Texas Longhorns with newborn calf in Bluebonnets

Texas Longhorns with newborn calf in Bluebonnets

Please note I have a new phone number...

512-517-2708

Alan Maki

Alan Maki
Doing research at the LBJ Library in Austin, Texas

It's time to claim our Peace Dividend

It's time to claim our Peace Dividend

We need to beat swords into plowshares.

We need to beat swords into plowshares.

A program for real change...

http://peaceandsocialjustice.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-progressive-program-for-real-change.html


What we need is a "21st Century Full Employment Act for Peace and Prosperity" which would make it a mandatory requirement that the president and Congress attain and maintain full employment.


"Voting is easy and marginally useful, but it is a poor substitute for democracy, which requires direct action by concerned citizens"

- Ben Franklin

Let's talk...

Let's talk...

Friday, January 16, 2015

Honoring Dr. Du Bois by MLK


I would suggest that this speech by Martin Luther King be distributed at every Martin Luther King event:



"We cannot talk of Dr. Du Bois without recognizing that he was a radical all of his life. Some people would like to ignore the fact that he was a Communist in his later years. It is worth noting that Abraham Lincoln warmly welcomed the support of Karl Marx during the Civil War and corresponded with him freely. In contemporary life the Englishspeaking world has no difficulty with the fact that Sean O’Casey was a literary giant of the twentieth century and a Communist or that Pablo Neruda is generally considered the greatest living poet though he also served in the Chilean Senate as a Communist. It is time to cease muting the fact that Dr. Du Bois was a genius and chose to be a Communist. Our irrational, obsessive anti-communism has led us into too many quagmires to be retained as if it were a mode of scientific thinking."




Honoring Dr. Du Bois




Martin Luther King, Jr.



Tonight we assemble here to pay tribute to one of the most remarkable men of our time. Dr. Du Bois was not only an intellectual giant exploring the frontiers of knowledge, he was in the first place a teacher. He would have wanted his life to teach us something about our tasks of emancipation. One idea he insistently taught was that black people have been kept in oppression and deprivation by a poisonous fog of lies that depicted them as inferior, born deficient and deservedly doomed to servitude to the grave. So assiduously has this poison been injected into the mind of America that its disease has infected not only whites but many Negroes. So long as the lie was believed the brutality and criminality of conduct toward the Negro was easy for the conscience to bear. The twisted logic ran if the black man was inferior he was not oppressed-his place in society was appropriate to his meager talent and intellect. Dr. Du Bois recognized that the keystone in the arch of oppression was the myth of inferiority and he dedicated his brilliant talents to demolish it. There could scarcely be a more suitable person for such a monumental task. First of all he was himself unsurpassed as an intellect and he was a Negro. But beyond this he was passionately proud to be black and finally he had not only genius and pride but he had the indomitable fighting spirit of the valiant.



To pursue his mission, Dr. Du Bois gave up the substantial privileges a highly educated Negro enjoyed living in the North. Though he held degrees from Harvard and the University of Berlin, though he had more academic credentials than most Americans, black or white, he moved South where a majority of Negroes then lived. He deliberately chose to share their daily abuse and humiliation. He could have offered himself to the white rulers and exacted substantial tribute for selling his genius. There were few like him, Negro or white. He could have amassed riches and honors and lived in material splendor and applause from the powerful and important men of his time. Instead, he lived part of his creative life in the South-most of it in modest means and some of it in poverty, and he died in exile, praised sparingly and in many circles ignored.



But he was an exile only to the land of his birth. He died at home in Africa among his cherished ancestors, and he was ignored by a pathetically ignorant America but not by history.



History cannot ignore W. E. B. Du Bois. Because history has to reflect truth and Dr. Du Bois was a tireless explorer and a gifted discoverer of social truths. His singular greatness lay in his quest for truth about his own people. There were very few scholars who concerned themselves with honest study of the black man and he sought to fill this immense void. The degree to which he succeeded discloses the great dimensions of the man.



Yet he had more than a void to fill. He had to deal with the army of white propagandists – the myth-makers of Negro history. Dr. Du Bois took them all on in battle. It would be impossible to sketch the whole range of his intellectual contributions. Back in the nineteenth century he laid out a program of 100 years of study of problems affecting American Negroes and worked tirelessly to implement it.



Long before sociology was a science he was pioneering in the field of social study of Negro life and completed works on health, education, employment, urban conditions, and religion. This was at a time when scientific inquiry of Negro life was so unbelievably neglected that only a single university in the entire nation had such a program, and it was funded with $5,000 for a year’s work.



Against such odds Dr. Du Bois produced two enduring classics before the twentieth century. His Suppression of the African Slave-Trade, written in 1896, is Volume I in the Harvard Historical Studies. His study The Philadelphia Negro, completed in 1899, is still used today. Illustrating the painstaking quality of his scientific method, to do this work Dr. Du Bois personally visited and interviewed 5,000 people.



He soon realized that studies would never adequately be pursued nor changes realized without the mass involvement of Negroes. The scholar then became an organizer and with others founded the NAACP. At the same time he became aware that the expansion of imperialism was a threat to the emergence of Africa. He recognized the importance of the bonds between American Negroes and the land of their ancestors, and he extended his activities to African affairs. After World War I he called Pan-African Congresses in 1919, 1921, and 1923, alarming imperialists in all countries and disconcerting Negro moderates in America who were afraid of this restless, militant, black genius.



Returning to the United States from abroad, he found his pioneering agitation for Negro studies was bearing fruit and a beginning was made to broaden Negro higher education. He threw himself into the task of raising the intellectual level of this work. Much later, in 1940, he participated in the establishment of the first Negro scholarly publication,Phylon. At the same time he stimulated Negro colleges to collaborate through annual conferences to increase their effectiveness and elevate the quality of their academic studies. But these activities, enough to be the life work for ten men, were far from the sum of his achievements. In the six years between 1935 and 1941 he produced the monumental seven-hundred-page volume on Black Reconstruction in America, at the same time writing many articles and essays. Black Reconstruction was six years in writing but was thirty- three years in preparation. On its publication, one critic said: “It crowns the long, unselfish and brilliant career of Dr. Du Bois. It is comparable in clarity, originality and importance to the Beards’ Rise of American Civilization.” The New York Times said, “It is beyond question the most painstaking and thorough study ever made of the Negroes’ part in Reconstruction,” and the New York Herald Tribune proclaimed it “a solid history of the period, an economic treatise, a philosophical discussion, a poem, a work of art all rolled into one.”



To understand why his study of the Reconstruction was a monumental achievement it is necessary to see it in context. White historians had for a century crudely distorted the Negro’s role in the Reconstruction years. It was a conscious and deliberate manipulation of history, and the stakes were high. The Reconstruction was a period in which black men had a small measure of freedom of action. If, as white historians tell it, Negroes wallowed in corruption, opportunism, displayed spectacular stupidity, were wanton, evil, and ignorant, their case was made. They would have proved that freedom was dangerous in the hands of inferior beings. One generation after another of Americans were assiduously taught these falsehoods, and the collective mind of America became poisoned with racism and stunted with myths.



Dr. Du Bois confronted this powerful structure of historical distortion and dismantled it. He virtually, before anyone else and more than anyone else, demolished the lies about Negroes in their most important and creative period of history. The truths he revealed are not yet the property of all Americans but they have been recorded and arm us for our contemporary battles.



