• About
  • Documentary Films
  • Index
  • Nota bene
  • Protect and Serve
  • Readings

Lumpenproletariat

~ free speech

Lumpenproletariat

Tag Archives: Mumia Abu Jamal

“Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote” by Michelle Alexander

27 Wed Jul 2016

Posted by ztnh in Anti-Imperialism, Democracy Deferred, Free Speech, Political Science, Presidential Election 2016, Prison Abolition, Racism (phenotype)

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Democracy Now!, Dr. Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton (b. 1947), Dr. Michelle Alexander (b. 1967), Michelle Alexander, Mumia Abu Jamal

Michelle_Alexander_2011_02LUMPENPROLETARIAT—Political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal was in conversation with Democracy Now!‘s Amy Goodman this morning.  As ever, Mumia gave us his intrepid analysis of the nation’s current political climate, despite suffering from untreated illnesses and disease behind bars.  Joining the Democracy Now! discussion, actor Danny Glover observed that it was apparent that the state was trying to kill Mumia through denial of needed medical care, as Mumia has now been taken off of death row.

Saliently, as Bernie Sanders betrays his supporters, betrays progressives, who poured their hearts and souls into his campaign, Mumia closed his telephone call by reminding us of an important article by legal scholar and human rights advocate Michelle Alexander entitled “Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote“.  Michelle Alexander is the author of The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness (The New Press).  Regarding the 2016 Presidential Election, we might add that Michelle Alexander‘s reasoning applies as well to why Hillary Clinton doesn’t deserve the Hispanic/Latina vote or the working class vote or any vote.

Messina

***

THE NATION—[10 FEB 2016]   Hillary Clinton loves black people.  And black people love Hillary—or so it seems.  Black politicians have lined up in droves to endorse her, eager to prove their loyalty to the Clintons in the hopes that their faithfulness will be remembered and rewarded.  Black pastors are opening their church doors, and the Clintons are making themselves comfortably at home once again, engaging effortlessly in all the usual rituals associated with “courting the black vote,” a pursuit that typically begins and ends with Democratic politicians making black people feel liked and taken seriously.  Doing something concrete to improve the conditions under which most black people live is generally not required.

Hillary is looking to gain momentum on the campaign trail as the primaries move out of Iowa and New Hampshire and into states like South Carolina, where large pockets of black voters can be found.  According to some polls, she leads Bernie Sanders by as much as 60 percent among African Americans.  It seems that we—black people—are her winning card, one that Hillary is eager to play.

And it seems we’re eager to get played. Again.

The love affair between black folks and the Clintons has been going on for a long time.  It began back in 1992, when Bill Clinton was running for president.  He threw on some shades and played the saxophone on The Arsenio Hall Show.  It seems silly in retrospect, but many of us fell for that. At a time when a popular slogan was “It’s a black thing, you wouldn’t understand,” Bill Clinton seemed to get us.  When Toni Morrison dubbed him our first black president, we nodded our heads.  We had our boy in the White House. Or at least we thought we did.

Black voters have been remarkably loyal to the Clintons for more than 25 years.  It’s true that we eventually lined up behind Barack Obama in 2008, but it’s a measure of the Clinton allure that Hillary led Obama among black voters until he started winning caucuses and primaries.  Now Hillary is running again.  This time she’s facing a democratic socialist who promises a political revolution that will bring universal healthcare, a living wage, an end to rampant Wall Street greed, and the dismantling of the vast prison state—many of the same goals that Martin Luther King Jr. championed at the end of his life.  Even so, black folks are sticking with the Clinton brand.

What have the Clintons done to earn such devotion? Did they take extreme political risks to defend the rights of African Americans?  Did they courageously stand up to right-wing demagoguery about black communities?  Did they help usher in a new era of hope and prosperity for neighborhoods devastated by deindustrialization, globalization, and the disappearance of work?

No. Quite the opposite.

Learn more at THE NATION.

***

Related Lumpenproletariat articles, relevant to Hillary Clinton’s 2015-2016 presidential campaign, include:

  • “Why Hillary Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote by Michelle Alexander“, 27 JUL 2016
  • “Hillary Clinton, US/NATO, & the Lynching of Gaddafi“, 3 MAR 2016
  • “Activist Berta Caseres Assassinated,” 3 MAR 2016
  • “Historical Archive: Third Party Challenge to Unconstitutional Prop 14“, 2 MAR 2016
  • “My Turn: Hillary Clinton Targets the Presidency (2015) by Doug Henwood,” 29 FEB 2016
  • “Hillary Clinton for USA Presidency: Pros and Cons“, 13 APR 2015

***

[Image entitled “Michelle_Alexander_11_02” by Miller Center of Public Affairs (flickr page, Charlottesville, VA – Flickr: Michelle Alexander at the Miller Center, December 3, 2011), Creative Commons (CC BY 2.0)]

[27 JUL 2016]

[Last modified  23:17 PDT  1 AUG 2016]

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

The Trump Party by Political Prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal

23 Wed Mar 2016

Posted by ztnh in Anti-Capitalism, Anti-Fascism, Anti-Imperialism, Free Speech, Police State, Political Prisoners, Political Science, Presidential Election 2016, Prison Abolition, Republican Party (USA)

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Dennis Bernstein, Donald Trump, Flashpoints, KPFA, KPFA/Pacifica Radio internal conflict, Mumia Abu Jamal, Noelle Hanrahan, Pacifica Radio Network, Prison Radio, Rage Against the Machine, transcript, Trump Party, Unleash the Beast, Voice of the Voiceless

Mumia03LUMPENPROLETARIAT—Gonzo:  One of the nicer people I’ve met over the years around the free speech radio community is Noelle Hanrahan.  When many thousands of us loyal free speech radio listeners swarmed to defend free speech radio KPFA from the armed thugs, backed by Janet Reno‘s office under the auspices of then-president Bill Clinton‘s administration, which arrested broadcasters, including Dennis Bernstein (Flashpoints, Executive Producer), for speaking out against labour violations and corruption of free speech radio leadership, Noelle Hanrahan courageously climbed up a ladder, scaling the front of KPFA’s building on Martin Luther King, Jr. Way in Berkeley, CA, in defiance of cops surrounding the radio station, to unfurl a free speech radio KPFA solidarity banner.  Such is the deep commitment of most of the people working in, and around, free speech radio, whose broadcast signals extend throughout the USA, and worldwide online.

Amplifying the voices of the silenced and marginalised is a noble endeavour.  And, perhaps, no sector of our society is more silenced and marginalised than our imprisoned population, which seems to constitute a nation, within a nation, of subjugated people with truncated human rights.  In defiance of all of that, imprisoned journalist and political prisoner, Mumia Abu Jamal, has become one of the strongest voices reporting on the American Nightmare from behind bars, from death row.  For many years now, Noelle Hanrahan has been recording Mumia‘s essays, reports, and commentaries by telephone and publishing them at PrisonRadio.org, where free speech radio stations around the world can access and broadcast them.

A few days ago, Mumia Abu Jamal filed a new audio commentary for Prison Radio entitled “The Trump Party“.  Even behind bars, even on death row, even suffering through being denied life-saving medical care for hepatitis C by prison officials, Mumia‘s journalism is far more perceptive, intrepid, and useful than most of our nation’s broadcast media.  Listen (or download) here.

Messina

***

[Transcript by Messina for Lumpenproletariat and Prison Radio]

PRISON RADIO—[20 MAR 2016]  “‘The Trump Party‘.  It’s months from the conventions.  But, if today is any indication, the results are all but guaranteed.  No matter the results of the election, the impact on the Republican Party is clear.  After years of playing with its southern strategy, the party has been colonised by a northern real estate magnate, Donald J. Trump—loud, bombastic, boastful, narrow-minded, bigoted, and vain.  Trump now epitomises the party.

“The party faithful had worshipped at the steps of the Chamber of Commerce and genuflected before the big bell on Wall Street.  It’s only natural that they would bow in the presence of a billionaire—Donald Trump.

