Nonviolence Now

Peace Education Booklet Release

2011-06-21T05:44:00.000-07:00

Hey friends of peace,
Here is a copy of the Peace Education Booklet I wrote with support from my colleagues at the Rutgers Newark Center for Conflict Resolution and the National Peace Academy.

http://cghr.newark.rutgers.edu/documents/PeaceSummit.pdf
It is a spruced up version of the booklet I put together while working with the Scottish Parliament to promote best practices in peace education. It offers a brief overview of some of the major content areas in the field, some peace stories, several activities for the classroom and a host of resources and suggested readings.
I hope you find this useful.
Let me know what you think.
Arthur

The Mess at Medgar Evers College

2011-01-05T08:58:00.001-08:00

Post by Kevin Powell in NewsOne Original on Jan 4, 2011 at 4:17 pm

“You can kill a man but you can’t kill an idea.”—MEDGAR EVERS

(NAACP Field Secretary in Mississippi murdered by Ku Klux Klan in 1963)

And, no doubt, Medgar Evers must be tossing and turning in his grave at Arlington National Cemetery this very moment. For how terrible is it that a college named in his honor is in the midst of the ugliest chapter of its long history, a history born of the sweat, and the blood, of the Civil Rights Movement ?

The problem, to put it mildly, are the president and the provost of Medgar Evers College, two Black men who, by virtue of one baffling action after another, demonstrate no respect for the mission of a school built in the heart of Black Brooklyn, and who ostensibly have little to no respect for faculty and staff, nor the community that surrounds that institution. That their behavior and mindset are akin to the Southern White segregationists of the Civil Rights era who went out of their way to block, literally and symbolically, the doors of their schools rather than allow Black students in, must be something the president and provost have conveniently forgotten. That the leadership of the City University of New York, which governs all 23 of the four- and two-year schools in its system, has allowed this now very public spectacle to fester and rot begs this question: Who really cares about the mission and future of Medgar Evers College?

I mean, seriously, would this blog and the protests and pending lawsuits be necessary if we were discussing, say, John Jay College, Lehman College, or Medgar’s borough cousin, Brooklyn College ?

No—

However, we are talking about Medgar Evers College, though not technically an historically Black college in fact, but certainly so in its creation, sense of purpose, and the overwhelming numbers in terms of faculty, staff, and students. Indeed, for those who do not know, Medgar Evers College is a four-year commuter school of 7000 students nestled in what we call Central Brooklyn. Brooklyn is not only the largest of New York City’s five boroughs (with 2.5-3 million residents we would be America’s 4th most populated “city”), but Brooklyn also contains the biggest Black population in our nation (nearly 1 million people of African descent from across America, and the globe).

And the original mission of Medgar Evers College, as stated currently on its website athttp://www.mec.cuny.edu/presidents_office/mec_mission.asp, was “a result of collaborative efforts by community leaders, elected officials, the Chancellor, and the Board of Trustees of The City University of New York. The College, named for the late civil rights leader, Medgar Wiley Evers (1925-1963), was established in 1969 and named in 1970, with a mandate to meet the educational and social needs of the Central Brooklyn community. The College is committed to the fulfillment of this mandate.”

Obviously someone didn’t mention this bit of history and purpose to President William Pollard or Provost Howard Johnson. Or perhaps the duo has simply not bothered to read the website during their tenure. Because in my 20 years of living in Brooklyn, and an extensive association with that school—as a community and political leader; as a writer and artist; as someone who has given numerous lectures there, and participated in more panels, conferences, and seminars than I can count, there; and as an ally and supporter with my own critiques of Medgar Evers College—never could I have imagined, when these two took over the leadership in August of 2009, such a swift and abrupt deterioration of the way the school is administered.

Immediate past president Dr. Edison O. Jackson definitely was no perfect leader, either, but you at least got the sense he genuinely loved the school and the community about the school. Conversely, at a chance encounter with President Pollard the summer of 2010, I came away thinking the man not only did not like Brooklyn (it took everything in me not to suggest he should leave if he despised it, and us Brooklynites, so much), but that Mr. Pollard was eager to do whatever he could to dismantle the inner mechanisms of Medgar Evers College, even the parts that were working just fine. It is one thing, as a leader, to put your own stamp on an enterprise you are now running, as every leader should have her or his vision on how things should be. It is quite another to give the appearance of destroying that enterprise entirely, with reckless abandon, just because you can—

Yet I am not even sure if “incompetent” is the right word to describe what is happening here. But it is abundantly clear to me, when one reviews the backgrounds of President Pollard and Provost Johnson prior to their coming to Medgar Evers College, that whoever thought these two gentlemen deserved to run a major institution for higher learning must not have seen any of the numerous articles critical of their prior escapades.

In Mr. Pollard’s case, we are talking allegations of the gross mismanagement of millions of dollars at his previous job as president of the University of the District of Columbia:

http://image2.examiner.com/a-1072664~UDC_chief_details_waste_of_millions.html

In Mr. Johnson’s case, we are talking allegations of the plagiarizing of an academic plan from Syracuse University, where he formerly worked, and which he gave to his new employer, the University of North Texas:

http://www.dailyorange.com/2.8654/plagiarism-by-administrator-unacceptable-1.1241774

So is it little wonder that since the arrival of Mr. Pollard and Mr. Johnson in August 2009 we have the present mess at Medgar Evers College, including:

1) Some very curious faculty dismissals

2) Threats of shutting down academic centers on the campus

3) Faculty concerns about the administration’s lack of respect for shared governance (in the past month 66 faculty members (89% of those who voted), mostly tenured, cast a vote of “no confidence” in the president and the provost)

4) No strategic plan by the president or the provost, after one year on their jobs, on the future of Medgar Evers College

5) The Provost eliminated the Writing Center and the Center for Teaching and Learning (what college does not have a Writing Center?)

6) The Administration removed Carver Bank ATMs (Carver is the largest Black-owned bank in America) and replaced them with Citibank ATMs

7) The Administration issued an eviction notice for The Center for NuLeadership; and although the proposal for formal approval of the Center under CUNY guidelines was approved before the current administration came into power, the President and Provost have refused to forward the proposal to CUNY

For a full accounting of faculty, staff, and community concerns, please check this excellent blog:http://eisaulen.com/blog///index.php/2011/01/02/interview-is-medgar-evers-college-under-attack-faculty-battle-provost-and-president

And there are many more issues, but the one that sticks out to me is the apparent attack by the Medgar Evers College administration on the Center for NuLeadership on Urban Solutions. As was stated in a recent press release, the Center for NuLeadership “is the first and only public policy, research, training, advocacy and academic center housed in the largest urban university system in the United States, conceived, designed, and developed by formerly incarcerated professionals.”

In other words, these are not just “ex-cons” running wild at Medgar Evers College. These are individuals like Dr. Divine Pryor, formerly incarcerated person, who has turned his life around and become a valuable asset to community and academia. And I can honestly say, in my travels throughout America, to literally hundreds upon hundreds of colleges and universities, community centers and religious institutions, and jails and prisons of every kind, that I have never encountered someone who is as articulate, dynamic, and passionate in identifying ways to stop the school-to-prison pipeline so real for American ghettos as Dr. Pryor.

And if Medgar Evers College was founded with the expressed purpose of meeting “the educational and social needs of the Central Brooklyn community,” then does it not make sense to house a center that deals directly with the record numbers of Black (and Latino) males being shipped off to jail each and every year, in Brooklyn, and all the Brooklyns in America?