In Black Reconstruction Dr. Du Bois dealt with the almost universally accepted concept that civilization virtually collapsed in the South during Reconstruction because Negroes had a measure of political power. Dr. Du Bois marshalled irrefutable evidence that, far from collapsing, the Southern economy was recovering in these years. Within five years the cotton crop had been restored, and in the succeeding five years had exceeded pre-war levels. At the same time other economic activity had ascended so rapidly the rebirth of the South was almost completed.



Beyond this he restored to light the most luminous achievement of the Reconstruction-it brought free public education into existence not only for the benefit of the Negro, but it opened school doors to the poor whites. He documented the substantial body of legislation that was socially so useful it was retained into the twentieth century even though the Negroes who helped to write it were brutally disenfranchised and driven from political life. He revealed that, far from being the tragic era white historians described, it was the only period in which democracy existed in the South. This stunning fact was the reason the history books had to lie because to tell the truth would have acknowledged the Negroes’ capacity to govern and fitness to build a finer nation in a creative relationship with poor whites.



With the completion of his book Black Reconstruction, despite its towering contributions, despite his advanced age, Dr. Du Bois was still not ready to accept a deserved rest in peaceful retirement. His dedication to freedom drove him on as relentlessly in his seventies as it did in his twenties. He had already encompassed three careers. Beginning as a pioneer sociologist, he had become an activist to further mass organization. The activist had then transformed himself into an historian. By the middle of the twentieth century, when imperialism and war arose once more to imperil humanity, he became a peace leader. He served as chairman of the Peace Information Bureau and, like the Rev. William Sloane Coffin and Dr. Benjamin Spock of today, he found himself indicted by the government and harried by reactionaries. Undaunted by obstacles and repression, with his characteristic fortitude he fought on. Finally in 1961 with Ghana’s independence established, an opportunity opened to begin the writing of an African Encyclopedia, and in his ninety third year he emigrated to Ghana to begin new intellectual labors. In 1963 death finally came to this most remarkable man.



It is axiomatic that he will be remembered for his scholarly contributions and organizational attainments. These monuments are imperishable. But there were human qualities less immediately visible that are no less imperishable.



Dr. Du Bois was a man possessed of priceless dedication to his people. The vast accumulation of achievement and public recognition were not for him pathways to personal affluence and a diffusion of identity. Whatever else he was, with his multitude of careers and professional titles, he was first and always a black man. He used his richness of talent as a trust for his people. He saw that Negroes were robbed of so many things decisive to their existence that the theft of their history seemed only a small part of their losses. But Dr. Du Bois knew that to lose one’s history is to lose one’s self-understanding and with it the roots for pride. This drove him to become a historian of Negro life, and the combination of his unique zeal and intellect rescued for all of us a heritage whose loss would have profoundly impoverished us.



Dr. Du Bois the man needs to be remembered today when despair is all too prevalent. In the years he lived and fought, there was far more justification for frustration and hopelessness, and yet his faith in his people never wavered. His love and faith in Negroes permeate every sentence of his writings and every act of his life. Without these deeply rooted emotions his work would have been arid and abstract. With them his deeds were a passionate storm that swept the filth of falsehood from the pages of established history.



He symbolized in his being his pride in the black man. He did not apologize for being black and, because of it, handicapped. Instead he attacked the oppressor for the crime of stunting black men. He confronted the establishment as a model of militant manhood and integrity. He defied them and, though they heaped venom and scorn on him, his powerful voice was never stilled.



And yet, with all his pride and spirit he did not make a mystique out of blackness. He was proud of his people, not because their color endowed them with some vague greatness but because their concrete achievements in struggle had advanced humanity, and he saw and loved progressive humanity in all its hues, black, white, yellow, red, and brown.



Above all he did not content himself with hurling invectives for emotional release and then to retire into smug, passive satisfaction. History had taught him it is not enough for people to be angry-the supreme task is to organize and unite people so that their anger becomes a transforming force. It was never possible to know where the scholar Du Bois ended and the organizer Du Bois began. The two qualities in him were a single, unified force. This life style of Dr. Du Bois is the most important quality this generation of Negroes needs to emulate.



The educated Negro who is not really part of us and the angry militant who fails to organize us have nothing in common with Dr. Du Bois. He exemplified black power in achievement and he organized black power in action. It was no abstract slogan to him.



We cannot talk of Dr. Du Bois without recognizing that he was a radical all of his life. Some people would like to ignore the fact that he was a Communist in his later years. It is worth noting that Abraham Lincoln warmly welcomed the support of Karl Marx during the Civil War and corresponded with him freely. In contemporary life the Englishspeaking world has no difficulty with the fact that Sean O’Casey was a literary giant of the twentieth century and a Communist or that Pablo Neruda is generally considered the greatest living poet though he also served in the Chilean Senate as a Communist. It is time to cease muting the fact that Dr. Du Bois was a genius and chose to be a Communist. Our irrational, obsessive anti-communism has led us into too many quagmires to be retained as if it were a mode of scientific thinking.



In closing, it would be well to remind white America of its debt to Dr. Du Bois. When they corrupted Negro history they distorted American history, because Negroes are too big a part of the building of this nation to be written out of it without destroying scientific history. White America, drenched with lies about Negroes, has lived too long in a fog of ignorance. Dr. Du Bois gave them a gift of truth for which they should eternally be indebted to him.



Negroes have heavy tasks today. We were partially liberated and then re-enslaved. We have to fight again on old battlefields, but our confidence is greater, our vision is clearer, and our ultimate victory surer because of the contributions a militant, passionate black giant left behind him.



Dr. Du Bois has left us but he has not died. The spirit of freedom is not buried in the grave of the valiant. He will be with us when we go to Washington in April to demand our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.



We have to go to Washington because they have declared an armistice in the war on poverty while squandering billions to expand a senseless, cruel, unjust war in Vietnam. We will go there, we will demand to be heard, and we will stay until the administration responds. If this means forcible repression of our movement, we will confront it, for we have done this before. If this means scorn or ridicule, we will embrace it, for that is what America’s poor now receive. If it means jail, we accept it willingly, for the millions of poor already are imprisoned by exploitation and discrimination.



Dr. Du Bois would be in the front ranks of the peace movement today. He would readily see the parallel between American support of the corrupt and despised Thieu-Ky regime and Northern support to the Southern slave masters in 1876. The CIA scarcely exaggerates, indeed it is surprisingly honest, when it calculates for Congress that the war in Vietnam can persist for one hundred years. People deprived of their freedom do not give up—Negroes have been fighting more than a hundred years, and even if the date of full emancipation is uncertain, what is explicitly certain is that the struggle for it will endure.



In conclusion let me say that Dr. Du Bois’ greatest virtue was his committed empathy with all the oppressed and his divine dissatisfaction with all forms of injustice. Today we are still challenged to be dissatisfied. Let us be dissatisfied until every man can have food and material necessities for his body, culture and education for his mind, freedom and until rat-infested, vermin-filled slums will be a thing of a dark past and every family will have a decent, sanitary house in which to live. Let us be dissatisfied until the empty stomachs of Mississippi are filled and the idle industries of Appalachia are revitalized. Let us be dissatisfied until brotherhood is no longer a meaningless word at the end of a prayer but the first order of business on every legislative agenda. Let us be dissatisfied until our brother of the Third World- Asia, Africa, and Latin America-will no longer be the victim of imperialist exploitation, but will be lifted from the long night of poverty, illiteracy, and disease. Let us be dissatisfied until this pending cosmic elegy will be transformed into a creative psalm of peace and “justice will roll down like waters from a mighty stream.”



