#Occupy

One Victory and a Step Forward

2012-02-26T11:47:00.000-06:00

After receiving notice of pending lay-offs^{^[1]}, theworkers at the Serious Energy plantin Goose Island refused to leave the building last Thursday. The Serious Energy plant is the same plantthat once housed the Republic Window andDoor Factory. The sit-down strike began in the afternoon of February 23,2012. By 8:30 PM the Strike was in full swing with approximately 65^{^[2]}union workers occupying the factory floor, and an additional 70 supportersoutside the plant. By 1:00 AM the strike was over as Serious Energy and Union agreed to “find a new owner if possibleand explore all other options,” according to Serious Energy.^{^[3]} Asof this writing, the Serious Energyplant remains in operation.

Remembering Hull House

As far as the Occupation Movement is concerned, I am anobserver, and part time participant. I did march with Occupy Chicago lastSunday (February 19, 2012) at the small Jane Addams Hull House memorial. It wasmy personal pleasure to catch up with members of Occupy Chicago who I have notseen since Day 2 of the Occupation. Unlike most events, however, I chose to bea participant, and not an archivist. I find it very hard to collect the streetscenes while focusing on the event as a member.

It was a small, sombergathering with members of the Hull House staff and the local UnionRepresentative. One thing that was revealed is that there is a movement afootto shut down small, independent, social service organizations in favor of somemassive entity using the Wall-Mart business model. The specifics of this werenot forthcoming while standing in the cold, and dark in front of the Hull HouseMuseum at 800 S. Halsted in Chicago.

Big Rubber Stamp

We regret to inform you that the Chicago Board of Educationrubber stamped Rahm plan to improve schools by shutting them down. After the Parentsof Piccolo[4]Occupation brought the plight of neglected schools to national attention, Rahm’splan was pushed through over the objection of parents and teachers alike.

Almost no one in Chicago’s corporate media sided with the parents. There isspeculative chatter on the net that the talking heads of Chi-Town’s news outletsare not living in the city, and do not have children in the neglected ChicagoSchool System. The establishment’s propaganda machine continues to roll overthe lives, and neighborhoods of the working hands of Chicago in a relentlesspush towards some still nebulous goal of improving education. How increasedclass sizes, fewer schools, longer school days, with less and less materials isan improvements is anyone’s guess at this point. There is no discussionwhatsoever about the shift of the expense to the parents for improvements tothe public school system. In the end it is just another abdication of socialresponsibility by the wealthy feudal lords of this era.

Transparency

A vote was taken Friday night (February 24, 2012) at OccupyChicago’s General Assembly that has the Occupation Movement in a bit of atwitter (pun intended). To put it succinctly, certain sensitive discussionswill not be live streamed out of Occupy Chicago’s loft. The Social Mediacommittee is wholly against this direction, and certain members of OccupyChicago’s General Assembly as in favor of it. Many say that this vote violatesthe generally accepted idea of absolute transparency which is part of theOccupation Movement’s ideals.

While not wanting to chime in on one side or the other onthis specific vote, it is safe to say it is only an official Occupy ChicagoGeneral Assembly decision of what has been practiced thus far. Occupy Chicagohas traditionally had a tendency towards keeping dirty laundry out of thepublic eye.

When the debates get heated, and they become the quintessential Chicagostreet discussion (i.e. participates screaming at each other) the streamusually stops. While this is annoying to the remote viewers, it is also prettymuch a Midwestern cultural trait. Passions will flair, we will scream, cuss, derideone another, but we do not want it broadcast all over the world. Essentiallythese are family squabbles, and it is uncouth to air ‘em in public.

While thereis no telling what will come of the scheduled review of the censorship policy,what was decided is nothing new for Occupy Chicago; it is not about secrecy,and is something they will have to work out on their own.

Upcoming Events

STOP the Suppression of the Occupy Movement! Tuesday, February 28, 2012 - 4:00pm to 6:00pm

Check out the new Chicago Spring Website for updates on the ongoing struggle to make the citizens' voices heard over the money changers in politics.

[1] Quinnell,K. (2012, February 24). Serious Energy Workers Occupy Goose Island Factory. In Crooksand Liars. Retrieved February 26, 2012, from http://crooksandliars.com/kenneth-quinnell/serious-energy-workers-occupy-goo

[2] aaroncynic,. (2012, February 24). Déjà Vu: Workers Occupy Former Republic Window And DoorFactory. In chicagoist. Retrieved February 26, 2012, from http://chicagoist.com/2012/02/24/workers_occupy_goose_island_factory.php

[3] Jenkins,V. (2012, February 24). Serious and United Electrical Workers Union Come toAgreement. In Serious Energy Blog: Get Serious About Our Buildings.Retrieved February 26, 2012, from http://www.seriousenergy.com/blog/press-release-serious-and-united-electrical-workers-union-come-to-agreement.html

[4] Notin Hibernation. (2012, February 19). In #Occupy: The Chicago Free Web Zone.Retrieved February 26, 2012, from http://occupythewhole.blogspot.com/2012/02/not-in-hibernation.html

Not in Hibernation

2012-02-19T10:37:00.000-06:00

A number of important events have occurred this past week.There is no real way of ranking them. One is not more important than another.They are indicators of where the nation is heading.

Parents of Piccolo

One was the Parents of Piccolo Occupation of PiccoloElementary School, 1040 N. Keeler, in Chicago, Illinois in response to ChicagoPublic Schools threat to fire the school’s current teachers and revamp theschools. This event was important for a number of reasons.

It was a protest staged by the parents and students insupport of their school. It is expected that the Teacher’s Union would stage aprotest of some sort; it is not status quo for the community to rise up inobjection to decrees handed down by the selectmen. The meaning hear is prettyclear. People are getting tired of being pushed around by those who are electedto represent them. They are taking direct action to make their displeasure known.

The Parents of Piccolo[1]are not activists. They are quintessentially people who “want to live theirlives within the acceptable norms of the sub-culture in which they were born.They want to assume that the political leadership, while questionable incompetence, will not adversely affect them if they keep a low profile.[2]”They are citizens of Humboldt Park.[3]The heavy handed treatment by the CPS (Chicago Public Schools) brought thecitizens to action.

From Friday night to Saturday Afternoon there were approximately15 parents, children, and community activist (Occupy Chicago was there insupport of the action) inside the School, and another 50 outside the schoolcamping out. Political math being what it is, they represent roughly 65,000people. Over the course of 20 hours, risking arrest by the Chicago PoliceDepartment, they managed to get the CPS to pay attention to their concerns[4].

The other reason this is important is that it was not anOccupy Chicago event. Members of Occupy Chicago supported the The Parents ofPiccolo[5]in their action with technical know-how, and moral support throughout thenight. Once again the members of Occupy Chicago proved their heart and headsare in the right place to aid the citizens of Chicago. As you might recall,Occupy Chicago came out in support of Pastor Corey Brooks in support of hisOccupation to put an end to community violence.[6]

A Helping Hand

Another event that received little fanfare is AnonCoOp. Inbrevity, it is sufficient to say that the much maligned Anonymous is floatingan idea to reach out to the community in pragmatic ways.[7]

Importance

Both of these events show that the activists of our currentera, unlike the misconceptions concerning the majority of Hippies ofyesteryear, are actively engaging average people to build community in a spiritof compassion for the well being of the citizens. It doesn’t get any better thanthis.

On Clout

As we found out this week, Illinois ranks third in UnitedStates in official corruption.[8] As the Sun-Times article points out, we’vesuspected this all along (it is, yet, another reason that Occupy Chicago exist,and is worth watching). That is not exactly news worth mentioning. Chicago isthe third largest city in the United States. It is the capital of Midwestcommerce. As such it is also under proportional scrutiny. A city this sizerequires such scrutiny. We are not exactly a lawless community, but there is acertain free-wheeling, devil-may-care attitude when it comes to legal andethical proprieties when almost a tenth of the nation’s population is jammedinto 234 square miles.[9]Varying, complex, economic, and sociological reasons are well document toexplain why the art-of-the-deal out ways legal and regulatory restrictions. Allof that is kind of a given. In Chicago is it simply explained as clout.

Mike Royko[10],the famous Chicago journalist, and personal inspiration, explained in SezWho? Sez Me[11], that “Clout” is not influence. Clout is theability to move around the laws of the land due to personal influence toachieve a personal goal that is usually not aiding the population at large. So,in spite of the Social Networking gage known as Klout, you may haveinfluence, but if you are not using it to wheel-and-deal with the big boyzto line your own pockets, it is not clout. I am sure Mike would wishthat the rest of the world would get the word straight.

On Another View

A video by Anonymous which was passed along from Los Angelesbecame the inspiration for a number of videos this week. Its point of origin inthis Globalized world is Germany.

Cobbling together some of my own recordings, I produced fourone minute video spots in support of the protest which will inevitably come toChicago the weekend of May 18, 2012.

Side note and Shop Talk

Mike Royko[12], andhis fictional counterpart, Carl Kolchak[13] aremy journalistic role models.

As too future issues of www.chicagofwz.info, I am going back to weekly installments. There is just too many blogs out that demanding your attention, and I'd prefer not to add to the noise. If you are active in the movement in any way, you life is hectic enough already.

[1] PiccoloElementary Specialty School. (n.d.). In education.com. Retrieved February19, 2012, from http://www.education.com/schoolfinder/us/illinois/chicago/piccolo-elem-specialty-school/

[2] Potts,C. A. (2008). Wealth, Women and War (p. 10). Dallas, TX: WordTechsPress.

[3] HumboldtPark, Chicago. (2012, February 17). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 14:28, February 19, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Humboldt_Park,_Chicago&oldid=477444138

[4] Trakhtensky,R. (2012, February 18). Piccolo Parents Call Victory After School Occupation.In Occupied Chicago Tribune. Retrieved February 19, 2012, from http://occupiedchicagotribune.org/?p=505#more-505

[5] PiccoloElementary Specialty School. (n.d.). In education.com. Retrieved February19, 2012, from http://www.education.com/schoolfinder/us/illinois/chicago/piccolo-elem-specialty-school/

[6] Sunday,Occupy Chicago, South Side Rooftop Reverend Encamp. (2011, December 4). In ChicagoI.W.W. . Retrieved February 19, 2012, from http://chicagoiww.wordpress.com/2011/12/04/sunday-occupy-chicago-south-side-rooftop-reverend-encamp/

[7] @MissRevolution_,. (2012, February 16). AnonCoOp. In #Occupy: The Chicago Free Web Zone.Retrieved February 19, 2012, from http://occupythewhole.blogspot.com/2012/02/anoncoop.html

[8] Janssen,K., & Spielman, F. (2012, February 15). It’s official: Chicago is nation’scorruption capital . In Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved February 19, 2012,from http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/10659504-418/its-official-chicago-is-nations-corruption-capital.html

[9] Chicago.(2012, February 19). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved16:07, February 19, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chicago&oldid=477658322

[10] MikeRoyko. (2012, February 11). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 16:13, February 19, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mike_Royko&oldid=476315672

[11] Nocitation given

[12] MikeRoyko. (2012, February 11). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 16:13, February 19, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mike_Royko&oldid=476315672

[13] Kolchak:The Night Stalker. (2012, February 1). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 16:24, February 19, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kolchak:_The_Night_Stalker&oldid=474348437

Parents of Piccolo

2012-02-18T13:52:00.001-06:00

As I write this members of the Occupy Chicago Social MediaTeam are supporting the Parents of Piccolo at Piccolo Elementary School, 1040N. Keeler, in Chicago. The issue is simple. After years of neglect the ChicagoSchool Board is going to vote to approve dismissing all the teachers. The actionwas started by a few parents yesterday afternoon at approximately 4:00 PMyesterday (February 17, 2012). With the help of Occupy Chicago, the Parents ofPiccolo have release their statement.

http://occupychi.org/press/blog/2012/02/18/piccolo-occupied-declaration-1-piccolo-occupation

Declaration #1 from Piccolooccupation

11:49pm - February 17th, 2012

We, the Piccolo Occupation, areputting our children’s education first. Piccolo has failed because CPS hasrefused to invest in public education. The school has struggled for years butyou have taken out all the programs, classes and opportunities to learn. Wehave had 3 principals in the last five years. We have not been able to workwith anyone on a long-term basis to address the chronic disinvestment in ourschool. CPS and City Hall have failed us and our children. Your goal is toprivatize the education system by giving it to corporations that support themayor. We have been ignored, you have ignored our children and now you aretrying to make money off of them.

The Chicago Public Schools is inviolation of its own remediation and probation policy. CPS is in violation ofthe Illinois School Code and the Illinois Civil Rights Act. CPS is in violationof Illinois Senate Bill 630. Because of this, a moratorium has been introducedin the Illinois Legislative Assembly by the School Facilities Taskforce.

We areenacting our moratorium for ourselves with this sit-in due to the fact that CPSnot once has laid out the necessary corrective action for Brian Piccolo orPaolo Cassals along with the Local School Councils for getting them off ofprobation during the last five years. The School Improvement Plans for AcademicAchievement (SIPAA) at these two schools have lacked the budgetary resources tobridge the achievement gap of our student populations. Further, the SIPAAsalong with the budgets at the time of their signings have not had realcommunity input.

Therefore, these actions could verywell be civil rights violations. At the recent CPS hearings, the formerprinciple of Cassals testified that not once in the last five years had CPS metwith her nor with the LSC about any of the necessary corrective action for PaolaCassals to be removed off of probation.

Because CPS (Chicago PublicSchools) has been not willing to meet with or listen to us, this is what wewant:

1) A meeting with Mayor RahmEmanuel

2) A meeting with at least five ofthe Chicago School Board members present

3) The removal of Piccolo andCassals from the turnaround list

The situation is fluid....

Parents, Students, Teachers and the Social Media andStreaming team of Occupy Chicago are standing ground under the threat ofarrest. I do hope Rahm is so very proud of himself in his sellout of the peopleof Humboldt Park.

@OccupieChicago Live Stream.

Update February 14, 2012 4:15 PM CST

After 20 hours of Occupation, the Parents of Piccolo, accompanied by the Occupy Chicago observers, exited the building with a promise from the Chicago School Board of Education to meet with them, and discuss their concerns. No arrest were made.

Good Work, Parents of Piccolo and Occupy Chicago!

AnonCoOp

2012-02-16T19:36:00.000-06:00

Hello friends,

Daily I watch tweets go by, of people I know that have been out of work, or work and still they have no food, need help in someway, or have just given up hope on how to survive because they simply cannot seek out resources.

About 15 years ago I (Miss Rev) ran a charity, called Santa's Helpers. It was a group of about 50 or so people, and when someone would come to us, because they just needed a help up, we would send care packages, slightly used clothing, and the likes. We would address the box as Santa's Helper. Some would put a mock address on it, some would put their own.

We had gotten pretty big to a point where different denomination of churches and pantries would direct us to people in need. Devised a state by state barter system eventually, for people who did not have the means to make much needed repairs on their homes, or cars. We got people to help people, not for anything more then, a thank you.

Well I want to bring this Charity back. On a bigger scale, do it world wide. Now, I don't mean that everyone here has to send out food to people, maybe you could help with resources, or even help finding deals online for your country (coupons, discounts etc)

The USA gov. has put a lot of restrictions on some of the food pantries here in the USA. One of the bigger ones in my area has now decided you need a letter from social services to be able to go there. Now I happen to know they closed the local social services office here, and you have to travel now 45 minutes to get to an office. Some of these people cannot travel as they have no money for gas or for the bus. A lot of the pantries have gone to locals only. If you are not living in their town, you cannot go. Alot of food pantries are simply running out of the food needed, and there is now a rise in families, not just single people going to food pantries a week. There is a food pantry here called Project Paul which last year served 600 families a month, now serves 600 a week. Thats staggering when you think about it. To get on food stamps now in USA requires you to be so dirt poor there is no chance of you ever getting off the system, and when you do get a job, and report it, instead of helping you succeed to get off of the system, they cut your food stamps, most just cut their hours or quit their job, as they just cant make it. Viscous circle.

Im not saying we will change the system, but if we can just simply start helping each other. We can make it. in the USA 1 in 6 families goes without food daily. this means when I look out my door, 4 people on my dead end street are without food each day.

My idea is as like it was before, build a forum. Forum will be set up into different categories. countries, pantries, outreach, clothing etc. Certain people will be Food pantry people for their country, outreach the same etc. I have built numerous forums (its kind of what I do in my biz as well ) I will get a host for this as well, and have the forums on that instead of not hosted.

Let me give you an idea, food pantry - when you go out shopping, you pick up extra food, obviously canned items are not the best because of weight, toiletries, simple pleasures like coffee and sugar.

Outreach can simply be if in your country you happen to know where a good food pantry is, or if you happen to find out your gov granted your utilities some money to help people, you can direct them where they need to call (as i did today for my own country for JCP and L) and was also told that they have not really advertised it, so no one knows (Face Palm)

Helping people survive should not be rocket science. It breaks my heart the world is in such chaos, that so many are trying to work trying to make a living and cant make it. I know this wont change the world, but I know it may help bring some relief when things can get so stressful.

Also note, when we ship out packages, we send a letter in the package, asking the people, if they can, to join in the forums. To help out and give back in some way, maybe some skill or knowledge they have. this is the co op of this whole program. Being kind to someone should not ever be an effort.

2 years ago I went on food stamps. I was in line at the grocery store, and a mom and her daughter were in front of me. They were celebrating her daughters graduation from preschool with strawberry short cake (I'm nosy) She didn't have enough money. She gave the merchandise she couldn't afford back to the girl at check out, paid for what she could, and left, her daughter in tears, and she said, "honey I'm sorry, mommy just doesn't have the money". I bought her items, and had my son run it out to her.

I didn't do it for any thanks, but this woman came back into the store in tears. she had lost her job, lost her home, and was living in some dive now with her daughter and trying to make the best of it. She hugged me and smiled and said thank you. And couldn't help thinking how wrong this whole situation was. She shouldn't have to cry like that over food.

I'm no longer on food stamps, because I don't lie to the welfare system and I work odd jobs to make it by, so therefore I don't qualify.

For those of you who don't know I was the creator of Operation Cash Back, one of the biggest money moving projects in the world (moving from big banks to credit unions) the account Your Anon News saw something in my tweet and backed me on it, where I did not think this operation could do anything large scale, it moved mountains (600k people moved money in one month) because the people were behind it. That's what Anon Co Op can do as well.

SO, that is it in a nutshell. We need to help each other, its simple.

In the next 2 weeks I will be building forums, finding hosting and organizing people into what you can do, and yes everyone here can help, even if its just being a spokesperson on twitter to get the word out. If you never thought you could be part of one of the biggest movements in history (Anonymous) well now is your time to shine. This is a world wide humanitarian effort that can only be successful with your help

Much love,

Miss Rev

@MissRevolution_

Take a Cue from Rahm?

2012-02-16T01:16:00.002-06:00

There are those who think that Rahm is stocking up on pepperspray, tear gas, and rubber bullets. Others think that is nonsense. One hassaid this is Chicago; we don’t do things like that. It was reported today (February14, 2012) that:

Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s administrationhas awarded a $193,461 emergency contract to Colorado-based Super Seer Corp.for the purchase of 3,057 new and improved shields to be used by officers onthe front lines during the May 19-21 summits at McCormick Place.[1]

I would strongly suggest that anyone participating in theNATO or G8 summit protest take a cue from Rahm. Prepare to protectyourself. Here are a few suggestions and sources

Amazon: Gas Mask
Amazon: Extra filters
Amazon: Gas Mask Field Bags and Kits
Amazon: Body Armor
Amazon: Helmet

Since this is thedirection that the Chicago Police Department is heading it is probably best toget ready for the same from them.

There is no rational point in preparing to wage anaggressive, offensive action against the Chicago Police Department. They are not the enemy. As a matter of fact ifthey were not so paranoid, I’d say give ‘em a hug.

However, personal protection gear is not a budget breaker ifbough a piece at a time, and it may come in handy at some point in the nextdecade … if not this May in Chicago.

My son is ex-Navy. How ex? He just got out this past June.We were talking about preparation for Gas attacks today. His take was simple.Preparation for Gas attacks is only useful if you are doing the attacking. Asthe target of a gas attack you will have about 15 seconds to get the mask andCBN gloves on. It takes 45 seconds to get that gear on. That leaves you exposedfor 30 seconds. And that is longenough to feel the effects. So what to do? He suggested wet face bandana ifthey are deploying Tear Gas. My suggestion? Put on the mask before you hit thestreet but, that may not be practical.

On that note, however, the Chicago Police Department hassaid they do not want to use Tear Gason the NATO/G8 protestors this coming May[2].Are they trustworthy? Yes. And, No. That may be their best intentions, butsituations may get escalated. Based on tweets coming out of the GeneralAssembly at the House at Congress Square this evening (February 15, 2012),Occupy Chicago still insist that they are a non-violent community. I’ve watchthem long enough to conclude that to be true. We can only hope that those whocome to Chicago to protest take their cue from Occupy Chicago.

With that in mind, the best suggestion yet is: bring a camera.

[1]Spielman, F. (2012, February 14). City buys face shields to protect cops fromG-8 protesters . In Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved February 14, 2012, fromhttp://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhall/10622261-418/city-buys-face-shields-to-protect-cops-from-g-8-protesters.html

[2] Bergen,K., & Coen, J. (2012, February 15). Business leaders brace for G-8, NATO.In Chicago Tribune: Chicagoland. Retrieved February 16, 2012, from http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-biz-g8-nato-protest-worries-20120216,0,3972510.story

An Alternative to the Judicial System

2012-02-13T22:38:00.000-06:00

This is specifically in response to a quarry posed by amember of the Occupation. The idea is to look for an alternative to the AngloAmerican Judicial system which has its roots in a secular version of Roman andChristian traditions.

For the sake of this discussion it would be best to have aquick review of the roots of the current Anglo American system. Again I citefrom my work in 2007[1].

Crime by definition,until the 1700s, was seen as a result of “evil” or a rebellion against God (orthe Gods), or a rebellion against the cultural expression of the common good aspersonified in the codified expression of a given religious deity. Take yourpick. This demonic perspective was overturned during the Age of Enlightenment.The work of Cesare Beccaria published in Italy in 1764 is the best knowndissertation on what is now known as classical criminology.[2]

The essential ideasare quite simple. Individuals are rational beings who pursue their owninterest, trying to maximize their pleasure and minimize their pain. And unlessthey are deterred by the threat of swift, certain, and appropriately severepunishment, they may commit crimes or harm others in their pursuit of selfinterest.[3]The objective of the enlightened classical approach is deterrence.

The current culturaldynamic within the popular dialogue is a mish-mash of the demonic perspectiveand the enlightened classical criminology. The resurgence of religion in thebody politic, due largely to the efforts of the late Rev. Jerry Falwell, hasaltered the view of the mass of humanity. The phrase “rational” has beenreplaced, in all practical purposes, with the phrase “sinful.” Mind you, withinthe religious framework such concepts as justice, mercy, charity, andforgiveness are forgotten. When objections are raised to this neo-classicaldemonic perspective, the religious roots of the current philosophy are swiftlycovered up.[4]

The primary change intoday’s environment is due largely to the popular rejection of science and thescientific approach. From the late 1800s to the mid-1960s, science was thereligion of the masses. However, as the culture moved forward, a perceptionemerged that human rational problem solving and scientific observation, and thepolicies created to address social challenges, were flawed. Science could notaddress the counter culture of the late 1960s, or the cultural chaos that arosefrom it. Some maintain that science, and rational thought, was the root causeof the of the counter culture movement. Moreover, science seemed to besupporting cultural chaos. Science gave us speed, LSD, PCB, crack,methamphetamine, and only God could counteract the effects of addiction. Thisled to the rise of “saved” sinners, and driedout drunks[5]who engaged the debate on law and punishment from a perspective that all peopleare criminals at heart, they are wicked, they are evil, and all deserve tosuffer. Moreover, they maintain that people should suffer to purge their soulsso they can have communion with God.

The popularmisconception of the counter culture is that the radicals of the era were notproperly indoctrinated into the broader morals of the U.S. culture. This is a myth. The20-ish rebels of the 1960s and 1970s grew up with some form of school prayer,and the mandatory Pledge of Allegiance. They sited by rote, “… one nation underGod, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”[6]The cause of the counter culture of the 1960s was not in God being taken out ofthe schools, but in a deeper disturbance resulting from the Cold War. Do notmisconstrue this as condemnation of individual faith or religious observance.Religion has been known to inspire greatness and great thought, however, whenapplied at the mass cultural level, responding to the lowest commondenominator, great acts of charity as an expression of religion gets lost.

From an individualreligious perspective this is all fine and good; the addictive substance isreplaced with a dependence on a spiritual being. However, it is a poorreplacement for observable, scientific cause and effect. Moreover, as harsh asthis may seem, the doctrine of popular Protestant Calvinistic Christianitytends to negate personal responsibility for one’s actions by placing allcriminal and harmful actions “under the blood of Jesus.” The individual, oncebecoming a Christian, is not likely to address their own faults in depth, and canminimize any guilt response for the actions they commit (this process is calledneutralization). This arrogance of perfection, goes so far as to say, in thewords of a local pastor broadcast on KCLE out of Cleburne, Texason July 4^th some years ago, “Christians are sinless because ofJesus!”

The situation in the1700s has similarities to what we have today. Again quoting Criminological Theory: Past to Presentby Francis T. Cullen and Robert Agnew:

Lawsin the 1700s were frequently vague and open to interpretation. Judges, who heldgreat power, would often interpret these laws to suite their own purposes. Sopunishment for a particular crime might vary widely, with some people receivingsevere penalties and others not being punished at all. Poor people, who couldnot afford to bribe the judges, were at a special disadvantage. Further, thepunishments for many crimes were quite harsh, often involving torture anddeath.[7]

So … what isdifferent today?

Judges stillinterpret laws based on the perceived need of the society in a given era.Punishments are still at the discretion of the judges. While the blight ofbribery has diminished somewhat in today’s legal system, it has been replacedby the need for expensive attorneys.

Having established the bases of our current system, it is sufficientto say that we need to revisit a system based on clearly understood principlesof psychology, sociology, and criminology. First, coercion is detrimental, andis a primary cause of criminal behavior. Coercion includes official indifferenceto the welfare of others. This can be seen in Mark Colvin’s 2000 study in Crime and Coercion. Second, to achievesocially acceptable goals, people will use socially acceptable means only aslong as the means allow them to achieve the goals. This is the thumbnail definitionfrom Merton Work on Crime and Anomie (lawlessness). It is also referred to as Social Strain Theory.[8]People are motivated to achieve a solid social bond when other needs, primarilythe fear of loss is quelled, and love and belonging is addressed.[9]

Most of what we see, and hear, in the popular approaches toJustice does not take these factors into account. Even within the Occupationthere is a propensity to a simplistic view of action and reaction. Thisis essentially the One-Size-Fits-All approach applied by the oligarchy to themasses. It is the main reason that we have so many people (more than at anypoint in the history of our nation even when seen as a percentage of the totalpopulation) in under court control today.

The following suggestions are loosely based on principals ofthe Talmud, the French Judicial system, Heinlein’s writings about Coventry, andan anthropological understanding of 12^th Century Druidic tribal practices.It is at best a skeleton.

No who is accused of a crime is allowed to confess to thatcrime.
If a crime is not witnessed by three people it did nothappen (witness can include evidence gathered through forensic science andinvestigation).
No crime has been committed unless it causes physical harm, or financial loss; uttering angry words do not constitute a criminal act.
The accused shall appear before a tribunal consisting of threepeople who have advanced training psychology, sociology, and related socialsciences, and two other citizens drawn by lottery to aid in the commonsense ofthe situation.
The goal of the tribunal is to discover what has occurred,then who is responsible for what occurred; the primary objective of thetribunal is truth, not winning or losing in a civilized variation of trial bycombat.
Once truth is discovered, the tribunal shall give the accuseda number of options to address the wayward behavior. One of which is his or herchoice to leave the group for a determined amount of time. Other options caninclude therapy and/or restitution.
All proceedings in such matters are public, and can beattended by any member of the group at large. However, the process is notsubject to the consensus process used in the General Assembly at large.

[1] Potts,C. A. (2008). Wealth, Women and War (pp. 62-65). Dallas, TX: WordTechsPress.

[2] Cullen,F., & Agnew, R. (2006). Criminological Theory: Past to Present (2nded.). New York:Roxbury Publishing Company, p 15.

[3] Cullen,F., & Agnew, R. (2006). Criminological Theory: Past to Present (2nded.). New York:Roxbury Publishing Company, p 15.

[4] largelydue to the separation of church and state prescribed within the words of theFirst Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which states: Congressshall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting thefree exercise thereof …

[5] “Dry drunk, [or dried out drunk]”according to Wikipedia, “is a term used, often disparagingly, by members of AlcoholicsAnonymous (AA) and by substance abuse counselors who subscribe to the AA theoryof alcoholism to describe the recovering alcoholic who is no longer drinkingbut whose thought processes are considered to continue to be distorted by thethought patterns of addiction.”

[6] Pledgeof Allegiance. (2008, June 18). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved03:49, June 18, 2008, fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pledge_of_Allegiance&oldid=220049542

[7] Cullen,F., & Agnew, R. (2006). Criminological Theory: Past to Present (2nded.). New York:Roxbury Publishing Company.

[8] A StepCloser to Civil War? . (2011, December 4). In #Occupy: The Chicago Free WebZone. Retrieved February 13, 2012, from http://occupythewhole.blogspot.com/2011/12/step-closer-to-civil-war.html

[9] Maslow'shierarchy of needs. (2012, February 9). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 04:04, February 14, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs&oldid=475962504

The Chicago Principles

2012-02-12T13:15:00.000-06:00

Last night Occupy Chicago’s General Assembly (#OChiGA) votedon the Chicago Principles[1].You might recall that these were a topic of criticism and scorn from theopposition. I noted this late last month when I looked at some propagandacoming from the 1%er wannabes[2].The Chicago Principles represent amile marker in the planned occupation, and protest, surrounding the NATO and G8summits in Chicago, Illinois.

