#but there are a lot of issues in gardening that are fundamentally racist

[tanadrin]

In 3 months there is gonna be a call out about you that will make you abadon your tumblr

thanks for the warning! i'd hate for any callout posts to miss my most problematic opinions. let's see here... ok, i'm contemptuous of almost all forms of spirituality and religion, i think i'm on record as saying that astrology is both proto-fascist and a way for people to avoid having to deal with their actual emotional issues, 'victim's rights' as a movement is actually fascist, most anticolonial discourse is just white ethnonationalism that's been brownwashed, and most of the anti-racist activism that's in vogue right now is useless.

but here are some other opinions to cancel me over. pick whichever ones seem most problematic to you:

english orthography is good, actually.

there is no scenario on this earth where i would rather swim in the gross slimy ocean than in a nice clean swimming pool. absolutely none. fuck the ocean. it's full of dead fish and it's existentially terrifying.

i find it basically impossible to grok nonbinary people who present in a way indistinguishable from their ASAB.

cats are slightly preferable to dogs

almost all fantasy fiction is irredeemably derivative of first-wave fantasy (roughly ending with Lord of the Rings), in a way which betrays a fundamental narrowness of imagination among almost all fantasy enjoyers.

ASOIAF specifically is trash. And not the fun kind.

kids seeing fucked up things on the internet too young is good actually

ok, that's kind of a contrarian way to make my point, which is a bit subtler, but is essentially:

i trust young people to seek out information and develop their own intellectual curiosities and identities much more than i trust sanctimonious gatekeepers to accurately judge what is bad for them and what is good, and given the structure of our society the only people who are empowered by censorship are prudes, authoritarians, and bigots. i do not at all trust the average parent not to infantilize or intrude on the autonomy of their kid in a way that's more harmful to them than accidentally seeing weird porn on the internet

age of consent laws, on balance, probably do a lot more harm (in the form of subjecting teenagers engaging in consensual and healthy sexual activity to state violence, usually along lines of class and race and gender) than good (in prosecuting adults who sexually exploit children). there are much better ways to protect children from sexual exploitation by adults.

abolishing the nuclear family, for instance

"asexual" is kind of a weird label to form identity politics around. not saying it's bad, just that it seems fundamentally different from most other classifications of sexual identity, in that there have been approved social roles for asexuals for centuries, and if anything, celibacy, or at least a lack of overt interest in sex, is generally considered to be morally neutral to laudatory historically, unlike homosexuality or a deviant gender expression.

discourse on cultural appropriation is stupid

'witchcraft' is really cringe. imitation of older customs in an effort to revive them will always involve reifying things as conscious Traditions that were simply part of the normal background of life, which renders any attempt to re-create them pure performance that can never capture the spirit of the original. plus, nobody who's in to neopaganism or witchcraft seems to have more than a shallow understanding of the history and culture in which the practices they're interested in were embedded, even if they're nominally descended from that culture. in many cases such a deep understanding is simply not possible owing to a lack of evidence.

goa's annexation by India was not only illegal but unjust.

higher levels of buddhist practice and spiritual attainment resemble both spiritual psychosis and garden-variety spiritual abuse too much for that to really be a coincidence.

the dutch language is inherently ridiculous

communities do not have moral rights. individuals and collections of individuals have moral rights, and we can speak of group moral rights as a useful shorthand for that, but frequently we get lost at that layer of abstraction and start treating groups as first-class concepts, and this produces (at best) inane conclusions and (at worst) an excuse to fuck over individuals in service of the community--which in practice cashes out to serving the interests of the elite that runs the community, i.e., authoritarian conservatism. authoritarian conservatism is not better just because the authoritarian conservatives it serves happen to be a racial or religious minority.

not only should all monarchies be abolished, countries that have abolished their monarchies should make it illegal to accept titles of nobility

germany was too lenient by letting people keep their titles as part of their name during the German Revolution. they should have abolished them full stop.

even orders of merit are on thin fucking ice

maine is the rightful territory of massachussetts, and mainers are a fictional ethnicity created to justify the destruction of Greater Massachussetts. Massachussetts should annex it.

Make Washington D.C. Square Again

[queering-ecology]

Queering Ecological Politics

“The articulation of sexuality and nature [can be used] as a form of eco-sexual resistance” (21). Gay urban culture, at least according to mainstream media, is tied to lifestyle consumerism. Social acceptance comes not because of queerness but because queers are good consumers.

The editors argue that we must reorient our politics towards a queer ecological perspective; “a transgressive and historically relevant critique of dominant pairings of nature and environment with heteronormativity and homophobia” in order to counteract the “environmentally disastrous (and often ethically void) lifestyle consumerism” (22) we feel trapped in.

Queer ecology then offers “new practices of ecological knowledge, spaces, and politics that places central attention at challenging hetero-ecologies from the perspective of non-normative sexual and gender positions” (22). The editors then demonstrate how (queer) literature has been used to challenge ideas of heterosexuality as natural by positioning same sex relationships as innocent/natural and heterosexuality as the thing that needs to be ‘learned’. There has been a lot of work done within environmental literature with queer ecology but also in these same oft hetero-naturalized parks.

