RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Now Is the Time to Solve Climate Change for 2050 Print
Sunday, 10 September 2017 08:27

Caballero writes: "The reality of daily life is that we try to fix the problems that are staring us in the face. In many ways, the desire for short-term results defines the rhythm of both public and private life. So the idea that decisions today will define where we end up in a couple of decades is difficult to grasp, and may even appear outlandish."

A bean farmer checks her crop in Democratic Republic of 
the Congo. (photo: Neil Palmer/CIAT)
A bean farmer checks her crop in Democratic Republic of the Congo. (photo: Neil Palmer/CIAT)


Now Is the Time to Solve Climate Change for 2050

By Paula Caballero, World Resources Institute

10 September 17

 

he reality of daily life is that we try to fix the problems that are staring us in the face. In many ways, the desire for short-term results defines the rhythm of both public and private life. So the idea that decisions today will define where we end up in a couple of decades is difficult to grasp, and may even appear outlandish.

Yet the unprecedented, deadly tropical cyclones in the Caribbean today and around the world foreshadow a perilous tomorrow if we don't tackle climate change now. We are at an historic crossroads that requires us to factor in the future. Because in a very real sense, 2050 is now.

Our decisions today will define where we end up tomorrow. The idea that unabated, incremental growth is the formula to eradicate poverty will leave us all ultimately poorer and make the pockets of desperate poverty more entrenched. Business as usual will lead to a world that is depleted, more unforgiving, more unequal.

What we do now will determine whether we are able to keep global temperature to 1.5 degrees C or well below 2 degrees C (2.7 degrees or 3.6 degrees F) above preindustrial levels; that's the point beyond which the most severe consequences of climate change kick in. Short-sighted investments could lock in 20th century ways of doing business and policy that will make achieving this target more expensive and technologically challenging.

In addition to taking paths that emit fewer greenhouse gases, a "2050 is now" mindset is also about protecting the natural resources and systems that will enable the people in tomorrow's communities—especially rural ones—to make a decent living. Ill-advised decisions on how we use land and manage water could undermine food, water and energy security in the decades to come.

Within the next two decades, the world will spend $90 trillion on infrastructure, transforming cities, energy systems and landscapes. We get to decide now whether we spend that $90 trillion on damaging, backward-looking more-of-the-same or shift our energy, transport, agriculture and consumption to radically new pathways that can be sustained. This is the only way we can ensure that our midcentury world gives all people a shot at a dignified life while safeguarding the planet's natural wealth.

The Drumbeat

We need to reframe how we understand development and its challenges. The global community has rightly prioritized the eradication of poverty. But unless we make the right decisions today, we may lock out development opportunities and end up perpetuating poverty, or making it worse.

By 2050, 2.5 billion people are expected to move to the world's cities. The growing global middle class will strain natural resources. Entrenched poverty will be increasingly concentrated in areas already experiencing conflict, fragility and resource degradation. Just eight years from now in 2025, 1.8 billion people will live in regions that lack sufficient water. Recognizing that 2050 is now means taking responsibility for avoiding conditions that will yield tomorrow's poverty and exacerbate inequality within nations and across regions.

The drumbeat of "2050 is now" must shape our thinking. We need to learn to frame our problems and solutions in terms of how they will define our world over the coming decades, not whether there will be results for a couple of years. Every cost-benefit analysis should consider long-term consequences.

Change is within reach. The investments, policies and actions we take today can ensure that the natural and built environments will provide decent lives for the world's people—especially the poorest and most marginalized—between now and 2050, while protecting the planet's awesome biodiversity.

Sustained, sustainable and inclusive development is only possible if we tackle climate change by making today's decisions looking to 2050, looking to create the conditions that will safeguard and increase natural and human capital. That is how to get the growth we need.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
If You Want to Find an Example of Modern Day Slavery, Look No Further Than US Prisons Print
Saturday, 09 September 2017 15:01

Excerpt: "Today marks one year since the largest prison labour strike in US history."

Prison inmates lay water pipes on a work project outside Oak Glen Conservation Fire Camp #35 in Yucaipa, California, November 6, 2014. (photo: Lucy Nicholson/Reuters)
Prison inmates lay water pipes on a work project outside Oak Glen Conservation Fire Camp #35 in Yucaipa, California, November 6, 2014. (photo: Lucy Nicholson/Reuters)


If You Want to Find an Example of Modern Day Slavery, Look No Further Than US Prisons

By David A Love and Vijay Das, Al Jazeera

09 September 17


If you want to find an example of modern day slavery, look no further than US prisons.

oday marks one year since the largest prison labour strike in US history. More than

24,000 prisoners across 29 prisons in 12 states protested against inhumane conditions, timing it around the anniversary of the Attica Prison uprising, a prisoner strike now 46 years old.

That violent uprising originated from prisoners rebelling against overcrowded cells, unsanitary conditions, medical neglect and abuse. From Attica to the strike led by the Incarcerated Workers Organizing Committee last year, these protests draw attention to an ugly truth: Prisoner abuse runs rampant and it has extended into modern-day versions of slavery. Last year's strike organisers described slavery-like conditions in prisons in the nationwide call to action.

Slavery persists by another name today. Young men and women of colour toil away in 21st-century fields, sow in hand. And Corporate America is cracking the whip.

