Prof. Robert Jensen Discusses Racism, White Supremacy - leaves out numerical inadequacy (fear of genetic annihilation), skin deficiency (90% of world is non-white) and the need to feel supreme

HuffPost

Robert Jensen is a professor in the School of Journalism at the University of Texas at Austin. In addition to teaching and research, Jensen writes for popular media, both alternative and mainstream. His opinion and analytic pieces on such subjects as foreign policy, politics, and race have appeared in papers and on websites around the world.

His latest book, 'Arguing for Our Lives: Critical Thinking in Crisis Times' (City Lights, 2013), draws on more than two decades of classroom experience and community organizing, and shares strategies on how to challenge "conventional wisdom" in order to courageously confront the crises of our times, and offers a framework for channeling our fears and frustrations into productive analysis that can inform constructive action.

Kathleen Wells: Define racism. People use the word a lot, however, I think they use it inappropriately. Everyone has their own definition. So, let me ask you, what is the definition of racism?

Prof. Robert Jensen: Well, first of all let's talk about, perhaps, what isn't a very good definition of racism. In its simplest form, or I would say, perhaps, most simplistic form, people want to define racism as any time somebody doesn't like somebody else because of some group characteristic. The problem with that definition, of course, is it misses history, it misses economics and it misses politics.

Racism isn't just about disliking people because of the color of their skin or a religious affiliation or an ethnic affiliation or something like that. When we talk about racism we have to talk about its roots in white supremacy. We wouldn't be talking about racism today if it weren't for a white supremacist system. That is a system that defines white as superior, as better, as more deserving.

So racism, that distinct, modern form of racism, flows from what we would call a white supremacist system. Now throughout human history, people have always had a sense of in-group and out-group. In other words, people have always had a sense that they are a member of a clan, a tribe, some sort of grouping and that others are different. That ability for human beings to identify as part of a group is not the same thing as modern racism.

Racism of the last, let's say 500 years, flowing out of Europe, is based on an assertion of white supremacy, white superiority and the right of white people to a disproportionate share of the world's resources. When we talk about race today, we always have to keep that white supremacist system in mind. Otherwise, race just becomes a kind of free-floating term to mean somebody doesn't like somebody, and that's really not what we're talking about.

Kathleen Wells: Yes. When I've had discussions about racism, you will always hear someone say, "Well, you know, I was treated poorly at the restaurant. They just didn't like me, you know." And that's not sufficient when you're using that word, "racism".

Prof. Robert Jensen: Absolutely. And of course, in a system like we live today -- a very racialized system -- even white people can experience, in particular moments, bad treatment from other people because of their race.

So, I'm white: Let's say I go into a predominantly Black or a predominantly Latino part of town in a store in which most of the patrons and the owners are Black or Latino, and I might be treated badly. Now, that's unfortunate. It would be a nice world if everybody was nice to everybody all the time. But that treatment I'm receiving, while unpleasant, maybe even dangerous -- who knows -- is not, I think, adequately described as racism. It's a product of a racist system. It's a result of white supremacy, that sometimes even those of us who are white are treated badly.

But it's not the same thing as the systemic day after day, mistreatment, discrimination, and hatred that is visited upon, not white people but, people with color. And so, I don't want to make light of that because, of course, if you're the person, or even if you're the white person, who's on the receiving end of that negative treatment -- of that impolite, rude, even physically threatening treatment, it doesn't feel very good.

But that's not what we really need to focus on. We need to focus on the nature of the system and then, therefore, the systemic nature of the discrimination that flows from that. And that's really, I think, where white people are quick to want to move the subject away from white supremacy, away from a white supremacist system and talk only about personal experience. Because that's where we white people can really flip the trap and, therefore, avoid the responsibility we have of being in a privileged position in a white supremacist system.

Kathleen Wells: They want to flip the script, they want to talk about their personal experiences as a reflection of, "Oh well, I've experienced racism." And this is some form of denial as to the reality of things.

Prof. Robert Jensen: I think that's very true. Now, let's take the flip side of that: That's white people saying that they've experienced racism. The other way I think white people avoid an honest account in discussion of racism is when we reduce racism only to overtly prejudiced or racist kinds of intentions. Most white people I know, and I'm not just talking about, you know, radicals or liberals or whatever, but most white people in the United States today do not go into situations with the intention of being overtly racist. And therefore, people say, white people often say, "Well, if there was a problem it wasn't my fault because I didn't intend to be a racist in the way that Bull Connor or George Wallace -- pick your favorite overtly white supremacist, Southern bigot from the 1950s acted.

But racism, again, just is not about simply people being treated badly. It's not simply about intentions. One can act in a way that reinforces a white-supremacist system, even though one doesn't have the intention of being a racist.

So, just to make it very personal, I like to think that I do not have the intention of reinforcing white supremacy -- I don't have racist sentiments. I don't go into situations hoping to act in a racist way. But I also know that I do have a position of privilege, I do act in a system based on white supremacy, and there are ways that I contribute to that. Some ways are unconscious, ways I can't see clearly because of my own limitation.

Others are ways I feel trapped because it's just the nature of the institution that I work in, such as a major university, for instance. All of this is complex. None of it can be reduced to simple assertions that one is or isn't racist or one has or does not have racist intentions. It's all about power, systems of power -- it's about economics and economic systems, and how they distribute wealth. Now that's all complicated -- it's messy, and there's no simple answers to it, but the last time I checked there's not a single question in human society that has a simple answer to it.

Kathleen Wells: So it's a sophisticated discussion that we must have. It's not some silly thing the way people just toss around the word racism - they are not fully understanding it.

So in your piece titled, "We Are the Result Of What We Want And What Society Allows", you talk about white privilege. So elaborate on white privilege. And, in fact, in that piece you give two stories, to exemplify white privilege. Can you speak on that?

Prof. Robert Jensen: White privilege is a term that's become fairly common, at least in education and in corporate diversity circles.

White privilege is just a word to recognize that those of us who are white, or frankly, anyone who holds a position of honor and power and privilege in a system, has to take account and be responsible for that. So if in fact we live in a white supremacist system, again, not an overtly racist, Jim Crow, apartheid system, but in a system where the distribution of wealth and power is still very much racialized -- that is, on average, white people are doing better. That institutions, educational institutions, economic institutions, government institutions are still dominated by, not only white people, but white cultural norms. And, that in a system like that, those of us who are white have certain privileges -- we are taken to be the norm. We are taken to be authoritative. We have a certain sort of status. That's all we're talking about when we talk about white privilege.

Again, it takes us out of the realm of looking at an individual and saying is or is not this person a racist, but asking what position does this person hold in society and how should one then make decisions based on that. So, I think that white privilege is an important concept, but only if we recognize that, it makes sense by understanding the white supremacist nature of the larger society.

Now, to understand how white privilege operates, we can look at both the ways it clearly benefits me, but also a way it clearly lead or takes me out of dangerous and threatening situations. So, white privilege has benefits for me both in the positive and in the negative. It gets me things and it keeps me out of trouble in certain ways, and we can talk more about this because I think that the details are very important.

Kathleen Wells: So give me some of the details.

Prof. Robert Jensen: Well, let's just take the latter, the way that white privilege can keep one out of trouble. And the example I want to use is also going to go into class privilege because, of course, we aren't simply racialized human beings. We also occupy a certain place in the distribution of wealth -- we have a class. We are gendered; we have male and female status...

There's all these other things that can play into any particular situation, but let's just take an easy example: I'm white and I live in what we would generally call the middle class. Now, imagine I have a child, (I actually do, but let's keep it hypothetical) and my kid in his high school years is a little wild and ends up going out and getting in trouble, maybe drinking too much, maybe having a little marijuana on him, maybe running a stop sign, maybe getting stopped by the police.

What's going to happen to that kid as he goes into this interaction with law enforcement: white and middle class, driving a certain kind of car, looking a certain way, certain kinds of expectations about that kid.

Well, maybe, the kid is going to get in trouble when that police officer stops him, but maybe the cops are going to cut him a break, maybe they are going to call his parents and give him a break. I've actually seen this play out all sorts of times. White, middle-class parents know there are certain ways they can protect their children, even when their children really mess up.

Alright, let's imagine another situation: An African-American parent living in a lower-class, working-class, poor part of town. That parent's child is stopped. Same situation, very different identity, very different class and racial identity, but what's gonna happen. Is it gonna play out exactly the same with that police officer, is that police officer going to give that young black kid a break? Are they going to call the parents and let the parents take the kid instead?

No, everybody knows that it would likely play out very, very differently. Well, that's white privilege, that means that my kid, going into that situation is going to be spared some of the pain and suffering that comes with making a mistake -- might be given a second chance, might be cut a break. I mean it's such a common example that every listener to this show right now, who is not white, is probably nodding his or her head saying "Yeah, well, of course, that's the way it works," but the privilege comes that white people are often not aware of this. There might be white people listening saying, "Well, that doesn't happen." Well, it does happen. It happens all the time. And that's an example of white privilege.

Kathleen Wells: And the most recent example of this scenario is Trayvon Martin.

Prof. Robert Jensen: Sure.

And even if we don't know all of the details about the Trayvon Martin case, (maybe the facts are still in dispute) that basic pattern is not in dispute. And every young black man, every black parent knows the reality of that situation.

Kathleen Wells: Stats indicate that 70 percent of mass murders are committed by white men. Do you think this has any correlation/connection with white privilege?

Prof. Robert Jensen: Let's start with the "men" part. It is hardly surprising that mass murders are all men, given the way that in contemporary culture the conventional ideals of masculinity are about control, domination, and conquest. That is an ideology of violence, and we see manifestations of it all around us. Why are the men who commit mass murder disproportionately white? My guess is that has something to do with the sense of entitlement that most white people feel. So, when the world doesn't deliver what those men feel they deserve, violence is seen as a reasonable response. Beyond that, I think it's important to recognize just how toxic contemporary culture is, which is reflected in the excessively violent and sexually exploitative mass media. All of this is playing out in an incredibly unhealthy culture.

Shed a Tear for Pat Buchanan - Suspected Racist Speaks His Mind on Race Relations

DemocraticUnderground

A Moment of Silence for the comments below: 

Election 2012 

Buchanan: ‘White America’ Died Last Night 

Nov. 07, 2012 

Conservative political pundit Pat Buchanan stoked controversy today by claiming that Barack Obama's reelection has 'killed White America'. 

The paleoconservative nativist is no stranger to racial controversy, having previously been accused of writing books with racist and anti-semitic undertones. 

But the former Nixon advisor was more explicit on the G. Gordon Liddy Show this morning. When asked for his reaction to Obama's victory, Buchanan replied brazenly: 

"White America died last night. Obama's reelection killed it. Our 200 plus year history as a Western nation is over. We're a Socialist Latin American country now. Venezuela without the oil." 

Stunned by his clear racisim, Liddy tried to walk his guest back from the ledge: 

"With what you just said right there...You seem to imply that white people are better than other people. That's not really what you're saying is it?" 

"Of course that's what I'm saying," Buchanan replied "Isn't it obvious? Anything worth doing on this Earth was done first by white people." 

"Who landed on the moon? White people. Who climbed Mount Everest? White people. Who invented the transistor? White people. Who invented paper? White people. Who discovered algebra? White people." 

"And don't give me all this nonsense about Martin Luther King and civil rights and all that. Who do you think freed the slaves? Abraham Lincoln. A white guy!" 

Carte Blanche 

"But we're not led by Lincoln anymore, we're led by an affirmative-action mulatto who can't physically understand how great America once was." 

"I cried last night G. I cried for hours. It's over for all of us. The great White nation will never survive another 4 years of Obama's leadership" 

Liddy tried to reason with Buchanan, reminding him that he shares similar positions with the President on Afghanistan, Iraq, and relations with Russia: 

"Of course I agree with half of what he does," Buchanan answered, "He's half white! That's not the half I'm worried about." 

Buchanan served as a speechwriter in the Nixon White House. He was fired as an MSNBC analyst this year following the publication of a book many considered to be racist. 

'White Privilege' Class At Delavan-Darien High School In Wisconsin Draws Ire

HuffPost

A Wisconsin high school is under fire after a parent accused a diversity class of promoting a critical race theory, alleging that students are being taught that minorities are disadvantaged by white oppressors, Fox News reports.

Delavan-Darien High School's "American Diversity" course aims to help students "better understand oneself and recognize how feelings, ideas and beliefs interact with the ideas and beliefs of other individuals and groups," according to the school's website. By studying American society through the connections among culture, ethnicity, race, religion and gender issues, the course seeks to "create a more accurate picture of modern America."

But an unnamed parent tells Fox News that assignments and class worksheets seem like "indoctrination." A handout gives students a definition of "white privilege," which appears to be taken from a book by the same name:

In critical race theory, white privilege is a set of advantages that are believed to be enjoyed by white people beyond those commonly experienced by non-white people in the same social, political, and economic spaces (nation, community, workplace, income, etc.). Theorists differentiate it from racism or prejudice because, they say, a person who may benefit from white privilege is not necessarily racist or prejudiced and may be unaware of having any privileges reserved only for whites.

“They’re teaching white guilt,” the parent told Fox News. “They’re dividing the students. They’re saying to non-whites, ‘You have been oppressed and you’re still being oppressed.’”

Click over to Fox News for more on the outcry and the school's response.

Another worksheet published by The New Guard, a blog on conservative youth organization Young America's Foundation, is an excerpt from Peggy McIntosh's "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack," listing examples of racial privilege. Among them: "I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color" and "I can be late to a meeting without having the lateness reflect on my race"

Yet another assignment asked questions of a lecture by anti-racism activist and writer Tim Wise, inquiring, "Why is the colorblind model of American ineffective," "Why is it important to talk about whiteness in America," and "Explain the irony of the phrase 'United We Stand.'"

To apply the lesson to the real world, students were allegedly told to go to a Wal-Mart and count the number of dolls in the toy section that represented blacks versus whites. Superintendent Robert Crist says there is merit to parental concern.

“A lot of red flags go up in my mind when I look at the materials," Crist told Fox News. "Ideally, you would want to present one theory that might be way on the left and another theory that may be way on the right and if you find one in the middle you can present that too … now you have a well-rounded discussion, in my opinion."

The course will not be offered at the school again until the district evaluates the curriculum.

In Portland, Ore. last September, Harvey Scott K-8 School Principal Verenice Gutierrez drew national attention for tying the peanut butter and jelly sandwich to white privilege during equity training in district schools.

“What about Somali or Hispanic students, who might not eat sandwiches?” Gutierrez said, according to the Portland Tribune. “Another way would be to say: ‘Americans eat peanut butter and jelly, do you have anything like that?’ Let them tell you. Maybe they eat torta. Or pita.”

To be sure, the U.S. Department of Education recently examined racial inequity in a survey of 72,000 schools. Findings revealed that minority students tend to face harsher disciplinary actions and are more likely to be taught by lower paid teachers with less experience than white students.

Racist Suspect Ann Coulter Blames Gun Violence on Non-Whites

PolicyMic

Right-wing commentator Ann Coulter appeared on Hannity last night to discuss her views on the gun control debate. While discussing her recent trip to England, she saidthat they had “not bought into this whole diversity enthusiasm.” (Calling it a lack of ‘diversity enthusiasm’ is a convenient way to brush aside Europe’s documented issues withxenophobia.) She went onto say, "If you compare white populations, we have the same murder rate as Belgium.”

Okay ... but can you compare white populations?

Let’s first take a look at the murder rates of both countries. These numbers are taken from the U.N. Global Study on Homicide (2001). The methodology and data can be found here

Country

Count

Rate

Year

Source

Male

Female

Undetermined

U.S.A.

15,241

5.0

2009

National Police

77.4

22.5

0.2

Belgium

185

1.7

2009

UN-CTS

58.5

41.5

0.0

This data shows that the murder rate is considerably higher in the U.S. than it is in Belgium. Still, all criminal reporting mechanisms have their limitations. This data set is no different. Intentional homicides can be defined differently from country-to-country and not all intentional homicides are represented in this data sat. It would be unwise draw comparisons or conclusions where reporting guidelines may vary.

Ann’s statement is also problematic because she alludes to white people in Belgium as if they are a homogenous group. They aren’t. There are several ethnic and linguistic differences throughout the country. These differences contribute to Belgium's murder rate. See the map below:

 

Let's break down America's murder numbers and arrests for murder. In 2010, according to Federal Bureau of Investigation-Uniform Crime Reports (FBI-UCR) data, 8,641 individuals were arrested for murder and non-negligent manslaughter.

Total Arrests

White

Black

American Indian or

Alaskan Native

Asian Or Pacific Islander

8,641

4,261

4,209

91

80

Now, here we have a look at murder offenders in 2010. Here's the data

Total

Male

Female

Unknown

White 

Black

Other

Unknown

15,094

9,972

1,075

4,047

4,849

5,770

251

4,224

Ann, you can't draw simplistic comparisons on race or ethnic makeup. In fact, the FBI warns against drawing conclusions for the following reasons:

“Crime in the United States provides a nationwide view of crime based on statistics contributed by local, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies. Population size and student enrollment are the only correlates of crime presented in this publication. Although many of the listed factors equally affect the crime of a particular area, the UCR Program makes no attempt to relate them to the data presented. The data user is, therefore, cautioned against comparing statistical data of individual reporting units from cities, counties, metropolitan areas, states, or colleges or universities solely on the basis of their population coverage or student enrollment. Until data users examine all the variables that affect crime in a town, city, county, state, region, or other jurisdiction, they can make no meaningful comparisons.” 

This statement highlights the difficulty in drawing comparisons of any kind within the United States. Imagine the complexities and problems that arrise when attempting to draw comparisons from country-to-country. It just shouldn't be done; I'm not going to do it, and Ann shouldn't have done it.

The real issue with Ann’s statement is that it is a thinly veiled racist critique against African Americans and other minorities. She went on to say, "So perhaps it's not a gun problem, it is a demographic problem, which liberals are the ones pushing, pushing, pushing."

This is racial coding. This is trying to get you to believe that white individuals commit crimes at a far lower rate than any other group. This just isn’t true; it is only her perception. African Americans are imprisoned at a rate disproportionate to their makeup in society. There is clear anddocumented racial bias and discrimination in sentencing. Coulter's statements feed into the notion that black equals criminal. For those that say racism isn't the problem here, Americans stillexpress explicit and implicit racial attitudes towards minorities and these views contribute to how we think about and view crime in America. 

It makes for poor politics — and even worse public policy — when individuals attempt to compare two things that cannot be compared or likened to one another. But what else would we expect of Ann Coulter? 

The Grio/Luke & Dick Gregory Shadow Box Spike Lee for Criticizing Shitty Racist Movie Django - Made for White Audiences

Racial Shadow Boxing occurs when victims of racism (non-white people) are directly or indirectly, "assigned", bribed, coerced, and/or otherwise influenced, by the racists (white Supremacist), to speak or act to do harm to to other victims of racism. White Supremacists oftentimes hide behind others whom they use as shadows of themselves. [MORE]  

TheGrio (an NBC product)  [MORE]

Director Spike Lee came out early to condemn Quentin Tarantino’s hit slavery-themed film Django Unchained, admittedly without having even seen it.

Now the outspoken figure is facing a backlash of his own, as a growing chorus of black entertainers have called him out for his criticism of the Academy-Award-nominated movie.

“Screw Spike Lee,” writes former 2 Live Crew frontman Luther Campbell in a new op-ed entitled “Spike Lee is no Quentin Tarantino” for the Miami New Times.

“Quentin Tarantino’s Django Unchained is a brilliant flick that more accurately depicts the African-American experience than any of the 15 movies about black culture Lee’s directed in his lifetime,” he added

theGrio slideshow: Who else could have played Django?

He closes his piece by comparing Lee to the villainous house slave portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson in the film.

“Spike is upset because Samuel L. Jackson’s character in the movie is just like him: a conniving and scheming Uncle Tom,” writes Campbell.

Dick Gregory, the legendary activist and comedian has also lashed out at Lee, referring to the Do the Right Thing filmmaker as a “thug” and a “punk.”

“I’ve seen Django Unchained 12 times. Never in the history of Hollywood, have they ever made anything that freed the inside of me. The inside of me. I’m 80 years old, I saw cowboy movies, wasn’t no black folks in cowboy movies. I’m looking at a Western, plus a love story. To those of you all that see it, you’ll never see a love story about a black man and a black woman where it wasn’t some foul sex and foul language, huh. And Spike Lee can’t appreciate that. The little thug ain’t even seen the movie; he’s acting like he white,” said Gregory in a YouTube interview.

Gregory also directly addressed Lee’s claims that the movie is “disrespectful” to his ancestors.

“[Talking about] ‘it offended my ancestors,’ but when you did She’s Got To Have It and some of those other thug movies you did…you took Malcolm X and put a Zoot suit on him…did that offend your ancestors, punk?” added Gregory.

After his initial remarks about Tarantino’s movie, Lee has largely remained quiet about the film.

It has since become Tarantino’s most financially successful film to date and was nominated for five Academy Awards last week, including best picture.

Meet The Republicans Who Want To Impeach Obama Over Gun Regulations

ThinkProgress


Republicans and pro-gun advocates are outraged over President Obama’s 23 executive orders to curb gun violence in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. Though executive orders have always been a standard element of the presidency, invocations of dictators like Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin and Saddam Hussein are becoming commonplace in the right-wing blogosphere. In reality, Obama hasissued fewer executive orders than any other American president in the last century. The executive orders signed today focus on strengthening background checks, making it easier for law enforcement to track guns used in crimes, and ending the freeze on gun research.

Regardless of the facts, the movement to impeach Obama over these executive actions is spreading from fringe conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones and taking hold among lawmakers and Republican activists. Here are five people calling for Obama’s impeachment:

Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX)


Stockman plans to introduce articles of impeachment, calling Obama’s anti-gun violence efforts “an existential threat to this nation.”

Rep. Trey Radel (R-FL)

 


Following Stockman’s lead is Florida Congressman Trey Radel, who said impeachment“should be on the table” and falsely claimed that Obama wants an executive order to “ban guns.”

 

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX)


Gohmert, a Tea Party favorite who recently claimed an assault weapons ban would have to include hammers, charged that the president’s action is “illegal” and grounds for impeachment. “The American Revolution was all about fighting such a monarchy — and that is not what the Constitution anticipates. It’s not something a Constitutional president would do,” Gohmert lamented.

Former Attorney General Edwin Meese (R)


Edwin Meese, former Reagan Attorney General and current Heritage Foundation official, is also taking up the call for impeachment. In an interview with Newsmax, Meese claimed Obama may have “really tried to override the Constitution itself.” Congress, he said, would have to take action, “perhaps even to the point of impeachment.”

Larry Pratt


The head of Gun Owners for America urged Republican lawmakers to stop being “spectators while the country is being torn apart” and impeach Obama. Pratt also attacked all gun safety laws as “the most pagan of paganism” because they assume guns and other “inanimate objects as possessing their own will.”

Maryland governor to introduce death penalty repeal

[JURIST]

Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley [official website] announced on Tuesday that he will file legislation to repeal capital punishment in the state of Maryland [press release]. O'Malley stated [text] that the death penalty was expensive and ineffective. The governor had previously attempted to repeal the death penalty [JURIST report] in Maryland in 2007, but the attempt failed. Following the failed repeal, O'Malley created the Maryland Commission on Capital Punishment [JURIST report] in 2008. The commission found that there was one exonerated innocent person for every 8.7 Americans on to receive the death penalty, that death penalty showed a racial bias, that no administrative fixes could address the racial disparity, and that the cost to taxpayers of pursuing a capital case was three times the cost of a life sentence without parole. The governor cited to those results as one reason he was re-introducing a repeal. On the decision to attempt the repeal again, O'Malley said:

To govern is to choose. And particularly in an era of limited budget resources, every dollar that we choose to spend on a policy that is wasteful and does not work—when instead we could be doing more of the things that do work to protect life—seems to me to run counter to the pragmatic "do the things that work" governance that is the hallmark of our State, and what our people desire. The death penalty does not work in terms of preventing violent crime and the taking of human life. If you look over 30 or 40 years, the death penalty was on the books, and yet Baltimore still became the most violent and addicted city in America. Having the death penalty on the books did nothing to keep the homicides from rising.

O'Malley will file the legislation this week.

In April Connecticut became the seventeenth state to abolish the death penalty and the fifth to do so in the previous five years. New Jersey, New Mexico, New York and Illinois [JURIST reports] have all recently eliminated the death penalty, while 34 states retain its use. However, California voters declined to repeal the death penalty on the most recent ballot, with 47 percent of voters supporting the repeal.

35 Statistics About The Working Poor In America That Will Blow Your Mind

BlackListedNews

In America tonight, tens of millions of men and women will struggle to get to sleep because they are stressed out about not making enough money even though they are working as hard as they possibly can.  They are called “the working poor”, and their numbers are absolutely exploding.  As arecent Gallup poll showed, Americans are more concerned about the economy than they are about anything else.  But why are Americans so stressed out about our economic situation if things are supposedly getting better?  Well, the truth is that unemployment is not actually going down, and the real unemployment numbers are actually much worsethan what is officially being reported by the government.  But unemployment is only part of the story.  Most American workers are still able to find jobs, but an increasing proportion of them are not able to make ends meet at the end of the month.  Our economy continues to bleed good paying middle class jobs, and to a large degree those jobs are being replaced by low income jobs.  Approximately one-fourth of all American workers make 10 dollars an hour or less at this point, and we see them all around us every day.  They flip our burgers, they cut our hair and they take our money at the supermarket.  In many homes, both parents are working multiple jobs, and yet when a child gets sick or a car breaks down they find that they don’t have enough money to pay the bill.  Many of these families have gone into tremendous amounts of debt in order to try to stay afloat, but once you get caught in a cycle of debt it can be incredibly difficult to break out of that.

So what is the solution?  Well, the easy answer would be that we need the U.S. economy to start producing more good paying jobs, but that is easier said than done.  Our big corporations continue to ship huge numbers of good paying manufacturing jobs out of the country, and millions of Americans have been forced to scramble to find whatever work is available.  Today, there are so many very talented American workers that are trapped in low wage work.  According to the Working Poor Families Project, “about one-fourth of adults in low-income working families were employed in just eight occupations, as cashiers, cooks, health aids, janitors, maids, retail salespersons, waiters and waitresses, or drivers.”  A lot of those people could do so much more for society, but they don’t have the opportunity.

Sadly, the percentage of low paying jobs in our economy continues to increase with each passing year, so this is a problem that is only going to get worse.  So don’t look down on the working poor.  The good paying job that you have right now could disappear at any time and you could end up joining their ranks very soon.

The following are 35 statistics about the working poor in America that will blow your mind…

#1 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, more than 146 million Americans are either “poor” or “low income”.

#2 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 57 percent of all American children live in a home that is either “poor” or “low income”.

#3 Back in 2007, about 28 percent of all working families were considered to be among “the working poor”.  Today, that number is up to 32 percent even though our politicians tell us that the economy is supposedly recovering.

#4 Back in 2007, 21 million U.S. children lived in “working poor” homes.  Today, that number is up to 23.5 million.

#5 In Arkansas, Mississippi and New Mexico, more than 40 percentall of working families are considered to be “low income”.

#6 Families that have a head of household under the age of 30 have a poverty rate of 37 percent.

#7 Half of all American workers earn $505 or less per week.

#8 At this point, one out of every four American workers has a job that pays $10 an hour or less.

#9 Today, the United States actually has a higher percentage of workers doing low wage work than any other major industrialized nation does.

#10 Median household income in the United States has fallen for four consecutive years.

The Winners of the Academy Award and Golden Globe Are … Government Propagandists/White Supremacists

BlackListedNews

Rob Kall points out that the military-industrial complex is the winner of the Golden Globe award:

Homeland won best TV series, best TV actor and actress. It IS a highly entertaining show which actually portrays some of the flaws of the MIIC system

Argo won best movie and best director. It glorifies the CIA and Ben Affleck spoke with the highest praise for the CIA.

And best actress went to Jessica Chastain of Zero Dark Thirty, a movie that has been vilified for propagandizing the use of torture.

***

The Military Industrial Intelligence Complex is playing a more and more pervasive role in our lives.  In the next few years we’ll be seeing movies that focus on the use of drone technology in police and spy work in the USA. We’ve already been seeing movies that show how spies can violate every aspect of our privacy– of the most intimate parts of our lives. By making movies and TV series that celebrate these cancerous extensions of the police state Hollywood and the big studios are normalizing the ideas they present us with– lying to the public, routinely creating fraudulent stories as covers for what’s really going on.

***

I was hoping that Zero Dark Thirty would come up without any awards. I was hoping that at least such blatant propaganda promoting  the lie that torture works would be repudiated by the Golden Globes. That didn’t happen.

***

The truth is we do live in a time when the police have been massively militarized. We don’t need movies or TV shows that celebrate that militarization. We don’t need entertainment that normalizes the obscene violations of our privacy that the intelligence state is inflicting upon us. We need stories that celebrate people who stand up to this seemingly irrepressible tide that is washing away our freedoms, sucking up all our resources and erasing the last bastions of privacy.

David Walsh notes that the real winner of the 2013 Academy Awards is the CIA:

Zero Dark Thirty, Kathryn Bigelow’s quasi-fascistic glorification of the role played by the CIA in the so-called “war on terror” … was tapped for five awards.

Of course,there is plenty of other war-o-tainment. being peddled by Hollywood.

The military has long had a direct influence on Hollywood. For example, a book published by the University of Texas points out:

The Central Intelligence Agency has been actively engaged in shaping the content of film and television, especially since it established an entertainment industry liaison program in the mid-1990s.

The book laments:

The significant influence that the CIA now wields in Hollywood

U.S. Military Suicides Outnumbered Combat Deaths in Afghanistan in 2012

BlackListedNews

The bigger struggle facing the U.S. military isn’t how to “win” in Afghanistan, but how to get the troops home and keep them alive.

Last year, more military personnel committed suicide (349) than the total of soldiers killed in the war (295).

The suicide total was the highest ever recorded since the Department of Defense began keeping track in 2001. The new mark shattered the previous high of 301, set in 2011.

The suicides among Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans may be attributed to depression, post-traumatic stress or substance abuse, according to David Rudd, a military suicide researcher and dean of the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences at the University of Utah. Suicidal military personnel who have not seen battle may face personal problems relating to financial, legal or relationship problems, Rudd told The Associated Press (AP).

Kim Ruocco, director of a suicide prevention program for the support group, Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS), told AP: "Now that we're decreasing our troops and they're coming back home, that's when they're really in the danger zone, when they're transitioning back to their families, back to their communities and really finding a sense of purpose for themselves.”

The U.S. Army had the highest number of suicides among active-duty troops in 2012 (182). But the largest percentage increase in suicides belonged to the Marine Corps, which saw its numbers increase by 50% from the prior year. A total of 48 Marines took their own lives.

The Air Force recorded 59 suicides, up 16% from 2011, and the Navy had 60, up 15%.

List of executive actions Obama plans to take as part of anti-gun violence plan

FoxNews

List of executive actions Obama plans to take as part of anti-gun violence plan

1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system. 

2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system. 

3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system. 

4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks. 

5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun. 

6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers. 

7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign. 

8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission). 

9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations. 

10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement. 

11. Nominate an ATF director. 

12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations. 

13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime. 

14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence. 

15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies. 

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes. 

17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities. 

18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers. 

19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education. 

20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover. 

21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges. 

22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations. 

23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

179 White Party (Republican) Freaks Vote Against Hurricane Victim Aid

Wonkette

The House finally voted Tuesday to graciously give out approximately $50.5 billion to the states hit hardest by the freakishly strong Frankenstorm of the Century, Hurricane Sandy. The measure passed with a vote of 241-180, with 179 Republicans voting against giving any money to anyone ever again at all.

It has been 80 days since one of the worst storms ever recorded by the obviously Socialist National Weather Monitoring Systems swept across the Northeast in yet another attempt by an angry God to punish all the gayness and abortioning in America. In that time, we re-elected a President, hundreds of Americans died in violent gun deaths, Republicans spent all their time trying to ban abortion harder, and Chris Christie became a confusingly rational hero for people who believe when we have a devastating natural disaster in this country we should try to fix it and that John Boehner is a callous, disgusting failure. READ MORE »

 

Read more at http://wonkette.com/#gUuRAULdsI3x6z8m.99 

White Party (Republican) "Ballot Security Program" in Non-White Neighborhoods Rejected by Court

Salon

The Supreme Court has turned down an effort by the Republican National Committee to end a 30-year-old court order aimed at preventing intimidation of minority voters.

The justices did not comment Monday in rejecting an appeal of lower court decisions that left the order in place at least until 2017.

The order stems from a lawsuit filed by Democrats in New Jersey in 1981 that objected to a “ballot security” program the RNC ran in minority neighborhoods.

Republicans said the order hampers efforts to combat voter fraud, but U.S. District Judge Dickinson Debevoise said voter intimidation remains a threat and preventing it outweighs the potential danger of fraud.

The court action is unrelated to legal challenges to Republican-inspired voter identification laws in the 2012 campaign.

Targeting Muslim Americans: Manufacturing Terrorists Inside the FBI's terror sting operations.

Reason.com

Imagine a country in which the government pays convicted con artists and criminals to scour minority religious communities for disgruntled, financially desperate, or mentally ill patsies who can be talked into joining fake terror plots, even if only for money. Imagine that the country's government then busts its patsies with great fanfare to justify ever-increasing authority and ever-increasing funding. According to journalist Trevor Aaronson's The Terror Factory, this isn't the premise for a Kafka novel; it's reality in the post-9/11 United States.

The Terror Factory is a well-researched and fast-paced exposé of the dubious tactics the FBI has used in targeting Muslim Americans with sting operations since 2001. The book updates and expands upon Aaronson's award-winning 2011 Mother Jones cover story, "The Informants." Most readers have likely heard about several alleged conspiracies to attack skyscrapers, synagogues, or subway stations, involving either individuals that the FBI calls "lone wolves" or small cells a credulous press tagged with such sinister appellations as the "Newburgh 4" or the "Liberty City 7." Many of these frightening plots were almost entirely concocted and engineered by the FBI itself, using corrupt agents provocateurs who often posed a far more serious criminal threat than the dim-witted saps the investigations targeted.

Drawing on court records and on interviews with the defendants, their lawyers, their families, and the FBI officials and prosecutors who oversaw the investigations, Aaronson portrays an agency that has adopted an "any means necessary" approach to its terrorism prevention efforts, regardless of whether there are real terrorists being caught. To the FBI, this imperative justifies recruiting informants with extensive criminal records, including convictions for fraud, violent crimes, and even child molestation, that in an earlier era would have disqualified them except in the most extraordinary circumstances.

Senator Asks CIA Nominee When Drones Can Kill Americans

Wired.com

The man in charge of America’s drone wars will face Senate questioning about perhaps their most controversial aspect: when the president can target American citizens for death.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) sent a letter on Monday to John Brennan, the White House’s counterterrorism adviser and nominee to be head of the CIA, asking for an outline of the legal and practical rules that underpin the U.S. government’s targeted killing of American citizens suspected of working with al-Qaida. The Obama administration has repeatedly resisted disclosing any such information about its so-called “disposition matrix” targeting terrorists, especially where it concerns possible American targets. Brennan reportedly oversees that matrix from his White House perch, and would be responsible for its execution at CIA director.

“How much evidence does the President need to determine that a particular American can be lawfully killed?” Wyden, a member of the Senate intelligence committee, asks in the letter, acquired by Danger Room. “Does the President have to provide individual Americans with the opportunity to surrender before killing them?”

Wyden’s questions about the targeted-killing effort get specific. He wants to know how the administration determines when it is “not feasible” to capture American citizens suspected of terrorism; if the administration considers its authority to order such killings inherent in its Constitutional war powers or embedded in the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force; and if the intelligence agencies can “carry out lethal operations inside the United States.” Wyden also expresses “surprise and dismay” that the intelligence agencies haven’t provided him with a complete list of countries in which they’ve killed people in the war on terrorism, which he says “reflects poorly on the Obama administration’s commitment to cooperation with congressional oversight.”

Unhealthy Coca-Cola Launches Misleading Ads To Obscure Soda’s Role In Obesity Epidemic

ThinkProgress 

Coca-Cola is pursuing a new PR strategy with the company’s first advertising foray into the national obesity debate. The ads, launched on Monday, come as the soda industry faces increasing scrutiny over the role that soft drinks play in the obesity epidemic, while it faces a declining share of the U.S. beverage market.

The Associated Press describes the new ads:

The Atlanta-based company on Monday will begin airing a two-minute spot during the highest-rated shows on CNN, Fox News and MSNBC in hopes of becoming a more influential voice in the intensifying debate over sodas and their impact on public health. The ad lays out Coca-Cola’s record of providing drinks with fewer calories over the years and notes that weight gain is the result of consuming too many calories of any kind — not just soda.

In the ad, a narrator notes that obesity is an issue that “concerns all of us” but that people can make a difference when they “come together.”

A second ad “features a montage of activities that add up to burning off the ’140 happy calories’ in a can of Coke.”

But soda’s impact on health is a little more complicated than that. One-third of the sugar in Americans’ diets come from soda and sweetened beverages, and ample research links soft drinks to obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. One study found children’s odds of becoming obese increased 60 percent for each additional 12-ounce soda. American children consume an estimated 7 trillion calories each year from soda.

In fact, research suggests that even when Coca-Cola touts diet soda as a healthy option, the company is still advertising a product that is linked to weight gain, heart attack, and stroke risks.

While Coca-Cola runs these ads, it will likely continue to wage well-funded battles against efforts to implement a soda tax, through the trade group American Beverage Association.

RNC Chair says to Rig it: The Next Presidential Election For the White Party (Republicans)

ThinkProgress

A little over a year ago, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett (R) proposed rigging the presidential election for Mitt Romney by allocating electoral votes based upon which candidate carried each individual congressional district, rather than upon who wins the state as a whole. Thanks in large part to Republican gerrymandering, if Corbett’s election-rigging plan had been in effect last November in the Republican-controlled states of Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin, Romney would have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by nearly four points.

In an interview with the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus did not simply endorse this election-rigging scheme, he indicated that it should be targeted towards consistently Democratic states where it is most likely to skew the presidential election to the GOP’s benefit:

Republicans are in a unique position to make headway with such a plan nationally because Wisconsin and other key states that have gone to the Democratic presidential candidate in recent elections are currently controlled by Republicans at the state level. The change would give Republicans a chance to claim some of those states’ electoral votes.

“I think it’s something that a lot of states that have been consistently blue that are fully controlled red ought to be looking at,” Priebus said of the plan to change how electoral votes are granted.

Such a system “gives more local control” to the states, he argued.

This would not be the GOP’s only effort to rig elections so that they win no matter what the will of the American people may be. Last November, Democratic House candidates won the national popular vote by nearly 1.4 million votes. Yet, thanks to Republican gerrymandering, they would need to win the popular vote by over seven points in order to take back the House.

Junk food linked to asthma and eczema in children ("Racism Still Exists" - it will Not End Until White Supremacy Ends)

BlacklistedNews -  In photo a billboard created by Racism Sill Exists. It is on display in NYC and [HERE

The high saturated fat levels in food such as burgers lower children's immune systems, it is believed.

A research project involving more than 50 countries found that teenagers who ate junk food three times a week or more were 39 per cent more likely to get severe asthma. Younger children were 27 per cent more at risk.

Both were also more prone to the eye condition rhinoconjunctivitis, according to The Sun newspaper

But just three weekly portions of fruit and vegetables could cut that risk by 14 per cent in the younger group and 11 per cent among the teens, it is believed.

Researchers from New Zealand's Auckland University looked at the diets of 181,000 youngsters aged six to seven and 319,000 aged 13-14. 

US Plans increased Pentagon role in Africa - Sending Troops to 35 African Nations

BlacklistedNews

The U.S. is sending troops to 35 African nations under the guise of fighting Al Qaeda and related terrorists.

Democracy Now notes:

U.S. Army teams will be deploying to as many as 35 African countries early next year for training programs and other operations as part of an increased Pentagon role in Africa. The move would see small teams of U.S. troops dispatched to countries with groups allegedly linked to al-Qaeda, such as Libya, Sudan, Algeria and Niger. The teams are from a U.S. brigade that has the capability to use drones for military operations in Africa if granted permission. The deployment could also potentially lay the groundwork for future U.S. military intervention in Africa.

NPR reports:

[A special American brigade] will be able to take part in nearly 100 separate training and military exercises next year, in nearly three dozen African countries

Glenn Ford writes:

The 2nd Brigade is scheduled to hold more than 100 military exercises in 35 countries,most of which have no al-Qaida presence. So, although there is no doubt that the U.S. will be deeply involved in the impending military operation in Mali, the 2nd Brigade’s deployment is a much larger assignment, aimed at making all of Africa a theater of U.S. military operations. The situation in Mali is simply a convenient, after-the-fact rationale for a long-planned expansion of the U.S. military footprint in Africa.