Not by the logic of President Pollard and Provost Johnson. Perhaps that is why these two Black males, along with CUNY central administration officials, saw nothing wrong with a December 17, 2010 late-night “raid” of NuLeadership’s offices, and the seizure of computers personally owned by Dr. Pryor and his colleague Kate Kyung Ji Rhee.

Or why the Center for NuLeadership was asked to vacate its offices by December 30th (the center had to go to court to block the eviction, temporarily).

Or why the president and the provost have refused to forward the recommendation by the college’s governing body to establish, officially, the center at Medgar Evers College.

Or why the president and the provost have blocked the Center for NuLeadership’s funds, and refused to approve a $2.4 million grant that would have given first-time non-violent offenders a second chance by sentencing them to college rather than prison.

The great sadness and irony of these two Black male administrators doing this at a college born to better the most underserved parts of Brooklyn is not lost on me. Doubly sad and ironic that we have a president of the United States (Barack Obama) and a Secretary of Education (Arne Duncan) who have consistently called for innovative solutions to prepare and propel the most marginalized populations in America.

And sad and ironic, furthermore, because the City University of New York actually has a system-wide Black male initiative. But how can we seriously discuss any initiatives for Black males and not include in that conversation ideas and best practices to cease the rapid flow of Black (and Latino) men in and out of the criminal justice system?

So as we approach the annual Dr. King holiday in less than two weeks, the president and provost of Medgar Evers College and the City University of New York hierarchy find themselves with a major dilemma, bad publicity, and unnecessary and very preventable beefs, in and out of court, with Medgar Evers faculty and staff, and Brooklyn community members. As one tenured professor at Medgar Evers College said to me in an email, what is happening at the school “should be a national outrage.”

For sure, the mess at Medgar Evers College is a national outrage, and a deeply moral failing, too, especially at a time in our history when America’s inner cities require, need, demand, nonstop and pro-active solutions and remedies, and as many opportunities as possible for our communities, particularly for the young and the poor.

And wasn’t that the point of Medgar Evers College in the first place, to serve the people?

Kevin Powell, a long-time Brooklyn resident, is a nationally acclaimed activist, public speaker, and author or editor of 10 books, including Open Letters to America (Soft Skull). You can contact him at www.kevinpowell.net

No Christmas presents again? Why we don’t want to believe that Santa has been visiting some people more than others.

2010-12-23T08:02:00.001-08:00

Dan Ariely of Duke Business School is quite ingenious when it comes to devising experiments to determine how people think and what drives their decision making when it comes to economic matters. In his entertaining book Predictably Irrational, he challenged the traditional notion of economists that people are rational actors on the economic stage, making decisions in their own best interest. Instead he argues that people are irrational (i.e., not really thinking things through to get the best result for themselves) but irrational in a predictable way.

Now in a new paper co-authored with Michael Norton of Harvard Business School titled Building a Better America – One Wealth Quintile at a Time, they demonstrate that people in the US have a wildly inaccurate understanding of how wealth is distributed in the US. (I have already discussed studies (see here and here) showing the rapidly rising inequality in incomes in the US.)

In 2005, they asked a representative sample of 5,522 people from 47 states with median income, age, gender, and voting patterns that were matched to the population to identify which of three wealth distribution models they would prefer their societies to have. All the respondents were given this definition of wealth: "Wealth, also known as net worth, is defined as the total value of everything someone owns minus any debt that he or she owes. A person's net worth includes his or her bank account savings plus the value of other things such as property, stocks, bonds, art, collections, etc., minus the value of things like loans and mortgages."

What they did was show people three pie charts representing different distributions of wealth by quintiles and ask them which society they would like to join, given that they would be assigned to a quintile in that society according to the 'veil of ignorance' model used by John Rawls to determine how to construct a just society. In this case, the 'veil of ignorance' took the form of telling the respondents, "In considering this question, imagine that if you joined this nation, you would be randomly assigned to a place in the distribution, so you could end up anywhere in this distribution, from the very richest to the very poorest."

The three pie charts (as presented to the respondents) were unlabeled. The top right one was constructed using perfectly equal distributions. The top left one was constructed using the actual income distribution in Sweden. The bottom chart was obtained using the actual wealth distribution in the US (with the top quintile having 84% of the wealth, the second 11%, the third 4%, the fourth 0.2% and the bottom 0.1%).

The respondents overwhelmingly (92% vs. 8%) preferred the Swedish distribution to the US and by a considerable margin (77% vs. 23%) for the equal distribution over the US. There was also a slight preference for the Swedish distribution over the perfectly equal one. Who knew that Americans had such an egalitarian mindset?

For the second part of their study, the researchers asked respondents to estimate what they thought the actual wealth distribution in the US is and also what they thought it should be. The results are shown in this chart that again splits the distribution by quintiles. The actual distribution is given the top line and is the same as the pie chart above for the US. The second line is the response when asked what they think the current distribution is. The third line represents what they would like it to be. The results are interesting.

As the study authors say,

First, respondents vastly underestimated the actual level of wealth inequality in the United States, believing that the wealthiest quintile held about 59% of the wealth when the actual number is closer to 84%. More interesting, respondents constructed ideal wealth distributions that were far more equitable than even their erroneously low estimates of the actual distribution, reporting a desire for the top quintile to own just 32% of the wealth. These desires for more equal distributions of wealth took the form of moving money from the top quintile to the bottom three quintiles, while leaving the second quintile unchanged, evidencing a greater concern for the less fortunate than the more fortunate.

In other words, not only do people think that wealth is more equitably distributed in the US than it actually is, their ideal of what the distribution should be would require a considerable redistribution of wealth from the richer to the poorer. Americans are socialists at heart, though they may not realize it.

What was also interesting is that there were not marked differences by age or gender or political party affiliation or income and wealth. As the authors say, "we observed a surprising level of consensus: All demographic groups – even those not usually associated with wealth redistribution such as Republicans and the wealthy – desired a more equal distribution of wealth than the status quo."

What has happened in the US is that the ruling wealthy oligarchy that controls the government and the media keeps repeating the message that the current distribution of wealth is not only good but that there should be even more inequality by giving tax breaks and other benefits to the rich. Given the almost total disconnect between reality and what people think is the reality, it should not be surprising that it is almost impossible to have a reasonable discussion in the US about income and wealth and taxes.

Reposted from http://blog.case.edu/singham/2010/10/11/is_the_us_a_nation_of_secret_socialists

Women fighting for the Right to Vote helped show Gandhi the way

2010-08-29T11:04:00.001-07:00

Gandhi, the English suffragettes, and non-violent direct action

Reposted from: International Museum of Women http://www.imow.org/community/blog/viewEntry?id=34

Read the entries, post a comment, and be inspired to create your own legacies to transform our world.

Return to Blog >

Google Images

Gandhi View Larger >

Postcard in Clio's personal collection

Emmeline Pankhurst under arrest View Larger >

Gandhi, the English suffragettes, and non-violent direct action

11/14/2008 | (0) | Submit a Comment

In 1906, Mahatma Gandhi, visiting London, praised the dignified non-violent methods of the English suffragettes, putting their case forward as a moral example to convince his Indian countrymen to adopt the practice of “satyagraha,” or non-violent resistance to the British in South Africa (and later in India). Later on, when the suffragettes adopted tactics of violence against property and even personal martyrdom, he became less enthusiastic. Still, Gandhi continued to follow the woman suffrage campaign with great interest, and clearly benefited from what suffrage advocates had taught. Gandhi had already formulated a theory of non-violence, based on his reading of Tolstoi, but the practical example furnished by the women’s campaign for the vote in England enabled him to refine and elaborate his approach - and perhaps to shame men who were reluctant to take action with the brave example of these remarkable British women.
Clio would never doubt the importance of action, but she believes that the words spoken by individuals such as Gandhi are powerful in their own right. Here is Gandhi's 1906 editorial:
“Deeds better than Words” [October 26, 1906]
Two things are now being widely discussed in England. One relates to the decision of the soap manufacturers who, like their American opposite numbers, have combined and resolved to increase the price of soap. The dealers in soap and the public naturally did not relish the decision. But they did not approach the Government for help; neither did they appeal to the manufacturers; but they resorted to direct action. They notified the manufacturers that they would not buy their soap even if it meant a great loss to them. The result was that Lever Brothers, of Sunlight Soap fame, who used till now to have fifteen ounces of soap in their one-pound cake, will henceforth give the full sixteen. The lesson from this is that deeds are better than words. The action of the dealers proved more fruitful than mere words.
The second example illustrating this saying is more remarkable. It is the movement in England for women’s right to vote, which the Government is unwilling to concede. The women therefore go to the House of Commons and harass the Members. They have sent petitions, written letters, delivered speeches and tried many other means. Last Wednesday, they went to the House of Commons as soon as it opened and demanded the right to vote; they caused some damage also, for which they were prosecuted and sentenced to furnish a security of £ 5 each. On their refusing to do so, they were sentenced to imprisonment, and they are now in gaol. Most of the women have got three months. All of them come from respectable families and some are very well educated. One of these is the daughter of the late Mr. Cobden who was highly respected by the people. She is serving her term in gaol. Another is the wife of Mr. Lawrence. A third is an LL.B. On the very day these women went to gaol there was a huge meeting here in support of the resolve adopted by the brave ladies, and a sum of £ 650 was collected on the spot. Mr Lawrence announced that he would pay £ 10 a day as long as his wife was in gaol. Some persons regard these women as insane; the police use force against them; the magistrate looks upon them with a stern eye. Cobden’s brave daughter said, “I shall never obey any law in the making of which I have no hand; I will not accept the authority of the court executing those laws; if you send me to gaol, I will go there, but I shall on no account pay a fine. I will not furnish any security either.” It is no wonder that a people which produces such daughters and mothers should hold the sceptre. Today the whole country is laughing at them, and they have only a few people on their side. But undaunted, these women work on steadfast in their cause. They are bound to succeed and gain the franchise, for the simple reason that deeds are better than words. Even those who laughed at them would be left wondering. If even women display such courage, will the Transvaal Indians fail in their duty and be afraid of gaol? Or would they rather consider the gaol a palace and readily go there? When that time comes, India’s bonds will snap of themselves.
We have sent petitions; made speeches; and we shall continue to do so. But we shall gain our object only if we have the kind of strength we have spoken of. People do not have much faith in articles and speeches. Anyone can do that, they call for no courage. Deeds after all are better than words. All other things are unavailing, and no one is afraid of them. The only way therefore is to sacrifice oneself and take the plunge. We have much to do yet, no doubt of that.
This article, “Deeds Better than Words,” dated 26 October 1906, was published in Gandhi’s weekly, Indian Opinion, and republished (in English, translated from Gujarati) in The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, vol. 6, pp. 29-30. It has since been partially reprinted by James D. Hunt, in “Suffragettes and Satyagraha,” Indo-British Review, 9:1 (1981), p. 67.
For another perspective on the British suffrage movement, see Clio's August blog on Lady Constance Lytton and the Women's Social and Political Union (WSPU).

View my profile | User directory

Advanced Search

Log In

Email Address

Password

Remember me

Forgot your password?
Register

RSS Feed

Nigeria 1

2010-08-21T12:29:00.000-07:00

Thank you for your patience I know many of you have asked me about my time working in Nigeria and I have wanted to fill you in but it has been a challenge to make the time to write. This is a short post and I intend to follow it with some additional writing in the upcoming weeks. As some of you may know in July I traveled with a group of 24 nonviolence trainers from South Africa, Columbia and the US as part of the Government of Nigeria's Amnesty trainings which are taking place in Objura, in the Cross River State of Nigeria which borders the Niger Delta.Here is a map that shows the various states. Also, if you have not heard much about the situation in the Delta here are some articles to get you started.

The 24 of us foreigners were part of a larger team led by Dr Bernard LaFayette that included roughly 100 Nigeria co-trainers. Many of the Nigerian co-trainers were former 'freedom fighters' who had left the battle being waged in the creeks of the Delta to participate in the nonviolence trainings that Dr LaFayette and The Foundation for Ethnic Harmony (FEIN) had been offering since 2005. These militants, after deciding to give up their arms, well before they were offered amnesty for their crimes, were moved by the nonviolence currriculum and many went on to become Kingian Nonviolence Trainers. In all, I heard that Dr. LaFayette and FEIN had trained 3,000 freedom fighters prior to the creation of the Amnesty Program. These people are now taking the lead at the camps in Objura with the support of Dr Lafayette and his international team.

Here you see some pictures of my fellow trainers from Nigeria.

So first a little bit more about the Amnesty agreement. The government explains that, "this agreement will exempt them (militants) from persecution for past crimes so long as they lay down their weapons and complete the Amnesty training." In addition to the nonviolence education and I have heard the Amnesty process includes post-traumatic counseling as well as hard skills acquisition in areas like ship ferrying, welding and a host of other fields where there is job availability. The government has also offered opportunities to go to college on scholarship if they complete the program and is providing a stipend while they pursue this transition.

More than 20,000 people are going to participate in this program and we were the first group to go over there. On our initial visit to the camp where the trainings were taking place the concrete in the classrooms was still wet when we arrived! As you might imagine it was a very exciting and nerve racking experience filled with ambiguity and possibility. There are many stories to tell and now that I have given you some basic context in the next blog post I will write more about the curriculum we were offering and some of the challenges and opportunities that emerged in these early stages of the training. There is a lot to say...

An alternative view on the bailout

2009-02-06T12:35:00.000-08:00

Published on Friday, February 6, 2009 by The Urban Coaster (Chicago, IL)

Naomi Klein: We’ve Got to Make Obama Do It!

by Matthew Hoffman

In her best-selling book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, Naomi Klein outlines the disturbing trend of governments using crisis as a means for corporate profit-advancement. She cites Hurricane Katrina, 9/11, and Pinochet's Chile as examples of the practice.

Naomi Klein (Photo: FABI/AFP/Getty)

At her January 29 speaking engagement at Loyola University, the award-winning author made the case that America's current economic crisis is just another "big bang moment" in this evolution.

Klein cautioned listeners at the packed 750-seat Mundelein Auditorium against cheerily consenting to the wave of Obama-fueled optimism. Throughout his campaign, Obama rejected the "worn out dogmas" and suggested it was time for an ideological sea change. Klein isn't ready, however, to embrace the recent market interventions as a shift in American policy, and instead implored her audience to work for a deepening, rather than deadening, of democracy in these tense economic times.

The concept of an American version of The Shock Doctrine is predicated upon two basic principles: panic forces the electorate to search out paternalistic political policy; and the resulting distraction stifles public debate.

These conditions nudge the collective American eye off the ball, allowing politicians to "override the will of the electorate." Disillusionment creates what Klein called a "temporary democracy free zone." She argued that the recent economic panic is an explicit example of The Shock Doctrine and she termed the $700 billion bailout the "greatest heist in modern history."

With a total of more than $7 trillion in estimated corporate handouts so far, the world is witnessing the largest transfer of wealth in history. Congress has opened the federal wallet to the financial and automotive sectors, justifying unregulated corporate welfare with warnings of economic collapse, frozen credit markets, and rampant unemployment. This "no-strings-attached" federal policy, orchestrated by former Secretary of Treasury Henry Paulson, offers a disturbing illustration of domestic shock doctrine in action.

Klein said that the recent actions of Paulson and company fly in the face of democracy. She revealed that Paulson began working on the bailout in secret six months prior to its sudden announcement just before the election. She added that a federal willingness to hand out taxpayer funds to banks with no prerequisite lending requirements has not only failed to unfreeze the credit markets, it has put massive pressures on public "entitlements."

In her speech, Klein quoted bank CEOs who referred to the bailout as a "cushion" and an "insurance policy," clearly defining their intent for use of the funds. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's successful enforcement of lending increases in the U.K. version of the bailout clearly shows that it is possible to use built-in regulation to thaw credit markets.

While federal bureaucrats exhibit an obvious aversion for corporate micromanagement, they have eagerly restricted the rights of workers. During negotiations for the auto industry bailout, Congress forced the United Auto Workers to roll back its members' pay to non-union levels prior to releasing funds. Klein remarked that it was odd that they "got this one in writing" after failing to do so with the lending increases from banks.

After issuing caution, Klein offered the Loyola audience cause for optimism and a few possible solutions to the current shock doctrine policies. The author's democracy-reclamation project begins with campaign finance reform. She framed the current economic atmosphere as a dichotomy of people power versus the corporate lobby, with the business set holding a stated advantage until election financing is made more equitable.

Klein's next step is the nationalization of America's banks. Her argument is simple: These private entities have already proved themselves failures within the market. If the banks are not viable, don't throw money at them - nationalize. After bailouts, Klein pointed out, both Citigroup and Bank of America actually received more in federal gifts than their total market value.

The U.S. financial industry has been effectively nationalized by the bailout, but Klein said the banks are "encouraged to pretend they're still private" because, otherwise, shareholders would lose their stakes. She posed the rhetorical question, if private banks knew how to effectively conduct business would this economic crisis exist in the first place? She also pointed out that U.S. taxpayers failed to receive even one seat on the Boards of Directors of any of the banks that have been aided by bailout funds.

Klein advocates green investment in industrial infrastructure as the follow-up to the nationalization of banks. As factories go under in today's economic maelstrom, she argued that government-directed "green audits" should take place to discern the cost of environmental retrofitting the failing shops.

If entrepreneurs are unwilling to take on these costs, Klein suggests that the federal government divert wasteful corporate subsidies and make a national investment in environmentally friendly production. She identifies this as the kind of bold action that would bolster employment and have positive ecological impacts. She posited a local case, the recently shuttered Republic Windows and Doors, as an exemplary instance of need for this "green-audit" policy.

Lastly, Klein encouraged the proliferation of democracy in the workplace. She argued that democratically run workers' cooperatives offer an egalitarian alternative to today's corporate hierarchy. As examples, she cited the success of the Argentinean co-ops portrayed in The Take, a film she made with her husband Avi Lewis.

She also came out strongly in favor of other policies to extend the social safety net so thoroughly picked apart since the Reagan administration. She insisted that it is time for a health care system "that covers every person in the country, and the model that works is single payer health care." Her view matched the sentiments of the local Transition Team Health Forums reported on in the last edition of The Urban Coaster, and her comments were loudly cheered throughout the auditorium.

Klein closed an excellent speech with a deeply relevant anecdote harking back to the New Deal era. President Franklin Roosevelt was well known for maintaining a dialogue with the electorate. At town-hall style meetings, Roosevelt would hear his political base's calls for change and challenge them to "go out and make me do it" - effectively admonishing the public to force his hand on policy.

Klein positioned President Obama as an executive caught in a tug-o-war between corporate and democratic interests, and one who needs to be pushed as FDR was. She stated that, "one scandal at a time, government has failed to extract any kind of meaningful reform." She's hopeful that the American public can remove government from its current position as a "corporate valet."

Klein is optimistic that due to its repeated use around the world, the affected are becoming resistant to the arguments for shock doctrine policy. She said that, "if we want a healthier, more just, and more peaceful world we must go out there and make them do it." And she urged readers, listeners, and interested voters around the world to go about that by demanding "war-levels of funding to fight Global Warming, exploitative health care, inequality, and poverty."

Memo to President Obama

2009-01-31T14:50:00.000-08:00

Memo to President Obama:
Ten Point Plan to Change the Course in Afghanistan

January 2009

As an aid agency implementing rural livelihood programs and supporting partner organizations for close to 20 years in 32 of Afghanistan’s 34 provinces, Oxfam has grave concerns that the current course of events is leaving Afghans less safe and placing extraordinary pressure on their livelihoods.

Afghanistan remains one of the poorest countries in the world; life expectancy is just 45 years and one of every five Afghan children dies before the age of five. Corruption is endemic, including among the police and judiciary, and the government lacks capacity at the local level, especially in key sectors such as agriculture, which forms the bedrock of Afghan livelihoods.

Security conditions are at their worst levels since 2001 and in 2008 insurgent attacks increased by 50% from 2007. Civilian casualties, caused by all sides, have continued to increase, with over 2,000 civilian deaths in 2008. Of these, nearly 800 were the result of international and Afghan government forces, yet there is still no unified or systematic mechanism for compensating victims and their families.

Insecurity has spread to previously stable areas and attacks on aid workers have increased. This is hampering development and humanitarian activities by the Afghan government and aid agencies. As of now, the United Nations cannot access half of the country.

A humanitarian crisis, affecting large parts of Afghanistan, is emerging due to an accumulation of factors, including widespread insecurity, a severe 2007-08 winter, high food prices, drought, and a high volume of returning Afghan refugees - in 2008 some 275,000 refugees returned from Pakistan and over 360,000 Afghans were deported from Iran. As a result of these factors, many Afghans are facing some of the worst conditions they have experienced in twenty years.

In Khers Khana village in Ashterlai, Dakundi province, located in central Afghanistan, farming land was flooded in the spring, fruit trees were damaged and animals killed by the harsh winter, and drought has significantly reduced the wheat yield. With no nearby health clinic and widespread malnutrition, eight children from the village died over the last year from preventable diseases. Families in Dakundi and all over Afghanistan are being forced to take exceptional measures to support their families such as selling their animals, even though livestock prices have significantly fallen, or sending family members to Pakistan or Iran to find work.

Today, up to five million people face food shortages and the health of over a million young children and half a million women is at serious risk due to malnutrition. In 2009, there are likely to be significant food shortages that could adversely affect public health and even spark displacement or civil unrest.

Memo to President Obama 1

There have been improvements in the effectiveness of foreign aid, but a significant proportion of assistance is still uncoordinated, inefficient or has limited impact at the local level. A large volume of aid money goes to private, profit-making companies or pays costly expatriate consultants. Assistance is over-centralized and unevenly spread throughout the country, with a disproportionate share allocated to the southern provinces in which international forces are operating. Too much aid seeks to achieve rapid material results, without sufficiently promoting local ownership, sustainable poverty reduction or longer-term capacity building.

The widespread use of military actors and contractors to implement assistance programs has contributed to a blurring of the distinction between security forces and aid agencies. This has undermined the perceived independence of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), increased the risk for aid workers, and reduced humanitarian operating space and access in Afghanistan and in neighbouring Pakistan. Although Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) in Afghanistan have undertaken significant assistance activities, they have absorbed resources that otherwise could have been devoted to civilian development activities, and so, have hindered the emergence of effective Afghan civilian and community-led development processes.

It is now widely accepted that there is no military solution to the problems facing Afghanistan, and many have called for a change in the strategy of the international community. However, the rapid deterioration of conditions in the country has prompted consideration of quick fixes, rather than long-term, comprehensive efforts.

The United States is the largest and most influential donor in Afghanistan, and as such, has the ability to directly address the deteriorating situation. Based on our research, experience and perspectives from the field, Oxfam has come up with ten steps to help change the course of events in Afghanistan. We believe if adopted in sufficient time, with sufficient political will and resources, these steps can be instrumental to establishing lasting peace and development in Afghanistan.

In short, we believe your Administration should:

1. Support an enhanced response to the humanitarian situation and the expansion of United Nations humanitarian personnel.

2. Support a robust expansion of rural development, especially agricultural development.

3. Actively promote regional cooperation to address humanitarian challenges.

4. Spearhead bold measures to enhance aid effectiveness.

5. Develop conditions under which the Provincial Reconstruction Teams can shift their focus to achieving local security.

6. Press for major governance reforms to generate an effective and accountable Afghan government.

7. Take further substantive measures to prevent harm to civilians.

8. Ensure the establishment of a unified system of monitoring, accountability and compensation for harm or damage to civilians as a result of military operations.

Memo to President Obama 2
9. Press for the establishment of a United Nations-backed regional peace process, involving Afghanistan’s neighbors and all relevant powers.

10. Support an effective national and community level peace-building strategy.

Humanitarian Response and Rural Development

1 Support an enhanced response to the humanitarian situation and the expansion of United Nations humanitarian personnel.

The current humanitarian situation is jeopardizing the health and livelihoods of millions of Afghans, yet the response so far has been slow, fragmented and insufficient. The US and other major donors should provide further support for the humanitarian response by fully funding the Joint Emergency Appeal launched in July 2008, which is currently only 50% funded. In addition, the international community should support and expedite the expansion of the United Nations humanitarian leadership, coordination and monitoring capacity.

The US Ambassador to the UN should support the expansion of the UN’s humanitarian leadership capacity, and the US Secretary of State should press other donors to join the US in fully funding emergency appeals for Afghanistan.

2 Support a robust expansion of rural development, especially agricultural development.

A large proportion of Afghans are food insecure, which is due to a range of factors, but has been exacerbated by insufficient support for agriculture and rural development. Even though 80% of Afghans depend largely on agriculture to feed their families or make a living, this sector receives only a fraction of international funding. With the exception of alternative livelihood programs, support for agriculture comprises less than 5% of USAID’s budget for Afghanistan since 2002; in 2007, agriculture funding comprised less than 1% of US assistance for the security sector.

As food has become increasingly unaffordable for millions of poor Afghans, malnourishment and micronutrient deficiencies are fast becoming major health threats for children under five, and pregnant and lactating women. An estimated 54% of children under five are stunted and 39% are underweight, while 21% of women of reproductive age are malnourished. Lack of access to adequate food is also one of the major factors contributing to high mortality rates. The Afghan government’s capacity to respond to food insecurity and other humanitarian crises is extremely limited, and therefore, it remains reliant on the efforts of the international community. More effective measures must be taken now to improve short- and long-term food security, reduce vulnerability to future disasters, and provide legitimate and viable alternatives to opium poppy cultivation.

The Administrator of USAID should increase the scale and effectiveness of US agricultural assistance at the local level and work to reform the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock. The US should also press for an expansion of UN activities that support and enhance agriculture and rural development.

3 Actively promote regional cooperation to address humanitarian challenges.

At the regional level, steps should be taken to ensure that sufficient commercial and emergency supplies of grain from Pakistan and other countries are reaching Afghanistan.

Memo to President Obama 3
Refugee returns should be voluntary and gradual, and the deportation of Afghan economic migrants from Iran should not be excessive or disproportionate.

Along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, clashes between Pakistani government forces and anti-government fighters have displaced at least 350,000 Pakistanis in the northwest region, including over 200,000 from the Bajaur tribal area alone. These people have lost their homes and livelihoods and are in need of clean water, food, and health assistance. Approximately 80% of those displaced are living with host families who likewise are impoverished and have limited space and resources.

The vast majority of those affected by conflict were already living in abject poverty and have been deprived of essential services due to years of government neglect, highlighted by the pervasive denial of fundamental civil and political rights.

Fighting is also preventing thousands of children and students, including 60,000 in Swat district alone, from attending school. As a result, they face increased risk of exploitation by criminal and extremist groups.

Any strategies to promote peace and development in Afghanistan will be undermined if the people living in Pakistan's northwest border regions continue to be neglected and denied their basic rights, and if there is no effective response to the large-scale displacement.

The US Secretary of State should engage with all countries in the region to ensure that they play an active and constructive role in addressing the humanitarian challenges in Afghanistan as well as northwest Pakistan.

Aid Effectiveness

4 Spearhead bold measures to enhance aid effectiveness.

The US must be commended for its generous and long-standing support for Afghanistan – but that support can achieve greater results on the ground. The US as well as other donors should take bold action to enhance aid effectiveness by increasing local ownership, channeling less aid through private contractors, enhancing aid coordination, and addressing geographical disparities in donor assistance.

To strengthen local ownership, the US should (1) make its aid funding as transparent, predictable and long-term as possible, including providing an indication of overall US assistance to Afghanistan for the next three to five years – as per the Accra Agenda for Action (September 2008), (2) take steps to ensure that Afghans are fully involved in the design and implementation of programs, such as the Afghan National Solidarity Program, and (3) increase the proportion of aid that supports Program Based Approaches, such as those facilitated by the World Bank-managed Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund.

Less US assistance should be channeled through private contractors. USAID allocates nearly half of its funds to five large US contractors, and while contractors are needed in the reconstruction process, excessive amounts of aid continue to be absorbed in corporate profits, especially within the layers of sub-contracts. The work of these contractors is of variable quality, and many are constrained in their ability to promote capacity building and ownership, which are vital factors for sustainability. As an example of extraordinary costs, one research organization has chronicled that, in 2005, USAID contracted the Louis Berger Group to construct a short stretch of road between Kabul center and the international airport. The Louis Berger Group then sub-contracted the project to the Afghan Reconstruction

Memo to President Obama 4
Company, and the road was constructed at a cost of over $2.4 million per kilometer, at least four times the average cost of road construction in Afghanistan.

The US should support and fund a full assessment of the levels of need across Afghanistan in order to address regional disparities in donor assistance. Currently, the majority of aid is going to the southern provinces, which receive, per capita, three or four times what certain other provinces are receiving. For instance, in 2007 USAID was allocating over half of its budget to just four insecure provinces in the south.

The Administrator of USAID should enhance the agency’s coordination with the Afghan government and other donors, review its use of contracting firms, ensure that aid has a clear focus on poverty reduction, and agree with the Afghan government and UN on priority action plans in key sectors that are coordinated, time-bound and focused on achieving local level impact.

5 Develop conditions under which the Provincial Reconstruction Teams can shift their focus to achieving local security.

PRTs can play a key role in security sector reform and can assist with the construction of major infrastructure, but because they are led by foreign militaries, their involvement in development work is unsustainable and in some instances exacerbates insecurity.

In some cases PRTs have diverted resources away from civilian development activities and institution building. For example, the US Commander’s Emergency Response Program for 2008 was close to half a billion dollars, which exceeds the total amount the Afghan government spent on health and education in 2007. In addition, PRTs are limited in their capacity to promote effective development, which is based on Afghan ownership and medium- to long-term capacity building of Afghan institutions.

In the short term it is essential that all military and civilian PRT staff take further steps to ensure full conformity with the newly agreed Civil-Military Guidelines for Afghanistan. In the medium-to-long term, PRTs should transition out of assistance activities and donors should increasingly allocate funds to Afghan civilian and community-led development processes. It is only through Afghan institutions, organizations and communities that we can achieve truly sustainable development in Afghanistan, which will ultimately allow foreign militaries to leave.

The US Secretaries of Defense and State should develop a transition strategy for PRTs, through which they incrementally shift their focus to achieving local security, while over the medium-to-long-term, the development sphere is increasingly occupied by Afghan and civilian actors.

6 Press for major governance reforms to generate an effective and accountable Afghan government.

Corruption is undermining public trust in the Afghan government and hindering its effectiveness. The US should press the Afghan government to achieve greater transparency, increase financial scrutiny and oversight, and take concrete action against high-level corruption. Measures must be taken to remove incompetent or ineffective officials from positions of authority.

Despite some improvements, the institutional and technical capacity of government ministries remains weak, and there are profound deficiencies in human resources. At a sub-national level, state entities have minimal capacity and resources, and there is widespread uncertainty about their roles and responsibilities.

Memo to President Obama 5

The US and other donors should strongly emphasize building the capacity of the Afghan government to deliver essential services at the provincial and district level, and should give stronger support to public administration reform at all levels of government.

Initiatives that are based on political patronage or perceived military advantage are no substitute for genuine reforms that seek to achieve effective and accountable governance. Given the fragile and complex security environment, priority should be given to achieving local security by enhancing and professionalizing the Afghan national police and security forces. In addition, proposals to empower tribes to create community defense forces or to establish new district councils with a security-related function carry a high risk of drawing civilians further into the conflict and therefore if mishandled could prove counter-productive.

As President, press for comprehensive governance reforms, especially at the sub-national level, stressing the need for a greater level of public sector capacity building, the removal of incompetent officials, and concrete action against high-level corruption.

Protection of Civilians

7 Take further substantive measures to prevent harm to civilians.

Civilian casualties caused by international military forces have continued to escalate, up in 2008 by some 30% over the previous year’s record-high figures, and are undermining support for the wider international presence in Afghanistan. Far greater caution and restraint must be exercised in the execution of air strikes, which were up in 2008 by 40% from 2007, and are a major cause of civilian casualties.

As President, issue an executive order creating a high-level position at the Pentagon that will assess the potential human cost of war, promote new and proven techniques to avoid civilian casualties when the US is engaged in battle, maintain proper investigative and statistical data on civilian harm in combat zones, and ensure prompt assistance to any civilians unintentionally harmed by US combat operations.

8 Ensure the establishment of a unified system of monitoring, accountability and compensation for harm or damage to civilians as a result of military operations.

Monitoring and investigation of abuses by military forces has been fragmented, accountability is limited and compensation is inconsistent and not systematic. International military forces should institute measures to enhance transparency with respect to their obligations and commitments to the Afghan people as well as standards of conduct. Troop-contributing states should unify or closely align their mechanisms for monitoring, investigation and compensation. In addition, further measures are required to expand and professionalize Afghan national security forces, and to put an end to abuses against civilians.

The US should fortify its compensation mechanisms by thoroughly investigating all incidents; increasing levels of assistance; processing claims within two years of the filing date; and creating a central record of all claims filed, decisions made and payments dispersed.

The US Secretaries of Defense and State should seek to expand and strengthen existing mechanisms that provide assistance to Afghans who have suffered as a result of US military operations. They should also seek to unify or align all mechanisms for monitoring, accountability and compensation of troop-contributing forces.

Memo to President Obama 6
Peace and Security Initiatives

9 Press for the establishment of a United Nations-backed regional peace process, involving Afghanistan’s neighbors and all relevant powers.

Despite the varied regional interconnections, interests and challenges throughout a range of sectors, including security, population movements, trade, trafficking, and energy supply, there has been no attempt to forge a comprehensive regional approach to Afghanistan, especially on security issues. Therefore, a process needs to be developed that is backed by the United Nations and supported by the US. It should involve all relevant countries and directly address their major political, security and economic concerns. Ultimately, it should strive for resolution of the region’s conflicts, address underlying causes of insecurity, and achieve regional support for Afghanistan with respect to its security, political independence, territorial integrity, and economic development.

As President, initiate a dialogue on broad-based regional cooperation, and explore the possibilities for establishing a framework for a regional peace process.

10 The US should support an effective national and community-level peace-building strategy.

Peace-building is rarely mentioned in the Afghan National Development Strategy, and there has been little progress on the Afghan government’s Action Plan for Peace, Justice and Reconciliation. The US should lend its political and financial support to an effective and inclusive peace-process that is active at both the national and local level. As highlighted by Oxfam in earlier reports, insecurity in Afghanistan often has multiple, local causes and consequences, and local violence and insecurity not only impede development, but are exploited by militants, warlords and criminal groups to strengthen their positions in the wider conflict. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a national strategy for ground-level peace-building and conflict resolution: progress achieved at the national level by power-holders can only be sustainable if it has the support of the Afghan people and rests on the foundation of local-level security.

The Administrator of USAID should provide financial support and necessary technical assistance to NGOs involved in local peace-building, and should give support to the development of a national strategy for community peace-building that is led by Afghan civil society.

Conclusion

With increasing and expanding insecurity, weak governance, and an impending humanitarian crisis, events in Afghanistan have reached a critical juncture. While Oxfam commends the significant aid contributions of the US and other major donors, development and stability can only be achieved by concerted, determined and effective action. These ends require a substantive, long-term international commitment to the Afghan people, both in resources and political will. Such action, in which the US has a central role to play, has never been more essential, as the lives and livelihoods of millions of Afghans and the future stability of Afghanistan and the wider region are at stake.

Memo to President Obama 7

Afganistan-Barack on the wrong track

2009-01-31T14:37:00.000-08:00

Published on Saturday, January 31, 2009 by Reuters

Oxfam Says New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan

by Jonathon Burch

KABUL - The United States must change its strategy in Afghanistan if it is to avoid a humanitarian crisis, with millions of Afghans struggling to survive and violence at its worst levels since 2001, an aid group said on Saturday.

Afghan villagers shout slogans against the U.S. and Afghan governments during a demonstration following a U.S. operation in their village, in Mehterlam, capital of Laghman province, east of Kabul, Afghanistan on Sunday, Jan. 25, 2009. (AP Photo/Rahmat Gul)

After almost three decades of war, Afghanistan remains one of the poorest and least developed countries in the world. Drought and high food prices have also hit many Afghans hard.

On top of that some 5,000 people, including more than 2,000 civilians, were killed in 2008 and insurgent attacks were up by 50 percent on the previous year.

"With spreading insecurity, and civilians facing critical needs, there must be a comprehensive new strategy which will avert a major crisis," Raymond Offenheiser, president of Oxfam America, a British-based charity said in a statement.

In a memo sent to U.S. President Barack Obama, Oxfam, which has worked in Afghanistan for more than 20 years, outlined a 10 point plan aimed at changing U.S. policy that if adopted, it says, will help bring lasting peace and development.

Washington is conducting a major review of strategy in Afghanistan and is expected to deploy up to 30,000 more U.S. troops and commit much bigger development assistance.

But instead of focussing on military efforts, the United States and other donors should step up their humanitarian assistance and concentrate on long-term solutions as opposed to quick fixes, Oxfam said in its memo to Obama.

"With faltering reconstruction and rising instability, the United States must look beyond military solutions and take a leading role in protecting civilians and forging a new international approach to Afghanistan," Offenheiser said.

While the United States is by far the largest donor to Afghanistan pouring billions of dollars in aid into the impoverished country, humanitarian assistance is dwarfed by that spent on military operations.

The U.S. military alone spends some $100 million a day fighting Taliban insurgents, but spending on aid by all donors since 2001 amounts to only $7 million a day, aid agencies say.

In 2007, U.S. funding for the agricultural sector was less than 1 percent of what it spent on security, despite 80 percent of Afghans relying heavily on agriculture to survive, said Oxfam.

Up to five million Afghans face food shortages this year and more than a million young children and half a million women face serious health risks due to malnutrition, it said.

Only half of a United Nations emergency appeal for $404 million for Afghanistan, launched last July, has been funded.

Posted in War/Empire, Afghanistan

11 Comments so far

Show All

rumiluv January 31st, 2009 5:28 pm

"Knee deep in the big muddy"--Pete Seeger

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

John Sullivan January 31st, 2009 5:11 pm

"If you get into trouble so far from home, you've got to be looking for it."
----WILL ROGERS

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

DavidC January 31st, 2009 3:47 pm

DMC:

All one has to do is watch the video at http://www.911missinglinks.com, to know our country has no reason to be in Afghanistan, much less Iraq. Even if the '911' attacks had been done by Islamic terrorists hiding in Afghanistan, it would hardly justify the many years our military has been fighting over there, which only bleeds our country economically and militarily. Putin knows this, so he invited the UN and US forces to use Russian airspace to send more military materiel and troops to Afghanistan. We now know without doubt that the House of Rothschild (HOR) Zionist entity was behind the '911' attacks, and most of the other false-flag attacks, wars, revolutions, and economic crises of the past century (and more). The world needs to wake-up to reality, and purge the HOR entity from our banking systems, media, education, and government (plus legal system, allopathic fascist medicine, etc.). These people are guilty of committing war-crimes and crimes against humanity, so the HOR and all its supporters, including journalists and internet 'warriors', need to be brought to justice at international criminal court tribunals. These people are guilty for being criminals, NOT for being "Jewish", and their attempt to hide behind Jewish people yet again is doomed to failure. The HOR created the persecution and suffering of Jewish people previously, and they are the worst enemy Jewish people have. Google-> "House of Rothschild" and "Zionism+911" for more information on this most important topic. The people of the world need to spread the Intifada (Arabic, literally to "shake off") and shake off the HOR parasites of humanity, once and for all.

Intifada ~ Shalom

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

locust January 31st, 2009 3:21 pm

Nothing will change until the American people get tired of being stuck in the 'war on terror', waged to 'prevent future terrorism' by our announced enemies al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

No new strategy will be successful, because the underlying insanity of fighting an unwinnable war is never addressed.

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

Bubbasouth January 31st, 2009 2:43 pm

Only one "new strategy" need apply: US/NATO out of Afghanistan. Get out and stay out.

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

freeyourmind January 31st, 2009 1:47 pm

The drug trade restored by the US puppet regime! While oil and oil pipelines out of the Caspian sea basin were undoubtedly a factor, the bombing of Afghanistan also served to restore the multi billion drug trade, which is protected by the CIA. Immediately following the installation of the US puppet government under Prime Minister Hamid Kharzai, opium production soared, regaining its historic levels. According to the UNDCP, opium cultivation increased by 657% in 2002(in relation to its 2001 level) In the immediate wake of September 11, the price of opium in Afghanistan increased three-fold. By early 2002, the price was almost ten times higher than in the year 2000. Its called the Afghan Golden Crescent drug trade and it represents approximately one third of the worldwide annual turnover of narcotics. The UN estimates about 500 billion a year.

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

m156 January 31st, 2009 1:50 pm

This commentary by a former BBC correspondent is useful in understanding where functionaries of a BINGO like Oxfam are coming from.

Michael Maren, author of The Road to Hell: The Ravaging Effects of Foreign Aid and International Charity has called their impact "positively evil." Here's an interview of Maren who spent decades in Third World hot-spots on the payroll of saintly organizations that exist "courtesy of First World saps who had been guilt-tripped out of their money".

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

Humbaba January 31st, 2009 1:28 pm

U.S. funding for the agricultural sector was less than 1 percent of what it spent on security, despite 80 percent of Afghans relying heavily on agriculture to survive,,,

...but then Big Oil's war on Afghanistan isn't about feeding starving Afghanis, it never was, but it's all about feeding bloated oilygarchs. Obama knows that.
Iraq's oil is already in the bag so onto Afghinistan and Iran. Neo-Cons never die, they just change color.

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

tanguero January 31st, 2009 11:42 am

President Obama needs a new strategy in Afghanistan. He must reverse course from the failed Bush policies. With Roberts Gates still in there though, it is unlikely that anything different will happen. This is Vietnam all over again. An inspiring young leader hoping to make broad social changes inherits a failed military policy and gets stuck in the mud, this time the sand.

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

DCBeltway1 January 31st, 2009 12:21 pm

Sand Tanguero? More like mud. Afghanistan is a mountainous region think Hindu Kush. Afghans are not Arabs and Afghanistan is in Central Asia not the Arab World. Afghans speak Dari and Pushtu not Arabic.

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

glenn ford January 31st, 2009 1:13 pm

Will Obama recognize a no brainner when he sees it?

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)

Nonviolence Works

2009-01-21T06:27:00.000-08:00

Published on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 by Reuters

Activist Spreads King's

Teachings on Nonviolence

by Andrea Shalal-Esa

WASHINGTON - Bernard LaFayette, beaten and arrested 27 times during the civil rights movement, has spent his life working toward a goal the movement's leader Martin Luther King shared with him hours before he was killed.

Bernard LaFayette recounts his experiences during the Civil Rights Movement in Birmingham, Alabama on January 10, 2009. LaFayette, beaten and arrested 27 times during the civil rights movement, has spent his life working toward a goal the movement's leader Martin Luther King shared with him hours before he was killed. (Reuters/Pamela Zappardino/Handout/United States)

"I devoted my life to fulfilling Martin Luther King's last request," said LaFayette, who said King had been gearing up to take his teachings on nonviolence around the world and ensure that became fully embedded in society.

King would have been heartened by the inauguration of Barack Obama as the first black U.S. president, but his dream was focused on a bigger goal of curing economic disparities and ending what he called "the curse of war," said LaFayette.

A trained minister and professor at Atlanta's Emory University, LaFayette said Obama's election underscored a desire for change at a time when the United States was again mired in an unpopular war and facing huge economic challenges.

"They didn't vote for him because he was black. They voted for him ... because they saw some hope and the possibility of change," he said, adding that Obama embodied King's principle of reaching out to one's enemies and seeking reconciliation.

"They wanted to be part of something," LaFayette added, remembering his own involvement as a young college student in peaceful sit-ins at white lunch counters, bus rides to integrate transportation in the segregated South, and later, voter drives to ensure all African-Americans could vote.

After King's assassination in April 1968, violence and riots in more than 125 cities left 46 people dead and 2,600 injured in an outpouring of African-American outrage that flew in the face of King's work on nonviolence, but made LaFayette even more determined to continue that mission.

Forty-one years later, LaFayette estimates he has trained and certified over 20,000 individuals in King's six principles of nonviolence, including 3,000 Miami police officers and hundreds of inmates in one of Colombia's most violent prisons.

He has helped set up 22 nonviolence centers in poor areas of the United States and places like Palestine and Nigeria,

"In the places where we've been able to institutionalize it, we've seen some dramatic results," he said, citing a bill introduced in the Colombian parliament that would mandate nonviolence training in all schools, from kindergarten on.

LaFayette also worked with prisoners to dramatically reduce violence at the Bellavista prison in Colombia where inmates once cut off a guard's head and played soccer with it.

In Miami, nonviolence training helped police avert riots in 1992 after an all-white jury acquitted four policemen accused of beating black motorist Rodney King, LaFayette said. By contrast, Los Angeles had its worst riots since 1965.

(Reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa)

Posted in Activism, inequality

1 Comment so far

Show All

eileenfleming January 20th, 2009 7:24 pm

I heard Dr. LaFayette speak in east Jerusalem, Nov. 2008 at Sabeel's 7th International Conference:

The Ongoing NAKBA:

http://www.wearewideawake.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=...

He said he has seen many movements and he was witnessing another one through the work of Sabeel/Arabic for The Way.........

In the ‘60’s two black men in America; one a Christian and one a Muslim shared a similar dream with different philosophies and means to achieve them.

Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. had “a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed… that all men are created equal.”

Malcolm X’s radical creed was, “Anything you can think of that you want to change right now, the only way you can do it is with a ballot or a bullet. And if you’re not ready to get involved with either one of those, you are satisfied with the status quo. That means we’ll have to change you.”

Both men dreamed of a world freed from the bondage of prejudice and racism, a world in which their children would not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

While King consistently advocated for a brotherhood of all peoples and persisted in only nonviolent actions to achieve it; not until after a pilgrimage to Mecca, did X evolve in his spirituality and thus reject his separatist beliefs and begin to advocate for unity and a world wide brotherhood.

Both can be said to have fully understood that there are “truths that are self-evident: That all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights;…[and] that, to secure [those] rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; and, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.”- The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.

Both men engaged in the struggle to wake up good people whose ears were not ready to hear, whose eyes were not ready to see and whose hearts were not yet pierced to bleed for the least and oppressed of humanity. Both men were shot dead before either could see any of their dreams realized.

A few weeks before Rev. King bled to death on a patch of pavement in Memphis, he said:

“Peace for Israel means security, and we stand with all our might to protect its right to exist…I see Israel as one of the greatest outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy.”

King died ten months after the 40 years of Israel’s Military occupation of Palestine began.

On May 14, 1948, The Declaration of the establishment of Israel proclaimed:

“On the day of the termination of the British mandate and on the strength of the United Nations General Assembly declare The State of Israel will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel: it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion it will guarantee freedom of religion [and] conscience and will be faithful to the Charter of the United Nations.”

The Hebrew prophet Amos prayed:

“Let JUSTICE roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever flowing stream.”

I contend that if King and X had lived, they would have followed the call of Amos and would have called for an IMMEDIATE Bilateral ceasefire, free flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and END to the Israeli Occupation and upholding of Universal Human Rights, upon which Israel’s statehood was CONTINGENT upon upholding.

On the evening of April 4, 1968, while standing on the balcony of his motel room in Memphis, Tennessee, where he was to lead a protest march in sympathy with striking garbage workers of that city, Martin Luther King, Jr., was assassinated.

In KEEP HOPE ALIVE,

I began with Chapter One:

THE MORNING AFTER APRIL 4, 1968:

http://www.wearewideawake.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=...

Eileen Fleming, Author, Founder WAWA:
http://www.wearewideawake.org/
Producer "30 Minutes With Vanunu" and "13 Minutes with Vanunu"

Login or register to post comments
report this comment

Join the discussion:

You must be logged in to post a comment. If you haven't registered yet, click here to register. (It's quick, easy and free. And we won't give your email address to anyone.)

History Matters

2009-01-21T06:20:00.001-08:00

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

History Matters

I am just returning from three deeply moving days in Georgia and Alabama. While there I met several amazing people including a 90 year old man in Birmingham who during the Civil Rights Movement removed a bomb with his own hands and saved a church filled with children from being blow up.

He like so many others sacrificed in the service of freedom, showing profound courage in the face of racial and economic violence. The freedoms we enjoy now in this country, like the right to vote for all, were not, as 97-year-old Alabama civil rights veteran Amelia Boynton Robinson said, "handed down on a silver platter" they were successfully fought for in the Civil Rights Movement by nonviolen means. The veterans of that movement are now moving on and I felt honored to meet with them and to learn from them as their actions just a few decades ago have forever shifted the trajectory of this nation and my life. The battles we face now for equal education, health care and a healthy economy will require sacrifices and informed action and as a result learning from the courageous lives of these peacemakers is essential.

While on the trip I was interviewed by a reporter from Reuters (article below) about the significance of this moment in time. Indeed I think history matters, we are continually faced with a mounting body of evidence that violence does not serve as a way of creating peace and prosperity. As the economy weakens and the gap between rich and poor widens, as our military budget reaches unprecedented levels, as our children are being left behind, we are faced with a growing responsibility to step it up, to dedicate ourselves to finding nonviolent ways to serve our country and the world.

Fortunately we are not alone in rising to meet this challenge, there are people working right now and a rich history to draw from. As I traveled through the deep south meeting with people who have been fighting for justice for many decades I was reminded that profound social change is possible. The Obama victory is a historic reminder of such progress and yet we have a long way to go. As we are tempted to shrink back from our own fear as a result of lessening economic security, we must ask tough questions: What will these difficult economic times mean for those already struggling? How can we support people from all walks of life and economic and racial backgrounds not just corporate CEOs and those who have access to resources. If we cannot afford programs for social upliftment then how can we afford to maintain a military budget that is greater then the budget of every other nation combined?

We carry with us many great stories of people who have made this country better by transforming injustice with love, courage and strength. It is too infrequent that the media features such uplifting stories and so I wanted to share this inspiring article with you. Let me know what you think.

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE50B4H720090112?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=10112

Peace,
Arthur

Nonviolence Now

Peace Education Booklet Release

The Mess at Medgar Evers College

No Christmas presents again? Why we don’t want to believe that Santa has been visiting some people more than others.

Women fighting for the Right to Vote helped show Gandhi the way

Gandhi, the English suffragettes, and non-violent direct action

Reposted from: International Museum of Women http://www.imow.org/community/blog/viewEntry?id=34

Gandhi, the English suffragettes, and non-violent direct action

Log In

Nigeria 1

An alternative view on the bailout

Naomi Klein: We’ve Got to Make Obama Do It!

Memo to President Obama

Afganistan-Barack on the wrong track

Oxfam Says New US Strategy Needed in Afghanistan

11 Comments so far

Comment viewing options

Join the discussion:

Nonviolence Works

CommonDreams.org

Activist Spreads King's

Teachings on Nonviolence

1 Comment so far

Comment viewing options

Join the discussion:

History Matters

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

History Matters