The Founders and Police Brutality

The real tragedy of the police brutality we're seeing in the attacks on Occupy is that we have the means to stop it but we let the 1% take it away from us.

The Founders anticipated what we're seeing, citizens rising-up to protest their government's actions and they feared the government's response. They knew professional "peacekeepers" would act as we've seen our militarized police act so they gave us the Second Amendment.

The notion of a professional police force acting responsibly is foolish. Ultimately, all professionals must be loyal to their profession. That's what drove the Founders to add the Second Amendment to the Constitution. It's not about guns. It's about ensuring our police and military are civilians called to service, that is, a militia, common citizens bearing arms for the benefit of their communities not to earn an income. What's a professional going to do when his commander tells him to pepper spray protestors? Pull the trigger or refuse, knowing he'll be fired?

The Founders thought they had a better way. They thought the guy next door, called for crowd control, wouldn't unload a can of pepper spray into your daughters face. They gave the People the right to control the security forces but we've allowed the 1% to pervert the Second Amendment. We've allowed a gun industry lobby, the National Rifle Association, to use the Second Amendment to sell guns. They've manipulated public policy to create private profit.

Now we have to march in protest to get back the government the Founders gave us. It's a shame and a tragedy we have to endure the consequences of our complacency but it's the only way to fix the problem we created.

Defending Occupy

Comments at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, stltoday.com, site seem overwhelmingly to be anti-Occupy, most recently on this story:St. Louis officials say time for Occupy protesters to leave plaza. Commenters seem to believe the violence and crime now being more frequently reported damns the Occupy movement.

That troubled me.

I believe the underlying reasons for Occupy to be progressive and good for the country but have to admit the crime and violence are a problem. We can't expect to gain the support of Americans if they see police in riot gear hauling-away protestors every night on TV. That creates a very bad impression and might be enough to marginalize the movement.

One way to combat that impression is to remind America that Occupy is attracting a variety of persons. As one blogger notes:

...Keep in mind that the whole Occupy Movement is one big populist shindig. It may vary from place to place,but the "Occupations" are full of people from all over the polticial spectrum. Some see this "broadness" as a really good thing. Some, like me, question it. Combine a so called leaderless movement with no common political oreintation and what do you get? Who is to say, who represents what, who is to do what, what tactic is correct, which slogan to shout, what sign to hold up? At some point the Occupy movement has to decide what it wants to be and whose interest it wants to represent...or it will implode. For how long can you have anarchists, Marxists, Ron Paul supporters, right wing libertarians, dogmatic pacifists, liberals, feel good people, angry people, people who intend to defend themselves and more, capitalists, petty bourgois, workers, unemployed. business owners, professionals, anti racists, racists, and all that and more in an "ain't we got fun" atmosphere?

WHAT LAST NIGHT'S CLASH IN OAKLAND MEANS AND DID IT HAVE TO HAPPEN

If we can't defend Occupy, it is doomed.

Tea Party Screams for Death

In last night's Tea Party-sponsored Republican debate, Wolf Blitzer asked Ron Paul if a sick person in a coma who didn't have health insurance should be allowed to die. Before he had a chance to answer, some in the audience yelled "yes."

If anyone needed any further reason to despise the Tea Party, this is it. Not only is the willingness to allow someone to die when we have the capacity to save him immoral, it's antipathetic to the intent of the Constitution. For the Tea Party to claim the mantle of patriotism is outrageous.

Conservatism is a vile political orientation but the Tea Party are the worst of the worst. Their insistence on public policies which are narrowly focused on their own self-interest are an insult to all the traditions we would like to regard as the American Way. We can be thankful their influence on our political direction is diminishing but until the stain of their existence is finally wiped-away they will remain an embarrassment to the American People.

Global Obstruction Pathology (GOP)

An emotional defect which causes the afflicted not only to resist the normal human tendency to work with others toward solutions to common problems but also to interfere with their attempts. It is not limited to particular activities or interests but extends to all areas of concern. We see manifestation of this pathology in the Republican Party, a political association organized around resistance to progressive public policy and pursuit of regressive polices.

America Needs a Labor Party

I was banned from Democratic Underground because I asked why I should support gay marriage. Just that question branded me as a homophobe. That's OK. Democratic Underground doesn't set the standard for political action in the US. We need a class war and the liberals at Democratic Underground don't have what it takes.

A few months ago, Richard Trumka seemed to be moving Labor away from the Democrats and now we're seeing more signs of the division. The Democrats chose North Carolina for their convention next year and some unions don't like it. They won't abandon the Democrats over their choice of convention sites but they'll move a little farther away.

I'm encouraged.

America needs a labor party. A party with the economic interests of working Americans as its sole and undivided focus. No abortion. No gay marriage. No green anything. Just wages and working conditions. That party never will be the Republicans. They've pretty much declared themselves to be stooges for the plutocracy, order takers for the likes of the Koch brothers. The Democrats have had their chance and they squandered it. They paid too much attention to the special interests on the fringe of American society.

So where is Labor now? Maybe they're at or soon to reach a point where they realize they have only themselves to care for their interests. It's not a bad place to be. Every successful journey must begin with knowing where you are and where you want to be.

One Step Toward More Jobs

America needs jobs. It would be best to have new the jobs come organically from boom times. But with private investors withholding their capital and with the government held back by the extremists of the political right, we have no prospect of the massive infusion of money we need to make the economy grow.

What can we do?

Well, one idea which wouldn't take a lot of new money would be splitting-up the jobs we have now. We could do that by eliminating income tax deductions for compensation paid for time over 32 hours a week. That would make current employees more expensive and new employees less expensive. Some employers would respond with reduction of hours allowed current employees and new hiring to make-up the time.

Of course, some current employees may be adverse to losing time but others may welcome the possibility of more free time if they don't need as much income as they have.

It's not a perfect solution but, given the difficulties we face, it's one step we can take.

A Congress of Aristocrats

Like many Progressives, I'm often puzzled by the failure of Congress to do what seems clearly in the best interest of the American People. What seems to benefit the greatest number of Americans seems never to be given more than cursory attention in Congress, if any at all. How can anyone in Congress, for instance, place more importance on any other issue than the employment crisis? It's resolution is critical to every American not just those who are unemployed. Even those who have jobs know they can lose them easily in an economy teetering on the brink of collapse. Why did Congress focus its attention on debt and the deficit when so many Americans are so close to economic devastation?

Then the answer was revealed. In Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1% Joseph E. Stiglitz writes:

Virtually all U.S. senators, and most of the representatives in the House, are members of the top 1 percent when they arrive, are kept in office by money from the top 1 percent, and know that if they serve the top 1 percent well they will be rewarded by the top 1 percent when they leave office.

How can we expect our representatives in Congress to care about the interests of the American People when their good fortune and large fortunes shape their perspective? For the most part, they're so affluent they never will have to worry about making the next payment on a used car or finding the money to buy groceries or pay the doctor. That's a big problem.