Further horor in Gaza

Yet again the Israeli government has launched an attack on the people living in the Gaza strip. Perhaps the peoples of Israel and Palestine can find a way to come to peace with out external changes. But the role of America's unflinching aid and support for Israel in the face of terror reigned on the people of Palestine raises the central issue that we in America need to address, our military aid makes us complicate in this war. How can we hope to make negotiations work while we have chosen sides. And more important, how can we break the monolithic support for Israel by the American government. Does any one really have an answer to this?

MoveOn goals

The group MoveOn.org recently asked it’s members what its top goal for 2009 should be. My answer: Reversing the Bush doctrine of preemptive strikes. They asked why this was important. My response: This got us in to Iraq and Obama seems willing to apply this to Pakistan. It goes against the foundational principals of modern international law. More importantly it is inherently destabilizing.

resistance and rising expectations

I was recently asked if conditions in the economy were such that we might have real social resistance or an uprising. My initial answer was first I thought the American people had become too passive, second, I was sure that I couldn't imagine what an uprising would look like in the present era, but my third point was that unmet rising expectations help the chances of any revolution.

Two case studies in economic resistance to the down turn suggest that I may be wrong on my first two points.

The most well known of the two is the United Electrical Workers Local 1110 workers at Republic Windows and Doors occupied the plant after the company tried to close up shop with out providing the legally requisite 60 day notice & severance pay. This tied into the companies failure to get loans, the common economic malaise. In the end the workers got there demands met, and for good measure Obama even weighed in saying he thought the workers were right.

The second story comes from Miami in the midst of rising foreclosures where a group called Take Back the Land is doing just that. For about a year now they have been helping homeless folks squat foreclosed houses, around a half a dozen homes have been liberated this way.

Both these cases show that people faced with dire conditions are taking direct action with success. While I'm not anticipating Obama weighing in on Take Back The Land. This kind of direct action is what I would imagine an uprising to look like. to get to a real revolution things will have to be more wide spread, and will need to be taken even further. Eventually occupied homes will need to be defended either through legal agreements (according to the AP story that covered the Miami Squatting such may be the case in Cleveland and Atlanta)or through extra-legal means. Demanding severance pay is no substitute for a job. An example of where this could go is what happened in Argentina, where workers have squatted closed factories and started producing as a workers cooperative.

Homelessness looks like a problem that wont go away until you look at the stock of foreclosed housing. If the auto industry goes down there will be no shortage of factories ripe for squatting. Perhaps then a wider uprising, one that would look familiar to me might be possible. If things go that way I will be delighted to have been wrong on my first two points. Lets keep our expectations rising!

apointment and disapointments

In a recent communication to left critics of Obama's cabinet choices, Barack Obama's deputy campaign manager Steve Hildebrand spelled out some of the problems our country faces. He then said, "The problems I mentioned above and the many I didn't, suggest that our president surround himself with the most qualified people to address these challenges. After all, he was elected to be the president of all the people - not just those on the left."

I have not been nearly as outspoken about Obama's choices as I think I should be. I think it is fortunate that others are raising concerns. Mr Hildebrand's comments merit a response.

First to say that we want a cabinet that is left is not just to say we won so lets take the spoils. To argue for a more left cabinet is to argue for a cabinet that does represent the views of all the people (of the united states). Consistently The American people express opinions (in polls and such) that are to the left of Americas politicians. If President Obama's goal is to surround himself with a diversity of intelligent opinions that represent the spectrum of American political opinion, that diversity would include someone like Medea Benjamin of code pink, or even Noam Chomsky. From the standpoint of pragmatism I understand why even the left would not rush into such appointments. But the diversity of opinion argument does not hold up if it amounts only to diversity to the right. Nor does it hold water if a couple of people from the left are appointed to token offices like the department of the interior.

Second there is the question of qualifications. This concept is too often represented as intelligence and experience. The third element of what makes one most qualified for a position is perspective. One can be brilliant and wrong. Experience can bring baggage. As we face so many crisis we do need leadership of perspective. we need good ideas, and frankly I think that the left has among the best ideas to address the problems we face. On the surface they may not seem pragmatic, but pragmatism that picks convenient solutions that are easy to push through may be penny wise and pound foolish.

Now let me get to the issue of criticism. This is the rough part. I'm suspect Mr Hildebrand and his colleagues in the Obama inner circle may observe that criticisms are coming and Mr Obama is not even in office yet. They may feel unnerved for a variety of legitimate reasons. and Mr Hildebrand's article is really a request that we give Obama's centrist cabinet a chance to work to fix the problems we face. I believe they will have that chance, but perspective does mater. A fix can be progress, or it can hold thing back. Critique when fairly given, to one who can listen as I believe that Barack Obama can, has the potential to strengthen. If Obama and his transition team hear that there are voices on the left that are not represented in his cabinet that are voices of his constituency perhaps he is more likely to act to include such voices.

I hope that critiques of appointments will continue, I hope the critiques will help strengthen the new administration. For those of us who raise critiques I would suggest that we strive to give fair criticism based on perspective not personality. We should understand that mistakes will be made but we can hope that our perspectives will help correct them.