Trying to stop the hate.

In the midst of all the talk about education and the war, we’ve found ourselves in yet another discussion of queer rights. This past Sunday, the Gay Liberation Network here in Chicago organized a protest outside of Holy Name Cathedral in response to Cardinal Francis George’s continuing hateful work in this world. A couple of years ago, we protested his lack of defense of the Catholic church’s stance on the war in Iraq (which they do not support). It has now come to our attention that he is vehemently opposed to gay rights. So much so that he has publicly denounced pro-gay ministry, spent money promoting Proposition 8, and is outrightly opposed to gays’ equal access to jobs, housing, and other accomidations.
Thus, we grabbed our flags and brought our voices to Holy Name on Sunday to let Cardinal George and his parishoners know that this is not ok! Big props to the Gay Liberation Network for organizing the protest and for all of the lovely people that came out (hah) to protest with freezing limbs! We will show the world what love looks like!
All photos by Rick Majewski.

@2 years ago with 2 notes
adailyriot:

protest (via swilton)

adailyriot:

protest (via swilton)

@2 years ago with 1 note

"If you want to defeat the right, we must defeat corporatism. This is a truth I thought we’d all learned during the decade now ending, but apparently we did not. The right-wing in the United States is still a fringe movement when you look at its overall numbers. Teabaggers are a noisy but tiny group not worth the concern. Even after 30+ years of right-wing dominance of our politics, their ideas remain fundamentally unpopular. So why do they dominate politics? Because they made an alliance with the corporations. This isn’t some conspiracy theory, this is lived reality and historical fact. In 1971 future Supreme Court justice and right-wing activist Lewis Powell wrote a famous plan, known as the Powell Memo, arguing that corporations needed to fund a network of right-wing institutions in order to protect their profits and their power. Although there is some debate about just how influential the Powell Memo was, we do know that its ideas were indeed taken up in the years after 1971. Billionaires like the Scaifes helped fund some of the key right-wing institutions in this country, just as oil companies have funded groups like the Reason Foundation in order to mainstream far-right ideas. Oil company money is a well-known source of climate denialism; Fox News is still a loss leader for Murdoch, Ailes and co.; and a whole class of movement conservatives make their living on wingnut welfare - people whose books don’t sell and who can’t get real jobs that are instead able to become right-wing pundits because they’re subsidized by corporate power. People like Jonah Goldberg, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, etc, etc, would never have become major figures in our politics all on their own. Without the support of corporate power, right-wing ideas may well have remained on the margins of American life, where they’d been since the 1930s. It was not at all inevitable that those ideas would become mainstream by the late 1970s - corporate power and money put them there, and corporate power and money keep them there."

@2 years ago with 26 notes

The odds of being on a plane that is targeted by terrorists are approximately 1 in 10,408,947. In contrast, there’s a 1 in 500,000 chance you’ll be struck by lightning.

adailyriot:

ohyeahfacts:

(source, via Mike Hudack)

@2 years ago with 253 notes

Mark Rudd: What It Takes to Build a Movement 

adailyriot:

by Mark Rudd

Since the summer of 2003, I’ve crisscrossed the country speaking at colleges and theaters and bookstores, first with The Weather Undergrounddocumentary and, starting in March of this year, with my book,Underground:  My Life with SDS and the Weathermen (William Morrow, 2009). In discussions with young people, they often tell me, “Nothing anyone does can ever make a difference.”

The words still sound strange: it’s a phrase I never once heard forty years ago, a sentiment obviously false on its surface.  Growing up in the Fifties and Sixties, I – and the rest of the country – knew about the civil rights movement in the South, and what was most evident was that individuals, joining with others, actually were making a difference. The labor movement of the Thirties to the Sixties had improved the lives of millions; the anti-war movement had brought down a sitting president – LBJ, March 1968 – and was actively engaged in stopping the Vietnam War. In the forty years since, the women’s movement, gay rights, disability rights, animal rights, and environmental movements have all registered enormous social and political gains. To old new lefties, such as myself, this is all self-evident.

So, why the defeatism? In the absence of knowledge of how these historical movements were built, young people assume that they arose spontaneously, or, perhaps, charismatic leaders suddenly called them into existence. On the third Monday of every January we celebrate Martin Luther King Jr. having had a dream; knowledge of the movement itself is lost.

The current anti-war movement’s weakness, however, is very much alive in young people’s experience. They cite the fact that millions turned out in the streets in the early spring of 2003 to oppose the pending U.S. attack on Iraq, but that these demonstrations had no effect. “We demonstrated, and they didn’t listen to us.” Even the activists among them became demoralized as numbers at demonstrations dropped off very quickly, street demonstrations becoming cliches, and, despite a big shift in public opinion in 2006, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan droned on to today. The very success of the spontaneous early mobilization seems to have contributed to the anti-war movement’s long-term weakness.

Something’s missing. I first got an insight into articulating what it is when I picked up Letters from Young Activists: Today’s Rebels Speak Out, edited by Dan Berger, Chesa Boudin and Kenyon Farrow (Nation Books, 2005). Andy Cornell, in a letter to the movement that first radicalized him, “Dear Punk Rock Activism,” criticizes the conflation of the terms “activism” and“organizing.” He writes, “activists are individuals who dedicate their time and energy to various efforts they hope will contribute to social, political, or economic change. Organizers are activists who, in addition to their own participation, work to move other people to take action and help them develop skills, political analysis and confidence within the context of organizations. Organizing is a process – creating long-term campaigns that mobilize a certain constituency to press for specific demands from a particular target, using a defined strategy and escalating tactics.” In other words, it’s not enough for punks to continually express their contempt for mainstream values through their alternate identity; they’ve got to move toward “organizing masses of people.”

(read more…)

@2 years ago with 3 notes
adailyriot:

soupsoup:

brooklynmutt:

The Bush-Cheney Economy
thedailydish

adailyriot:

soupsoup:

brooklynmutt:

The Bush-Cheney Economy

thedailydish

@2 years ago with 41 notes

Obama's Imperial War - An Anarchist Response 

adailyriot:

bradicalmang:

adamquinn:

In discussing President Obama’s expansion of the US attack on Afghanistan and Pakistan, it is important not to focus on Obama as a personality but on the social system to which he is commited, specifically to the war-waging capitalist national state. “War is the health of the state,” as Randolph Bourne declared during World War I. It is what the national state is for, what it does, and why it still exists, despite the real trends toward international unity and worldwide coordination. In an age of nuclear bombs, the human race will not be safe until we abolish these states (especially the big, imperial, ones such as those of North America, Western Europe, and Japan) and replace them with a federation of self-managing associations of working people.

@2 years ago with 11 notes

(via newleft)

Naomi Klien speaks at the University of Chicago.

@2 years ago with 7 notes

The War in Mexico

adailyriot:

bradicalmang:

kimclit:

The anti-war movement in the United States has totally ignored the war in Mexico. The mainstream media also has ignored this war. Most Americans don’t know there is a major war happening right now in Mexico. Cuidad Juarez, the city with the most deaths from the war, is only 1,250 miles from Chicago. War broke out in Mexico in December 2006 when the newly elected president Felipe Calderon sent 6,500 troops to Michoacan state to fight the drug cartels. Few people outside Mexico even noticed the war and no protests against the war, outside of Mexico, have taken place.

Currently 45,000 Mexican troops are battling drug cartels whose combined force is estimated at 100,000 fighters. Most of the violence is concentrated in northern Mexico. The US government has played a huge role in the Mexican Drug War. Bush and Obama have been strong supporters of Calderon’s war. The US government has supplied the Mexican military with millions of dollars worth of weapons, training and intelligence. The death toll in the Mexican Drug War is 2,477 killed during 2007 and 6,290 killed during 2008 and 7,598 killed during 2009. The war in Mexico is the deadliest armed conflict occurring right now in the world except of course for the other US-led wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen. One big reason the US government supports the war is so American corporations can maintain their control over Mexican workers. US corporations like Reebok and Nike operate a lot of sweatshops in Mexico. If many people in Mexico get their income from the drug trade then they are less likely to work for the sweatshops. One more drug cartel member is one less sweatshop worker.

Another reason the US government supports the war is that they do not want the drug cartels to overthrow the Calderon regime which is friendly to US interests. Mexico also has large quantities of oil in the ground and Mexico is the third largest supplier of oil to the United States. In Mexico all healthy males are required to join the military at the age of 18 and serve for at least 12 months. Human life is more important than oil and corporate profits. The people of Mexico have a right to self-determination, indeed, people everywhere have a right to control their own lives. This includes being free of oppressive sweatshops, factories, corporations, governments, military conscription and warfare. War for oil, money and other resources is always wrong. Calderon’s war must end. The war in Mexico is a crime against humanity. It is a war for US domination of Mexico. There is no need for this war.

(via)

@2 years ago

adailyriot:

bradicalmang:

sarasponda:

Tim Wise - The Pathology of White Privilege

Wise provides a non-confrontational explanation of white privilege and the damage it does not only to people of color but to white people as well.

Well done! The beginning really won me over, because he immediantly addressed his own privilege concerning giving the presentation in the first place and how people will automatically listen to him because he is white.

I’m going to send this video to my father haha

Fuck yes! I love Tim Wise. His book: Between Barack and a Hard Place is amazing. I’ve got Speaking Treason Fluently: Anti-Racist Reflections From an Angry White Male on my self waiting to be read as we speak. so excited

@2 years ago