“It has become, in essence, the party of business.  And, in furtherance thereof, it has turned a blind eye to the pains and needs of the poor and the dispossessed.

“It was not always so.

“It was the 1870s, when the spirit of Lincoln animated the party.  Its most loyal voter was the newly emancipated black people.  Wives tossed their husbands out of their homes, if they dared vote Democratic.

“But the Republicans, in their not-so-Great Compromise in the 1870s, supported Rutherford B. Hayes for president, who announced a let it alone policy, allowing racist southern forces to attack at will black voters.

“Black troops were removed from the south and, incidentally, marched to the west to fight Indians.  And black Republicans were left to the tender mercies of the terrorist groups, like the Ku Klux Klan.  That betrayal burned in black Americans for decades.

“In the ’60s, the time of the Civil Rights movement and the Black Liberation movement, the Republicans, once again turned their backs on blacks and waged a Southern Strategy, an appeal to white nationalism, xenophobia, and anti-blackness.

“Donald J. Trump is the logical development of that process—loud, bombastic, bullying, racist.  He is the very embodiment of the so-called conservative movement.  He is more.

“He has become the Republican Party.  And Lincoln has left the building.

“He is the true leader of the newest version of the Grand Old Party, the Trump Party.

“From imprisoned nation, this is Mumia Abu Jamal.”

Learn more at PRISON RADIO.

***

[Transcript draft by Messina for Lumpenproletariat and Prison Radio]

PRISON RADIO—[13 MAR 2016]  “‘Unleashing the Beast‘  In a recent commentary on the pending election, I said that one needn’t worry about billionaire presidential candidate Donald Trump, who wouldn’t last.  I was wrong.

“I seriously underestimated Trump’s ability to pummel and assail his opponents.  I should have known better, for money is the mother’s milk of politics.  And, while Trump hasn’t been forced to spend his resources, his opponents have been bleeding green.

“Trump’s bombast has attracted the brutish spirits of their nature to rise from their growling slumber.  Now, presidential rallies are fistfights and curses, especially when Trump protesters are black folks.

“The ugly image of white-haired retirees pushing and punching young people the age of their grandchildren reveals the roiling racist hatreds, that lurk beneath, awaiting activation.  Trump, with an easy cruelty, gives permission for these assaults by his minions.

“Richard Hofstadter, the brilliant author of the classic The Paranoid Style in American Politics, examined the American right-wing and, particularly, described what he called pseudo-conservatives in their ranks.  Hofstadter writes that ‘those new dissenters‘—he’s writing in the 1950s—’are a threat to true conservatism’—explaining—’the new dissent is certainly not radical.  There are hardly any radicals of any sort left.  Nor is it precisely conservatism.  Unlike most of the liberal dissent of the past, the new dissent not only has no respect for non-conformism, but it is based upon a relentless demand for conformity.  It can most accurately be called pseudo-conservative because its exponents, although they believe themselves to be conservatives and usually employ the rhetoric of conservatism, show signs of a serious and restless dissatisfaction with American life, traditions, and institutions.  They have little in common with the temperate and compromising spirit of true conservativism, in the classical sense of the word.  And they are far from pleased with the dominant practical conservatism of the moment, as it is represented by the Eisenhower administration.  Their political reactions express, rather, a profound, if largely unconscious, hatred of our society and its ways, a hatred which one would hesitate to impute to them if one did not have suggestive evidence, both, from clinical techniques and from their own modes of expression.’

“Richard Hofstadter’s insights from a half century ago show the moment we now inhabit—raw, naked hatreds, exploited for political purposes to fuel social discontent, to buttress political ambitions of the neo-fascists, forces unleashed to sow the seeds of disaster.

“From imprisoned nation, this is Mumia Abu Jamal.”

Learn more at PRISON RADIO.

***

“Voice of the Voiceless” (1998, 1999) by Rage Against the Machine

***

[Image entitled “Mumia Abu Jamal” via Fair Use of Wikipedia source.]

[23 MAR 2016]

[Last modified  16:37 PDT  24 MAR 2016]

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

Presidential Election 2016: Voting Democrat to Vote Socialist

16 Wed Mar 2016

Posted by ztnh in Democracy Deferred, Democratic Party (USA), Political Science, Presidential Election 2016, Prison Abolition

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Amy Goodman, Bernie Sanders, Chad Peace, closed primary, Democracy Now!, Jasmine Richards (Black Lives Matter), KPFA, Mumia Abu Jamal, nonpartisan blanket primary, Pacifica Radio Network, Peace and Freedom Party, Rosa Clemente, semi-closed primary, Sonali Kolhatkar, Top Two primary, transcript, Uprising

BernieSanders-Caricature by Flikr user DonkeyHoteyLUMPENPROLETARIAT—Gonzo:  On Monday, I did what I never thought I’d do again.  I registered (online) to vote, as a Democrat.  Gasp.  Like many progressives across the nation, I abandoned an alternative political party—in my case, the socialist Peace and Freedom Party—and registered as a Democrat. [1]

I admit that I voted for Bill Clinton in the first presidential election, in which I was old enough to vote.  But free speech radio and alternative media soon shed light on the many problems with the Clinton administration’s foreign and domestic policies, including laying the foundations for the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008.  So, some of us have voted (and campaigned for) Ralph Nader‘s presidential campaigns since then, until Nader’s retirement from running.

But, momentously, Bernie Sanders, a self-described socialist, has an opportunity to win the Democratic presidential nomination.  But something tells me the Democrat Party bosses, whoever they are, will not allow that to happen.

Although the rules and laws vary from state to state, in California, for example, it seems that so-called independent voters, or closeted voters, those who “Decline to state” a political party, it seems those non-affiliated voters can vote in the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination election, or primary. [2]  At least, that’s what some colleagues tell me.  But, then, the Democratic Party can be anti-democratic, if it so chooses, and break its own rules, as it pleases.  So, voters, such as your author, who are strategically re-registering as Democrat to throw their weight behind the Bernie Sanders campaign and against Hillary Clinton, may simply be discounted by the Democratic Party’s bosses at the last minute.

Lumpenproletariat is a non-partisan website, open to all perspectives, but transparency seems key to understanding.  And, in the interest of transparency, we’ll admit that securing one’s right to vote for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Party’s 2016 primary appears to be the most effective strategy working class voters can take at this moment.  We just don’t see the candidates being proposed by any of the alternative political parties as being more progressive or competent than Bernie Sanders.  Of course, we’ll also admit, should Bernie Sanders fail to be nominated by the Democratic Party, we’re immediately going back to building alternative political parties for a more democratic society.

Often, we can rely on free speech radio to be informed about the world around us to be effective and engaged citizens affirming our own political autonomy.  But in the case of electoral politics, at least the free speech radio broadcasts I’ve caught, the public has been given flimsy information.  For example, Democracy Now!‘s Amy Goodman decided to interview a former Republican congressperson, who was arguing that blanket primaries, were the most democratic form of primaries.  And, sadly, the usually bright Amy Goodman, didn’t question the anti-democratic nature of blanket primaries. [3]  To give a second example, Uprising‘s Sonali Kolhatkar provided a useful broadcast on explaining particular rules and laws of voting processes.  Unfortunately, she decided to interview the author of an antidemocratic Top Two primary law without being particularly critical.  Granted, Sonali Kolhatkar did question the voting system, her questions didn’t seem to have any teeth. [4]

Celebrated, and lionised, Mumia Abu Jamal has also recently contributed to the literature a new commentary on the USA’s electoral process, or lack thereof.  Basically, voting sucks within a corrupt system.

MUMIA ABU JAMAL: [5]  “Voting for your pain.  An election is occurring tonight.  It’s a primary, one of many dozens to come.  It matters not where or, for the most part, even who.  Elections are public expressions of emotion, as in, who do you like?  Who do you feel like voting for?