Many gay men (and other queers) have used public green spaces to ‘cruise’. These spots have also been impetus for community activism. “Shortly after the 1969 Stonewall riots in New York, a popular cruising area in Queens, Kew Gardens , was destroyed by extensive tree cutting. ‘Within a week…there were public actions showing conscious visibility, and the first gay liberationist environmental group, Trees for Queens, was formed to restore the park” (Ingram, 1997a, 47) (27).

When we consider environmental politics through issues of race, gender, and sexuality we expand the understanding of ‘what counts’ as an environmental issue; when viewed from a queer, feminist, anti-racist perspective, the environment is understood as “where we live, work, play and worship” (2004, 1)(27).

Greta Gaard’s article ‘Toward a Queer Ecofeminism’ (1997) is one that I plan on also reading and summarizing. But the main points that are made are, “Western culture’s devaluation of the erotic parallels its devaluations of women and of nature’ and “queers are feminized, animalized, eroticized, and naturalized in a culture that devalues women, animals, nature and sexuality” (29).

Gaard emphasizes the concept of ‘erotophobia’ as a bridge between heterosexism and ecological degradation, and it opens the door to considering environmentalism as sexual politics, “as a form of aesthetic and corporeal struggle against the disciplinary logics of heteropatriarchal capitalism” (29).

Queer Ecology then involves the ‘opening up of environmental understanding to explicitly non-heterosexual forms of relationship, experience, and imagination as a way of transforming entrenched sexual and natural practices towards simultaneously queer and environmental ends” (30). All the chapters/articles in the remainder of the book should share this fundamental supposition: “scrutinizing and politicizing the intersections between sex, and nature not only opens environmentalism to a wider understanding of justice, but also deploys the anti-heteronormative insistences of queer politics to potentially more biophilic ends than has been generally imagined”(30). The editors finally dedicate the remainder of the introduction to laying down the upcoming chapters, which I do not feel the need to summarize as I will probably end up summarizing most of them eventually.

#environmentalism #environmental justice #environmental politics #queer theory #queer ecology #heteronormativity #queer politics #anti capitalism #trees for queens #intersectionality #ecofeminism #critical ecology

[rgr-pop]

someone posted this justseeds thing and I obviously hate it, I mean, just the top text, I hate it. and I know you could have guessed that, and I know this is like My Problem but I don’t think it’s okay to use this language. it’s just not okay, this is not even a historical argument, because the history of this framing is really complicated. the history doesn’t only implicate the things I’m hoping you (my followers) think about first when you hear something like this (racism and policing). in reality, this exact language, “neighborhood defense,” has been used in all kinds of cases historically including: antisegregation movements, “de facto segregation,” policing theory, policing practice, social science about inequality, resistance to urban renewal, resistance to other kinds of teardown, bourgeois architectural preservationism, resistance to busing, resistance to industrial pollution, communist revolutionary movements, anticommunist counterinsurgency movements, domestic white supremacist counterinsurgency movements, aryan nation movements, american militias, neighborhood watch, anti-gentrification movements, gangs, anti-gang politics, cops paying gangs to do counterinsurgency, neighborhoods in chicago where only cops with punisher jackets are allowed to live, urban youth crime panics, anti-vice movements, immigrant protection movements, language preservationism. 

but it does not matter to me, because today, right now, this is a deeply disturbing and reactionary framing that i don’t want to hear anymore. there is no neutrality of defense. this language freaks me out. and you know, my followers, that all the time i see the worst of this play out, local neighborhood enthusiasts talking about arming themselves against vagrancy. we cannot, we absolutely cannot, and i admit i’m revolted when i see “abolish borders” types say some shit like this. borders except for these ones? 

I think it is okay to talk about “neighborhoods” in tenant organizing. it really does help people identify and feel implicated and included. and it is true that there are meaningful spatial boundaries in cities--my issue is never that these boundaries don’t exist, but that we need to acknowledge that they were most often produced through violence and by racism specifically. it’s okay to talk about “neighborhoods.” but not “neighborhood defense”! certainly not when you’re trying to brand your rent strike as a general strike lol

but I do think we have every obligation as tenant organizers to talk about what is wrong with “the neighborhood.” not just because people should know that the thing is often used in a racist way or has a racist history or whatever. people need to know that “the neighborhood” is a scam precisely because the neighborhood is so important to them. where I live, in my “neighborhood,” it is a really culturally prominent frame, a big deal, means a lot to people, has teeth. and plenty of this stuff locally is already reactionary, sure--land bank “community” gardenists, small business paternalists, etc.--but it is also true that, now more than ever!, people believe what they are experiencing is “community” of “neighborhood.” they are not experiencing that at all and I will not lie to them. 