The Centennial Address delivered by Nobel Laureate Dr. Martin Luther King at Carnegie Hall in New York City, February 23, 1968. The occasion was the International Cultural Evening sponsored by FREEDOMWAYS Magazine on the 100th birthday of Dr. W. E. B. Du Bois and launching an “International Year” (1968) honoring his life and works.






Why I Am Opposed to the War in Vietnam... Martin Luther King

Why I Am Opposed to the War in Vietnam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyE4eo_leX8


Full speech.


Martin Luther King

"There is something wrong with capitalism. There are 40 million poor people here and one day we must ask the question, Why are there 40 million poor people in America? And when you begin to ask that question, you are raising a question about the economic system, about a broader distribution of wealth. When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy" - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 1967

Thursday, January 15, 2015

All you can eat buffet and good music...

Hey all you friends in the Armadillo Army - we'll be at Wilebski's Blues Saloon this Friday January 16th from 6:00 to 10:00 pm - come on out for an early party!! Here's the address:


Location:
1638 Rice St Saint Paul, MN 55117

Phone: 651-207-0000


The buffet opens at 5 p.m.


There is a $5.00 cover charge

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

The Communist Control Act of 1954 rears its ugly head in Minnesota

Why won't Minnesota Democrats acknowledge Hubert H. Humphrey as the primary author of the "Communist Control Act of 1954," the most repressive piece of legislation ever enacted in the United States with the unanimous support in the U.S. Senate from both Democrats and Republicans?


And why is the Humphrey Center at the University of Minnesota so dogged in refusing to place this on display for all to see just what kind of "liberal" Hubert H. Humphrey was?


By the way, this most repressive and undemocratic fascist legislation remains on the books and at this present time the FBI and its Minnesota "Red Squad" which includes the Minnesota Commissioner of Public Safety along with a gaggle of local police and prosecutors is working under the auspices of this legislation searching for the organizers of the huge demonstration at the Mall of America protesting racist police killings, beatings, violence and brutality in solidarity with the people of Ferguson, Missouri and others around the country seeking justice.


Why has this Minnesota "Red Squad" decided to carry out their dirty work under the aegis and auspices of the "Communist Control Act of 1954."


According to the Minnesota Commissioner of Public Safety, who was hand-picked by Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton, the reason is, "Only Communists would have organized an interracial demonstration."


Here is the complete text of the:


Communist Control Act of 1954

U.S. Statutes at Large, Public Law 637, Chp. 886, p. 775-780

AN ACT

To outlaw the Communist Party, to prohibit members of Communist organizations from serving in certain representative capacities, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the ''Communist Control Act of 1954''.

Findings of Fact

Sec. 2. The Congress hereby finds and declares that the Communist Party of the United States, although purportedly a political party, is in fact an instrumentality of a conspiracy to overthrow the Government of the United States. It constitutes an authoritarian dictatorship within a republic, demanding for itself the rights and privileges accorded to political parties, but denying to all others the liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. Unlike political parties, which evolve their policies and programs through public means, by the reconciliation of a wide variety of individual views, and submit those policies and programs to the electorate at large for approval or disapproval, the policies and programs of the Communist Party are secretly prescribed for it by the foreign leaders of the world Communist movement. Its members have no part in determining its goals, and are not permitted to voice dissent to party objectives. Unlike members of political parties, members of the Communist Party are recruited for indoctrination with respect to its objectives and methods, and are organized, instructed, and disciplined to carry into action slavishly the assignments given them by their hierarchical chieftains. Unlike political parties, the Communist Party acknowledges no constitutional or statutory limitations upon its conduct or upon that of its members. The Communist Party is relatively small numerically, and gives scant indication of capacity ever to attain its ends by lawful political means. The peril inherent in its operation arises not from its numbers, but from its failure to acknowledge any limitation as to the nature of its activities, and its dedication to the proposition that the present constitutional Government of the United States ultimately must be brought to ruin by any available means, including resort to force and violence. Holding that doctrine, its role as the agency of a hostile foreign power renders its existence a clear present and continuing danger to the security of the United States. It is the means whereby individuals are seduced into the service of the world Communist movement, trained to do its bidding, and directed and controlled in the conspiratorial performance of their revolutionary services. Therefore, the Communist Party should be outlawed.

Proscribed Organizations

Sec. 3. The Communist Party of the United States, or any successors of such party regardless of the assumed name, whose object or purpose is to overthrow the Government of the United States, or the government of any State, Territory, District, or possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein by force and violence, are not entitled to any of the rights, privileges, and immunities attendant upon legal bodies created under the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States or any political subdivision thereof; and whatever rights, privileges, and immunities which have heretofore been granted to said party or any subsidiary organization by reason of the laws of the United States or any political subdivision thereof, are hereby terminated: Provided, however, That nothing in this section shall be construed as amending the Internal Security Act of 1950, as amended.

Sec. 4. Whoever knowingly and willfully becomes or remains a member of (1) the Communist Party, or (2) any other organization having for one of its purposes or objectives the establishment, control conduct, seizure, or overthrow of the Government of the United States, or the government of any State or political subdivision thereof, by the use of force or violence, with knowledge of the purpose or objective of such organization shall be subject to all the provisions and penalties of the Internal Security Act of 1950, as amended, as a member of a ''Communist-action'' organization.
(b) For the purposes of this section, the term ''Communist Party'' means the organization now known as the Communist Party of the United States of America, the Communist Party of any State or subdivision thereof, and any unit or subdivision of any such organization, whether or not any change is hereafter made in the name thereof.

Sec. 5. In determining membership or participation in the Communist Party or any other organization defined in this Act, or knowledge of the purpose or objective of such party or organization, the jury, under instructions from the court, shall consider evidence, if presented, as to whether the accused person:
(1) Has been listed to his knowledge as a member in any book or any of the lists, records, correspondence, or any other document of the organization;
(2) Has made financial contribution to the organization in dues, assessments, loans, or in any other form;
(3) Has made himself subject to the discipline of the organization in any form whatsoever;
(4) Has executed orders, plans, or directives of any kind of the organization;
(5) Has acted as an agent, courier, messenger, correspondent, organizer, or in any other capacity in behalf of the organization;
(6) Has conferred with officers or other members of the organization in behalf of any plan or enterprise of the organization;
(7) Has been accepted to his knowledge as an officer or member of the organization or as one to be called upon for services by other officers or members of the organization;
(8) Has written, spoken or in any other way communicated by signal, semaphore, sign, or in any other form of communication orders, directives, or plans of the organization;
(9) Has prepared documents, pamphlets, leaflets, books, or any other type of publication in behalf of the objectives and purposes of the organization;
(10) Has mailed, shipped, circulated, distributed, delivered, or in any other way sent or delivered to others material or propaganda of any kind in behalf of the organization;
(11) Has advised, counseled or in any other way imparted information, suggestions, recommendations to officers or members of the organization or to anyone else in behalf of the objectives of the organization;
(12) Has indicated by word, action, conduct, writing or in any other way a willingness to carry out in any manner and to any degree the plans, designs, objectives, or purposes of the organization;
(13) Has in any other way participated in the activities, planning, actions, objectives, or purposes of the organization;
(14) The enumeration of the above subjects of evidence on membership or participation in the Communist Party or any other organization as above defined, shall not limit the inquiry into and consideration of any other subject of evidence on membership and participation as herein stated.

Subversive Activities Control Act Amendment

Sec. 6. Subsection 5 (a) (1) of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 784) is amended by striking out the period at the end thereof and inserting lieu thereof a semicolon and the following: ''or
''(E) to hold office or employment with any labor organization, as that term is defined in section 2 (5) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended (29 U. S. C. 152), or to represent any employer in any matter or proceeding arising or pending under that Act.''

Communist-Infiltrated Organizations

Sec. 7. (a) Section 3 of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950 (50 U. S. C. 782) is amended by inserting, immediately after paragraph (4) thereof, the following new paragraph:

''(4A) The term 'Communist-infiltrated organization' means any organization in the United States (other than a Communist-action organization or a Communist-front organization) which (A) is substantially directed, dominated, or controlled by an individual or individuals who are, or who within three years have been actively engaged in, giving aid or support to a Communist- action organization, a Communist foreign government, or the world Communist movement referred to in section 2 of this title, and (B) is serving, or within three years has served, as a means for (i) the giving of aid or support to any such organization, government, or movement, or (ii) the impairment of the military strength of the United States or its industrial capacity to furnish logistical or other material support required by its Armed Forces: Provided, however, That any labor organization which is an affiliate in good standing of a national federation or other labor organization whose policies and activities have been directed to opposing Communist organizations, any Communist foreign government, or the world Communist movement, shall be presumed prima facie not to be a 'Communist-infiltrated organization'.''
(b) Paragraph (5) of such section is amended to read as follows:

''(5) The term 'Communist organization' means any Communist-action organization, Communist-front organization, or Communist-infiltrated organization.''
(c) Subsections 5 (c) and 6 (c) of such Act are repealed.

Sec. 8. (a) Section 10 of such Act (50 U. S. C. 789) is amended by inserting, immediately after the words ''final order of the Board requiring it to register under section 7'', the words ''or determining that it is a Communist-infiltrated organization''.
(b) Subsections (a) and (b) of section 11 of such Act (50 U. S. C. 790) are amended by inserting immediately preceding the period at the end of each such subsection, the following: ''or determining that it is a Communist-infiltrated organization''.

Sec. 9. (a) Subsection 12 (e) of such Act (50 U. S. C. 791) is amended by-

(1) striking out the period at the end thereof and inserting in lieu thereof a semicolon and the word ''and''; and
(2) inserting at the end thereof the following new paragraph:
''(3) upon any application made under subsection (a) or subsection (b) of section 13A of this title, to determine whether any organization is a Communist-infiltrated organization.''
(b) The section caption to section 13 of such Act (50 U. S. C. 792) is amended to read as follows: ''Registration Proceedings before the Board''.

Sec. 10. Such Act is amended by inserting, immediately after section 13 thereof, the following new section:

''Proceedings with Respect to Communist-Infiltrated Organizations

''Sec. 13A. (a) Whenever the Attorney General has reason to believe that any organization is a Communist-infiltrated organization, he may file with the Board and serve upon such organization a petition for a determination that such organization is a Communist-infiltrated organization. In any proceeding so instituted, two or more affiliated organizations may be named as joint respondents. Whenever any such petition is accompanied by a certificate of the Attorney General to the effect that the proceeding so instituted is one of exceptional public importance, such proceeding shall be set for hearing at the earliest possible time and all proceedings therein before the Board or any court shall be expedited to the greatest practicable extent.
''(b) Any organization which has been determined under this section to be a Communist- infiltrated organization may, within six months after such determination, file with the Board and serve upon the Attorney General a petition for a determination that such organization no longer is a Communist- infiltrated organization.
''(c) Each such petition shall be verified under oath, and shall contain a statement of the facts relied upon in support thereof. Upon the filing of any such petition, the Board shall serve upon each party to such proceeding a notice specifying the time and place for hearing upon such petition. No such hearing shall be conducted within twenty days after the service of such notice.
''(d) The provisions of subsections (c) and (d) of section 13 shall apply to hearings conducted under this section, except that upon the failure of any organization named as a party in any petition filed by or duly served upon it pursuant to this section to appear at any hearing upon such petition, the Board may conduct such hearing in the absence of such organization and may enter such order under this section as the Board shall determine to be warranted by evidence presented at such hearing.
''(e) In determining whether any organization is a Communist-infiltrated organization, the Board shall consider-
''(1) to what extent, if any, the effective management of the affairs of such organization is conducted by one or more individuals who are, or within two years have been, (A) members, agents, or representatives of any Communist organization, and Communist foreign government, or the world Communist movement referred to in section 2 of this title, with knowledge of the nature and purpose thereof, or (B) engaged in giving aid or support to any such organization, government, or movement with knowledge of the nature and purpose thereof;
''(2) to what extent, if any, the policies of such organization are, or within three years have been, formulated and carried out pursuant to the direction or advice of any member, agent or representative of any such organization, government, or movement;
''(3) to what extent, if any, the personnel and resources of such organization are, or within three years have been, used to further or promote the objectives of any such Communist organization, government, or movement;
''(4) to what extent, if any, such organization within three years has received from, or furnished to or for the use of, any such Communist organization, government, or movement any funds or other material assistance;
''(5) to what extent, if any, such organization is, or within three years has been, affiliated in any way with any such Communist organization, government, or movement;
''(6) to what extent, if any, the affiliation of such organization, or of any individual or individuals who are members thereof or who manage its affairs, with any such Communist organization, government, or movement is concealed from or is not disclosed to the membership of such organization; and
''(7) to what extent, if any, such organization or any of its members or managers are, or within three years have been, knowingly engaged-
''(A) in any conduct punishable under section 4 or 15 of this Act or under chapter 37, 105, or 115 of title 18 of the United States Code; or
''(B) with intent to impair the military strength of the United States or its industrial capacity to furnish logistical or other support required by its armed forces, in any activity resulting in or contributing to any such impairment.
''(f) After hearing upon any petition filed under this section, the Board shall (1) make a support in writing in which it shall state its findings as to the facts and its conclusions with respect to the issues presented by such petition, (2) enter its order granting or denying the determination sought by such petition, and (3) serve upon each party to the proceeding a copy of such order. Any order granting any determination on the question whether any organization is a Communist-infiltrated organization shall become final as provided in section 14 (b) of this Act.
''(g) When any order has been entered by the Board under this section with respect to any labor organization or employer (as these terms are defined by section 2 of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, and which are organizations within the meaning of section 3 of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950), the Board shall serve a true and correct copy of such order upon the National Labor Relations Board and shall publish in the Federal Register a statement of the substance of such order and its effective date.
''(h) When there is in effect a final order of the Board determining that any such labor organization is a Communist-action organization, a Communist-front organization, or a Communist- infiltrated organization, such labor organization shall be ineligible to-
''(1) act as representative of any employee within the meaning or for the purposes of section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended (29 U.S.C. 157);
''(2) serve as an exclusive representative of employees of any bargaining unit under section 9 of such Act, as amended (29 U.S.C. 159);
''(3) make, or obtain any hearing upon, any charge under section 10 of such Act (29 U.S.C. 160); or
''(4) exercise any other right or privilege, or receive any other benefit, substantive or procedural, provided by such Act for labor organizations.
''(i) When an order of the Board determining that any such labor organization is a Communist-infiltrated organization has become final, and such labor organization theretofore has been certified under the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, as a representative of employees in any bargaining unit-
''(1) a question of representation affecting commerce, within the meaning of section 9 (c) of such Act, shall be deemed to exist with respect to such bargaining unit; and
''(2) the National Labor Relations Board, upon petition of not less than 20 per centum of the employees in such bargaining unit or any person or persons acting in their behalf, shall under section 9 of such Act (notwithstanding any limitation of time contained therein) direct elections in such bargaining unit or any subdivision thereof (A) for the selection of a representative thereof for collective bargaining purposes, and (B) to determine whether the employees thereof desire to rescind any authority previously granted to such labor organization to enter into any agreement with their employer pursuant to section 8 (a) (3) (ii) of such Act.
''(j) When there is in effect a final order of the Board determining that any such employer is a Communist-infiltrated organization, such employer shall be ineligible to-
''(1) file any petition for an election under section 9 of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended (29 U.S.C. 157), or participate in any proceeding under such section; or
''(2) make or obtain any hearing upon any charge under section 10 of such Act (29 U.S.C. 160); or
''(3) exercise any other right or privilege or receive any other benefit, substantive or procedural, provided by such Act for employers.''