“Millions of dollars are spent on massive advertising campaigns built to bend your emotions, play to your fears, or evoke your deepest hatreds.  Few have plans for your hopes.  Fewer still have a handle on your dreams.

“We have become accustomed to voting for lesser evils, forgetting the obvious truth that the lesser evil is still evil.

“So, we end up voting for wars we don’t want, policies we don’t support, and people who you don’t like.  Essentially, we settle and wonder why things go from bad to worse.

“Each candidate promises the moon and barely delivers dust.  And that is the nature of the beast.  The U.S. political system wasn’t designed to represent the people.  It was constructed to represent the propertied, the well-to-do, elites.

“A system was built to protect the interests of a wealthy minority.  The people, in the words of one of the so-called founders, Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania, were seen as a riotous mob, which filled him with fear and trembling.

“Do you really think that founders like these ever wanted the mob to vote, ever?  That spirit, the fear of the mob may be seen today in the increasing efforts to deprive more and more people of a so-called right to vote, not to mention giving them someone to vote for.

“For over 70 years, it allowed primarily southern states to develop practices, that demanded that blacks pass literacy test, bean-counting tests, and noxious grandfather clauses, which allowed one to vote only if one’s grandfather voted, which, if one’s grandfather was a slave, their grandchildren were barred from voting forever.

“Today, voting itself has become a lesser evil, a process, that preserves the power of the propertied and the economic privileges of the elites.

“From imprisoned nation, this is Mumia Abu Jamal.”

Messina

***

[Partial transcript by Messina for Lumpenproletariat and Uprising.]

UPRISING—[14 MAR 2016]  “From Los Angeles, California, this is Uprising.  And I’m Sonali Kolhatkar.  It’s Monday, March 14th, 2016.  With anti-establishment candidates running in the presidential primaries, we’ll explore, today, the question of:  Who can vote in which primary?  And we’ll hear a commentary by Mumia Abu Jamal on voting and elections.  Plus, organiser and activist Rosa Clemente is one of seven people with Black Lives Matter [BLM] facing charges in Los Angeles.  We’ll speak to her about it.  And we’ll hear the voice of Jasmine Richards, a young BLM activist, who may be facing the harshest criminal charges in the nation for her activism.  That’s coming up after the news.” (c. 1:08)

[News Headlines omitted by scribe]

SONALI KOLHATKAR:  “Welcome back to Uprising.  I’m Sonali Kolhatkar.  According to Gallup, more than a third of all eligible voters in the United States are not affiliated with, either, the Democratic or the Republican party.  While they can, also, choose who they want as president in a general election, in the primaries, it becomes more complicated.

“Depending on the state where you live in, independent or Decline–to–state voters may, or may not, be allowed to vote for a candidate, that they like, if that candidate is running with a major party.

“The case of Bernie Sanders is especially telling.  The Democratic-leaning Senator spent most of his career identifying as an independent, but is now running as a Democrat.  And he’s attracting plenty of independent progressives.  But can they all vote for him?  (c. 9:11)

“Similarly, there may be some independent voters who back Hillary Clinton simply because they yearn for a woman in the White House.

“Joining me now to shed some light on these questions is Chad Peace.  He is president of Independent Voter Media.  Welcome to Uprising, Chad.” (c. 9:25)

CHAD PEACE:  “Thanks for having me.”

SONALI KOLHATKAR:  “Well, let’s start with California, whose primary is in early June.  It’s a huge state.  Or, as Sanders would say:  a ‘uge state.  Lots of delegates at stake.  If independents can vote in the Democratic Primary, you might have a very different dynamic, than in a closed primary.  So, can they in California?

“Can independent or Decline-to-state or even people registered with other parties, can they vote in the Democratic Primary, if they choose?” (c. 9:54)

CHAD PEACE:  “Well, in California, we have what’s called a semi–closed primary.

“Now, if you wanna get technical about it, our Constitution actually says we’re supposed to have an open primary.  But the Democrats have opened their primary to non-member voters or non-partisan voters.  So, if you’re an independent, you can vote in the Democratic primary, but not if you’re a member of a third-party or the Republican Party.” (c. 10:20)

SONALI KOLHATKAR:  “I see.  So, if you’re like me, who’s Decline to state, I could vote in the Democratic primary.  But if I was with, say, the Green Party, or the Peace and Freedom Party, or the Libertarian Party, I would not be allowed to vote in the Democratic Primary in California.”

CHAD PEACE:  “That’s correct.  You’re Decline-to-state, you have to request a Democratic Party ballot; and they’ll allow you to vote.”

SONALI KOLHATKAR:  “Now, this is something, that the Democratic Party has made as an exception to this year’s election?  Or is this how it always is?”

CHAD PEACE:  “Well, if you go back in—California, actually, used to have what was called an open blanket primary. [3]  And it was the choice of the voters to participate.

“In the year 2000, ironically, it was the Democratic Party, that sued the State of California, saying you can’t force us to allow non-members to participate in our primary.

“Now, they won that case.  And I say irony because now the Democrats, on their own volition, allowed non-members to participate.  In the Republican Party, actually, on their own volition, chooses not to allow them to participate.” (c. 11:21)

SONALI KOLHATKAR:  “And I wanna get to the Republicans in a minute.

“So, just to clarify, for our California listeners, who are eligible voters, if you are registered with a party, that is not the Democratic Party, but you would like to vote in the Democratic Primary, you would have to, either, change your party affiliation to Democrat or Decline to state.

“If you are already Decline-to-state, then you can vote in the Democratic Primary, or you could vote in the primary of, I believe two other parties, that have opened up this year, the Libertarian among them, and one other party.  Right?”

CHAD PEACE:  “The American Independent.”

SONALI KOLHATKAR:  “The American Independent Party.

“So, if you want to vote in the Democratic Party, those are the ways, in a Democratic Party primary, those are the ways, in which you can do so. (c. 12:14)

[SNIP] (c. 59:59)

Learn more at UPRISING.

[This transcript will be expanded as time constraints and/or demand or resources allow.]

***

[1]  Here’s a recent article from the Peace and Freedom Party, the only socialist political party in California, critiquing and citing Bernie Sanders:

*

We Can’t Tail After the Democrats  by Bernie Sanders

Posted on September 2, 2015 by the Communications Committee

This article is the first to appear in The Sanders Campaign: A Symposium. To download in Adobe Acrobat format for printing and distribution, click here.

Introduction by the PFP Communications Committee

We find much of what presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is currently saying about wealth inequality and by implication about the failures of a capitalist economy in the U.S. to be consistent with our platform.

But we think that Bernie Sanders should be running outside the two-party system. Instead, he is running as a Democrat and will likely support the winner of the Democratic primary (he did with Obama), which almost without a doubt will be the “corporate liberal” Hillary Clinton.

While raising important issues for the electorate to consider, the Sanders candidacy also has the function of giving an undeserved left-liberal legitimacy to the Democratic Party. His campaign, which does not directly criticize the record of the Democratic Party or of Ms. Clinton, serves to draw back into the fold otherwise disaffected voters who had been disappointed when the progressive hopes generated by candidate Obama turned out to be largely hopes without substance.

The Peace and Freedom Party considers that one of the first steps toward progressive change in the U.S. is to have an organized left party that is independent of the two corporate parties, the Democrats and the Republicans. Ironically, this argument is masterfully made by Bernie Sanders himself in the following article that is reproduced from The Guardian of September 27, 1989 (we have added the subtitles). Written 26 years ago, Sanders’ prescient analysis applies to his current campaign.

Bernie Sanders says the following …

Democratic and Republican Parties Are Indistinguishable

We need a new, progressive political party in the U.S. because on almost every important issue the Democratic and Republican Parties, both controlled by Big Money, are indistinguishable. The “Reagan Revolution” of the 1980s was not created solely by Ronald Reagan and the Republicans. It was brought about with the active and strong support of the Democratic Party which controlled the U.S. House of Representatives for eight out of Reagan’s eight years and the U.S. Senate for two out of Reagan’s eight years.

During the Reagan era both parties supported huge tax breaks for the rich – and major cutbacks for working people and the poor. Both parties supported a huge increase in military spending – and cutbacks in education, housing and environmental protection. Both parties supported the illegal and immoral wars against Nicaragua – and efforts to weaken the trade union movement.

We need a new, progressive political movement in this country because the Democrats and Republicans are not only incapable of solving any of the major problems facing this country, they are not even prepared to discuss them. On the most important issues facing this country the Democrats and Republicans have nothing to say.

Mass Media Is Heavily Censored

The mass media in this country is heavily censored by the corporate ownership and the companies that advertise. “News” is increasingly presented as entertainment with exciting video of plane crashes, terrorists in action and other 30-second “news briefs.”

Analysis of why things are the way they are–the unfair distribution of wealth and power, starvation and poverty, war, ecological destruction, racism, sexism, etc. – is not considered “news.” Serious writers and cultural workers who wish to address the problems that most affect the U.S. public are completely out of the “public” broadcasting system. The simple truth is that ideas that are in conflict with the ruling-class ideology are almost never allowed on the mass media.

Has the Democratic Party ever once raised the issue of corporate control over the media, and the need to provide for a national media that will address the reality of U.S. life and allow for a diversity of opinion?

For over 150 years, under Democratic and Republican administrations, the U.S. government and U.S. corporations have overthrown, or attempted to overthrow, every government that has come to power in Latin or Central America or the Caribbean that has defended the interests of its workers and peasants.

Compromised and Corrupt Democratic Party Dominated by Big Money

The U.S. people, as almost never before, are rejecting the “2-party” system and are crying out for a political alternative. Half the people no longer vote for President, and fewer vote in state and local elections. Poor people are almost completely boycotting the current election system.

We need a new political movement in this country because our citizens desperately need to see and hear a radical alternative to the tired old status-quo politics of the Democrats and Republicans. Everyone instinctively knows that the current system is failing, but the progressive movement is not getting out an alternative vision of society or an alternative program of immediate demands.

It is my strong opinion that the boldness and clarity that we need to articulate can never be done through the compromised and corrupt Democratic Party – dominated by Big Money.

We Can Create a Third Party

We need a new political movement in this country, one that must put an end to the ineffective single-issue syndrome that currently exists – where unions, environmentalists, women, people of color, farmers, tax reformers, and senior citizen groups fight their separate battles against a hostile establishment.

We must begin to have the courage to fight for power – not handouts. We are the majority of people and must act accordingly. Clearly, there will be differences within the progressive movement that will have to be worked out. We can do it.

I am not naive, and I understand the enormous difficulties that confront us when we take on the Democratic and Republican Parties and the economic oligarchy that controls this country. I believe, however, that if we stop thinking about all the reasons as to why it can’t be done, and go out in the streets and do it, we can succeed.

We can create a third party. We can raise the important issues which the Democrats and Republicans ignore. We can make politics relevant to working people and the poor. We can win.

Bernie Sanders represents Vermont in the U.S. Senate and is a candidate for the Democratic Party nomination for President.

*

[2]  Fact-check pending.

[3]  For more on the anti-democratic nature of the heinous California Proposition 14 (2010) and blanket primaries, see:

  • “Historical Archives: Third-Party Challenge to Unconstitutional Prop 14“, 2 MAR 2016

[4]  See free speech radio’s Uprising broadcast for Monday, 14 MAR 2016, 08:00 PDT.

[5]  See free speech radio’s Uprising broadcast for Monday, 14 MAR 2016, 08:00 PDT (c. 24:50).  Transcript by Messina for Lumpenproletariat, Mumia Abu Jamal, Prison Radio, and Uprising.

***

[Image entitled “Bernie Sanders – Caricature” by Flikr user DonkeyHotey used under Fair Use via Creative Commons.]

[16 MAR 2016]

[Last modified 01:38 PDT  17 MAR 2016]

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...
← Older posts

Follow me on Twitter

My Tweets

Blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel
%d bloggers like this: