As One Human Life Goes and the Atrocities Mount…

 

 

As one human caused atrocity mounts upon another and nature seems to be zeroing in on the human dilemma of just keep on doing everything the same way, just in case the main truth in life is Repetition rather than Love, Truth or Justice, we'll either succumb to emotional overload or straight out overkill. The possibilities of some kind of war are increasing, and plausibility as well as redemption of an actual government that resembles whatever ideal we had of one seems unlikely.

The fact of the matter with me is, that I no longer trust my government nor rely on it to give myself credibility. I've worked hard and earned my keep, nearly everybody has. And those who for whatever reason have not, then based solely on their existence as human beings they deserve to reap some of what the great majority have produced.

That's simple. But I do not trust my culture either. It is a culture based on skin color privileges as well as a hierarchical system of justice. Within each race resides the meaningless self -importance, either taught by suppression or by glorification. It is a culture that puts more value on things than on existence, and where existence is worshipped, it is based on nationalism, racism, and all the isms. Our value as human beings is purely speculatively, arbitrarily divine and based in commodity currency and international monetary policies. What is more contradictory than that?

Conversation and Change #4 by Kraig Scwartz History of World Social Forum

                              World Social Forum

 After the Cold War ended neoliberal capitalism , no longer fettered by the Soviet Union, expanded to all parts of the world.  Whether it be farmland in Ethiopia, or the fisheries of our great ocenas, the world increasingly came under the control of unbridled “free market” capitalism and the corporations that serve and benefit from those markets.  Under the sway of neoliberalism, governments deregulated their economies, cut back or eliminated social spending,  pushed aside labor unions and promoted “free trade.”

Perhaps the major economic hallmark of this post Cold War era was the expansion of world trade through the WTO, NAFTA and other regional trade organizations.  The yearly World Economic Forum held at Davos, Switzerland embraced the  world-wide neoliberal capitalist order.  Yet,  strong resistance to this push for the commodification of the world emerged in various parts of the world, most notably by the indigenous  Zapatistas in Mexico.  NAFTA  was about to go into effect on January 1^st of 1994.  When that  debut day arrived the neoliberals were beaten to press deadlines by the Zapatistas, who from the jungles of southern Mexico denounced NAFTA, neoliberalism, and declared war on Mexico.   The newspaper headlines that day reflected this development. The Zapatista had the lead story that day.  They rejected neoliberalism and demanded a better world.  They gained much sympathy from all over the world.

One year later, the WTO was launched and the neoliberal agenda advanced with all due speed.  In 2001 China joined the WTO,  an event which fully integrated China into the world economy.  Taking the lead from the Zapatistas, many people and civil society organizations from all over the world began to resist the neoliberal juggernaought. The resistance included workers, peasants, students, labor unions, churches, NGOs and other parts of civil society.   Opposition to “free trade”  and globalization emerged very broadly over much of the world.   In Seattle in 1999,  30,000 people took to the streets and effectively shut down the WTO ministerial meeting; it was a major victory for the emerging anti-globalization forces.

      Many of the most active anti-globalization forces in the late 90s were located in Brazil where friendly local governments, friendly social and political movements, particualry the Brazilian Workers Party, took up the challenge of globalization.  Meetings were held, the call went out all over the world.  A forum was being organized, a forum where people from all over the world could meet, share their ideas and proposals about how to make a better world.  The1^st meeting of the WSF was  held in January of 2001 in Porto Alegre.  12,000 people attended that first meeting.  Hundreds of movements, organizations, labor unions,  NGOs and individuals from all over the world participated.  It was and is an open meeting that encourages democratic participation.  It is  a non-hierarchal horizontal movement.  It has no leaders, nor does it make pronouncements;  it is a leaderless  movement.   Although, its politics are mostly from from the left, not all individuals or organizations are of the left. It is a gathering to discuss and demonstrate the ways a better world can be constructed, a world based on social justice, environmental sustainability, racial equality and world peace.

An International Committee (IC) was established that organizes the annual meetings, invites guest speakers or participants, and along with a Local Organizing Committee seeks funds and logistical help. Many annual meetings have been  held in Brazil, but in other countries as well, particularly in the Third World.  Some local or regional forums have  been held as well, such as Detroit.  Some years more than 150,000 people  have attended, including  well-known activists, academics, union leaders and political leaders. 

It is difficult to assess the contributions that the WSF has made to world-wide political and social change.  This is a difficult task because of the organizational character of the WSF.  With no leaders, pronouncements, or policy proposal it is difficult to assess the influence of the WSF.  However with some speculation, it seems that its influence has been enormous.  Attendees and presenters from  all over have brought concrete proposals to work shops and plenary sessions, including models for social and raciall  justice, sustainable agriculture, human rights, climate change, and much more.  These proposal has been brought back to the country of the attendees, which in turn enhances the ideas, proposals, etc. “for making a better world.  Moreover, the language used at the forum has altered the thought and vocabulary of people all over the world.  It  most certainly had an impact on Occupy Wall Street, both in terms of substance and procedure.

 

 

Twilight of the forum? 

In recent years the WSF has been deeply scrutinized by many of its participants.  The last forum was attended by only 10,00 people, half of whom were Brazilian,   A call has gone out to alter the WSF.  Roberto Savio, whose linked article is included here, and many other founders, have formed the International Renew Group (IRG), calling for numerous reforms to save the WSF.  Savio and the IRG believe that a small group that he calls “an intransigent power group needs” to accept reform and recognize that the Charter of Principles adopted 22 years ago are no longer adequate, and that the WSF is in danger of folding.  The IRG suggestions are offered here.

 

1.       Need for a new communications policy, as the internet was in its early days of development and not utilized the way it is today. Using just email or relying on the Web pages as communication sources are limited. In 2000 few people had cell phones, nor was there Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram.   Web sites and email cannot fulfill the functions of the communication needed today.

2 . The IRG asks for a major restructuring of the WSF, specifically it    calls for the creation of a general assembly, which in turn will elect an executive committee. And, this new executive committee will interact with the world political system.  It will make proposas, evaluate proposal,l and take part in international debates within civil society, and be proactive within that process.  The view is that, if reforms are put in place the WSM will again become an important voice in world politics, particularly at a time when it seems the world is greatly a skewed

3.     Eliminate consensus as decision-making tool.  It is now a major block to change, as it call for unanimity.

4.     Implement policies and finances that will allow people without means to attend the forum, but also participate in the life of the forum.  Over the years this problem has intensified.

For further Reading;

1. https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/11/04/farewell-world-social-forum      Roberto Savio

2.        World Social Forum Under Criicism….history of the WSF and current situation: https://www.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:1441768/FULLTEXT01.pdf

3. https://vimeo.com/80210085  trailer of film “another world is possible” by Melissa Young  Mark Dworkin. 

Conversation and Change #3- by Todd Boyd- My Movement Criteria

 

Hello Fred and Kraig

Thanks for the input and articles. It’s clear we aren’t alone in this beginning of what we all should do-re-evaluate, re-tool, and re-build our movements through a different language, a language of our own making and not a reactive language of oppression, control, and manipulation. Trying a different way. I like the articles for saying some of the things we are saying. I like the economic equality project because of it’s basic ideas about how wealth is distributed.

Since we are building this in situ, I took some of the wiipedia stuff and tried to illustrate some of it with my own thinking. How I see movements and building movements. The best minds of the new world, including Black Lives Matter, Poor Peoples Campaign and many other worldwide campaigns for change are all on the same path. Here’s a sample of what I believe is necessary for any progressive movement.

 

A political movement is a collective attempt by a group of people to change government policy or social values.^[1] Political movements are usually in opposition to an element of the status quo ^[2], and are often associated with a certain ideology.^[3] Some theories of political movements are the political opportunity theory, which states that political movements stem from mere circumstances ^[4], and the resource mobilization theory which states that political movements result from strategic organization and relevant resources.^[2] Political movements are also related to political parties in the sense that they both aim to make an impact on the government and that several political parties have emerged from initial political movements.^[5] The use of electoral policies many current movements seems irrelevant to me. While political parties are engaged with a multitude of issues, political movements tend to focus on only one major issue. If movements are going to pursue one major issue we are doomed unless there are umbrella universal humanitarian connections between. All movements  with organizational abilities should find a way (language) to connect with others who share same values.

And if this seems top-heavy, I should note that some sort of organization, ability to disseminate funds, co-ordinate resources, etc need to be temporary, non-authoritarian, and consensus, democratically controlled within the leadership, however loosely it is defined. All movements need Money.

 

 

 

A social movement is a loosely organized effort by a large group of people to achieve a particular goal, typically a social or political one.^[1][2] This may be to carry out, resist or undo a social change. It is a type of group action and may involve individuals, organizations or both. Definitions of the term are slightly varied.^[3] Social movements have been described as "organizational structures and strategies that may empower oppressed populations to mount effective challenges and resist the more powerful and advantaged elites".^[4] They represent a method of social change from the bottom within nations.

All means all.

Things are what things are. To change these things, it is my belief that any movement I can be a part of (by endorsement, word, financial, or action) should be able to commit to a fully integrated mobilization of all social, racial, cultural, economic, political resources by initiating, involving, training, and supporting any and all non-violent legal, monetary, or “unauthorized” (protest) methods in order to achieve universal, humanitarian principles of revolutionary change.

We know what the goals are, what principles we believe in, what economic methods are fair and reasonable, what realistic political ends are necessary in order to enact radical change and institute universal and egalitarian rights and humanitarian principles and to try and eliminate what is anti-thetically opposed to those principles of universal humanitarianism.

A progressive radical movement should support all the ones who are victims in all wars, regardless of origin. All the ones who are persecuted, prejudiced against in all nations, all the ones who do the work in every nation whether or not bombs fall, diseases spread, militaries, armies, police under orders from their political leaders drive from their homes and communities, all the ones who are mostly silent.

A progressive, radical movement should adhere to a basic-non-authoritarian structure based in temporary, but representative leadership who are  of a community or region familiar with issues, values, and political influences.

A movement must be non-nationalistic, non-capitalistic, non-imperialistic, de-nuclearized, de-weaponized, de-institutionalized ( that is, not enforceable by any acceptable authorized, authoritarian level of violence, imprisonment, war). Should adhere to a variety of non-violent principles and methodology, including but not limited to strikes, de-vestiture, resistance, Learning to step back, step away, step forward when confronted by opposition. Also, a movement should be de-centralized but connected to first- communities of similar economies or needs, second-regional connections based on positive environmental concerns and evaluation, third- cross regional and continental policies related to support of global trade/non-capitalistic values.

In my opinion, any movement has to remember it is on borrowed time, borrowed from millions who will be humiliated, degraded, crushed while neoliberal, methodical, institutionalized political doctrines, adhere to slow, time consuming, corporate authoritarian direction.

Deathbound Subjectivity. Through religious beliefs, superstition, fear we’ve separated ourselves from the natural order of things. Yes, the natural world can be a dangerous place, a beautiful place, a fruitful place and an ever -changing place. In the modern world, we’re living a theoretical existence at best. Politics, nations, governments are all based on theoretical constructs that conditions us to believe, or even, forces us to believe we really do have control over our environment rather than simply being a part (and not even an integral part) of a natural order. A movement, in my opinion, must reflect on our place in the natural world so that any change we initiate is integrated into environmental, conservation global policy, not dependent on a reliance on our “superior” position, through technology, maintaining the same small human minority retaining the same control over our own comforts and use of natural resources throughout the world.

Saint Father Junipero Serra once remarked that california natives lived near perfect lives, they just needed to get dressed and get a work schedule. And with that, a justification for genocide. A similar premise for slavery (read Stamped From the Beginning). For me, both slavery and indigenous genocide, all over the globe, renders senseless the idea that Reason and Law fostered by worldwide colonialism, imperialism, nationalism has anything to say about human nature so why do we listen or argue?

Sometimes I know we are a simple nation of carnivores, preying on each other, our success, purely determined on size, swift of foot, teeth and claw, all the while, the majority of people, neither left nor right, worki for family and community, regardless of who is in power. A movement should respect universal, non-violent, non-predatory principles whether or not they are traditional, religious bound.  Capitalism (and we really need to find and use another word for it) is a philosophy sprinkled with carnivorous, unclever, unwise aphorisms that if placed before any “electorate” in it’s true undisguised form, would be thrown out. Any movement should rewrite the history books, the philosophy books, the economic books. A movement should recreate and rewrite descriptive language on it’s own terms. Language should reflect a common understanding of universal rights and encourage community and local support of those universal principles.

When the big comet hit the earth, dinosaurs didn’t just roll over and die they took whatever time they had left and slaughtered each other in order to survive until it was the smaller ones, the ones which would change, grow tooth and claw and, later, emerge triumphant for their own epoch.

We don’t want to be dinosaurs or predators either. A movement should be able to use money for improving people’s lives and livihood. A movement needs money and from our discussions, many of them have money. Donations and support come from many people in many ways. A movement needs to be able to outsource resources, distribute equitably and justly. Spending hard earned money on trying to change the legal system only is not beneficial nor helpful in a resource fight for real change.

Other important movement support should focus on universal education, universal health, universal self-defense by resistance, divestiture, rejection against laws and policies supporting fascism, racism, patriarchy, war etc.

I think lastly, any movement should be building the social, political, economic global community it wants to see,

Conversations and Change #2 by Frederick Foote

 

It is my assumption that there are systems of repression, degradation, and profit masquerading as criminal justice systems in this country. Law enforcement, judicial systems employees, attorneys, prison construction and management industries, and state and local governments each have a vested interest in keeping these invidious systems in place, if not growing. I further assume that these counterfeit justice (or injustice) systems target black, brown and poor communities. Furthermore, I believe we all have a moral and legal obligation to oppose such systems.

Historically, and unto this present day, violence has been employed as the government’s preferred method of dealing with aboriginal resistance, racial and labor unrest, and challenges to the status quo internally and externally. In this way, law enforcement has a license to kill with impunity and immunity from prosecution and this amounts to a long history of state terrorism against people of color.

Those who are willing to admit that there are problems with the American law enforcement systems often respond with the idea that a few rotten apples in the barrel make all of the good apples look bad. This “rotten apple” theory is not applicable to our systems of injustice. “[The] Adult correctional systems supervised an estimated 6,851,000 persons at year end 2014.” This scale of mass incarceration, based on racial and income bias, is not the result of a few bad apples. It is the political, economic and social goal of this country to incarcerate or place black, brown, and poor people under the control of the injustice systems in these enormous numbers.

The number of law enforcement stops and contacts of young African-American and Latino males is astonishing. In 2011 the New York City Police Department stopped people on the streets 685,000 times². This is not the work of a few bad apples. Law enforcement officers have a long history of lying for each other and covering up each other’s misdeeds. Their Code of Silence is a no snitch policy that may be stronger than the no snitch street code found in many urban cities. This, again, is not the work of a few bad apples. This is a collection of rotten to the core systems.

Another component of the “bad apple” argument is that aside from the few “bad apples,” the rest of the police are performing in an admirable matter. In a system of mass incarceration that disproportionately destroys black, brown and poor lives and communities, it is inconceivable to think that enforcing and participating blindly in this brutal, racist system is performing admirably.

These prosecutions and persecutions on political, profit and racial grounds are crimes against humanity. During the Nuremberg Trials, a series of military tribunals held by the Allied Forces after World War II, the principle that we are legally accountable for our actions even if we are following the law was examined. “The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.”

Slavery in the United States was a constitutionally based and government supported system of labor exploitation and human degradation. Despite the lawful nature of slavery, it was questioned for its legality and morality. Each of us is responsible for the consequences of our actions in systems of slavery or mass incarceration. To work in a racist system as obviously oppressive as the United States criminal injustice system and not protest the principles, practices and results of the system is not working admirably. It is, in fact, being an active and aware supporter of racism and oppression.

The President of the United States calls for peaceful, non-violent protests if we must, in fact, protest. It is ironic that President Obama, the champion of drone warfare which violates international law and national sovereignty, calls for nonviolent protest. Every drone assassination has the potential to promote more violence. The call to the protesters from the United States, a country that is the greatest arms merchant in the world today, for non-violence is cynical and hypocritical. There is no similar call or mandate directed to the law enforcement purveyors of violence in our communities.

It would make more sense to direct the pleas for non-violence at the extraordinary violent activities of our government agencies.

Our history is an unbroken trajectory of racial oppression in the United States of America. The nature and intensity of the suppression waxes and wanes but it is always there. The problem is white racism. Many pundits will argue that it is far more complicated than that, and it may well be. However, the first step is realizing, defining and accepting the nature and scope of white racism. I do not see this nation ready to move forward with this inquiry now or in the near future.

For decades some have suggested a national discussion on race and racism. However, I suggest that more practical steps should precede any such dialogue. The stop and frisk laws of this country need to be further modified so that black and brown males feel free to walk the streets of their communities without being detained and assaulted by law enforcement officers. Such a change may be seen as a show of good faith by those in power.

Let us proceed to national discussions on these issues at the same time as we rectify some of the obvious wrongs that make the systems of injustice so odious. Let us change the laws to integrate convicted felons back into society, to promote their education and training, to provide gainful employment, to assist them in finding public housing, and to encourage them to vote.

Let us substantially reduce the prison population prior to any discussions.

Let us immediately change the laws that lead to draconian sentencing.

Let us start today providing adequate resources for those accused of crimes to defend themselves.

Let us end the placement of law enforcement officers in elementary, middle and high schools and remove existing police from these schools.

Once we progress on this path of changing a few of the obvious wrongs in the injustice systems, discussion becomes a more meaningful prospect. Without these kinds of initiatives and changes our government’s words are just as trustworthy as our treaties with the Native Americans.

There are literally hundreds of calls for healing. Most of these calls are from establishment sources both black and white. It is difficult for the healing to begin when new wounds are inflicted daily.

A more reasonable and appropriate order is for the state and federal agencies to end their murderous acts and pervasive abuses. And that those who break the law receive equitable punishment on both sides of the blue line.

Only then can the healing begin.

Conversations and Change #1

 April 1, 2022

Let's Get Started-Apocalyptic Cynicism

(Back a few months ago, I read Amid Apocalyptic Cynicism, Lets Embrace Radical Hope in the New Year, the name of an article in Truthout, authored by Henry Giroux, published January 5^th, 2022. I liked the idea of a new language though focusing on Hope to develop that new language seemed worthy of critique, or the need for further discussion. I shared that article with a couple of friends, and we got together on Zoom and talked about the article, hope, change, movements, leadership, and have continued to meet trying to look at what we, as progressives, radicals, revolutionaries have done in the past that’s been successful and what might work in the present to realize a new civil, social system that is both realistic and actual. A new language such as what’s come out of Black Lives Matter resistance. A new language that is defining of our continuing resolve as well as what we need to DO. Language without action is not enough. Action without cause is futile.)

#1-So, with all that in mind, we’ve set out some challenges. We’ve written some of our thoughts to share and would like to continue a dialogue regarding all the issues and challenges the world is currently facing- war, economic inequality, capitalism, fascism, all currently on the rise.

Since reading Giroux’s article, I’ve read others who are all thinking along the same lines- we cannot rely completely on old social theories, the world has not remained that static. Technology, though not the answer by itself either, has changed the scope and depth of both our dilemma and resistance.)

 

Let me say right off, I agree in principle, with what intellectual reasonings are mentioned in this article. It is a proper discourse to have of what, in essence needs to happen, in order to develop an action  vision of  CHANGE. Not simple nor easy.

 

Basically, I could be one of those apocalyptic cynics. That’s a new label for those of us who feel we’ve interpreted history as it was and not as we were taught it was and what we, the people, continue to resist and reject further attempts to reiterate American exceptionalism as real history. The acceptance of American exceptionalism as fact does  seem an obvious long march into a dystopian future,  apocalyptic, no, but dystopian, si.

This article by Henry Giroux is about radical hope vs cynicism and pessimism.

 

It’s true, some people are weary of their dreams and hopes being continually diminished and dismembered through what others might call a stark, dreary political, social and economic reality. But for leftists who always seem to fall back on hope and illusions and want to call up those two ethereal memes as way stations to actual progress, there always seems to be a never-ending, relentless onslaught against that real change we desperately need.  Yes, that could be cynical, I suppose, believing that what many call progress has always meant incremental, evolutionary political change, which on its face flies in the face of facts supporting a thesis there is no permanent change in human behavior regardless of how high and mighty puritan humans do get.

Every settler, every colonizer of every conquered country in world history has had the very same dream of, if not peace, at least, the dream of pursuing it. And nearly every one of those dream pursuits results in war, oppression, terrorism, genocidal practices in its pursuit of land, resources, revenge, democracy. Much of our dreams and wants come out of an already developed, socialized belief of “getting what you deserve.” Whether working for it or being denied it, most people in the western world, whether rich or poorer believe in some sort of “exceptionalism. The medieval religious belief that wherever we are, we are the center of the universe. Even in the modern scientific concept of the universe, we look out at the night sky and it’s hard to understand how very small and insignificant we are.

So it isn’t the apocalyptic cynic who continues to manifest a mundane and inane concept of a future destined to be no better than the present , nor no better than the past from which it arose, but the continued denial of progressives who arrogantly feel, much like their settler predecessors, that dreams come true because we wish them to be rather than built with our hands, minds, hearts and a lot of sacrifice.

Hell, what ripped the dreams from even our own time? The women’s movement is torn because leaders can’t agree or accept that one or two could accept the teachings of Muhammed over Zionism.

How many early attempts on communes or alternative communities have been upset because one individual disagrees with another individual, or someone commits a crime against one of their own and how do we judge or enforce? Then there is the money, fairness, socialism, diversity, all those things that make our reality and commonality. How about the food? Meat vs PETA. Our own “community” is at war with each other.

We can argue or discuss civilly how to build a dream but a dream will not be built and sustained without common people doing all the jobs that really sustain us while every progressive wants to be an autocrat, bureaucrat, or holograph and not a carpenter or truck driver, maid or grocery clerk.

Let’s face it, people don’t want their basic beliefs, which in most cases came from religious, textbook learned remnants of our upbringing, yet our ,solutions rather than being inclusive, are always so atomized. Why?

Because we live in a society that is consumer choice based, a media crazed, authoritative state where for most progressives relegated to being able to discern between values of homes, cars, children’s education, and political issues, have been so entrenched in American settler values, are unable to dig their way out of the real intellectual and moral cages of their own making. Acknowledgement of one’s inability to escape the circumstances of one’s oppression is only the first step in realizing what needs to be done, and then, of course, you have to do it.

Calling other revolutionaries ‘apocalyptic cynics’ then calling up an old, new vision based on hope and dream or even a belief in revolution, because revolution is what it is when anyone is attempting to thwart long-standing institutional oppression. It is a complete denial of so many intelligent people who have expressed similarly cynical views.

Cynics or lovers of false realities shouldn’t really impede a revolution without a gun. After all, talk is cheap, intelligence is a dime per dozen, but it does take a revolution to make sure that the lowest on the economic scale, the ones with the least power, are content to continue to make the beds, cook the food, take care of their families, stand in factory lines, butcher or grow the food, transport and all the other millions of little jobs necessary to run a society. Very few work for theirs and their families survival and security with the revised axioms of economic and political theory in their heads.

If anyone thinks continually going left, however it is currently defined, gets you anywhere other than a square or circle, depending on the geometry of your trends, only gets mired in old, tired constructs.

The use of words such as create, vision, compassion, equality, democrazy, hope, motivations to embrace, resistance, to ponder, long for, fire in the hole, empathy, don’t produce new language. They only make us believe there is an inevitability to what we want, need, or desire.

The truth is we can fail and will fail if we don’t go on a different path, a path that is both simple and social, practical and powerful, active andthoughtful. Aren’t we already overburdened with the stuff of academic thinking? 

 

Reclaim history? Let history be what it is, a resource, a sinkhole for all the bad ideas that have become our reality, cage, and refuge for the knowledge that people used to overcome and physically resist as well as die for something better.

Mass movements? Oh, what failure has that been. A more benevolent imperialism, a better social media campaign, the wanting of middle-class values for everyone? Impossible.

What happened to “build locally, think globally?” Real cynics will say what good does it do to grow your own food if you can, support those near you who do, organize neighborhoods around basic and essential needs of communities- health, food, water, education, safety (law enforcement as well as improvised social networking), and love, because  real cynics remind us, there’s the big bad wolf of capitalism, the violence of racism, corporate personhood (ownership), worldwide catastrophe (war, disease, climate change) always at the door.

We need to go from rationalizing to actualizing. It’s the real cynics who can’t believe organizing communities are enough because their ideas are always bigger than what’s possible, aiming high, shoot to the pie in the sky.

Believe me, as my apocalyptic cynical vision creeps along, it’s going to be hard to even get too far from your community in the future as resources and fear will keep us chained. Living under global capitalism, fascism is pure survival. We need to organize real alternatives to that survival. Farm co-operatives and the support system to go along with it. Urban co-operatives based in providing food, water, healthcare, childcare.

 The only apocalypse is the one caused by capitalism, deterioration of institutions its based in,  nations divided, assaults on the reality of climate, infrastructure deterioration, travel restrictions, inflation or recession, all these are like putting a herd of zebras into a cage of lions.

"The new year should be rooted in dreams that reject a vision of the future as simply a continuation of the present."

Yes and No! This is a quote that is especially disturbing, simply hoping for all these changes is a vision of the future a continuation of the present. That’s all Hope is about, a sucker fish attached to the shark. It’s part of the present package.

There’s nothing about actual change in Hope. 

I believe in community because that’s the place, home, where anyone can look around and find answers to their concerns. Sure, getting involved in the school isn’t as good as establishing your own school, or getting the city to build a community project isn’t as good as having the ability or means to build it yourself.

There are many people working toward the same end. The good end, in thousands of communities across this land. Let actions be our guide and drive rather than what politics seem to be. Think outside the box. Act, resist, and build the revolution you want to see. 

Think Outside the Box