Community Blogs Welcome, Alan.
Manage | Logout | Search Blogs
Alan Maki's Blog
View Full Profile »
About The Author...
Alan L. Maki (Warroad, MN)
Profile Picture
« Hide Full Profile
User Profile
Profile Picture
User:
Name:
Frank Marshall Davis Roundtable for Change
Framing issues... Framing ideas... Framing solutions to our problems
By Alan L. Maki - Aug 5th, 2008 at 11:46 am EDT
My good friend Sam Webb has published a very important piece of work. I am posting it below followed by a quote from Franklin D. Roosevelt and something of mine published in the Madison, Wisconsin "Capital Times."
As you will probably note, Sam Webb emphasized the positive with the Obama campaign to the exclusion of the negatives and the requirements for uniting people for change.
I share Webb's confidence that Obama is going to win; and, I share Webb's enthusiasm for dumping the Republicans.
I don't just think Obama is going to win... I think Barack Obama is going to win in a great big landslide simply because the American people are just so darn fed up with Bush and the Republicans.
I also think that those who are counseling us to "hold back until after the Election" are dead wrong; Barack Obama, the community organizer, understands and appreciates the fact that "out of sight is out of mind." Barack Obama, the community organizer, understands that during an Election is the perfect time to "make political hay" in bringing concerns forward. We shouldn't be timid; we for sure shouldn't be holding back in our thoughts or our actions. In fact, with-holding our thoughts and opinions and suppressing our actions at this crucial time can only be to the benefit of John McCain.
People, working people, are fed up for a reason... actually a whole lot of reasons which Webb didn't get around to mentioning and I do in my follow-up letter to the Madison, Wisconsin "Capital Times" and in my previous commentary on this blog which I re-publish below... followed by what I think are some good suggestions for action which anyone can participate in.
But, whether or not this Obama victory benefits working people and the working class is another matter; as Carl Winter, who Webb quotes so often, drew our attention to while he was the Editor of the Daily World... the newspaper that replaced the Daily Worker and the Worker which Frank Marshall Davis read and circulated among his friends and fellow activists.
Here is Sam Webb's excellent article in the People's Weekly World. For some reason Webb has had a lot of difficulty grappling with the Obama campaign; I don't know why:
Elections ’08: embracing the moment
Author: Sam Webb
People's Weekly World Newspaper, 08/01/08 13:46
The expected presidential nomination of Barack Obama is a path breaking and historic achievement from many standpoints, not least the struggle for equality and against racism. Obama’s nomination leaves an enduring mark on every aspect of our nation’s culture – a culture steeped both in racism and anti-racism.
Eugene Robinson, a columnist for the Washington Post, had this to say:
“A young, black, first-term senator—a man whose father was from Kenya, whose mother was from Kansas and whose name sounds as if it might have come from the roster of Guantanamo detainees—has won the marathon of primaries and caucuses to become the presumptive presidential nominee of the Democratic Party. To reach this point, he had to do more than outduel the party’s most powerful and resourceful political machine. He also had to defy, and ultimately defeat, 389 years of history.”
The breaking of this barrier says much about the candidate but it also speaks volumes about the American people. While it augurs well for our country’s future, it must be very disconcerting for the ruling class – that class which has been the main architect and beneficiary of racism for nearly four centuries.
People crossed racial and gender barriers in numbers that many of us didn’t think possible only a few months ago. Some said an Obama nomination was impossible, that it would never happen, and that white voters would never pull the lever for a Black presidential candidate. But the primaries proved that the doubters were wrong.
Breaking barriers
The Clinton campaign also broke barriers. Her concession speech was stirring as well as profound in many ways. While we had disagreements (and stated them) with the racist text/subtext in her campaign, it is also true that she captured the imagination of millions of women who in their own lives encounter gender barriers and oppression in the home, work and community. I am not sure if we have taken full measure
Her candidacy dissolved male supremacist notions disfiguring the thinking of men and plowed away barriers preventing women from playing a full and equal role in every aspect of social life. The struggle for full equality of women won’t necessarily be easy going forward, but Clinton’s campaign did take the fight to higher ground.
Decent and democratic minded people are rightfully celebrating the breaking of these barriers. Imagine how enthused the depression-era communists – those who gave their lives to Black/white unity and equality at a time of legalized segregation and lynching with impunity — would be about these turn of events.
Soberness in politics is essential, but it should be combined with passion, hope, excitement and images of a just and peaceful future. If we are going to err with respect to the significance of the moment and the potential of the coming elections, it is better to err on the side of passion and hope.
Anti-racism at a new level
Most, I suspect, underestimated the growth of anti-racist feeling among white people to one degree or another. Consider this statement by Loree Suggs, executive secretary of the Cleveland building trades, in reference to Obama:
“Go back to your locals. Now is the time to unite. We cannot let any bias or racial thoughts get in the way. If your members have any problem with racial bias, tell them to get over it for all time, but especially now for this election, get over it. We must put Barack Obama in the White House and, if we don’t, we are in deep trouble.”
This may not be typical of changing sentiments of white people in general and white unionists in particular, but it isn’t atypical either. Mass thinking is changing. Again, to quote Robinson,
“[T]he amazing thing isn’t that there were instances of overt, old style racism during the campaign, it’s that there were so few. The amazing thing is that so many Americans have been willing to accept – or, indeed, reject – Obama based on his qualifications and his ideas, not on his race. I’ll never forget visiting Iowa in December and witnessing all white-crowds file into high school gymnasiums to take the measure of a black man – and, ultimately, decide that he was someone who expressed their hopes and dreams.”
While I don’t think that we have fully digested the political meaning of this turn of events, we can still say that the readiness of so many white voters to cast their ballot for an African American candidate in the presidential primaries gives confidence that the struggle against racism in its ideological and material forms can proceed on higher ground and in a bolder fashion.
Beware of rigid concepts
Tightly sealed political categories in this moment are not useful. It is said, for example, that Obama is a centrist or, worse still, a bourgeois politician. But aren’t categories of this kind, even if they capture some aspects of reality, too closed to be useful in a dynamic situation?
Political categories should allow for complexity, contradictions, transitions and new experience. If this is true in general then it is even truer at this moment when politics are fluid and social actors (individuals and social groups) are in motion?
Isn’t it possible for a social group or an individual to occupy more than one political space? Isn’t there something to be said for Italian Communist Antonio Gramsci’s concept of “contradictory consciousness?” Shouldn’t we think twice before embracing cut and dried assessments of social actors that not only fail to capture complexity of their politics, but also impede our political imagination to creatively elaborate strategic and tactical positions?
Assessments of candidates should be informed by their political formation and sensibilities, the movement that has sprung up around a candidacy and the overall context of these elections, including the presence of a powerful right-wing attack machine. Rather than pigeonholing Obama, for example, as a centrist or bourgeois politician, it may be more useful to characterize him as a potentially transformative political figure, much like Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Martin Luther King, Jr. were. None of them were revolutionaries, but they each had a keen appreciation of the moment in which they lived, they each interacted with the larger movement of their time and they each understood the necessity of expanding and giving new content to democracy and citizenship rights, albeit in the context of their times.
It isn’t ordained that Obama will fit into this category, either, but it is also far too early to foreclose that possibility. Life and struggle will decide.
Appreciating political realities
There is a tendency – especially among some on the progressive and left part of the political spectrum — to nitpick every single position of this or that candidate, including Obama. Some people on the left were apoplectic over Obama’s speeches to AIPAC and a Cuban American group in Miami. It is true that there is much in each speech that the left would disagree with, but at the same time we should look for positive openings that the speeches offer, if not now, then in the event of an Obama presidency. Unfortunately, looking for openings, by the way, isn’t something that the left is skillful at doing, especially in the electoral arena.
There should be an appreciation of this broad popular movement that has arisen around Obama’s candidacy. It has diverse currents and trends, including sections of the ruling class – all of which have to be taken into account. This campaign is also up against a very powerful right-wing attack machine – not to mention powerful and reactionary corporate interests.
