Bulletin N°508



25 November 2011
Grenoble, France

Dear Colleagues and Friends of CEIMSA,
Early the other morning I prepared breakfast for my daughter before school. We sat in the semi-dark kitchen with our plates on the table before us. I had prepared poached eggs, with toast and tea. As we ate, we spoke about the economic crisis in Greece and in Italy, of homelessness and poverty in the United States, and naturally of the massive demonstrations from Cairo, Egypt to Davis, California.

Was the world turning upside down? she wondered. I suggested that our situation was much like passengers on a speeding bus, who discover that the bus driver is drunk and that our lives are in imminent danger. Gradually it becomes painfully obvious to us that this man has the power of life and death over all of us. As we speak to one another, it becomes increasingly clear that we all share the same interests, namely that we want the bus brought to a stop immediately and this man taken out of the driver's seat. We are not talking about who will replace him, or whether it is preferable that we walk instead of ride in the bus. The urgency of our situation requires that we prioritize our objectives, and on this priority we can easily agree. Together we can overcome the driver and bring the bus to a stop, thus saving the lives of everyone.

Just how far can this analogy go? My daughter suggested that buses polluted the air and that it would be preferable if everyone had a bicycle, or some other mode of environmentally friendly transportation. But what if someone else wanted to take the bus driver's place and she promised to drive more safely? I asked. She was adamant: The bus must go! It pollutes our environment.

There is something attractive about the autonomy that a bicycle represents. You are on your own and can go at any speed you choose and stop anytime you wish. Mass transportation, like mass society, implies a powerlessness; you are simply required to submit to someone who has somehow acquired power over your life. Sometimes this sort of submission is beneficial; I recalled going into surgery: my life was literally in the hands of a doctor, and I had to trust his competence and his good will. But, putting your life in the hands of a banker is another proposition. Worse that a drunken bus driver, the banker is not just a menace, he is a predator, out to rob the system for everything he can get --if he gets there first. Like the legendary Count Dracula, he is willing and able to destroy his "host" in an effort to satisfy his insatiable hunger --he is a threat to the entire political economy upon which the world depends and to the citizens of this world. He has already left a bloody trail of walking zombies in the carnage he has caused.

My daughter got up from the kitchen table and put on her coat to bicycle to school. She looked at me, and asked me to buy some oatmeal for tomorrow's breakfast; it's better than eggs, she reminded me, for the cardiovascular system; and she left to meet her friends as school.

The 7 items below may draw our attention to the dependent power hierarchies of which we are a part. Like the drunker bus driver mentioned above, or the hungry banker living off the life blood of others, our daily lives and well being depend on powers presently beyond our control. When we realize that these powers over us are illegitimate (i.e. that we could live better without them), then all that remains is to organize and to seize control over these forces that ruin us. This is a question of tactics, of course, and of logistics, and of scientific competence; and no longer a question of Grand Strategy. We know what we want, and solidarity, mutual trust, and compassion are essential qualities that will make or break our social movement to get this man out of the driver's seat and to bring this system to a halt.

Item A. is a video documenting : The Wall of Shame and a deafening silence of protest, when UC Davis Chancellor Linda P. B. Katehi walks from her office to her car on the evening of November 19, following the afternoon attack by police that she ordered against students occupying the Davis campus.

Item B. is a video of the violent pepper spray attack on student protesters on the UC-Davis campus, the afternoon of November 19. which has since gone viral to represent fascist police tactics against protesters in the United States.

Item C. is an article sent to us by Professor Edward Herman, in which Joseph Massad writes of the US-Syria connection.

Item D. is a report from The Real News on "The Coming Global Recession."

Item E., sent to us by Professor Richard Wolff is the recording of his talk at "Occupy Boston" on 17 November.

Item F., sent to us by Michael Parenti, is an article that reviews the historical significance of the OWS movement: "Occupy America".

And finally, we suggest that CEIMSA readers read Jerry Ashton's November 21 article in the Huffington Post :

"America's Financial Institutions and Student Lenders - ATTENTION: OWS'  'Occupy Student Debt' Committee Has Something to Say"

Francis McCollum Feeley
Professor of American Studies
Director of Research
Université Stendhal Grenoble 3

from Francis Feeley :
Date: 19 November 2011.
Subject: "The Wall of Shame" at UC Davis.

On Friday, police officers at the University of California, Davis doused students with pepper spray for sitting together with locked arms. (Please see Item B.) This act was perceived as a “threat,” according to the officers. Last night, students lined the way between UC Davis Chancellor Katehi’s office and her car, and sat in silence as she walked out of the building to go home. The silence is deafening in this video :

UC Davis Chancellor Katehi walks to her car


from Francis Feeley :
Date: 19 November 2011
Subject: The infamous "Pepper Spray Attack" at UC Davis.

UC Davis Police Violence Adds Fuel to Fire

by Scott Galindez,

The Revolution Will Be Live Streamed: Global Revolution TV, the Occupy Movement’s Video Hub

For the past two months, a website called Global Revolution TV has become the main video hub for the Occupy Wall Street movement. Featuring live video feeds from New York and dozens of other cities hosting Occupy protests, the site has transformed how protests are covered and observed. When OWS protesters hold a General Assembly in Zuccotti Park, the gathering is usually live streamed across the world. When police raided the park early on Tuesday, it was caught on live stream as well. We speak to one of the site’s co-founders, Vlad Teichberg. He is a former derivatives trader who gave up a life in the financial world to work on video activism. “This project started initially with the beginning of the New York occupation. Other, similar versions of this project had been done in the past for other actions and revolts,” Teichberg says. “People think of Occupy Wall Street as an American revolution. It has its roots though, in the Arab Spring, obviously, which inspired a lot of things. And it has very direct roots in the Spanish revolution.”

from Edward S. Herman :
Date: 20 November 2011
Subject: The struggle for Syria.

Joseph Massad is very good.
ed h

The struggle for Syria
by Joseph Massad

The Syrian people are being sacrificed at the altar of US imperialism, says author.

"It was the United States that destroyed Syrian democracy in 1949,
when the CIA sponsored the first coup in the country ending democratic rule"
As the uprising proceeded in Tunisia last December and January and as it picked up in Egypt in January and February, developments seemed clear. Despite attempts to suppress the press, much of the news of what was unfolding reached national and international audiences immediately. The situation changed dramatically when the uprisings began in Bahrain, Yemen, Libya, Syria, Oman, and Saudi Arabia. While a quasi news blackout suppressed coverage of the ongoing popular revolt and its violent suppression in Bahrain by Bahraini and Saudi forces (and only intermittent coverage of Oman was allowed), we continued to get important updates from Yemen. It was in Libya where the lies and propaganda started from the first week of the revolt. It was there that international forces, extending from the Gulf to Europe to the US, took charge of propagandising against Gaddafi (that he used his forces to strafe demonstrators, that his forces received Viagra and raped hundreds of women, that he used "African" mercenaries against his own people, that he was preparing to use chemical weapons against his people, that he had already killed 50,000 Libyans, etc. - all proved to be lies that international observers and agencies finally exposed as baseless fabrications) and ultimately of overthrowing Gaddafi’s dictatorship under the guise of the popular uprising led by NATO forces who actually bombed and killed hundreds of Libyan civilians.

We have seen similar developments on the Syrian scene with much propaganda by the regime and its international enemies who also began to speak for the popular revolt, whether in the Gulf-controlled press and satellite television stations, or by the Western media, and the Western "representatives" of the Syrian demonstrators.

In the cases of Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, and Yemen (not to mention Morocco, Jordan, Oman, and Saudi Arabia where less massive but substantial demonstrations have continued for months), the Arab League, under US instructions, made no move to intervene at all, while in the cases of Syria and Libya, following US instructions, the League moved swiftly. This is not the first time that the League moves against a member state to facilitate foreign invasions. The dress rehearsal for this was the Iraq situation in 1990/1991, when the Arab League (like the United Nations following the fall of the Soviet Union) became another arm of US imperial power. It was then that the League joined forces with US and European powers to invade the Gulf, which was the first step in legitimising the second American invasion in 2003 to unseat Saddam Hussein. Saddam was a brutal dictator that the US and France helped sponsor in the 1980s and who did their bidding when he invaded Iran, an invasion that led to the death of one million Iranians and four hundred thousand Iraqis. But Saddam was not fully obedient to imperial will and retained a measure of independence from US imperialism despite his valuable services to it. At the time, many cautioned the so-called Iraqi opposition in exile, which called for the invasion, that the US invasion would result in an imposition of a regime that is at least as bad as Saddam if not worse. The loss of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives and the total destruction of the country, the massive current repression and corruption of the American-installed regime, one would think, should be a cautionary tale to any Arab who seeks US help in overthrowing Arab dictators.
But if the story of Iraq is ignored, could anyone ignore the calamity that is hitting Libya as we speak under the guise of the new NATO-led government, and the first dose of violence and repression this government has unleashed on the Libyan people in the name of NATO democracy (more doses are in store of course)? Did the Libyan people revolt against the brutal dictatorship of Gaddafi to replace it with NATO-sponsored pillage and repression?
A lesson in imperialism

This is the lesson for those in Syria who are struggling to bring about democratic rule. The evidence is clear. If you live in an Arab country whose dictator is a client of the Americans, the US will do everything in its power to suppress your revolt, and if you succeed despite US efforts, the US will sponsor the counter-revolution against you directly and indirectly through its local allies, especially Saudi Arabia and Israel, but now also Qatar. This of course applies to the situations in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen, Morocco, Jordan, Oman, and in Saudi Arabia itself. If you happen to live in a country whose dictator, though friendly to the West, maintains an independent line on foreign policy or at least a line that cannot always be guaranteed to serve Western interests - and this applies to Syria and Iran (and lest we forget their services to the West, both countries helped actively the US effort to unseat Saddam, and the Syrian regime helped with US efforts in supporting rightwing forces in Lebanon against the Lebanese left and the PLO in the 1970s) and less so Libya, then the US will help sponsor your revolt against your dictator to bring about a more pliant dictator to serve its interests without equivocation, and it will do so in the name of supporting democracy. The US also explains its counter-revolutionary efforts in countries where the revolts succeeded in overthrowing the American-sponsored dictators as "pro-democratic" measures.
In this context of a US-dominated world, those in Syria who legitimately have struggled and are struggling to bring about an end to dictatorship must face up to a few central questions, now that the Arab League and imperial powers have taken over and assumed the leadership of their struggle: Is the aim of their ongoing uprising the overthrow of the Asad regime in order to bring about a democratic regime, or is it simply to overthrow Asad? As the Iraqi and Libyan precedents make clear, the Arab League and imperial powers have taken over the Syrian uprising in order to remove the Asad regime and replace it with a US-obedient regime like the ones installed in all other Arab countries. The second question for the Syrian demonstrators is clear and unequivocal: given the aim of imperial forces and the Arab League, do Syrian demonstrators understand the new leadership of their struggle by Gulf dictators and the United States as the final defeat of their uprising or as a necessary step for their uprising to succeed?
Those who see the Syrian popular struggle for democracy as having already been hijacked by these imperial and pro-imperial forces inside and outside Syria understand that a continuation of the revolt will only bring about one outcome, and it is not a democratic one - namely, a US-imposed pliant and repressive regime à la Iraq and Libya. If this is what the Syrian demonstrators are struggling for, then they should continue their uprising; if this is not their goal, then they must face up to the very difficult conclusion that they have been effectively defeated, not by the horrifying repression of their own dictatorial regime which they have valiantly resisted, but rather by the international forces that are as committed as the Syrian regime itself to deny Syrians the democracy they so deserve. In light of the new move by the Arab League, the US, and Europe, the struggle to overthrow Asad may very well succeed, but the struggle to bring about a democratic regime in Syria has been thoroughly defeated.
It was the United States that destroyed Syrian democracy in 1949 when the CIA sponsored the first coup d’état in the country ending democratic rule. It is again the United States that has destroyed the possibility of a democratic outcome of the current popular uprising. My deep condolences to the Syrian people.

Joseph Massad is Associate Professor of Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University in New York.
The views expressed in the article are the author's own and do not necessarily represent Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

from The Real News :
Date: 24 November 2011
Subject: The Coming Global Recession:

Global Recession Looms as Euro Crisis Deepens


from Richard Wolff :
Date: 23 November 2011
Subject: Speaking out at "Occupy Boston".

Thought you might be interested in these clips.


Rick Wolff at Occupy Boston: Video 1 of 2

Rick Wolff at Occupy Boston: Video 2 of 2

from Michael Parenti :
Date: 19 November 2011
Subject: Occupy America.

Occupy America 
by Michael Parenti

Beginning with Occupy Wall Street in September 2011, a protest movement spread across the United States to 70 major cities and hundreds of other communities. Similar actions emerged in scores of other nations.

For the first two weeks, the corporate-owned mainstream media along with NPR did what they usually do with progressive protests: they ignored them. These were the same media that had given the Tea Party supporters saturation coverage for weeks on end, ordaining them “a major political force.”

The most common and effective mode of news repression is  omission. By saying nothing or next to nothing about dissenting events, movements, candidates, or incidents, the media consign them to oblivion. When the Occupy movement spread across the country and could no longer be ignored, the media moved to the second manipulative method: trivialization and marginalization.

So we heard that the protestors were unclear about what they were protesting and they were “far removed from the mainstream.” Media cameras focused on the clown who danced on Wall Street in full-blown circus costume, and the youths who pounded bongo drums: “a carnival atmosphere” “yongsters out on a spree,” with “no connection to the millions of middle Americans” who supposedly watched with puzzlement and alarm.

Such coverage, again, was in sharp contrast to the respectful reportage accorded the Tea Party. House Majority Leader, the reactionary  Republican Eric Cantor, described the Occupy movement as “growing mobs.” This is the same Cantor who hailed the Tea Party as an unexcelled affirmation of democracy.

The big November 2 demonstration in Oakland that succeeded in closing the port was reported by many media outlets, almost all of whom focused on the violence against property committed by a few small groups. Many of those perpetrators were appearing for the first time at the Oakland site. Some were suspected of being undercover police provocateurs. Their actions seemed timed to overshadow the successful shutdown of the nation’s fourth largest port.

Time and again, the media made the protestors the issue rather than the things they were protesting. The occupiers were falsely described as hippie holdovers and mindless youthful activists. In fact, there was a wide range of ages, socio-ethnic backgrounds, and lifestyles, from homeless to well-paid professionals, along with substantial numbers of labor union members. Far from being a jumble of confused loudmouths prone to violence, they held general assemblies, organized themselves into committees, and systematically took care of encampment questions, food, security, and sanitation.
One unnoticed community protest was Occupy Walnut Creek. For those who don’t know, Walnut Creek is a comfortable conservative suburb in northern California (with no known record of revolutionary insurrections). Only one local TV station gave Occupy Walnut Creek brief attention, noting that about 400 people were participating,  average age between 40 and 50, no clowns, no bongos. Participants admitted that they lived fairly prosperous lives but still felt a kinship with the millions of Americans who were enduring an economic battering. Here was a contingent of affluent but rebellious “middle Americans” yet Walnut Creek never got mentioned in the national media, as far as I know.  

The Occupy movement has promulgated a variety of  messages. With a daring plunge into class realities, the occupiers talk of the 1% who are exploiting the 99%, a brilliant propaganda formula, simple to use, yet saying so much, now widely embraced even by some media commentators. The protestors carried signs condemning the republic’s terrible underemployment and the empire’s endless wars, the environmental abuses perpetrated by giant corporations, the tax loopholes enjoyed by  oil companies,  the growing inequality of incomes, and the banksters and other gangsters who feed so lavishly from the public trough.

Some occupiers even denounced capitalism as a system and hailed socialism as a humane alternative. In all, the Occupy movement revealed an awareness of systemic politico-economic injustices not usually seen in U.S. protests. Remember, the initial and prime target was Wall Street, finance capital’s home base. 

The mainstream news outlets not only control opinions but even more so opinion visibility, which in turn allows them to limit the parameters of public discourse. This makes it all the more imperative for ordinary people to join together in demonstrations, hoping thereby to maximize the visibility and impact of their opinions. The goal is to break through the near monopoly of conservative orthodoxy maintained by the “liberal” media.

So demonstrations are important. They have an energizing effect on would-be protestors, bringing together many who previously had thought themselves alone and voiceless. Demonstrations bring democracy into the streets. They highlight issues that have too long been buried. They mobilize numbers, giving a show of strength, reminding the plutocracy perched at the apex that the pyramid is rumbling.

But demonstrations should evolve into other forms of action. This has already been happening with the Occupy movement. It is more than a demonstration because its protestors did not go home at the end of the day. In substantial numbers they remained downtown, putting their bodies on the line, imposing a discomfort on officialdom just by their numbers and presence.

At a number of Occupy sites there have been civil disobedience actions, followed by arrests. In various cities the police have been unleashed with violent results that sometimes have backfired. In Oakland ex-Marine Scott Olsen was hit by a police teargas canister that busted his skull and left him hospitalized and unable to speak for a week. At best, he faces a long slow recovery. The day after Olsen was hit, hundreds of indignant new protestors joined the Occupy Oakland site. Police brutality incites a public reaction, often bringing more people out, just the opposite of what officials want.

Where does this movement go? What is to be done? The answers are already arising from the actions of the 99%:

--Discourage military recruitment and support conscientious objectors. Starve the empire of its legions. Organize massive tax resistance in protest of corrupt, wasteful, unlawful, and destructive Pentagon spending.

--Transfer funds from corporate banks to credit unions and community banks. Support programs that assist the unemployed and the dispossessed. It was Giulio Tremonti, Italy’s embattled finance minister who declared: “Salvate il popolo, non le banche” (“Save the people, not the banks”). It would be nice to hear such sentiments emanating from the U.S. Treasury Department or the White House.

--Coordinate actions with organized labor. Unions still are the 99%’s largest and best financed groups. Consider what was done in Oakland: occupiers joined with longshoremen, truckers, and other workers to close the port. Already there are plans for a general strike in various communities. Such actions improve greatly if organized labor is playing a role.
--We need new electoral strategies, a viable third party, proportional representation, and even a new Constitution, one that establishes firm  rules for an egalitarian democracy and is not a rigmarole designed to protect the moneyed class. The call for a constitutional convention (a perfectly legitimate procedure under the present U.S. Constitution) seems long overdo.

--Perhaps most of all, we need ideological education regarding the relationship between wealth and power, the nature of capitalism, and the crimes of an unbridled profit-driven financial system. And again the occupiers seem to be moving in that direction: in early November 2011, people nationwide began gathering to join teach-ins on “How the 1% Crashed the Economy.”

We need to explicitly invite the African-American, Latino, and Asian communities into the fight, reminding everyone that the Great Recession victimizes everyone but comes down especially hard on the ethnic poor.

We need to educate ourselves regarding the beneficial realities of publicly owned nonprofit utilities, publicly directed environmental protections, public nonprofit medical services and hospitals, public libraries, schools, colleges, housing, and transportation--all those things that work so well in better known in some quarters as socialism.

There is much to do. Still it is rather impressive how the battle is already being waged on so many fronts. Meanwhile the corporate media ignore the content of our protest while continuing to fulminate about the occupiers’ violent ways and lack of a precise agenda.

Do not for one moment think that the top policymakers and plutocrats don’t care what you think.  That is the only thing about you that wins their concern. They don’t care about  the quality of the air you breathe or the water you drink, or how happy or unhappy or stressed and unhealthy or poor you might be. But they do want to know your thoughts about public affairs, if only to get a handle on your mind. Every day they launch waves of disinformation to bloat your brains, from the Pentagon to Fox News without stint.

When the people liberate their own minds and take a hard clear look at what the 1% is doing and what the 99% should be doing, then serious stuff begins to happen. It is already happening. It may eventually fade away or it may create a new chapter in our history. Even if it does not achieve its major goals, the Occupy movement has already registered upon our rulers the anger and unhappiness of a populace betrayed.
Michael Parenti’s most recent book is The Face of Imperialism. For further information about him, see www.michaelparenti.org.