Weary of War

Violence around the world has been popping up a lot lately.

 Estimates put the death toll in Syria over 100,000 that makes it the most deadly global conflict at the moment; as deadly in the past 4 years as Iraqi violence in the last 10 years. Negotiations around the civil war in Syria seem to be going nowhere. Some accounts suggest that the negotiations were never more than a charade by the Assad government in the first place.  

Iraqi violence had a significant increase in 2013 with around 10,000 known casualties. Although the end of 2013 and the beginning of 2014 show some signs of decline in violence Iraq’s irregular periodic up ticks and down swings makes it hard to predict.

 Violence in the streets in Ukraine has led to the toppling of the government and as I write this the Ukrainian president and sections of parliamentary are resigning in mass. There is uncertainty about what is next.

 Venezuela is experiencing violence in street demonstrations started by an extreme right wing and responded to by pro-government groups. It is unlikely that this situation will evolve into a situation like the Ukraine much less the civil war in Syria but one never knows. 

Africa has 15 countries involved in wars or post war conflicts.  

American drones recently hit a wedding party in Yemen killing 12 people. American drones terrorizing the northeastern Pakistani tribal regions controlled by Taliban has led to Taliban leaders refusing to allow immunization programs to continue in one of the last places on earth still plagued by polio. Between the drones and the refusal to permit immunization this should be considered biological warfare.

 This week the UN commission of inquiry on human rights in the DPRK reported their finding of crimes against humanity in North Korea spelling out the violence that the North Korean government has been inflicting on their own population.

In spite of this outline of political violence in the world there are some small hopeful signs. However weekly symbolic North Korea recently allowed a small group of North Koreans to meet with their long separated South Korean relatives. Negotiations around Iranian nuclear development between Iran and the US lead “West” continue to move at pace. On Valentine ’s Day countries of the non-aligned movement called for a target date to be set for the elimination of nuclear weapons. On that same day women around the world participated in a day of mass action called 1 billion women rising which is a protest of violence against women.

But let’s return to the various conflicts around the world. Among these conflicts there is imperial attacks, civil wars , street fights, acts of self-defense,  violence propagated by terrorist groups and bands of thugs (who is a thug or terrorist and what is self-defense may depend on your political perspective). There are conflicts that drag on for years and violence that may be over by the time you read this. Syria has a high death count.  I hope the number killed in Venezuela will remain single digit.

The reasons for these violent conflicts are up for debate: Economics, and the control of resources, religious beliefs, and religious feuds, historical conflicts, political order, political liberty, national pride and political alliances, ideology or class conflicts? Depending on the conflict any one or several of these issues may be at the root.

From a distance I could condemn all of this violence as pointless, and immoral.  Fortunately I believe that more and more people everywhere are growing critical of political violence.  But I want to emphasize the uncertainty and ineffectualness of political violence.

Let’s just look at the Ukraine, with push from Russia, Ukraine’s president Yanukovych decided to crack down on the protesters, they fought back and the crises of legitimacy grew too great so that just a few days later Yanukovych and much of his government resigned and have fled.  Now there is a political vacuum and the forces that might fill it are sometimes opposing factions. If the country leans too far to the west some observers say this could lead to drawn out military conflicts with Russia.

The Syrian Civil war is a struggle for a country with at least three different political tendencies, and regardless of who “wins” as the country is torn apart everyone loses.  The longer the war goes on the harder it becomes to forgive and make peace.

Presumably the North Korean leadership even with Kim Jong Un, the new supreme leader has still concluded that torture, abduction, public killings, planned food withholding and prisoner work camps (all findings of the UN commission) is a way to move forward in the world or perhaps it’s just their desperate strategy for holding onto power.  

Behind the violence in Venezuela some people see US puppeteers; with US history in Latin America this wouldn’t be entirely surprising. Whatever the final results of this violence, likely political fall-out from this street violence will be further fuel for the anti-Chaves anti-Maduro propaganda machine. Engagement in the violence from either the government or its supporters only hurts its cause.  

“Well meaning” American drones are (surprise) fueling anti-American sentiments and helps to prop up the Taliban while increasing political instability in Pakistan and Yemen.

It would be nice if I could claim that the non-violent  “Orange Revolution” of  Ukraine created a fully democratic government that was responsive to the aspirations of its people even 10 years later. 

I wish I could look to the results of the Arab Spring and see clearly that its nonviolent campaigns produced the fruits that its participants were trying to cultivate. While the case can be made for that kind of success in Tunisia, Egypt has swung from nonviolent success, to electoral counter revolution, to military counter revolution each swing seeming to take the Egyptian people further from the society that the original revolution sought.

Things would be easier if Venezuela hadn’t already experienced at least one coup attempt since Hugo Chavez was first elected, if there weren’t forces actively working to overturn Venezuela’s political efforts at economic fairness.

Building a better world is often one step forward one step back and repeat. Wishes don’t always come true, things aren’t always easy. 

Maybe there are times when violence makes sense in moving forward some important political program or goal.  I don’t know how one knows when it’s one of those times.

