This is a fascinating Associated Press article which I first saw in the Santa Barbara News Press. Like most newspapers, the News Press is good producing boring, empty, non-news, you-can-read-it-anywhere articles. Occasionally, though, the newspaper tells the truth and sometimes there’s an interesting story.
Did you ever think about commercial fishing in Milwaukee? You might want to become a historian if you are interested in the subject. “It’s mid-April and the gray-haired fisherman and his gray-haired son are not headed out for just another day of hoisting nets from the depths of Lake Michigan.” There are fish, but no commercial fishing ventures. “Today, for the first time since the 1800s, there are no commercial fishing boats operating out of Milwaukee.”
” By 1938, Wisconsin’s commercial fishing operations were motorized and mechanized and generated jobs for more than 2,000 workers. They were dropping enough nets in state waters, mostly in Lake Michigan but some in Lake Superior, as well, to stretch from Milwaukee to the Eastern Seaboard, and back. And those nets were still pulling 14 million pounds of fish out of Lake Michigan a year.” This was a decrease from the 41 million pounds a year in 1900, but still significant and impressive.
“The decline of the (commercial) fishery going on right now in Lake Michigan and Huron doesn’t have anything to do with overfishing,” says David Lodge, a biologist and Great Lakes expert at the University of Notre Dame. So what happened?
Changes in the food web that appear to be driven by invasive mussels. The primary suspect is the quagga mussel, which arrived in the Great Lakes as a stowaway in the ballast tanks of freighters that carried them across the Atlantic. Still a rare find in Lake Michigan until just several years ago, the mollusks mysteriously and suddenly went viral. Today they smother the bottom of the lake almost from shore to shore, and their numbers are estimated at 900 trillion. Almost unfathomable, and each “quagga can filter up to a liter of water per day, stripping away the plankton that for thousands of years directly and indirectly sustained the lake’s native fish.”
For fishermen, when there are no fish left their livelihood is gone. It would be like, for farmers, some invasive worm sucking all the nutrients out of the soil. When the fishing is gone, the stores who prepare the fish, package the fish, and sell the fish also suffer. “Jeff Ewig stands in a blue smock behind the counter of Ewig Brothers Fish Company with a sign that says: ‘We are out of smoked chubs for the season. The soonest they would again be available is late next winter, ifwe can find a new supplier.’ Today Ewig and his son hang on to the family fish-smoking wholesale and retail operation any way they can, selling Alaskan halibut, farmed South American salmon, lobster tails, haddock, cod and tilapia, as well as some Great Lakes smoked fish, often from Lake Superior. But “their specialty used to be Lake Michigan chubs.” There are no options to sue and no one to blame.
What do the fishermen do? Dan – the son of a fishermen who has been on the same boat since he was eight, in 1944, and who himself grew up on the boat – is planning to move his wife and three kids to Alaska in the coming months. He’s got a boat in Alaska, and after years of boating in Alaska there for several weeks each summer he is ready to make the place home. He says this is the only choice he has because he can catch more fish in one day in Alaska than he can catch all winter off Milwaukee. “I’m not leaving” Lake Michigan, Dan says. “The lake left me. It’s gone.”
I haven’t seen this film, and today is the first day in theaters, but this sounds fascinating. Circumstance is “set in contemporary Iran in the unseen world of Iranian youth culture, filled with underground parties, sex, drugs and defiance, CIRCUMSTANCE is the story of two vivacious young girls — wealthy Atafeh and orphaned Shireen — discovering their burgeoning sexuality and, like 16 year-old girls anywhere, struggling with their desires and the boundaries placed upon them by the world they were born into.” It doesn’t claim to be completely accurate – in fact, it’s fiction, like so much of Hollywood and Baliwood – but like all fiction that isn’t science fiction, it is based on reality and possibility.
There is criticism of the movie – often from older Iranian men, naturally. “Keshavarz understands that many people will be upset by her deliberately provocative film, saying ‘people are threatened by the film, and not just the issues of sexuality, but it also deals with repression and how it affects individuals. They’re really unnerving topics, and they’re addressed in different ways in Iran. They can’t show the scenes that I do and that’s uncomfortable for them. But I think it’s good to have that discomfort.'”
Perhaps someday this movie or a movie like this will sell the most tickets at the box office. Or maybe I’m just a dreamer. I hope you join me in my mighty dream.
“It is a time for watching and waiting to see how things are going to turn out. It is a time to think how we are going to assure the security of Israel’s citizens in the southern part of the country from daily rocket attacks, and make sure that those living in the north and the center of the country do not share their fate,” writes Moshe Arens, former member of the Knesset (Likud). In 1982, Arens became the Israeli ambassador to the United States for a year, before returning to Israel to become Defense Minister. Arens served as Foreign Minister from 1988 to 1990. Arens became defense minister again between 1990 and 1992, retired from politics, only to return in 1999 to the same portfolio.
Moshe Arens is a rational voice with a rational argument – “let’s wait and see how things are going to turn out.” However, I’m not sure I could disagree with him more – not because he makes a states a sensible conservative philosophy, but because he argues that “It is a time to put away the placards calling for ‘Peace Now’ and ‘An End to the Occupation.’ It may be the time for those demanding ‘social justice’ for the “middle class” to fold their tents.” So it’s the middle class of the tent cities, the advocates for peace, that are the distraction from enhancing the national security state. It’s a fascinating political philosophy that says “we’ll be safer if we just beat a few more people up.”
Even more than dissuading the middle class from protesting cost of living and quality of life, Arens is writing about a changing world. He begins his introduction to this changing world by mentioning that “John Maynard Keynes, the great economist, once said in a debate: ‘When the facts change I change my mind, what do you do, sir?'” The world is changing. We’re talking about a world where Egypt is transitioning from dictatorship to democracy, a civil war in Libya is ending to ensure the same, and the dictatorship of Syria has been unable to shoot and bomb its own people into silence. Yes, the world is changing.
What I have not seen is that ‘when the facts change I change my mind, what do you do, sir?’. I make no pretense that a change in fact will change my mind, or that my mind will not change without seeing a change in fact. It is understandable, but not sensible, to me that Arens would speak of changing his mind when the facts are changed. The facts have been changed; he documents this clearly. His mind has not been changed, a mind that says only security state, security state, security state. How you secure the state is another matter.
The revolution/revolt/civil war of Libya is not quite over, but general consensus says the rebels have defeated the no-longer-legitimate government of Muammar Gaddafi, and the rebels have captured Gaddafi’s son. The post-Gaddafi Libya is being considered. As with all changes it is unique, but it can serve as an excellent case study for transition of leadership in any country – democratic or authoritarian. Some of the problems for Libya in the short term, based on guesses of a writer in Benghazi, include,
- There are lots of privately-organized militias or “kitaeb”, 40-plus at last count. They are mostly unpaid volunteers, usually from one particular town or region. The nucleus of one of the largest — Benghazi’s 17 February Martyrs brigade, is a computer company. Several hours of tracer fire over Benghazi’s skies last night bore witness to how many weapons are in private hands, and how much people like to fire them. They are bound together by group solidarity engendered by the fighting of some pretty hard battles, and while right now they say they just want to get rid of Qaddafi, rebel forces also frequently develop a strong sense of entitlement.
- Qaddafi still has a base of support, or — just as dangerously — groups that will be perceived by the victorious rebels as bases of support. The NTC have tried to bring in representation from as many different tribes as possible, and some of the larger groups allied to Qaddafi — like the Warfalla — are big enough that the perception of regime ties will simply be diluted by their numbers. However, it’s going to be very difficult to make the colonel’s own tribe, the Gadadfa, feel like they are full partners in the new Libya. The Gadadfa dominate the highly inconveniently located town of Sirte, which blocks the main east-west highway, and also share control over the oasis town of Sebha. Sebha in particular is a dangerous spot because there was an uprising in June by the Awlad Suleiman against the Gadadfa, and when two groups live in extremely close proximity and think each other a mutual threat, some very nasty violence can result.
