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

Lumpenproletariat

~ free speech

Lumpenproletariat

Tag Archives: Rosa Clemente

Hard Knock Radio: Presidential Election 2016, A Failed Democracy

07 Tue Jun 2016

Posted by ztnh in Democracy Deferred, Political Science, Presidential Election 2016, Racism (phenotype)

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

"Dump Trump" (2016), Anita Johnson, Black Lives Matter, Davey D, Hard Knock Radio, hip hop, identity politics, Jasmine "Abdullah" Richards, KPFA, Olmeca (rapper/activist), Pacifica Radio Network, Rosa Clemente

hard-knock-radioLUMPENPROLETARIAT—Free speech radio’s Hard Knock Radio has provided broadcast coverage of today’s Super Tuesday IV, which they observed as symptomatic of a failed democracy.  Unfortunately, this particular broadcast doesn’t delve terribly deeply into the details evidencing this failure.  But they are out there.  Our election process does appear to be antidemocratic, at best, and completely rigged, at worse.  People, such as Greg Palast and William Simpich have been staying on the election protection beat.  Here, the strongest arguments against any illusions we have a healthy democracy are delivered by Rosa Clemente, yet even they merely scratch the surface.  There are transformative and emancipatory ideas out there for participatory democracy, such as ranked-choice voting, proportional representation, and publicly-funded elections, which progressives agree on, but neglect to include in their analyses.  Besides discussing Black Lives Matter, Rosa Clemente gave Davey D the latest iteration of her third-party politics and general critique of electoral politics.  Oddly, Rosa Clemente, who was the 2008 Green Party candidate for Vice President of the USA alongside Presidential Candidate Cynthia McKinney, sends mixed signals about the electoral process.  While she seems to advocate for the Green Party, she also says she believes “in organised efforts for folks to withhold the vote for future elections”.  (Closing out this broadcast, Olmeca gave street perspectives to some black and brown identity politics within the hip hop subculture.)  Listen here. [1]

Messina

***

[Working draft transcript of actual radio broadcast by Messina for Lumpenproletariat and Hard Knock Radio]

rigged 2016HARD KNOCK RADIO—[7 JUN 2016]  “Wussup, fam.  You are tuned to Hard Knock, here on the Pacifica Network.  Up next on the programme, we speak with long-time organiser Rosa Clemente about the persecution of Black Lives Matter organiser Jasmine “Abdullah” Richards.  And, also, we talk about the upcoming presidential election, a stolen democracy.  And, later on in the programme, last but not least, we speak with hip hop artist and activist Olmeca.  All this and more straight ahead.  So, keep it locked.”

[News Headlines (read by Mark Mericle) omitted by scribe]  (c. 7:30)

[intro audio collage]  (c. 8:40)

[interview with Rosa Clemente]

[SNIP]  (c. 21:06)

DAVEY D:  “Let me ask you thi—”

ROSA CLEMENTE:  “Or that she is not get electable, that that does not happen.”

DAVEY D:  “Yeah.  Since we’re talkin’ politics, let me just ask you this, since we have you on the line, Rosa.  I know she’s not your favourite person, you know, Hillary Clinton, especially, you, being a Green Party member.  But, with that being said, this whole announcement of her clinching the nomination on the eve, not even on the eve—happening overnight, people woke up, many people feeling that they can go to the polls and make a difference for the first time in a few decades here in California—all of a sudden, it’s kind of got short-changed with this announcement that super delegates, you know, over night have decided to put her over the top.  What’s your thoughts on that mechanism?  There’s a lot of fallout, a lot of conversation about that.  From the outside looking in, how do you see this and your thoughts on that?”  (c. 21:57)

ROSA CLEMENTE:  “Well I mean, first, for those that, um, are Democrats and were going to vote for Bernie, I think it is foul. [scoffs]  I think it is—you know.  I, I think that the Democratic Party has shown itself to, even, folks, that were still, essentially, gonna vote Democrat, if you’re going for Bernie, that they are an establishment party—they are an elite party—that there’s no democracy in that party.  (c. 22:24)

“And the idea, too, I mean that the media could say that the night before, before—how many?—folks in six states are left to vote. [3]  I mean I think it really shows.  It’s gotta show people the incestuous relationship between the media elite and the two-party system, that elite system as well.

“And I think it’s gonna, hopefully, push people to break, finally, from the Democratic Party and join an independent party.  I would hope it would be the Green Party.  But there are other parties out there.  And there are other presidential candidates, including the Socialism and Liberation Party.