The two summits will converge on Chicago from May18, 2012 to May 21, 2012[3].Chicago’s Mayor, Rahm Emanuel[4],has passed draconian measures to limit free speech and protest in Chicago[5].The city sees it as an opportunity to display Chicago for the world to see, andthey don’t want some dirty,disenfranchised, long haired, tattooed, malcontents (which is how#OccupyChi is seen by the local establishment – even if it is a misinformedassessment) mucking up their plans.

Into this mix there is AdBusters, the electronic magazineout of Canada which has been given far too much credit for Occupy Wall Street. AdBusters[6],has invited 50,000 Culturejammers toconverge on Chicago[7] startingon May 1, 2012. In doing so, they evoked images of the 1968 Democratic NationalConvention[8].

Due in no small part to the Police response to Occupy Oakland[9],there is a discussion going on within the #Occupation about the use of Black Block (Anarchist property damage)tactics. On one hand there is the majority calling the Black Block a Cancer[10].Opposing that is a rational minority pointing out that Diversity of Tactics waswithin the framework of Occupy Wall Street before it stepped off on September17, 2011[11].

The Chicago Principles[12]are Occupy Chicago’s response to the world converging on the city this May.

Chicago 1968

I was 10 in 1968. My father was working on earth movingequipment in Cerro-De-Pasco, Peru. My mon and one of my sisters and I moved with him onNovember 1, 1967. The promises of the job did not pan out. Six months later he moved us out ofharm’s way. The job, and the politics of the region, was becoming unstable.

We movedfrom Las Banos, California[13],to Cerro-De-Pasco, Peru[14],to Bakersfield, California[15],to Wheatland, California[16],and eventually settled in Chicago, Illinois over the course of seven months. Whilemy Dad was still in Peru, my Mom moved us to where her family was because shethought she was dying. As it turned out she was suffering from severe, anduntreated, altitude sickness.

By the summer of 1968 we finally had an apartmentof our own. The Democratic National Convention of 1968 was my introduction toChicago style politics.

The images that flashed across the Television screen latethat summer did nothing to inspire me to activism (that came much later after Iactually read the Gospels of Jesus Christ). The images that flashed across thescreen left me feeling terrified. I was frightened for my sister (who was inHigh School, and nowhere near Grant Park or the Convention Center – but, as Isaid, I was 10 and did not realize it). I was frightened for my newly (andsomewhat unwillingly) adopted city. And I was terrified that the violence thatwas shown was going to spill out across my front yard. That is the messagedelivered, in Black and White, on a Sears Television, with Rabbit Ears, in abasement apartment on West Argyle Street across from Roberts Square Park.

Wasthat really what Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, David Dellinger, Tom Hayden,Rennie Davis, John Froines, Lee Weiner, and Bobby Seale had in mind? Did theyintend to terrorize a ten year old boy some ten miles from their epicenter?Somehow I don’t think so. However, that is often the afterimage of the streetprotest anywhere in the world.

I was not inspired to activism by the Chicago 7[17].I was inspired by Jesus Christ when I found out that he was not Santa Clause,but a man (and maybe more) who gave up all he had for the welfare of others. Heis still my inspiration. It is the work that Jesus started which I seek to continue as best as I can.

Black Block Tactics

Chris Hedges is a respected journalist with a legitimatemaster’s of divinity. He is what I aspired to be, but never had the connectionsor the resources to achieve the high goals. I have nothing but respect for hisachievements and additions to the collective knowledge of the universe.However, I do take umbrage to his assessment of the Black Block (I am stillreading at his long article on it). I have to ask, “What did Jesus do?”

And the Jews' passover was at hand,and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And found in the temple those that sold oxenand sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: And when he had made ascourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, andthe oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables. (John2:13-15).

In my opinion, that direct action looks pretty much like aBlack Block tactic. Hedges may not like it, but there it sits. Some 2,012 yearsafter the fact we have a pretty good idea what is allowable … even within mainstreamChristianity.

[1]Chicago Principles. (2012, February 11). In capricious yet constant, likethe sea.. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://capriciousyetconstant.tumblr.com/post/17470202936/chicago-principles

[2]Truth Was the First Causality . (2012, January 29). In #Occupy The ChicagoFree Web Zone. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://occupythewhole.blogspot.com/2012/01/truth.html

[3] G8NATO Summit Chicago 2012. (n.d.). In World Business Chicago . RetrievedFebruary 12, 2012, from http://www.worldbusinesschicago.com/events/g8-nato-summit-chicago-2012

[4]Lennard, N. (2012, January 31). Rahm’s Chicago crackdown aims at Occupy . In Salon.Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://www.salon.com/2012/01/31/rahms_chicago_crackdown_aims_at_occupy/singleton/

[5]Rahm’s “Sit Down and Shut Up” Laws . (2012, February 5). In #Occupy TheChicago Free Web Zone. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://occupythewhole.blogspot.com/2012/02/rahms-sit-down-and-shut-up-laws.html

[6]Tactical Briefing #25: Showdown in Chicago. (2012, January 25). In AdBusters.Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://www.adbusters.org/blogs/adbusters-blog/tactical-briefing-25.html

[7]NATO, G8 In Chicago: Adbusters Puts Out Call For 50,000 To Protest Summits(VIDEO) . (2012, January 27). In Huff Post Chicago . Retrieved February12, 2012, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/nato-g8-in-chicago-adbust_n_1236503.html

[8]1968 Democratic National Convention. (2012, February 3). In Wikipedia, The FreeEncyclopedia. Retrieved 16:24, February 12, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1968_Democratic_National_Convention&oldid=474709472

[9]Truth Was the First Causality . (2012, January 29). In #Occupy The ChicagoFree Web Zone. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://occupythewhole.blogspot.com/2012/01/truth.html

[10]Hedges, C. (2012, February 6). The Cancer in Occupy. In truthdig.Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_cancer_of_occupy_20120206/

[11]Graeber, D. (2012, February 9). Concerning the Violent Peace-Police: An OpenLetter to Chris Hedges. In n+1. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://nplusonemag.com/concerning-the-violent-peace-police

[12]Chicago Principles. (2012, February 11). In capricious yet constant, likethe sea.. Retrieved February 12, 2012, from http://capriciousyetconstant.tumblr.com/post/17470202936/chicago-principles

[13]Los Banos, California. (2012, January 28). In Wikipedia, The FreeEncyclopedia. Retrieved 16:33, February 12, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Los_Banos,_California&oldid=473756749

[14]Cerro de Pasco. (2012, January 10). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 16:35, February 12, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cerro_de_Pasco&oldid=470551399

[15]Bakersfield, California. (2012, February 5). In Wikipedia, The FreeEncyclopedia. Retrieved 16:37, February 12, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bakersfield,_California&oldid=475180394

[16]Wheatland, California. (2012, January 14). In Wikipedia, The FreeEncyclopedia. Retrieved 16:37, February 12, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wheatland,_California&oldid=471376060

[17]Chicago Seven. (2012, January 31). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 17:54, February 12, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chicago_Seven&oldid=474234060

Rahm’s “Sit Down and Shut Up” Laws

2012-02-05T11:42:00.001-06:00

There are times when being a dispassionate observer ofsociety is painfully difficult. The recent “Sit Down, and Shut Up” Laws passedby Chicago’s selectmen is one such occasion. By now we’ve seen how such lawsare enforced in northern California.[1]

Even before the recent outbreak of repression on Oakland’sstreet, Rahm Emanuel (the quintessential suburban political usurper) and theCity Council passed their own response to the indignation on the streets; a setof laws which can only been seen as a blatant indifference for the Constitutionof the United States. Lawyers are going to have a hay day with this one, whichis certain.

The Constitution of The United States of America

Not too many years ago a low administrator in the BushAdministration floated the idea that quoting the Constitution would make anindividual a suspected terrorist. That 2003 source is now lost to antiquity.Perhaps some Anon can snoop thearchives to check it for validity. Anecdotally, however, it shows the levelthat despots will sink to prevent questioning authority. For the sake of thisarticle, however, it is worth the reminder what our collective rights are inthe United States:

Congress shall make no lawrespecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercisethereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right ofthe people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redressof grievances. ~ The Constitution of The United States of America: Amendment 1 (Ratified15 December 1791)

Before running off with the common misconception that suchlaws only apply to the federal government, the Amendment 14 was passed on 9July 1868.[2]

All persons born or naturalized inthe United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of theUnited States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make orenforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens ofthe United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, orproperty, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdictionthe equal protection of the laws. ~ The Constitution of The United States ofAmerica: Amendment 14, Section 1

It is the passage “NoState shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges orimmunities of citizens of the United States” in conjunction with “Congressshall make no law … abridging thefreedom of speech … or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and topetition the Government for a redress of grievances” (italics, of course, aremine) is what is important in our discussion.

Chicago’s Sparkling New Law

It is still, some nineteen days later, hard to get a fix onwhat exactly was passed. On 17 January 2012, Truthout reported on an increase in fines, a one-million dollarliability insurance bond from organizers, "a description of any recordingequipment, sound amplification equipment, banners, signs, or otherattention-getting devices to be used in connection with the parade",registration with the city to protest, and new language that would exclude, orinclude, sidewalk protest, and “allow the police Superintendent to deputizeFBI, DHS, ATF, and DOJ employees as Chicago police officers.”[3]The law was passed 41 to 4.

The Chicago Sun-Timesreported on the Mayor’s proposal in an article from the same day.[4]Quoting Rahm, the article states, “We don’t want to give the impression thatwe’re looking to do anything about the First Amendment except protect it. It’sreally that simple. Even if it’s just a perception issue, we want to avoidthat.” I am sure that there are many people out there who will agree with thisreasoned statement.

Truth on The Street

This far, the Chicago Police Department has done everythingbut “protect” the First Amendment. As reported in the chicagoist[5]“[An] Occupy Chicago member, Keilah Becker, … [reported] a female officer tookher cell phone, turned it off and deleted the footage… informing her thatrecording police officers is a class 4 felony.” One has to wonder how exactlyRahm, the Chicago City Council, the State of Illinois, or the U.S. Department ofJustice for that matter, is protecting the First Amendment.

Where are We atNow?

As far as Illinois almost unenforceable “eavesdropping law,”the chicagoist reports that, “StateRep. Elaine Nekritz is sponsoring an amendment which would legalize recordingpolice.”[6]This, of course, makes sense because the Police do everything they can torecord citizens activities.

We are still in some kind of quazi grey area concerning Rahm’slaw. It is blatantly illegal to “make or enforce any law which shall abridgethe privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” There is a periodthere. That is the end of the statement. What is more obvious than that? Theselaws are illegal! Congress cannotlegally deny the right to free speech, and peaceful assembly, the state cannotdeny the right to free speech and peaceful assembly, and only a lawyer couldargue that the city can deny theright to free speech and peaceful assembly.

The City Council passed these laws. The City Council canrepeal them. Start putting pressure on the 41 votes which passed these repressive laws.

Side Note

As a “point of order” for the Chicago Police Department: theTerry decision[7]which give you the “right” to stop, and to frisk suspects, does not include anymention of cameras or recording equipment.[8]Read it for yourself.

[1] TruthWas the First Causality. (2012, January 29). In #Occupy: The Chicago FreeWeb Zone. Retrieved February 5, 2012, from http://occupythewhole.blogspot.com/2012/01/truth.html

[2] TheUnited States Constitution. (n.d.). In U.S. Constitution Online.Retrieved February 5, 2012, from http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

[3] Kunichoff,Y. (2012, January 18). Emanuel's Protest-Squashing "Sit Down and ShutUp" Ordinance Passes in Chicago. In Truthout . Retrieved February5, 2012, from http://www.truth-out.org/emanuels-sit-down-and-shut-ordinance-aims-chill-protest-chicago/1326902816

[4] Spielman,F. (2012, January 17). Rahm Emanuel backs off stiff fines for G-8, NATOprotesters . In Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved February 5, 2012, from http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/10061186-418/rahm-emanuel-backs-off-stiff-fines-for-g-8-nato-protesters.html

[5] Cynic,A. (2012, January 31). Occupy Chicago Alleges Police Deleted Video Footage OfSunday March. In chicagoist. Retrieved February 5, 2012, from http://chicagoist.com/2012/01/31/eavesdropping.php

[6] Cynic,A. (2012, January 31). Occupy Chicago Alleges Police Deleted Video Footage OfSunday March. In chicagoist. Retrieved February 5, 2012, from http://chicagoist.com/2012/01/31/eavesdropping.php

[7] Terryv. Ohio. (2012, February 2). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 17:12, February 5, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terry_v._Ohio&oldid=474538734

[8] Terryv. Ohio (No. 67) . (1968, June 10). In Legal Information Institute.Retrieved February 5, 2012, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0392_0001_ZS.html

A Christian Myth

2012-01-31T20:04:00.002-06:00

Like I have thousands of readers who hang on my every word,right? Not likely. So, to the few who rarely discuss religion with any seriously,please go find someone cute to flirt with. Barring that, get yourself a stiff belt (strong drink); then take a few minutes to read a rational discussion about a popularmisconceptions about Christianity.

A rather strange tweet appeared in my stream. It saidsomething about Anonymous being the Antichrist. I guess I was supposed to bewarned, concerned, intimidated, or something. I’d quote it here, but it hasvanished. Needless to say that got me thinking about the whole Antichristpersona in the current Christian mindset. According to popular myth The Antichristis that one person who is going to lead the forces of evil in the world againstthe forces of Jesus. Yes, you read that right; it is a myth.

The Apostle John wrote four lines about the Antichrist backin 70 C.E. None of them point to a far future Armageddon. John, in 70 CE, wasconvinced that he, while still alive, was living in the end times. This isevident when he writes, “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye haveheard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; wherebywe know that it is the last time” (1 John 2:18).

From this one gets the impression that The Antichrist is nota “he,” not an individual, not a single person, but a group of people. Johnpins this down when he writes, “Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus isthe Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son” (1 John2:22). John’s assertion is a simple one:anyone who does not believe that Jesus is the anointed on of God, or theChrist, then he, or she, is an antichrist.

It seems rather simple, if one does not believe that Jesusis the Christ then that person is “Anti” Christ. A little later in the same letter, Johnexpands on the idea even further. He writes, “And every spirit that confessethnot that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is thatspirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even nowalready is it in the world” (1 John 4:3). How many times does one have to statethe obvious?

Based on John’s own writings, from his life, from hisinspiration, he saw that all who basically held a different belief as being an “Anti”Christ. Mind you, this is an English word, transliterated from Greek, of aHebraic concept. I think it does lose much in the translation.