- Thanks to Qaddafi’s obsession with a façade of Libya has no experience of party politics, and competing interests. NTC is a rather lawyerly bunch who often seems to lack political acumen. They engendered a lot of criticism last week for announcing an interim constitution, supposedly without proper consultation. Rebel officials said that they needed to get a document out to be fully recognized by the UN and to get ahold of Qaddafi’s frozen funds, but the move seen as a power play by NTC deputy chairman Abdel Hafez Ghoja.
- One danger here is that as soon as the revolutionary euphoria wears off, inevitably people will start imagining that the remnants of the old regime have just gone underground and are plotting a comeback, cutting nefarious deals with the NTC to remain in power. One or two mysterious bombs or assassinations can easily spark a panic, and the next thing you know you’ll have katibas demanding that they retain their arms to “safeguard the revolution.” There’s no way that the NTC can stop this, but they should be careful to be as inclusive and as transparent as possible.
And, just as importantly, some things are not perceived as problems.
- The combination of foreign airstrikes — which rebels realize saved them, albeit without foreign ground forces which would inevitably antagonize people — gives the West leverage without creating a backlash. Foreign interference is not a dirty word here: one katiba member I met in Ajdabiya said that the first thing he wanted to do after victory was buy a sheep, and bring it to Sarkozy to slaughter in Sarkozy’s honor. This means that proposals like bringing in the UN to help with the transitional process, as some Libyan politicians have proposed, is probably going to be broadly acceptable. Also, when NTC member Mahmoud Jibreel says that fighters should not loot or commit reprisals because the “eyes of the world are upon us”, his logic is actually appreciated by fighters on the ground.
- There seem to be few divisive differences over the identity of the country — Libya is tribally and ethnically diverse, but pretty homogenously Sunni and conservative. In order to whip up radical Islamist populism, it really helps to have some kind of Other — be they crony capitalists, nefarious secularists who want to sneakily impose atheism through supraconstitutional principles, Baathists, Shia or others who practice scandalous rituals, or other “heretics”, Tartar military dictators, etc. There aren’t any of these in Libya.
Kuna Gaza. We Are All Gaza. When we say We Are All Gaza, that means we feel empathy for Gazans; that is, we have an understanding of their emotions and feelings. Today, now, always, We Are All Gaza. We may also be Wisconsinites, and Minnesotans, and Californians (“California has the 2nd highest unemployment rate in the nation. Out of 58 counties, 52 are suffering from double-digit unemployment – 21 of which exceed 15%. One county, Imperial, has an astonishing unemployment rate of over 30%!”), and South Sudanese, and Israelis, and all others with whom we feel empathy.
Why on this day, and on all other days, should we all be Gazans?
Neither the circumstances, let alone the actual perpetrators of the attack on Israel have been identified so far, every Palestinian military faction has denied any involvement in it. But Gaza is blamed, as Gaza is always to be blamed for, Gaza must be punished, Gazan blood must flow so that the murder on Israelis will be avenged.
How much blood must still flow, you Israeli generals? How many Mahmouds [aged 13] and Maleks [aged 2] will have to die, how many women and children will have to be injured and killed? The signs suggest that it will still be many. And the signs suggest that the world is going to accept it. That it will accept that innocent people are being killed who had nothing but nothing to do with the attack on Israel.
But of course Palestinians must be “punished”, simply because they are Palestinians. I was at the protests against the Israeli embassy in Cairo. There were also Egyptian soldiers being killed. “Regrettable”, called Ehud Barak, the Israeli defense minister, the incident. Since when is it just a pity when you kill the soldiers of your neighboring country. The people outside the embassy were angry, they demanded the expulsion of the ambassador, removed the Israeli flag and replaced it with an Egyptian one.
As we speak, Gaza is being bombed. As we speak, innocent people are dying. If Israel doesn’t experience any resistance, any outcry, any appeal from the world public to act carefully, then a new massacre will happen. A ‘Cast Lead’ two. In which 1382 people were murdered in three weeks, including 320 children.
We in the West are told war is just when it is against the ‘other’ – the non-believer, the native, the foreigner, the terrorist, the Communist – and we in the West are in an unusually strong technological power and economic capacity to wage war on the ‘other.’ Therefore, we also have an unusually strong need to feel empathy for those who need our help (there are few who don’t). We the West are not the only ones who make war or sanction violence, but our unprecedented deterrent ability renders us, we think, safe from attack and free to attack others. Those ‘others,’ then, think themselves threatened, and rightly so when oppression of the ‘others’ brings about war, regardless of the perpetrator or initiator.
Why are we All Gaza now? After all, wasn’t there a ceasefire? Yes, but besides the necessity of empathy for those who are in occupied territory and those who are suffering, “a Hamas official on Sunday said that all of Gaza’s militant groups had agreed to a ceasefire with Israel, starting at 9 p.m. on Sunday evening, but as attacks continued through the night, fears about the implementation of the cease fire surfaced.” The need for us – American, Israeli, United Nations citizens; Jews, Muslims, Christians and others – to stand with Palestine as they seek the right self-determination is continuing, and we hope, demand, and act that that need will end soon. Until then, We Are All Gaza.
South Sudan is the world’s newest country, but that doesn’t prevent serious security problems.
More than 185 people have been killed in South Sudan in a recent cattle raid and an unrelated militia attack, officials said Sunday.
South Sudan army spokesman Col. Philip Aguer said fighters loyal to rebel leader George Athor crossed the border from north Sudan and attacked a town in South Sudan’s Upper Nile state. Aguer said the violence which started Friday left 60 people dead, including seven soldiers and 53 militia members. He said the soldiers managed to repel the attackers.
Separately, South Sudanese officials said Sunday 125 people were killed in a cattle raid during which tribesmen stole 2,000 cattle in the country’s east. Jonglei state Governor Kuol Manyang Juuk said eight villages were destroyed when warriors from the Murle tribe in Pidor county attacked the Lou-Nuer tribe of Uror county on Thursday.
The two tribes frequently clash over land and cattle. In May, nearly 70 people were killed in a weeklong cattle-related conflict between the two rival tribes.
The May cattle raid happened near water points in Jonglei state when ethnic Nuer tribesmen allegedly attacked the area and drove off with more than 100,000 cattle owned by the Murle.
As frustrating as it is to be an informed person, it is perhaps much more difficult to be partially informed. Thus, when I stopped reading news late last month to go camping, I missed the beginnings of important developments, which could not be understood without understanding the beginning. Tent cities in Israel began as a protest to a high cost of living compared to income, including protests over housing costs. While I missed the beginning of the story, the protests are not over, although they have been heavily compromised and appear to need new direction. Before we begin at the current point in the story, it is necessary to understand what created the climate for protests, who is involved, and why now.
When the housing market in America collapsed around 2006 to 2008 various tent cities sprang up in American cities. There are “a dozen improvised communities across the country, from Olympia, Washington, to Camden, New Jersey. Our follow-up reporting showed, however, that the camps tend to predate the current foreclosure crisis. There’s nothing new about tent cities in the United States. There’s nothing new about poverty in America. Some folks will be living in improvised shelters in public space whether we’re in a recession or not.” In Seattle, “since 2002 the city has worked with local nonprofits to maintain a rotating 100-person tent city sanctioned by the actual city.”
Israel has many uncoordinated responses to the tent cities. An article by CBC (Canada) says “part of the protest is taking place on Tel Aviv’s expensive Rothschild Boulevard, where a tent city has sprung up among the hip cafés, restaurants and swirling traffic.” There are hundreds of tents just in that area with “tables, chairs, sofas, lights and a kindergarten area,” mostly as a result of students not being able to “find affordable apartments in a deregulated housing market.” A volunteer kitchen coordinator is donating his time, and says ‘people come here in the evening, sit in a circle, talk in a group. People get a spirit, a change of mind, this is the thing that will do the change for the long run.’ Others are donating food, fridges and electric power.
A senior Editor for HaAretz, Bradley Burston, writing in the Huffington Post article titled The Middle Class Anarchists of Israel’s Tent City Revolution describes who the ‘anarchists’ are that the title is referring to. “‘Part of the protest going on at the moment on Rothschild Boulevard is being driven by a gang of anarchists,'” the Likud lawmaker Ofir Akunis, a former spokesman and adviser for Benjamin Netanyahu, said on radio, claiming the protesters came from “‘the adjacent Ahad Ha’am Street, where, as you know, the main branch of the Communist Party is located.'” The “middle-class young adults that seemed the least likely to ever raise a cry” are the “anarchists” the government will have to deal with.
In an article in the Sydney Morning Herald of Australia written the same day as the CBC article the “main complaint is something Sydneysiders know about: the unaffordability of housing and the spiralling cost of living. Property prices [in Israel] have risen about 50 per cent since 2008 as Israel’s burgeoning population – more than 7 million people squeezed into a sliver of land about a third the size of Tasmania – vastly outstrips construction.” To put that in perspective for an American audience, Israel is about the size of New Jersey, and has a population about the same as Washington state. Though unemployment is low and the economy strong, there’s a gaping chasm between rich and poor: one in four people in Israel, and one in three children, live below the poverty line.
This is how it always seems to work in the Middle East. Are the people rising up against you? Are they demanding greater rights, economic equality, social justice? Don’t worry. All you need to do is point the finger at an external enemy — some outside force that threatens your borders, your identity, your very way of life — and hope that the people will forget their troubles and rally around you instead. That’s how it works in Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Egypt, and Palestine. Why shouldn’t it work that way in Israel, too?”
Luckily, for the Israeli government, although the “most dangerous part of this revolution is that its goal is not to topple the government, but to spur the government to do what it was put there to do” there just happens to be an “external threat” waiting to return the government to business as usual. “Right on cue, a group of as-yet unnamed Palestinian militants launched a series of coordinated attacks in Eilat on Thursday, killing eight and wounding dozens more. Israel immediately retaliated with a series of air strikes on targets in Gaza that have thus far killed at least a dozen Palestinians including a two-year-old boy. In retaliation for the Israeli retaliation, more than a dozen rockets have been fired from Gaza into Israel, injuring six Jews near a religious school in Ashdod. And the cycle continues.”
I frequently condemn Israel for use of disproportionate force. I also answered a facebook question, ‘how should Israel respond to the rocket attacks?’ with ‘end the occupation.’ However, although I believe Israel is in the wrong to use force when not necessary – just as I think that of the United States – I think Reza Aslan says it best at the moment: “There is, of course, no justification for unprovoked attacks against civilians — either by Israel or the Palestinians. And certainly Israel has the right to strike back at those who attack its citizens.” Just as importantly, in a different way, what he says in the remainder of that paragraph is just as important. “But there can be no doubt that the attacks and counter-attacks of the last couple of days have given the Netanyahu government the perfect excuse to try to put an end to the J14 protests in the name of national unity.”
Aslan informs us that “already one of the main protest organizers, the National Union of Students, has issued a press release canceling the planned rallies for the weekend so as to show solidarity with the grieving country. While other groups say they still plan to demonstrate on Saturday, they’ve also promised that rally will be not target the government and its policies but will instead be a somber memorial procession meant to honor the victims of Thursday’s attacks.” While this is admirable, and may gain brownie points, it takes away from the cause of the J14 protesters. It would be like the protesters in Wisconsin, in recent months, stopping every time a soldier died in one of our wars. Or, as Aslan says, “this is a perfectly appropriate response on the part of the Israeli public. Solidarity in the face of a tragedy is to be expected. But make no mistake, the Netanyahu government will use the heightened security situation in Israel to pressure the protesters to put aside their demands for social reform and focus instead on the enemy next door.”
70% of Israeli Jewish teenagers think that national security is more important than democratic values (perhaps someone should inform an Israel-supporting US representative of that). Reza Aslan’s reading of the poll says the teenagers “are advocates of militant determinism against Palestinian resistance, and they overwhelmingly support the Likud government’s hard-line position in negotiations with the Palestinian Authority. Yet this is also the same generation that has been flooding the streets of cities across the country, demanding the reallocation of funds from the military budget to welfare and healthcare services for the lower classes.”
And yet, Amos Oz, writing for HaAretz, “embraces this new generation, which surpasses the previous ones, with love and wonderment.” One aspect of this rising generation in Israel will prevail. Will it be fairness, equality, and an end to conflict, or will it be the continuation of a security state and avoidance of maintaining a middle class?
I’m not sure how your family ended up in the country you’re in, but chances are that like my family, you immigrated. If you did so recently in the United States, you had the pleasure of working with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which is about as friendly as its acronym. ICE was “created in 2003 through a merger of the investigative and interior enforcement elements of the U.S. Customs Service and the Immigration and Naturalization Service,” and describes itself as the investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security.
To say ICE is unfriendly is not only a judgment call, it is backed up by repeated evidence. ” Even though the Bonilla family members do not have criminal records, they face removal proceedings before an immigration judge. The family was able to find legal representation and general public support, enabling their release from ICE custody, but undocumented immigrants who are less lucky are routinely sent to prisons and detention centers where ICE will process their paperwork and decide whether they may be released…. What happened to the Bonillas has happened to thousands of immigrant families.” Additionally, and just as importantly, ” the incarceration trend is not limited to public prisons. Thanks to a concerted lobbying push from the corrections industry, growing numbers of undocumented immigrants could end up in private detention facilities.”
Too few of us are familiar with ALEC (the American Legislative Exchange Council), which is a lobbyist group advocating similar legislation in various states. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that, but “some of ALEC’s members are both the most ardent proponents of anti-immigration laws and representatives of the industries that will benefit directly from having more people behind bars.” Specifically, “‘98% of ALEC’s funding comes from corporations like Exxon Mobil, corporate “foundations” like the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, or trade associations like the pharmaceutical industry’s PhRMA.'”…
“One of ALEC’s members is Corrections Corporation of America, the country’s largest for-profit prison company, founded in 1983. CCA designs, builds, manages and operates correctional facilities and detention centers on behalf of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the United States Marshal Service in nearly half of all states, according to the company’s website.”
That’s not all ALEC does, although that may cover the gist of its immigration policy. ALEC was also behind the anti-union legislation in Wisconsin. Internal ALEC emails to a Wisconsin member “give us a behind-the-scenes look at ALEC’s process, influence and the eventual policy that they produce. These emails were obtained from State Senator Leah Vukmir (while she was still a state representative) through an open records request that was made last year.” That’s only the beginning. “ALEC actively supports repealing the minimum wage, privatizing Social Security and replacing guaranteed health benefits with medical savings accounts. It gives large donations and other perks to legislators, most often reactionary Republicans, in states across the country to carryout corporate initiatives.” It has also been a steadfast proponent of telecommunications deregulations and an opponent to Net neutrality.
The political battle in Wisconsin made the long-secret but very powerful Koch brothers famous. In the same way, ALEC’s practices have long remained hidden, playing a behind-the-scene role effectively using state-legislative stooges to implement the agenda of giant corporations and the super-rich.” Its time to shine a bright light on this organization.
Many events in history are mixed with sadness and joy, by destruction and construction, and with observable and non-observable consequences. Sometimes we celebrate by remembering destruction that is no more, and sometimes we celebrate by remembering construction that is no more. Of all the events in modern history, the results of the Second World War are the most poignant; it is this history that people remember with sadness and joy, and with destruction and construction. Joy is the wrong word, perhaps it is hope. A belief that a better world can be built. So thought the 2.5 million people that fled from East Germany to West Germany after the War. “The Berlin Wall was erected in 1961 on the orders of East Germany’s former leader, Walter Ulbricht, to stop a population exodus,” but not all walls last forever.
Fifty years ago, today, on August 13, 1961, “East Berliners woke to find soldiers had blocked off the streets, cut off rail links and begun building a wall of barbed wire and cemented paving stones, which over the years grew in height and eventually stretched over 155km.” Not all construction is good. Nor is all destruction bad: the Berlin Wall was destined to fall after 28 years. On June 12, 1987 – a little more than two years before the wall came down, President Reagan, in what may be his most resounding foreign policy speech, if not his most resounding action, – spoke what has become an immortal line: General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!
Germany is remembering the construction of wall, which began fifty years ago today, with an event that “began overnight on Saturday at a chapel, with a seven-hour-long reading about the lives of those killed while seeking freedom as they fled East Germany for West Germany.edom and democracy around the world….Church bells peeled while trains and traffic came to a standstill at noon across Berlin for a moment of silence for the victims.”
Sometimes, a person under 30 asks Michael Moore, “When did this all begin, America’s downward slide?” They say they’ve heard of a time when working people could raise a family and send the kids to college, that anyone who wanted a decent paying job could get one. They’d heard that “people only worked five days a week, eight hours a day, got the whole weekend off and had a paid vacation every summer. That many jobs were union jobs, from baggers at the grocery store to the guy painting your house, and this meant that no matter how “lowly” your job was you had guarantees of a pension, occasional raises, health insurance and someone to stick up for you if you were unfairly treated.”
I’ve often asked the same thing, knowing that there’s an answer. But the answer I’ve always thought, and occasionally heard when I voice my question aloud, is that our “decline” (and it is a decline, though I put that in quotation marks) has been gradual, and our standard of living often falling. I never thought to put a date on it. But Michael Moore has a date: Thirty Years Ago, Today. August 5th, 1981.
On August 5, 1981, President Ronald Reagan fired every member of the air traffic controllers union (PATCO) who’d defied his order to return to work and declared their union illegal. They had been on strike for just two days.
It was a bold and brash move. No one had ever tried it. What made it even bolder was that PATCO was one of only three unions that had endorsed Reagan for president! It sent a shock wave through workers across the country. If he would do this to the people who were with him, what would he do to us?
Reagan had been backed by Wall Street in his run for the White House and they, along with right-wing Christians, wanted to restructure America and turn back the tide that President Franklin D. Roosevelt started — a tide that was intended to make life better for the average working person. The rich hated paying better wages and providing benefits. They hated paying taxes even more. And they despised unions. The right-wing Christians hated anything that sounded like socialism or holding out a helping hand to minorities or women.
People are often aggravated with the talking heads on television. I confess I am turned off listening to the screaming rhetoric from the right, and even sometimes from the left. The problem, of course, is that the talking heads have opinions – and they will express those opinions – which alienates those who do not agree (and sometimes, those who just want more moderation and agreement and compromise). Michael Moore is one those people with opinions he expresses, and who alienates those who do not agree. The opinion that life – our standard of living – is getting worse is an opinion, measurable by standards, that people might or might not agree with. This is Moore’s view of what Reagan did to America:
- The super-rich will make more, much much more, and the rest of you will scramble for the crumbs that are left.
- Everyone must work! Mom, Dad, the teenagers in the house! Dad, you work a second job! Kids, here’s your latch-key! Your parents might be home in time to put you to bed.
- 50 million of you must go without health insurance! And health insurance companies: you go ahead and decide who you want to help — or not.
- Unions are evil! You will not belong to a union! You do not need an advocate! Shut up and get back to work! No, you can’t leave now, we’re not done. Your kids can make their own dinner.
- You want to go to college? No problem — just sign here and be in hock to a bank for the next 20 years!
- What’s “a raise”? Get back to work and shut up!
The AFL-CIO “told its members to cross the picket lines of the air traffic controllers and go to work. And that’s just what these union members did. Union pilots, flight attendants, delivery truck drivers, baggage handlers — they all crossed the line and helped to break the strike. And union members of all stripes crossed the picket lines and continued to fly.”
That was the beginning of the end … and the end has been the past thirty years.
“Reagan and the Republicans knew they could get away with anything — and they did. They slashed taxes on the rich. They made it harder for you to start a union at your workplace. They eliminated safety regulations on the job. They ignored the monopoly laws and allowed thousands of companies to merge or be bought out and closed down. Corporations froze wages and threatened to move overseas if the workers didn’t accept lower pay and less benefits. And when the workers agreed to work for less, they moved the jobs overseas anyway….
Bit by bit, piece by piece, in the ensuing 30 years, those in power have destroyed the middle class of our country and, in turn, have wrecked the future for our young people. Wages have remained stagnant for 30 years. Take a look at the statistics and you can see that every decline we’re now suffering with had its beginning in 1981 (here‘s a little scene to illustrate that from my last movie).
Thirty Years Ago, Today. When is enough enough?
The Dole Blog 