Influenced by enormous corporate lobbying, the United States Congress enacted the Prison Industry Enhancement Certification Program in 1979 which permitted US companies to use prison labour. Coupled with the drastic increase in the prison population during this period, profits for participating companies and revenue for the government and its private contractors soared. The Federal Bureau of Prisons now runs a programme called Federal Prison Industries (UNICOR) that pays inmates under one dollar an hour. The programme generated $500m in sales in 2016 with little of that cash being passed down to prison workers. Stateside, where much of the US addiction to mass incarceration lies, is no different. California's prison labour programme is expected to produce some $232m in sales in 2017.

These exploited labourers are disproportionately African American and Latino - a demographic status quo resulting from the draconian sentencing and other criminal justice policies ransacking minority communities across the United States. African Americans are incarcerated at a rate five times higher than that of whites. In states like Virginia and Oklahoma, one in every 14 or 15 African American men are put in prison.

We lock people of colour up at alarming rates. We put them to work. Corporations gain. This story is an age-old American tradition. Throughout history, our nation has successfully pulled back corporate greed, but private corporations have always found new ways to reap enormous wealth from cheap labour.

The historical circumstances following the abolition of slavery provide the necessary context to understand how corporations function in a de facto replacement for slavery. Although the US Constitution's Thirteenth Amendment prohibited slavery and involuntary servitude, it made an exception - a loophole for "punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted", which made prison labour possible.

Following the Civil War, the Southern economy was in shambles and the slaves were emancipated. A cheap labour source was needed, and the convict lease system was invented. States leased out their convicts to industrialists and planters to work in locations such as railroads, coal mines and plantations, and entrepreneurs bought and sold these leases.

With little capital investment required and no need to care for the health of the prisoners, the system of economic exploitation became highly profitable for businesses and states and even cheaper than slavery. For example, in 1883 convict leasing provided Alabama with 10 percent of its revenue, 73 percent in 1898. Leased convicts were treated abysmally, with death rates 10 times higher than prisoners in states that did not employ leased convict labour. Secret graveyards contained the bodies of prisoners who had been tortured and beaten to death.

The viability of the convict lease system required that black people be returned to their former status as a source of labour. Hence, the Black Codes were enacted to suppress the rights of the recently emancipated African Americans, and criminalise them for minor offences such as vagrancy. Under the vagrancy laws, any black person under the protection of a white person could be swept up by the system for simply loitering, as black people were rounded up in this manner to provide a source of nearly free labour.

Today, prison labour is a billion-dollar industry, and the corporate beneficiaries of this new slavery include some of the largest corporations and most widely known brands. For example, Walmart has purchased produce from farms, where women prisoners face bad working conditions, inadequate medical care and very low pay.

Workers flipping burgers and frying french fries for minimum wage at McDonald's wear uniforms that were manufactured by prison labourers.

Further, UNICOR manages 83 factories and more than 12,000 prison labourers who earn as little as 23 cents an hour working at call centres, manufacturing items such as military body armour, and in past years, defective combat helmets. In 2013, federal inmates made $100m worth of military uniforms.

UNICOR has also provided prison labour in the past to produce Patriot missile parts for defence contractors Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, and parts for others such as Boeing and General Dynamics.

Corporations such as Starbucks, AT&T, Target, and Nordstrom have also profited from prison labour at some point in the past as well.

Some critics oppose the characterisation of the US prison system as a slave labour camp. For example, James Kilgore argues that prison labour is infrequently used, and identifying multinational corporations that profit from it loses sight of the key issues behind mass incarceration.

Kilgore is correct in his analysis that a lack of economic opportunity coupled with draconian laws results in a perverse private incentive to drive up mass incarceration. We should enhance employment options for former inmates to reduce recidivism and integrate returning citizens back into society. However, this does not mean that corporations do not profit from prisons and prison labour today and it is obscene that this still happens.

The Trump administration reversing the Obama-era order to phase out private prisons and enacting new law-and-order policies to increase arrests and fill these prisons will only increase opportunities for profit for Trump's corporate donors and their many investments in mass incarceration. Exploiting prison labour is consistent with this troubling trend.

Over a century and a half since the abolition of slavery, the dreaded institution still lives on in another, dressed up form. Taking advantage of a constitutional loophole, corporate profiteers continue the modern-day version of the convict lease system. In the land of the free, the dollar still takes precedence over human rights, and that which can be monetised and exploited for profit will be, regardless of ethical or moral considerations.

Once again, race, criminal justice and capitalism have joined forces to deprive captive black and brown bodies of their human rights. In the age of President Donald Trump and hardliner Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the return to "law and order" and a war on drugs signals a reversal of progress the US was making untethering itself from the expansive grip of a carceral state.

The anniversary of last year's prison strike is a chilling reminder that one need not point to authoritarian regimes in distant countries to find examples of blatant labour rights violations. If you want to find slavery in the US, look no further than its penitentiaries, jails and detention centres where the consequences of being locked-up extend much farther than doing time.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Dave Zirin: Stand With NFL Star Michael Bennett, Who Refused to Be Silent About Racial Profiling Print
Saturday, 09 September 2017 14:55

Excerpt: "As the National Football League begins its new season, one of its most outspoken players has revealed he was recently detained and assaulted by police in Las Vegas. Seattle Seahawks star Michael Bennett issued a statement on Twitter Wednesday, writing that an officer threatened to 'blow my f****** head off' and that 'Las Vegas police officers singled me out and pointed their guns at me for doing nothing more than simply being a black man in the wrong place at the wrong time.'"

Michael Bennett. (photo: AP)
Michael Bennett. (photo: AP)


Dave Zirin: Stand With NFL Star Michael Bennett, Who Refused to Be Silent About Racial Profiling

By Dave Zirin and Amy Goodman, Democracy Now!

09 September 17

 

 

s the National Football League begins its new season, one of its most outspoken players has revealed he was recently detained and assaulted by police in Las Vegas. Seattle Seahawks star Michael Bennett issued a statement on Twitter Wednesday, writing that an officer threatened to "blow my f****** head off" and that "Las Vegas police officers singled me out and pointed their guns at me for doing nothing more than simply being a black man in the wrong place at the wrong time." The incident took place outside a boxing match last month in Las Vegas while police were responding to reported gunshots. We speak to Dave Zirin, sports editor for The Nation magazine. He is working on a book with Michael Bennett about Bennett’s life, "Things That Make White People Uncomfortable."

Transcript

AMY GOODMAN: As the National Football League begins its new season, one of its most outspoken players has revealed he was recently detained and assaulted by police in Las Vegas. Seattle Seahawks star Michael Bennett issued a statement on Twitter Wednesday, writing an officer threatened to, quote, "blow my f****** head off" and that, quote, "Las Vegas police officers singled me out and pointed their guns at me for doing nothing more than simply being a black man in the wrong place at the wrong time," unquote. The incident took place outside a boxing match last month in Las Vegas while police were responding to reported gunshots. Video released by TMZ shows Michael Bennett on the ground being handcuffed. Listen closely.

MICHAEL BENNETT: I wasn’t doing nothing, man. Wait, you asked me a question. I was here with my friends. They told us to get out; everybody ran. Did you ask me a question, sir? OK, man.

AMY GOODMAN: On Wednesday, Michael Bennett held a news conference to talk about what happened.

MICHAEL BENNETT: Obviously, I hate to be up here through these circumstances that happened, to be up here talking about it. It’s a traumatic experience for me and my family. And it sucks that the country that we live in now, sometimes you get profiled for the color of your skin. And it’s a tough situation for me. ...
There’s a lot of people who experience what I experienced at that point, at that moment, and they’re not here to live to tell their story. I think about Trayvon Martin. I think about Charleena Lyles. I think about Philando Castile, Tamir Rice—so many different people that had the experience that I had, and they’re not here to tell their story. So, that’s what it is. ...
I’m just lucky to be here to be able to speak about it, as, OK, any moment, I could have made the wrong decision on whether—move, it felt like I was resisting or doing something wrong, and you guys would be wearing, the Seahawks would be wearing a patch with number 72 on it. So I’m just lucky to be here right now and to be able to continuously fight for people, fight for the equality of all people, regardless of their color, regardless of their gender, regardless of all that. I’m just going to continuously do what I’ve been doing. It’s a hard journey, and sometimes you feel like you’re alone, but there’s a lot of people who support me. And I just want to keep doing what I do. ...
At this point, it’s like it’s the reality of what I live in every day. I think a lot of people—as a black man, you fear sometime what could happen to you, the possibilities if you’re in the wrong situation at the wrong time. And you hope and you wish that everything that Martin Luther King said, or the people before me—we hope that you’ll be judged on the content of your character, not the color of your skin. But sometimes you get judged on that. And that’s the reality that I live in. And it’s just this—people ask why I sit down, and this is why. This is the things that I go through, what people go through that look like me, or people that’s going through something different.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s Seattle Seahawks NFL star Michael Bennett. The Las Vegas police union has accused Bennett of making false accusations against the officers. Bennett has a long record of speaking out against racial and social injustice. He’s joined a protest movement led by former 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick against racial injustice, sitting on the sidelines during the playing of the national anthem ahead of Seahawks games.

For more, we go to Washington, where we’re joined by Dave Zirin, sports editor for The Nation magazine, also the host of Edge of Sports. Zirin is working on a book with Michael Bennett about his life, Things That Make White People Uncomfortable.

Welcome, Dave, to Democracy Now! So, explain exactly when you understand this happened. I think you talked to Michael Bennett that night. This was at the famous boxing match that took place in Las Vegas?

DAVE ZIRIN: Yes, it was the Saturday before last, the famous Floyd Mayweather-Conor McGregor match in Las Vegas. And I received phone calls from friends of Michael Bennett and texts from Michael saying what happened immediately. And what happened sounded just incredibly traumatic. And I really want to say something to Democracy Now! listeners. People have to understand that Michael Bennett, as you so beautifully laid out, Amy, he’s one of us. I mean, he has the soul of an activist. He has stood with people from Seattle to Houston to the Gaza Strip to Haiti. He’s given his time. He’s given his money. And what he described to me that night was so frightening. And all I could think to myself, as I’m hearing this story about him having a gun against his head, police officers saying they were going to blow his effing head off, him speaking about like his daughters and whether he would ever be able to hug his wife again or kiss his daughters—

AMY GOODMAN: But can you explain what happened—

DAVE ZIRIN: Yeah.

AMY GOODMAN: —after the match?

DAVE ZIRIN: Yeah, absolutely.

AMY GOODMAN: Why hundreds of people started running?

DAVE ZIRIN: Yes. There were reports inside a casino called Drai’s, right on the Las Vegas Strip, of gunshots. And people started yelling "Gunshots! Gunshots! Guns! Guns!" And there was loud noises. There was a scuffle of some kind. Hundreds of people ran out onto the Strip. Statues were toppled over—just to give you an idea of the chaos. And Michael was one of the people who was running out, trying to find somewhere safe to go, because of gunshots. And what it looks like what happened, what Michael described to me happened, is that police honed in on him as somebody who could possibly be a suspect in what may have happened. And they took him to the ground. They handcuffed him. They put a knee on his back, which is very scary, because if a knee is on your back and you move, that can also look like you’re resisting arrest. And then, as photographs clearly show, a weapon was unholstered by the police and put by his head.

And what’s so disturbing about this police union letter that you referenced, by the Las Vegas police union, is that they say they’re putting out this letter to refute what Michael Bennett said in his own letter about what police did, but they don’t refute any of those facts—the gun against his head, the threat to blow his head off. They don’t refute any of that. Instead, what the police union wrote—and, I mean, this is so disturbing to me—is that, in the first paragraph, they write, "While the NFL may condone Bennett’s disrespect for our American flag and everything it symbolizes, we hope the league will not ignore Bennett’s false accusations against our police officers." So think about what they’re doing here. They’re calling upon the NFL to investigate Michael Bennett for telling the truth about what we see on tape of what happened. And they’re saying, basically, that, well, maybe he deserved it because of his stance about the flag. That is so frightening to think that the police would put forward the statement that one’s personal politics justifies brutality.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to turn to Michael Bennett’s brother. They’re both football stars. Martellus Bennett was with the Patriots, now he’s with the Green Bay Packers. This is what he said.

MARTELLUS BENNETT: Today, someone sent me the video. I didn’t even know that there was a video. And I got—I had to walk out of a meeting, because I broke down crying just thinking about like what could have happened.

AMY GOODMAN: So, Dave Zirin, what happens now?

DAVE ZIRIN: Well, there’s some very interesting developments at work. First and foremost, the National Football League and Roger Goodell has already put forward a statement saying that they stand with Michael Bennett in this, and they describe him as one of the people in the league who they really are proud of, because of the community work that he does, which is epic and legion, from Seattle to Houston.

I’ve got to tell you, Amy, one of the reasons why Michael didn’t come forward the week right after this took place is because Michael Bennett is from Houston. So he immediately was getting to work to raise money for victims of the hurricane. I mean, that was why the week layoff before he came forward with this. I mean, that’s just the kind of person that he is.

And so, I think the NFL has already announced that they would not be investigating Michael Bennett for false statements against the Las Vegas police. Michael Bennett’s team is thinking about ways that they can stand with him. And a week from this Sunday—I’ll tell you this right now—which is the home opener for the Seattle Seahawks, there’s going to be a rally that’s held in front of the Seattle Seahawks stadium that’s going to be put on by the Seattle branch of the NAACP, that is about standing with former 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick. That’s why it was originally called, but now it’s turned into a solidarity rally for Michael Bennett to let him know that he will not be alone in this process as he goes forward with a lawsuit, and really to send the message that Las Vegas police may have victimized Michael Bennett, but he is somebody who refuses to be a victim in this case, and they really picked on the wrong big black man outside a melee in Las Vegas.

AMY GOODMAN: In February, I had a chance to interview Michael Bennett on Democracy Now! and asked him about the NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s decision to protest against racial oppression and police brutality by kneeling on one knee during the pre-game national anthem. This is what Michael Bennett said.

MICHAEL BENNETT: And I think, for us, for me personally, it just challenged me to be—to even, you know, join him and try to make it—try to make everything in his message more—make it where people understand and they want to be a part of it, where young kids are speaking about it, too.
For me, the greatest thing about what he did wasn’t that the adults were having a conversation about it; it was that the young people were having a conversation about it. It was the 10-year-old, 9-year-old teams. You know, they’re not even getting paid in the NFL, and they just—they’re fearless. They’re taking a knee. And they don’t even know—they understand why they’re taking a knee, but at the same time, they really don’t understand the magnitude of what they’re doing. And then you take the middle school teams that are taking a knee, and there’s not even a lot of fans in the stadium, but they’re taking that knee. And you see high school people doing it, and you see college people doing it. Then you see guys in the NFL doing it. And it’s like, man, that started a fire. And the greatest thing was that the young kids were aware, starting to be awoke about things that are going on, and more aware. And I thought that was the coolest part about all of it. It was that the young people—the seed that he planted with the young people, it started growing, and it caught—started growing like fire and just started growing like weeds everywhere. And it was special. I think that, you know, he did something really special. And really, it all started with a knee. And that’s the funniest part about it. And I think it was—I think it was a great—and it was a great thing.

AMY GOODMAN: So, that’s NFL star Michael Bennett speaking on Democracy Now! months ago, before he was taken down by police a few weeks ago in Las Vegas. Now, Dave Zirin, here in New York a few weeks ago, a thousand people came out in front of NFL headquarters protesting about Colin Kaepernick, that he hasn’t been able to play since then. Can you talk, very quickly, before we wrap up this segment, about the history of "The Star-Spangled Banner" being played and the players being there and this beginning resistance?

DAVE ZIRIN: Absolutely. Like Michael Bennett says, he says we’re all standing up, and it started with a knee. It started before last season, with Colin Kaepernick. And what Colin did—and I think this is sometimes undervalued—is he took this knee before the anthem for four straight months. Sixteen straight weeks, he did this protest. I remember speaking to John Carlos before the—the man who raised his fist during the ’68 Olympics. And John said, "Wow! I just raised my fist once." Colin Kaepernick did it—for 16 straight weeks, he took a knee. And I think what it did is, as Michael said, is it inspired people, from middle schools to high schools to colleges, cheerleaders, soccer players, hockey players. And what it did was it expanded the discussion in uncomfortable spaces. It forced sports radio to talk about police brutality.

And that’s something that Michael Bennett is doing right now. It would have been so easy for him to be silent after what happened in Las Vegas. But he refused silence because he knows that he has the resources and the platform to be public and perhaps make sure that the next time Las Vegas police think about racially profiling somebody, maybe they’ll think twice, because of Michael Bennett.

AMY GOODMAN: And very quickly, have the teams always been out on the field when "The Star-Spangled Banner" is played? When did this start?

DAVE ZIRIN: No, this is a post—largely a post-9/11 phenomenon. College football players still don’t come out before the national anthem. I mean, that’s what’s so crazy about this, is that everybody says that Michael Bennett and Colin Kaepernick, they shouldn’t be mixing politics and sports, when that’s all the NFL does. I mean, the reality is what the NFL doesn’t want to have mix is politics—I’m sorry, they don’t want resistance politics to mix with sports. When it comes to politics like militarism, they’re all too happy to have that mix with sports.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, Dave Zirin, I want to thank you for being with us. Colin Kaepernick, his future, just briefly?

DAVE ZIRIN: Colin Kaepernick’s future will be—I don’t know. I mean, it’s going to take an NFL owner being very courageous. But I communicate with Colin Kaepernick, and one thing I can tell you, he just gave another $100,000 earlier this week to an organization that’s fighting for DACA kids and immigrant children in this country. He’s not going to stop organizing. He’s not going to stop being political. The NFL—an NFL team should be proud to have Colin Kaepernick on their roster. If none of them can wake up and see that, he’s not going to stop trying to change the world.

AMY GOODMAN: Dave Zirin, thanks for being with us, sports editor for The Nation magazine, also host of Edge of Sports, working on a book with Michael Bennett about Bennett’s life, Things That Make White People Uncomfortable. To see our extended interview with Michael Bennett from February, you can go to democracynow.org. We’ll be back in a minute.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: "I Will Spite Survive" by Deerhoof, performing here on Democracy Now! in our studios. Their new record, Mountain Moves, is out today. To see their full performance and conversation, go to democracynow.org. This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org. I’m Amy Goodman.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Remembering the Attica Rebellion Print
Saturday, 09 September 2017 14:52

Thompson writes: "On the eve of what would become the US's most famous prison uprising, the inmates of Attica Correctional Facility in upstate New York endured deplorable conditions. Their infections went untreated, their teeth fell out due to negligible dental care - they even lacked adequate access to soap and toilet paper."

The Attica uprising. (photo: AP)
The Attica uprising. (photo: AP)


Remembering the Attica Rebellion

By Heather Ann Thompson, Jacobin

09 September 17


The Attica Prison inmates who rebelled on this day in 1971 remain a symbol of resistance in the face of injustice.

n the eve of what would become the US’s most famous prison uprising, the inmates of Attica Correctional Facility in upstate New York endured deplorable conditions. Their infections went untreated, their teeth fell out due to negligible dental care — they even lacked adequate access to soap and toilet paper.

On September 9, 1971, these pent-up grievances simmered over when roughly 1,300 inmates took over the prison. For four days they were effectively in charge. They made demands on the state (better medical care, fewer limits on their freedom of expression, immunity from prosecution for rebelling), negotiated with mediators brought in at their behest (including, briefly, Black Panther leader Bobby Seale), and generally asserted their worth as human beings.

But whatever the prisoners gained in those few days was quickly pulverized by the brute force of the state. Seeking dignity, they instead unleashed the wrath of New York governor Nelson Rockefeller.

On the morning of September 13, state law enforcement streamed into the prison by the hundreds, and killed by the dozens. When they were finished, thirty-nine men (twenty-nine prisoners and ten state employees) lay dead. And for the inmates who survived (especially rebellion leaders like Frank “Big Black” Smith), ghastly torture and severe intimidation soon followed.

Top officials never faced legal reprisals for the atrocities at Attica. They shielded themselves from prosecution, and did their best to squirrel away evidence about what happened on that autumn morning.

Yet Attica lives. It’s still on the lips of anti-prison activists and striking inmates, still in the panicked nightmares of law-and-order types. The American carceral state, built up feverishly in the rebellion’s wake, rests in its shadow.

Few are more qualified to detail what transpired at Attica — and its lasting effects — than University of Michigan historian Heather Ann Thompson, the author of an exceptional new book on the rebellion. Earlier this week, Jacobin associate editor Shawn Gude caught up with Thompson to talk about the politics of the Attica rebels, the uprising’s highs and lows, and why solidarity outside the prison walls is vital to ending the injustices within them. What follows is a condensed and lightly edited transcript of their conversation.


Shawn Gude

Even before the uprising, state officials were terrified of radical inmates and what they called “outside agitators,” and they ended up blaming a lot of what happened on these figures. How politicized were Attica inmates? What groups had an especially large following? And to what extent did this drive the uprising?

Heather Ann Thompson

I was surprised to discover that while it was true that there were many political guys in Attica, and that there was a real thirst to read everyone from George Jackson to Fanon to Mao, that this was a relatively small percentage of the population — and quite divided, frankly.

So the Panthers stuck to themselves, and there were the Black Muslims (overwhelmingly members of the Nation of Islam, but there were also Five Percenters, and different offshoots). There were some white radicals there from the Weather Underground, but those groups largely, you know, stayed to themselves. They did try to conduct educational rap sessions in the yard.

But one of the really extraordinary things about Attica, and what is kind of ironic, is that what politicizes the men in Attica, what really makes them go from having basic human right claims and sort of a guttural desire for improved living conditions to being political, and to thinking about this through the lens of politics, is the state’s brutality.

Nothing makes these guys more militant than a) the state’s refusal to help them when they try to work through the process to get their conditions improved, and b) when they retake the prison with such brutality. That’s what makes a prisoner, for example, like “Big Black” very political. It was his experience at the hands of the state, not his reading of Marx or Fanon.

Shawn Gude

How did the interaction between the more politicized and the less politicized prisoners shape the uprising?

Heather Ann Thompson

Well there’s no question that it is the more politically aware prisoners, and certainly those who had spent a lot of time thinking through questions of struggle and strategy, that were part of the first group that tried to bring conditions to the attention of the state — the so-called Attica Liberation Faction. And those people will play a very central role in the rebellion because they understand the importance of being organized.

Once this whole thing jumps off, they understand the importance of, first of all, having this democratic process where the guys in the cell block elect leaders to speak for them, and then to really hash out what are the most important demands. And it’s in those first three days, where these guys are sorting through what the most important demands are, that you really do see politics and democracy at work in the yard.

Some are much more political and initially called for things like transportation to a non-imperialist country — imagining going, for example, to places like Algeria or wherever — but others are focused much more on the ability to have Spanish-speaking guards. And it’s in that dialogue that ultimately the final demands are crafted. But there’s no question that the political guys are helping to organize this and give it coherence.

Shawn Gude

Can you talk about the events immediately leading up to the rebellion? Even though prisoners had long-running grievances about prison conditions, the rebellion itself was quite spontaneous and perhaps even accidental.

Heather Ann Thompson

Yes, indeed, and I would actually take it a step further and say that it was actually management-created. Because the night before what came to be known as the Attica Rebellion, there was a relatively routine altercation between a guard and a prisoner out in the rec yard. The guard was hassling the prisoner to, you know, stop horsing around, and he told him to get back into the cell, into something called keeplock, where you’re basically just locked down.

What made that incident unusual was that the frustration had reached such a point that this prisoner struck the guard. And that was new. Because one of the things about all prisons is that peace is maintained through the legitimacy of authority — or at least that’s what they’re striving for. And of course when this prisoner hits the guard, everyone just stopped in shock.

The administration decides to retaliate. What it does is not only cell extractions that night, but the next morning, it decides to punish the entire company that that guy was from and to effectively not let them go out to rec by locking them into a tunnel, so that they have to go back to their cells. The problem was, the prison management never even told their own guards that this was the plan. When it locks everybody in that hallway, utter panic ensues — on the part of the guards, on the part of the prisoners.

So in fact, it was touched off by this management decision, because of the panic.

It is a riot, I think, in the truest sense of the word, in those first few moments. But again, this is where the political organization comes in, because this is the moment that it does become a rebellion, when some of the most outspoken and really thoughtful of the prisoners (particularly a guy named Roger Champen), decide that it’s crucial that we make the most of this and tell the world, shine the light on prison conditions, use this as an opportunity.

Shawn Gude

Let’s get into the rebellion itself. You have a really great passage in which you describe prisoners feeling the sense of freedom for the first time, really, since their incarceration. One inmate says, laying out in the prison yard the first night, that it’s the first time he’s seen the stars in twenty-two years. To what extent did this feeling of freedom characterize the uprising, and what were some of the darker moments inside the prison those four days?

Heather Ann Thompson

It’s so interesting that struck you, because it did me as well. And what really got to me about so many of those descriptions in the book is that it actually was perhaps less about freedom and more about experiencing what human beings, by their form and their nature, are meant to experience. Such as starlight or sunshine or fresh air.

It’s actually, if you think about it, quite interesting that in all the lists of demands, from the most militant to the most basic, nobody said, “Open the walls of Attica.” What they said was, we want to be treated like human beings. So the experience of being in that yard and being able to have touch and sunshine and starlight and air and freedom of movement — all these things that make us humans — are what characterized those four days for the men.

Of course, there was also terror, and fear. They never knew at what point the state might come in. There were snipers on the roof at all times threatening them and jeering at them, filming them. They were at every moment in a state of panic, and they were exhausted, because people were afraid to sleep for fear of a nightly attack.

Unfortunately, there were really grimmer moments during that rebellion. There was a lot of paranoia on the part of some of the prisoners, and it resulted in three prisoners being accused of treason and taken away and placed in a cell, where later we understand that they were murdered.

But even that is such a difficult story to tell — and the murder was brutal and needs to be told — because it was not part of the rebellion in the sense that it was far away from where the rebellion was. It was off in the recesses of a dark cell and down to a very small group of people — one of whom was probably suffering a psychotic breakdown. I mean, he was so paranoid that some of these guys were out to get him.

Shawn Gude

Rumors of prison atrocities were actively spread by state officials and were ubiquitous in the news media and in the town of Attica itself during the uprising. There were reports of hostages getting castrated, race rioting, all these sorts of things. How were hostages actually treated inside the prison, and how did this perception of prisoner barbarity affect the form that the retaking took?

Heather Ann Thompson

The initial hours of what I would call the riot were quite brutal for many of the guards. They were, especially the ones who had been particularly brutal to prisoners, beaten very severely. One of them actually will die of injuries, because he is overrun and beaten so mercilessly — the guy who holds the keys in the center of the prison in the first minutes of the riot.

But from the moment that the rebellion begins, which is relatively quickly, these hostages are actively protected. The prisoners surround them with two rings of their fellow men to make sure that no one takes revenge on the guards, these guards are given mattresses and blankets and fed, and, even by their own words, treated really really well. And by day four, they too are saying to the governor, “Look, these guys have a bunch of grievances, keep talking, give these guys what they need.” They were advocating for negotiations as well. So they’re treated well.

But what’s so extraordinary is that meanwhile, you’ve got not just prison officials, but federal law enforcement, spreading vicious rumors about what is happening in the yard, and they’re getting police on the outside of the yard more and more and more furious.

It bears mention that this is a state prison, in a tiny town, in upstate New York, and from the instant that it happens, the FBI is not only interested, but teletypes on all of this are going up the chain of command to literally every branch of the US government and military — the Army, the Navy, the Marines, the CIA, the president, the vice president, the attorney general. And that says a great deal about what the state, both local and federal, thinks of the risks that they faced with this prison rebellion.

Shawn Gude

The retaking ended up being quite brutal, and also just entirely avoidable. How did things go so wrong?

Heather Ann Thompson

Well, first of all, it was completely avoidable. There’s no question in my mind that there were myriad ways that this assault could have been avoided. But even if the decision had ultimately been made to retake the prison, every other example of retaking a prison was quite different than this one. Guards would go in, nobody would ever have firearms because everybody understood that the prisoners did not have firearms, and it would be more like a hand-to-hand combat retaking situation.

In this case, the governor — and I think this is very significant — decides to send in not just the New York State Police, but really the lowest level guy, from the nearby town of Batavia, to lead this assault. The very head of the state police is AWOL, so he’s not on hand. The governor does not ask the National Guard, who actually have a plan for retaking a prison. And my understanding of this is that Rockefeller very much knows that it’s going to be bloody, and wants to keep as much distance from the responsibility for it as he can — basically, pinning it on the lowest level of the state prison authority.

So he unleashes nearly six hundred men, troopers and corrections officers who are armed to the teeth with their own personal weapons, and weapons that are being passed out at the supply truck without regard for serial numbers or identification of the specific officers. Then these guys rip off their identification badges, so that they can do whatever they want once they get inside.

And it is one of the most horrific assaults in US history. The doctors that go in later liken it to My Lai, to a Civil War painting, to Vietnam writ large, because it is nothing but carnage. And, by the way, this is after they had already doused the yard in CS gas (which is a powder that clings to your nasal passages). People were sick, they were retching, they were already disabled when the shooting began.

Shawn Gude

This might be somewhat speculative, but what do you think went into Rockefeller’s decision to retake the prison like this? Was it a combination of his political future and his fierce anticommunism, or what’s your read on what was motivating him at that point?

Heather Ann Thompson

I’m not sure that it actually requires much speculation. I think that the evidence is quite clear that it was all of those things plus racial politics.

Firstly, he was a diehard Cold Warrior. He literally saw himself as a defender of this nation against the communist threat, whether that involved operations in Central America, or whether it involved Attica — he was very consistent on the idea that there’s a communist threat everywhere.

He also had long wanted to be the president of the United States. He had watched the party move farther and farther to the right, and wanted to have greater conservative credentials, so in that sense, Attica is his opportunity to make that clear.

Thirdly, we just simply cannot sidestep the deep, deep racial politics of this retaking. When he talks to Nixon, Nixon has one question of significance, which is: “Is this a black thing? Was this started by the blacks?” It is clear when you listen to the conversation, not only does Rockefeller affirm that, but that is enough of an explanation for them both. This is about putting down black civil rights, it is about having no regard whatsoever for black life.

And indeed, the retaking reflects this as well, because the racial epithets that are combined with the physical abuse just cannot be underestimated. The torture that takes place afterwards is nothing short of a modern lynching.

Shawn Gude

Some of our readers might be surprised to know that less than half the book is devoted to the uprising itself. Why were the subsequent years and decades so important to this story, and to what extent do you think prisoners ended up getting some semblance of justice?

Heather Ann Thompson

It was clear to me quite early on that the rebellion was a pivotal part of the story, but the more, perhaps, lastingly important part of the story was the way in which two things unfold: one, the state’s determination — really a shocking level of determination — to make sure that no members of law enforcement or politicians were ever held accountable for the atrocities at Attica.

And then at the same time, the truly remarkable spirit of struggle that lived on well past Attica, on the part of both the hostages and the prisoners — that no matter how marginalized, no matter how attacked, no matter how dismissed by the public as well as politicians, they never give up. Their struggle takes thirty years for the prisoners, plus, forty years for the guards, plus, to be heard.

Right after the rebellion, of course, it was such a disaster that there had to be some form of an investigation. The initial investigation into Attica is a criminal investigation. That is to say, what crimes were committed, either in the course of the rebellion or during the retaking. And the plan, ostensibly, was that both prisoner and law enforcement crimes were going to be equally investigated and equally prosecuted should they exist.

What happens, of course, is only the prosecution of the prisoners — fifty-two prisoners get indicted — so the first big story after the rebellion is the indictment of these prisoners for over 1,400 crimes. It’s really an extraordinary state indictment, probably one of the largest series of indictments ever, in American history, or certainly in New York State. So all prisoner energies are taken up defending themselves.

There are ultimately five trials, and in one of the most remarkable defense efforts in American history — akin only to what happens in the South during Freedom Summer or perhaps surrounding the Scottsboro Boys years earlier — young law students and lawyers from across the country descend on upstate New York and offer their legal services to these prisoners.

And then, of course, there are the civil cases: both the prisoners and the hostages try to get the state to be accountable via civil rights charges, on the part of the prisoners, and via the workman’s compensation system, on the part of the hostages.

Did they get justice? No. They got recompense. They got restitution, finally, in the form of money, for some of the damages of what they suffered. For example, the killing of someone at Attica would net a family $6,500 when all was said and done.

It was pathetic, but it allowed them to get the story told, so in that sense it was incredibly important. That spirit is one of the ultimate legacies of Attica: that as much as this rebellion touches off one of the worst backlashes in American history that results in us being the largest jailer in the world, it was also an enduring story of struggle.

Shawn Gude

You mentioned the really remarkable suppression of information by the state. Can you expand on that a little bit? From the hours after the uprising to the present day, the state has worked doggedly to prevent information about the uprising from coming to light.

Heather Ann Thompson

It’s funny, because anyone who writes about prisons knows that part of that is just the deal when you’re trying to write about prison. If you want to know what happens behind bars, good luck — because the state is not even required to keep a lot of vitally important information like, for example, how many hours of solitary its prisoners do in a year.

That is compounded in Attica, triply compounded, by the fact that the state committed crimes at Attica. And so therefore, from the minute that the tear gas clears over the yard, the state, particularly and initially the state police, is working overtime to make sure that their own are protected. They coerce and alter statements, they tamper with photographs and film, they make it possible for some of the worst offending troopers to resign (or at least one of the worst offending troopers to resign rather than be prosecuted), they destroy evidence.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Because the state and politicians, meanwhile, are scrambling as well, to cover their rear ends.

I discovered a series of meetings that took place at Rockefeller’s pool house at his mansion in Pocantico Hills, where in attendance within a very short time after the rebellion, you had the architects of the retaking: the state police (the guys who presumably could be prosecuted); the head of the Attica investigation (the state’s attorney general, who should be prosecuting these guys); and the governor’s men. And they all essentially are there to get their stories straight.

It’s a remarkable story of protecting power.

Shawn Gude

The nature of prisons obviously makes it enormously difficult to coordinate any sort of organized effort to resist inhumane conditions, but you note at the end of the book that it’s gotten even harder for prisoners to do so, both in prisons themselves and through the legal system. Can you talk about some of those hurdles, and how solidarity work outside prisons might mitigate some of those barriers?

Heather Ann Thompson

In the immediate aftermath of Attica, there were in fact very important reforms, but because of the lies told about Attica, the American public had a quickly convenient excuse to become more punitive. That punitive moment truly begins by 1972 and only increases thereafter.

It not only resulted in prisoners doing more time than ever before in American history, more solitary than ever before in American history, but also having more lockdowns — and, that is to say, less movements in prisons, less freedom of expression in prisons.

All of this has been accompanied by clamping down on prisoners’ ability to even use the legal system to improve their conditions — so not just passage of laws such as “three strikes” or mandatory minimums, but also the passage of something called the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which has effectively barred prisoners from using the courts to speak.

For all of those reasons, not only are conditions worse today than they were during Attica, but it’s even more important than it was at Attica that people on the outside speak up and work to shine the light on what goes on behind prison walls. Because, of course, if you’re serving solitary, as so many people are now, or you’re on constant lockdown, you are physically and illegally prevented from telling the world what really goes on behind those walls.

Shawn Gude

Forty-five years after the uprising, how does Attica live in the public imagination, and how does it inform the contemporary struggle against the carceral state?

Heather Ann Thompson

Because of the state’s hard work at protecting its own and really distorting what happened at Attica, Attica had become synonymous with the “worst of the worst” — with prisoners not as people but as animals, and so forth.

But in recent years, the veil is being lifted — people are speaking out, and it’s getting harder and harder for people to justify this prison buildup on the basis of prisoner brutality. Because there’s just been so many stories of police brutality in the media again, both in the streets, such as police shootings, but also behind bars, such as at Attica, where this inmate George Williams was severely beaten recently and almost died.

Attica once again is not synonymous with prisoner brutality, but is synonymous with prisoner resistance. I’m very grateful that that’s true, and I’m also hopeful that the book really helps to make that clear — that Attica touches off the backlash, but what it means is that no matter what someone did that lands them behind bars, they are human beings that will never ever give up that struggle.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Now Is a Time for Unity, but Soon We Must Reckon With the Fact Our Climate Is Changing Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=40776"><span class="small">Dan Rather, Dan Rather's Facebook Page</span></a>   
Saturday, 09 September 2017 12:56

Rather writes: "Now is a time for unity and compassion, for evacuations and pledges of assistance, for those facing Hurricane Irma, for those rebuilding their lives from Hurricane Harvey, and for those still suffering from the wildfires out West."

Dan Rather. (photo: Christopher Patey)
Dan Rather. (photo: Christopher Patey)


Now Is a Time for Unity, but Soon We Must Reckon With the Fact Our Climate Is Changing

By Dan Rather, Dan Rather's Facebook Page

09 September 17

 

ow is a time for unity and compassion, for evacuations and pledges of assistance, for those facing Hurricane Irma, for those rebuilding their lives from Hurricane Harvey, and for those still suffering from the wildfires out West.

But sometime soon we must have a reckoning.

Our climate is changing, and human activity is a major factor. We cannot ignore this any longer. We have to make changes in the way we live, where we live and how we live. To ignore this is a dereliction of duty, as assuredly as if we tell people to ride out a category 5 storm. Science gives us satellite images of hurricanes. It gives us models of where they will strike. But it also gives us the data that says that our warming planet will produce catastrophic natural challenges like the ones we are seeing, even worse.

We ignore this threat, like we ignore a hurricane, at our collective peril.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 Next > End >>

Page 1517 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN