to those of us at Hillside, Beth is also the reason society needs places such as ours; places of refuge for non-performers in a performance-based culture.

Beth, and all of the others to whom we have given sanctuary from abuse, neglect and slaughter, are mere whispers in a world roaring with the importance of words such as performance, competence, viability and productivity. Beth represents the almost forgotten values of other words, such as kindness, compassion, inherent value and community. For if the word performance is needed greater than kindness, then there is no place in this world for Beth. And the hunger that many of us feel for a more compassionate world will go unfulfilled.

Beth takes up so little room, and yet because she can no longer 'perform' she would be denied even that space. And in society's denial of space, a final 'use' found for her. She would be sent to the slaughterhouse to endure all its terrors, so that she can be food for the tables of Europe and profits for corporate giants. Beth and others like her are our only defence for the decision to provide sanctuary for all animals in need, instead of choosing only those that could be loaned to new families. The path to rehabilitate the 'rideable' and 'useable' horse, although somethimes well meaning, is too easily lost in the many justifications for performance-based value.

Sanctuary, on the other hand, is one of those words that picks at the collective conscience of society. It picks at it because Beth needs sanctuary, not from a great evil out 'there' somewhere, but because she needs it from us, the you and me that make up society. Because such value is put on performance, horses are in jeopardy from the moment they are born. But then that should not be any great surprise, for each of us learns from an early age that our value as individuals is directly linked to whether or not we can perform, produce or be competent at something.

This is why Beth becomes important. She is a gentle, but 'imperfect' being, vulnerable in her inability to perform anymore, and put before us to ponder her fate. The decisions we make about Beth, and thousands like her, become measures of who we really are as individuals and as a society. Our collective character is shaped, not by the decisons we make about the beautiful, powerul or competent, it is shaped by how we treat the weakest and neediest amongst us. So, when adults and children come to visit the animals, we speak to them about the importance of a world where there is room for 'imperfection'. And as they watch Beth nap in the sun or amble around with her companions they are able to see the meaning of sanctuary, for it is painted in the bold colours of Beth's living, breathing existence. And because there is a place of hope and healing for Beth, then maybe, just maybe, there is a place of hope and healing for the rest of us.

Alison Banville, TPC’s UK editor of total liberation, is a long-term campaigner on rights for human and nonhuman animals, the environment, and political issues. She is committed to showing how they are all interconnected. Alison is also a singer, lyricist, and teacher, and she has a keen interest in vegan health and fitness.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

MEAT. IT'S WHAT'S FOR MURDER.



By Vi Ransel

7/11/09

It invariably comes down not to "their" eating other animals that have been killed for them, but our "killing" plants and eating them. In an effort to derail discussion and take the spotlight off the issue, meat-eaters refuse to deal seriously with the topic, remaining in denial, or refusing to interrupt the delicious comfort and convenience of the habit deliberately grown in them by the public relations, advertising and mass production mechanisms of corporate capitalism's need to increase sales of meat products. Pavlov's dogs would understand this.

The argument that humans are carnivores is outdated by scientific information. Raw meat, anyone? That carnivorous animals who have no choice in what they eat should be singled-out for their meat-eating is, what, disingenuous? That human animals should always come before any other animals is a supremacist premise. Animal Farm, perhaps? Try peddling that passivity in the face of annihilation is a virtue to Palestinians, Iraqis and Afghanis, the current recipients of Western Civilization's obsessive/complusive drive for dominion. Nota bene: No one has suggested preventive nuclear attack on slaughterhouses, CAFOs and meat venders. No one has advocated shooting meat-purchasers in the face with shotguns. The most ludicrous suggestion of all is that the odor of burning flesh has an "instinctive" appeal to human animals. Would that be with marinade or BBQ sauce? The smell of charring flesh, unadorned with condiments, is off-putting, to say the least. Perhaps some white phosphorous would make it better.

While the "authors" of such "arguments" claim to want scientific fact to back up vegetarian/vegan statements, this is not the case. They simply seek to continue to do as they have always done without anyone's comments, to be left in peace while the cultivation of "livestock" for the titillation of their tastebuds hastens the destruction of the planet and the onset of hundeds of thousands of cases of preventable, chronic disease. Like it or not, whether you care about animals' - or plants' - lives or not, this is self-destructive behavior. Is there a part of SELF-destructive that remains unclear? The science of climatology and the science of medicine have proven that meat-eating is eating us alive. Case closed. That the culture of meat-eating should be held sacrosanct, forbidden to be exposed for what it is, that discussing this subject seriously is held up to ridicule is again, self-destructive.



Dominion, once tasted, is most often forever. The messenger is metaphorically slaughtered. Whether the victims of dominion are human, or other animals is not the crux of the argument. The root of the problem is some animals feeling entitled to dominion over others to the point of discontinuing their existence, whether by WMD dispensed remotely on weddings and funeral parties or ripping them apart while conscious in slaughterhouses, whether by confinement in concentration camps or in CAFOs. The slaughter of human animals springs from the slaughter of their brothers, non-human animals, as the story of Cain and Abel and the subsequent murder of everything that moves illustrates. There is a breadcrumb trail that leads from the murder of animals to the murder of people. It's like a gateway drug. Ask Bush#43, who delighted in blowing up frogs as a child and graduated to blowing up entire countries full of people.

How many times must this site state that the fight is for ALL sentient beings to be able to their lives as their own, not as prey, physical, economical or cultural? How many times must it be stated that this is a war in which there are many fronts, that each of us may choose his or her own battle, but that we are all, supposedly, on the same side here? What is it about the dominion of one over the other that fails to be perceived as counterfeit, bankrupt and immoral?

chickenbelly

"Man's character is his fate." - Heraclitus

"First you must learn to smile as you kill." - John Lennon, from "Working Class Hero"

The ABCs of Atrocity

sow the seeds of future perversity.
Animals are the means we use to teach
our children not only the basics of speech,
but to give them the tools they're going to need
to begin elementary reading.

We ask "What does the cow say?"
"P is for pig" we tell them
while their animal friends scream in agony
as we mechanically and mercilessly slaughter them,

renaming their dismembered body parts
beef, pork, mutton and poultry
in order to distance the abattoir
from the innocence, the purity, of the nursery.

And as children learn that they are complicit
with their nuggets, wings, ribs and cheeseburgers,
they lock it down deep in denial,
repressing interfamilial murder.

Further, children learn god has given them
"dominion" over all other animals
and some of them practice what's termed
"animal husbandry." The 4-H is an example
of the indoctrination of impressionable children
into support of this hypocritical debacle.

It teaches children to care for an animal,
to feed her and groom her and name her,
grow up with her, win a blue ribbon,
and sell her to a restaurant in a stone cold betrayal.

In another perverse twist, we take kids into the woods
and arm them with deadly, high-powered weapons
and teach them to hunt down their animal friends,
who are essentially defenseless against them.

And since we no longer need them as food,
having made factory farms a mass murder industry,
their desecrated bodies are abandoned,
their stuffed heads prove their killers' masculinity.

Thus what were once
bunnies, Bambi and myriad birds,
cows, sheep, chickens and pigs
who taught us our very first words
are changed into "game", trophies and edible commodities,
which are undeniably tasty and outrageously profitable.

The point, however, is not sport,
not animal husbandry, nor even macho display,
but to inculcate in children that the value
of friends, love, loyalty and especially fair play

may be dispensed with in simple self-interest,
in particular with regard to "the other",
thus turning them all into Cain, that they may
more easily make money off and murder their brothers.

It divorces the force of children's emotions
from the consequences of having a conscience
in the service of their Financial Masters,
for whom they are willing to perpetrate violence

and from responsibility while feeling entitled to rape,
slaughter, plunder and excuse mass atrocities
with not an inkling of compassion or compunction
for either animals or the rest of humanity.

The Pecking Order

Pick
a distinguishing
characteristic
like ————–Black.
Almond eyes. Foreign
accent. Begin to attack.

Label them “other”,
not people at all.
Ignore them. Abhor
them. Push them to the wall.

The more
differences they
have, the lower their
worth. Heaven help
them if covered with
scales, feathers or fur.

Because the more
visible the difference, the
worse off they’ll be. That’s
segregation, designation
to “le caste poverty”.

It’s about having your
cake and eating everyone
else’s, too. The Perpetrators
of Poverty have their
eyes on you!

But you’re not worried
’cause your difference can’t
be seen from afar. Vell,
dollink, zey haff vays to
tell you apart. Remember
those armbands with six-
pointed stars and get up off
your ass before it gets that far!

Think occasionally of the suffering of which you spare yourself the sight.”

- Dr. Albert Schweitzer


Because, indeed, it may one day be your own.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

The New Insurrectional Thinking

riot

French youth rioting, November, 2005

By Nicolas Truong

Simulposted with Truthout

7/7/09

Put on sale in March 2007 by the publishing house La Fabrique and with over 27,000 copies already sold, "L'insurrection qui vient" ["The Coming Insurrection"] (7 Euros), authored by the mysterious "Invisible Committee," is poised to become a real best seller. Its popularity also owes much to the active complicity of the government which has taken this invitation to "block everything" and to "form communes" by a possible "take-up of arms" quite seriously.

Considered by the police as a piece of evidence against the alleged saboteurs of the TGV overhead wires, "L'insurrection qui vient" is much more than a manual for juvenile civil disobedience. Far from the snow job by poseurs that some commentators have depicted, the work takes the form of a simultaneously dangerous and coherent synopsis of the decay of an empty era. For many readers, this little green book seems to be the insurrectional manifesto, the revolutionary breviary of certain disillusioned youth.

This "imaginary collective" considers that a specter haunts the French Republic: that of the November 2005 riots, the fires of which "continue to throw their shadow over all consciousness, over everyone's conscience." But the "unheard-of" aspect of those events does not reside in the confrontation between the center and the periphery, the City and the suburbs, the police and neighborhood youth.



The novelty, the authors assert, consists in the total absence of message, leader or demand on the part of the insurgents. Thus have the suburban rioters, according to the authors, set the tone for any new guerilla action. Since "the present has no exit," it's useless to seek empty social compromises. Since the catastrophe "has already taken place," it's impossible to further an ecumenical ecology that supplies capitalism with its most perfect ideological legitimization. Since everything must be made spectacle, traceable, legible, one might as well become "invisible."

This strategic upheaval is a political turning point. Most alternative movements have sought to attract the attention of newspapers, even though that risked their transformation by the media into official trouble-makers. So it's not only against all union and militant bureaucracies, but also against all coordinated movements that "reproduce so many governments in miniature," that the "Invisible Committee" pits its anonymity, its permanent dissolution. This fraction that assumes the form of a little army of shadows takes aim at all the glories of subsidized subversion and other TV children with out-sized egos: "Seeing the maws of those who are somebody in this society may help you to understand the joy of being nobody in it." Thus, to be "socially nothing" paradoxically constitutes "the condition for maximum freedom of action."

The sudden media coverage of Julien Coupat, whom the police and the prosecutors' office consider the alleged ringleader of this "imaginary collective" and sometimes stage as a replica of Guy Debord (1931-1994), founder of the Situationist Internationale, will undoubtedly alter the group's strategy. Nonetheless, the surfacing of the cutting edge of Julien Coupat's radical remarks - Coupat, who along with his friends has been subjected to a legal-police relentlessness - dispatches a certain kind of leftism to its obsolescence. Thus, in the eyes of Julien Coupat, "the extreme left à la Besancenot" offers nothing but "Soviet grayness barely retouched by Photoshop" (in May 26's Le Monde). As though suddenly Trotsky's made-over children, Che nostalgics, Fidel Castro aficionados were sent back to their not-only-authoritarian, but also counter-revolutionary, references.

What returns with "L'insurrection qui vient," a corrosive essay for which Eric Hazan, director of publisher La Fabrique, has been abusively interrogated, is a social criticism that until now had been reduced to its cultural dimension. People frequently remember a single image only from Guy Debord, one of the "Invisible Committee's" main sources of inspiration: that of the gang leader who becomes a master in the art of misappropriating American comics intended to feed the results of contemporary art galleries. So they forget that the author of "La Société du spectacle" ["Society of the Spectacle"] (1967) bet among other things on the advent of new workers' councils, along the lines of those in Barcelona in 1936-1937 or Budapest in 1956.

The movement Julien Coupat has emerged from - in spite of all the efforts to erase the trails of that heritage - from the anti-industrial criticism of Jaime Semprun, founder of the publisher, Encyclopédie des nuisances, to writer Annie Le Brun's critique of techie rationality - applies itself to conducting a radical and coherent critique of the present. If this "Invisible Committee" was seeking to renew the voluntary opacity, theoretical preciousness, rhetoric of excess and apology for violent action that were especially present in the first issues of the review Tiqqun (see Le Monde's June 28-29 edition), which was one of its branches, then it would risk adding to the general disorientation.

But perhaps that wouldn't entirely displease this little party of subversive defection.

Translation: Truthout French language editor Leslie Thatcher.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Thursday, July 09, 2009

Capitalist Dominionism, the Temper Tantrum of Thanatos

flaming-skulls-bones-image

By Vi Ransel

7/9/09

The anthropocentric Judeo-Christian ideology of Western Civilization causes its adherents to lash out like spoiled babies when thinking people challenge ANY of the sacred privileges they believe that they are entitled to by the virtue of their being them. That is, as the designated-hitters - and I mean that literally - the self-chosen people of the god they themselves created, spun out of pure hubris and an obsession with dominion and the subsequent need to rationalize it, not only have these "people" set themselves apart from, and above, all of the natural world of which they are an intrinsic part, groups of them have declared that some of them are even more entitled to use and/or possess all of the stuff in existence than other groups of them. And to cloak this pig in a semblance of respectability, they have smeared it with the lipstick of religion in an attempt to legitimize it. Religion fosters fear, obedience, ignorance and dependence.

Thus the various and sundry groups of "chosen" people have been able to convince other, more benevolent/gullible/innocent/ignorant/human groups, to tolerate their intolerance, cowed by fear of deviant-divine wrath if they don't bow down and worship those who are colonizing and/or exploiting them, who claim to be their superiors in every way.

Not only do these arrogant self-choosers claim the divine right to exploit, brand, neuter, turn out, "shoot, trap, slash, cage, enslave, cut, gut, slit, slaughter, butcher, burn, shock, inject, beat, stomp, rape, wear, eat," brutally torture and murder any and all sentient beings they designate sub-human, they designate most of the rest of human beings as sub-human through the self-revealed doctrine of White Supremacy. And in a further winnowing out of those unworthy of sharing in Earth's freely given bounty, they designate those of their own hue, whom they've intentionally deprived of a share in the plunder as garbage, AKA poor white trash.



And this branding as beneath contempt is moving, increasingly rapidly, UP the pyramid of privilege as world economies and the ecology of the entire planet, off which the self-chosen are living, goes increasingly DOWN the toilet they've made of it.

The inhuman humans at the top of the pyramid of privilege have moved completely off it, with the advent of global capitalism, on to a Hindenburg-like blimp that floats over not only those designated inferior from time immemorial, as far as Western Civilization is concerned, but those useful idiots in the "Middle" Class who were created as a buffer between the blimp and the unwashed masses to allow the self-chosen to do exactly that - rise even further above the rest of us slugs without effective opposition.

In much the same way, the aftermath of Bacon's Rebellion, comprised of slaves and indentured "servants", created the white "race" in America. Until that point, more or less, "inferiors" were "inferiors" no matter what their color. After Bacon's Rebellion, WHITE "inferiors" were given a smidgen of privilege and deemed to have a common interest with the Masters by virtue of their same skin color.

FLASH FORWARD.

In the United States, especially, not only the "Middle" Class was recruited to support their own oppression/exploitation, but the masses of the "Lower," or Working Class, who do the, like, actual work that makes the system, like, work, were enlisted, via the New Deal, to partake in a tacky imitation of the excess of their "betters" via consumerism. The access to some shoddy, shiny objects, with built-in obsolescence of course, to make the cycle of The Consumption of Production endless at an ever more increasing rate (capitalism in a nutshell), and the assurance that the possession of the Chosen Skin Color made them chosen, too, conflated their interests with that of their Masters. And that was all it took to get the Middle and Working Classes to endorse their own exploitation. That and the hope that they, too, might one day leave the ranks of the exploited to become exploiters themselves.

How long will we continue to deny that the conveyor belt which passes before our very own eyes on a daily basis, carrying our pitiful portion of the planet's gifts to us straight up to that blimp hovering over the pyramid of privilege, exists?!!

It seems that HUMAN beings, as opposed to beings (See how this works?) are "just intelligent enough that we've developed a devastatingly (self) destructive superiority complex, believing that our capacity to engage in complex forms of thought and communication endows us with the right to serially abuse the planet and other sentient beings, create artificial barriers to alienate us from the rest of nature, and to litter and contaminate the land-base and waterways with all manner of toxic, putrid, noxious, infectious, and disgusting liquids and solids, many with half-lives that exceed 10,000 years that the disease we call civilization has existed. Homo sapiens, the "superior species," has taken "stewardship" of the planet and is careening toward self-destruction and mass extinction of other species own. How intelligent is that?"

But those who believe they are not only the masters of the system, but the masters of existence are in the process of "patenting life" via the genetic modification of all sources of food, and storing the uncontaminated (by genetic engineering) seeds in an explosion proof vault two miles beneath the ice under Svalbard, Norway. They naively think that they will escape and start over again after the holocaust they've initiated. Or do they? As Earth's climate changes at an ever-accelerating rate, acceleration being a hallmark of capitalist production, "human" beings, along with all other sentient beings, are losing their habitat, the climate that makes their life on Earth possible.

The flow and feedback of one ecosystem into another - air, rain, oceans, rivers, deltas, marshes, glaciers, aquifers, the tropics, polar regions, temperate zones, the changing seasons, etc. - the climate we call weather, are intrinsic parts of the infrastructure that not only sustains life on the planet, but created it.

Now back to "Or do they?" Do the cavalier dominionists floating up there off the pyramid in the blimp of their bloated self-importance actually realize that nature is their benefactor? And do they intend to murder her for their "inheritance?" Like ungrateful children too impatient to wait 'til a parent dies to collect his or her wealth, will they kill the planet in order to possess it? Alternately, are they so pissed off at being dependent on the planet, so angry that it is actually not THEY who are in charge of life, but her, that they plan "to take their ball back" in a giant hissy fit and just kill us all, including themselves, because they can't have their own way?

All quotes from Jason Miller's "To dam the torrential rivers of blood and to silence the cacophony of their agonized cries..."

Vi Ransel, TPC’s senior editor of anti-capitalism, is a researcher and poet of exceptional caliber. Very little is known about her.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC at http://biteclubkc.wordpress.com/.

Wednesday, July 08, 2009

Everything is backwards; everything is upside down....

Photobucket


By Keith Mann


7/8/09


“Just look at us. Everything is backwards; everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information and religions destroy spirituality” --Michael Ellner


Since I overcame the cloudy negative restraints imposed on me during my formative years of state sponsored schooling and instead learnt to prioritise life on this planet and to think for myself I have become exposed to an extraordinarily different picture to the official one. Fractions, logarithms, official history and religion were one thing but the world outside the rigid curriculum is quite something else. Relevant in fact!


The gross use of other animals to satisfy ours desires is a big part of the problem we face on this planet and addressing this is an essential ingredient in the healing process but that’s not quite enough. Our world is governed by ruthless, heartless monsters who lack all empathy and compassion and whose goal is absolute power and control over all life on this Earth. No they don’t have enough just yet.


I found my feet sabotaging hunting events and sneaking into farms and laboratories to expose the horrors they hide. I have personally experienced the incomprehensible force directed at people who want to save animals from their short, tortuous existence and see the increase in this anger as more of us seek to bring change. It’s clear there is a concerted drive by those who control human society to slow down the inevitable climb into a higher level of consciousness and compassion.



Their attempts to slow me down as I’ve sought to adjust the direction of our world have included prison sentences totalling seven and a half years, endless raids on my homes and those of close friends and cowardly low level intimidation. Most recently they arrived mob handed from a Hampshire Police HQ in search of half a dozen battery hens they thought I had rescued from waste pits below battery cages they’d escaped from. These wretched creatures would have died a slow death in dark stinking sheds but the enforcers of this retarded structure they call an advanced society came not to complement me on my ingenuity or compassion rather to take my computers and phone books and Why Vegan leaflets and sneer about tasty chicken nuggets and make threats. They never did find the fugitives.


It’s this incompatible human behaviour that motivates me. I want to live somewhere that people are nurtured to be nice. So, here goes today’s attempt to partake information that may assist me in that goal. This site is here to share news and information that I believe people should know. Knowledge is power which is precisely why so much of it is hidden from us. We know so little of the reality of life around us that its mind boggling for many people to accept the real version of events or even a sniff of them. Thinking for oneself removes the comfort zone we have had created for us. That’s one very positive thing to do for those whose suffering we hide ourselves from, the farm animals are a classic example of this, because our complicity through inaction leads to an endless stream of distress, discomfort and death as these animals are churned out for human consumption. It becomes less and less of an option to ignore this situation the more you realise the awesome connotations of this which are looming large for every human being on this planet.


Anyone who is serious about changing things while believing the traditional methods of bringing that change are sufficient will I hope have a look at some of the evidence that exists that indicates quite clearly that most of what we call the real world is in fact an illusion. A web of deceit and omission designed to keep us hidden from the true nature of what we are and are capable of being. Today is the day to take one step back, have a look at what we haven’t been told and look again at the way forward. You and those you love depend on you. Your life is in the hands of very twisted controllers and if you look around the world you can see they don’t care for the misery and destruction they’ve wrought. You’d be forgiven for thinking that they thrive on it and that’s a very real probability.


While in prison I begun to pen a voluminous collection of stories interlinking the history of the Animal Liberation Movement and the pivotal role of the Animal Liberation Front. This was a mammoth task and so long overdue and it took me 15 years to complete. The response since release has been truly overwhelming. I wrote a good book that tells a fascinating story of an ideal that is leading the way to a more inclusive, loving society.


Keith Mann is a long-time animal liberation activist and author of From Dusk 'til Dawn. Visit his My Space page at http://www.myspace.com/keiththemann.


Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com


For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/


If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.


And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan


Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!


To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC.

Tuesday, July 07, 2009

Crafting a New Praxis:



The Art of Excoriating Science & Technology

For the Sake of the Natural

By Frank Joseph Smecker

7/7/09

War to the death should be instantly proclaimed against [the machines]…Let us go back to the primeval condition of the human race. If it be urged that this is impossible under the present condition of human affairs, this at once proves that the mischief is already done, that our servitude has commenced in good earnest, that we have raised a race of beings whom it is beyond our power to destroy and that we are not only enslaved but are absolutely acquiescent in our bondage.

---Samuel Butler

It is imperative, when acting from one’s ethical sensibilities, or hankering for conditional propitiousness, to remain grounded in craftsmanship. Author and philosopher Christopher Manes states: “Technology confronts the world, forces it to do things it wouldn’t do naturally. Craft belongs to a humbler, more ancient relationship with nature…Craft fits human needs into the existing landscape…technology attempts to alter and deny landscape at an ever accelerating pace with no recognition of nature’s limits.” I would go on to promote that craft is an agency for creation that is heedful to the limits of its resources and the latter’s ecological provenance.

The advancement and progression of technology has indeed accelerated, as well as offered convenience and expedience to the tasks and avocations of our everyday lives. However, the evolution of technology has left a lucid trail of debris, destruction, and annihilation (e.g. CFCs, depleted uranium, automobiles, airplanes, dragline excavators, routine international trade, fellerbunchers, computers, plastics, endocrine disrupters, pesticides, vivisection, internal combustion engines, televisions, cellphones, and nuclear [and conventional] bombs). The ascendancy of technology has, undeniably, exacerbated oil and other energy sources, water sources, and food sources (not to mention it has been culpable for the genetic transmutation of crops and trees i.e. tomatoes spliced with fish genes, fish spliced with human genes, cotton with larval genes, trees vacant of lignin [picture a human being without a skeletal structure], pesticidal seeds, ad nauseam).

Over the last seventy years, annual pesticide use has gone from zero to more than five hundred billion tons worldwide. How much sense does it make to poison our own food?



Technological advancement (viz. technomania) has been responsible for forced and violent dissolving of traditional communities in order to access mineral-rich lands; it has been responsible for curable cancers and other degenerative ailments (while ironically providing novel remedies and cures for specific ailments that, well, nature has provided all along). And let’s not forget Zygmunt Bauman’s book Modernity and the Holocaust – which is quite the indictment of the modern industrial rationalistic scientific instrumentalist perspective – as well as Derrick Jensen’s The Culture of Make Believe. And industrial technology has, invariably, been culpable for the assault on ecosystems that pervade into the myriad regions of the planet, undermining the homes of variegated species and cultures of remarkable complexity.

Migratory birds are in inexorable decline.

Honeybee populations are in inexorable decline.

Whale populations are in inexorable decline.

Siberian tigers are in inexorable decline.

There is more plastic in the planet’s oceans than there is phytoplankton.

Rainforests are in inexorable decline.

Potable water is in inexorable decline.

Amphibian populations are in inexorable decline.

The Eastern Lowland gorilla is in inexorable decline.

Traditional, vernacular communities are in inexorable decline.

My tolerance is in inexorable decline.

Ultra-sonar blasts, conducted by the U.S. Navy, also used for seismic surveying for oil beneath ocean swells, are killing whales. The sonar causes gas bubbles to form in the whale’s blood, fatally damaging their livers and kidneys. The fact that schools of hundreds upon hundreds of whales no longer impede the passage of seaborne ships brings me to tears.

Year after year, technological contrivances and the latter’s byproducts are discarded profligately into the planet’s waters, ground, and air (e.g. landfills, greenhouse gas emissions, illegal dumping, fluoridation, spent uranium holding tanks, et al.) – destabilizing the only known complex system that supports life. The continuation of technological advancement (keeping in mind its stringent reliance on fossil fuels and mineral ores, and the damage done to this fecund planet and communities of human and nonhuman beings in order to access the former and latter, and then the damage done again to the planet and communities of human and nonhuman beings through refinement processes), at the rate and condition it is at now, will be responsible for the loss of one-third of all species on this planet within the next forty years, and according to Michael Soule, the founder of the Society for Conservation Biology, says “for all practical purposes vertebrate evolution is at an end… only large mammals left in another decade or two will be those we consciously choose to allow to exist.”

The anthropologist Marvin Harris admonished about the industrial bubble and that as it expands “its skin becomes thinner.” And it will pop.

Whether technology of “civilized” proportion has been implemented for practical purposes or for recreational purposes, it is not sustainable, and essentially has only been of practical use to humans (and of course not all humans) as a way to pander to a Western ethic, or Transcendental ethic, proclaiming, “certain obligations hold true everywhere at all times for all people.” Omniscience and omnipotence, a (delusional) set of desires that has emerged from the Western philosophia perennis canon, is the ultimate (delusional) goal of a static and technologized world.

Philosophy aside, technology has become the hallmark of modern societies and contemporary economies and deeply imbedded in a culture of extraction, hyper-exploitation, and a lack of reverence for the natural and physical reality we are circumscribed to. There is no doubt we are about to find out what it means to overshoot our physical limits, as we’ve invested an entire history of thought and actions into a way of life that is deleterious and unsustainable.

Wendell Berry, a prolific author, essayist, and critic wrote in an article for the May 2008 issue of Harper’s Magazine on the topic of peak oil:

To deal with problems, which are after all inescapable, of living with limited intelligence in a limited world, I suggest that we may have to remove some of the emphasis we have lately placed on science and technology and have a new look at the arts. For an art does not propose to enlarge itself by limitless extension but rather to enrich itself within bounds that are accepted prior to the work. It is the artists, not the scientists, who have dealt unremittingly with the problem of limits.

Berry’s expatiation on art is parallel to defining craft, through which engaged, craft respects its natural limits in order to “enrich” not “extend.”

Vermont, the state in which I reside, home to many fine craft folk, artisans, potters, and more, know intimately this convivial relationship between their handiwork and the natural landscape that offers up its influence and consent to be enriched when such a relationship is respected and met with reciprocity.

Renowned playwright and Vermont resident David Mamet reminds us: “All machines are limited. The more elaborate the mechanism, the narrower its application (there are myriad things one can accomplish with an ax, but only one thing with a photocopier).” This is why I love Vermont. We seem to have an intimate understanding of Mamet’s latter aphorism.



DREAMING MACHINES by *vmaximus

Technological compulsiveness: a condition under which society meekly submits to every new technological demand and utilizes without question every new product, whether it is an actual improvement or not (Mumford, 186).

It is impractical, fatuous, and irrational when folks advocate for technology as an answer to the problems we are facing with exponential growth and the quest for sustainability. I hear quite too often that technology is a hopeful option for survival and sustainability, and that if we just keep trucking along, advancements in science will resolve our plight (the word hope conflated with the planetary mess we’ve made implies that this culture does not want to accept the reality that we will need to fix this mess, rather than some future in which we have no agency over). This strikes me as frightening for many reasons; there is already a plethora of realistic, pragmatic choices to make and actions to employ that will benefit not only the human species for generations to come, but the ecosystems that harbor the complex webs of relationships that support our very lives– and they do not require the aid of modern technology. These choices and behaviors include large-scale moderation, self-limitation, and a halt to many of the conventions we have today that are perceived as “healthy” for a "civilized" life.

We know that burning fossil fuels in order to bolster the industrial culture not only alters the global climates, but acidifies the oceans and creates dead-zones where no sea-life whatsoever can thrive; and that the burning of fossil fuels is responsible for preventative cancers and other respiratory ailments resulting from air pollution causing agents, i.e. particulates, mercury, sulfur dioxide, lead, and more (there are 14,000 deaths biweekly in the U.S. from preventable cancers). And yet the baleful impacts felt by millions upon millions of humans and non-humans as a result of poisoning our only atmosphere and our only sources of water are not good enough reasons to stop burning fossil fuels....but instead are reasons to continue scientific exploration to search for solutions to these problems, when in fact, the monolith that is technological advancement can only continue with the plinth that is cheap and efficient energy resources such as fossil fuels and other mineral resources, as well as a vibrant economy with an annual growth trajectory of three to four percent. It should be known that any economy that does not benefit the land through which it is reliant upon is fucking stupid, let alone invariably unsustainable. I hope the reader is realizing the illogic embedded in the pattern of thought here. In psychology this would fall pretty damn close to perseveration. No wonder the dominant culture is so insane.

Let us recall, too, Lewis Mumford’s clarification that at the moment any impulse becomes irresistible, for no other reason than that it just exists, it becomes pathological. The unawareness of this pathology among scientists who are driven by such impulses, and whose discipline putatively serves as a prophylactic against irrational conclusions or behavior just further attests to the insanity that imperils their pathologically impaired minds (Mumford, 186).

There is also John von Neumann’s scientific injunction that “technological possibilities are irresistible to man. If man can got to the moon, he will. If he can control the climate he will.” Following the logic of Neumann’s socio-scientific forecast, if man has the means to annihilate life on the planet, more than likely he will attempt to do so. I can not say for sure that he will – by placing the ability to eradicate all life on the planet in the hands of humans is still narcissistic and undeniably humancentric, hence the word attempt up above. However, this does not exculpate the dominant culture from being accountable for perhaps the largest case of species extinction the planet has ever witnessed, alongside global climate change, and never-before-seen pollution, vertically and horizontally, so widespread that clean, unadulterated air – anywhere – is nearing obsolescence. These are more than enough reasons to dismantle civilization.

By the same token, the dominant culture’s behavior is also very similar to the behavior of heroin addicts; the incessant, self-afflictive abuse of a toxic, detrimental element to maintain an ephemeral feeling of satisfaction, ironically maintained by the counterforce of denial – upping the dose more and more. Until finally, chagrined with one’s dirty habit, one turns to methadone. “As long as the hospital is sanctioning my methadone, I’m not an addict, I’m a person under care.” Still that denial. Still that chemical attachment.

Let’s face it: addicts who really kick the habit get sick before they get better. They go through hell, through pain, and sweat out their woes in a state of ungovernable catharsis, contorting with spasms and cramps, enduring the screaming fantods and until suddenly – voila! they remember how to live again! And better yet, they live without the chemical dependence – and they return to their families and friends.

Weaning off of our reliance on fossil fuels and our addiction to technology will not be easy, and it will not be effortless – it will be a painful process through which we will need to turn to each other and to our landbases for support. But kicking the habit will fare much better than overdosing.

Furthermore, the argument that science will present synthetic options to substitute the natural resources and requirements we continue to deplete is outright asinine. This is proven with Liebig's Law, also known as the Law of the Minimum. Richard Heinberg sums up the law pretty well in his book Powerdown, stating that "Every species has a list of requirements for survival: water, temperature range, degree of salinity of water, degree of acidity or alkalinity of soil, food of a certain nature, so many hours of sunlight, and so on." Liebig's Law elucidates that even if all factors are "optimal" it only takes the lack of one requirement to erode an organism's ability to survive. Heinberg goes on to note: "This puts a tough burden on humans' attempts to completely manage a fully artificial environment." In other words, my exegesis of L’s Big Law is that if we continue to use the planet as a natural resource to be exploited for whatever it is we are trying to accomplish here (because, really, what is the reason for this giant circus…seriously…we have proof that acephalous cultures lived peacefully for hundreds of thousands of years without monotheism, science, government, corporations, bureaucracy, TVs, automobiles, industrial modes of production, et al – so what’s our deal; what is it we are striving for through all of this destruction and aimless development? Do we really think we’ll successfully colonize space or something? I think that’s it – some people want to be Masters of the Universe™); anyway, if we continue to exploit the planet as a ‘natural resource,’ (and if you’re wondering if it seems sociopathic to refer to living beings [trees, rivers, mountains, nonhuman animals, etc] as ‘natural resources’ it’s because it is very sociopathic to view other natural beings as ‘natural resources;’ but how else would this sociopathic culture rationalize their using [or destruction] of other beings other than robbing them of their subjectivity and willful unpredictability? As author Derrick Jensen told me in a recent interview I conducted with him: “If you see yourself as entitled to a resource, and if you’re not willing or incapable of seeing this other as a being with whom you can and should be in relation with, then you’re going to take the resource”); so yeah, back to my explanation of L’s-Law-of-the-Minimum– if we continue to objectify and exploit the shit out of our only planet, well, we will eventually undermine all ecosystems, leading to a complete collapse of all other life on the planet. This is by no means a scenario that can be managed realistically – we would eventually reach the point where we would have to synthesize everything. Looking at this logically and rationally – and really, just commonsensically (because we all know what logic and rationality can lead to sometimes), humans cannot survive in a world deprived of its natural requirements, let alone attempt to synthesize them all – duh.

Even if fortuitously, science does prevail and a cheap energy source is discovered to supplant our reliance on fossil fuels (which, c’mon – it just ain’t gonna happen folks), what then? Self-aggrandizing economies will surely use it up, continue to dismantle the planet's pristine land-bases to provide resources for other innovations and contrivances, and exponential growth will continue. One important fact one must always consider is that energy comes from matter, and matter is finite – meaning it does not last forever – there is a limit that cannot be exceeded. Without self-limitation, the quest for energy will be a perpetual concatenated tail-chase exhibiting severe nocuous, deleterious, and ultimately annihilative repercussions – over and over again. And again. And again.

Peak oil should be a matter of concern, a matter of public interest, and a matter of sustainability for the inhabitants of this planet, and especially for our communities. Our options for handling the decline in cheap energy sources are found in choices of moderation and self-limitation, community solidarity and education. The belief that science will provide new technologies to help us endure nature's response to our profligate growth (i.e. global warming, desiccation of potable water, diasporas, viral vectors, etc) is in my opinion a severe state of denial within the dominant culture, as well as a casuistic rationalizing for the way the dominant culture behaves, and for the way it is responding to (or denying) the repercussions of its treatment toward the very planet that has miracled us into existence in the first place; a planet, that without, none of us could ever write books, make love, play music, go swimming; think about it.

It is of vital importance that we begin to implement the steps needed to adjust our cultural behavior with regard to our personal limits alongside the laws of nature. Our holistic health, as well as our interrelations domestic and foreign, is commensurate with the condition of the land beneath our feet.

Vermont, as well as being a great example for other regions, yields the intact landbases that can provide for a community. CSAs (community supported agriculture), farmers’ markets, organic farming and gardening, are all well practiced endeavors that fare well for the state community. To bring to fruition a sustainable community, on a state level, relocalization is imperative. Initiatives such as worker and producer cooperatives, neighborhood and community associations, collective kitchens, unemployed worker mutual-aid organizations, and more--all working holistically together--are essential to have in a functional community. If humans can wholly embrace a functional model espoused to cooperation rather than competition in every sector, then immediately everyone on board is working together to build a sustainable community. Eventually, everyone could even transcend ‘state’ and ‘sector’ and just be a community again.

Vermonters owe themselves a pat on the back for being a step ahead of most of the country. Farmers’ markets, co-ops, community gardens in Burlington’s North End, the Intervale, Pete’s Greens, High Mowing Seeds and the rest of the folks involved with the High Field’s Institute, as well as many others, have done a lot of great work to put Vermont’s foot on the right path. But there’s still much work to be done, and Vermont also has to be wary of “mistaking motion for change” e.g., lauding over $20 lavish pints of interior finish made of soy whey while 19,000 Vermont children go without food every winter (I’m not putting down the soy finish – I’m grateful and very psyched for the safe version of finish over the toxic version, I’m just attempting to exemplify the overall situation). There’s no excuse for childhood hunger in a state that is quickly becoming defined by its sustainable agriculture endeavors. Poverty and hunger is a social deformity largely caused by the market. It’s time we say fuck the market –we’re a community. After all, it takes a community to raise a child. I strongly believe that in the wake of civilization collapsing, many can embrace a true cooperative community ethic. It just means we all need to preserve the health of our landbases, and engage with them reciprocally (put back that which you take out, if not more)– enrich rather than extend, and perhaps proselytize all of the technocratic capitalists back into compassionate human beings with real human emotions (and if that is to no avail, well, let them all play Monopoly™; real life does not follow market formulae).

Perhaps Wendell Berry has touched upon a crucial point, which is we must reevaluate not only our relationship with our habitat (the earth), but the way we engage with the earth as well. Perhaps the dominant, concerted view of expedience, tools, and appliances that beguile so many will be transformed by the concept of craft into a more sustainable and pragmatic notion of our vocations and avocations; and then the concept of technology can be replaced by the practice of art; blossoming a new praxis of engagement through arts and crafts.

I’ve been thinking lately about the word revolution. And I’ve been thinking about the response that word often conjures up in many folks. Sometimes fear. Sometimes a laugh. Sometimes a smile. The truth is, we’re in need of a serious revolution, and the sooner we recognize this the sooner we can begin. And it should be known that the bulk of any revolution is the time spent building a community. The Black Panther Party worked more toward building community schools for children, free health clinics for the poor, and other community projects. The Zapatistas, too, expressed that the most important work to be done during revolution is the nonviolent work, the education, the community gardening, the triage and networking, and so on. Harvey Milk fought for revolution, and indeed wanted mass protest and riot to draw attention when necessary, but he worked much harder at building safe communities for homosexuals and pushing for legislation that broadened equal rights.

During revolution it is most important to congeal as a community and to educate, to write, to garden, to relocalize, to deindustrialize while creating a replacement model that is sustainable and safe. It’s okay to be angry, even enraged, over current conditions; how else would we know that those conditions no longer suit us, never did suit us, and won’t ever suit us? But more importantly, we must love the land beneath our feet and every being, including ourselves and each other if we want a sense of peace and sustainability. We will defend with all of our hearts and might all that we love. Also, it must be fun. I agree with many who state that if a revolution is not fun –if I can’t laugh or smile, if I can’t dance or garden, make love or play my guitar, then I want no part of it.

Sources:

Lewis Mumford. The Pentagon of Power; The Myth of the Machine Vol. 2. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc. 1970.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

To support or undertake animal rights and liberation activism in the Kansas City area, visit Bite Club of KC.

Sunday, July 05, 2009

To dam the torrential rivers of blood and to silence the cacophony of their agonized cries….



By Jason Miller

7/5/09

Disclaimer: I am in no way affiliated, allied, aligned, or connected with the Transformative Studies Institute, the Institute for Critical Animal Studies, Anthony Nocella II, or Richard Kahn. While I am a press officer for the North American Animal Liberation Press Office and am an associate of Jerry Vlasak and Steve Best, I am penning this piece independently of NAALPO and all of my allies.

Years of introspection and profound soul searching—intrepidly trekking the seemingly infinite number of unexplored, untamed, thorny and treacherous paths winding circuitously through my psyche---led me to naively conclude that I’d sketched out a nearly complete map of who I am, my worldview, and my purpose.

Fortunately a chain of events that began unfolding several months ago, and recently culminated when I immersed myself in the company of some of the most dedicated, knowledgeable, and passionate animal activists with whom I’ve had the privilege to associate,[1] shattered my semi-complacency and ignited my passion to launch yet another thorough and harrowing examination of who I am and what I believe---a “revaluation of all values” if you will--including the inevitable significant growing pains of personal evolution. While I recognize that my core sense of self, general worldview, and essential beliefs are relatively immutable, there’s still plenty of room for discovery and growth.

Steve Best commented to me about a year ago that he wanted to make philosophy dangerous again. With that in mind, I’ve come to some radical conclusions about us humans and our largely reprehensible ways of being as a species. Indulge me as I “philosophize with a hammer,” driving home some ideologies, thoughts, observations, principles, and assertions that will bludgeon some of the sacred tenets of the anthropocentric Judeo-Christian status quo of Western Civilization, evoke the wrath of hardened speciesists who lash out like spoiled children when people challenge their “unassailable right” to torture, murder, and eat other sentient beings, and leave me about as popular as an agitated, unleashed pit bull at a Cat Fanciers’ Association show.



Despite the nearly unanimous anthropocentric belief that we human animals are superior to nonhuman animals, we are equal—AT BEST. In fact, our collective malevolence, greed, apathy, belligerence, arrogance, selfishness and tendency to dominate, exploit, and mutilate the Earth and its other inhabitants, have me convinced that we are inferior to other animals, both morally and, in a perverse way, intellectually. We’re just intelligent enough that we’ve developed a devastatingly destructive superiority complex, believing that our capacity to engage in complex forms of thought and communication endows us with the right to serially abuse the planet and other sentient beings, create artificial barriers to alienate us from the rest of nature, and to litter and contaminate the land-base and waterways with all manner of toxic, putrid, noxious, infectious, and disgusting liquids and solids, many with half-lives that exceed the 10,000 years that the disease we call civilization has existed. Homo sapiens, the “superior species,” has taken “stewardship” of the planet and is careening toward self-destruction and mass extinctions of other species. How intelligent is that?

Nonhuman animals are sentient, and an increasingly impressive body of peer-reviewed research scientifically legitimizes the empirical, common sense observations that many other animals are also ‘subjects of a life’ in that they lead relatively rich and complex intellectual, emotional, and social lives. Intentionally killing them is as much murder as it is to kill a human being. That’s right; I wrote it. “Meat” is murder. As are vivisection, fur, dog-fights, cock-fights, dairy and egg production, and the rest of the myriad monstrous atrocities committed by the animal industrial complex around the globe. While the consumers and end users are complicit, it is the shit-laden toilet of the speciesist capitalism system that we need to smash into a million shards of porcelain by wielding the most massive sledgehammer we can find.



To dam the torrential rivers of blood flowing from the veins of billions of slaughtered animals; to silence the cacophony of their agonized and pitiful moans, bleats, squeals, and shrieks; and to redeem ourselves for this seemingly endless holocaust, one of two things must happen. The human species has to become universally vegan. Or if our cravings for flesh consumption, our desires to wear the skin of another, our cowardly compulsions to stalk defenseless creatures and riddle them with bullets or pierce them with arrows, or our perceived need to subject other animals to heinous torture to “advance our science and medicine” are too strong to overcome, we need to put human flesh on the menu, stock the store shelves with shoes and coats fashioned of human skin, turn our hunting rifles on human targets, and fill our research laboratories with human subjects. After all, if we’re going to use, abuse, and slaughter sentient beings to please our palates, enhance our lives, and vivisect, in order to restore justice and to put an end to abject hypocrisy, we need to include our own species in these activities.

Destruction of property, equipment, buildings, machinery, laboratories, and virtually any inanimate human construct or “resource” used in the exploitation, oppression, maiming, raping, or murder of human animals, other animals, or the Earth is not violence. It may be illegal under a system that fetishizes property and profits, but it is not unethical. In fact, in many cases it is the right thing to do.

With respect to true violence--harming or killing sentient beings (hateful speciesists will, of course, limit the definition to human beings)---the corporatist state (of nearly any nation, as corporate capitalism is virtually ubiquitous) and its myriad components, agents, sycophants, agencies, bureaus, businesses, branches, soldiers, employees, propagandists, officers, blindly obeisant citizens, and their ilk are far and away the most egregious perpetrators of directly violent acts. In stark contrast, the animal liberation movement has committed no direct violence—not one human animal exploiter death to its credit. However, we as a movement are guilty of committing indirect violence in that our collective restraint in the face of the torture and murder of billions of other animals each year has enabled the unfathomably cruel direct violence of the corporatist state, the animal exploiting industries it supports, and the billions of relentless, hardened speciesist foot soldiers who are so anthropocentric that they grieve or pay respects when sociopaths like Harry Harlow, Philip Armour, Ray Kroc, and their ilk die while turning a blind eye to innocent raccoon dogs being skinned alive so that privileged humans can wear “fur.”



Philosophically speaking, the animal liberation movement needs to embrace ‘counter-violence to protect innocent beings’ as one of many tactics in the war to end the animal holocaust. Attacks on incorrigible, empathy-deficient, sociopathic speciesist animal torturers and murderers by courageous underground militants are both necessary and morally acceptable aspects of the fight to liberate nonhuman animals. From an ethical standpoint, such acts would be readily justifiable as a form of extensional self-defense on behalf of voiceless, defenseless sentient beings.

Given the opportunity and the means, nonhuman animals would obviously slay their tormentors and killers---be they ranchers, Big Ag executives, hunters, vivisectors, puppy mill operators, or the like. Just imagine how many billions of nonhuman animals would be spared at the cost of a relatively miniscule number of human lives if activists were to act as proxies in some instances and simply do that which nonhuman animals would do for themselves--if only they could. Once obtaining their bloody lucre or satiating their desires became too much of a risk, the players in the “exploitation game” would fold their hands and the industrialized carnage of nonhuman animals would come to a grinding halt.



While the corporatist state employs extreme levels of institutionalized violence to make profits, rape the Earth, and maintain social order, many oppose any counter-violence on the grounds that it is ineffective and that even limited use by a few activists turns public opinion against entire social movements. Yet there are no social justice victories in history that were won without violent tactics, even if such tactics played a small role. Nor did public disdain for the use of violence prevent movements like Abolitionism, Women’s Suffrage, Civil Rights, or Anti-Apartheid from succeeding.

Centralized governments, their closely aligned corporatist-capitalist entities, and all those around the globe who enable, perpetuate, or perpetrate wholesale, large-scale animal exploitation invite and deserve the enmity of those of us in the animal liberation movement. As ridiculously out-numbered as we are, and in light of the overwhelming power of our enemy, we need to confront this multi-headed hydra with as many tactics of asymmetrical engagement and with as much determination as we can muster, battling them within the framework of the inherently corrupt political and legal systems that are heavily stacked in the favor of anthropocentric murderers; struggling to educate and win the hearts and minds of the people whose empathy hasn’t been eradicated by the soul-murdering narcissism and consumerism of the dominant culture; allying ourselves with other anti-capitalist liberation movements; and undertaking various forms of direct action on behalf of the billions of nonhuman animals immiserated and annihilated by speciesist capitalism every year.

If the corporatists and their faithful flock can shoot, trap, slash, cage, enslave, cut, gut, slit, slaughter, butcher, burn, shock, inject, beat, stomp, rape, wear, eat, and brutally murder voiceless sentient beings, how can we anti-speciesists, in good conscience, allow them to operate unchallenged and with impunity? In light of the unimaginable horror, pain and suffering they’ve inflicted on nearly countless billions of our nonhuman animal friends, nothing our movement does to challenge, impede, harm, stop, or decommission either the system or individual animal exploiters could be morally reprehensible or excessive. We needn’t worry about maintaining the moral high ground. Dante wrote an unpublished addendum to the Inferno that includes a Tenth Circle--just for our opposition.

In the corporatist state’s legal system, which principally serves to protect profit and property, an activist who killed a factory “farmer,” a vivisector or a hunter would be punished as a murderer. Yet in the court of nature’s higher laws, those who didn’t engage in some form of activism (be it direct or indirect, violent or non-violent) to defend nonhuman animals would be tried as accomplices to murder.

Apathy is complicity. With whom do you want to ally? Thanatos or Gaia?

[1] Many to those of you with whom I socialized, exchanged ideas, and demonstrated at the Let Live Conference in Portland, Oregon from 6/26/09 to 6/28/09.

Jason Miller is a relentless anti-capitalist, vegan straight edge, animal liberationist, and press officer for the North American Animal Liberation Press Office. He is also the senior editor and founder of Thomas Paine’s Corner.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

Friday, July 03, 2009

Barbecuing Iraqis on the 4th of July:

ArtDees2

Thoughts of a Summer Solstice--What Are We Now?

By Gary Corseri

7/3/09

Those who study signs and omens may find the conjunction of Father’s Day and the summer solstice on the very same day—a mere 13 days before the onanistic, self-congratulatory celebrations of the birth of our lost Republic, with its concomitant nod to the “wisdom” of the “Founding Fathers”—a matter for concern, or whimsy … or fantastic speculation and extrapolation. The rest of us will mutter “mere coincidence,” rush to the malls to remember dear old dad, fire up the grills, and wonder perhaps if time is shrinking?

After all, wasn’t it just a few days ago, on “Memorial Day,” that we unfurled the flags, honoring the Empire’s liveried fallen? That was for a war that started 95 years ago and seems never to have ended—since the “enemy” is still at the gates and threatening anew our long lost Republic.

Haven’t we merely been fox-trotting in place after the last solstice’s showing of “It’s A Wonderful Life,” retaining heat for the next time we plunge into the river to save an angel--or Zuzu’s petals unfold in our pockets? As the crookster said in “Dirty Harry”: I’se gots to know: Just when did life become so ritualized, so formulaic, such a corporate-media and corporate-government controlled shazaam? Just when did culture lose its sap and vim and capacity to surprise, nourish and enlighten? Particularize certain days, designate some for celebration or mourning, some for remembrance—of parents, sweethearts, children, et. al.—and succeed in zapping wonder from the numerous, amorphous, undesignated days—days reduced to plodding through the morass of details, interruptions, interventions that constitutes our daily “life” together in the electronic matrix.



In passing, some fun facts about the solstice: 1. Re our pagan ancestors—and, yes, we all had pagan ancestors (even those later chosen by “G_d”!)—our original “fathers” and mothers of the tribes called the Midsummer moon the “Honey Moon,” named for the mead made from fermented honey—a central part of the summer solsticial wedding ceremonies (droit de seigneur came later—a salacious wink to feudalism’s/capitalism’s, all-embracing, gilded, purple power). 2. Those jovial pagans celebrated Midsummer with bonfires: couples would leap through the flames, believing their crops would grow as high as their leaps. 3. Midsummer was thought to be a time of magic: crypts opened, evil spirits spun webs around the innocent; garlands of herbs and flowers were thought to thwart the worst of them. And Love could make fools of all—then, as now.

And here are some un-fun facts (courtesy of Jason Ditz) about this solstice in 2009: 1. At least 70 Iraqis were killed in a truck bombing in Kirkuk—and more than 200 wounded in a blast against a Shi’ite Mosque. 2. The attack appears to have been the deadliest in nearly two months. 3. “Violence in Iraq had been escalating in March and April, but US forces appeared to feel vindicated that this was an aberration when May’s death toll was somewhat lower.” The bombing in Kirkuk suggests “the trend of rising sectarian violence is far from over.”

Our present disjunctive world system could be compared to the “bizarro world,” of the classic Superman comics where good is bad, up is down—the world is a cube and all is backwards. But that, at least, would imply some kind of order. Maybe so. … The Chaos Theorists tell us that even chaos in extremis has a feedback loop of information and order is reasserting itself. Yin and yang, Shiva and Vishnu bound together like two suns exchanging star stuff. All well and good for the metaphysicians among us. For the rest: “Man that is born or woman is of few days, and full of trouble.”

Joe Bageant writes about our “holographic” reality in which we lose ourselves, lose our core identities and empathic humanity in the projections of sounds and images that envelop us—and, indeed, flow through us, absorbing us and projecting our “selves” back to us. And so the solstice comes and goes without a nod to its “magic”—white or black--and the herb that might protect us from the evil spirits unleashed at this time is a contraband “weed” draining in the dreamscape rubbish heap of a countercultural movement that spawned the last great effervescence of the arts and social consciousness—and, not incidentally, the last great peace movement--in our moribund Republic.

But … we still have our bonfires (of the vanities)! Or, at least, barbecues. …

Two days later and the news is all about Iran. Macho Republican leaders like Senator Lindsey Graham-cracker have been calling Obama weak. In the background, Dick Cheney and Henry Kissinger—Dr. Strangelove is still very much alive, it seems, and still carrying water for the Rothschilds-Rockefellers banking interests—both of them wonder in basso profundo if this isn’t the best time to send predator drones up the mullahs mulish asses? Mr. Obama takes a defiant—though certainly not a Larry-Craig-“wide”--stance and assures the hand-picked press and the TV audience around the world that he isn’t weak—and that he really is trying to kick his smoking habit. Meantime, kinky Kim Jong Il has been threatening to blow up Waikiki Beach, but we do want freedom-loving people all over the world—with the exceptions of Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela and a few score other places—to know that we are closely monitoring the situation, our C.I.A. is definitely not even a teensy-weensy bit involved, and we are without a doubt the greatest nation that will ever exist in the whole wide world—if not the ever-expanding Universe! Further, we really want all those in Bigscreenland to know that the Iranians can’t wait to enjoy the blessings of our unstolen elections—remember President Gore?—not to mention our level of health care and our overflowing prisons where we stuff our malcontents, losers, homeless and foreclosed upon, and other assorted sub-human detritus. What is wrong with these pix?

For one thing: there is nary a mention of the fact that 40 more Iraqis have been blown up—this time in Baghdad. I watch Brian Williams and this new guy with the goatee talk for ten minutes about how the people in Iran really, really, really want democracy. A young woman has been killed in the street and they show the awful picture of her bleeding there, her eyes wide with wonder as her life ebbs away. I grieve for her. She was in the wrong place at the wrong time. I grieve for the Iraqis blown up today and blown up 2 days ago. One could also say: wrong place, wrong time. But that would be a dismissal. There is no dismissal here. Brian and Chris Goatee don’t even mention Ali Baba and the 40 thieves, who no doubt left their bloody sandals behind. It’s like they never were. It’s, like, existential, man! Background muzak (to be sung to the strains of “Who’s Sorry Now?” circa early ‘60’s, Connie Francis much preferred: “We’re leaving now; it’s their heartache now. …”)

capitalism_is_fun_by_mexicanpryde2000

I wanted to talk about barbecues as we scrape the corroding grills for the approaching celebrations. A few facts culled from the Financial Times (so you know they must be right because, let’s face it, their bloody, elitist, aristocratic, royalist, you-can-kiss-my-arse system, actually educates its unwashed “yearning to breathe free” masses better than ours—and they get decent healthcare thrown in to boot—as I learned to my chagrin in the early 80’s, laid up for 12 days with a rather embarrassing ailment related to salmonella or amoebic dysentery—possibly both—and definitively traced to bad chicken eaten on an American airliner on the way over. I was quarantined, had a private room. Didn’t cost me a half penny, and the nurses were pretty … but that’s a different story.)

So, here goes, ye exultant patriots: The US Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association estimates that about 50 percent of all American households will light barbecues on the Fourth of July. Most of these households will use charcoal rather than wood. Charcoal is easier to handle—who chops their own wood anymore?—and it burns at a higher temperature. On the glorious Fourth, 2300 acres of forest will go up in smoke in little backyard grills, emitting some 225,000 tons of carbon dioxide.

Breathing easier? In the mood for firecrackers and hot dogs? Let’s consider the lowly, symmetrical briquettes: they’re bound with borax, have had nitrite added to make them ignite easily—after we soak them with lighter fluid!—and they’ve been mixed with lime to whiten the ash for a nice aesthetic affect. The concentration of dioxins in the vicinity of an “average” barbecue is “equivalent to 220,000 burning cigarettes."

According to the American Institute for Cancer Research, “When fat from meat, poultry or fish drips on to hot coals or stones [carcinogenic] polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are deposited back on to food through smoke and flare-ups.”

Mah fellah Americans … Bon apetit!

What a fine solstice we’ve been having! Latest AP news as of 6/24/09: “An airstrike believed to have been carried out by a U.S. drone killed at least 60 people at a funeral in South Waziristan, Pakistan, according to residents of the area and local news reports.” Of course, it’s only “according to” them. Brian and Chris and Katie, Rush and Bill and Sean and even the lib blowhards like Olbermann, Shultz and Maddow are bound to ignore it. As George the Wimp Bush used to say: “Wouldn’t be prudent.”

Also today, the death toll in the bombing in Baghdad of two days ago has now been raised to 52. Still no pictures. Obama has not called a press conference to aver that Iraqis are striving for freedom and the whole world is watching. Apparently, no one has yet found any weapons of mass destruction and the yellow cake uranium was … just yellow cake! Saddam Hussein is still dead, along with a million other Iraqis who were in the wrong place at the wrong time when our long-time lost Republic decided it needed to build the largest Embassy-cum-Fortress-cum-Listening Post—cum Military Forward Thrust Encampment smack-dab in the cunny of Baghdad.

So I guess my question is, Just what the hell are we supposed to be commemorating and celebrating on the 4th of July? That strange concoction of revolutionaries—democrats and slave-holders, visionaries and anti-tax men, criminals, freemasons, adventurers, horse-thieves, horse-traders, farmers, “winter soldiers and sunshine patriots”—had more in common in terms of their perception of time, their mores, the general conditions of their lives—more in common with the Gracchus brothers of ancient Rome than with anything going down in the multiplex Empire today. So, other than distraction, hocus-pocus and mesmerism—what’s the point?

Which, of course, answers my own question. Hot dog and hamburger buns and circuses of “bombs bursting in air”—a pyrotechnic display of “sound and fury signifying nothing.”

And the masses will be taken in again. Another “holiday” will come and they’ll forget the outsourced jobs, and the TARP funds and “stimulus packages” that put their tax money in the hands of banksters; they’ll forget about “change we can believe in,” and trudging through the snow in New Hampshire and Iowa so ready to believe once more, God Almighty just once again let it be so: the City on the Hill, “purple mountain majesties,” “America, the Beautiful.”

So ready, so willing, so eager to believe that the System can work, that the People, The People, Yes!—have a voice.

Back to the Financial Times. Just before our ne plus ultra election, columnist David Walker (at the time of the writing, the comptroller general of the U.S., and head of the US Government Accountability Office) proffered the de rigeur comparison of America and Rome. More things to worry about; we compare in these ways: “First … a decline in moral values and political civility. … [including] the devaluation of life, greater self-centeredness by individuals and increased partisanship and ideological divides in Congress.” (Throw in the death of the extended family, and now the nuclear, in the last 60 years and I’d say we compare fairly well with the height of the Roman orgiastic period and the plutocrat Cicero railing against his maligned victim Catiline.) “Second, we now have an overextended military around the world.” (Mr. Walker reminds us that our military is “unmatched,” but, alas, it is “under stress.”) “Last, there is fiscal irresponsibility by the central government. Our debt ratios are set to increase dramatically when the baby boomers retire.”

Of course, the solution to the last part of this triumvirate of problems is simple: Don’t let the baby boomers retire! And, indeed, in recent months all those California-dreamin’, woozy Woodstock refugees have moved their retirement dates back from a lusty 62—thank goodness for Viagra and Dos Equis!—to a more shuffle-boarding-ready 67 or, even, sweet Jesus, 70, or phlegmatic Walmart-greeter, 75! We now can answer McCartney: “Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I’m 64?” Well … actually … no. …

All of which leads me to conclude—as the latest news drones in the background—another 76 barbecued in Iraq today!—all of which leads me to conclude: on the 4th of July, the rational man and woman, the feeling ones, the sensible ones, the unclouded, the mind-free, the spiritually unshackled, will do everything they can to eschew participation in that idiot display of hubris, chutzpah, chicanery, vaudeville and irrelevance. Perhaps he or she will take refuge, too, not in the verities of the lost Republics of ancient Rome or almost equally ancient America, but in the still fresh insights of the Taoist poet-philosopher who wrote: “By and by comes the great awakening, and then we find out that this life is really a great dream. Fools think they are awake now, and flatter themselves they know.” If Chuangtse’s words pry open consciousness a little, let us consider where and how we have strayed down the thorny, primrose paths of power and self-aggrandizement, and reflect on the words of the disciple’s teacher:

“Cultivated in the individual, character will become genuine; cultivated in the family, character will become abundant; cultivated in the village, character will multiply; cultivated in the state, character will prosper; cultivated in the world, character will become universal.”

Gary Corseri has published his work at Thomas Paine's Corner, CounterPunch, Dissident Voice, The New York Times, Village Voice and hundreds of other websites and publications. His books include the novels "Holy Grail, Holy Grail" and "A Fine Excess" and the anthology, "Manifestations" (edited). He has taught at US and Japanese universities and in US prisons and public schools. His dramas have been performed on Atlanta PBS and elsewhere, and he has performed his work at the Carter Presidential Library and at coffee shops and universities.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

Corruption can never penetrate the place from which empathy originates:

soul_by_Ily

Graphic: soul by ~Ily

A response to CRACKDOWN ON ANTI-CORPORATE DISSENT: THE ANIMAL RIGHTS MOVEMENT

By Alison Banville

7/3/09

Great stuff on NETCU and the crackdown on activists. It's the same strategy the Austrian authorities used last year. It's frustrating yes, but also a sign of the desperation of governments in response to the success of the movement. What they will never understand is that when someone is motivated by moral principle, a felt sense of compassion fuelled by outrage about the exploitation of the defenceless, they will never give up their cause because it runs in their veins like blood; it's who they are on the very deepest level and only those who have no capacity for such empathy would ever believe that prison walls could imprison the heart. That well of compassion can't be tainted by repression because it springs from a place of such purity it is an incorruptible and inexhaustible source; it is the stream that will never run dry.

How to explain this to the likes of our politicians with their mere facade of morality, their paper-thin pretended concern, their total lack of ethical integrity. To devote one's life completely to the wellbeing of others without thought of reward or compensation, to be motivated by selflessness rather than self-interest, are concepts utterly beyond their grasp, and so they use only the tools they have as dictated by their limited understanding - corruption, misuse of power - which can never penetrate the place from which empathy originates; it will be forever out of reach, and that is why no matter how many activists are jailed there will always be more taking their place.



I can't remember if I mailed you the extracts from Thoreau's Civil Disobedience that I sent Sean Kirtley:

"Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. It is there that the fugitive slave, and the Mexican prisoner on parole, and the Indian come to plead the wrongs of his race, should find them; on that separate, but more free and honorable ground, where the State places those who are not with her, but against her — the only house in a slave State in which a free man can abide with honor. If any think that their influence would be lost there, and their voices no longer afflict the ear of the State, that they would not be as an enemy within its walls, they do not know by how much truth is stronger than error, nor how much more eloquently and effectively he can combat injustice who has experienced a little in his own person.

"I have paid no poll-tax for six years. I was put into a jail once on this account, for one night; and, as I stood considering the walls of solid stone, two or three feet thick, the door of wood and iron, a foot thick, and the iron grating which strained the light, I could not help being struck with the foolishness of that institution which treated me as if I were mere flesh and blood and bones, to be locked up. I wondered that it should have concluded at length that this was the best use it could put me to, and had never thought to avail itself of my services in some way. I saw that, if there was a wall of stone between me and my townsmen, there was a still more difficult one to climb or break through, before they could get to be as free as I was. I did not for a moment feel confined, and the walls seemed a great waste of stone and mortar. I felt as if I alone of all my townsmen had paid my tax. They plainly did not know how to treat me, but behaved like persons who are underbred. In every threat and in every compliment there was a blunder; for they thought that my chief desire was to stand the other side of that stone wall. I could not but smile to see how industriously they locked the door on my meditations, which followed them out again without let or hindrance, and they were really all that was dangerous. As they could not reach me, they had resolved to punish my body; just as boys, if they cannot come at some person against whom they have a spite, will abuse his dog. I saw that the State was half-witted, that it was timid as a lone woman with her silver spoons, and that it did not know its friends from its foes, and I lost all my remaining respect for it, and pitied it."

Alison Banville, TPC’s UK editor of total liberation, is a long-term campaigner on rights for human and nonhuman animals, the environment, and political issues. She is committed to showing how they are all interconnected. Alison is also a singer, lyricist, and teacher, and she has a keen interest in vegan health and fitness.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

Native Americans and Vegetarianism

bison

In the late 1880s, there was massive slaughtering of bison. (This photo of bison bones slated to be ground up for fertilizer is from the National Park Service’s archive.)

This article first appeared in the Vegetarian Journal, September 1994, published by The Vegetarian Resource Group

By Rita Laws, Ph.D.

How well we know the stereotype of the rugged Plains Indian: killer of buffalo, dressed in quill-decorated buckskin, elaborately feathered eaddress, and leather moccasins, living in an animal skin teepee, master of the dog and horse, and stranger to vegetables. But this lifestyle, once limited almost exclusively to the Apaches, flourished no more than a couple hundred years. It is not representative of most Native Americans of today or yesterday. Indeed, the "buffalo-as-lifestyle" phenomenon is a direct result of European influence, as we shall see.

Among my own people, the Choctaw Indians of Mississippi and Oklahoma, vegetables are the traditional diet mainstay. A French manuscript of the eighteenth century describes the Choctaws' vegetarian leanings in shelter and food. The homes were constructed not of skins, but of wood, mud, bark and cane. The principal food, eaten daily from earthen pots, was a vegetarian stew containing corn, pumpkin and beans. The bread was made from corn and acorns. Other common favorites were roasted corn and corn porridge. (Meat in the form of small game was an infrequent repast.) The ancient Choctaws were, first and foremost, farmers. Even the clothing was plant based, artistically embroidered dresses for the women and cotton breeches for the men. Choctaws have never adorned their hair with feathers.

The rich lands of the Choctaws in present-day Mississippi were so greatly coveted by nineteenth century Americans that most of the tribe was forcibly removed to what is now called Oklahoma. Oklahoma was chosen both because it was largely uninhabited and because several explorations of the territory had deemed the land barren and useless for any purpose. The truth, however, was that Oklahoma was so fertile a land that it was an Indian breadbasket. That is, it was used by Indians on all sides as an agricultural resource. Although many Choctaws suffered and died during removal on the infamous "Trail of Tears", those that survived built anew and successfully in Oklahoma, their agricultural genius intact.



George Catlin, the famous nineteenth century Indian historian, described the Choctaw lands of southern Oklahoma in the 1840's this way: "...the ground was almost literally covered with vines, producing the greatest profusion of delicious grapes,...and hanging in such endless clusters... our progress was oftentimes completely arrested by hundreds of acres of small plum trees...every bush that was in sight was so loaded with the weight of its...fruit, that they were in many instances literally without leaves on their branches, and quite bent to the ground... and beds of wild currants, gooseberries, and (edible) prickly pear." (Many of the "wild" foods Anglo explorers encountered on their journeys were actually carefully cultivated by Indians.)

Many of the Choctaw foods cooked at celebrations even today are vegetarian. Corn is so important to us it is considered divine. Our corn legend says that is was a gift from Hashtali, the Great Spirit. Corn was given in gratitude because Choctaws had fed the daughter of the Great Spirit when she was hungry. (Hashtali is literally "Noon Day Sun". Choctaws believe the Great Spirit resides within the sun, for it is the sun that allows the corn to grow!)

Another Choctaw story describes the afterlife as a giant playground where all but murderers are allowed. What do Choctaws eat in "heaven"? Their sweetest treat, of course: melons, a never-ending supply.

More than one tribe has creation legends which describe people as vegetarian, living in a kind of Garden of Eden. A Cherokee legend describes humans, plants, and animals as having lived in the beginning in "equality and mutual helpfulness". The needs of all were met without killing one another. When man became aggressive and ate some of the animals, the animals invented diseases to keep human population in check. The plants remained friendly, however, and offered themselves not only as food to man, but also as medicine, to combat the new diseases.

More tribes were like the Choctaws than were different. Aztec, Mayan, and Zapotec children in olden times ate 100% vegetarian diets until at least the age of ten years old. The primary food was cereal, especially varieties of corn. Such a diet was believed to make the child strong and disease resistant. (The Spaniards were amazed to discover that these Indians had twice the life-span they did.) A totally vegetarian diet also insured that the children would retain a life-long love of grains, and thus, live a healthier life. Even today, the Indian healers of those tribes are likely to advise the sick to "return to the arms of Mother Corn" in order to get well. Such a return might include eating a lot of atole. (The easiest way to make atole is to simmer commercially produced masa harina corn flour with water. Then flavor it with chocolate or cinnamon, and sweeten to taste.) Atole is considered a sacred food.

It is ironic that Indians are strongly associated with hunting and fishing when, in fact, "nearly half of all the plant foods grown in the world today were first cultivated by the American Indians, and were unknown elsewhere until the discovery of the Americas." Can you imagine Italian food without tomato paste, Ireland without white potatoes, or Hungarian goulash without paprika? All these foods have Indian origins.

An incomplete list of other Indian foods given to the world includes bell peppers, red peppers, peanuts, cashews, sweet potatoes, avocados, passion fruit, zucchini, green beans, kidney beans, maple syrup, lima beans, cranberries, pecans, okra, chocolate, vanilla, sunflower seeds, pumpkin, cassava, walnuts, forty-seven varieties of berries, pineapple, and, of course, corn and popcorn.

Many history textbooks tell the story of Squanto, a Pawtuxent Indian who lived in the early 1600's. Squanto is famous for having saved the Pilgrims from starvation. He showed them how to gather wilderness foods and how to plant corn.

There have been thousands of Squantos since, even though their names are not so well-known. In fact modern day agriculture owes its heart and soul to Indian-taught methods of seed development, hybridization, planting, growing, irrigating, storing, utilizing and cooking. And the spirit of Squanto survives to this day. One example is a Peruvian government research station tucked away in a remote Amazon Indian village called Genaro Herrera. University trained botanists, agronomists and foresters work there, scientifically studying all the ways the local Indians grow and prepare food. They are also learning how to utilize forests without destroying them, and how to combat pests without chemicals.

The trend that moved some North American Indian tribes away from plant food-based diets can be traced to Coronado, a sixteenth century Spanish explorer. Prior to his time, hunting was a hobby among most Indians, not a vocation. The Apaches were one of the few tribes who relied heavily on animal killing for survival.

But all that changed as Coronado and his army traversed the West and Midwest from Mexico. Some of his horses got away and quickly multiplied on the grassy plains. Indians re-tamed this new denizen, and the Age of Buffalo began.

Horses replaced dogs as beasts of burden and offered excellent transportation. This was as important an innovation to the Plains Indians as the automobile would be to Anglos later on. Life on the Plains became much easier very quickly.

>From the east came another powerful influence: guns. The first American settlers brought their firearms with them. Because of the Indian "threat", they were soon immersed in weapons development and succeeded in making more accurate and powerful weapons. But they also supplied weapons to Indians who allied themselves with colonial causes. Because it was so much easier to kill an animal with a rifle than with a bow and arrow, guns spread quickly among the Indians. Between the horse and the rifle, buffalo killing was now much simpler.

The Apaches were joined by other tribes, such as the Sioux, Cheyenne, Arapahos, Comanches, and Kiowas. These tribes "lost the corn", gave up agriculture, and started living nomadic existences for the first time. It wasn't long before their food, clothing, and shelter were entirely dependent on one animal, the buffalo.

George Catlin lamented this fact as early as 1830. He predicted the extinction of the buffalo (which very nearly happened) and the danger of not being diversified. Catlin pointed out that, were the Plains Indians only killing a buffalo for their own use, the situation might not be so grave. But because the great beasts were being slaughtered for profit, they were destined to be wiped out.

It was the white man who profited. There was an insatiable Eastern market for buffalo tongue and buffalo robes. In 1832, Catlin described a wholesale buffalo slaughter carried out by six hundred Sioux on horseback. These men killed fourteen hundred animals, and then took only their tongues. These were traded to whites for a few gallons of whiskey. The whiskey, no doubt, helped to dull the Indian talent to make maximum use of an animal. Among the tribes who did not trade with whites, each animal was completely used, down to the hooves. No part went to waste. And buffalo were not killed in the winter, for the Indians lived on autumn dried meat during that time.

But now buffalo were killed in the winter most of all. It was in cold weather that their magnificent coats grew long and luxuriant. Catlin estimated that 200,000 buffalo were killed each year to make coats for people back East. The average hide netted the Indian hunter one pint of whiskey.

Had the Indians understood the concept of animal extinction, they may have ceased the slaughter. But to the Indians, the buffalo was a gift from the Great Spirit, a gift which would always keep coming. Decades after the disappearance of huge herds, Plains Indians still believed their return was imminent. They danced the Ghost Dance, designed to bring back the buffalo, and prayed for this miracle as late as 1890.

In spite of the ease and financial incentives of killing buffalo, there were tribes that did not abandon the old ways of the Plains. In addition to the farming tribes of the Southeast, tribes in the Midwest, Southwest, and Northwest stuck to agriculture. For example, the Osage, Pawnee, Arikaras, Mandans, Wichitas, and Caddoans remained in permanent farming settlements. Even surrounded by buffalo, they built their homes of timber and earth. And among some of the Indians of the Southwest, cotton, basketry, and pottery were preferred over animal-based substitutes like leather pouches.

Catlin was eerily accurate when he predicted dire consequences for the buffalo-dependent tribes. To this day, it is these Indians who have fared the worst from assimilation with other races. The Sioux of South Dakota, for one, have the worst poverty and one of the highest alcoholism rates in the country. Conversely, the tribes who depended little or not at all on animal exploitation for their survival, like the Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek, and Chickasaw, are thriving and growing, having assimilated without surrendering their culture.

In the past, and in more than a few tribes, meat-eating was a rare activity, certainly not a daily event. Since the introduction of European meat-eating customs, the introduction of the horse and the gun, and the proliferation of alcoholic beverages and white traders, a lot has changed. Relatively few Indians can claim to be vegetarians today.

But it was not always so. For most Native Americans of old, meat was not only not the food of choice, its consumption was not revered (as in modern times when Americans eat turkey on Thanksgiving as if it were a religious duty). There was nothing ceremonial about meat. It was a plant, tobacco, that was used most extensively during ceremonies and rites, and then only in moderation. Big celebrations such as Fall Festivals centered around the harvest, especially the gathering of the corn. The Choctaws are not the only ones who continue to dance the Corn Dance.

What would this country be like today if the ancient ways were still observed? I believe it is fair to say that the Indian respect for non-human life forms would have had a greater impact on American society. Corn, not turkey meat, might be the celebrated Thanksgiving Day dish. Fewer species would have become extinct, the environment would be healthier, and Indian and non-Indian Americans alike would be living longer and healthier lives. There might also be less sexism and racism, for many people believe that, as you treat your animals (the most defenseless), so you will treat your children, your women, and your minorities.

Without realizing it, the Indian warriors and hunters of ages past played right into the hands of the white men who coveted their lands and their buffalo. When the lands were taken from them, and the buffalo herds decimated, there was nothing to fall back on. But the Indians who chose the peaceful path and relied on diversity and the abundance of plants for their survival were able to save their lifestyles. Even after being moved to new lands they could hang on, re-plant, and go forward.

Now we, their descendants, must recapture the spirit of the ancient traditions for the benefit of all people. We must move away from the European influences that did away with a healthier style of living. We must again embrace our brothers and sisters, the animals, and "return to the corn" once and for all.

(Rita Laws is Choctaw and Cherokee. She lives and writes in Oklahoma. Her Choctaw name, Hina Hanta, means Bright Path of Peace, which is what she considers vegetariansim to be. She has been vegetarian for over 14 years.)

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

The U.S. Federal Budget Pipeline: Where Do The Dollars Drain?

obama_eisenhower

By Emily Spence

7/3/09

In order to raise sales and personal royalty gains, Alan Greenspan, just prior to the release of his book The Age of Turbulence, carried out a public relations blitz dragged out for a whole week in which he made remarks similar to those conveyed in his hardback. These included statements such as “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.”

Indeed, many Americans and people from other countries knew that domination of a region rich in fossil fuels represented the primary motive for the Iraq incursion and the only reason that Iran is not similarly assaulted is that it has an arsenal, unlike Saddam Hussein, capable of rendering serious damage in retaliation. Besides, the U.S. military is stretched too thin as it is with approximately 1,000 bases worldwide, along with operations occurring on every continent, such as the AFRICOM sorties, which are generally tied to oil company interests as the map at the first reference shows. [1]

Furthermore, plans to invade Iraq were long in the making, but the problem was finding the grounds, legal or otherwise, to obtain the support of the public for such an outrageous act of violence, which to date has led to the displacement of millions of Iraqis and the slaughter of more than one million individuals, including over 4,300 U.S. troops. In tandem, George W. Bush and Tony Blair knew that the UN inspectors would not find Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and were hard pressed to find a reason that could justify the war. So the U.S. President came up with alternatives:



"Bush told Blair the US had drawn up a provocative plan 'to fly U2 reconnaissance aircraft painted in UN colours over Iraq with fighter cover'. Bush said that if Saddam fired at the planes this would put the Iraqi leader in breach of UN resolutions.

"The president expressed hopes that an Iraqi defector would be 'brought out' to give a public presentation on Saddam's WMD or that someone might assassinate the Iraqi leader. However, Bush confirmed [in a memo written approximately two months prior to America's preemptive attack on Iraq that] even without a second [United Nations] resolution, the US was prepared for military action. The memo said Blair told Bush he was 'solidly with the president.'" [2]

This in mind, it behooves the public, particularly the American public, to realize that U.S. armed invasions and covert operations, in general, have little to do with protecting Americans from global terrorists and more to do with getting fossil fuels on behalf of the Pentagon and favored companies, whose heads contribute to government officials' campaign funds and offer other perks like high paying jobs upon the completion of terms in office. As such, it would be more accurate were the directors of the Department of Defense to change its name to the Department of Assault. Doing so would, certainly, better reflect the United States history that has been well chronicled by Bill Blum, who indicates, "From 1945 to the end of the century, the United States attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements struggling against intolerable regimes. In the process, the US caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair." [3]

He, further, reminds that there existed a total of 168 separate invasions of countries around the world by the United States. This information was derived from the revision to the 1969 rendition of the Appendix to a report researched by the Foreign Affairs Division, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1975 and listed as "Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-1945. [4]

Meanwhile, Alan Greenspan summarized, in talks and The Age of Turbulence his displeasure with the Bush administration. “My biggest frustration remained the president’s unwillingness to wield his veto against out-of-control spending,” Greenspan indicated. “Not exercising the veto power became a hallmark of the Bush presidency. . . To my mind, Bush’s collaborate-don’t-confront approach was a major mistake.”

It, certainly, was and, in the Obama administration, it still is a major mistake compounded by other factors. These include the bailout funds committed as of December 2008 in the amount of $8.5 trillion, which represents 60% of the GDP [5] and the $1,449 billion, 54% of the federal budget, allocated for military expenditures in 2009. (This is in contrast to $1,210 billion, which represents 46% of the $2,650 billion total intended for the 2009 federal outlay, which is largely comprised of money borrowed from Chinese government controlled institutions). [6]

Out of such a reckless and cavalier setting, the total federal debt, itself, has blossomed to around $100 trillion [7], according to some researchers, based on the ongoing pattern of spending loaned funds and expecting future taxpayers to foot the ultimate bill in a ponzy-like scheme, one that makes the USA inarguably the world's biggest debtor. (While Barack Obama seems to consider spiraling healthcare costs as the primary driver of the public deficit, surely he jests. Based on the tabulations above, it is clear that warfare and preparedness for extended wars is the largest cost that taxpayers subsume.)

Simultaneously, the IMF and WTB directors, in a way, must be beside themselves with glee over the mounting shortfall. Like the personification of Bernie Madoff, Simon Legree and Uncle Scrooge all rolled into one, they draw together in a perfect vision of eager anticipation over the financial killing yet to come.

As Vi Ransel explains about them in two sections of "Manufacturing Poor People":

"The World Bank loans money to a poor country to “help” in its development, to build up a part of its economy. “If”, and almost certainly when (that’s The Plan) the poor country is unable to pay the usurious interest on the loan because of declining exports (again, The Plan), the country has to borrow more money in order to service the debt. Enter the [International Monetary Fund].

"The IMF extends more loans, with more of those stainless steel strings more tightly bound around the victim, er, I mean, loan recipient, trussing up the “benefiting” poor nation like a Thanksgiving turkey about to be devoured by the West, The Rich. The country which borrows money... must give tax breaks to Western transnationals. The country must slash wages and refuse to protect local businesses from being ravaged by cheap imports and corporate takeovers.

"The country is further strong-armed to sell, at fire sale prices, all its government-owned mines, its railroads, industries and utilities to privately-owned, mostly-foreign corporations. The country must allow its forests to be clearcut and its land to be strip-mined. Money for education, healthcare, food assistance and the transportation infrastructure must be sheared back to service the debt. And the interest on the debt, through the wondrously magical Western miracle of compound interest, keeps growing and growing and growing and growing and on and on and on and on… And all the while, the people of the country are less able to feed themselves, since they are forced to grow cash crops for export to feed that debt service.

"Well, U.S. transnationals didn’t intend to ever let that happen again. There would be no more giving a real leg up to potential competitors. And thus we arrived at where we are today. And, in fact, the ruse works so well, that since the Seventies the plutocracy has been using the very same template here at home, – with an increasingly heavy hand. See U.S. auto workers, healthcare, the bank bailout, foreclosed homes, 600,00 jobs a month jettisoned, the murder of California, et al. Who, or what, will be next?" [8]

Will it be the entire USA? Perhaps it will be in that the public finances in America are, currently, arranged along this line:

In Fiscal Year 2008, $412 Billion was spent to pay back interest on money owed to holders of the National Debt. It represents the third biggest federal expense and the full amount owed in 2009, due to continued borrowing, will be, in all likelihood, higher as it equaled $214 Billion by May. Furthermore, educational spending in 2008 received a mere 4.4 percent of the budget while the accumulated estimated total for the interest owed on the National Debt is estimated to be $445,095,000,000, although the sum will, obviously, increase as more money is borrowed. [9]

Meanwhile, the current monthly aggregate for the 2009 interest owed is roughly $42.8 billion per month while monthly federal outlay is approximately $220.8 billion per month with this interest paid back each month representing slightly more than 5.1 % of each tax dollar spent or, posed another way, over nineteen cents for each one expended while the budget deficit, itself, entails loans close to fifty cents on each dollar paid out with an increase in borrowing by $87 billion to $1.3 trillion expected in 2010 according to a White House spokesperson. [10]

In addition, there will, ultimately, be less tax dollars to collect in that presently, America is hemorrhaging jobs at one every thirty seconds according to some analysts. So why not spend money to bail out the families living in their cars and under tarps in tent cities by providing employment and income through a widespread Works Progress Administration (WPA) and extended Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) programs as occurred during the Great Depression?

DC2_dees

Wouldn't such a plan go further than bailouts to financial institutions and the ever present resource wars as a way to jumpstart the American economy, as well as US taxpayers who are watching 73 % of every tax dollar going to military expenditures (54%) and interest payments (19+ %)? (It forces one to wonder from where funds are going to derive for universal public health care, future Social Security payments, Medicare, Medicaid, public education and assorted other programs, such sustainable benign energy provision on a model close to energy independent Denmark's enviable prototype as described by Thomas L. Friedman in "Flush With Energy". [11]

Then again, the Pentagon directors probably have concluded that they need their resource wars in that the U.S. military is the single biggest user of oil in the world and it takes lots of oil to get the further oil supplied to American favored oil companies so that it can be returned in large measure and at high expense to the armed forces. In other words, it requires the type of assurance for a continued oil supply that only beaten down countries and puppet governments can render.

On account, open combat and covert operations will be the favored means to obtain fossil fuels. On account, the military will continue to drain away the majority of the U.S. federal budget while the US covert operations budget, by itself, will surpass a staggering $50 billion for 2009.

"'That’s the largest-ever sum,' according to Aviation Week’s Bill Sweetman, a longtime black-budget seer — a three percent increase over last year’s total. It makes the Pentagon’s secret operations, including the intelligence budgets nested inside, 'roughly equal in magnitude to the entire defense budgets of the UK, France or Japan,' Sweetman adds. All in all, about seven and a half percent of the Defense Department’s total spending is now classified." [12]

All in all, the ongoing U.S. financial mess provides signs that, while China's rising, the USA will never gain back its former glory days that gave rise to both world dominance and a large middle class. As the country continues to lose jobs at the rate of approximately one every thirty seconds to either offshore company sites or business cutbacks, it has nowhere else to go except to sink down into increased hardship, as well as some degree of destitution, for an increasing number of Americans and the nation as a whole.

The unending act of misappropriating a land's collective assets year after year has a way of ensuring this final result. As Ethel Grodzins Romm alleges,“What could our worst enemy do to damage this strong and beautiful country? He could do no better than to get us to squander our human and natural resources on dubious missions and then trick us into plugging our ears against the howls of those who object.”

[1] Major Oil Corporation and U.S. Military Activities in Africa (http://therearenosunglasses.wordpress.com/2009/06/22/major-oil-corporation-and-u-s-military-activities-in-africa/).

[2] Confidential memo reveals US plan to provoke an invasion of Iraq (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/21/iraq-inquiry-tony-blair-bush).

[3] The question of oil: U.S. corporate interests in control of ... (http://www.representativepress.org/Oil.html).

[4] APPENDIX II from 'KILLING HOPE' by William Blum (http://www.worldproutassembly.org/archives/2008/07/appendix_ii_fro.html).

[5] Cost Of Bailout Hits $8.5 Trillion-Total sum represents 60 per .... ( www.investment-blog.net/cost-of-bailout-hits-85-trillion-total-sum-represents-60-per-cent-of-gdp/).

[6] The Federal Pie Chart (http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm)..

[7] The Real US Federal Debt Has Ballooned to More than $100 ... (http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20090527/real-us-federal-debt-has-ballooned-more-than-100-trillion.htm).

[8] Manufacturing Poor People (http://thomaspainescorner.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/manufacturing-poor-people/).

[9] Tax Chart 2009 Notes & Sources (http://www.nationalpriorities.org/taxday2009/notes_and_sources).

[10] US to borrow 46 cents for every dollar spent (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2248835/posts).

[11] Op-Ed Columnist - Flush With Energy - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/opinion/10friedman1.html).

[12] Pentagon's Black Budget Grows to More Than $50 Billion .... (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/05/pentagons-black-budget-grows-to-more-than-50-billion/).

Emily Spence is an author living in Massachusetts. She has spent many years involved in human rights, environmental and social services efforts.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

It's the Inequality, Stupid

capitalism33

By Vi Ransel

7/3/09

Our government, composed, ostensibly, of the people's own representatives has refused to take the banks - merely corporations initially created to serve the needs of the people - in hand and deal with them. The tail has become the dog. The Federal Reserve and Rubin's sorcerer's apprentices of deregulation have unleashed the hounds of economic hell and allowed the few who rule from behind the curtains of the financial system to sit upon the rest of the American people as if on a throne. And by that I mean toilet. They've plundered and pillaged the United States of America into a reasonable facsimile of a banana republic after financial gang rape by NAFTA, the IMF and the World Bank.

As the financial aristocracy which holds the reins of the banks settles ever more comfortably into the driver's seat of the rest of the American people's lives, they strangle the entire economy, squeezing out every last drop of profit at the people's expense. The level of inequality is staggering, and it's being ratcheted up even further on the ski lift of excess to the summit of the sheer cliff overlooking the abyss of total economic collapse.

And all for those worthless pieces of paper, those I.O.U.s we call dollars. But no, the Plutocrats are not stupid. They're planning to palm off this ephemeral currency on anyone stupid - or desperate - enough to exchange tangible assets for dollars. Real things like businesses, factories, infrastructure, natural resources and real estate. Yes, my pretty, your very own home. And all for pennies on the dollar. Just as in the First Great depression, the Plutocrats will consolidate real - as opposed to financial paper or computer entry - wealth into, as George Bush #41 put it so succinctly, "higher, tighter and righter hands." Please feel free to add "whiter" to that list. This has always been The Plan.



As more and more of us no longer even live paycheck to paycheck, but credit card fee to credit card fee, struggling just to keep our heads above water, the smaller and smaller percentage of those at the tippy top hoarding the bulk of America's wealth gorges on 99% of the American Pie, floating up there above the rest of us like a yacht the size of a football field, its hull honed to the sharpest Sword-of-Damocles-like edge.

Everybody knows this. It's as plain as the "knows" on your face. But no one dare speak its name. The Plutocracy parades in the Empire's new clothes, completely naked - especially its arrogant CEOs - its excess perpetuated by our denial. The market, and the money and power it symbolizes, is our god and it will have none other before it. We may not take its name in vain. "There is no alternative" to capitalism. (Margaret Thatcher)

Thus almost everyone who has eyes to see and yet denies this fact eventually succumbs to apathy, ennui and despair. This feeling of powerlessness in Americans is as carefully cultivated as hot house roses (or genetically-engineered tomatoes) in order to cripple the spirit of the American Revolution as it becomes more and more apparent that merit, character, ethics and hard work are mere road apples in the dust as the Plutocrats' progeny cakewalks their way to the top of the heap, leaving equal opportunity, a level playing field, liberty and justice for all in the same pile of road apples. And we, the majority of the American people, have languished there in that pile, afraid of, and subservient to, the all-American authoritarianism that masquerades in the sheep's clothing of democracy until 1% - ONE PERCENT - of 305 million of us is holding 25% - ONE QUARTER - of all of America's wealth.

Let's say there are 100 of us in our science class and we're about to start on our projects for the science fair. There's a fund we all share in to buy the things we need to complete our projects. Little Lord Fauntleroy gets $25.00. The other 99 of us split $75.00. That means the rest of us get about 76 cents each. How do you think our science projects will turn out? Who do you think will win the science prize on this level playing field?

But maybe our folks, the parents of the 99 of us who have 76 cents each to spend on our science projects, can help us out. Fuggeddaboudit. Mom and Dad haven't had a raise since 1980. They've been financing our American Dream on their credit cards. And Little Lord Fauntleroy's parents? They've been outsourcing our parents' jobs, loaning them money at loan shark rates, getting them to buy their own debt via "structured investment vehicles" and laughing all the way to the bank.

And while these financial wizards, particularly the banksters, were racking up billions and billions by impoverishing our parents, they were also slipping it to our representatives in the congressional shark tank in the form of lobbyists and campaign contributions. Why do you THINK the Democrats, who were elected with a mandate to do the bidding of the majority of the American people - enact single-payer healthcare, ease access to higher education, create jobs, save Social Security, stop the foreclosures and get us the hell out of the Middle East, to name just a few - have been bending over, grabbing their ankles and taking it from all comers, Republicans, "conservatives", neoliberals, neocons, the hospital/insurance/pharmaceutical and banking interests, and their own, body-snatching, DLC "centrist" Democrat ghouls? Money makes their world go 'round. It rings their bell. It makes them feel big and powerful, even if only more big and powerful than lowly "we the people" as they remain subservient, groveling, licking the ass of the money-grubber on the next rung up of the money ladder begging for more shit.

And we KNOW this. We look at it "from the side" like "good Germans" saw their neighbors carted off to concentration camps from the corner of their eye and denied it all the same. Many, to this day. This putrid political parlaying in the twilight of perception management grows inequality like fungus in the dark, popping up everywhere our "reality" is manufactured for us by the kindly protégés of Leo Strauss, who know what's best for us, who do it for our own good, because we're too stupid-by-design to be able to run either a government or a financial system all by ourselves - or so they've engineered us to believe.

They've actually enlisted us to enable, aid and abet our own assault, battery and financial gang rape at the behest of men of obscene and obese wealth - Yes, men. White men. - behind the curtain who made us say we love it, told us to suck it up, baby. Siphon that money up to your American idler daddy, the plutocratic parasite that turned us out and made us what we are today. Who made us believe that greed is good. That what's good for Wall Street is good for Main Street. This pornographic molestation has fostered the takeover of the United States government, that government ostensibly of the people, by the people and for the people in a coup de banks, which, remember, are only the front men for the creepsters behind the curtain, the billionaires and multi-millionaires who fancy themselves philanthropists like raisin-like old John D. Rockefeller handing out shiny new dimes during the First Great Depression to the foreclosed upon, the jobless, the sick, the hungry and the homeless in an effort to make himself look human via public relations.

Keep in mind that if you make $50,000 a year, you will have to work for 20,000 years to make a billion dollars, a mere 10,000 years to make half a billion. A billion is one thousand million. The richest man in the world is worth $40 billion. What does one do with $40 billion? That's an awful lot of shiny dimes. And these billionaires are certainly not giving until it hurts. They're too busy taking. And damn the consequences. "When questioned about the devastation that currency speculation caused to countless millions in Asia when his type of gambling caused cataclysmic chaos, (George) Soros replied casually that 'As a market participant, I don't need to be concerned with the consequences of my actions.'" (1)

While they're busy sucking it up, our money as "surplus" value, our assets and engineered stock losses, that is, they're more or less telling us metaphorically, perhaps literally, to "suck on our yachts" (2) Charming, no? No.

Between the Plutocrats sucking us dry and "our" Congress and the Obama Administration sucking up to them, all that suction has sucked us up to the top of that sheer cliff overlooking the abyss of total economic collapse. We the people have nothing left for the predatory Plutocrats to suck. And we're sick of sucking on their yachts.

But note, when they've taken everything from us and we have nothing left to lose, they've inadvertently set us free, hoisting themselves on their own petard. Let's finish the revolution.

KILL CAPITALISM BEFORE IT KILLS YOU. POWER. TO THE PEOPLE.

(1) Brian Cloughly, "Scoundrels of Great Wealth"
(2) Matt Taibbi, "Suck on Our Yachts: Goldman Sachs Issues Non-apology
for Destroying the World Economy", Truth/Slant, Alternet, June 22, 2009

Vi Ransel, TPC’s senior editor of anti-capitalism, is a researcher and poet of exceptional caliber. Very little is known about her.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

Thursday, July 02, 2009

CRACKDOWN ON ANTI-CORPORATE DISSENT: THE ANIMAL RIGHTS MOVEMENT



Simulposted with Corporate Watch

7/1/09

During the past three years, the police and the Crown Prosecution Service have launched a new campaign against anti-corporate animal rights campaigns across the country. The crackdown has lead to the imprisonment of activists linked to Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) for a total of 50 years and the jailing of Sean Kirtley, who was linked to the Stop Sequani Animal Torture Campaign (SSAT), for four and a half years. The sentences, the charges and the nature of the prosecutions have all been political. Public opposition to the crackdown has been confounded by a media smokescreen thrown up by the press releases churned out by the National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit (NETCU), portraying activists as ‘extremists’ and disseminating misinformation. Many of those jailed have not committed any conventional crime but have been targeted by new legislation intended to counter the threat posed to the pharmaceutical industry by effective direct action.

The role of NETCU

The National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit was set up partly as a replacement for the Animal Rights National Index (ARNI). The creation of NETCU came at the same time as a realisation by the police that the small, autonomous direct actions against companies involved in vivisection in 1980s and 90s were being replaced by mass campaigns such as the campaign to shut down the Hillgrove cat breeders and, later, Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC).

NETCU monitors the policing of animal rights campaigns and other political movements, often focused anti-corporate campaigns; follows prosecutions through courts and cultivates informants. One of NETCU’s most important roles, however, is the undermining of campaigns through partisan use of the media and support for groups presenting counter arguments to the dissenters NETCU is targeting. For instance, the NETCU website hosted links to the pro-vivisection Research Defense Society and articles praising PROtest. NETCU is also one of the least transparent of all UK police departments and shrug off all requests for information about the work of the unit. The political nature of NETCU’s work is illustrated by several press releases boasting of activists being prevented from doing street collections and leafletting (see, for example, ‘Animal rights campaign refused permission to hold street collections in Sunderland’ at www.netcu.org.uk/media/article.jsp?id=280).



The Sequani Six

“All effective campaigns that have tried to change the world have suffered severe repression at the hands of the state. If the state isn’t interested, then you’re not being effective.” - Sean Kirtley

An amendment to the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (SOCPA) in 2005 made it illegal to “interfere with the contractual relations of an animal research organisation” or to “intimidate” employees of an animal research organisation. One of the people consulted during the drafting of the act was the CEO of Sequani labs in Ledbury, Herefordshire. The labs had been the subject of protests due to their involvement in animal testing.

On 9th May 2006, coordinated dawn raids took place at various homes around the Midlands. The massive police operation, dubbed ‘Tornado’, was given up-to-the-minute coverage on the news section of the NETCU website. Computers and mobile phones were seized as well as items like a plastic witch’s nose that were later exhibited in court. Twelve people were charged under SOCPA. In the trial of the first seven defendants, in January and February 2008, the prosecution alleged that the events at 16 demonstrations against Sequani and related companies amounted to an ‘interference with the contractual relations’ of Sequani. The incidents related to words spoken (allegedly offensive), acts of trespass and the sending of a repeating fax message to block up company fax machines. All of these charges are minor and would be extremely unlikely to carry a prison sentence. However, when they form an element of a SOCPA offence, they can carry up to five years in prison.

The 18-week-long trial, subject to a media-gagging order imposed by the judge, examined reams of computer and mobile phone evidence. The prosecution produced an ‘expert analyst’ who examined the network of phone calls between the defendants and presented them as evidence that they were organising demonstrations. The very act of planning to demonstrate against Sequani was portrayed as illegal. The prosecution identified what they presented as a ‘hierarchy’ in the SSAT campaign and portrayed certain defendants, including Sean Kirtley, as the ‘leaders’. Much was made of the fact that Sean Kirtley’s computer showed that he had updated the SSAT website. SMS messages and emails downloaded to computers, through email clients like Thunderbird or Outlook, were read out in court.

What the defendants were accused of essentially amounted to nothing more than a public, legal protest campaign. Nothing the average person would perceive as illegal occurred. No acts of direct action were relied upon by the prosecution and no physical damage had been done to Sequani or any other company (except for one window broken by accident).

The trial at Coventry Crown Court took its toll on the defendants. According to Sean Kirtley, defendants suffered “mental and physical exhaustion, nightmares and disturbed sleep” as a result of the stress. Wendy Campbell told Corporate Watch, “It nearly killed me but I was innocent, so I stood my ground.”

All defendants apart from Kirtley were acquitted. The judge, a game-shooter, remanded Kirtley and later sentenced him to four and a half years imprisonment and a five-year CRASBO on release, which is an anti-social behaviour order (ASBO) imposed by a criminal court.

So let us look for a moment at the specific charges against Kirtley. He was not directly accused of using offensive language: the prosecution admitted he was mostly silent at demonstrations. Nor was he accused of sending disruptive faxes. The only charges against him were of allegedly ‘organising’ demonstrations through phone calls and emails and updating the SSAT website. The SSAT website was not offensive and did not even advertise the demonstrations at Sequani. It merely discussed animal abuse by Sequani and listed companies doing business with it. It also encouraged readers to engage, politely, with these companies and not break the law. SSAT was also a general animal rights resource with information about the fur and dairy trades and anti-foie gras campaigns.

Thus, Sean Kirtley, perhaps more than any other prisoner in the UK at the moment, is a political prisoner punished for nothing but exercising his right to freedom of expression and right to protest.



The SHAC Seven

Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) is perhaps the most ambitious and most effective anti-corporate campaign against vivisection in the world. Its aim is to close Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS), Europe’s largest animal testing laboratory. In its attempts to do so, it has aimed to persuade companies to desist from investing in, supplying or providing services to HLS. This tactic recognises that corporations cannot do business in a vacuum but rely on other companies to provide a network of services to them.

In May 2007, police arrested 32 people in raids dubbed ‘Operation Achilles’. Since then, 15 people have been charged with ‘conspiracy to blackmail’ and are being tried in two separate cases, of which the trial of the ‘SHAC 7’ was the first.

The charges related to six years of campaigning against HLS, which the prosecution claimed was ‘blackmail’. Blackmail is defined as “making an unwarranted demand with menaces.” The alleged blackmail in the three and a half month long trial at Winchester Crown Court takes a little bit of creative thinking to understand. SHAC, in which all seven on trial were allegedly active, published publicly available company details of customers, investors and other companies doing business with HLS. SHAC supporters were encouraged to write to them or protest against them in the hope that they would cease trading with HLS. SHAC always added a caveat that actions should remain within the law. In fact, SHAC went to such lengths to remain within the law that Natasha Avery, one of the defendants, entered into long correspondences with the police over SHAC-related demonstrations, even praising the policing of some as even-handed.

Throughout the history of the SHAC campaign, autonomous direct actions, often under the banner of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), have taken place against HLS, secondary and tertiary companies and their employees. Cars have been paint-strippered, company property damaged and letters threatening more damage have been sent to company offices and, sometimes, to directors’ homes. Hoax bombs have been sent and, on one occasion, an incendiary device was placed at the home of a company director of a related company. These actions are not alleged to have been carried out by SHAC. However, during the trial a spreadsheet, allegedly pieced together from fragments of a document linked to a computer in the house where the SHAC office was based, was produced. The spreadsheet detailed actions against HLS, including the sending of letters accusing directors of being paedophiles and damage to cars, giving the place and the date when the actions occurred. The prosecution alleged that other documents recovered from computers provided tenuous links between some defendants and the spreadsheet.

Thus, the alleged ‘unwarranted demand’ was what SHAC had asked companies: to sever links with HLS. The supposed threat, or ‘menace’, was that of direct action carried out by others. The existence of some evidence, albeit weak, of links between some of the people on trial and direct action was an added extra for the prosecution.

A further complication was that three people had pleaded guilty. A SHAC statement said that this was because they “could not hope for a fair trial” and that the government “had a political will to find them guilty of something.” However, this effectively meant that it was accepted that blackmail had occurred, although the other five defendants denied conspiracy. The trial, therefore, was about how much the remaining defendants could be linked to this ‘blackmail’. Much of the evidence, including the aforementioned spreadsheet, could not be challenged as the defendants who pleaded guilty were not cross-examined.

Although it was technically accepted that blackmail had occurred, the prosecution never specified the exact nature of the blackmail. At its highest, the prosecution case linked most defendants to direct action through the computer evidence. However, the evidence of such a link was tenuous to non-existent. Failing that, the prosecution essentially argued that SHAC operated legally but gave tacit support to direct action. In some cases, particularly where activists had not been involved in SHAC for long and could not be painted as organisers, the prosecution argued that words they had said on demonstrations, ranging from threats to articulate speeches about the need to end vivisection, were evidence of ‘conspiracy to blackmail’. The judge even instructed the jury that simply being on demonstrations where threatening statements were uttered could be evidence of ‘conspiracy to blackmail’.

When the jury found 7 out of the 8 defendants guilty, it remained unclear which one of the prosecution’s many definitions of the charges they accepted. It may be that they were simply influenced by the media storm whipped up by NETCU press officers or the wealth of irrelevant allusions to actions not carried out by the defendants, such as the theft of the body of Gladys Hammond in the completely separate campaign against Darley Oaks Guinea pig farm. It is evident that the defendants were convicted, to a large extent, through guilt by association with the actions of others.

At the three-day-long sentencing in January 2009, Judge Butterfield sentenced the defendants according to how he saw them in the supposed hierarchy of the SHAC campaign, not according to the evidence against them. Thus, Greg and Natasha Avery were given the heaviest sentences possible but were given credit for their guilty pleas and sentenced to serve nine years each. Heather Nicholson, who plead not guilty, received the longest actual sentence, eleven years. Gavin Medd Hall was sentenced to eight years; Daniel Wadham, five years; and Daniel Amos and Gerrah Selby were each sentenced to four years.

So what does this mean for free speech and anti-corporate dissent in the UK? By the same logic, an anti-war campaign that publishes information on the whereabouts of a military base or arms factory and calls for its closure could be put in the frame for the same crime if that base was then the subject of an arson attack. All it takes is for the police to imply that the people running the public campaign are linked to those involved in direct action. Consequently, campaigners might feel compelled to publicly distance themselves from acts of direct action lest they find that, unbeknown to them, those involved in public action are responsible for the covert actions too and the whole movement is charged with ‘conspiracy’. In fact, the use of such charges is a classic police tactic aimed at spreading paranoia and convicting as many activists as possible for acts carried out by a few anonymous people. The other aim is to minimise public support for ‘illegal’ actions by harassing and criminalising those who speak up in solidarity.

For more on the crackdown on animal rights activists, see:
www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=3179
www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=3191
www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=3194
www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=3385

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!

Wednesday, July 01, 2009

Ungar Furs Attacked by Activists



Simulposted with NAALPO and Portlandindymedia

6/19/09

This morning around 9:30am I was traveling on the MAX reading a book and I saw bright red from the corner of my eye. I looked up to see bright red paint splattered across a building like blood. Then I noticed it was Nicholas Ungar Furs. So I got off the train to get some photos and info for this article. The entrance, the sidewalk, the windows, and the sign on the front of the building were significantly splattered. The Police arrived very shortly after I did leading me to believe that perhaps this just happened last night. I was not able to get the photos off of my camera but others will hopefully post some soon.



As of this posting I have not seen a communiqué from this anonymous guerrilla artist so I will attempt to piece together an understanding of why such an action has been taken. Ungar Furs, the last remaining furrier shop in downtown Portland located on 1137 SW Yamhill, has been targeted many times by local animal rights advocates. As the name implies they are a furrier shop and a particularly nasty one. They have even been busted by Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife for illegal sales of pelts from endangered/banned species. The profits apparently make the fines look like an acceptable loss. A group recently formed out of the momentum from the Schumacher victory, Portland Animal Defense League, has been organizing an ongoing campaign since Dec of 2008 currently happening every Friday at 1pm to educate fur shoppers on the brutality of the process of taking fur from animals (Including: inhumane living conditions, anal electrocution, gas, neck breaking, skinning alive, etc.). Today's anonymous guerrilla art action appears to be in solidarity with that campaign but not part of it because it deviates from the stated mission and tactics of the Friday protesters found here.

Thomas Paine’s Corner wants to periodically email you links to the most recent material and timeless classics available on our diverse and comprehensive site. If you would like to receive them, type “TPC subscription” in the subject line and send your email to willpowerful@hotmail.com

For the latest updates on the animal liberation movement, visit NAALPO at http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/

If you have a Facebook account, don’t forget to look up Thomas Paine’s Corner’s Facebook page via the “search” feature and become a fan.

And if you have a MySpace account, don’t forget to friend Thomas Paine’s Corner at www.myspace.com/anarchovegan

Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIjanhKqVC4 and go vegan. Do it for your health, for nonhuman animals and for the Earth!