Dissatisfied?

Just a marvelous op-ed in the Boston Globe by James Carroll. I'll reiterate that King didn't launch anything. Other than that, learn and enjoy, via portside. ~ No1KState

King: `Now is the Time to Make Real the Promise'

By James Carroll

Boston Globe
January 18, 2010

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/01/18/king_now_is_the_time_to_make_real_the_promise/

The great Martin Luther King Jr. address of 1963 at the
Lincoln Memorial is remembered as the "I have a dream''
speech. But King spoke an even more compelling line
that day: "When will you be satisfied?'' It was the
question that had so often been put to him and his
fellow "devotees of Civil Rights,'' and it carried the
accusation that he was a malcontent - never happy with
the incremental progress offered to black Americans, as
if the shift from slavery to Jim Crow should have been
enough. "No!'' he answered.

King launched the civil rights movement, but was not
satisfied - because he saw that racial discrimination
was embedded in violence. Therefore he drew the link
with the nation's violence in Vietnam. He then brought
together powerful movements opposing racism and war -
but still he was not satisfied. He saw how the brew of
racism and violence was essential to poverty, and he
recast the movement again, launching the Poor Peoples'
Campaign. Yes, a class revolt, and it got him killed.
"No! No! We are not satisfied!'' he had declared in
Washington, "And we will not be satisfied until justice
rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty
stream!''

If King were with us today, one imagines him speaking
less of dreams and more of dissatisfaction. For
starters, he might eschew the word "poor'' in favor of
"impoverished,'' since poverty is not a natural state,
but the result of social structures, policies, and
market systems tilted to protect the privilege of a few
at the expense of many. That's more clear this year
than ever. In the four decades since King's murder, it
is true that doors have opened to African-Americans,
even including the door to the White House. Wouldn't
that leave him satisfied? But one hears the answer,
"No! No!'' And then that rolling cadence, the prophetic
voice denouncing, say, the vast American prison
population, disproportionately made up of young black
males, most of whom are guilty not of violent acts, but
of the crime of, well, being dissatisfied. Rather than
educate or motivate such malcontents, and rather than
address the conditions that condemn them to
dissatisfaction, America would rather snatch them from
the streets and lock them up.

Since King's time, the free markets have gone global,
and now vast populations of humans have been declared
redundant. Having made connections between civil
rights, domestic poverty, and US wars, King can be
readily pictured today making further connections with
the cast-aways abroad - the impoverished masses who
have been declared superfluous by the world economy.
The catastrophe of Haiti would be no mere symbol of
global inequity to King. He was attuned to the real
suffering of individual human beings, and would be part
of the effort to alleviate it there. But would he be
satisfied with the compassion of the moment? Moral
sentiment unattached to structural analysis, and to
changes in systemic causes of poverty, is worse than
useless. The Haiti earthquake might be deemed an act of
God, but King would rage at any characterization of the
foundational Haitian plight that left out historical
factors like slavery and colonialism, or the defining
contemporary influence of the United States, which,
across the years since King's death, has, in relation
to Haiti, defiled the meaning of neighbor.

What is the key to King's greatness? It was his
ferocious dissatisfaction that fueled his capacity to
dream, and to articulate his dream in a way that made
its fulfillment possible. Yes, King's dream did come
true when Barack Obama took the oath as president one
year ago this week. But equally, King's dream, even in
coming true, continually fired his refusal to be
satisfied. No! No! King would be a malcontent today:
"When will you be satisfied?'' And today, Haiti would
define his answer. His burning unhappiness on behalf of
that benighted nation would ignite his urgency and his
action. " Now is the time to make real the promises,''
he said in Washington. "Now is the time to open the
doors of opportunity to all of God's children.'' In
nearby Haiti we glimpse the far distance that separates
this world from justice. Now is the time to close it.

James Carroll's column appears regularly in the Globe.

I Don't Believe This!

First off, I hope I'm not breaking any laws. This is copyrighted by the AP. But, if somebody says something, I'll just take it down.

Okay. Now. I'm really happy about this decision. I'm happy for the victims of apartheid. Now, hopefully somebody can catch a clue about the victims of slavery and neo-slavery (Jim Crow).

Well. Truth be told. I'm actually a little upset that a US judge can rule in favor of the victims of racism in another country, but more than 9 out of 10 white Americans would reject reparations for the descendants of slaves. That's not even counting what's owed to the descendants and living victims of neo-slavery (Jim Crow).

But. I am happy for the victims of apartheid in South Africa. ~ No1KState

NY judge rules in favor of 1970s apartheid victims
Published: 4/8/09, 9:05 PM EDT
By LARRY NEUMEISTER


NEW YORK (AP) - Apartheid victims who accused automakers and IBM of helping the government of South Africa engage in violent repression to enforce racial segregation in the 1970s and '80s can go to trial with their claims, a judge ruled Wednesday.

U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin rejected assertions by several countries that the lawsuits should not proceed because that might harm relations between the United States and South Africa.

The written decision was related to lawsuits filed about seven years ago on behalf of victims of apartheid. The lawsuits once targeted many more U.S. corporations, including oil companies and banking institutions, but the number of defendants was decreased after the lawsuits were tossed out by one judge and an appeals court that reinstated them said allegations needed more specifics.

After Scheindlin dismissed several more companies as defendants Wednesday, the plaintiffs were left to press their claims against IBM Corp., German automaker Daimler AG, Ford Motor Co., General Motors Corp. and Rheinmetall Group AG, the Swiss parent of an armaments maker.

The plaintiffs, at least thousands of people seeking unspecified damages, allege the automakers supplied military vehicles that let securities forces suppress black South Africans. IBM is accused of providing equipment used to track dissidents.

The judge noted that the U.S. Supreme Court had referenced the apartheid cases in the footnote of an earlier decision when it wrote "federal courts should give serious weight to the executive branch's view of the case's impact on foreign policy" when the U.S. and a foreign government agree litigation could harm the domestic policies of a foreign nation.

But she said the footnote was only meant as guidance and the executive branch was not "owed deference on every topic."

The U.S. government had submitted a statement saying the lawsuits could become "an irritant in U.S.-South African relations" because they might interfere with South Africa's sovereign right to decide apartheid issues and might discourage investment in South Africa.

South African officials had said the efforts to compensate victims should be pursued within South Africa's political and legal processes.

Defense lawyers have said corporations shouldn't be penalized because they were encouraged to do business in South Africa during apartheid. Lawyers for the companies didn't immediately return telephone messages Wednesday.

Plaintiffs attorney Michael D. Hausfeld praised the ruling, saying it will allow his clients to begin obtaining evidence from the companies that will show what they did in relation to South Africa during apartheid.

"It's great," he said. "There's a treasure of documentation that would be disclosed for the first time ever."

Hausfeld said that besides South Africa and the United States, countries including Germany, Switzerland and England had opposed letting the litigation proceed.

He said it was significant that the judge concluded that opposition by governments was not enough to halt lawsuits brought for human rights reasons. Ruling otherwise, he said, "would have given governments a veto power over the bringing of legal claims."

Daimler is based in Stuttgart, Germany, while Ford is headquartered in Dearborn, Mich., and General Motors is based in Detroit. IBM is based in Armonk, N.Y.

Rheinmetall Group is a holding company headquartered in Dusseldorf, Germany. It is the parent company of Oerlikon Contraves AG, an armaments maker headquartered in Zurich, Switzerland.




Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

President Barack Obama News Conference on the Recovery Plan (aka Stimulus Package)

I think he did a great job. What did you think?

Wanda Sykes Cracks Me Up!!

I plan to starting discussing some foreign issues soon. American politics has come to depress me. I find it quite distressing that McCain/Palin with their lies and terrible policies might actually win.

Not that I won't mention the election at all or talk about race anymore. Just that I want to broaden my horizon. What I've found by chatting with people online from all over the world is that the issues confronting everyone are just about the same - everywhere there is racism, sexism, greed and capitalism. And, of course, everybody is suffering from poor decisions of George W Bush; and, to be quite honest, American hegemony overall. So yes, I will deal with the issues while including an international flavor. Yes, that means I'll have to start reading more articles about foreign affairs and what's going on in other countries. But that's fine. I look to learn as much as my brain can hold.

But until then . . . Wanda Sykes is hilarious!

We Are the US of America, not the World

I disagree with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on theology, being a Christian.

But he is right about the need for justice and righteousness, and the fact that the USA is doing as much, if not more, damage than good. How it is that we call ourselves a "Christian" nation, but can't fall the simplest of Christian ethics, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, is beyond me.

And while I'm all for peace. As an unbeliever pointed out to me, even Jesus said he "did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

So all and all, and with the exclusion of religion, tell me where Ahmadinejad is wrong or how he lied. Don't just say, "He's crazy," and I'm some bigot for agreeing with him, tell me what he said that was untrue or unjust.