In another letter, John again asserts his observation. “Formany deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ iscome in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist” (2 John 1:7). Thepoint is obvious ... again. By the Christian standard, anyone who is of adifferent opinion and conviction concerning the, now institutionalized, Jesusis an “Anti” Christ. It is worth pausing here and considering that almost everygeneration of Christians since John’s death has thought it would be the lastbefore the return of Jesus Christ.

"Anit"Christ is not a person. "Anti"Christ is a philosophy.

Why bring all this up, here and now? We are in another eraof social upheaval. Once again Capitalism has proved to be dysfunctional. Onceagain the few have an essential strangle hold on many. In this environment, itis irrelevant what you believe or don’t believe. That is your own conviction,decision, and belief. All that matter now is what you do, and do not do. Thismay be contrary to the popular religion. We are however, in a pluralistic, secularsociety. If one wants to paint themselves as an “Anti” Christ, go for it; it isirrelevant. The only good, or evil, iswhat one does, or does not do. That is all that matters.

Truth Was the First Causality

2012-01-29T14:20:00.000-06:00

Real Time

It is Saturday, January 28, 2012. At approximately 6:32 PMPST, peaceful protestors were kettled by the Oakland Police.

According to earlyreports from Oakland Police is that protestors were throwing rocks at police.According to Citizen Journalist, and the few main stream journalists, on thestreet, the police report is pure fabrication. The Oakland Police came out inforce against the Citizens of Oakland, California who participated in thisnight protest. There are confirmed reports of police blocking off exit routswhile demanding that the protesters disperse. One Oakland Police Sargent washeard telling protestors to “submit” to being arrested while other OaklandOfficers were shoving people against the wall, and throwing them to the ground.A full two block area was cut off by Oakland Police, and all within that areawere subject to arrest. Most of the Citizen Journalist on the street weresubsequently arrested, zip-tied, and put into Oakland Police vehicles.

There are also confirmed reports of Oakland Police usingTear Gas[1],and rubber bullets, against the protestors again. From @__Klio__, “Police justshot protester in small of her back when she was less than a foot away. Crying,limping.” @susie_c, Susie Cagle, a credentialed freelance reporter, stated, “Ihave a tear gas headache and sore nose and throat still. And it's early yet.” SeemsOakland Police will never learn. Susie C was briefly detained by OaklandPolice, but released. Five other citizen journalists were taken into custody.

Atone point in the evening, a YMCA opened its doors to allegedly allow protestorssafe haven. The YMCA, according to street reports, then was besieged by OaklandPolice threatening to arrest all within the building.

The Oakland Police, inspite of contrary witness, are denying ketteling protestors, using chemicalagents on them, or allowing them to disband. Hundreds of protesters are beingarrested on the slimmest presence of officer safety. The protest was to callattention to the number of abandoned buildings in Oakland California.

Truth

This is, to some, a Civil War. If that is correct then truth was the first causality of thiswar. One can see this in a post from Thursday, January 26, 2012 on the Andrew Breitbart Presents Big GovernmentFeaturing Editor in Chief Mike Flynn blog.[2]There is enough in the blog’s title to ponder before getting into the article It's Official: #OccupyChicago Feeble Pawnsof the NATO/G8 Protest. Who is Andrew Breitbart? Who is Mike Flynn? Who isthe author Rebel Pundit? Why should the reader care? Why should the readerconsider them a credible authority on any topic, let along the NATO/G8 Protest,or #OccupyChicago? It would be best to answer those questions first.

The Players

Andrew Breitbart ^{^[3]}is, as best as one can put it, a web-based technocrat.[4]He is essentially a Regan era, self-absorbed GenXer, who embraces a certainform of Libertarianism which only want to outlaw whatever it is that otherswant. He uses his considerable skill at website development to puff himself up,and prove his worth to humanity. Considering his early years, one can’t faulthim. Too, his skills are commendable. However, when it comes to Occupy Chicago he has no credibility.Seems a question should be asked here: If he is against Big Government, why ishe pro NATO and G8? Supporting NATO and the G8 is the essence of the articleposted on Thursday.

As far as Mike Flynn is concerned, a cursory search onGoogle doesn’t turn up much. Other than being the Editor-in-Chief ofBigGovernment, there is nothing on him. It is a guess that his role inBigGovernment is the guy with the sharp pencil who makes sure the site has somekind of capability for the Target Audience. Again, there is no Chicagoconnection.

That of course brings us to who is @rebelpundit (to use thetwitter name)? Rebelpundit[5]is not a “who,” it is a “what.” Rebelpundit is a late comer Chicago basedanti-progressive, supporter of the Tea-Party. According to their website, “RebelPundit is a group effort based in Chicago, the belly of the progressive beast.”While Chicago based, they are not on the “inside” of Occupy Chicago.

Caustic Denunciations

According to Rebelpundit’s bombastic proclamation, “We nowhave the evidence to prove that the early phase of the movement was nothingmore than a staging period to build an infrastructure that will culminate in amassive occupation of Chicago this May.” Really? Were they paying attention to@OccupyChicago when “Lee” first tweeted the unplanned call to support OccupyWall Street in Chicago? Many will remember her assertion that she needed helpin organizing this effort since she was not good at organizing. Lee was thefirst to hit the streets here in Chicago. Like so many of us, it is highly doubtfulthat she had any connection to AdBusters. She, and most who latter came to the originaloccupation site, were there in support of Occupy Wall Street, and the obscenitythat wealth has made of our Democratic Republic.

Again citing the opposition website,” A source affiliatedwith Occupy Chicago has also revealed to RebelPundit that the Occupy Chicagoleadership was totally caught off-guard that this tactical advance was comingfrom Adbusters; and Occupy Chicago PR is now playing it off as if they were“in-the-know” all along.” Point of fact, this was proposed by “99,” and othersin the Direct Action committee, at an Occupy Chicago GA back in October. Ithappened to be one of the few General Assemblies where I was in attendance. Theopposition would have you think otherwise.

Here is where the opposition’s logic begins to falter. Mindyou they have already stated that Occupy Chicago was not “in the loop” on theplans to massively protest the NATO/G8 conventions in May 2012. They state, “[T]helocation [of Occupy Chicago’s new loft] is conveniently located within walkingdistance to the McCormick Place convention center, the site the summit ispresumed to be held.” If Occupy Chicago was not “in-the-know” about the McCormickPlace Conferences then the location is a coincidence. If they were “in-the-know”then they are moving forward with plans which were first brought up in October2011. Whichever it is, the opposition needs to get their story straight.

They also point out; “The “grassroots group” is spendingover $5,000 per month on the headquarters ....” Occupy Chicago has collectedover $18,000.00 in donations since September 23, 2011. $5.00, $10.00, $20.00add up over time. The Occupation movement gained popularity in the early days. Comparedto the hundreds of thousands spent by the Koch brothers to fund CATO[6]and the Tea Party[7],$18K is pocket change. One can guess that “Grassroots” fundraising is justUn-American to The Opposition because it excludes Corporate People.

“Is it any wonder that the same week OccupyChicago secured its lease on a giant warehouse loft, Adbusters put out thisgrand call? This coordination is a perfect example of the strength of theinfrastructure now in place and the ease with which the Occupy puppets arebeing strung along,” is probably the most inane statement in the entireanti-Occupy Chicago diatribe[8].Again, either Occupy Chicago’s General Assembly planned this site to be used inconjunction with the NATO/G8 conferences protest, or they did not. They can’tbe the ones planning the assistance, and the puppets dancing on the string. Onecannot be both at the same time.

One does have to wonder: why does TheOpposition love NATO and the G8?

Cooler Heads in Chicago

While Occupy Chicago seems about as transparentas smoked glass, and tends to “Keep people off-balance and in the dark bynever revealing the purpose behind [their] action ….” [9] they are in a precarious situation. They could find themselves, at some futuredate, being labeled, enemy noncombatants, terrorist, traitors, saboteurs, or infiltrators.

It has to be noted that almost anything that anyone wants to know about OccupyChicago can be found at www.occupychi.org.Navigation through the forums is a bit rough, but all the information is there …you just have to find it.

Right now, in spite of the paranoia within,and the denunciation from without, Occupy Chicago is seen as a group ofprotestors in opposition to Corporate Rule of The United States of America. Asfar as the NATO/G8 summits later this year, even Alderman Ricardo Munoz[10](22^nd Ward[11])sees the NATO/G8 protestors as an important part of the democratic process. Munozis set to propose legislative protection to social networking in the comingFebruary 15, 2012 Council Meeting. According to the Sun-Times, Munzo’s said “Socialmedia sites are more than information-sharing tools. They are also organizingtools. They’re fundamental to our right to free speech and public assembly,”[12]

[1]List of chemical warfare agents. (2011, August 26). In Wikipedia, The FreeEncyclopedia. Retrieved 03:35, January 29, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_chemical_warfare_agents&oldid=446790477

[2] Pundit,R. (2012, January 27). It's Official: #OccupyChicago Feeble Pawns of theNATO/G8 Protest. In Big Government . Retrieved January 29, 2012, from http://biggovernment.com/rebelpundit/2012/01/27/its-official-occupychicago-feeble-pawns-of-the-natog8-protests/

[3]Andrew Breitbart. (2012, January 25). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 17:09, January 29, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Andrew_Breitbart&oldid=473223742

[4]Technocracy. (2011, December 20). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 17:17, January 29, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Technocracy&oldid=466831214

[5]Rebelpundit. (n.d.). About. In Rebelpundit: Citizen Journalism from theBelly of the Beast. Retrieved January 29, 2012, from http://rebelpundit.com/about/

[6] ProjectCensored. (2011, September 12). Koch Brothers Fund Tea Party. In MediumFreedom Intl.: Media Democracy in Action. Retrieved January 29, 2012, from http://www.mediafreedominternational.org/2011/10/24/koch-brothers-fund-tea-party/

[7] Fang,L. (2011, November 2). Romney Campaign Memo: The Koch Brothers Are The‘Financial Engine Of The Tea Party’. In Think Progress. RetrievedJanuary 29, 2012, from http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/11/03/360433/romney-koch-tea-party/

[8] diatribe.(n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved January 29, 2012, fromDictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/diatribe

[9] Maxwell,John C. Ethics 101: What Every Leader Needs to Know. New York: Center Street, 2003, p.64

[10] RicardoMuñoz. (2011, June 12). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved19:41, January 29, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ricardo_Mu%C3%B1oz&oldid=433890666

[11] LoganSquare, Chicago. (2012, January 3). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Retrieved 19:45, January 29, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Logan_Square,_Chicago&oldid=469298603

[12] Spielman,F. (2012, January 27). Alderman wants to keep social media on during NATO/G8 .In Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved January 29, 2012, from http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/10270799-460/alderman-wants-to-keep-social-media-turned-on-during-natog8.html

Time to Make Some Changes

2012-01-22T11:37:00.003-06:00

Chicagoist: Board of Trade has a message for Occupy Chicago

There is no secret on my twitter account, or other blogs, that I was an active supporter of Occupy Wall Street months before September 17, 2011.

There is also no secret that I have had misgivings about Occupy Chicago, and the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Those misgivings, however, are small in comparison to the accomplishments of that group of activist. The have brought the message of corporate accountability to the heart of Chicago’s financial district. One can’t get much closer to the pulse of Capitalism in Chicago then the corner of LaSalle and Jackson.

For those of you who do not know Chicago. LaSalle runs north and south and “T”s at Jackson. To the east, where you will often find #Ochi (Occupy Chicago), is Bank of America (will write more about them in a later installment). Across the street, on the west, is Chicago’s very own branch of the Federal Reserve. Both are imposing, if not dysfunctional, American Institutions. But the real heart of Chicago’s money movers is The CBOT.

Physically at 141 W. Jackson[1] the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT)[2], merged in 2007 with the CME[3] (Chicago Mercantile Exchange) to become the CME Group[4], reaches around the globe. It was here in this muddy, convoluted world, originally designed to protect farmers and consumers from wild price fluctuations in basic food stocks, that Wall Street’s Dirty Paper Changed hands.

At this point, pending further investigation, one can speculate (part and parcel of the CME Group’s[5] “stock and trade”) the dirty paper (toxic asset bundled commercial paper) was not generated here; it was only moved here. If true, then one would think that the boyz at the CBOT would be more sympathetic to Occupy Chicago. But, that has not been the case.[6]

As preserved by the Chicagoist[7] from the Camera of @OccupyChicago (on Twitter), the boyz of the CBOT have a different view of life. Having worked as a runner on the trading floor of the CBOT from 1980 to 1983, I can assure you that not everyone who works at the CBOT is a 1%er. There are probably fewer 1%ers at the CBOT than even the CBOT would like to admit. However, they are almost all Capitalist. I say, almost ‘cause – well, what the hell? -- I worked there; Boyz, been there, done that; know the cubby holes in the trading desk for hiding the juice cans.

The one thing that we’ve learned from the kids of Occupy Chicago is that what happens on the street is far more important than what happens on the web. The web can be a conduit to report the events from the street, but the events have to occur first. This, of course, is fundamental. However, in the Bush years, cyberactivism seemed to be about the best you could get out of most people. Their silent consent to be part of a Yahoo Group (like New Millennium News Archive [8] a.k.a. USAFWZ or The Progressive Voice) denouncing the policies that brought us to this point was the best one could hope for. Latter day baby boomers, or Generation Jones,[9] did not believe that there was the will, or the energy to take it to the streets. I did believe it was there. It was just waiting to be pushed. The recession of 2008[10], TARP[11], and the GM Bailout[12] provided that push.

For more than a generation we were all taught to be personally responsible for our own financial wellbeing. That is still the mantra of the Capitalist today. However, when it came time for the Corporation to pay for their high risk bookmaking, they stuck their hand in the public till to keep afloat. Our conservative, capitalist government invited them to the cashbox! As is often shouted, “The Banks got bailed out; we got sold out.”

That is why Occupy Chicago took to the street on September 23, 2011, and why they are still functioning out of loft space at Riverfront Work Lofts, 500 W. Cermak Rd, Chicago, Ill.[13]

So … what is changing? Succinctly, you are looking at it. I’ve acquired a new domain name, a new title, and a new mission. Actually, it is the old mission began at Forest Glen Baptist Church[14] in 1975: the attempt to make Chicago a better city.

Thank you very much, Occupy Chicago[15], and Occupy Wall Street[16] for proving I was right all along.

@cliffpotts

[1] Chicago Board of Trade Building. (2011, November 22). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:43, January 22, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chicago_Board_of_Trade_Building&oldid=461863866

[2] Chicago Board of Trade. (2012, January 18). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:43, January 22, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chicago_Board_of_Trade&oldid=471980368

[3] Chicago Mercantile Exchange. (2011, December 13). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:43, January 22, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chicago_Mercantile_Exchange&oldid=465687937

[4] CME Group. (2012, January 21). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:43, January 22, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CME_Group&oldid=472481428

[5] http://www.cmegroup.com/company/cbot.html

[6] http://www.mediaite.com/online/traders-from-chicago-board-of-trade-dump-mcdonalds-applications-on-occupy-chicago-protesters/

[7] http://chicagoist.com/2011/10/05/board_of_trade_has_a_message_for_oc.php

[8] http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/NMNewsArchive/

[9] Generation Jones. (2012, January 8). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:53, January 22, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Generation_Jones&oldid=470338903

[10] Late-2000s recession. (2012, January 22). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:57, January 22, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Late-2000s_recession&oldid=472142593

[11] Troubled Asset Relief Program. (2012, January 14). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:56, January 22, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program&oldid=471386958

[12] Automotive industry crisis of 2008–2010. (2012, January 20). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:59, January 22, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Automotive_industry_crisis_of_2008%E2%80%932010&oldid=472338307

[13] http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/01/20/new-winter-headquarters-for-occupy-chicago/

[14] http://chicago.citysearch.com/profile/36778253/chicago_il/forest_glen_baptist_church.html

[15] http://occupychi.org/

[16] http://occupywallst.org/

Historical Hull House Halts Helping Hand

2012-01-21T10:53:00.000-06:00

Hull House was founded in 1889 to help immigrants adjust to America. According to AP it helped 60,000 foster children and battered women a year. According to the story posted in The Chicago Tribune’s News website, “The agency's board chairman Stephen Saunders said Thursday that the organization will close this spring and file for bankruptcy.” [1]

According to Liam Ford and Kate Thayer, Chicago Tribune reporters, writing on January 21, 2012, in Reliance on shrinking government funds doomed Hull House; the closure of the private agency helping foster kids, and battered women was due to its dependency on Government Funding. As if echoing the voice of Occupy Chicago’s support of Occupy Wall Street, “In fundraising, ‘it's difficult to raise private money to donate to government work,’ said Margaret Berglind, president of Child Care Association of Illinois. ‘The government is asking you to do today's work at yesterday's prices.’” The article points out, “Even with high-profile fundraisers honoring prominent Chicagoans at places like the Museum of Science and Industry, it's been hard for the organization to make up for losses from government cutbacks.”[2] In a related story, “Terry Mazany, president and CEO of the Chicago Community Trust, called Hull House's bankruptcy filing “the canary in the coal mine, alerting us to the impact of successive years of cutbacks to human services in our state. This action is a reminder of just how precarious the viability of this sector is in the face of government retrenchment.”[3]

We are told that Capitalism will work to “trickle down” and assist the less fortunate, yet this is the news of the day. How much more needs to be written about the lies we are told daily about the superiority of American Capitalism? Not only is the public sector failing, but the private sector charity (or love, as it has been translated) is nonexistent. Liam Ford and Kate Thayer point out that private donation trickled to a few million for this historic institution in recent years. Even the Tribune, in print, and television (as seen on WGN’s Morning News) wants us all to embrace American Capitalism and the Voo-Doo economics started under Ronald Reagan 32 years ago.

In a recent conversation I was told (on Twitter) by an Occupy Chicago sympathizer, “I [wouldn’t] call all upper 99% (80%+) evil; they [are] doctors, [and small business] owners who worked hard. Some see the need [for] change, others don't.” There is much truth in his observation. The caveat, however, is that even in this current system, those who see the need for change can do very little.

In 2007, I shared Elliott Currie’s observations on how the free market (American Capitalism) economy leads to crime in the United States of America.[4]

Elliott Currie identifies seven pathways through which the free market economy creates the high risk of crime in the United States:

1. The progressive destruction of livelihood;

2. The growth of extremes of economic inequality and material deprivation;

3. The withdrawal of public services and support, especially for families and children;

4. The erosion of informal and communal networks of mutual support, supervision, and care;

5. The spread of materialistic, neglectful, and “hard” culture;

6. The unregulated marketing of the technology of violence;

7. The weakening of social and political alternatives.^{^[5]}

This is exactly what we are seeing played out in the nation today. People are on the street, even now when the temperatures are dropping below freezing, protesting this materialistic, neglectful, and hard culture. They are classified as criminals, and worse, even by those who are less than a paycheck away from destitution. Stories fill pages on the crime ridden, infested, unhygienic impromptu camps of the Occupation Movement around the world; some locations have even labeled the protestors as terrorist.[6]

The real crime is not committed by the Occupy Protestors. The real crime is committed by those within the system who embrace the criminal mentality, and the destruction of humanity. What are we seeing here?

Jobs are outsourced because it is more profitable to run a sweet shop in China than develop a viable business in the US.
The destruction of the Middle Class as 400 people control more wealth than 151,285,314 people.
Constant threats to popular social networking sites like Twitter, YouTube, FaceBook, the now defunct Megaupload[7], by heavy handed legislation as proposed in SOPA and PIPA.
The constant attacks against the Occupy Wall Street movement by local police acting on the behalf of a few prominent officials desperately quashing any call for accountability.
And now, The Bankruptcy of Hull House after 123 years of operation, and surviving The Great Depression of the 1930s.

Even Republican Presidential Candidate Newt Gingrich is questioning what is going on in the U.S.A. today: "[C]rony capitalism, where people pay each other off at the expense of the rest of the country, is not free enterprise; and raising questions about that is not wrong."[8] He has since decided that questioning Crony Capitalism is wrong to his constituents.

Hull House is closing. The 60,000 foster children and battered women it helps per year will now turn to the state. The 157,460,224 who don’t want to see change in the nation, those who quashed Gingrich’s criticism (politically motivated thought it may be), may indeed be qualified as accomplices to flagrant criminal activity; or just plain evil.

[1] Associated Press. (2012, January 19). Chicago's Jane Addams Hull House to close. In Chicago Tribune News . Retrieved January 21, 2012, from http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-il-hullhouseclosing,0,6480287.story

[2] Ford, L., & Thayer, K. (2012, January 21). Reliance on shrinking government funds doomed Hull House. In Chicago Tribune: Chicagoland. Retrieved January 21, 2012, from http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-hull-house-closes-20120121,0,5594743.story

[3] Kapos, S. (2012, January 20). 'Canary in the coal mine': Hull House will file for bankruptcy . In Crain's Chicago Business (blog). Retrieved January 21, 2012, from http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20120120/BLOGS03/120119729

[4] Potts, C. A. (2008). Wealth, Women and War (p. 74). Dallas, TX: WordTechs Press.

[5] Cullen, F. T., & Agnew, R. (Eds.). (2003). Criminological Theory: Past to Present (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company, p. 338.

[6] Rawlinson, K. (2011, December 5). Police in City see occupiers as 'terror' risk. In The Independent . Retrieved January 21, 2012, from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-in-city-see-occupiers-as-terror-risk-6272434.html

[7] Tijs, A. (2012, January 20). File-Sharing Site Megaupload Has Been Shut Down. In Noise11. Retrieved January 21, 2012, from http://www.noise11.com/news/file-sharing-site-megaupload-has-been-shut-down-20120120

[8] Finnegan, M. (2012, January 11). Newt Gingrich: 'Crony capitalism . is not free enterprise'. In Los Angeles Times . Retrieved January 21, 2012, from http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/11/news/la-pn-newt-gingrich-crony-capitalismis-not-free-enterprise-20120111

Games: Obama for the Block

2012-01-19T07:13:00.000-06:00

The movie is pure fiction, but one worth watching. In 1983, David Lightman, looking to download a game, hacks into a Supercomputer, and innocently sets off a chain of events which almost set off a global thermonuclear war. The machine, as it turns out, does not know the difference between a simulation and the real thing. The movie is called WarGames.

This was brought to mind the other day when I was arguing with a troll from the CATO Institute on Twitter. His take is that government is bad, capitalism is good, and he will succeed even if all others fail. It is all a game anyway, and he will win. Nothing else matters as long as he wins. The troll is the offspring of a School Teacher in Minnesota who has raised him under the protection of the Civil Servant’s system and Union Representation, but he is anti-government, anti-union, and anti-Obama. He is also a rabid supporter of Ron Paul. Like many he embraces the lawlessness of the Libertarian ideal until it bumps up against some cherished institution; repealing farm subsidies being one of them.

During this conversation, I was informed that it is all a game; nothing but a game with deep implications. And a game he was going to win.

I use the personal pronoun there because that was the core of his argument. Nothing else mattered as long as he won in life. With a world view like that, we see the core of the 1%ers. He will probably win, and the remaining 308,745,537 U.S. Citizens can go to hell. That was the gist of the budding Gekko-ish “Greed is Good” argument. He is not alone. This is the argument behind Janie Johnson’s “Don't Take My Lemonade Stand – An American Philosophy,” and the ramblings of John Stossel, and George Will.

That brings me back to WarGames: an unwinnable game. If you have not seen the movie this is going to be a spoiler (I figure that talking about the end of a 29 year old movie is not a gross offense of public civility). In WarGames, to stop the WOPR (the supercomputer) from launching its missiles at the Soviet Union, they had it play Tic-Tac-Toe as it frantically sought the launch codes. Computer multitasking, along with Artificial Intelligence which could learn from experience, was a Si-Fi dream in Hollywood in 1983. The WOPR decided, based on Tic-Tac-Toe, that thermonuclear was a pointless, no win game. It did not launch.

Right now, politically, we are pretty much in the same boat. 1%ers, and those who aspire to be 1%ers, think this is all a game. As such they are doing all they can to block the progress of the nation. One might be so bold as to call that a class version of Global Thermonuclear War. However, it is a no win game. If 400 win at the expense of 308,745,137 citizens, that is not a win.

Using the Tic-Tac-Toe, no win, analogy all we can do is block the elite who are bent on destroying the US for the sake of their dream of domination. View it as a political version of Hollywood Squares. If that is the case, we have one choice this coming November (if we stay within the current rules of society).

I choose, Obama for the block.

Your move now ….

Make Their War Pay Off

2012-01-16T23:03:00.000-06:00

Technological Stratification

I did hear from the producers of 99% (The Occupy Wall Street Collaborative Film). There is no animosity there. The incident I shared with you is only one illustration of what people take for granted along the way (and I am a very small, infinitesimal part of that major project), but it was worth illumination.

There is allot of this technological stratification going on. It is not new. A telephone poll of November 2, 1948, proclaimed that Dewey Defeated Truman. He did not. The majority of Truman's voters in 1948 did not have phones.

This recession has gutted many people in this nation. And has caused frustration for many. As a minor example, I cannot be at Occupy Chicago’s activities because of various factors I have mentioned; I can’t afford bus fare. It is frustrating. It is frustrating because I am doing everything I am supposed to do, all the right, ethical, Christian things I am to do, and I am in the hole financially the day after I get paid. This is the America of the 1%. This is the America of the CATO institute. This is the America of the Republicans. Since Obama, the era's current version of Woodrow Wilson, is the best hope we have to block the aims of the GOP, then there is a damn good chance that he will have a second term.

Written Even Before the GOP went off the Deep End Last Night

There is a pretty good chance that before we are out of this decade we will see one more war. It will not be a colonial war on some foreign soil. It will not be against the impoverished citizens of some forgotten tribe. It will not be an asymmetrical war against some form of enemy noncombatant or “unlawful combatants.” It will be a war like WWII, a full war. It will be like the Civil War with blood on the American streets. There will be American blood, foreign blood, human blood, staining the sidewalks of Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas, San Francisco, Long Beach, and hundreds of small towns along the way. It will happen because we have done this to so many smaller countries around the globe that when the power does shift we will be left standing alone on the wrong side of the history of humanity. It does not make one small speck of difference who we elect this November. This war is coming. If for no other reason it is Karma. We’ve brought it on ourselves. One can even say we have earned it.

When this happens, no matter who the US ends up calling “The Enemy,” remember that it is to the benefit of the 1%. Think not? Remember US Corporations sold strategic supplies to Nazi Germany during World War II through satellite operations in South America. Old man Bush was one of them, even as his son was in harm’s way in the Pacific Theater.

War is a money machine for the few at the cost of the general population. Need a reminder? Very few of the Confederacy soldiers owned slaves, and very few of those who stood for the Union ever saw a Black person. In the end, one out of eleven Union combatants never returned home. They were left on the battlefields of the South. The best guestimate is 612,000 dead. Why? ‘Cause of a Peculiar Institution called chattel slavery that crushed humans for the sake of the profits of a very few. Confederate States cited as much in their statements of succession.

In the end of the World War II, we did prosecute the German War criminals; we did nothing about the US traitors. The same thing occurred when the Civil War was over. There were ramifications during the Reconstruction era. That is a given. However, those who had committed treason were given a pass. They were doing their duty … and making money off the blood of others. We paid the price for their greed, and stupidity.

I’d probably do better, and be more convincing if I posted all sorts of links here. However, you can educate yourself on what happened, or you can let it be. The bottom line here is that while the buildings burn, and the smoke obscures the sun, the 1% will be wheeling and dealing to make even more off of your blood, and that of your children and grandchildren.

Of course I am not telling you anything new, but this you should consider: if we get dragged into another World War, and the enemy climbs over the hometown ridge, when you finish off the invaders, before the pen is laid on the armistice, clear out the 1% for the sake of the future generations. Send ‘em packing, penniless, destitute, and stained as the murders they are. This is no less than what God did to Cain.

Allies, and Opponents

2012-01-15T09:31:00.000-06:00

To belabor the obvious: Welcome to the 2012.

So far this year, I’ve managed to alienate allies, and opponents.

Last Saturday, I attended the screening of 99% (The Occupy Wall Street Collaborative Film). You may have seen the tweets, or email which I sent announcing this event. That screening did not go well on my end. As you may know from reading this blog, I am one of the struggling 99%. I live in an extended stay hotel with two others in an “alternative living” arrangement. I am one of the many working poor. I have no extra money for frills. My access to the net is limited by what is provided by the hotel. Even at the best time, like now, I have a Wi-Fi connection which is choked to 11Mbps (best throughput on an IEEE 802.11b connection). Once the Hotel awakens it degrades to about that of a fast dial-up modem. Last Saturday, 7 January 2012, my throughput was 1 Mbps. Unfortunately, that was not enough throughput for me to watch the rush screening.

While I did participate graciously in the Theater, I also had a conversation with the services' Technical Support. I was certain they could do nothing about the data throughput, but I contacted them anyway. I figured that they needed to know the limitations of their service. I was told that I could go to a different location, and try again later if the producers of the movie would arrange to allow me to have another screening (shades of someone who was trained by Microsoft’s® Technical Support). I was not too surprised at that answer; once again, even among Occupy Wall Street Supporters the dark hand of American capitalism comes to play.

There is, even within the Occupation, an assumption of access to Middle Class Resources. Those who are not up to that level need not jostle the sensitivities of those who still retain their socioeconomic strata. I can only guess that they were somewhat surprised by my not taking the suggestion like a vagabond on the street with a “Yes, Ma’am …. Thank you, Ma’am …. God bless you Ma’am.” I did go to twitter and rip off a blistering stream aimed at no one. No names were mention. No one was condemned. No one was called out. I was venting. That is, by design and convention, one of the reasons the Internet exists.

Before moving on, let me again repeat myself; I was one of the tens of thousands who had a hand in bringing the Internet into existence. I was one of the geeks who came in to new installations and made the network work. And I was one of the tens of thousands dumped on his ass when Corporate America was done with us by the end of 2000. That puts me about eight to ten years ahead of many of the Occupiers. As I was told in 2005 by my Comp TIA A+ Certification instructor: “Success in IT (Information Technology) is not what you know, but who you know.” Mind you I had just paid $1,500.00 for the boot camp to get certified on what I already knew. I was also informed by one recruiter at TekSystems in Fort Worth that once one is out of IT for six months it is almost impossible to get back into the field. While seeming to digress here, the point is: The pervasive attitude, even among the Occupiers, is “I’ve got mine!” Sometimes that is followed by an expletive of what you, or I, should do.

Being that I am 54, I am also pretty sure that many would just as soon I shut up and die already to make room for the twenty-somethings rising to fill positions that we have clogged up on the way down. Age discrimination is rampant in the US (and I documented it in Wealth, Women and War in 2007). “I’ve got mine!” is the real battle cry in the USA today.

I’ve not heard a word from the folks at 99% (The Occupy Wall Street Collaborative Film) – other than the anonymous, oft’ unanswered, and repeated tweets since January 7, 2012. They do have some of my video and all of my pictures from Occupy Chicago dating from September 23, 2011 to November 25, 2011. And they have the signed agreement which has not been returned to me.

On good faith in compliance with the agreement, I have removed my pictures from Flicker, and made most of the video on YouTube private. I have left the videos up here pending the finalization of the agreement.

Exclusivity: by uploading or delivering media to the Producer, The Production Company, its representatives or agents, the Filmmaker warrants that they will not use (nor allow the usage of) the same media in another film that exceeds 25 minutes in length and is about Occupy Wall Street, which is intended for release in any format in the Unites States of America. The window of exclusivity begins now and ends one calendar year after The Film’s first commercial theatrical screening or Television or Cable broadcast that is not part of a Film Festival, or by Dec 29, 2013, whichever is first. The Filmmaker agrees to only upload and/or deliver and/or make available to The Production Company (and/or its representatives or agents) media of which they are comfortable granting exclusively to The Film. The Film is intended for Theatrical, Television, Digital, Physical (DVD and all Ancillary formats) release in the US and international markets (throughout the Universe), as well as in formats and technologies that may not yet exist.

Nothing which I have produced exceeds the 25 minutes stated herein, I will note.

At this point I’ve no idea if the work I have submitted will be used or not. The producers may be too busy with the project to answer my email. However, from what I have seen in the USA, and the Occupation movement, until we start understanding that others have limitations on resources with the upper classes take for granted, the movement is, as they say on the net, an Epic Failure.

However, I do wish the producers of 99% (The Occupy Wall Street Collaborative Film) continued success. With their connections and their considerable skill they have raised the funding to make the project viable. No idea if that will trickle down to me here in the extended stay hotel outside of Chicago, working on a dismal and decaying 11Mbps 802.11b connection. I am, however, getting the impression that they really don’t want to hear from any of the real 99%. I guess I am not a gracious enough bum.

Of course, I will ask, being anticlimactic here, why should I beg? I’ve done my work with my little, unprofessional, amateur Kodak Zx5 Play Sport; it may not be much, but it is what I do have to work with. Too, this movie has very little out of Occupy Chicago, so if you like what you have seen, and support true Indy reporters, tell them about it: http://www.99percentfilm.com (contact@99percentfilm.com).

Update: I did hear from the producers today. They're busy ... very busy; putting in 100 hours a week. And, yes, they will be using some of what I have contributed. I'd bet a good word to them, and/or a donation to the cause, couldn't hurt.

Looking at Corporate Citizenship ... Again.

2011-12-30T09:11:00.001-06:00

For the past few days a co-worker pressed me to read Matt Taibbi's A Christmas Message From America's Rich from December 22, 2011. Reluctantly, I found myself on the page this morning. It is well worth the read.

Taibbi takes a look at the well wishes of the 1%ers, and analyses the actions which have brought the whole global economy to this point in history. Matt is spot on when he writes, "What makes people furious is that they have stopped being citizens."

Matt is echoing concerns written in 2007 in Wealth, Women, and War.

Today’s corporations have failed to realize that they too must act as citizens of the United States, and not just play lip service to the flag while selling the nation out to the highest bidder.

I've no idea what Matt was doing in 2007, but I know I was working as a Security Guard for Texas Industrial Security as one of many educated, displaced, underemployed workers in the U.S.A.

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/a-christmas-message-from-americas-rich-20111222#ixzz1i2QTqSIr

Today's video: A short work showing just how idle the airports were this past Christmas. I'd sardonically ask, "Where are the crushing throngs of people?" By now, however, the answer is a bit to obvious to any concerned patriot. It is not alarmist to state that the nation is at risk when so little money is moving in the economy.

Make a video - it's fun, easy and free!
www.onetruemedia.com

2011 in Review from The Maji

2011-12-27T07:15:00.001-06:00

This has been an exceptional year for Protest in the U.S.A. That is one thing that cannot be dismissed. Tens of Thousands of people across around the world have taken to the street in utter dismay over the failings of Anglo-American Capitalism. Most of us are not Kettled, nor Pepper Sprayed, nor roughed up by the local authorities for voicing a descendent's opinion about the state of the nation, or the world. Many are just ignored.

The one thing become that becomes apparent is most people (left and right) only want to have their preconceived ideas reinforced. To get over the problem created by the American form of Capitalism, people are going to have to start becoming educated. That is why the protestors took to the street in 2011: to narrate the story so long ignored by the mass media. Here's to hoping that the passion continues in 2012.

Make a video - it's fun, easy and free!
www.onetruemedia.com

The Night Before Christmas Eve (Part 3)

2011-12-19T20:30:00.000-06:00

To start this discussion, it is worth a pause to read:

SteveNoHo: The Eyes Have It: Time Magazine paying homage to the global protester of 2011 as the person of the year is a double-edged sword. On the o...

And, then read 25 Facts about Females by Kylene on Occupy Los Angeles.

Now, I want to take you back to where we were just five short years ago.

Women Rule, Men Drool

Currently in the United States the stratification of the social structure is based on gender specific socioeconomic status lines. According to the current marketing model of Madison Avenue, our nation is built to produce goods and services, which include ideas, concepts, and philosophies, geared toward the consumption by middle class women. Pay close attention to the run of advertisements during prime-time television on any night. Even drugs like Viagra®, Levitra®, and Cialis® are sold with the idea of the enhancing the woman’s intimate relationships with her mature partner. They cure him so she can experience pleasures again.

She, not her male counterpart, is the primary barometer of what is socially acceptable within the social contract. When the woman feels threatened, then the threat is addressed with righteous indignation and vigor. When the corporations are perceived as the providers of livelihoods then they will receive her loyalty and acceptance. When, however, the corporations fail to provide her with acceptable means to tend to her needs then the corporation will be perceived to be the blight on her existence. Everything hinges on her understanding of her rightful place within the social contract. She is a loyal and caring friend, and a fearless enemy.

To keep the middle class woman content there must be reasonable assurances that follow a prescribed set of social rules that will produce a given positive result. When the activities of a corporation diminish her capacity to maintain or achieve status and/or maintain or achieve the security of her home it becomes a moral imperative to rein in the activities of the corporation. It does not matter how she defines the home within her individual perception, or how it is defined within her community. It is her home and she will protect it.

This may be dubious to many of the more aggressive feminists, but the majority of middle class homes, with or without a male presence, are defined by the woman in residence. She cares for the physical home by acquiring the goods and services needed to keep it in operation. Many women in today’s society feel that a male counterpart is superfluous in the equation. Men are nice to have around, but no longer necessary; the economic necessity of the dual income notwithstanding. This is revealed in current census data showing that for the first time in U.S. history there are more single people than married couples living in the United States. This is a 180 degree position from where society was prior to World War Two.

Even when the man is present in the home, more often than not, the woman’s morality view is deemed the correct view for the family. A successful marriage is one where male view is closely aligned to the female view.

Women’s studies indicate that women do not need a collective leader, but rather work for a more congenial harmony of the group as a whole. In the selection of a male counterpart, the woman seeks a man who closely reflects her own values and world view, and who has proven himself trustworthy enough to uphold that worldview in all core activities of life. The decline in marriages is an indication that there is a fixation on safety issues as defined by Maslow’s pyramid, and coincides with Elliot’s Currie’s observations on the dark effects of capitalism.

John Gray, Ph.D. the author of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, points out in Men, Women and Relationships: Making peace with the Opposite Sex:

“ … we do not fully acknowledge that people differ from us. Instead we are bent upon changing one another. We resent, resist, and reject each other’s differences. We demand that the people in our lives feel, think, and behave as we would. And when the react differently we make them wrong or invalidate them; we try to fix them when they really need understanding and nurturing; we try to improve them when instead they need acceptance, appreciation, and trust.”[1]

What is detailed on this micro-level exists within the culture as a whole, fueled by mass marketing, and consumerism. It was called “keeping up with the Jones” in the 1960s, and it is still prevalent today. If you do not have “A,” “B,” and “C,” then you are broken and need to be fixed. If your mate is not such and so, then he is inadequate, or she is not sexy. Since the obsession of the corporations is to bring in wealth, it is a necessity of the market. They need to find a way to make you want to buy their product; that is their job. However, it does not, by it divisive nature, breed “acceptance, appreciation, and trust.”

The outcry against globalization is growing. As this is being written, Reuters released as story on Wednesday, June 06, 2007 at approximately 10:00 AM CDST, that an estimated 10,000 and 16,000 G-8 protesters had effectively closed the three main roads leading to Heiligendamm, the coastal city on the Baltic Sea, founded in 1793, in Germany. The story refers to these protesters as being “anti-capitalist protestors.” It goes onto report that “A German man and a Spaniard were found guilty of attempted grievous bodily harm and disturbing the peace and sentenced to nine months in prison without parole …” and “A Pole was given a 6-month suspended sentence while another Spaniard was given a 10-month jail sentence.”[2] Men are protesting in the streets because the women are seeing diminished resources, and declining standards of living at home. This social-sexual aspect of the dynamic is often overlooked for the sake of political correctness, but it does exist.

It really does not matter if a given culture’s women have full social equity with the men. This reaction is more primal than social or cultural. As long as women feel they are secure then there will be no open rebellion against the status quo. When they feel threatened then they will rise to redress grievances. Why? The threat causes social bonds to decay and dictate that the threat be eliminated. If the woman is unhappy, there is not enough to make ends meet, she is not likely to be amorous and affectionate. The man feels as if he failed her through no fault of his own, he feels misunderstood, disrespected and he is cut off from the pleasure of an intimate relationship. It is not that men and women are shallow; it is a primal drive mechanism. This reinforces Doug Callaway’s observation, “All politics is personal.”[3]

If there is no male counterpart, the woman will take whatever action is acceptable within the frame work of the social contract to correct the unacceptable situation. If there is a male counterpart, he will be engaged to act on behalf of the woman and the family. While the dynamic may, if the situation is perceived correctly, lead to civil action (or unrest), it also, unfortunately leads to domestic violence, and other assorted crimes.

This was illustrated in George Orwell’s essay Inside the Whale written in 1940:

For the ordinary man is passive. Within a narrow circle (home life, and perhaps the trade unions or local politics) he feels himself master of his fate, but against major events he is as helpless as against the elements. So far from endeavouring to influence the future, he simply lies down and lets things happen to him.[4]

No soul is as ordinary as the dysfunctional one who occupies the lowest end of the economic spectrum. As to lying down and letting things happen to him, the science of crime would indicate that is not quite the case. However, being limited in scope and afflicted with myopic tunnel vision is a trait recognized in the criminal individual. The criminal is so absorbed in the “here and now” that he or she, is unaware of the largest view of what is occurring. Even the healthy rational person is often limited in the scope of what they can, or want, to see. For the criminal, the need is felt, but the means to fulfillment is outside the scope of his or her personal collection of solutions. For the ordinary and rational person, the need is not felt, and there is no drive to take corrective action, even if they have solutions for the situation.

Women tend to act with a focus on relationships, with empathy, sympathy, and better verbal skills. Men, on the other hand, are expected to be ruthless, aggressive, cunning, somewhat reckless, and to disregard consequences except in regard to fulfilling a given role on the “team.” We send men into combat, to kill and destroy, and tell them they have done a “fine job.” According to Rob Becker from his nationally acclaimed Defending the Caveman, this distinction is anthropologically driven.[5] Many years before the pyramids rose above the dessert in Egypt, men hunted, women gathered.

Within the dialogue concerning gender differences there is a running joke about men never asking for directions. Men are not supposed to ask for help. They either do it on their own, or it does not need to be done. Men are not allowed to seek help; it is a sign of weakness. In today’s U.S.A. the mythos of A Country Boy Can Survive has become manic to the point of being obsessive-compulsive.[6]

When a woman walks into a service station and asks for directions the attendant, usually male, is more than willing to help the “little lady.” When a man asks for directions, the first thing which will occurs is that he receives the “What’s wrong with you?” look of disgust. The next thing that will occur is that the directions will be mumbled to him at minimal volume. These directions may or may not be accurate. The attendant, seeing the competitive advantage of increasing their status over another man, may deliberately give the man the wrong directions. To the attendant, it is funny. He will further amuse his friends with the tale of inflicting misfortune on another man through many retellings during the day.

Men, in the capitalist culture, are in a constant state of chronic competition to improve their status. This is the “hunt” in modern society. It is also the basic reason for exploitation of women, and spousal infidelity. Notice that those who condemn such behavior the loudest are most often the ones who extol the virtues to enhance their own status. Many are conservative in their social orientation and politics. The exploitation of women, even within this sub-culture, is acceptable so long as it does not include an overt sexual or erotic context. If a man “loses” at “the game” he is expected to “suck it up” and the status shifts from the loser to the winner. The loss is to be accepted because the man is expected to “take care” of himself. Men in today’s culture are expected to derive solace from being able to do so.

Many books have been written on the complex difference between men and women. John Gray’s Men are From Mars, Women are from Venus, and Men, and Women and Relationship: Making peace with the Opposite Sex, are but two of the current popular ones. Women on the other hand are still protected in society, and society still defers to her need whether real or perceived.

There is sufficient fuel in the records of history to prove that the woman’s view, and activity in opposing a social wrong, is the view which will become prominent.

Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin was published in 1852. It depicted the long suffering slave Uncle Tom, and all those around him. The work details the cruelty and deprivation of Southern slavery. This one book became the second best selling book of the 1800s. Abraham Lincoln, upon meeting Ms. Stowe shortly after the beginning of the Civil War, is said to have quipped, "So this is the little lady who made this big war."[7]

Rosa Parks mobilized the nation against the apartheid-like conditions which prevailed in the South up to 1964. She was honored by the U.S. Congress who dubbed her the “Mother of the Modern-day Civil Rights Movement.” On December 1, 1955, Ms. Parks was charged with civil disobedience for refusing to give up her seat to an Anglo-Saxon American man. The resulting trial triggered the Montgomery Bus Boycott and the subsequent civil right struggle of the 1960s. Martin Luther King, Jr. became a prominent figure in the early days of this movement.

It is interesting to note the hypocrisy of the apartheid-like segregation and the southern culture. In any other circumstances, a man would have been considered a cad had he demanded that a seat be vacated for him. It would be a source of severe cultural embarrassment, and a cause to shun him. It illustrates one of many ways the prominent culture displays its duplicity, and demanded within the order of things the clear observation of the social superiority of one culture over another.

While both Civil Rights struggles, the end of slavery and the end of segregation, were championed by men, both were ignited by the outrage over the wrongs by women. It cannot be a coincidence that both women came out of the so-called liberal Christian expression. If history is a guide, in spite of conservative opposition, slavery did end, and so did segregation. For that matter, women won the right to vote and express their voice in the body politic over the opposition of the conservative factions of the 1920s. Too, the U.S. won its independence from Britain over the opposition of conservatives. Opposition to the conservative agenda is not the exception, but a general rule of thumb. A living dynamic society must, and will, grow.

When the few global winners do not invest in the local community they are seen as the pariahs in society. When they do not make allowances for the local family to participate in the local production and delivery of good and services, and reap just compensation for their labor, then the corporation is seen as the enemy of the community. Some form of public action will occur. One can conclude that 10,000 protestors shutting down a city in Germany is public action.

As shown in the news about Heiligendamm, the action can range from civil disturbance, down to the solitary individual committing an aggressive act of vandalism or violence, to attempted legislative action to correct the gross wrongs within the society. The variable seems to be the level of danger perceived by the individuals involved. The action also depends on the individual’s understanding of the level of risk he, or she, will experience in carrying out the act of reprisal, and the level of suffering the individual is willing to take on in order to eliminate the threat to the family. This is relative to the standards of the person’s community. If Morris Berman is correct and the corporations have destroyed any sense of community in the United States today, the ability to predict an individual’s response is only controlled by what is noted in behavioral science. For this reason a spike in crime in some form including murder is entirely reasonable; it is not an idle threat. If life is cheap, and the individual lives in isolation, then the predisposition towards brutality goes up. This is true for the protestor and the corporation which is targeted. If the person thinks he will be punished no matter what (again referencing the coercion studies) then again the likelihood of belligerence increases. This is the effect of coercion.

The perceived good or harm of the corporation is based upon the standards of the community in which it exists. The loose nature of the communities in the United States gives the corporations a great deal of leeway. After all, under the current rules of life, corporations basically have no social responsibility and exist only to make money for their executives and eventually their owners. The same corporations have a harder time operating with such liberty in the European Union and the Islamic countries. Where the wearing of the Burka is seen as a symbol of oppression in the West, it is seen as a symbol of protection and liberation by Islamic women. If the corporation services the needs of the local community, and by extension the security of the local female population, then it will enjoy a hero status. On the other hand, failure to respect the local needs will become an economic and political disaster.

The primary method of taking care of the local population is to make sure that someone in the family can earn an income which allows the family to retain or better its socioeconomic status within the prescribed underpinnings of the social contract.

There is little doubt that these assertions do not bode well with the feminist approach to describe the current social dynamic. However, feminists have a stated political objective of wanting to replace the male dominated social structure.[8] What they fail so often to do is engage their “sisters” in the real dialogue in the era. Most women appreciate their male counterparts even if they are sure that the female is more intelligent, better at adapting, more articulate, and better at surviving than their male counterparts. While they feel a union with the male is not obligatory, and somewhat unessential, women like to have men around; it is like having a pet. More often than not, women are reluctant to wield the significant power they hold in the civilized sector of society. They feel that doing so will violate their position as defined within the social contract. That violation will, in their minds, diminish their status in society. They bring a man in the picture, cultivate the bond, and then put him in the forefront, while whispering subtle instructions in his ear to achieve the woman’s goals. And sometimes the instructions are neither whispered nor subtle, but they are always communications of her needs which he is to acquire for her. The best place to observe this dynamic in action is in the more socially conservative religious institutions (including both Christianity and Islam). Men run the institution at the behest of their women as defined within the given culture’s rules of life. Even in the highly criticized fundamentalist Christian sub-culture, the commandment remains “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it…”.[9] What the feminists need to do is to address the issue from a reconstruction of the social contract and accept that men are part of the equation, too.

The male in society is equally complex and equally mysterious. His behavioral patterns, however, include criminal activity within his cognitive landscape of what is allowed in the competitive arena. This is the essence of James W. Messerschmidt’s 1993 work Masculinities and Crime: Critique and Reconceptualization of Theory, men “doing gender” or “being male.”[10] This is echoed in Bunger’s observation that criminal behavior is “widespread in the working class.” It is also inclusive of the idea that “honest business practices of value only so far as honesty does not interfere with market advantage.”[11] Men resort to criminal activity and taking of the tangible personal property of another with the intent to deprive him or her of it permanently [Wikipedia] – vandalism, assault, murder) because, President Bill Clinton put it “he can.”[12]

While it is of little value to emasculate men, within the framework of what men conceive as permissible responses to a given challenge does include crime. While equally as emotionally vulnerable as his female counterpart, he is more concerned about the long term physical ramifications of actions taken. Why? This is due less to the importance placed on society’s edicts, and on relationships, and due more to a focus on his ability to “win” in a given situation. This is true even when the solutions in the situation include criminal activity. He decision is based on risk assessment and his probability of “winning.” More than one criminologist has observed that criminals are a rather intelligent breed with a higher than average predilection towards optimism. When you take into account that any individual crime, taken as a single event, has a 97% success rate, this optimism is well founded.

It is only through repetitive criminal activity that the chances of success lessen. This is the essence of Stafford and Warr’s work on Specific Deterrence (learning to improve the skills necessary to achieve the criminal ends)[13] and Cohen and Felson’s work on Routine Activity (carefully observing the environment to find optimum opportunity to commit criminal activity)[14]. Both discussions boil down to risk assessment.

Since the man tends to be more aggressive, he knows that he can eliminate the risk posed by the corporation by taking direct action. There is little doubt in his mind that he, and/or others within his tribe or community, can inflict a punitive cost on the members of the corporation. His concerns are not can he, but should he, can he do so effectively, and can he survive the encounter to carry out further reprisals as needed until the situation is alleviated. In some cultures the latter is not a high concern; this is especially true where daily life has become so onerous that death is preferable, or where the individual is assured of a place in the afterlife if he falls in combat (i.e. Christian’s self-sacrifice for the love of God, the Vikings dying with sword in hand to gain entry to Valhalla, Islamism’s jihad, a Kamikaze’s death for the Emperor).

Suicide for a cause is nothing new. Moreover, if one considers it with care, suicide for a cause with the promise of a glorious afterlife is also well within the capitalist ideological framework: the individual makes a deal with the “ultimate authority” to give up his life for a better one in the spiritual realm. In Christianity this idea is contained in the parable in Matthew, Chapter 25. The servant is rewarded for his faithfulness:

His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.[15]

And, too in the Gospel of John:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.[16]

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.[17]

While the West has the idea that self-sacrifice in a holy cause is an Islamic ideal, it is contained well within the prevailing Christian expression. Even if we would rather not address it, suicide for a cause is what is addressed in the passages from the Gospel of John. This is also part of the cognitive landscape of the western male in society. If a person is not willing to make such a sacrifice, he is considered less than spiritual or, in the worse case, in rebellion against God. The distinction is made within Christian circles that one is to “give up his – gender specific – life for God” not “kill for God.” The concept, however, is neither exclusive to Christianity nor unique to Christianity.

To answer the question of “should he take direct action?” It really depends on how well he can apply what Gersham M Sykes and David Matz defined as Techniques of Neutralization in 1957. These techniques are Denial of Responsibility, Denial of Injury, Denial of Victim, Condemnation of the Condemners, and finally Appealing to Higher Loyalties.[18]

In Denial of Responsibility, the criminal shifts blame to outside forces. This is usually the environment itself or the environmental conditions (poverty being one of the causalities given).

In Denial of Injury, the person is oblivious to the injury he causes others. This is the main argument concerning drug abuse, prostitution, and vandalism. The idea that the purchase of illicit and contraband goods is funneling monies to violent criminal elements is beyond the scope of their recognition. The counter-argument becomes “if drugs were legal, then the money would not be going to criminals.” This is a detachment of the basic cause and effect of the drug trade; drugs are illegal and the money does go to criminals who are destabilizing societies.

In the case of prostitution where poverty is a contribution factor to the sale of sexual favors, the exploitation of women is denied. Men will argue that prostitution in its various forms is “a great way for woman to make money.”[19] Degrading women to the status of sex objects is disregarded.

In the case of vandalism the target is an inanimate object, and the connection between the object and its owner, and the cost of replacing the object is dismissed out of hand.

Not to leave the corporations out of this discussion, it is worth noting that Denial of Injury is the essence of the phrase, “Nothing personal, just business.” Tell that to someone who has been underemployed for a number of years.

In Denial of Victim, the criminal sees the injured party as less than human, or the injured party was corrupt and “had it coming.” This is the essence of unethical discriminatory practices of any sort. The idea of the person “having it coming” is codified in the comic-book hero The Punisher and the 1999 movie, The Boondock Saints. While both are entertaining, the message is clear, some people, due to corruption at the individual and sociological level, are untouchable through legal means, and as such need to be “punished” through extralegal means.

Timothy McVeigh definitely applied this neutralization technique to the innocent people (including six children) in and near the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building on April 19, 1995 on Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. So too did the hijackers on September 11, 2001.

Is it stretching the point too far to admit that governments or corporations in business engage in denial of victim when they justify their actions as political or economic necessity?

Condemnation of the Condemners is witnessed most often when a terrorist is brought to trial. Not only was this seen in McVeigh’s trial, but it also was a factor in Richard Colvin Reid’s trial.

Glaring at the flight crew, Reid tried to justify his actions as part of a broad war against the United States. "With regards to what you said about killing innocent people, I want to say one thing: Your government has killed two million children in Iraq," he said, referring to the US-backed sanctions there.[20]

The person feels that he is justified in his actions because the nature of the crime committed against him, or his community, is far more heinous than his retaliatory action.

Finally, as we often see when it comes to terrorist acts, there is the Appeal to Higher Loyalties. This is the God Card in the current discussion. The acts against the corporation were demanded by God’s call to justice. This is the justification which Eric Rudolph gave for his Olympic Park bombing on July 27, 1996, his abortion clinic bombing on January 16, 1997, the bombing of the Outside Lounge on February 21, 1997, and the Birmingham, Alabama abortion clinic in on January 29, 1998. Rudolph even found the use of John Lennon’s Imagine, the theme song of the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, reprehensible and an offense to God.

On March 10, 1993, Michael Griffin shot and killed Dr. David Gunn during an anti-abortion protest. On June 24, 1994, Dr. John Britton and James Barrett were shot and killed by Rev. Paul Jennings Hill. On December 30, 1994, John Salvi murdered Shannon Lowney and Lee Ann Nichols. On January 29, 1998, Robert Sanderson was murdered in one of the Rudolph bombings. On October 23, 1998, Dr. Barnett Slepian was shot dead at his home by James Kopp. John Silva, Paul Jennings Hill, and others are still considered heroes in the anti-abortion struggle according to Rev. Donald Spitz of ArmyOfGod.com. Moreover, when the smiling Rev. Paul Jennings Hill was being ledto his execution, by lethal injection, on September 3, 2003, he shouted to reporters, “I’ll be in paradise today.” It is interesting to note that Rev. Hill is considered a martyr by Neal Horsley of the Creator's Rights Party and Troy Newman of Operation Rescue. Many of these men were given a folk hero status among the general population via media coverage. It would seem that someone forgot to tell them that their God told them, “Thou shalt not kill.”[21]

As to effectiveness, the question really depends on the tools available and/or what can be acquired. As we saw in Oklahoma City, sophisticated weapons can be delivered in a variety of ways. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which contained the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, (in effect from September 13, 1994 and expired in September 13, 2004) did nothing to stop McVeigh or the terrorists on September 11, 2001.

When addressing the survivability of the encounter, deterrence is of little concern. Once all other factors are in place, the injured citizen who decided to take illegal action often is no longer concerned about his survival. The Middle East differs only slightly.

As noted, some factions of Islam consider it a holy act to die fighting the community’s enemies. This tactic, however, is extremely wasteful and a poor management of resources. No matter how noble they may see the act, they lose the bravest operatives when striking a soft target. It is ineffective as well. Not only do they lose a capable operative, but they only manage to enrage the general population without achieving any real end to the situation which instigated the action in the first place.

Violence, though arguably a natural response to aggressive stimuli, does not work. When people function at a “safety” level creativity is usually impeded.

There are ways around using violence as a primary response to corporate violations, and ways around using violence in protection of the corporate interest. Corporations are built on “the art of the deal” and their ability to “cut the deal.” As such, it is in the corporations’ best interest to “deal” honestly with the people who can make life impossible if they do not work as good corporate citizens.

While a woman will come to expect her mate to address the wrongs done (or do it herself, to his chagrin) the man does not expect his mate to engage in direct opposition. Where there is a disconnection in continuity towards addressing the wrong, he may simply find another mate who will be more supportive of his view. This has as much to do with the difference in how men and women address situations as the situation itself. Men fixate on the single issue until they can find a resolution to the problem. Women look at the larger complete matrix and address it from the aspect of the decay within the whole picture.

When sufficiently stressed, compensation for the differences in perspective becomes a less and less cordial process. Atop this, men focus on their large gifts to the family (paying bills, making sure the car runs, fixing the home as needed) and women focus on the little acts of kindness and consideration. Where he is no longer able to be the primary source of income, he feels he has failed her, and resents her for the way he feels about the situation. Feeling that he can no longer uphold her in her status, he may simply find a mating partner who he feels is more supportive of his lowered status, his opinion of the corporations, or his loss of status in society. While she does not hold him responsible for the actions of the corporation, his own anger at his loss in the competition becomes transferred to her. The dreams of prosperity which he had for her and his inability to achieve those goals taunt him as a failure, and he becomes angry with her as if her presence is a constant reminder of what he can no longer do for her. The family is stressed and may eventually dissolve into poverty for both parties and the children which they produced.

Human behavior gets somewhat fuzzy within the close relationship. However, looking at Maslow’s work for some clarity, and Gray’s work for some understanding of the differences between men and women: when safety does not exist all other social factors become moot.

Maslow’s study, as bears repeating, was a specific of the economic sub-culture we would now call middle class, and as such it remains an important indicator to what we can expect from this segment of society. Keep in mind that McVeigh, Reid, Hill, Kopp, Rudolph, Horsley, and Newman are all within the middle class. Some would consider the specific criminals within this context may be mixing apples and oranges. It isn’t. It specifically shows that middle class men can turn to violence when opposing corruption. In McVeigh’s case there were no overt religious overtones. With Reid, Hill, Kopp, and Rudolph, the religious overtones were overt but from different religious traditions. Horsley and Newman are listed as they keep the goal of righting the perceived wrong alive in the hopes that others will join their cause and commit violent acts against the opposition.

A man’s response is directly proportionate to his ability to find acceptance at his current cultural level. He will find his place on the team which best allows him to achieve his individual aims within the context of the community. He realizes that his cherished individuality is at stake outside the greater good of the community.

The mechanics of status loss within the middleclass interpersonal relationships can be summed up in the following manner: The husband loses his “good paying” corporate job through no fault of his own, “Nothing personal, it is just business,” he is told. He is further humiliated as his desk is cleared and he is escorted out of the building by the staff security officers. This represents a loss of status on two levels. The loss of income, and the humiliation in front of his peers as he is treated like a common trespasser by men who, in his opinion, barely managed to graduate from high school, are both very public indications of the loss of status. One is tangible. The other is psychological. He has gone from “hero to zero” in the corporation.

Eventually, as unemployment compensation runs out, he is forced to take a survival job. This solidifies him in a lowered status state. This in conjunction with loss of the home, hounding bill collectors, “friends” who will no longer return phone calls, drives him deeper and deeper into despair and fixation on the economic problem. Added to this, there is in today’s society a general harassment of anyone who is a “loser” in the corporate game. The man looks for help in society and is ignored. This is where he experiences the effect of the subtlest coercion of official indifference. At one time he could take care of himself, and his family; now he needs help, but he is seen as a pariah, and at best he is told to “suck it up.” Slowly he slips into economic deprivation and social isolation. It is indeed very personal. He is fixated on this issue and this issue alone.

If the wife blames her husband for becoming emotionally absent then the causality is shifted from the “system” to her mate. Society is filled with wonderful alternative causes to explain economic loss. Some of them are valid, some of them are not. Addiction is high on the list, yet our business culture still thrives on social lubrications. Beyond that there is a slough of personal biochemical causes to explain away economic disparity. One has bi-polar disorder. One has adult attention deficit disorder. One is socially challenged. There is an overabundance of possible individual aliments, and all of them have some little pill from the pharmaceutical labs for not being competitive in the global environment. When none of these apply, it is simply that the person is “not good enough.” Mind you, a few months, or years prior, he was “good enough.” So what changed?

In the broadest view, there is no individual fault. The reason for the loss of status and the economic resources is that one is a human being living in a culture which has fully embraced the capitalistic system; there are winners and there are losers, and that is the nature of the system. In the long view of this reality, today’s winners may become tomorrow’s losers. To which we can shout, “The King is dead, long live the King.” This is the lesson being learned by so many at Ford, GM, Radio Shack, MCI, Arthur Andersen, and Enron. That is the essence of capitalism, and an essential truth in life. All living things come to an end.

Within today’s social norms, the man who has lost status is hung with the label of being lazy, stupid, uneducated, ungodly, sinful, etc. This was once the socially unacceptable practice of victimizing the victim. In the current culture of hyper-capitalism and the conservative application of the Neutralization Techniques, it is perfectly acceptable to kick someone who is already down. This is acceptable because it further limits the competition for resources in the community. It has to be said that a major goal in the competitive market is not being competitive against others, but eliminating other competitors as often and as fast as possible. In essence, Roller Ball Murder by William Harrison, which inspired the 1975 movie Roller Ball, about the world under corporate domination in 2018, is coming to pass. Within that view, destroying the competition is not just the social norm, it is expected. Whatever is the social norm, it appears within the closest relationship even if we would prefer not to admit it. Many conversations revolve specifically on how to compete within the framework of the capitalist system even in the best of circumstances. Winning is everything, or so we are told.

The tension generated by loss in a society obsessed with the equation of winning is surviving eventually leads to the dissolution of the family in one form or another. According to Gray, we have a hard time communicating and understanding the gender based differences in the best of times. This gets more intensified in a time of loss and crisis. The destruction, or the crippling, of the family again shows the hypocrisy, if not dysfunction, of the current system. Politician’s pay lip service to the sanctity of the family, but do little in the way of policy and policing to make sure the family remains functional and solvent. Economic dislocation due to underemployment caused by management (or mismanagement) of the workforce is a primary contributor to many social ills attacking the family.

The social welfare programs still in place reward the family where no man is present, and punish the family where the man is present; the punishment is in the of fewer benefits. The political solutions to bolster the classical male/female family have met with heavy opposition from liberals and feminists. This again is due to the predisposition within the social contract to conclude that the man in the family is unnecessary, and that essentially the female-led family is by default married to the system. Every social program in the U.S. is one which mates the individual female to her place the corporation.

Capitalism, for better or worse, is amoral; it is neither good nor bad. What we do within that system is what gives it its moral flavor. Furthermore, capitalism is neither natural nor unnatural. It is a system which evolved over time. As noted, prior to the “Black Death” sweeping Europe the “natural” system was feudalism where the individual worker was tied to the land and under the “ownership” of whoever had the land grant. The human being was equally a part of the landscape as was a tree, hill, river, or glade. This was considered the natural order of things for thousands of years, and went on unquestioned. That is no different than the assumptions made concerning capitalism today. Capitalism is e an artificial construct which we have collectively decided works in the best interest for the majority of the people.

If the woman perceives that the system is at fault, and the cause of economic loss, then she will attempt, even reluctantly, to replace the lost income through her own efforts. This has created a situation which allows the corporations to read the social situation and further reduce wages to coupled individuals, and it has created a situation where coupled individuals now require dual incomes in order to maintain their socioeconomic class.

With the exception of the lowest class workers, dual incomes were unnecessary in previous generations to sustain both status and survival. Yet the criticism is often heard in social institutions as they continue to bolster the agenda of the corporations at the expense of their members, that the agenda no longer serves. This is exemplified in the late Rev. Falwell remarks concerning labor organization. Falwell stated, "Labor unions should study and read the Bible instead of asking for more money. When people get right with God, they are better workers."[22]

This utterly ignores land grants under the Torah, the Hebrew body of law and scripture. Those land grants guaranteed a family’s ability to sustain their own status outside dependence of a group. It also ignores the economic reality of today which contradicts Saint Paul’s assertion that working with one’s hands guarantees sustainable income.

Mr. Falwell’s remarks were made in support of the status quo which helped him sustain his church of 24,000 members, and facilities which were purchased for $20 Million dollars, until his death on May 15, 2007. Whatever else one can say about Rev. Falwell, he was a great capitalist; he understood how to make the system work for himself.

Today, the view of the church being a charitable organization to service the full range of needs to the individual over the needs of the church’s facilities and status is considered absurd. However, to paraphrase what Lenny Bruce pointed out late in his career, the opulence of the church is accepted because most people live in squalor. This is a more cutting variation of Marx’s observation that “Religion [was] the opiate of the people.”[23]

When Marx struggled against religion he was, in the Christian mind, struggling against Jesus Christ personally. This emotional argument especially effected women who had come to find “love” in the personage of Jesus Christ. Hence Marx, within the Christian context of what is good, and moral, is not a hero when he argues:

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.[24]

In the woman’s mind, he is arguing the abolition of the Christ. Still if one separates religion as an extension of the corporation, and faith in Christ, one might find a way to again listen to Marx’s critique. This, of course, is the lesson which the corporations, who manipulate capitalism in their favor, do not want anyone to learn. Having said this, however, the Communist approach did not work in the Soviet Union. It has worked in Communist China with help from the West. And the rise of Communist China has been at the expense of the Western world.

If the woman fails to sustain or gain economic status, then her perception will change. She will see that there is a flaw in the distribution and control of economic resources. She will align with community based groups which will raise a social movement to restore her opportunity and status. She will engage in the righteous struggle for what she perceives is hers by right under the middle class social contract. She is not looking to become a celebrity, she is looking for what she was promised when she was playing with her dolls; she wants the proverbial house in the suburbs and the white picket fence – even though today’s picture may vary.

The idea that there is not enough economic sustenance to go around is lost at this point. She knows what she should be able to earn, and what she is earning, and is well aware of the differences. The corporations which can fulfill the contract will survive.

Right now, we are somewhere in the middle of this process. We are already seeing articles written telling people to lower their expectations. We are already seeing women authors coming out with highly detailed warnings about the dual income “trap.” The business community is responding to the cost of super-sized monthly mortgage payments by proposing 50 year mortgages. This sounds good in the short term but clouds the reality of lowered incomes against the higher cost of housing. The standard measure for income status was at one time that the cost of housing was one quarter of one’s monthly income. Today it can be fifty percent or more of one’s monthly income. While these mortgages look good on paper with an “affordable” monthly payment, it is only to secure the bank’s ownership of the property for a longer period of time. This of course allows the corporations to resell the property after the mortgagee’s loss of it.

Women in the United States are opting, with or without a mate, to take on the role of acquiring the primary economic resources. Thus far, in spite of the warnings, they have been relatively successful. Additionally, those who are on the upward climb hold the belief that through a little more effort they will be successful. They have lowered their expectations, they are willing to work within the framework of a 50 year mortgage, they will tolerate prejudice in the workplace, so long as they can keep within the rules of the current society. They are willing to take on short term losses for perceived long term gains. As long as she can chase the illusionary reward, the woman will not directly confront the mismanagement of the corporation. Moreover, she will not endorse anyone else directly confronting the corporations, either.

The concept that the corporation is responsible for providing sustainable income within a community has been successfully hushed. This has been accomplished primarily by the hue and cry of “individual responsibility.” This has been aided with neo-Calvinist rhetoric emitting from various religious institutions within the United States. The message is that faith and loyalty to Jesus, hard work, and thrift will deliver the socioeconomic status sought in conjunction with the expectations of the current era. The definition of status is constantly being driven home by the media telling us all what we need in life to be happy. Happiness, as defined by the corporate media, is the ultimate goal in life. What one has is never sufficient, one must consume more.

The mandate of individual responsibility, work, thrift, and consumption can carry a society only so far. It doesn’t take long for the opposing goals to be come apparent. Work is only available at the whim or need of the corporation. Thrift and consumption are polar opposites of the economic spectrum. Individual responsibility is only as valid as the visible responsible actions of those who control the corporation. The predatory activities of corporations are vast.[25]

The current situation will probably hold until the next presidential term recession cycle. At that time the liberated women will alter their perception of the current capitalistic system. They will concede that no amount of effort on their part, or their sidelined mates – if the men are still in the picture, will bring about the economic security needed to survive in the capitalistic system.

Capitalism is amoral. While it has a dark side, it also holds the promise of success. It will not be dumped. It will be altered. Even with a lowering of expectations, and an awakened sense of savvy concerning the aims of the corporations, what defines middle class individualism will be a migration towards some form of collective civilization within the framework of capitalism. Social change will be demanded.

Women political leaders are defined as socially acceptable within the construct of the middle class social contract. John Gray, Ph.D. in Men, Women and Relationships explains it thusly:

As her awareness expands out into the future, a woman is naturally concerned for what potentially could happen. She is motivated to prepare for the future. On the other hand, focused awareness makes men more concerned with efficiently achieving their goals. While the men are worried about getting to their destinations, the women are more concerned about what will happen when they get there.[26]

In preparing … however, the [women] tend to be late in arriving, or the may feel the journey is too risky and let their fears hold them back. It is much easier to be courageous when you are unaware of the possible consequences of an action.[27]

Men drool for the opportunity to use socially acceptable means, legal or not, to make the right things happen for themselves and their mates. Based on what is available on the web, in the bookstores, and in the underground press, men are ready for a change, they are just waiting on the go ahead from the women.

To define the typical U.S. approach, the words of General George S. Patton come to mind. "No bastard,” he said, “ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."[28]

Adjusting the capitalist system to be humane and responsive to the citizens within it may not be equal to war, but the General’s principle is still applicable. The corporations will become responsive to the people, or they will cease to exist.

Merry Christmas 2011

[1] Gray, J. (1993). Men, Women and Relationships: Making Peace with the Opposite Sex. New York: HarperCollins, p. 1.

[2] Kirschbaum, E. (2007, June 6). Police clash with protesters at G8. Reuters Limited.

[3] Callaway, D. (2006, November). Callaway’s Quotes. Retrieved June 18, 2008, from http://www.bettertransportation.org/docs/callaway_quotes.pdf

[4] George Orwell (1903–1950), British author. “Inside the Whale,” Inside the Whale and Other Essays (1940).

[5] Story aired on NPR in Dallas/Fort Worth

[6] Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a psychiatric disorder most commonly characterized by a subject's obsessive, distressing, intrusive thoughts and related compulsions (tasks or "rituals") which attempt to neutralize the obsessions. Thus it is an anxiety disorder. It is listed by the World Health Organization as one of the top ten most disabling illnesses in terms of lost income and diminished quality of life. (Obsessive-compulsive disorder. [2007, June 5]. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 19:40, June 6, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Obsessive-compulsive_disorder&oldid=136030440).

[7] Charles Edward Stowe, Harriet Beecher Stowe: The Story of Her Life (1911) p. 203

[8] Observation and experience over 30 years of adult life.

[9] Colossians 3:19

[10] Messerschmidt, J. W. (2003). Masculinities and Crime. In Criminological Theory: Past to Present (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company. p. 430

[11] Cullen, F. T., & Agnew, R. (Eds.). (2003). Critical Criminology: Power, Peace, and Crime. In Criminological Theory: Past to Present (2nd ed., ). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company. p.336

[12] "because, as President Bill Clinton put it “he can.” " Again, it is some information I picked up in auditory form from some interview done on NPR.

[13] Stafford, M. C., & Warr, M. (2003). A Reconceptualization of General and Specific Deterrence. In Criminological Theory: Past to Present (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company.

[14] Cohen, L. E., & Felson, M. (2003). Routine Activity Theory. In Criminological Theory: Past to Present (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company.

[15] Matthew 25:23 AV

[16] John 3:16-17 AV

[17] John 15:13 AV

[18] Cullen, F. T., & Agnew, R. (Eds.). (2003). Criminological Theory: Past to Present (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing Company, p. 135.

[19] Common argument for a “victimless crime.”

[20] Thanassis Cambanis, The Boston Globe, Sentenced to life, Reid denounces US, June 16, 2005

[21] Exodus 20:13 AV

[22] Ricca, J. (2002, August). The Right Wing Attack on the American Labor Movement. Retrieved June 18, 2008, from http://www.wisaflcio.org/political_action/rightwing.htm

[23] Opium of the People. (2008, May 18). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 16:41, June 18, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Opium_of_the_People&oldid=213301658

[24] Marx, K. (1844, February). Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right. Retrieved June 18, 2008, from http://www3.baylor.edu/~Scott_Moore/texts/Marx_Contr_Crit.html

[25] Mokhiber , Russell . Top 100 Corporate Criminals of the Decade. Ed. Russell Mokhiber . 22 Jan. 2008 .

[26] Gray, J. (1993). Men, Women and Relationships: Making Peace with the Opposite Sex. New York: HarperCollins, p. 84.

[27] Gray, J. (1993). Men, Women and Relationships: Making Peace with the Opposite Sex. New York: HarperCollins, p. 85.

[28] General George S. Patton Quotes (2008). Retrieved June 18, 2008, from http://www.military-quotes.com/Patton.htm