Up here in Boston, just days ahead of July 4th, someone hit Christopher Columbus with a big bucket of blood.
Or what looked like blood.
Local media stations were all over the story. But no one on TV would say the word.
Paint, said reporter after reporter, Paint.
The midterm elections are over. The right-wing Republicans delivered a massive defeat to the floundering Democrats across the board, regaining control of the US Senate and grabbing governorships and statehouses across the country.
To revolutionaries, and I'd imagine many others too, anniversaries are when we remember past events and struggles, discuss their significance and what lessons they may hold for us in the current moment. Although I hold to the reflections I gave on the previous two anniversaries of the Occupy Movement (see here and here), that still leaves the question: what do we say now?
Some of the best-known whistleblowers in the U.S. appeared at a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington D.C. on June 4 to announce the creation of a new organization, exposefacts.org, that offers a website where anonymous whistleblowers can submit information in a secure and protected environment.
"Democracy" is a contested term, so anything I write about union democracy is bound to be controversial. And this is as it should be, because one vital characteristic of democracy is the positive, creative role it allots to disagreement. If we desire democracy, it is because we believe that no individual or economic or political elite has a monopoly on truth. The "correct" policy is simply the one we can get most people to agree on in the face of opposition.
My tie is too tight and I can barely breathe. I gag as I loosen it a little. Even though the waiting room is plush, immaculate and air conditioned, it still feels unnaturally hot. As one of the corporate suits walk by, I quickly straighten out the collar, making sure that the tie is perfectly centered. He doesn't see me and walks past, carrying a bunch of reports and talking about profit margins. Once again, I have to gasp for air. It is like this at every job interview.
A good chunk of the debate on l'affaire Donald Sterling seems to be focusing on the legality of the taping of the conversation between Sterling and his girlfriend. This debate turns around issues of privacy - the private nature of the conversation - and whether something spoken between two people, in manner of a confidential exchange, can be subject to criticism of a public nature. Set aside for a moment the laws against and the ethics of secret recording.
In mid-April, Vijay Prashad, sentinel thinker of the Global South, paused after returning to Beirut from the Bekaa Valley. Focusing away from his surroundings and momentarily halting his ongoing commentary on the Indian elections to his East, Prashad gazed west to New York City. “I can’t believe the news I just heard.