From my perspective, even with its uncertain results, non-violence holds better promise.  I would much rather be in Egypt than Syria. The science of non-violence deserves deeper research. Even just negotiations whether with a government, a terrorist group or a political opposition hold more promises than turning to force. You might ask, “how can you negotiate with them?” My response is “could talking really be worse than coming in shooting?”

Moral Monday in Georgia

I had the good fortune of being in Atlanta for the first Moral Monday in Georgia. More about that in a moment but first some background.

 Moral Mondays started in North Carolina In response to an aggressive right wing  state legislature and governor the people of Moral Monday started protests at the state legislature building. These weekly protests gradually grew until they were regularly attended by 2500 protesters. In 2013 over 900 people have been arrested in civil disobedience cases in North Carolina. Moral Mondays came out of coalition organizing work going back at least 8 years.  Moral Mondays are to a large extent lead by Reverend Doctor  William Barber who is also the North Carolina head for the NAACP. In North Carolina these protests have focused on countering several pieces of  legislation that were railroaded through by the Republican controlled North Carolina state government. The legislation included attacks on voting rights, cuts to unemployment benefits, opting out of the Medicaid expansion associated with the affordable care act, an increased tax to lower income workers, restrictions to abortion access, and  cuts to public education.  This right wing legislative blitzkrieg reminds me a bit of what Michigan went through once Rick Snyder and the Republican Party took charge of our state.  To the Moral Monday coalition the North Carolina Legislature was engaged in an immoral war on the poor. 

In Georgia apparently planning efforts have been underway for a while to build a similar political response to a conservative state government, and on January 13^th 2014 the protest was launched.  It was a rainy day, not the most encouraging of outdoor demonstrations, but by my count I think about 500 of us were present, many huddling under umbrellas, but all generally in good spirits.  The focus of the protest was the governors opting out of the Medicaid expansion.  This expansion would bring coverage to approximately 600,000 citizens in Georgia, with my quick back of the envelope calculations this is about 6 % of the population of the state.  Initially the Medicaid expansion will be covered by the federal government, later the states will be required to take up 5%  of the costs, then later still 10% of the costs.  Even if you’re a fiscal tight wad providing healthcare benefits for some 6% of your states poorest people is a fiscal win.  A healthy population is a more productive population; productive populations bring in more tax review and cost the government less. Reverend Barber traveled to Atlanta this week to join us on the Georgia state house grounds. While my general patients for clergy is not so high I found his talk encouraging. Specifically he contrasted the so called construction of “morality” by the right to the morality of his faith.  Jesus was clear about one thing, helping the poor, and Reverend Barber pointed out that there is no inconsistency in using the government to provide the help. A next Moral Monday Georgia style is scheduled for the end of January.

I was lucky to be in Georgia on the 13^th, I was there for my mother’s 80^th birthday. We celebrated on the Saturday before and she actually turned 80.  Moral Monday felt like part of the celebration , as an activist family participating in a protest that is a launch of an effort for economic justice in Georgia was certainly celebratory, rain and all.

As I reflected on this demonstration I thought about the 2011 protests in Wisconsin, and the Occupy Movement.  I remembered the many demonstrations against the keystone pipeline in 2012, I thought about the efforts to prevent anti-abortion legislation from passing in Texas this past year, I also thought about the growing fast food workers strikes and demands for living wages. It has been argued that many of these efforts haven’t really brought about significant change; Occupy fizzled out, the Republican legislatures continue to pass their anti-worker, anti-poor, anti-women, anti-gay legislation, and no change to minimum wage seems immanent. Moral Mondays? How long will they last you might ask. But its important to see each of these protest movements as part of, and the first tiny steps in an uprising.  More and more people are getting that things are amiss, and people are starting to do something about it.  I have two hopes, one is that these protests and direct actions continue and grow, and the other is that as the protest movements grow activists from different sectors learn to listen and communicate with each other. I hope that the anarchist from Zuccotti park, can understand the Minister from North Carolina, that southern anti-poverty activists, can see the struggle against global warming as a struggle for a sustainable and fair economy, that women’s rights to choose are linked to rights for a living wage, rights for access to health care. All this and more. Somewhere in here is also a struggle for democracy, against the rule of the 1%. As I participated in the demonstration this past Monday I had the feeling that there was space for a broad coalition and I felt encouraged. Good luck Georgia going forward.

Debt and Budget Compromise

The recent government shutdown was of course driven by a political attempt to keep poor people from having healthcare. But the architects of the shutdown had another agenda that they insisted was related: uncontrolled government spending. They claim we need to balance the budget and limit federal debt or our children will suffer.

As economist Mark Weisbrod points out when it comes to national debt, more important than the dollar amount is what percentage of our GDP is reflected in our interest payments on that debt. Currently that it's about 1% which is as low as it has been in 60 years. (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/18/shutdown-takewaway-fair-society)

I have heard other economists make similar points about the irrelevance of the debt. And of course strategic government spending can pay for itself with economic growth. Perennial growth is an issue which I don't care to address in detail at the moment. Suffice it to say there are natural limits to growth, and we will have to come to terms with this eventually.

Weisbrod understands the economic implications of budget and debt far better than I ever well, but if the tea party and by extension the Republican party are so set on balancing the budget perhaps as a compromise that could be worked out. The Republicans have proposed a constitutional amendment, the so-called balanced budget amendment. I'd like to borrow their initial idea and modify it. How about the balanced equitable and just budget amendment.

Below are what could be the first 4 sections of that amendment. The first two borrow from the language of the Republicans proposal. I've added to section 1 the notion that spending could exceed receipts if a government surplus existed. Presumably if outlays never exceeded receipts a surplus would inevitably develop. Section 2 I have modified to reflect the fact that the economy as a whole grows. The next two sections are my additions. I think they speak for themselves. People might squabble about what an appropriate ratio between the top and the bottom should be. The main point is that it is currently out of control.

`Section 1. Total outlays for any fiscal year shall not exceed total receipts for that fiscal year, unless a surplus exists from previous years and then not exceeding that surplus or unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a specific excess of outlays over receipts by a rollcall vote.

`Section 2. The debt of the United States held by the public as a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product shall not be increased unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House shall provide by law for such an increase by a rollcall vote

`Section 3. Any fiscal year where budget estimates for outlay exceed estimates for receipts shall result in automatic cuts to current military expenditures unless three-fifths of the whole number of each House of Congress shall provide by law for a reduction in other budgeted or approved  spending by a rollcall vote.

`Section 4. Income tax shall be structured so that the mean post-tax income of the 1% of the taxable population with the greatest income will average no more than 5 times the mean post-tax income of the 20% of the taxable population with the least income

I don't know if limits on the budget and the debt make economic sense but they say politics is about compromise so the left might want to put forward something like this.

understandign race

Our towns college, the University of Michigan, recently dedicated a semester to "Understanding Race" part of the semester program was an exhibit at the university's Natural History Museum  about "Understanding Race." This exhibit and the theme semester it is a part of are both commendable.  We need more conversations about race,  I recently saw the exhibit as part of a group I am involved with.  I was not able to make the follow up discussion so I put some of my thoughts in writing and  to make those thoughts public I am sharing  them here. If you haven't seen the exhibit these comments may be less relevant.

I would like to share my honest impression of the exhibit.

It was a nice exhibit covering a variety of relevant issues.  However I felt that it had some limitations. I wont claim that I read and watched everything in the exhibit, but I was there for an hour and a half and the subject is engaging to me so I was trying to take in as much as I could.

For me little of the information presented was novel or new, I know race is a biologically inaccurate construct.  I am familiar with the disgraceful history of discrimination and the bulk of the historical specifics were familiar. I appreciate that race identity issues get complex.

Beyond the lack of  new information or perspectives I felt that the exhibit really fell short on the politics of racism.  I did not see any portrale of the very real and ongoing racist attitudes that can span from out right race hatred to the almost universal race bias (for an experience of you own level of bias check out https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/). Neither did I see much on institutional racism. I did not see the wall of statistics that should have been there about the discrimination of the criminal justice system.

Racism as I understand it is not just discrimination , but discrimination plus power. unless we can talk about racism we can't understand race, and racism is about power. There was a display about the 2008 elections, but no mention of how elements of the Tea Party were a backlash to a "bi-racial" president.

Education is good but it is best when it can inform action. Two displays that I felt were important to [our group] . . . . were: 1) the stacks of money representing assets of different racial groups. I want to point out it was assets, not income.  .  .  . and 2) the local exhibit pointed out that our neighbor Ypsilanti is a food desert.  I don't know what we can do about this but I think it is relevant to [us].

Morning-after pill rules are good for big pharma and rich kids.

Under court order the FDA is allowing and over the counter version of the morning-after pill. According to the public health science of the FDA it is clear that making emergency contraception available over-the-counter will help to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and the health risks associated with the morning-after pill are dwarfed in comparison to the health risks associated with unwanted pregnancies.

Unfortunately the Obama administration and Kathleen Sebelius rejected the FDA science and tried to prevent the morning-after pill from becoming over-the-counter. The courts disagreed and mandated the FDA to allow an over-the-counter version. The policymakers had one more trick up their sleeves. Instead of releasing all varieties of emergency contraception to over-the-counter sales, the FDA is only allowing the brand Plan B One Step to be over-the-counter. There is a generic version of the same medication available for half the price, but the generic is required to be kept behind the counter and customers must prove their age to purchase it.

Teva pharmaceuticals the Israeli based company that owns Plan B One Step is able to maintain its monopoly pricing as the only over-the-counter emergency contraception option. What this means is that the over-the-counter morning-after pill continues to be inaccessible to girls who can't afford it. If unwanted teen pregnancies contribute to the cycle of poverty then this FDA granted monopoly only contributes to an increasingly rigid class structure. Rich kids won't be turned away by Plan B One Step's $60 cost. 

Since a generic version exists, why couldn't that be allowed for over-the-counter sales? Apparently there is an idea that the increased price will prevent very young girls from inappropriately using the morning-after pill. While it's true that the younger you are the less money you are likely to have access to it's also true that the poorer you are the less money you are likely to have access to. What's particularly interesting is that this monopoly privilege is only given for three years. Now you really have to ask why?