I’m a known community garden hater lol but I think it’s a great illustration: the community gardens to which I refer are often still private property and when they are not private property they are land that is only “community” because somebody was evicted for profit and a house was demolished for profit. in many cases like really recently. and also because a bunch of landowners around this vacant lot fought to turn this vacant lot into something for the community--incidentally, you know, good for the value of their home. this is not a commons, this is in fact the opposite of a commons. your commons cannot exist without ongoing dispossession. it is full-on malpractice to represent this dispossession factory as a commons. and, most of all and most importantly, there is no “community” or “commons”--obviously and definitionally!--before decommodification of housing. this is sinister placation and it’s a fucking lie. and now is the WORST time to lie about this!

then, of course, the “community” of the “neighborhood” exists because of and daily performs the work of policing and therefore “the neighborhood” our people desire--if they really desire that real thing they claim to desire--also cannot exist before the abolition of policing and, of course by extension, prisons. this is a more difficult thing for many of these neighborhoodists to concede because, of course, they still desire policing to “defend” the community they believe they have cultivated. proving my fundamental belief: the neighborhood is reactionary and nothing more!  

#landscapes of production #a hustle and a racket

[jonboudposts]

Winston Churchill and the British Fear of History

This piece is adapted from a broadcast of All the Rage due to be played on Trax FM on 20 February 2019.  It will then be available for streaming and download; I thought it was worth putting into a readable piece too but please excuse the tone if it sounds like a radio show.

Sometimes when the deadline for a radio show approaches, I can be rather panicked.  It can be a struggle to address interesting subjects in the right detail, or at the right time and I often have weeks wandering around stressing about what we should talk about.

This is not one of those weeks; because often, especially in Britain, anything from a serious issue to a seriously-not one drops into my lap from the wider world and our wonderful media - this week it has been that ghost of British history’s appalling past in the shape of one of Britain’s worst sons, Mr Winston Churchill.

The reason he is back in the news is because a few people recently have mentioned how he was not a wonderful person unlike his historical profile; the one getting the most attention is Labour Shadow Chancellor John MacDonnell, who was asked if Winston Churchill was a hero or villain; he replied villain and qualified this as being based in his actions as part of the Tonypandy riots. It caused the usual bullshit response from the usual people and lots of pathetic apologetic behaviour too.

Personally I wish they ha asked me because my response to Churchill would cause mass pearl-clinching hysteria in these circles no doubt.

Now, this will not be a biography on the bloke; I am not going to note his school life, every position he ever held or what so-and-so said about him. This is about facing some of Britain’s most terrible history and how it affects life in the country today – and what position Churchill takes in all this.

Straight out the gate, he is my position:

I hate Winston Churchill.   I hate the things he believed, the things he did based on those beliefs and how he holds a heroic position in much of British culture.  As a working class political activist and believer in the importance of knowing our history, he is a figure of oppression. As an active anti-racist, he is a figure of evil.  He is class privilege personified and someone who has become a Jesus-like figure to the far right and centre and an example of the cultural inertia we face today.

More importantly, I hate the way it has become taboo to raise any question about him or anything about the Second World War, including setting certain facts straight.

If you are someone who feels saying such things about people like him or feel any criticism of the generation he supposedly represents is not acceptable, we will never agree but I would ask you to listen and hear a totally different view that while perhaps repellent to you, is sincerely held and formed.

Churchill represents so much that I hate about British culture and society and he was a terrible man.  Let’s look at his worst hits:

Racism – Churchill was a white supremacist and is today considered a hero by people who have the same opinions.  He saw Indians, whom he starved and Kurds, who he wanted to gas as ‘beastly people’ of a lesser worth and talked of wiping out the Japanese.

Whites were a stronger race according to him; better than blacks or quote ‘red Indians’ and this justified taking their place an land, mass slaughter, etc.  Ironically for his modern supporters, he had more respect for Islam then they like to admit but one does not cancel out all the others.

He was also not opposed to fascism; he in fact had admiration for Franco in Spain and spoke admiringly of Mussolini in Italy.

Famine – most acts of mass starvation are caused by human action and Churchill was fundamental to the Bengal famine in India where 4 million or more died and it is estimated the Indian population suffered the equivalent of a loss up to 100 million.

Ireland – he suppressed Irish people, their culture and anyone who believed in independence including sending the brutal Black and Tans to subject the population to violent suppression, with thousands killed during the War of Independence.

Miners – during the miner strike of 1910-11, where strikers attempted to improve their terms and conditions that were being kept deliberately low.  Mr Churchill decided to send in the troops and many in the working class community and especially Wales have never forgiven him.

He was a racist, extremist and enemy of the working class – simple as that.  He was totally led by ego and getting his name into the history books just like some of his political decedents, although most of them have not managed to rack up the bodies that Winston has on him.

This of course feeds into the subservient attitude of today’s British (or more specifically English) culture that detests change and difference and while refusing to show decency and respect to so many types of people and viewpoints, demands obedience to the things they hold dear – such as war and dominating other parts of the world.

Every far right group, politician or general gobshite uses the war and ‘respect’ for soldiers as a shield usually for their own racism or similar hatred.  It is a mindset like many religions or cults try to enforce – of not thinking or questioning what you are told.  This foul representative of the ruling order somehow becomes a ‘man of the people’ through the power and privilege bestowed upon him by his class position.

In the modern context, we now see ludicrous comparisons with Brexit to the ‘Blitz spirit’ and a need to believe in Britain to get what you want; this was of course what won World War 2 and nothing to do with the Soviet army smashing the shit out of the Nazis at the expense of around 27 million soldiers and civilians on their part.

Worse, some people seem to like the idea of the Blitz; when bomber planes randomly took out houses and people every night; this is something that can only be thought by the dangerously ignorant and disconnected, not to mention a great insult to those who survived it, not to mention those not so lucky.

Winston Churchill did not win WW2; he did not even fight in it.  He toured the sites of warfare after the bodies were cleared away and after the war, when the British electorate put him out of a job, he spent time writing himself into the history books; in fact many of his quotes are quite useful here – ‘history will be kind to me for I intend to write it’.

What he did is make speeches calling for unity and strength, which he acted on by leading a coalition government.  But this was his job and not the only speeches he made.  He also praised Mussolini, Franco and even seems to have admiration for Hitler.  In fact his view as we noted earlier is that fascism was only a problem if it invaded Britain; it could do what it liked on the continent.

Winston Churchill did not save Britain in the war; everyday people fought, planned, sacrificed and died.  Most importantly, the generation who fought in the war knew this.

Post-WW2: Birth of the Welfare State

The generation that fought in the war, who we lionise more than we ever talked to, had far less delusions about Winston Churchill; so much in fact that upon returning home and perhaps remembering how badly the returnees from WW1 had been treated, they demanded a better country to live in with a welfare state that took care of it’s people rather than privileged the rich.

Churchill was up for none of this – so they voted him out.  A ruling class thug could never bring himself to allow the rabble to have any control over their own lives nor the country they had just fought for.

Fortunately the Labour Party was offering free healthcare via the NHS and all the benefits of a decent welfare system that treated people with decency and respect – and fortunately for all of us, the public voted for it.

Churchill’s Cheerleaders

Boris Johnson – this bell-end has written a book on the man and has nothing but unqualified and uncritical praise.  For those of you not in the know, Boris Johnson is another egotistical upper class prick who has come into politics as his birthright – he is also utterly useless and never takes responsibility for his actions; sound familiar?

During the last week, when it was announced that the budget for a planned garden bridge that was never build during his time as London Mayor ran to £53 million of public funds, you would think the media might have been chasing him over this and a few other gaffs.  But no, he was able to flap about John MacDonnell and the great insult to daddy Winston.  Talk about a snowflake.

Also like Churchill, our Bodger Boris loves to indulge in racism such as against Muslim women and their ‘letterbox’ face vales, or claiming that when President Obama said Britain would not get preferential treatment for trade deals upon leaving the EU, that he was motivated by his ‘Kenyan roots’ to ‘hate Britain’ – so at least Boris has some understanding of British history.

Jacob Rees-Mogg – the living epitome of class privilege and the awful right wing politics that goes with it.  Old Jacko cuts a ludicrous figure and that is probably the most dangerous thing about him; for like Mr Johnson he comes across as someone not to take seriously – but we really should.

Along with his retro-views on women and LGBT rights, he loves the Victorian era and was once exposed attending a dinner hosted by The Traditional Britain Group, who among other things feel no one non-white can be British and advocates other ethno-nationalist themes.  They have advocated for the deportation of non-whites including Doreen Lawrence. They also hosted Simon Heffer and Richard Spencer as speakers.  

His recent hit was to claim that the British invention of concentration camps during the Boar War was for their own safety and all those who died were just part of what happened years ago when more people just died…this was part of his answer to the question of Churchill.

All of which slots nicely into his hard right political position

Sadiq Khan – I don’t like to take a pop at the London Mayor as in a lot of ways I like him; but he is a centrist and on issues like this, he is a little too cautious for my liking; not perhaps a cheerleader but part of those who have equally failed to tackle the true meaning and human weight of the actions that Churchill committed.

While co-hosting a regular phone-in last week on LBC Radio, the question came up and he talked about understanding Churchill ‘in context’. What exactly the context for understanding a mass murderer who hated non-whites and the working class is, Sadiq did not go on to note sadly.

In fact this liberal unease at condemning Winston Churchill is probably more disgusting that the right wing open praise and hero worship; after all, it is their nature to cheer a right wing white supremacist whose actions led to the death of thousands – what’s your excuse liberal boy?

No doubt it relates to the hatred in liberal centrist circles for the left; during the Blair and Brown years they thought the political inevitably of capitalist realism meant we had been cast into history forever.  But that is not the case and they have been having daily breakdowns ever since Corbyn became Labour Party leader.