What is more, to win, the campaign has to reach out to independents and disaffected Republicans. Without winning a section of them, a landslide victory is improbable.
The broader movement should give some wiggle room to this path-breaking candidacy. Obama is not running for city council in Berkeley or a safe congressional seat. Instead he is running for the highest national office in 50 states and in every region of the country.
Being right in the right way
Communists and others on the left can and should differ with Obama and other Democratic candidates. But the more important question is how we do it. Carl Winter, a former national leader of the Communist Party, said to me on more than one occasion: “It is not enough to be right, but you have to be right in the right way.” By which I understood Carl to mean that Communists, in advancing our views, have to be not only respectful of other people’s opinions and circumstances, but also to present them in a way that deepens people’s understanding, confidence and unity in the context of our strategic objective.
In order to advance one iota of a pro-people’s agenda, the people’s movement has to elect Obama and to enlarge the Democratic Party majorities in Congress. Without that everything else is wishful thinking.
However the focus in these elections should neither be solely on the candidate nor solely on the movement, but rather on the interactions and connections between the two. We should accent dynamics, fluidity and possibilities of the political process rather than dwelling on this or that shortcoming of either the candidate or the broader movement. If the latter consumes us, if it becomes the main thing, we will miss the forest for the trees.
Sam Webb is chairman of the Communist Party USA. This article is based on excerpts from his latest report on the 2008 elections. For more information: www.cpusa.org.
This appeared in the writings of a professor who trains community activists:
Obama can certainly learn valuable lessons from
President Franklin Roosevelt, who recognized that his
ability to push New Deal legislation through Congress
depended on the pressure generated by protestors and
organizers. He once told a group of activists who sought
his support for legislation, "You've convinced me. Now
go out and make me do it."
As depression conditions worsened, and as grassroots
worker and community protests escalated throughout the
country, Roosevelt became more vocal, using his bully
pulpit-in speeches and radio addresses-to promote New
Deal ideas. Labor and community organizers felt
confident in proclaiming, "FDR wants you to join the
union." With Roosevelt setting the tone, and with allies
in Congress like Senator Robert Wagner, grassroots
activists won legislation guaranteeing workers' right to
organize, the minimum wage, family assistance for
mothers, and the 40-hour week.
The entire article is an excellent read:
http://dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=1215
My own letter published in the Madison, Wisconsin "Capital Times" is more specific and raises specific points we need to discuss because I am sure Barack Obama, as Sam Webb has suggested, shares many things in common with President Franklin D. Roosevelt; and, one of those things is that even though he may personally agree with much of what we are talking about when we talk about the kind of change we need in this country, there are also very powerful financial forces, many of us call it the "military-financial-industrial complex," in opposition to moving our country in a more progressive direction... and, Sam Webb's article alludes to these problems; that is, a lot of big-businesses are banking that they will be able to exert greater influence and pressure over Barack Obama than can, we--- the people. This is why Frank Marshall Davis always tried to make working people fully aware of the class struggle--- bankers, industrialists, war-profiteers on one side; working people determined to create a better life on the other side.
Keep in mind, this statement by President Franklin D. Roosevelt is of utmost importance:
"You've convinced me. Now go out and make me do it."
We are not in a situation where we have the ability to whisper in Obama's ear our concerns. Barack Obama needs to be able to tell his big-business backers, "Hey, fellas; look here, I got all these people out here yelling and demonstrating and raising heck about their problems... I can't just ignore all these people... I have to discuss with them how we are going to solve their problems."
Unlike President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Barak Obama the community organizer, understands we have a job to do in mobilizing grassroots working class activists; and because he received guidance from Frank Marshall Davis he will understand that he has a job to do right now--- get elected President of the United States--- and Obama will understand, that as working people who are suffering the consequences of a rotten capitalist system on the skids to oblivion, we aren't willing to go down with the sinking ship.
Here is my letter published in the Madison, Wisconsin "Capital Times":
Obama needs to offer solutions to get working-class votes
Link to article in Capital Times I responded to:
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/letters/296575
Link to my Letter to the Editor:
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/letters/296575
Alan Maki: Obama needs to offer solutions to get working-class votes
Alan Maki — 7/17/2008
Dear Editor:
I agree with the AFL-CIO's Richard Trumka that "labor must battle racism"; however, I don't think racism is the main obstacle to Obama getting the votes of working people.
Trumka recently eloquently rattled off the list of problems working people are experiencing. The problem Obama is having convincing workers to vote for him is that he has not put forward one single solution to any of the problems Trumka listed: "when it comes to protecting jobs, when it comes to protecting pensions, when it comes to health care, child care, pay equity for women, Social Security, Medicare, seeing to it that people can afford to go to college and buy a home -- and restoring the right to collective bargaining ..."
Until Obama clearly brings forward real solutions to the problems of working people he is going to have a very difficult time getting our votes -- and this has nothing to do with racism.
For some reason, Trumka conveniently made no mention of the need to end this war for oil in Iraq. Why not? We cannot have an economy of guns and butter.
Trumka also failed to note the other twin evil of racism: anti-communism.
Anyone who looks at the conservative and right-wing bloggers supporting John McCain sees that the attacks on Obama are both racist and anti-communist.
These attacks center around Frank Marshall Davis, the deceased black journalist and Communist Party member who Obama says was his "mentor." Apparently Joe McCarthy has risen from the grave and intends to go goose-stepping backward over the dead body of one of this country's most courageous working-class journalists.
Richard Trumka had better concern himself with both racism and anti-communism, pernicious forms of hate and bigotry which feed on each other and spell a doomsday scenario for progressive working-class politics.
Alan L. Maki
Midwest Casino Workers Organizing Council
Warroad, Minn.
In another article of mine published in a variety of publications around the country, and previously in one of my blog postings on this site, I referred to some specific issues:
It is up to working people to clearly chart the course for progressive change and to unite for change behind the agenda we articulate. We need to make politicians understand that they work for us, not the other way around.
Several very basic changes come to mind that I think about:
1.)In the area of health care we need single-payer universal health care which will be a stepping stone to get us to socialized health care. Obama’s idea of health care “reform” leaves much to be desired; he wants to leave the profit gouging insurance companies, HMO’s, doctors and the pharmaceutical industry in control when most of us know this is what is wrong with the system--- profits come before people; and, it should be the other way around.
2.)We need a minimum wage that is a real living wage. Any job that an employer needs done should provide the worker doing that job a real living wage. The way to arrive at what the minimum wage should be is to use the statistics and calculations of the United States Department of Labor and the Bureau of Labor Statistics based on real cost of living factors rather than having some politicians pull a miserly figure out of their hat at election time. If employers don’t like this let them do the work themselves; with the robbery at the pumps it won’t be long before it won’t pay to go to work anyways. What’s Obama’s stand on the minimum wage? I don’t know. It doesn’t really matter. We need to seize the initiative and make it clear to him the change we want.
3.)We need to end this dirty war for oil in Iraq; it’s a war that was based upon lies and deceit right from the beginning and it has taken a terrible toll, not only on the people in Iraq, but on us here, too--- to the point where we can say that every bomb dropped and every bullet fired is destroying our society, too. We can’t have a foreign policy which sees wars as solutions to complex problems. As far as I can see Obama doesn’t really offer much change in this area either so we are going to have to take the initiative in charting a course for change as we expect things to be and make our voices heard.
4.)We need to make it clear that in any program aimed at “greening” America through massive government subsidies to business and industry, that what taxpayers finance, taxpayers should own--- including the profits.
5.)Public ownership of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant needs to be considered. Saving two-thousand jobs is a major priority for Minnesotans in this election.
In the end, we should see ourselves and our unity as the surge for change, and stop waiting for Obama or any other politicians to explain what kind of change they are for.
Change should be about solving real problems. The people experiencing these problems, you and me, should be able to articulate the solutions… this is what real change is about.
In a democracy people are supposed to be active participants in movements for social change, not mere cheerleaders clapping and waving placards for politicians mouthing hollow, meaningless platitudes about “change.”
“Yes we can” bring about “change” if we get together where we work and in our communities.
Once again I would note what President Franklin D. Roosevelt told a group of leaders from the Communist Party USA and the Unemployed Councils during his meeting with them:
"You've convinced me. Now go out and make me do it."
Of course, President Franklin D. Roosevelt was referring to Social Security.
I am confident that we will be seeing Sam Webb elaborating on the class struggle aspect of the 2008 Elections as we go along.
I do think that this posting from another blog, in the best traditions of community organizing, is the direction we need to be moving in very quickly if we intend to build a bridge to the Obama Administration:
Help Make A Grassroots Movement Grow... Starting a grassroots movement for change is as easy as 1, 2, 3, 4...
1. Get your friends and neighbors together around the kitchen table.
2. Discuss the problem.
3. Make up some signs saying:
"We are fed up!"
"Stop the robbery at the pumps!"
"No more wars for oil!"
"Tax oil company profits to pay for health care, education, housing!"
"Boycott Mobil/Exxon/Esso!"
4. Head out with your signs for your neighborhood Mobil/Exxon/Esso gas station/convenience store.
The time has come to serve notice on the oil companies that we are fed up with the robbery at the pumps and we aren't going to take it any more.
Education.
Organization.
Unity.
Action.
One little raindrop doesn't amount to much... but, let it pour and all those little raindrops sure add up... talk to your family, friends, fellow workers and neighbors.
Whenever possible purchase Citgo gas and oil products.
The time has come to consider public ownership and nationalization of the oil industry.
Let's talk about the politics and economics of livelihood.
Some people have intentionally mis-stated my motives in stating my views so openly on these issues.
The right-wing has been pounding away on my blog here for weeks now. Others, who I consider friends, think I should keep my thoughts to myself until after the Election. In all candor, I don't think suppressing ideas is what is called for. I am not going to be bullied from the right; and I am not going to be bullied into silence by those who call themselves "liberals," "progressives," or "left."
As Bob Dylan sang, "The times they are a changin'"... but, the answers, my friends are not blowin' in the wind... we need open dialogue, discussion and debate.
I would encourage everyone to go out and get the two books by Frank Marshall Davis, "Livin' the Blues" and "The Writings of Frank Marshall Davis" from your local public library... and begin a Frank Marshall Davis Roundtable for Change in your neighborhood.This doesn't have to be anything elaborate... sitting on lawn chairs out in the back-yard or gathering in a local coffee shop or restaurant. Think of the Frank Marshall Davis Roundtable for Change as an alternative to the big-business "think-tanks" like the Heritage Foundation or the Cato Institute or RAND... as working people and community activists and labor and community organizers we need our own think tanks.
In his recent book, "The Age of Turbulence," Alan Greenspan repeatedly points out how important his weekly get-to-gethers with the thoroughly reactionary Ayn Rand were to shaping his thinking, his outlook and developing a strategy for American business to dominate the world. We see, and are experiencing, where we are at today as a result of letting the Alan Greenspans of the country do our thinking for us.
In view of the attacks from the right-wing we shouldn't cower or with-hold our thoughts; as President Franklin D. Roosevelt stated on numerous occassions, and as his wife--- the heroic Eleanor Roosevelt--- continued to say in response to right-wing racist and anti-communist attacks long after President Roosevelt's death:
"We have nothing to fear, but fear itself..."
Madame Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins, a close friend of labor leader Harry Bridges and the first woman secretary ever appointed to such a high-level government position--- appointed Secretary of Labor by President Roosevelt--- was even more forceful in her response to the never-ending, vicious, right-wing attacks emanating from big-business circles, calling Frances Perkin's advocacy of social programs like Social Security and socialized health care "straight from the pages of the Communist Manifesto;" Madame Secretary Perkins courageously responded to these vicious right-wing attacks hurled at her from the likes of the American Medical Association and the Nazi sympathizers like Henry Ford, "I would much rather see these programs as legislation helping people rather than remaining as words on the pages of a pamphlet."
Alan L. Maki
Initiator of the Frank Marshall Davis Roundtable for Change
Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content
Writer offered a young Barack Obama advice on life
By Alan L. Maki - Aug 4th, 2008 at 1:16 pm EDT
This is a great article about how Frank Marshall Davis... journalist, poet and Communist has been a good influence on the lives of so many people...
Don't forget to visit your local public library to pick up copies of Frank Marshall Davis' two books:
"Livin' the Blues" and "The Writings of Frank Marshall Davis."
The right-wing, hate-mongering surrogates for John McCain are using anti-communism and racism to try to whip our country into another McCarthyite fear frenzy; it isn't working.
Anyone who takes the time to read these books by Frank Marshall Davis quickly understands this is the direction our country needs to go.
McCarthyism and its perverted stifling of democracy using racism, anti-Semitism and anti-communism prevented any forward movement in our country by working people. This is about to change as more and more people start to read the writings of Frank Marshall Davis as a result of all this controversy swirling around him; as more and more people begin to examine how we can unite for real change around peace and social and economic justice.
Even in death, the progressive ideas held by Frank Marshall Davis to his dying breath provide us with a beacon from which we can get our bearings to unite our country for real change; and, it is these ideas of Frank Marshall Davis which will now "mentor" this generation in building a bridge of progressivism to the Obama Administration.
It is truly unfortunate that the editor of Frank Marshall Davis' books fears speaking out; a throw-back to the lingering dark days of McCarthyism.
Not many people care if Frank Marshall Davis was a Communist; in fact, the response so far demonstrates that people admire Davis even more because under massive pressure by the McCarthyite witch-hunters pressuring Davis to give up his views and ideas, he never so much as flinched, nor were these two-bit McCartyite fascists succesful in even forcing him to bend under their shameful dirty deeds... and it is this courage and strength, combined with the truth embodied in each and every one of Davis' writings, which is imparted to the reader of his writings... perhaps more than anything, this is what John McCain's right-wing, racist, anti-Semitic, anti-communist surrogates and big-business fear the most... that working people will gain the strength to fight for justice and human dignity.
Alan L. Maki
Initiator, Frank Marshall Davis Roundtable for Change
There are no membership fees, no membership requirements... just pick up these books by Frank Marshall Davis and begin discussing his writings with your family, friends, neighbors, fellow students and workers and invite people to come together to discuss Davis' views in light of our problems today.
Feel free to distribute my blog postings far and wide.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g-kOchVDYR0fDD0zy_-CtMIgYKaQD92A8KT00
Writer offered a young Barack Obama advice on life
By SUDHIN THANAWALA –
HONOLULU (AP) — At key moments in his adolescence, Barack Obama could not turn to a father he hardly knew. Instead, he looked to a left-leaning black journalist and poet for advice on living in a world of black and white.
Frank Marshall Davis had his opinions. He once argued that the public schools of his youth prepared neither blacks nor whites for "life in a multiracial, democratic nation." He called hypocrisy "a national trait of American whites." Advocating civil rights amid segregation, Davis wrote in 1949: "I refuse to settle for anything less than all the rights which are due me under the Constitution."
The depth of the influence Davis had on the presumptive Democratic nominee is a question. While Davis' leftist politics could allow the candidate's critics to group Davis with Obama friends and acquaintances with allegedly anti-American views, those who knew Davis and his work say his activism was aimed squarely at social injustice.
Obama's father was a black man from Kenya and his mother a white Kansas woman. They separated when Obama was 2, and he saw his father just once after they divorced two years later. Raised with the help of his white grandparents, Obama attended school in his native Hawaii with few African-American peers. He struggled to find mentors in his search for a black identity.
His white grandfather, Stanley Dunham, was friends with Davis — both had roots reaching back to Kansas and had families of mixed races — and the black writer took an interest in Obama.
"Our grandfather ... thought (Frank) was a point of connection, a bridge if you will, to the larger African-American experience for my brother," Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama's half-sister, said during a recent interview.
Although Davis does not appear to have been a constant figure in his early life, Obama in his 1995 memoir, "Dreams from My Father," presents Davis — referred to in the book only as Frank — as an important influence who gave him advice about race and college.
A longtime journalist, Davis (1905-1987) was among a group of prominent black writers pushing for equal rights in the 1930s and '40s, before the civil rights movement gained momentum. He published several volumes of poetry and served as executive editor of the Associated Negro Press, a wire service for black newspapers, before leaving the mainland for Hawaii in 1948.
"Frank was part of a group of black vanguard intellectuals," said Kathryn Takara, a professor emeritus at the University of Hawaii who wrote her Ph.D. dissertation about Davis. "The people that he came into contact with throughout his life, like Richard Wright and Margaret Walker, were very significant."
As a young man in Kansas in the early part of the 20th century, Davis encountered segregation and racial epithets. In his memoir, "Livin' the Blues," Davis describes almost being lynched by a group of his white schoolmates as a 5-year-old in Arkansas City, Kan.
"You could get a lot of strength from a person like Frank who had suffered all the discrimination ... that a black man goes through in America," said Ah Quon McElrath, a friend of Davis' who lives in Honolulu.
In spite of his writings, Davis scholars dismiss the idea that he was anti-American.
John Edgar Tidwell, a University of Kansas professor who wrote the introduction to Davis's memoir and edited a collection of his work, declined by e-mail an interview request, saying Davis has become the victim of a "McCarthy-era strategy of smear tactics and condemnation by association."
In his introduction to "Writings of Frank Marshall Davis: A Voice of the Black Press," Tidwell wrote of Davis and his later work: "He made his vision into a beacon, a light shedding understanding and enlightenment on the problems that denied people, regardless of race, national origin or economic status, their constitutional rights."
For Obama, Davis was an intriguing figure, "with his books and whiskey breath and the hint of hard-earned knowledge behind the hooded eyes."
Dunham and his grandson would spend evenings at Davis's dilapidated home in Waikiki, Honolulu's main tourist district. Davis, who had raised a family with a white wife, would read his poetry and share whiskey with Dunham, Obama recalled.
Dawna Weatherly-Williams, a friend of Davis' who also lives in Honolulu, said Dunham wanted Obama to know that there were other children like him who were part black and part white, she said.
"Stan was real proud of that," she said, adding that it was rare to see black men with white women at the time.
Obama describes driving to Davis' home in Waikiki after learning that his white grandmother was so afraid of a black panhandler she did not want to take the bus to work. Davis told the teenager that his grandmother was correct to feel scared because she understood African-Americans "have a reason to hate."
Davis said Obama's grandfather would never understand people like him because they hadn't experienced the humiliations he had, according to Obama's memoir. As he left Davis's house that night, Obama wrote, he knew he was completely alone for the first time in his life.
Davis appears again later in the book, when Obama recalls meeting the writer shortly before leaving for college on the mainland. At that meeting, Davis scolded Obama for his listless attitude toward college and warned him not to leave his race behind, which he called "the real price of admission" to higher education. Davis went on to tell Obama that no matter how well he did in college, his race would be a glass ceiling.
Obama, who would later leave a job as a financial researcher and writer to work as an organizer on Chicago's South Side, wrote, "It made me smile, thinking back on Frank and his old Black Power, dashiki self."
Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content
Afghanistan: Not a Good War
By Alan L. Maki - Aug 3rd, 2008 at 9:11 am EDT
Afghanistan: Not a Good War
By Conn Hallinan
Foreign Policy in Focus
July 30, 2008
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5423
Every war has a story line. World War I was 'the war to
end all wars.' World War II was 'the war to defeat
fascism.'
Iraq was sold as a war to halt weapons of mass
destruction; then to overthrow Saddam Hussein, then to
build democracy. In the end it was a fabrication built
on a falsehood and anchored in a fraud.
But Afghanistan is the 'good war,' aimed at 'those who
attacked us,' in the words of columnist Frank Rich. It
is 'the war of necessity,' asserts the New York Times,
to roll back the 'power of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.'
Barack Obama is making the distinction between the 'bad
war' in Iraq and the 'good war' in Afghanistan a
centerpiece of his run for the presidency. He proposes
ending the war in Iraq and redeploying U.S. military
forces in order 'to finish the job in Afghanistan.'
Virtually no one in the United States or the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) calls for
negotiating with the Taliban. Even the New York Times
editorializes that those who want to talk 'have deluded
themselves.'
But the Taliban government did not attack the United
States. Our old ally, Osama bin Laden, did. Al-Qaeda
and the Taliban are not the same organization (if one
can really call al-Qaeda an 'organization'), and no one
seems to be listening to the Afghans.
We should be.
What Afghans Say
A recent poll of Afghan sentiment found that, while the
majority dislikes the Taliban, 74% want negotiations
and 54% would support a coalition government that
included the Taliban.
This poll reflects a deeply divided country where most
people are sitting on the fence and waiting for the
final outcome of the war. Forty percent think the
current government of Hamid Karzai, allied with the
United States and NATO, will prevail, 19% say the
Taliban, and 40% say it is 'too early to say.'
There is also strong ambivalence about the presence of
foreign troops. Only 14% want them out now, but 52%
want them out within three to five years. In short, the
Afghans don't want a war to the finish.
They also have a far more nuanced view of the Taliban
and al-Qaeda. While the majority oppose both groups
13% support the Taliban and 19% al-Qaeda only 29%
see the former organization as 'a united political
force.'
But that view doesn't fit the West's story line of the
enemy as a tightly disciplined band of fanatics.
Whither the Taliban
In fact, the Taliban appears to be evolving from a
creation of the U.S., Saudi Arabian, and Pakistani
intelligence agencies during Afghanistan's war with the
Soviet Union, to a polyglot collection of dedicated
Islamists to nationalists. Taliban leader Mullah
Mohammad Omar told the Agence France Presse early this
year, 'We're fighting to free our country. We are not a
threat to the world.'
Those are words that should give Obama, The New York
Times, and NATO pause.
The initial invasion in 2001 was easy because the
Taliban had alienated itself from the vast majority of
Afghans. But the weight of occupation, and the rising
number of civilian deaths, is shifting the resistance
toward a war of national liberation.
No foreign power has ever won that battle in
Afghanistan.
War Gone Bad
There is no mystery as to why things have gone
increasingly badly for the United States and its
allies.
As the United States steps up its air war, civilian
casualties have climbed steadily over the past two
years. Nearly 700 were killed in the first three months
of 2008, a major increase over last year. In a recent
incident, 47 members of a wedding party were killed in
Helmand Province. In a society where clan, tribe, and
blood feuds are a part of daily life, that single act
sowed a generation of enmity.
Anatol Lieven, a professor of war at King's College
London, says that a major impetus behind the growing
resistance is anger over the death of family members
and neighbors.
Lieven says it is as if Afghanistan is 'becoming a sort
of surreal hunting estate, in which the U.S. and NATO
breed the very terrorists they then track down.'
Once a population turns against an occupation (or just
decides to stay neutral), there are few places in the
world where an occupier can win. Afghanistan, with its
enormous size and daunting geography, is certainly not
one of them.
Writing in Der Spiegel, Ullrich Fichter says that
glancing at a map in the International Security
Assistance Force's (ISAF) headquarters outside Kandahar
could give one the impression that Afghanistan is under
control. 'Colorful little flags identify the NATO
troops presence throughout the country,' Germans in the
northeast, Americans in the east, Italians in the West,
British and Canadians in the south, with flags from
Turkey, the Netherlands, Spain, Lithuania, Australia
and Sweden scattered between.
'But the flags are an illusion,' he says.