Sec. 11. Subsections (a) and (b) of section 14 of such Act (50 U.S.C. 793) are amended by inserting in each such subsection, immediately after the words ''section 13'', a comma and the following: ''or subsection (f) of section 13A,''.

Sec. 12. If any provision of this title or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the remainder of the title, and the application of such provisions to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby.

Approved August 24, 1954, 9:40 a.m., M.S.T.

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

60 minutes proclaims Obamacare a "disaster."

60 Minutes has proclaimed Obamacare a "disaster."



Obamacare is a disaster; not even single payer universal health care could correct the problem(s).



Nothing short of a National Public Health Care System can fix the health care mess in this country...



Public Financing; Public Administration and Public Delivery--- a real controversial idea; about as controversial as public education.



Obamacare should be referred to by a name that really reflects just what it is:



The "Health Insurance and Pharmaceutical Industry Bailout and Profit Maximization Act of 2010."

Raising Wages

Check out this speech by AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka talking about the Raising Wages campaign coming to four states (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina) and seven cities (Atlanta, Columbus, District of Columbia (Metro), St. Louis, Philadelphia, Minneapolis and San Diego) in the spring:


http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Economy/AFL-CIO-to-Take-Raising-Wages-Campaign-to-States-and-Cities


With all this talk about "raising wages" there is not a single mention that real living wages means wages in line with actual cost-of-living. These millionaire labor leaders, politicians, appointed bureaucrats and think-tank spokespersons all fear using the term "cost-of-living" in relation to wages. To talk of raising wages without speaking of the relationship between wages and "cost-of-living" which determines "standard-of-living" means nothing.


To speak of workers' rights means nothing unless we begin to talk about putting an end to "At-Will Employment."


Decent jobs mean decent lives--- provided the jobs pay real living wages in relation to cost-of-living.


Once again we get these big blowhards saying working people should not have to receive poverty wages but they refuse to clearly define the line between poverty and living wages. Without comparing wages to "cost-of-living" there is, very conveniently for these big blowhards, no way to define real poverty.


These big blowhards talk about Minimum Wage increases as if these Minimum Wage increases in some twenty states eliminated poverty and provided workers with a decent standard-of-living when just the opposite is true; these Minimum Wage "increases" have assured employers of highly profitable poverty wages for the next decade.


These millionaire labor leaders and politicians talk about "ladders out of poverty" and "staircases to shared prosperity" when there are so many rungs and steps missing that workers can't use the ladders or staircases.


If you live in Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina or Atlanta, Columbus, District of Columbia (Metro), St. Louis, Philadelphia, Minneapolis, San Diego this is our chance to raise these issues by writing letters to the editor, blogging, distributing leaflets in workplaces and working class communities.


We need to raise these issues in these Summits and beyond:


* That the relationship between wages and cost-of-living is what needs to be the issue.
* That "At-Will Employment" laws and legislation needs to be repealed and rescinded.
* That it will take a fight and struggle by the working class with the full participation of rank-and-file workers and their families to win real wage increases in line with cost-of-living.
* We need to explain how these dirty wars result in a reduced standard-of-living because we are being forced through increased prices and austerity measures to pay for these wars.
* We need to insist that the voices of rank-and-file workers are central to the collective bargaining process.
* We need to insist there be an end to concession contracts.
* We need to insist on full employment legislation which includes making the president and Congress are made responsible for attaining and maintaining full employment.
* Richard Trumka and these millionaire labor leaders pay lip service to the struggle against racism but refuse to insist on the enforcement of Affirmative Action.
* Demand the Trans Pacific Partnership trade deal be stopped.


Take part in these "Summits to Raise Wages" by bringing forward these important facts.

Cuba beware



Cuba beware
·                                 Written by  Ken Fuller 
·                                 Tuesday, 13 January 2015
·                                 Daily Tribune
The news last month that the remaining three of the imprisoned Cuban Five had been released from their unjust incarceration in the USA was understandably welcomed by people around the world. Also welcome was Obama’s decision to re-establish diplomatic relations with the small Caribbean socialist republic. 

While Obama is able to unwind some of the blockade measures which have been in place for half a century, however, it will fall to the US Congress to dismantle the whole disgraceful apparatus, as it is embedded in legislation.

It would almost certainly be a mistake, though, to interpret this development as marking a fundamental shift in Washington’s strategic designs. This is readily demonstrated by looking first at the global context in which the USA’s new Cuba policy was announced, then taking a closer look at Obama’s public announcement of said policy.

A few days earlier, Obama approved a bill imposing sanctions against Venezuela on the hypocritical basis (for a country which tortures its perceived foes and where police kill unarmed civilians with impunity) that the government of Nicolas Maduro had condoned human rights violations when it responded to anti-government protests earlier last year. Washington’s new measures triggered mass demonstrations in Caracas, while other Latin American nations rallied to Venezuela’s defense. 

Bolivian president Evo Morales charged that Washington, having failed politically in its campaign against Maduro and his late predecessor Hugo Chaves, was now waging “economic aggression” against Venezuela.


Shortly after announcing the new policy on Cuba, Obama issued an executive order banning exports to Crimea and imposing further sanctions against Russian and Ukrainian companies and individuals (the European Union had agreed similar measures a few days earlier). It is probably safe to assume that the Ukraine’s largest private gas producer, which last year appointed US Vice-President Joe Biden’s son to its board of directors, will not be affected.

Let’s just remind ourselves, stating the matter bluntly, just how the situation in Ukraine came about. In late 2013, Ukraine’s president’s Viktor Yanukovych had second thoughts about signing an agreement with the European Union (EU), calculating that this would involve forsaking the undoubted economic benefits of Ukraine’s association with Russia. The EU was upset, and doubtless encouraged the demonstrators who soon began to assemble in Kiev. This would lead to the toppling of Yanukovych in February 2014.


Quite apart from EU involvement, it is now clear that the demonstrators in Kiev (who, it should not be forgotten, were extremely violent) were funded by the USA. Such was acknowledged by Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Newland, who stated in a speech in Washington in December 2013 that Washington had provided $5 billion. More recently, George Friedman, founder and CEO of “intelligence” company Stratfor, has said that the USA was behind the coup against Yanukovych, as it was concerned about Russia’s growing influence in the Middle East, and in particular by its pro-Assad position on Syria.

The anti-Yanokovych forces contained neo-fascists, and these now made their way into government. It was in these circumstances that the population in Crimea voted overwhelmingly to rejoin Russia (it had been transferred to Ukraine in 1954 by Khrushchev). At the same time, people in the eastern Ukraine were equally concerned by the re-emergence of neo-Nazi elements in Kiev and began to agitate for separation (although not, as repeatedly reported in the West, necessarily union with Russia).

It should never be forgotten that the former Soviet Union lost almost 30 million people in World War II; this indelible memory has informed the actions of people in Crimea and eastern Ukraine and has also conditioned Russia’s own position, as it has watched Nato forces, despite agreements to the contrary, move ever-closer to its borders.

We now have a situation, therefore, where Washington and the EU, having interfered in a sovereign nation and caused the overthrow of an elected president (good or bad, honest or corrupt — none of this was their business), now impose sanctions on Russia and Crimea for taking measured and moderate steps to safeguard their interests.

Rightly or wrongly, many suspect that the hand of Washington is behind the recent steep fall in oil-prices which, along with sanctions, is having a major depressant effect on the Russian economy. The fact that Venezuela, another oil-producer, is similarly affected has done nothing to dispel such suspicions.

So, coming as it did in a period when Washington was following up its previous regime-change adventures in Venezuela, Ukraine and now Russia (to say nothing of Libya and Syria), and braying about the right of Hollywood “comedians” to conduct international diplomacy, what must we look out for in the USA’s new tack toward Cuba?

There was, in Obama’s speech, no hint of neighborliness toward Cuba’s regime, no note of apology for past crimes committed in the name of “demarkracy.” 

Alan Gross, the American released from a Cuban jail on humanitarian grounds, was portrayed as an innocent hero, and warmly welcomed home. Gross had been employed by a contractor of US Aid for International Development (USaid) which had been awarded a $6 million government contract for “democracy-promotion” in Cuba, for which Gross himself received over $500,000.

The Cuban Five, on the other hand, were merely referred to as “agents.” Not a word about the fact that they had penetrated terrorist groups run by Cuban exiles in Florida, or that their evidence had been handed to the FBI at a meeting in Havana. 

The all-important question: why? Why now? Was it because Washington had undergone a Damascene conversion and would no longer interfere in the internal affairs of other nations? No, we have seen above that this is certainly not true. Obama himself stated quite flatly that the previous policy of isolation and embargo had simply not worked and thus needed to be discarded.

But what had been the aim of the previous policy? Regime change, and that has not altered, as evidenced by the recent revelation that USaid, the same outfit for which Gross was working, had infiltrated Cuba’s hip-hop fraternity with the notion of recruiting dissidents, leading to a youth revolt.

Thus, the new policy will be directed at achieving that aim by alternative means. Although, if the embargo is lifted, there will be economic opportunities for Cuba, it is perhaps no exaggeration to say that it is entering its most dangerous period yet. Cuba beware!

Monday, January 12, 2015

Defeat the TPP

http://www.cwa-union.org/news/entry/on_capitol_hill_big_tent_news_conference#.VLRFwHvrV00

The big question is this:

Will this coalition made up of organizations which represent millions of Americans from all walks of life now bring these people into active opposition to the Trans Pacific Partnership or will it become just one more press conference claiming to be the beginning of fighting back when all that it will do is nothing to mobilize the members of these organizations into concrete action entailing everything real movements do--- from writing letters, circulating petitions, to taking to the streets to refusing to vote for politicians who support the TPP to running candidates on a ticket of a new political party led by working class activists so these Wall Street bribed politicians pay a real price?

As it stands now, this press conference was just a small part of "The Big Tent Party;" here is the list of those who were present or spoke:


Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT)
Congresswoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY)
Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR)
Congressman Tim Ryan (D-OH)
Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ)
Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN)
Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL)
Congresswoman Donna Edwards (D-MD)
Congressman Mark Pocan (D-WI)
Congressman Dan Kildee (D-MI)
Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (D-MI)
Sister Simone Campbell; Executive Director; NETWORK
Larry Cohen, President, Communications Workers of America
Richard Trumka, President, AFL-CIO
Hilary O. Shelton, Director of the Washington Bureau/Senior Vice President for Advocacy, NAACP
Tony Corbo, Food and Water Watch
Ellen Bloom; Senior Director Washington Office and Federal Policy; Consumers Union
Debbie Sease, Federal Campaign Director, Sierra Club

How can any "coalition" which only represents a small group of Democrats possibly win against Obama (whom they all supported) who with the majority of the Democrats is allied with the majority of the Republicans?

The TPP is part of Wall Street's imperialist agenda. It is time to free ourselves from Wall Street's two-party trap as part of the struggle to defeat the TPP.

In reality, this is no coalition in any sense of the word; what it is, is an unauthorized caucus of the Democratic Party which the leaders of the Democratic Party and Obama will arrogantly ignore.

This struggle against the TPP requires in the first place, international working class action and solidarity. 

Another question:

Why haven't the unions and peoples' organizations--- including the Socialist, Communist and people's parties from all the countries involved with the governments and big-business parties in supporting the Trans Pacific Partnership being invited to form a real coalition that would have the possibility of defeating this swindle; isn't this the kind of coalition really required?

Sunday, January 11, 2015

Raising wages agenda rolled out at AFL-CIO summit

So; the AFL-CIO is going to launch a campaign to raise wages--- AGAIN:


http://peoplesworld.org/raising-wages-agenda-rolled-out-at-afl-cio-summit/


But, once more, these millionaire labor leaders and wealthy politicians like Elizabeth Warren who they team up with, are only creating an illusion of movement building and struggle.


In fact, well over half the union contracts in this country at the present time are poverty wage contracts when compared to actual cost-of-living factors which Trumka and these politicians refuse to compare with wages.


Will we see local committees capable of taking on employers and the politicians these employers bribe being organized in communities across the country capable of advancing raising wages to real living wages in line with the actual cost-of-living? No we won't be seeing this because how do you organize a struggle for something when you don't even dare advance the idea that wages should enable working class families an income which would enable them to live above the poverty line.


In fact, to get working class votes which they required in order to win, Democrats promised a Minimum Wage that is not a poverty wage claiming no working class families should be forced to endure poverty but--- this was while these Dumb Donkeys were campaigning to get elected.
After they were elected, including with super-majorities in many states including here in Minnesota, they used the levers of government to assure employers of highly profitable poverty wages--- and, low and behold, Richard Trumka and his millionaire labor chums cheered these Democrats on and praised them for "raising the Minimum Wage"--- wages which are at present more poverty wages and will amount to even less when they go into effect than what the poverty Minimum Wage is now when compared to what these wages will buy in terms of goods and services.


These millionaire labor leaders have forced concession contract after concession contract down the throats of the workers whose high dues pay their big fat salaries... can we expect such labor leaders to lead any kind of movements now to "raise wages?"


These labor leaders won't even enforce the terms of their existing contracts in the workplace when it comes to job security, health and safety; they won't even struggle around very legitimate grievances that arise in the workplace.


At least 23 members of the AFL-CIO's Executive Committee have called me names because I have insisted that organized labor should lead a struggle to repeal "At-will Employment" legislation in place in every single state with one state having a few restrictions. But, as it stands, union and non-union workers face very Draconian and severe employer enforcement of "At-will Employment" laws which are the primary obstacle to union organizing in this country. It wasn't until I explained this to Leo Gerard in a public exchange on the FireDogLake website that he understood what was at stake; and then his response was to call me filthy names.


We can examine in workplace after workplace all over the country what happens to workers who get involved in struggles to improve their workplace environment and defend the rights of union contract language and what we find is these crooked and corrupt millionaire labor leaders and their state and local cronies harassing and intimidating and even threatening these workers right along with the bosses--- this is shameful and disgusting. From Tootsie Roll to Ford Motor Company to Cleveland Cliffs we see what happens to workers who dare to struggle for what is right and just and how these workers get hounded and harassed and discriminated against by both management and the corrupt union leaders who work in cahoots with the bosses to make the lives of these workers a living hell.


We find language inserted into union by-laws and union constitutions in order to circumvent democracy and thwart rank-and-file participation in the unions to make it easier for these crooked and corrupt union leaders to keep themselves in office through manipulation and control not unlike the way Wall Street and big-money interests controls the Democratic Party--- which, except for the hypocrisy, is no different than the way Wall Street maintains control of the Republican Party.


If we now come forward and suggest that the AFL-CIO should finance "Raise Our Wages" campaigns in every city and community across the country in a way that will bring millions of workers into the streets to enforce our demand for real living, non-poverty, wages we will find our selves harassed and intimidated and even threatened by these millionaire labor leaders and their cronies... if you don't believe me, just ask any worker who has initiated struggle around winning a grievance in their place of employment about how they have been treated.


Ask any worker who has been unjustly fired by an employer, what the union has done to protect their right to their job and their livelihood.


Once again we will see Trumka and company holding these phony "Summits" and press conferences without backing up their militant sounding rhetoric with movement building--- instead, what they intend is to push workers into the arms of the Democratic Party who will give the working class, instead of pay raises, nothing but one more royal shafting. This is the nature of class collaboration trade unions in the age of Wall Street enforced neo-liberalism in the era of capitalism in its most barbaric imperialist stage where these union "leaders" kiss up to management and their bribed politicians instead of working with the rank-and-file from whom they extract dues to pay their big fat salaries.


Richard Trumka and the members of the AFL-CIO's Executive Council know almost every corporate CEO on a first name basis--- how many members of the rank-and-file do they know as well?


Does the AFL-CIO have an agenda intended to "raise wages" or do they have an agenda to elect and re-elect a bunch of worthless Democrats?


If you doubt what I say, I suggest you go to your next union meeting and suggest that your local initiate a "raise our wages" campaign--- to raise wages through collective bargaining and through legislation; chances are your union "leaders" are preparing for another round of a "concession contract negotiations" and will sit on their hands as Democrats shove more poverty wages down the throats of the unorganized.


Have you noticed that instead of the wages of the unorganized going up to meet the higher wages of organized workers just the opposite is going on in this country? Wages of organized union workers are going down to the level of the unorganized... and so are working conditions and benefits.


Think about this:


How can wages of the unorganized go up in relation to actual cost-of-living when the wages of organized workers are going down in relation to the actual cost-of-living?


The Minimum Wage needs to be legislatively tied to actual cost-of-living.


In contract discussions; the discussion about wages needs to be centered around the relationship of wages to actual "cost-of-living."


It is up to rank-and-file workers to bring this kind of discussion into the workplace.


Once we initiate a massive discussion about the relationship of wages to the actual and real "cost-of-living" we will be on our way to winning real wage increases... but, not until this discussion is brought out into the proverbial "public square."

WASHINGTON - The nation's largest labor federation, the AFL-CIO, rolled out here today its first- ever Raising Wages agenda.

peoplesworld.org

Yes, a

Raising wages agenda has been rolled out at this AFL-CIO summit

But, is it real?

Raising wages agenda rolled out at AFL-CIO summit

assets/Uploads/_resampled/CroppedImage6060-johnwojcikatwork2.jpg

wagesraising520x340
WASHINGTON - The nation's largest labor federation, the AFL-CIO, rolled out here today its first- ever Raising Wages agenda.
Speaking to the hundreds of union members and allies gathered for the AFL-CIO National Summit on Raising Wages, the federation's president, Richard Trumka, declared that it will involve accountability for all office holders and candidates, coming down to a basic question: "Are you satisfied with an America where the vast majority works harder and harder for less and less, or do you propose to build an America where we the people, share in the wealth we create? This is the single standard by which we will judge leadership."
The gathering here today was another indication that labor's old style of simple transactional politics is dead.
"Not one of us can go it alone," Trumka declared. "We must unify on our common ground, raise the bar, then go out there and raise it even higher."
If the summit here is any indication the progressive movement may be witnessing cooperation and collaboration on an unprecedented scale - realizing, in effect, many of the goals laid out at the AFL-CIO's 2013 convention - aiming to unite the labor movement with many allies who share its goals.
"We hoped for exactly what we've seen today," Trumka declared. "People who share our vision of a better America coming together and getting things done.
At the summit here today there were  union organizers, social media activists and religious leaders engaging in robust talks with one another in the hallways. Professional economists shared breakfast at tables with field organizers from local unions and other organizations, discussing proposals on how best to raise wages. Business leaders chatted with workers about how to overhaul a system that results in unreasonable schedules for millions of workers.
David Borris, owner of Hel's Kitchen Catering in Chicago, explained why, from the point of view of a business owner, higher wages were important. "If one person gets paid $10 million, he explained, it is not as useful to small business as 100 people getting paid $100,000 each. It's the same money getting paid out but the guy with the $10 million is more likely to stash it offshore while the 100 with the $100,00 each will spend it in the community, growing our business' It's also a matter that treating workers with respect leaves them with something to spend at a theater or in a restaurant."
The "roundtable discussion" on the morning agenda was also unique as "roundtables" at conferences go. In addition to the businessman talking about how higher wages will grow his profits there were people from many movements participating. A Walmart worker debated with a think tank president and the mayor of Boston, himself a member of the Laborer's union, picked up some pointers from a Fight for 15 activist.
Trumka singled out what he said were two subjects people don't automatically think about as work and wages issues: immigration and race.
"Let me put it plainly," he declared. "Our Raising Wages campaign can only be complete when there is justice for America's immigrants and people of color. We must have a pathway to citizenship for all immigrants, and we must be a country of dignity for all people, regardless of race or ethnicity. Justice at work and justice in our community are intertwined, and both must advance for either to grow."
Conference participants, rejecting the notion that the wage gap is "just the way things are" and that nothing can really be done about it hammered out a plan of action.
The AFL-CIO announced that in 2015, for example, it, along with community partners, will hold Raising Wages summits in the first four presidential primary states - Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina. "And we're not waiting around," Trumka declared: "The first state summit will be in Iowa this spring. Each summit will bring together diverse voices, just as we did today, to lay out the entire Raising Wages platform and establish state-based standards of accountability."
Although the starting point for the agenda is a living wage for all workers and the availability of collective bargaining rights for all workers it goes on from there to become  a comprehensive economic agenda that includes:
- Trade policies that lift incomes in America and around the world rather that pit workers against one another.
- Strong labor  laws that give all workers the opportunity to bargain for higher wages without fear of losing their jobs.
- Stricter controls on Wall Street's financial speculation. "It means treating Wall Street like it is part of America, not above America," Trumka declared.
- Allowing workers to demand and win fair work schedules, paid sick leave and overtime checks.
- Ending all tax benefits for companies that move jobs offshore.
Photo: Sen. Elizabeth Warren.  |  Jose Luis Magana/AP


Friday, January 9, 2015

Why war games are bad... I am very proud of my Granddaughter, Alicia, who wrote this essay.

Why war games are bad


Written by: Alicia Maki grade 5    2015

War games are bad because they are all about shooting and killing people. They tell kids and adults that it is ok to pretend to kill people when it is not ok to pretend or even kill people. They also teach kids how to use guns and sometimes bombs. When people play war games they think that it would be fun to actually get to be in the war and get to kill people. People playing the game think that they are the good guy when they are the one that is killing the people. The kids would think that it would be fun to actually get to be in the war and shoot and kill people on the game. Playing war games can make people think that it is all right to kill people. People think it is fun when they play war games.


War games are bad because they are all about shooting and killing people. Another reason that the war games are bad is because during the actual war people got sick, injured, and maybe even kidnapped and tortured. Some people in the war attacked other people because they were racist. That is why we should not play war games because it is pretty much supporting the people who were attacking the other innocent people. Playing war games might make kids start battling with sticks and the inside of a paper towel roll and they might pretend to kill their friend or their brother or sister and they won’t realise that it is wrong to pretend like that.


Playing war games can make people think that it is all right to kill people. I think that if kids play the war games too much they might join the army because they think that it would be fun to kill the innocent people in the world. Some of the war games that kids play are: call of duty, black ops, and lots more. These games should not have been made because they are not good for kids to play or act out by having stick fights or other kind of fights.


When people buy war games the company that made it is probably getting money for telling kids that killing is good and make them want to replay the war. I think that the companies make the war games so that kids and parents don’t look twice at the war and so that they might join the army. In war games there is probably a lot of blood, screams, and violence.


In war games you are practically replaying the war and people who know that the war is bad will get mad and tell their kids not to watch or play that kind of game and that it is bad because you would be supporting the war games and the people who made them.


When people play war games they often want to keep playing and tell their friends to start playing and more people would play the war games. Without war games kids would be playing fun games such as Mario, Pokémon or something else, kids would play games that teach them to be good and not support the war.


I think that teachers and parents should tell the kids that killing is wrong and that they shouldn’t play war games.

Thursday, January 8, 2015

More discussion on environmentalism and class struggle

This is a link to an interesting article. My opinion follows the link to the article:


http://prospect.org/article/must-environmentalists-and-labor-activists-find-themselves-odds-each-other


This is for sure an interesting article but on its own without broad
discussion and debate without the author being held accountable to defend
his ideas in the presence of Marxists (and others) it is quite useless- and
even ideologically harmful in a way that hinders the kind of movement
building required; for a number of reasons.

First; the author in all of his thousands of words here, not once so much
as mentions the cost of imperialism as far as being a major contributor to
global warming, climate change and deteriorating lives and livelihoods.

Two; the author makes the ridiculous claim that there is nothing for us to
agree on as far as what kind of livelihoods and living conditions offer
something we can all unite around when he intentionally omits any mention
of the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights... Isn't this
Declaration THE point of unity?

Third; the author, not surprisingly since his article has been published in
American Prospect magazine, claims there is some kind of "progressive"
Keynesianism is not being honest; quite frankly, Keynesianism was and
always will be a thoroughly reactionary, anti-working class ideology since
its intent is the survival of capitalism which has for decades been in its
most advanced, morbid, cannibalistic and barbaric stage--- imperialism which
is all about making the world and the earth a worse place to live and work
since the parasitical capitalist of which Wall Street investors are the
bosses seek the greatest possible profits through employing the cheapest
labor they can get to attain the cheapest natural resources and then
turning those resources into products and services of "use" (as long as
these products and services are profitable to them) always using the
cheapest labor they can acquire. All of this they enforce through severe
repression, militarism and wars.

Fourth; this author writes as if only "experts" are entitled to seats at
the real decision-making table. Where is the call for rank-and-file workers
and all working people to have a say in the decision-making process----
politically and economically?

Fifth; there is nothing in this article that even suggests that Wall Street
and its junior partners in the G-20 (especially the dominant imperialists
in the G-8) are our main enemy when it comes to creating a livable planet
from which we can all derive a decent standard of living working together
in harmony--- at peace towards the common goals held forth in the United
Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

And, finally, in order to keep this brief, the problem  arising in labor
circles is that a bunch of millionaire labor leaders have relentlessly
tried to push neo-liberal, of which Keynesianism (no matter how it is
packaged) thinking down the throats of working class activists and
rank-and-file workers which is detrimental to the working class movement.

Nothing here suggests the need for an anti-monopoly coalition representing
all the movements this author mentions (and those he very conveniently
ignores mention of like the peace movement).

Nor is there any mention of the need to break free from Wall Streets two
parties, the Democrats and Republicans if we are serious creating a livable
planet we can all survive on while making decent livings with no one left
behind.

And, quite frankly, these millionaire labor leaders and here equally
corrupt little enforcers at the state and local levels have worked
hand-in-hand with the bosses to harass and repress rank-and-file workers
who are advocates of a more just social and economic alternative---
socialism--- in fact, the primary goal and objective of American Prospect
magazine has always been to either defame and slander the advocates of
socialism or to deny their is a socialist alternative--- usually both.

In closing, I would just point out that the wealthy don't simply need to be
"powered down" as this author is suggesting; these wealthy Wall Street few
need to be completely removed from power so they aren't using the levers of
power to destroy OUR living environment as the destroy our livelihoods and
standard-of-living and prevent billions of people from attains a decent
standard-of-living.

If anyone wants to pass this on to the author feel free to do so.

If anyone wants to pass this on to the anti-Communist, anti-working
class rag, The American Prospect magazine, feel free to do so.

I don't think there is much here that any rank-and-file worker who has
struggled to improve the pay and conditions of work in their place of
employment would disagree with.

This article could easily be summed up as just one more intentionally
confusing piece intended to make excuses for the Democrats and those in the
labor movement who have become so well-heeled from holding up the tail of a
bunch of Dumb Donkeys while trying to convince us that we should be content
living off what the sparrows leave behind.

Just imagine what kind of world we could be living in if we were to take
up William Winpisinger's suggestions and beat swords into plow
shares, thereby putting an end to the most environmentally destructive
human endeavor on our planet--- the U.S. Military-Financial-Industrial
Complex established by Wall Street; for which we and our planet pay in so
many hurtful and harmful ways. It is not coincidental that William
Winpisinger's advanced socialist ideas as part of his urging a struggle for
peace and a livable planet.

I can see no reason why we Marxists must withhold comment as these
Keynesians continue to push their very reactionary ideas in the name of
being "progressive" when it is Marxist with ideas advancing the progressive thoughts.

Why should any working class family have to settle for less than what is
embodied as human rights advanced in the United Nations' Universal
Declaration of Human Rights? The only thing standing in the way is
capitalism.

Feel free to comment on my thoughts

Alan L. Maki

A rank-and-file member of UNITE-HERE Local #17, Minneapolis, Minnesota