Perception

Earlier I referred to the perception of Winston Churchill in this country and what I am specifically talking about is how he has become an icon who cannot be criticised; when people do criticise him, responses can range from complete dismissal of you as a person to outright death threats.

But it was not always such because once again we have seen a cultural movement that has taken even more drastic hold in the last thirty years’ class war.

Despite what media and modern discourse might have you believe, it is not uncommon – and was more so for the war generation – to find working class communities and people who have no time for Winston Churchill, my family included. He was seen as the elitist rich boy he was and all the things he did were informed by that and the need to preserve the status quo.  People from Wales to India have no trouble assessing him based on everything he did, not just his hyped-up war record.

So many of the ideals of the far right come from Churchill; his belief in the lesser worth of other nations’ people and religions; his belief in mass slaughter; that ethnicities like Indian people ‘bread like rabbits’ and even closer to home, his contempt for the Irish and working class in general.

Subservience

All of this is also tied into British history in regards Empire and all the evils done there.  Too much of English-dominated society either does not want to face this history, or has no problem with it; this is the reason for racism, xenophobia and the silly idea of English exceptionalism

Now I have my theories about why this is but none of them are complete so I may have to conclude with a question rather than an answer; why are people so subservient to power?  We can look nationally, in which case no doubt it involves the class system but then America is just as bad if not worse.  They of course have a class system that is rarely talked about traditionally but also the overt worship of position in hierarchy, which they probably inherited from the British.  It does not matter how you got power, just that you have it.

So is it a western problem?  Not entirely although that may be a particular type but plenty of countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America, anywhere you choose to mention has a love of ‘strong man’ leaders.

But then again many other parts of the world – from Europe to wider – have also had working class-led revolutions and Britain has not.

Recently Lord Finkelstein – a Tory Lord – published a piece in The Times saying that Churchill was a racist and life-long white supremacist.  Even someone on the political opposite gets this, so what’s the problem?

Conclusion

Winston Churchill was one of the worst people Britain ever produced who cynically wrote himself into history as a more important man than he was.

I feel no affinity to country or nation and I will not surrender my critical faculties for anyone especially a self-serving member of the elite.

This brings us back to the culture war again and links into wider blathering about ‘Western Civilisation’ and how anything foreign (read non-white or Jewish) is degrading the greatness of our beloved culture – that would be the thing whose biggest exports in the last 20/25 years have been a game show about becoming a millionaire and a supposed-talent show about torturing my ears. ‘Western Culture’ is again a concept with roots in colonialism, anti-Semitism and racist assumptions about impurity brought about by mixing.  

As Owen Jones pointed out, our rights and freedoms were not given to us but won by everyday civilians demanding them; suffragettes, trade unionists, political campaigners and today kids striking for the future of the planet.

The hero worship of Winston Churchill is a way of airbrushing out the work done by all these people; real people like you and me who give and gave everything as oppose to Churchill who only ever acted for himself.  Hero worship and patriotism will get you nowhere and require wiping out large swaths of actual fact and history in order to make your side look better – a side to which you have added nothing, merely been born into and taken for granted that you have a right to certain things above others.

Now, for the first time in my life, we have the chance to really change society – to make life better with stronger rules and laws governing working; the opportunity for a foreign policy that does not involve terrorising weaker countries; to make life more equal and demand those with the most pay their way. We also need to get with the programme in regards climate change otherwise we will not be here much longer.

Ditch the worshipping of anyone but especially these appalling establishment toads.  The class war has not managed to destroy us despite throwing everything at the job; now we need to stop doing it for them.

Recommendations

Winston Churchill by Clive Ponting (Sinclair-Stevenson, 1994)

A far more honest and comprehensive study of the man’s career

Contrpoints video on The West was very informative and funny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyaftqCORT4

[omginstantpaperbouquetblr]

By Michele Caltagirone / The Dawn News.

Viola Carofalo. Credit: potere al popolo

Interview with Viola Carofalo, national representative and presidential candidate of the new left-wing movement.

Born last December from the experience of the volunteers of the “Je So’ Pazzo” (“I am mad”) social center of Naples, the radical left-wing movement Potere al Popolo (Power to the People) has certainly grown in recent weeks, so much so that according to some surveys it could even touch the entrance to parliament. This is thanks to a simple policy, carried out among the people and directed towards those sectors of the population that once were a fertile garden of the progressive forces. Power to the People revives the original left, a political force that knows how to get across their message in a way that everyone can understand it. Amidst the chaos of a parliamentary center that is losing approval and has undergone its umpteenth split, it is likely for the proposal of the new movement to take hold.

We contacted Viola Carofalo, national representative and premier candidate, by phone, to speak about her views on the electoral campaign and about some key points of the program she runs for.

  ‘There still is a left wing in Italy”

In the context of a resurgence of the right-wing, which seems to have increasing power, we have asked Viola Carofalo whether in Italy, in the current electoral context, there is still a cultural and political area that says “left-wing things”. “I think it’s a matter of the amount of space that the press dedicates to certain political forces, in order to give us the impression that now people in Italy are looking to the right” says the national representative of Power to the People “but I think it’s just a feeling provoked by the media”.

“In the last few weeks we are meeting so many supportive people who look at politics as a source of social equality. People who want things different from what the newspapers say. For our part, we are making the biggest possible effort, we are a small movement but in four months we have been able to create assemblies in 160 cities that are not limited to the electoral campaign. There are Italians who want to talk about work, the environment, social equality and gender. Beyond what the press says, there is also another Italy “.

  Work and environment, key points of the program

Power to the People puts issues related to labor at the center of its electoral program. “Labor, as we envision it, must be dignified, stable and secure. Data tells us that in Italy there are still people who die or get sick due to work, and the numbers are growing. Italians deserve a job regulated by certain laws and rights. You can not dismiss workers without just cause, and I’m referring to Article 18 [which establishes the rights of workers in case of dismissals, and is currently the center of a nationwide debate], you can not be doing precarious work for life because the nightmare of precariousness prevents you from being able to plan your life”.

“We support jobs without expiration dates”. And they have equally vigorous views on environmental issues. “This is another issue that we consider central, which is supported by the presence of so many environmental committees within our organization. The environment is everyone’s good, therefore we oppose those who regard it only as a means to make profit, to those who exploit and pollute it. The future of environment is also our future and that of our children. Power to the People also carries forward programs aimed at combating any form of inequality”, Carofalo adds “be it economic, ethnic-based or gender-based: any behavior that leads to an unequal treatment has to be stopped”.

  The electoral constituency

Power to the People aims in particular to appeal to that part of the electoral that has been disappointed both by the Five-Star Movement (5SM), and by the center-left. “There are people on the left who vote for the 5SM out of desperation,” Viola Carofalo explains, “because they have no alternative. Others, meanwhile, continue to vote for the center-left because they formally recognize it as the heir to a long political tradition, even if it has nothing to do with the left. The Democratic Party in Italy has managed to do what the center had failed to do in terms of liberalism and destruction of rights, just look at reforms like the ‘Jobs Act’ and the ‘Good school’.”

The party pays particular attention to the youth. “We want to bring the young people who vote for the first time to the polls, which is why we are doing a lot of electoral campaign outside schools. So far, we have had very positive feedback among youth”.

  Differences with the 5SM

Power to the People is a movement and, as such, it is easy to make comparisons with the Five-Star Movement. “We are a people’s movement”, Carofalo clarifies, “not a populist one”. “They want to appear as transversal, while we are a leftist movement and we do not necessarily want to please everyone. Our ideas are clear, while they make ambiguous speeches about issues like work and immigration. Moreover, the grassroots of the 5SM are only an illusion. Their movement is vertical and hierarchical and even their online voting system is purely formal. When they chose their presidential candidate, they put [Luigi] Di Maio and three complete strangers, so the result was obvious before the vote. We are also for active political participation, while they tell Italians to click with their mouses from the comfort of their own homes. We hold open assemblies, we have committees where anyone can participate in the decision-making on their territories. We stand for active politic involvement, while the 5SM’s reasoning was based on anti-politics”.

“LeU? No difference with the PD”

Many people think that Power to the People can somehow “steal” a part of the electorate of Liberi e Uguali (Free and Equal, abbr. LeU) party alliance. Others foresee a potential common front if both forces should succeed in entering Parliament. “If the LeU’s proposals were convincing, we would make the alliance first. Today, this makes no sense, neithber before nor after the elections. LeU is the party of Pietro Grasso and Massimo D’Alema, who are politicians who voted for all of the reforms that we reject, such as the “Good School” act or the “Fornero” pension reform. We could define them as a spin-off of the Democratic Party.     Beyond what Grasso and the others say in this electoral campaign, it seems to me that facts speak louder for them. When they were in government, they did none of the things they say they want to do today”.

The abolition of 41bis

Among the points of the electoral campaign of Power to the People, is a proposal to abolish the 41bis, which establishes a harsh prison regime, has raised controversy. “We are proud of this point because we have no interest in fomenting hate and revenge. We will support this proposal because the definition of “torture” was not written by us but by the European Court and the UN. We won’t combat prison mafias by preventing prisoners to cook their own meals or having books in their cell, but creating job opportunities for youth in disadvantaged areas and thus taking manpower away from organized crime, avoiding the creation of gray areas that can become business opportunities for the mafias, such as the extraordinary policies for refugees. Regarding the prison system as a whole, it must be a rehabilitation system of just punishment and not torture”.

  Immigration policies

Another one of the focal topics that are being debated in the electoral campaign is linked to migrants. Some political forces have made it their battle horse, pointing at migratory flows as the origin of all evil. “In Italy we have fundamental rights that have been denied for years by certain policymakers, and certainly not because of foreigners” Viola Carofalo emphasizes “but the truth is that immigration policies have never been seriously planned. The reception is poorly managed, and this is deliberate, because behind this there are many cooperatives seeking to profit from migrants. Then there is the overall plan to lower labor costs by using foreigners who arrive in Italy, who are already clandestine due to the Bossi-Fini law, and they are fragile and blackmailed, and therefore ready to work for just a few euros. This system eventually coerces Italians into precarious work as well”. Having identified the problem, for Power to the People the remedy could be to strengthen the local structures that deal with immigration. “The reception should not be managed by the prefectures, but by the local authorities, municipalities and regions that better understand the need of each individual territory. When you put all of these people who are already in difficult situations in large and crowded centers with another two or three hundred people, in the end you have created a ghetto that, indeed, can have difficulties to become integrated with the local population. If, on the contrary, reception is widespread and planned, then it can become a resource. This is also what Confindustria [the General Confederation of Italian Industry] says and, although it is certainly not my ideological reference, it is still an authoritative opinion “.

  ‘Italy is not racist, but it can become so’

The issue of immigration is certainly connected to that of a growing intolerance, according to Viola Carofalo, but Italy is not yet a racist country. “Racism exists” she clarifies “but it is also fomented. If part of the press and politicians continue to say that all the problems of the country are linked to foreigners, there will be more and more people who will take up this rhetoric. What happened Macerata [where a man shot six African immigrants] is an example: when the highest offices of the state, apart from president Mattarella, attribute that cowardly fascist attack to the presence of immigrants, I think it is inevitable to foment racism. I therefore believe that Italy is not yet a xenophobic country, but if foreigners are used to explain every problem, it seriously risks becoming one”.

from Home http://ift.tt/2Fi2dAk

#NEWS

[consciousowl]

Integral Politics: A Fresh Vision for America

Please Be Pat​ient—God Is No​t Finished with Me Yet!

~Bill Gothard

A Presidential election is a singular event for the U.S.A., the world’s oldest continuing Republic. We were built upon a union of staunchly independent states in need of a compelling figure to pull together diverse and competing interests. Historically, the President assumes the role of interpreting the American experience and projecting its vision. In a recent election, America went from a technologically friendly President with a global vision and a deep appreciation of diversity to a President who insists on America First at every turn and fixating upon the past, rather than the future. How can we possibly make sense of such a sudden switch? Is America running in reverse gear, torn between warring factions with irreconcilable differences? Is the solution Fortress America? Can we eliminate escalating acts of terrorism by building a strong military and shutting everyone else out?

Learn more about Integral Politics

Could We All Be Right?

We are saturated by digital media obsessed with a systematic attack on the President to undermine his legitimacy, even though he won sufficient electoral votes to be elected. We see disenfranchised poor white people coming out of schools with little opportunity for professional jobs. The corporate ladder is over, and your first and last job may be working as a barista at Starbucks. While the previous Administration was right about inclusion, it favored town over country, the educated over the marginal and the technosavvy over everyone else. The new Administration, in championing the needs of the working class, is right about an economic index that supports the countryside as much as the cities.

Does a paradigm exist that shows how both Democrats and Republicans, Socialists and Capitalists are right in different ways? When we look at religion, we see that each tradition is sufficient to transform some people, but no religion is sufficiently expansive to transform all people everywhere. Every religion is true, in one sense or another, but incomplete. So also, every party and political persuasion is true to some degree, but incomplete for the unprecedented challenges facing humanity.

Beyond Red and Blue

In the last couple of decades, America has been deeply divided between Red and Blue states. The Red states lie in the interior, including states with the largest territory, such as Texas and Alaska, although not the most densely populated, such as New York. The Blue States, such as Massachusetts and California, tend to lie in the coastal areas, facing the Atlantic or Pacific oceans. Red states champion traditional and modern values over against pluralistic values; Blue states sport modern and pluralistic values over against traditional values. The Republican party favors the Red states, while the Democratic party favors the Blue states. Only the Republican party would offer as President an entrepreneur with no political experience, simply because he was good in business. Only the Democratic Party would run a female candidate for an office entailing the role of Commander and Chief of the Armed Forces. Are the distinctions between left and right, Democratic or Republican, still valid? It is significant that both major parties had a severe fall-out in the last election. Bernie Sanders, a lifelong Independent and philosophical socialist, gave a credible run against Hillary Clinton, a former First Lady and White House occupant. Donald Trump, a hotel magnate popular in his role in the TV series, “The Apprentice,” had no special loyalty to the Republican Party before taking the nomination.

The Changing Face of America

The United States looks much different than it decade a generation ago. The Latino population is increasing to over 17%, while Afro-Americans have risen top 14%. Asians have come in to take up the slack with over 5 ½%. For example, one percent of us were born in India. That one percent just happens to be the most affluent block of Americans. Religiously, we have moved from mainstream denominations toward fundamentalism on the one hand, and New Age practitioners on the other. Increasing numbers of Americans look to the East, and even indigenous people for inspiration. Millennials are increasingly “None’s,” identifying with no particular religion and shunning traditional institutions. The Internet revolution has made computer literacy increasingly a survival issue for many Americans. The technological waves come every couple years. To keep up can make your head spin: From PC to Network to Internet to Mobile to Social to Big Data and Cloud to Artificial Intelligence. The digital divide can impact people of all ages.

Spiral Dynamics Reveals New Possibility

Dr. Don Beck devoted the majority of his life to popularizing Spiral Dynamics, a socio-cultural-psychological theory developed by Dr. Clare Graves over 50 years ago. It sees human organization and psycho-spiritual development in terms of an ever accelerating process of evolution. Don has enjoyed spectacular success working with groups in hot spots around the world, such as Israel and South Africa. He gave them critical insights on how to relate effectively with people of very different backgrounds and orientations. This theory gives a window into why people think and act the way they do. It helps you actually get into their hearts and heads and understand why they value what they do. We all start from helplessness as infants and grow to self-determining adults, following the pattern of life on earth, emerging from simple forms to infinitely more elaborate species. From single cell amoeba to complex mammals, such as dolphins, elephants and apes, and finally, human beings. We all go through evolutionary cycles, even the Creationists among us!

States and Stages

Ken Wilber, in his Integral Theory, adopted Spiral Dynamics at the core of his Integral Map, while adding many other distinctions. Two of the most important are States and Stages. Just as we all experience waking, dreaming and sleeping, so we may all experience flashes of a Witness state, or even a Transcendent state. How we interpret our experience depends entirely upon the structure of our consciousness. Someone at a Traditional level will see a vision as a living encounter with Krishna, Buddha or Christ. Someone at an Integral level will see the vision as the Play of Consciousness that has aspects of traditional, modern and pluralistic. Changes in state can happen to anyone at any time under any conditions. Literally anyone can experience Cosmic Consciousness without any religious qualifications. However, to maintain that state, or have your entire life informed by it, is quite another matter. This is the difference between Waking Up and Growing Up.

How To Detect Hidden Patterns

From First to Second to Third Tier

Ken Wilber draws attention to the Integral Structure of Consciousness as the very first state that is capable of seeing ALL the other stages as being right in their own way, even though their perspectives may allow relatively less freedom. Integral is comfortable with a growth hierarchy. It belongs to a separate tier. First Tier characterizes Traditional, Modern and Pluralistic. Each of these orientations can’t stand the others. Traditionalists are convinced they alone are going to heaven. All the rest are headed straight for hell. Modernists see through mythology and refuse to be fooled again. Scientific reason and investigation can solve all of our problems. Traditionalists are naïve, and Pluralists are empty-headed fools. Pluralists see everyone else, Modernist or Traditionalist, as racist, classist and sexist. Only pluralism is truly cool.

Third Tier is where people adopt a transpersonal, universal outlook. Everyone and everything is a living expression of Whom and What we call “God.” Since God is love, the only appropriate thing to do with our lives is honor, cherish and serve God in everyone else. You qualify for a role as an Avatar, Bodhisattva or Messiah. You are what Eckhart Tolle refers to as cherished blossoms in an exquisite flower garden.

We Are All Doing the Best We Can

What does Integral Theory and Spiral Dynamics possibly have to do with politics in the United States? When we look at such recent figures as Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, each of the candidates was doing the best he or she could do under the circumstances. If you had the very same mindset as Obama, Clinton, Sanders or Trump, you would think, do or say the very same things. Each would be “right” for his or her particular stage of development. Some candidates might enjoy more inner freedom than the others. However, each candidate got as far as he or she did because they spoke deeply to a certain segment of the American population. People on the opposite sides of the aisle are not stupid. They just have different concerns and priorities based on their own predicaments. If you grew up in a farm, you would think a whole lot different than if you grew up in an urban high-rise. Both life stories are valid, even though some orientations may be more expansive than others.

Putting Uncle Sam Back Together Again

Arianna Huffington, a media mogul who sold her blog for hundreds of millions of dollars, urges recent audiences to shut off their computers and digital devices from time to time. Her particular revelation came from overwork as an entrepreneur where she fell down on the office floor and injured herself. Getting a life became a matter of sanity. You have the power within you to stop letting the media, whether on a Smart TV, an iMac, iPad or iPhone, tell you how to think. You can give up entertaining hateful thoughts towards anyone, including President Trump. You have the power within you to support people with drastically different perspectives than your own to do the right thing. Love is the most powerful force in all the Universe. It is the best possible marker of true enlightenment. A truly enlightened person knows and expresses absolute, unconditional love. Jesus Christ, Himself, admonished his disciples to shine like the sun on the good and the evil, the just and the unjust. The sun shines on everyone alike. So let your love, the love locked up deep inside you, in the very nucleus of your being, shine upon a world that includes everyone—with no one and nothing left out!

If the people lead, the leaders will follow.

~ Peace and Environmental Activist Slogan

Learn Integral Politics with Dr. Don Beck

Integral Politics: A Fresh Vision for America appeared first on http://consciousowl.com.