The UN considers one third of the country
'inaccessible,' and almost half, 'high risk.' The
number of roadside bombs has increased fivefold over
2004, and the number of armed attacks has jumped by a
factor of 10. In the first three months of 2008,
attacks around Kabul have surged by 70%. The current
national government has little presence outside its
capital. President Karzai is routinely referred to as
'the mayor of Kabul.'
According to Der Spiegel, the Taliban are moving north
toward Kunduz, just as they did in 1994 when they broke
out of their base in Kandahar and started their drive
to take over the country. The Asia Times says the
insurgents' strategy is to cut NATO's supply lines from
Pakistan and establish a 'strategic corridor' from the
border to Kabul.
The United States and NATO currently have about 60,000
troops in Afghanistan. But many NATO troops are
primarily concerned with rebuilding and development
the story that was sold to the European public to get
them to support the war and only secondarily with war
fighting.
The Afghan army adds about 70,000 to that number, but
only two brigades and one headquarters unit are
considered capable of operating on their own.
According to U.S. counter insurgency doctrine, however,
Afghanistan would require at least 400,000 troops to
even have a chance of 'winning' the war. Adding another
10,000 U.S. troops will have virtually no effect.
Afghanistan and the Elections
As the situation continues to deteriorate, some voices,
including those of the Karzai government and both U.S.
presidential candidates, advocate expanding the war
into Pakistan in a repeat of the invasions of Laos and
Cambodia, when the Vietnam War began spinning out of
control. Both those invasions were not only a disaster
for the invaders. They also led directly to the
genocide in Cambodia.
By any measure, a military 'victory' in Afghanistan is
simply not possible. The only viable alternative is to
begin direct negotiations with the Taliban, and to draw
in regional powers with a stake in the outcome: Iran,
Pakistan, Russia, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, China, and
India.
But to do so will require abandoning our 'story' about
the Afghan conflict as a 'good war.' In this new
millennium, there are no good wars.
_____________
Conn Hallinan is a Foreign Policy In Focus columnist.
Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content
Make the Democratic Platform the American Dream Platform
By Alan L. Maki - Aug 2nd, 2008 at 2:04 pm EDT
Barack Obama and the Democratic Party are asking people for input into the 2008 Democratic Party Platform.
I would encourage people to participate in this discussion, dialogue and debate even though we all know these people are not sincere in wanting our input; if they were sincere they would have sought out our input long ago rather than waiting for the last minute; instead, especially the Obama Campaign, has been hard at work trying to smother people's participation at every level of the decision-making process while now hypocritically saying our input is desired... we saw this very concretely here in Minnesota as these party hacks sought to thwart:
1. Any discussion concerning the plight of casino workers in the Indian Gaming Industry. Here in Minnesota some thirty-thousand casino workers are employed in smoke-filled casinos at poverty wages without any rights under state or federal labor laws; employed at the mercy of a bunch of mobsters who are the real owners of these casinos. Strung out in some 400 casinos across the United States over two-million casino, hotel/motel, restaurant and resort workers are employed under these Draconian conditions as Barack Obama takes campaign contributions from the Indian Gaming Industry, its management firms like Station Casinos owned by the sleazy and notorious Fertitta family together with the industry's legal/lobbying firms, the likes of Brownstein/Hyatt/Farber/Schreck.
2. All efforts aimed at saving the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant, the hydro dam which has powered the operation for free for over eighty years, and most importantly, save two-thousand UAW, SEIU, Teamster and rail workers' jobs. Minnesota Democratic Farmer-Labor Party hacks employed by the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce and working at the behest of the Obama Campaign tried to smother any discussion concerning three resolutions brought forward at precinct caucuses. This dirty work was done under the auspices of supporting "free enterprise. Public ownership needs to be considered as the way to save the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant and other closing auto plants. In fact, nationalization of the entire auto industry needs to be considered because the Wall Street coupon clippers have taken the wealth created by American workers and invested this money in plants overseas where labor and natural resources can still be exploited and stolen willy-nilly. No matter what the capitalist sooth-sayers have to say about the "supremacy" of "free markets," capitalism has failed miserably;
3. Any discussion of socialized health care and its first stage--- single-payer universal health care. Minnesotans have insisted they want a no-fee, comprehensive, all-inclusive single-payer universal health care system which is publicly financed and publicly administered... nothing less--- yet, the Democratic Party hacks and those employed by the Obama Campaign have systematically tried to force every phony scheme they could conceive down the throats of Minnesotans in the name of "affordable health care." Anyone who doesn't believe this is what the majority of Minnesotans want only have to place this alongside all other schemes and scams concocted by the insurance industry, HMO's, the American Medical Association, the Hospital Administrators, pharmaceutical companies and self-serving opportunist politicians like John Marty--- put all these alternatives on the ballot on Election Day and see what Minnesotans choose since they like elections so much;
4. All discussion about legislating a real living minimum wage. All discussion was trashed by the party hacks working for Obama during the precinct caucuses. The solution to a living minimum wage is very simple. Create legislation tying the minimum wage to all the cost of living factors monitored by the United States Department of Labor and its Bureau of Labor Statistics. When the cost of living goes up, the minimum wage goes up--- if the cost of living goes down, let the minimum wage go down with it (We want to be fair to business, eh?) When all is said and done about this issue it must be clearly stated in no uncertain terms: Any and every job any employer--- large or small--- requires being done must pay the worker employed to do the job a real living wage; if this isn't acceptable to the bosses, let them do the jobs themselves;
5. Discussion of how to proceed with Social Security. This has never been mentioned. Hands down, the United States' Social Security system is the best existing social program available to the working class anyplace in the world. The only thing required is a full employment economy so Social Security is fully funded (unemployed people don't contribute--- nor do employers contribute anything for unemployed workers); along with greatly increased and expanded benefits to make a great social program even better for working people Social Security stands right along side public education and public libraries as a fantastic social program. Any attempt to privatize Social Security would destroy this excellent public social program;
6. Peace, this should be at the top of this list because the working class suffers from wars more than any other class. Tremendous human and material resources are wasted in preparation for wars and fighting wars as working class youth are expected to be the cannon fodder as the merchants of death and destruction profit.
7. Any discussion surrounding the "greening of America" and creating new "green industries." We have been through these massive government programs subsidizing the Wall Street coupon clippers in the past... from agriculture and forestry to rail and mining and automobile and energy industries. Tax-payers have nothing to show for one-hundred and fifty years of government subsidies of these industries. With these new "green industries" it is time to put an end to this scam. What tax-payers finance, tax-payers must own... including the profits according to the share tax-payers invest. If government is going to subsidize these operations and industries the people must have a say in all decision making from the get-go on wages, terms of employment, hours worked, etc. What is happening surrounding the decision made by the Ford Motor Company to close the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant should be all the proof required that the interest of tax-payers who have subsidized this operation from day one to the workers who have created all the wealth need to be protected.
We need a real progressive agenda which serves to unite working people to bring about real change as an alternative to the neoliberal agenda of state-monopoly capitalism; more commonly referred to as the military-financial-industrial complex.
We need to fight for such a progressive agenda inside and outside of the Democratic Party because we all know working people are going to have to begin putting together a real labor party in this country. We simply can't keep fighting the monopoly business interests which dominate the Democratic Party just like the Republican Party.
Working people need to be careful, and reject those who try to make elections turn on which candidate to support... the real question is what kind of agenda working people will support. The real question is what issues should be our primary focus. Most important, we need to focus on uniting for change around real solutions to long-standing problems which have not been addressed as noted above.
The following very pathetic excuse for a "progressive Democratic platform" is being boosted by "Change to Win;" This group which divided the house of labor even more than it already was divided.
Check it out; it is vague and hollow and means absolutely nothing; just like everything Barack Obama says. Check it out. Then submit real platform resolutions which address the real problems working people are experiencing by bringing forward real solutions.
As the Democratic Party considers what issues to run on in 2008, it is critical that the most urgent issue of our age -- the decline of the American Dream -- be among them.
The Democratic Party platform must be a platform for the American dream. The next President and the next Congress must promote policies that renew the dream, and provide an infrastructure of opportunity so all Americans, through their effort and hard work, can hope to achieve the American dream.
I, the undersigned, urge the Democratic Party to include the following in their party platform for 2008:
1. Workers must have the free choice to form unions at work so they can achieve living wages, affordable health care, and a secure and dignified retirement;
2. Affordable, quality health care must be available for all Americans;
3. A new trade model must provide for rising global prosperity for workers through rigorous enforcement of labor standards;
4. The Social Security system is fundamentally sound and must not be privatized;
5. Immigration reform must be comprehensive, stop the exploitation of workers, and allow undocumented workers a path to legalization;
6. Workplace fairness and the protection of basic legal rights of workers must be restored;
7. We must build a green America.
By endorsing and running on these positions, the Democratic Party can affirm its historic role as the party of working men and women -- and give those men and women real hope of seeing the American Dream restored.
We should use the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights as the basis for all our platform resolutions.
Look through my blog < http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/ >, especially those things posted on the right-hand side in blue and you will find examples of numerous resolutions, all of which have been passed by precinct caucuses and/or county and state conventions here in Minnesota.
I think we are looking at a landslide victory for Barack Obama shaping up. If we, as working people, are going to have any influence in the Obama Administration it will only be from a position of demonstrated strength.
Yes, we must engage in this platform debate.
But, we must also demonstrate that we are serious and that we mean business.
The only thing the business interests who have the dominant position in the Obama Campaign understand is working people in militant struggle fighting for their rights.
From now through the Election we need to be out in the streets raising hell.
Let's show Obama that we understand what it means to unite for real change.
Get your friends and neighbors together, make up some signs saying "We are fed up!" "Stop the robbery at the pumps!" "No more wars for oil!" "Tax oil company profits to pay for health care, education, housing!" "Boycott Mobil/Exxon/Esso!" Whoops, looks like I forgot about a platform resolution. Well, write it up and get this platform resolution in.
Simply bringing forward platform resolutions is no substitute for working people taking their concerns out into the streets and to the public square.
Without grassroots and rank-and-file activity behind these platform resolutions... as good as many of these resolutions will be, we know these resolutions will be filed in the circular file.
Barack Obama was a community organizer--- as such, he understands better than most people what is meant by "out of sight; out of mind."
Keep our problems within the confines of the very undemocratic Democratic Party structure designed for party hacks to maintain control through manipulation; and, without taking our demands into the streets and into the public squares, Obama is never going to have our problems placed in his mind. We need to make our presence known by becoming very visible to him.
Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content
Barack, thank you for the letter...
By Alan L. Maki - Aug 1st, 2008 at 3:17 am EDT
Obama for America Barack--- I received the following letter from you. Following your excellent letter bringing forward McCain's unwarranted attack on you, I have provided a copy of aletter I sent out regarding my thoughts on one aspect of this energy mess. I hope you will take the time to read my thoughts, too. When I meet you on the picket-line boycotting Mobil/Exxon/Esso I will contribute five dollars to your campaign. Best wishes and good-luck to you! Alan
From: Barack Obama
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 8:12 PM Subject: 'The Low Road'
Alan --
A few hours ago John McCain, the same man who just months ago promised to run a "respectful campaign," said he is "proud" of his latest attack ad.
That's the one attacking your enthusiasm, comparing me to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears, and making false claims about my energy plan.
Now, we're facing some serious challenges in this country -- our economy is struggling, energy costs are skyrocketing, and families don't have health care.
Given the seriousness of these issues, you'd think we'd be having a serious debate. But instead, John McCain is running an expensive, negative campaign against us. Each day brings a desperate new set of attacks.
And they're not just attacking me. They're attacking you.
They're mocking the desire of millions of Americans to step up and take ownership of the political process.
They're trying to convince you that your enthusiasm won't amount to anything -- that the people you persuade, the phone calls you make, the donations you give, the doors you knock on are all an illusion. They believe that in this election the same old smears and negative attacks will prevail again.
They're wrong.
And right now, we have a few hours left to prove them wrong in a very concrete way.
Make a donation of $5 or more before the July fundraising deadline at midnight tonight.
Show the strength of our movement for change.
Thank you,
Barack
Thursday, July 31, 2008 Exxon/Mobil has biggest quarterly profit ever at $11.68 Billion... Are we fed up with the robbery at the pumps? I hope this will be circulated far and wide… if you know any of the “Progressives for Obama” pass this on to them for their comment and consideration.
Can a movement be built around “We are fed up!”?
We are fed up! Stop the robbery at the pumps!
If progressives can’t build a grassroots movement around stopping the robbery at the pumps now taking place, I question whether or not “progressives” have the ability to build any kind of grassroots movements in this country anymore.
The outfit called “Progressives for Obama,” from Tom Hayden and Carl Davidson to Katrina vanden Heuvel and Emanuel Wallerstein to Bill Fletcher---and, well, look at this list…
Initiators:
Barbara Ehrenreich
BIll Fletcher, Jr.
Danny Glover
Tom Hayden
Signers:
Sean Ahern
United Federation of Teachers
Jean Alonso
Dorchester-Roxbury Labor Committee
Fran Ansley
University of Tennessee
David E. Apter
Yale University
Barbara Aguirre
AFL-CIO
Rosalyn Baxandall
American Studies SUNY Old Westbury
Daniel Bourke
National Lawyer Guild
E. Richard Brown
Public Health, UCLA
Paul Buhle
Writer and Historian
Anna Burger
Secretary-Treasurer, SEIU
Paul Burke
Sacramento Progressive Alliance
Malcolm Burnstein
Progressive Caucus, California Democratic Party
Duane Campbell
Sacramento Progressive Alliance
Jim Campbell
CC-DS, Nat'l Co-chair
Jeff Chang
Author, 'Can't Stop, Won't Stop'
Frank Christopher
Crosskeys Media
Steve Cobble
Progressive Democrats of America
Barry Cohen
NJ Institute of Technology
Carl Davidson
SolidarityEconomy.Net
Laurie Davidson
SEIU, NYC
John Delloro
Dolores Huerta Labor Institute
Ariel Dorfman
Chilean Playwright
Peter Dreier
Occidental College
Thorne Dreyer
MDS Austin, Texas
Terry DuBose
VetSpeak.org
Andrea Dupree
Lighthouse Writers Workshop
Carolyn Eisenberg
Hofstra University
Eddie Eitches
President, AFGE Local 476
Daniel Ellsberg
Writer, Military Analyst
Jane English
Plymouth UCC Board of Social Action
Diane Fager
Public School Administrator
Margaret 'Julie' Finch
Progressive Democrats of America
Mickey Flacks
Housing Advocate
Richard Flacks
Santa Barbara County Action Network
Jane Fonda
Writer, Actor
Rev. John C. Forney
Progressive Christians Uniting
Aviva Futorian
Long Term Prisoner Policy Project
Christine George
Researcher and Unversity Teacher
António Geraldo Dias
INDEG/ISCTE
The Rev. John-Mark Gilhousen
Progressive Democrats of Oregon
Todd Gitlin
Columbia University
Danny Goldberg
Gold Village Entertainment
Jorge Gonzalez
Cuba Journal
Thomas Good
Next Left Notes, Editor
Van Gosse
Franklin & Marshall College
Ellen Gurzinsky
Funders for Lesbian and Gay Issues
Paul Haggis
Producer
Nancy Hall
City Life/ Vida Urban
David Hamilton
MDS, Austin Texas
Lionel Heredia
Freedom Media
Jim Hightower
Radio Commentator
Adam Hochschild
Author, 'Breaking the Chains'
Sharron Howard
Lafayette Area Peace Coalition
George Hunsinger
Princeton Theological Seminary
David Jacobs
Americans for Democratic Action
Steven Jacobs
Rabbi, Progressive Faith Foundation
Harold Jacobs
SUNY New Paltz
Michael James
Heartland Cafe, 49th Ward Democrats
Zenobia Johnson-Black
Nat'l Org of African-Americans in Housing
Earl Katz
Public Interest Pictures
Marilyn Katz
Founder, Chicagoans Against War on Iraq
Stephen R. Keister M.D.
Physicians for National Health Care
Georgia Kelly
Praxis Peace Institute
Robin D.G. Kelly
Historian
Anne Lowry Klonsky
Education Writer, Chicago
Fred Klonsky
President, Park Ridge Education Association, IEA, NEA
Susan Klonsky
Education Writer
Michael Larkin
South Kingstown Peace and Justice Action Group
William Mandel
Journalist and Activist
Amy Manuel
Denton for Barack
Eric Mar
SF Board of Education
Jay Mazur
Working Families Party
John McAuliff
Fund for Reconciliation and Development
Joe Moore
49th Ward Alderman, Chicago
Ruth Needleman
Labor Studies, University of Indiana
Max Palevsky
Philanthropist
Robert Pardun
Writer & Producer
Patricia Paredes
Texas Campus Compact
Frances Fox Piven
Author, 'Poor Peoples Movements,' CUNY
Matilda Phillips
Progressive Democrats North Carolina
Brian Redondo
Asia-American Activist
Christine R Riddiough
Americans for Democratic Action
Constancia Dinky Romilly, RN
Civil Rights Activist
Mark Rudd
Writer, Organizer
Jay Schaffner
Local 802 American Federation of Musicians
Stanley & Betty Sheinbaum
Publisher
Jennifer Amdur Spitz
Amdur Spitz & Associates
Don St.Clair
GreenDemocraticAlliance.org
Andy Stern
President, SEIU
William Strickland
UMass, Amherst
Dan Swinney
Center for Labor and Community Research
Harry Targ
CC-DS, Purdue University
Jonathan Tasini
National Writers Union
John Trinkl
San Francsico for Democracy
Flo A Weber
Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles
Immanuel Wallerstein
Yale University
Paula Weinstein
Producer
Cornel West
Author, 'Race Matters'
Mildred Williamson
CC-DS
Betty Willhoite
Living Wage Advocate
John K Wilson
Obamapolitics.com
Tim Wise
Author, Anti-Racism Educator
All of these “Progressives for Obama” continue to say that what we need is “grassroots organizations” and “movement building” to influence and keep pressure on Obama to force him to do what is right by the American people. We know Obama understands and appreciates mass movements because his mentor was Frank Marshall Davis… the journalist, poet and member of the Communist Party USA. Check out this excellent video:
http://www.hawaii.edu/uhwo/clear/HonoluluRecord1/Frankvideo.html
Two books by Frank Marshall Davis are well worth reading; I assume Barack Obama has read them both:
"Livin' the Blues"
"The Writings of Frank Marshall Davis"
Both books are available from your local socialist institution, more commonly known as the Public Library.
Plus, we know Barack Obama was a community organizer; so, we know Barack Obama will not only appreciate, but understand, the power of such a grassroots campaign with people marching and picketing across this country at Exxon/Mobil/Esso gas stations and convenience stores saying: We are fed up! Stop the robbery at the pumps! Tax oil company profits to pay for education, housing and health care! No more wars for oil company profits!
With obscene profits like Exxon/Mobil has reported this corporation can't even pay those employed in its gas stations and convenience stores real living wages... now, this is downright criminal.
Now, look at this list of “Progressives for Obama.” These people have the resources and the influence to roll out such a grassroots movement for change… if they can’t spark this kind of movement, they sure can’t be believed they are going to influence Obama and the Wall Street coupon clippers backing him. Make no mistake, Barack Obama is the candidate of choice for state monopoly capitalism in this country… his handlers are the foremost proponents of neoliberalism. Progressives will not get such a candidate’s attention to act on our concerns by whispering in his ear.
These people have control over tremendous movement resources… there is no way anyone can tell me that if this most impressive group of writers, newspaper and magazine publishers, union officials, philosophers, historians, ideologists, university professors, radio commentators, and activists from a variety of movements and organizations can’t come together around organizing a nationwide boycott of Exxon/Mobil--- a boycott which would include an educational campaign about the nature of imperialism and exploitation; more important, a grassroots action campaign aimed at demonstrating to Barack Obama and the Democratic Party that we mean business by flexing our collective, united progressive muscle for change as we bring Exxon/Mobil to its knees… if we can’t do this then there is something drastically wrong with “progressivism” in the United States.
Here we have the biggest rip-off in world history taking place, combined with massive seething public anger and we have this body of progressives coming together in support of Barack Obama while acknowledging that Obama is neither progressive or liberal and it will take grassroots organization to convince an Obama Administration to do what is right by the American people instead of going along with his “handlers” and the big-business interests backing him to the hilt and we keep hearing from Carl Davidson and Katrina vanden Heuvel that they are all for “grassroots movement building.”
A war for oil is being fought in Iraq… Exxon/Mobil is poised to reap the spoils of this war… its profits should be taxed to the hilt to pay for socialized health care, or, at least single-payer universal health care.
I don’t think anyone would mind if on each and every sign carried in front of an Exxon/Mobil/Esso gas station convenience store saying, “We are fed up! Join our boycott of Exxon/Mobil/Esso” would be this: “We are fed up! A united grassroots campaign for change initiated by: Progressives for Obama.”
You see, I do not think Tom Hayden and some of these other “progressives” are sincere. I think they have ulterior motives. I think they are intentionally trying to stymie real grassroots campaigns for change even as they repeatedly claim “movement building” as their intent. It would be easy as heck for this impressive group of “Progressives for Obama” to initiate a campaign: We are fed up!
If this headline: Exxon Mobil has biggest profit ever at $11.68B isn’t enough to spark a grassroots movement--- “We are fed up!”--- I don’t know what it will take. Perhaps Carl Davidson or Tom Hayden or Robert Borosage could provide us with an articulate explanation as to why they aren’t rolling out such a campaign. This campaign could be kicked off around the country on Labor Day… it is not like it takes a great deal of thought to pick up some heavy black markers and poster boards and walk in front of Exxon/Mobil/Esso gas stations and convenience stores. It is not like it takes book after book being written to explain to people that there is a robbery at the pumps taking place. I think most Americans will get the drift of what is going on, and why.
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20080731/D928R1GOG.html
Exxon Mobil has biggest profit ever at $11.68B
Jul 31, 8:28 AM (ET)
By JOHN PORRETTO
HOUSTON (AP) - Exxon Mobil reported second-quarter earnings of $11.68 billion Thursday, the biggest quarterly profit ever by any U.S. corporation, but the results fell well short of Wall Street expectations and shares fell in premarket trading.
The world's largest publicly traded oil company said its net income for the April-June period came to $2.22 a share, up from $10.26 billion, or $1.83 a share, a year ago.
Revenue rose 40 percent to $138.1 billion from $98.4 billion in the year-earlier quarter.
Excluding an aftertax charge of $290 million related to an Exxon Valdez court settlement, earnings amounted to $11.97 billion, or $2.27 per share.
Analyst on average expected Exxon Mobil to earn $2.52 a share on revenue of $144 billion, according to a survey by Thomson Financial. The estimates typically exclude one-time items.
Exxon shares fell more than 2 percent, or $1.88, to $82.50 in premarket trading.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080731/D928Q9PO0.html
Big prices for oil, record 2Q profits at Shell
Jul 31, 7:37 AM (ET)
By TOBY STERLING AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) - Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSB) reported a 33 percent jump in second-quarter profits Thursday, its biggest quarter ever at $11.6 billion thanks to high oil prices and the weak dollar.
The company earned $8.67 billion in the same quarter last year.
Shell said its selling price per barrel of oil was around $112, up from $64 a year earlier. That pushed earnings at its main exploration and production arm up 90 percent to $5.88 billion, despite a 1.1 percent fall in production to 3.05 million barrels of oil and equivalents per day.
Chief Executive Jeroen van der Veer dismissed calls in Britain for a windfall tax on oil companies.
Britain's BP PLC (BP) reported this week that its profits jumped 28 percent to $9.47 billion in the quarter.
"If we do less investment there will be less supply for consumers" which would drive prices higher, Van der Veer said.
"The world needs energy."
He said the company was reinvesting profits and now expects capital spending of between $35 billion and $36 billion this year, up from the last previous estimate of $24 billion to $25 billion. That figure includes the company's $5.8 billion bid for Canada's Duvernay Oil Corp., launched earlier this month.
He said Shell was benefited from a strong operating performance as well as high energy prices, but said refining margins had weakened.
Refining profits rose 16 percent to $4.54 billion, but Shell said at the current cost of supplies - which strips out the impact of oil prices - refining earnings would have fallen by 63 percent to $1.08 billion, mostly due to weaker margins in the United States.
The company's net sales were $131 billion in the quarter, up from $84.9 billion.
The strong quarterly results had been widely expected and shares rose 1.2 percent to 23.63 euros ($36.77).
Petercam analyst Alexandre Weinberg repeated his "buy" recommendation, saying the company has been undervalued since 2004 when it was forced to restate its proven oil reserves in a major accounting scandal.
"Though the sentiment toward the majors (major oil companies) has weakened in the past weeks due to the oil price decline, we believe that Royal Dutch Shell will continue to generate massive cash flows," he wrote in a note on the earnings.
"The following 18 months should see significant production capacity increase," he said, citing a large project on Sakhalin island in Russia expected to begin production at the end of the year.
"The company still trades at a discount to its peers and we deem this unjustified."
There are some problems ahead for Shell, however.
In Nigeria's oil-rich delta region, the company had nearly 200,000 barrels per day of oil shut down during the quarter due to attacks by armed militias. The militias seek a share of oil profits now controlled by the national government.
Shell has been investing in deep-sea oil platforms in Nigeria to minimize the risk, but in June, its Bonga platform 75 miles from the coast was shut down briefly after an attack there.
"We had always right or wrongly thought that being that far away, an attack would be relatively unlikely," Van der Veer said.
"We will think through how we can better protect our facilities, I don't think we should publicize what we (plan to) do."
Alan L. Maki
58891 County Road 13
Warroad, Minnesota 56763
Phone: 218-386-2432
Cell phone: 651-587-5541
E-mail: amaki000@centurytel.net
Check out my blog:
Thoughts From Podunk
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content
The change we need
By Alan L. Maki - Jun 13th, 2008 at 12:21 am EDT
I have been active in the Minnesota DFL and the Democratic Party most of my life.
Lately people have a lot of questions about Obama using the phrase, “Unite For Change.” People want to know what Obama means by “Unite for Change.”
People come up to me and ask, “What kind of “change” is Obama talking about?
Quite frankly, I don’t know what kind of change Obama is after since he doesn’t spell it out and articulate any specifics.
But, what kind of change is needed really isn’t up to Obama anyways, is it?
We know the social fabric of our country will continue to be torn asunder should we get another four more years of Republican rule. Quite frankly, and I am ashamed to say this, given the way the Democrats have acquiesced and gone along with Bush the last eight years I’m not all that confident Democrats will do any better controlling the Presidency, the House and the Senate. Part of the reason I feel this way is because the Democrats have had ample opportunity to stop Bush in his tracks; they didn’t.
Working people have been pushed out of the decision-making loop for quite some time in our country and we have to figure out a way to get back in the mix.
It is up to working people to clearly chart the course for progressive change and to unite for change behind the agenda we articulate. We need to make politicians understand that they work for us, not the other way around.
Several very basic changes come to mind that I think about:
1.)In the area of health care we need single-payer universal health care which will be a stepping stone to get us to socialized health care. Obama’s idea of health care “reform” leaves much to be desired; he wants to leave the profit gouging insurance companies, HMO’s, doctors and the pharmaceutical industry in control when most of us know this is what is wrong with the system--- profits come before people; and, it should be the other way around.
2.)We need a minimum wage that is a real living wage. Any job that an employer needs done should provide the worker doing that job a real living wage. The way to arrive at what the minimum wage should be is to use the statistics and calculations of the United States Department of Labor and the Bureau of Labor Statistics based on real cost of living factors rather than having some politicians pull a miserly figure out of their hat at election time. If employers don’t like this let them do the work themselves; with the robbery at the pumps it won’t be long before it won’t pay to go to work anyways. What’s Obama’s stand on the minimum wage? I don’t know. It doesn’t really matter. We need to seize the initiative and make it clear to him the change we want.
3.)We need to end this dirty war for oil in Iraq; it’s a war that was based upon lies and deceit right from the beginning and it has taken a terrible toll, not only on the people in Iraq, but on us here, too--- to the point where we can say that every bomb dropped and every bullet fired is destroying our society, too. We can’t have a foreign policy which sees wars as solutions to complex problems. As far as I can see Obama doesn’t really offer much change in this area either so we are going to have to take the initiative in charting a course for change as we expect things to be and make our voices heard.
4.)We need to make it clear that in any program aimed at “greening” America through massive government subsidies to business and industry, that what taxpayers finance, taxpayers should own--- including the profits.
5.)Public ownership of the St. Paul Ford Twin Cities Assembly Plant needs to be considered. Saving two-thousand jobs is a major priority for Minnesotans in this election.
In the end, we should see ourselves and our unity as the surge for change, and stop waiting for Obama or any other politicians to explain what kind of change they are for.
Change should be about solving real problems. The people experiencing these problems, you and me, should be able to articulate the solutions… this is what real change is about.
In a democracy people are supposed to be active participants in movements for social change, not mere cheerleaders clapping and waving placards for politicians mouthing hollow, meaningless platitudes about “change.”
“Yes we can” bring about “change” if we get together where we work and in our communities.
In reading Barack Obama’s book I learned about his mentor, Frank Marshall Davis. I then got interested in finding out more about who this “mentor” was. I think Frank Marshall Davis would be somewhat disappointed in Obama today because Frank Marshall Davis didn’t mince any words when it came to articulating the problems of working people and bringing forward real solutions to the problems. Frank Marshall Davis understood that working people once educated, organized and united are a powerful force for “change.” Frank Marshall Davis understood something Barack Obama doesn’t seem to have learned from his “mentor;” that in order to get “change,” you need to articulate and clearly define and spell out what kind of “change” is being talked about. Of course, as we all know, Frank Marshall Davis was a Communist and he had a very good understanding of the underlying source of problems which all too often goes unstated and unchallenged and remains hidden because of the high fear-factor level in this country; I am referring to capitalism--- a thoroughly rotten system. Frank Marshall Davis also understood through his thorough studies of the situation that socialism provided the only workable alternative to capitalism.
Education starts in our homes, gathered around the kitchen table discussing our problems with family and friends. From there these discussions need to find their way into our places of employment and into the larger community.
There really isn’t much for us to learn about “change” from Obama, but there is quite a bit to be gleaned from the writings of Frank Marshall Davis and I thank Barack Obama for bringing him to my attention… now I can say that Frank Marshall Davis is in many ways my mentor, too.
Obama has called on all of us who want change, irrespective of our differences, to come together on June 28, 2008 under the auspices of “Unite For Change;” I think this is a good idea. We can use this opportunity to discuss what kind of change we need in our communities and in our country.
I would encourage people to exchange contact information, e-mail addresses and phone numbers so we can start networking and organizing around our problems and their solutions.
I look forward to discussing with others what kind of change we need.
Yours in the struggle,
Alan L. Maki
Check out my blog:
http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/
Feel free to call me: 218-386-2432
Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (24) | Report Objectionable Content
Posts
Content on blogs in My.BarackObama represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign.
