Why Voting Matters: Barack Obama...I got you.

I have written a number of blog posts about Barack Hussein Obama (30 mentions to be exact). Last May, I wrote a blog titled Why I Will Be Voting for Barack Obama, and I stand by all that I wrote in that blog as well.  If you want to know why I am voting to support our president, please check out one of those two links above.

I am writing today to talk about the practice of voting itself. Yesterday, I posted this status on Facebook:

 I know I should not have to say this, but I am. If you have the right to vote for President, unlike our immigrant brothers and sisters, folks living in our colonies, and the millions of mostly men of color that have lost the right due to felony convictions (Jim Crow is alive and happy as Hell)...and you do not vote because "voting doesn't matter," or "you are protesting the system," please take your selfish self-centered ass up and out of these here United States. Most likely someone died for you to have that right especially if you are a woman, person of color, non land owner. Folks are still dying because y'all decided to stay home in 2000 and 2004 here and around the world thanks to wars started by Bush. Go vote. I hope you will vote for Obama, but not voting isn't a protest it is an abrogation of your most minimal democratic obligation. Don't vote; relocate. Danke! Gracias! Merci! Obrigado! Salamat po! Grazie!

 I stand by this Facebook status emphatically, but I want to explain a bit more about why I believe voting to be important even within this broken system, particularly after receiving some well thought out and meaningful push back from a former colleague and someone that I adore as a human and as a thinker, Patrick Barret from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. You can read Patrick's full discourse on my Facebook page by scrolling down a bit and clicking on the comment feed under the above status.  But one of his comments struck me in response to my statement that we have an obligation to participate [in democracy via the minimal act of voting]:

"Yes of course we do, but not blindly. We are plenty smart enough, and we're morally obligated, not to just participate aimlessly, with no analysis of what works and what doesn't. The system's broken, and in my opinion, that obligates us to avoid fulfilling Einstein's definition of insanity."

I agree with Patrick. The system is broken. Democracy is limited more now than at anytime since the official dismantling of Jim Crow era poll taxes/lit tests/etc. Using the vehicle of the prison industrial complex and restrictive ID laws and court room shenanigans, the vote is either directly or effectively stripped from millions upon millions of mostly people of color and poor voters. That, of course, is not coincidental since a working poor/oppressed class of folks that see themselves as having a legitimate opportunity to use the electoral system to effect change would buck the two party system and create a much fairer (as fair as can be possible while still operating under capitalism). It would be a democracy that was at least multi-party if not explicitly socialist in its leanings. That's my belief and the trends of the 60s of radical social groups that were broad based holds this up as do the union organizing of previous decades, etc. So it is in the interest of power to limit the franchise as much as possible and to those that have some particular interest and investment in the current system. It is easier for the working poor to see themselves in cahoots with a struggling and shrinking middle class which identifies with American dream aspirations rather than having the working poor and middle class seeing themselves as fundamentally the same as the working poor and having the middle class risk what small privileges still exist for a chance at a revolutionary democratic movement that would pay out real liberation dividends via a time of struggle. 

Yet even with that broken reality, I believe that our system is not yet so monolithic and gone that the two parties are one party from rhetoric to recent history WE KNOW THAT TO BE UNTRUE! 

The system is broken. It needs to be fixed. But the reality is that who sits in the White House DOES matter. It matters to those of us living with HIV if the president in the White House is going to fund Ryan White and at what level, Medicaid and other social programs. It matters to working class people of color and poor whites if the president in the White House is going to rush to or manufacture a war for political and financial gain. It matters who is the White House when it comes to basic human rights protections for queer and trans folks. It matters for many reasons who sits in the White House.

HEAR ME CLEARLY! No person in the White House is going to give us our liberation, But I do not ascribe to the notion that who you vote for in this corporate democracy doesn't matter. Eight years of Bush and the Great Recession that followed proved, unequivocally, that, in fact, it does matter. It matters in a cost of lives. Mayhaps I am not as "down," as those that are willing to suggest that voting doesn't matter because the system is inherently flawed. Voting doesn't matter in the way that it should. I spent years working with Patrick Barret, David Cobb and others on just these issues. And I continue to advocate for real and meaningful democratic practice. And if I need to do so, I will continue to repeat that voting is only your most minimal obligation to democracy. But I will vote tomorrow. I will vote for Barack Obama. And I encourage every one of you to vote, attempt to vote, or raise Hell in one way or another if you find your right to vote denied while at the polling station...and then...no matter what the outcome of the election tomorrow night, get ready for the real work of democracy that comes each and every day afterwards.

For a Better Democracy: Ranked Choice Voting

Despite what the 24 hour news cycle and modern pundits would have you believe, democracy as practiced now in the United States is neither the model for democratic practice internationally nor is it a static exercise practiced once a year in November. Nor is democracy simply the act of voting.

While, the practice of modern democracy in the United States enjoys a longer, more stable history than perhaps any other modern state, the history of democracy in this country has been one of struggle. What is now held up as sacred—universal suffrage, the rights gained under the 1963 Voting Rights Act, and diminished barriers to voting for people of color—are all hard won rights that have been taken through massive grassroots action and often times have been paid for in a cost measured in lives lost. While the premise of democracy is that the demos, Greek for common people, should hold the ultimate decision making power in a polity, the actuality is that there has been and continues to be a struggle between the demos and a minority that enjoys and maintains privilege through limiting access to democratic practice and the institutions that are reserved for the elite through electoral gate keeping.

Nowhere is this gatekeeping more apparent and more rigidly defended than in plurality voting winner takes all elections. The basic premise of democratic practice is majority rule, minority rights. The actuality of the U.S. tradition of democracy is that of minority rule with majority rights. Candidates that win with less than 50%+1 of the voting public, sometimes with much less than that—Jesse Ventura's 1998 Minnesota gubernatorial win with 37% of the vote is one recent example, still claim a mandate to govern. No gubernatorial candidate in Minnesota has won a real mandate to govern in more than two decades. Because of winner take all voting systems, a candidate no longer has to convince a majority of the electorate that his or her ideas are in the best interest of the state and its people, they only have to convince a large enough minority with narrower interests and less concern for the broader collective welfare to turn out in margins just large enough to beat the other candidates. When a candidate no longer has to challenge his or her own views in order to meet the needs of the broadest good, self-interest and politics trump public service and communal well-being. Democracy is reduced to “beating the other guy.” And political offices become prize fight trophies instead of public trusts. The deeply polarized and vitriolic rhetoric of recent election cycles bear clear testament to this deepening and disturbing reality.

Thankfully, winner take all elections are not the only option. Ranked Choice Voting (RCV), a voting system that requires a winner receive a true mandate to govern and allows for deeper, more nuanced, yet still straight-foward and simple voting not only changes what happens in the ballot box but also the tone, rhetoric, and ideology that dominates the campaign trail. RCV, also known as Instant Run-Off Voting, is used in municipalities across the United States, including Minneapolis and San Francisco, as well as for national elections in Australia and Ireland, allows voters to rank their candidate preferences on the ballot. If no single candidate receives 50%+1 of the vote, then the lowest vote getter is dropped and his or her votes are redistributed to the voters second choice candidate, etc.. This process continues until one candidate passes the required 50%+1 benchmark guaranteeing that he or she actually has the confidence of the people when forming a government.

When candidates are forced to not only consider their narrow ideological base of supporters but also the social and political priorities of broader set of voters, it has been demonstrably proven that the tone, style, rhetoric, and reality of the practice of democracy changes---less vitriol, broader base building, and fewer or no negative ads. When a candidate is forced to consider not only his base but also the needs of those that lay further afield from his personal preferences, the result is public policy that requires a broader view that is much less likely to infringe upon minority rights.

Because of the possibility for such wide reaching impact, a commitment to ranked choice voting should be an active part of a progressive platform that weds outside-of-the-system direct action organizing and movement building with electoral reform. As the recent attacks on organized labor in Wisconsin have clearly demonstrated, as long as the electoral system continues to volley back and forth across polarizing lines, more and more harsh and intractable public policy will be the result. As a movement building opportunity, the attacks on organized labor in Wisconsin are priceless but the emotional and psychic cost on communities constantly under siege by the very people that are supposed to represent their interests is not one that can be long sustained without long lasting wounds.

Ranked Choice Voting, which inherently inhibits these types of reactionary figures from earning (or barely squeaking into) public office, is a launching point for sensible, just social change. When our voting system reflects the nuanced choices of the electorate, including the viable promotion of third parties, the public policy that results from the ensuing compromises is very simply better for everyone. From education to health care, when elected officials are forced to incorporate the broadest possible coalition to win election as opposed to a slim and fervent minority, real social change and progress towards justice is not only possible, it becomes probable without sacrificing anyone for political gain.


For more information on ranked choice voting, check out FairVote Minnesota the national organization FairVote: The Center for Voting and Democracy.

Revolution and the Middle East: Why the U.S. Should Stay the Hell Out of It

This morning, on Facebook, a conservative gay that often times comments on my wall posts, made a comment today, when I posted a status that was celebrating Tunisia, Egypt and now Bahrain, that "Egypt was easy because they didn't want a bloody coup on their hands. Some of these countries will now be bloody (and some have been). Think about where we would be if we backed the FIRST Iranian protesters last year instead of standing by, timid..."

First of all, I don't believe the U.S. government was at all timid during the Iranian protests. I think that Obama understood the politics and reality of the situation. Also, comparing the uprising in Iran with what has taken place in Egypt and Tunisia are not valid comparisons. Very simply...the uprising in Tunisia and Egypt worked. Iran failed.

As I said to this gentleman on Facebook, I do not deny at all that the Iranian people have the POWER to overcome their current government. And, should the people of Iran rise up and throw down the Supreme Council, I believe the U.S. should immediately recognize whatever new transitional government is formed. It is going to take sacrifice by the Iranian people, and it is going to cost lives. The people rose up once before and threw down the Shah. I believe that, specifically, is why their uprising took place and failed.

It took place because, to the young people of Iran, the revolution of the 1970s, was disconnected from their personal narratives in that they did not live through it. Like all human beings that inherit history but were not around to live through the history, we relate to it differently. As a black American, the Civil Rights movement resonates with me deeply. It gives me a sense of pride and an understanding of the power of people. I look back at that time and think about the unity of community, the folks unafraid to take to the streets and face dogs, water hoses, lynchings, and police brutality. It makes me want to grab everyone I know and form a new human rights peoples army and march off to Washington or Selma or Minneapolis or, better yet, Wall Street. I wonder why our elders aren't marching off with us, leading us, taking us where we need to go.

Of course, right there, is part of the dissonance. I look at the Civil Rights movement from a distance of history and from a vantage point that has been privileged by the work that has gone before without having had to experience any of the pain that went with it. For those folks that fought the fight during the Civil Rights era still bear the scars, pain, and knowledge of exactly how far the state is willing to go to maintain the status quo. That memory is often and can be paralyzing.

I fully believe that the reason that the Iranian uprising was not successful was, in part, due to the memory of the overwhelming repressive actions taken to maintain the Shah's authority. To face that sort of repression once, and survive, is an act of heroism. One is no less of a hero if the idea of facing that sort of repression again is too much for the spirit to handle.

So those beautiful young people in Iran rose up against the Iranian government...but, unlike with the Shah, the movement was limited, isolated, and was facing a modern state with all the powers of social control at its command along with a willingness to roll tanks over angry students if necessary.

Also, if we had intervened during the protests last year, the Iranian government would have had all of the fodder they needed to paint the protests as a U.S. backed attack on Islam and the Islamic Republic of Iran. That would have absolutely galvanized the ultra-conservative base that props up the regime, and Ahmadinejad would have had absolutely no qualms about blowing up a few city blocks in Tehran to wipe out protesters, if it meant retaining power and upholding the Supreme Council. And, if the uprising last year would have been successful and the U.S. had backed the protesters, whatever regime would have come into power, no matter how legitimate, would have been seen as a tool of the U.S. That would have made it continuously vulnerable to reactionary forces and given them a bullet-proof platform to fight against any democratic progress AND, if they manage to regain control of the government, institute such draconian state controls that any movement for democracy will be put far out of reach for the next 30 years. Don't believe me? I got two words for you: Tienanmen Square.

And let's be real about why the U.S. can not intervene in any of these tremendous and powerful uprisings taking place in North Africa and West Asia. It is directly a result of the United State's fucked up, suck ass, imperialist ambitions and actions in the Middle East...when moments like this arrive...when the people are rising up to demand change from their government (or to overthrow their government)...the U.S. has neither the standing nor the relationships within these legitimate pro-democracy movements that would allow us to support grassroots democratic movements. Historically, it has not been in our best interest to support democracy anywhere outside of Europe and North America. Folks living in the underdeveloped world are not stupid. They understand that many of their most oppressive leaders have been able to hold onto power because of direct support from the United States. The Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, Manuel Noriega, Papa Doc, Trujillo, Fulgencio Batista, and the list goes on and on of the dictators that the U.S. has supported that have used the most despicable means of social control on their own people.

We should absolutely recognize, immediately, any real movement for democracy in a country as it is happening. When those movements are successful, we should move quickly to offer aid and support for the new governments. We should offer quiet aid packages to the new regimes that will help support them through the transition. The U.S. should send send CIVIL delegations from the U.S., from places like the Liberty Tree Foundation/Center for Media Justice/FairVote, and other democratic practice NGOs, as teams of experts to help work with the new regime in setting up new institutions that will help preserve and expand democratic practice as it makes sense for the countries where nascent democratic movements are taking place. But our government should stay far far far away from these movements and from the new governments....unless we want to see them brought down in bloody civil wars and arch-conservative backlash movements.

The bottom line is that I fully believe that it is up to the people of each country in the world to bear responsibility for changing their ruling regime. In almost all cases, I absolutely oppose any foreign intervention in the self-determination process of nation-states, including the use of violent resistance to the state, including guerrilla actions and civil war. There is one notable exception to this rule. I believe that anytime that there is evidence of genocide, there is a moral obligation and a human rights imperative that ALL nations, especially developed nations, have the right and obligation, without permission from the particular nation-state sponsoring the genocide to intervene and do whatever is necessary to protect those being "ethnically cleansed."

Outside of that, I truly believe that, even if a regime is propped up by the U.S. or whatever other world power, the ultimate responsibility for confronting and changing a repressive government is the responsibility of the people living in that place. Real democratic practices requires a ground up process that has only ever proven effective by being developed through a revolutionary process that has cost innumerable lives. Name for me ONE single country in the entire world that is a stable democracy that did not arrive at democracy through a process of war, revolution, popular uprisings, and social agitation by the undeserved. Democracy is only powerful when the people choose it because it is the best vehicle for their well being.

I am super heartened by the popular uprisings taken place right now. Some have already been brutality smacked down while others are clearly headed for or have achieved some level of victory. The worst possible thing that could happen right now would be for the U.S. or any of the European powers to intervene in these organic processes. Let the people fight their fight and find their own voice, and when they reach out to the rest of the world in friendship, let's be ready to give them the support they need to walk tall down their own democratic path.

The Filibuster Be Damned!

I have already written exhaustive rants about the filibuster, so I will keep this one short. There was a time when I felt emphatically that the filibuster had to remain as a defining element of Senate debate, as it has been an effective tool in keeping the Senate from passing truly heinous laws based on whatever particular craziness seemed to leap out of nowhere and grip the popular majority for a time before running its due course and returning to sanity. With the House, we get all kinds of super kooky bills that have been backed a majority of members and then killed (most often secretly) by this or that Senator that didn't poo poo publicly the House's legislation, which was the Congressional equivalent of a drunk text, but instead would send a nice handwritten note or while deliberating great deliberations in the world's greatest deliberative body would take a moment, perhaps over a nice cup of tea, and sidle to the Senate Majority Leader's desk, tap the House Bill, written out in an elegant hand, and then would shake his head ever so slightly. He would then move on to make a congenial jab at an old Princeton chum from across the aisle before returning to his chair, feeling proud of his tact and poise, something the barbarians in the House simply would understand (comportment! please!). Then he would congratulate himself for staving off another disaster and all before he drank his morning tea.

But don't be fooled, every now and again one of great lions would shake the dust and crumpet crumbs from his great mane, climb to the front of the room and roar. It was unthinkable before the 1980s to indicate that you would filibuster, and then when challenged, meekly step aside. No! You knew that every now and again, the cause of the moment was sometimes taken up by a dangerous majority of the Senate, and it was now not only a point of taste but a point of honor that you should enter into this contest of wills alongside your like-minded and right-minded colleagues and roar down those that challenged your power. And roar they did. Why Strom Thurmond (no lion was he...more like a sickly leopard) proved that he was made of the stuff of which Senators from ancient days had been hewn, when he spoke for 24 hours and 18 minutes straight in his attempt to derail the Civil Rights Act!

But one by one the old Senators fell away until only the greatest of the last generation of gentleman senators, the grandmaster of the Senate Robert C. Byrd, remained. Now he too has passed. But long before he took his final rest, as the others were replaced by the Congressional equivalent of new money Senators, the filibuster, which was made great by the risk that you would actually, in rare instances, take the podium, became instead a veto pen wielded by exactly 100 legislatures, each of whom thinks of him or herself as a petty monarch at best or a Grand Duchess at worst.

Well fie I say! FIE! What I once believed to be an integral part of the Senate and the safeguard of the legislative process has now become, instead of a proceed with caution/dangerous roads ahead sign,there is now a stop sign and a checkpoint that makes the Berlin Wall look like it was made out of legos and guarded by Rainbow Brite and those creepy little star creatures.

To Hell with the filibuster! Let America do as the rest of practicing democracies do...pass legislation with a 50% majority (or now again 2/3rd as may be called for by those greatest of all procedural guidelines, Robert's Rules of Order aka my personal Bible). And, just in other countries, when we realized we passed some crazy bullshit, have the House Speaker and the Senate Majority Leader keep calling Congress into session until the ubercrazies take their meds and start talkin' sense again.

Damn...that was a long as rant. I believe it shall be my blog of the

The Supreme Court Decides that Wal-Mart is a Person

Fuck me three ways til Tuesday.

Today has been a hell of a day. First the racist, classist, and ugly young woman working at the Genius Bar at Apple, without looking at my brand new iPhone 3Gs, suggested that "some people," fall and smash their phones on purpose when new ones come out, so that they can get an upgrade. Therefore, she was going to have to charge me $200 to replace the glass front of my phone...which...by the way...was the only thing broken on the damn thing...the LCD and touch screens worked just fine. And I did my research, the glass costs $24. So I guess that's $175 for labor. Fuck you Genius Bar.

And then, I come home, and lo and behold I log into Facebook only to find that the Supreme Court has all the balls that seem to be missing from the Democratic members of Congress. Against 100 years of precedence, the Roberts Court (may your dick shrivel and fall off) went right on ahead and said it was unconstitutional and the court saw no compelling argument for limiting in any way the right of corporations (oh and unions...throwing the left an old, run down, and chewed on bone) to speak freely and spend freely to promote their speech during political campaigns.

Excuse me?

The U.S. Supreme Court has lost its damn mind. This is what I love...it was the Supreme Court that magically decided way back in the 1880s and 1890s that corporations, which didn't really exist in 1776, were actually entitled to all the rights and privileges of a living, breathing human being. Successive court rulings places some limits on the ability of corporations to engage in direct political speech and advocacy. But the Bush Supreme Court that we now have went on ahead and bucked 100 years of court precedence and said...what the fuck...Wal-Mart can run America...party on Exxon Valdez and Dow Jones why don't you and DuPont just go on ahead and pick a couple of your stock holders names out of a hat and they can be U.S. Senators.

Basically, the judges wrote a total of five different opinions on the ruling totally 175 pages. I can boil all that down for you into one short letter.

Dear U.S. Democracy,

Fuck you. Go buy a McDonald's Happy Meal.

Love,
SCOTUS

And you see, thanks to our wonderful system of checks and balances, which, since Bush took office, really hasn't worked worth a damn...this opinion rips apart state laws in roughly half of the states and writes corporations a blank check signed Chief Justice Roberts.

I think I am going to vomit.

The midterm elections next year are going to ridiculous. Special interests, labor unions, and corporations spent $1 billion in the 2008 presidential elections and that was WITH spending limits. Every CEO on Wall Street just got a fat dripping chubby when this news came down.

I can smell the end of the farce that has been called "democracy" in the United States. But, let me be clear, this country has never been a democracy and now, finally, the mask is coming off and the corporate dictatorship that has run this nation for the last century is going to show its true face. Time for the American Revolution Part Deux.

(Though I would rather pretend this didn't really just happen, here is a link to an article with more and less angry details.)

And, if you are as pissed off as I am, there is something you can do. Sign this petition asking Congress to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban corporate personhood.

United States of Afghanistan or NYC Democracy Dies

Welcome to New York City, the capital of Venezuela...or maybe it's Ecuador....or perhaps Cuba...or maybe Haiti....could be the Central African Republic....might be Liberia...pick a place that has had a dictator that has engineered an overturn of constitutional or legal term limits...and had themselves re-elected...and that is what New York has become.

The next time that someone has the nerve to say some shit about a "Latin American dictator" engineering their own perpetual electoral victories over the will of the populace, I am going to punch him or her in the face and scream "BLOOMBERG" at the top of my lungs.

I am a wee bit depressed.

Last night, I spent a couple of very chilly hours on a street corner in Astoria encouraging folks to cast ballots for Lynne Serpe. At the site where I was standing, more than a dozen people passed by letting me know that they had, indeed, voted for Lynne. The people that voted for Lynne were damned excited. It's rare to see people that are happy about voting. Other than Obama voters, I have never really had that experience (well, people that voted for Peter Hutchinson in the Minnesota Gubernatorial election in 2006 also were extremely confident in the justness of their votes).

Lynne last night managed to bring in 23% of the vote against an extremely popular incumbent. Lynne was the Green Party candidate, and she out fundraised, out organized, and out shone Peter Vallone, so much so that he launched an attack direct mail piece days before the election in which he did NOT attack Lynne but instead attacked the Green Party on an issue of "national security."

Vallone was one of the diabolic cadre of fucknuts that voted to overturn TWO popular referenda that established CLEAR term limits for city wide office holders in the city of New York. I swear to Sweet Jesus that if a Latin American leader used a parliamentary vote to overturn two popular referenda in order to hang on to power, there would be screams and shouts and bellows and condemnations from every "democratic" corner in the world. France would tsk tsk, the UN would issue a statement, and the U.S. President would have harsh words for X President that would instantly become a "dictator" in the popular imagination.

Yet, just as with the election stealing of George W. Bush, when dictatorial anti-democracy behavior happens in the United States it is chalked up to the wheels of democracy turning and Divine Providence.

FUCK THE DOUBLE STANDARDS THAT WE APPLY TO THE WORLD.

I am so fucking pissed off today. I was so depressed last night that I ate two McDonald's cheese burgers, an order of fries, three fried chicken wings, a slice of cheese pizza, two empanadas, and three mini pigs-in-a-blanket. Talk about stress eating.

It so deeply fucks with my mind that the general populace so readily and blindly accepts the "Do As We Say Not As We Do" philosophy without thought. The same douche nozzles (thanks Gracie) that scream about the vagaries of young democracies are the same ones that hop, skip, and jump to participate in the gutting of democracy right here in our own back yard.

Last night was a democratic sham. Michael Bloomberg is a fucktard billionaire that proved once again that the rules of democracy do not apply to the mega wealthy. Peter Vallone is a small dick bastard that should be strung up by his nutsac with chicken wire dipped in sulfuric acid for his crimes against democracy and his electorate.

I declare again that America is about as much of a democracy as I am the Prince of Wales.

As the French would say, "FUCK YOU BLOOMBERG AND VALLONE."

PS Minnesota once again proves that it understands democracy as St. Paul, the state capital, has joined Minneapolis in approving Ranked Choice Voting as its preferred election process. THANK YOU FAIRVOTE MINNESOTA!

Congratulations

To Senator Barack Obama:

On behalf of myself, my family, and all my ancestors that went before us. Thank you. Congratulations. And may God bless and protect you. This is the people's doing by the will of God.

Thank you for having the courage to put yourself forward. You have a responsibility now to the hope that you have inspired in all of us. Please do not let us down.

Yours,
Brandon

Democracy Today

I was raised in Minnesota. As long as I have been alive, Minnesota has had the highest voter turn out in the country, and it has continued to increase general election after general election. In my neighborhood back home, the question wasn’t, “Did you vote,” the question was, “When did you vote?”

Never in the 13 years that I have been an eligible voter, have I ever seen lines such as the ones I have seen today.

I am on my way to my co-worker Mervyn Marcano’s spot to have a Black Family Reunion viewing of the election returns. Since we are proud black folks, I volunteered to stop and pick up the fried chicken. God Bless Church’s, amen.

Across the street from Church’s Chicken on Park Boulevard is the Park Theater, which, tonight, is doubling as a polling place. The line to vote at 4:45 pm wrapped around the theater, into the parking lot, up the slope and to the front door of the automative supply store hundreds and hundreds of yards from the entrance to the theater.

There is hardly a street corner in Oakland that is not peppered with individuals waving signs advocating their positions on a number of statewide propositions: most notably Prop 4--which seeks to roll back the rights of women by requiring parental notification before a teenage woman can receive an abortion and Prop 8---which seeks to alter the California State Constitution to enshrine bigotry and hatred by removing the right of queer folks to marry. Violence over Prop 8 has sprung up across the state, largely as hate filled Prop 8 advocates have PHYSICALLY attacked LGBT folks and their allies going so far as smashing Yes on 8 signs into cars and ripping signs out of front yards. Apparently speech is only free when it is hate filled.

There is so much at stake today. And, because of the hegemony of the United States, not just for those of us that live here but for the entire world.

The Enron Factor

I am pretty much exhausted. I work for an organization comprised of largely kick ass individuals that I respect and love. But, like many small non-profits still in the start-up phase, we have lots and lots and lots to figure out when it comes to organizational development and personal interactions. I am as guilty as the rest of falling into the personalities not policies trap.

One of the strengths of organizing in the political left is that we value not only the product but the process and the people. For many of us, if the product is stellar but the process to develop it is fucked up and the people involved in creating the product walk away from the process hurting (physically, mentally, spiritually) then, truthfully, the product is worthless. Our inherent difference from the Corporate Right is that the total value of an outcome is not solely based on the worth of the product but indeed the worth of the entire endeavor from start to finish. The belief that only outcomes matter continues to be at the core of mainstream society and at the heart of the underpinnings of our capitalist system and our democracy.

Liberty Tree works specifically around democracy issues. At our core, we reject winner take all systems because, frankly, those systems are the “democracy” equivalent of Enron. At Enron, the bottom line was dollars and profits and it didn't matter that the process to create the dollars was flawed, faulty, and false. It didn't matter that while some few would become mega rich that the people involved, particularly the workers, would eat the penalities at the cost of their pensions when the three Fs were un covered. In a winner take all democratic practice, it doesn't matter how the process to get elected happens, who pays for it, what promises are made and not kept or the margin by which victory is declared (ie plurality versus majority) the only thing that matters is victory and the people left without representation or voice be damned and the shredded and mortally wounded democratic process be buried alongside the people. At Enron it was the top executives that “won.” In the American Democracy, it is generally Senators, Representatives, Governors and Presidents that are the Ken Lays.

Unfortunately, at times, these same values to which all U.S. citizens to some degree are inculcated manage to sneak across the center aisle, weave through the liberals and sneak into the progressive community. In the last couple of weeks, both internal to my own organziation and to organizations with which I volunteer the depth of the infiltration of the “me first, me second, me last and always” mentality has been unveiled. But there is a difference, on the right the Me Mentality is often calculated and conscious. On the Left, particularly the revolutionary left, it is a subconscious act that the conscious radical rejects while actively acting it out. I am no exception. When I find my personal issues triggered, I find myself to be a masterful player of the Me game. To my credit, when I am confronted (or I confront myself, which also happens) I do what I can to seperate the Me from the what's right and try to make amends for any actions I took in defense of my self interest that crossed from self preservation into selfishness.

I once believed that all my comadres and copadres on the left had the same ability and desire to overcome, reject, and replace the Corporate Right instincts that have been ingrained into us by pop consumer captialist culture. I am still convinced that 98% of my friends and loved ones that are seeking to change the world for the better are still committed to fighting the three Fs both personally and in the political realm and excorcising them. But, I realized today, after thinking over some of the struggles of the last couple of weeks, that there are some people on the Left that even when lovingly given the grace to confront their own inner Ken Lay instead hire an internal Karl Rove to run a public image campaign to allow them to continue presenting one reality while living another. For the first time in a long time, my faith has been shaken. Or, perhaps better to say, that for the first time in my life I am considering walking away from particular people because I do not believe they want to be different than they are now. Even more sobering is that there have been times in my life when people in my life have felt the same way about me.

DEMOCRACY DAY PRESS RELEASE!

###FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE###

May 1, 2008

Contact: Brandon Lacy Campos, Associate Director
Organization: Liberty Tree Foundation
Phone: 612-408-7375 Email: blc@libertytreefdr.org
Website: http://www.claimdemocracy.org/

HUNDREDS OF PRO-DEMOCRACY & ELECTION REFORM
ADVOCATES TO CONVENE IN MINNEAPOLIS THIS SUMMER

Exclusive Media Access for Speakers at Democracy Day conference,
to be Held in Conjunction with the National Conference on Media Reform

MINNEAPOLIS, MN - On June 5, 2008 hundreds of democracy activists and organizers will gather for Democracy Day, a one-day gathering organized in conjunction with the National Conference on Media Reform. Democracy Day is a joint project of the Liberty Tree Foundation, FairVote, Public Campaign and Common Cause with support from local partners FairVote MN, Verified Voting, TakeAction Minnesota and the Center for Election Integrity Minnesota. This one day conference will take place at the Minneapolis Hilton from 9:00am-7:00pm. Registration information can be found at http://www.claimdemocracy.org/. Complimentary registration for members of the media can be obtained by calling Ross Margulies, FairVote Development Director, at 301.270.4616.

Former Congressman Dr. Bob Edgar (D-PA), Executive Director of Washington, D.C. based Common Cause, stated that, “While every day should be Democracy Day in America, this conference provides a special opportunity for activists and experts to come together and strengthen the movement for self-government in our country.”

In the run-up to the upcoming presidential elections, the Democracy Day conference will include workshops addressing electoral reform, instant runoff voting, election integrity and protection, student unionism, and a host of other visionary work aimed at expanding, deepening, broadening, and protecting U.S. democracy.

Featured speakers include:

• Secretary of State Mark Ritchie (D-MN),
• Radio Host Amy Goodman,
• The Nation Columnist John Nichols,
• Author Walter Mosley,
• Former Nirvana bassist Krist Novoselic,
• Former Presidential candidate David Cobb (G-CA),
• And other leaders in the national democracy movement.

Please inquire about opportunities to schedule interviews with any speakers during the conference.

FairVote MN Executive Director Jeanne Massey said, “Now more than ever we need to be fully and deeply engaged in a discussion around the future of our Democracy. For eight years we have watched our democratic institutions attacked and weakened, but, here in Minnesota with passage of instant runoff voting in Minneapolis in 2006 and the St. Paul IRV campaign in 2008, we are committed to expanding democracy. It is right that the first Democracy Day conference is held here.”

The conference is a continuation of the work of the Claim Democracy Coalition, which is a national coalition spearheaded by FairVote which held the Claim Democracy Conference in November 2007 in Washington, DC.

###