“And, you know, I also believe in organised efforts for folks to withhold the vote for future elections.  As it bodes for today, I think the entire state of California and all those voters were disenfranchised.  I mean it’s a huge slap, especially, to young folks, that had a little bit of hope, you know, like, especially, those in California, that were like:  Wait, wait.  Everything, that they said was gonna happen with Hillary, we actually have a voice ‘cos we’re pushing for Bernie.  I realise that that’s where most young folks are at.  And I think it was the biggest slap in the face for all those young people, that somehow have been put or brought into the electoral/political process.  And I hope that they know that there’s another place for them to go.  And it doesn’t have to be within this two-party system.” (c. 23:58)

DAVEY D:  “That leads me to my last question here.  I know in the past you’ve been very critical, in particular, of Sanders because he had promised that he would support the Democratic nominee, in this case, Hillary.  Where we’re at in this crossroads is, you know, how do you unify people, who are Sanders supporters with Hillary folks and her values and her politics?  And can that happen?  And, if not, you know, maybe Bernie, personally, will go out and say:  I’m with you.  But, for those who are really angered or feel that the politics are too much to swallow—”

ROSA CLEMENTE:  “Yeah.”

DAVEY D:  “—you know, if Bernie‘s not gonna run third-party, do those people run third-party?  And do they risk a Trump or somebody getting in, if that happens?”  (c. 24:44)

ROSA CLEMENTE:  “Well, I mean I think that that’s what people don’t have a full understanding of a popular vote and the electoral college.  But, with that said, if Bernie Sanders supporters are listening to me right now, he’s already committed to Hillary Clinton.  He’s saying he’s committed to who the eventual Democratic Party nominee.  What he should be saying is:  I’m committed to looking into joining a third-party ticket, i.e., the Green Party, the Libertarians—obviously, he’s not going to join them—, or the Socialism and Liberation Party.  If he’s not saying that, Bernie Sanders supporters do have another option.  You don’t have to vote for Hillary Clinton.  You could be a registered Green within a day in California and vote for Jill Stein and get a third-party on the ballot permanently, so that there’s never again a two-party option. [4]  (c. 25:41)

“For folks, that are saying, well, that means Trump might win, they can’t fall into that trap of, first, a mythology that a third-party candidate is what loses the other candidate an election.  You win an election, or you lose it, by the way you run a campaign. [5]

[SNIP]

Learn more at HARD KNOCK RADIO.

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

***

“The Browning of America” (2014) by Olmeca

***

[1]  Terrestrial radio transmission, 94.1 FM (KPFA, Berkeley, CA) with online simulcast and digital archiving:  Hard Knock Radio, hosted by Anita Johnson and Davey D, Tuesday, 7 JUN 2016, 16:00 PDT, one hour broadcast.

[2]  Notably, at the same time that many people feel “short-changed” by the Super Delegates seeming to be arrayed already on the side of Hillary Clinton, the Super Delegates will not cast their votes until the Democratic Convention.  But, conversely, a segment of Bernie Sanders supporters are hoping for the long shot hope that Bernie Sanders will be able to gather enough support from some of those Super Delegates to defeat Hillary Clinton during what Sanders has predicted will be a “contested” convention process.  Meanwhile, others have reported signs that Bernie Sanders may concede to Hillary Clinton before the convention.  Indeed, Sanders has already announced that he won’t run against Hillary Clinton as an alternative or third-party candidate, should he fail to win the Democratic presidential nomination.  (And it’s important to remember that, even after the polls close, there will still be a certain number of mailed-in ballots to be counted.)

But, since we know that the Democratic Party is principally in the hands of corporate, antidemocratic, anti-working class hands, it is unlikely that any Super Delegates would want to support Bernie Sanders against Hillary Clinton.  It seems like Bernie Sanders’ campaign’s only hope is to receive enough support from voters to override the arbitrary resistance of Super Delegates and Democratic Party bosses.

[3]  In a recent speech Amy Goodman, of Democracy Now!, noted that in other countries it is forbidden or illegal for media outlets to be ‘predicting’ election outcomes because of the unfair and undue influence it can bear upon elections.  Instead, Goodman noted, articulating what many of us have long thought, the press must devote its efforts to researching and presenting the political track records of political candidates and comparing that to their campaign promises and rhetoric.  But, sadly, that’s not what we get in the USA.  Most people cast their votes predicated on amorphous ‘feelings’ about candidates, rather than evidence-based reasoning and historical facts.  If the working classes knew the political history of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, they would never vote for them.  Then, the working classes would never vote against their interests.  They wouldn’t be fooled again.

[4]  The problem with this argument, for those of us aware of (or old enough to remember) the fact that the Green Party, being the third largest political party in the USA has already been here before with Ralph Nader.  And when Ralph Nader was gaining a critical mass of support, a factional dispute within the Green Party resulted in the Green Party succumbing to the bogus spoiler vote argument and pressuring Nader to agree to pull out at the end in order to help the Democratic Party.  At that point, the Green Party became an appendage, a tool, of the Democratic Party.  And this turned many of us off from the Green Party.  This has caused the Green Party to appear untrustworthy and insincere in the eyes of many progressives.  How can we trust that the Green Party won’t sell out again?

[5]  Or one wins or loses an election by the structural and legal forces stacked in a particular direction to benefit a particular candidate or political party.  Or, in other words, one wins or loses according to a rigged political process.

***

[7 JUN 2016]

[Last modified  08:24 PDT  9 JUN 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...

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • Oct 2017
  • Jul 2017
  • May 2017
  • Apr 2017
  • Mar 2017
  • Feb 2017
  • Jan 2017
  • Dec 2016
  • Nov 2016
  • Oct 2016
  • Sep 2016
  • Aug 2016
  • Jul 2016
  • Jun 2016
  • May 2016
  • Apr 2016
  • Mar 2016
  • Feb 2016
  • Jan 2016
  • Dec 2015
  • Nov 2015
  • Oct 2015
  • Sep 2015
  • Aug 2015
  • Jul 2015
  • Jun 2015
  • May 2015
  • Apr 2015
  • Mar 2015
  • Feb 2015
  • Jan 2015
  • Apr 2014
  • Dec 2013
  • Jun 2013
  • Nov 2012
  • Apr 2012
  • Mar 2012
  • Nov 2011
  • Oct 2011
  • May 2010
  • Oct 2009
  • Sep 2009
  • May 2007
  • Feb 2004
  • Sep 1997
  • Dec 1993
  • Dec 1990
  • Oct 1990
  • Dec 1983

Categories

  • Africa
    • Burundi
    • Ivory Coast
    • Libya
    • Mali
    • Mozambique
    • Rwanda
  • Anti-Capitalism
    • Anti-Austerity
  • Anti-Fascism
  • Anti-Imperialism
  • Anti-Totalitarianism
  • Anti-War
  • Asia
    • Eurasia
    • Turkey
  • Civic Engagement (Activism)
    • Environmental Activism
    • Feminism
      • Women's Reproductive Rights
  • Comedy
  • Critical Theory
    • critical media literacy
  • Democracy Deferred
  • Documentary Film
  • Education
    • Critical Pedagogy
  • Fiction
  • First Amendment (U.S. Constitution)
    • Freedom of Speech
    • Freedom of the Press
  • Free Speech
  • Global Labour Movement
    • collective bargaining
  • Globalisation
  • Historical Archives
  • History
    • French History: 19th Century
    • U.S. History: 19th Century
    • U.S. History: 20th Century
  • Immigration
  • Indigenous Rights
  • International Trade
  • Latin America
    • Honduras
    • México
  • Linguistics
    • Cognitive Linguistics
  • Marxian Theory (Marxism)
  • Mindfulness
  • Music
    • History of Bluegrass
    • History of Chicano Rock
    • History of Cuban Music
    • History of Electronic
    • History of European Classical
    • History of Folk
    • History of Funk
    • History of Gospel
    • History of Hindustani Classical
    • History of Hip Hop
    • History of Holiday Music
    • History of Jazz (Black Classical)
    • History of Mexican Song
      • History of Norteño
      • History of Tejano
    • History of Reggae
    • History of Rhythm & Blues
    • History of Rock and Roll
      • History of Alternative Country (Americana)
      • History of Chicano Rock
      • History of Metal
      • History of Pop Music
    • History of Soul
  • Neoliberalism
  • Organised Religion
  • Philosophy
    • Dr. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831)
    • Philosophy of Education
      • Critical Pedagogy
  • Police State
  • Political Economy
    • History of Economic Theory
      • Dr. Karl Marx (1818-1883)
    • Macroeconomic Analysis
      • Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
      • Open Economy Macroeconomics
    • Microeconomic Analysis
      • urban economics
      • Worker Self-Directed Enterprises
    • Political Science
      • Democratic Party (USA)
      • Republican Party (USA)
  • Political Prisoners
  • Presidential Election 2016
  • Prison Abolition
  • Racism (phenotype)
  • Science
    • Digital Technology
    • Evolutionary Biology
    • Medicine
    • Pyschology & Psychiatry
  • Social Theory
  • Sociology
  • Uncategorized
  • Underclass Debate

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
%d bloggers like this: