Scratching the Surface

Putting Together the Puzzle Pieces to Yield a Different Perspective on American Society

i. Acknowledgements

ii. Forward

iii. Introduction

I. Section One - Democracy; The good and the bad

• A Means to Create the “American Dream”

• Creating the Slave Society Out of the Working Class

• Maintaining the World Order

• Final Thoughts on Democracy

II. Section Two - Assault On The Working Class Poor

• The Immigrant American

• Women and Children

• Are the Working Poor “Middle-Class”?

III. Section Three - Failing to Conform

• Activists

• Criminals

• Homelessness

IV. Section Four – Connecting the Dots: Following the Trail

• The Future of America

• Know Your Enemy

© 2002 by Michael Lerma 2

Forward

What began as a ranting between two old friends about the ills of American society has

located foundation in the overt actions of the American government and American corporations.

A collection of evidence and examples to back up the conclusions drawn was a clear

understanding of what is dangerously close to appearing as a conspiracy although there is

reluctance to call it that. What is evident is that the end result has become too vile to live with.

After the picture has been drawn out, it becomes apparent that there are little to no answers

offered by these writings; the overwhelming task of solving all the problems of American society

are much too daunting for a couple of writers to figure out in a period of 3 months. Rather, these

writings are an awakening for its writers and readers. Personally, a voice of optimism resonates

with a notion that no human with compassion for their fellow human could allow such a

monopolistic beast to spread its tentacles throughout the world and just sit back with full

knowledge of the details discussed here. It is with that same optimism in mind that these writings

set out to gather humans to stop the beast before it is unstoppable. Alternatively, the masses

could seize power when the beast goes too far and fails to function any longer.

What you are reading is an outgrowth of personal frustration coupled with a great deal of

interest from the friends and family of its authors. It is hoped that such interest is more generally

applicable to the population at large. These writings will step away from affiliations with

political parties and activist groups opting instead for the more ideal strength in numbers. The

reasons for such a pulling back are mainly based in the reality of modern politics. The days of

non-representation of minority groups in politics and among the wealthy seem to be slowly but

surely dissipating. This may be evidenced by the 2002 Presidential election. During the

republican national convention we saw the wealthy Hispanic community emerge and band

together with other wealthy republicans in a show of solidarity and loyalty to their fortunes and

their agreement to exploit any resource necessary to achieve and maintain their affluence. In

spite of the can’t beat ‘em join ‘em attitude of some minority groups, it seems the cost to

minority culture and the idea of being human out weigh the benefit of sitting back and joining

the country club. For that reason, there is no need to join an underprivileged minority group if

success and wealth are the appetizers that an individual is striving for. Today there are few white

only establishments opting instead to become all-inclusive as long as the members are all of

western European culture and place their own ethnicity in the back seat; preferably the ethnic

minority culture is dissipated all together. For those that are opposed to the consequences of

corporate wealth building America, you will find within these pages the tie that binds us all.

For the authors of these writings there does remain a dream. That it will spread like wild fire

to those that are willing to help is a dream that only you, the reader, can give rise to. That it will

bring together a seemingly incoherent mob of activists and protestors under one umbrella. That it

will use all of our momentum to send a message to corporate America; that we are taking back

the power our ancestors let go of when they were hypnotized by material wealth. These writings

purposefully leave room for the experts in each field to use their knowledge to further our

common goal; promoting human kind above all else. These writings are meant to celebrate our

differences since without them we would be another monopolistic version of what corporate

America is today. They are meant to show that the differences are not adversarial but are tools

used by corporate America to divide us and keep us fighting amongst each other while the real

issues go unchallenged and, therefore, unchanged. There will be no attempts to water down the

masses separate ideologies. Any idea is a good idea if it places the human first and we all want to

be human again; we just have different visions on how to get there. You can call it Mecca,

karma, aztlan, utopia or any other word that is not mentioned but it all points to a unity, a peace

that has not been experienced in generations. Reading these pages may make one realize that

there is nothing here at odds with any group. Do not let the means by which we choose to

achieve the goal hinder our vision for that common goal.

Section one is the introduction and addresses the audience that the authors believe can help

the most but do not be persuaded to stop reading because you do not fit in the box. Any and all

help is needed to act on the situations laid out here. The second section is a reality check; a

lesson in real life democracy’s past for us to gain perspective on what it is to be democratic. The

third section is the application of ancient democracy to modern day democracy with startling

similarities that we are taught have little to no meaning via public education and media

invention. The fourth section addresses those of us that have seen a glimpse of what is behind the

curtain; the ugliness that is America provoking our movement to change and do away with such

ugliness. The final section is the summary of all the points discussed. It offers us a clue about

what to do with the information herein. It is hoped that these writings are the origin for a plan to

address the failures of the current power structure.

Not every thing that needs to be addressed will be addressed. Not every problem is here. It is

the big picture we should concern ourselves with as many of us will be experts in the smaller

pieces of this great mess. Mistakes are likely to emerge both typographically and factually and

we ask for forgiveness in advance. We ask that you keep in mind that these writings began on

January 4, 2002 and concluded just three months later on April 4. Bear with us by keeping in

mind that we do not pretend to be experts; we have a lot to learn from you the reader. We are not

above accepting criticism in our thought processes and look forward to working with you to fight

this tidal wave moving against us; we struggle with you to keep our heads above water as well.

In the end we are only saying what needs to be said. We are only speaking about what many

people already feel. We only add the examples and the statistics to back up our claims so that

right wing America will have a harder time casting us aside into the abyss of ranting fools that

want a free ride from taxpayers and European culture. The haves can cast aside the

environmentalists alone. They can pass off civil rights advocates as a group of bleeding heart

liberals that warrant no attention. Of course, they will tell us that those against the war on terror

are unpatriotic fools that want terrorists to bomb New York City again. In the end we need to do

what needs to be done; come together and gain an audience from mainstream America. With our

brief spotlight we will have a chance to show that solidarity and union against corporate America

can be a powerful entity. With that brief spotlight we will breed fear and draw more attention.

On the momentum of all of our collective effort we will bring down the powers that be. And it all

begins with one.

Holding as true the notion that one person can make a difference we ask that these writings

come with a challenge to you; a challenge that begs your awareness. Perhaps an assumption is

beneficial here; the assumption that humans will react in one of two ways to the mere awareness

of the contents of these writings. One reaction is that you will see a way for yourself to capitalize

on these occurrences in order to make yourself wealthy or famous or both. A second reaction

could be that you will slowly but surely want to become more aware. And then, when you are fed

up, you will take action. You will refuse to do what you are expected to do. And you will make a

difference in your own way. Once the awareness has evolved into action there is little to hinder

you from moving forward with a human first agenda. A challenge to be brave and be strong but

above all be intelligent and be open minded cease to be a challenge and instead become as

natural as breathing. So we ask that you bring your knowledge and be aware that there is more to

see and react to. With our awareness and foolish optimism we embark on a journey to quite

simply change the world.

Introduction

In the year 2002, a problem still exists in the world. Although many people can independently

think of examples of hardships or discriminant practices, as far as can be seen by the average

person, there is little to no collection of information on the various situations that affect

everyone. Why has no one stepped up to speak on the big picture? One theory that comes to

mind is that not everyone can see the big picture. Only those that are capable of living among the

haves and the have-nots are capable of seeing everything. Those that drift from one group to the

other may not realize what they have achieved. Instead they live life blinded by one group or the

other; and no one has comments on being in the middle. The median that can communicate with

both worlds often has a hard time reconciling their unique position in life; they are ghosts of

modern times.

A ghost is neither here nor there. They are in the middle looking at both worlds. Typically, as a

child, a ghost is unmistakably a have not. They suffer along side the have-nots through life and

triumph with them when a victory is at hand. The ghost drifts away in time and joins the haves.

Some go off to join the haves and never return. They try to bury their past and completely

become a have. Others stay behind and visit from time to time and rekindle the friendships they

have made in the have-not world. The have-nots look at the one who made it to the have world as

the successful of the have-nots. They seem to look at those that escape as a way out. The have

will see the have-nots in the street, at the bars or the clubs and they all seem to look at the have

differently. They are happy that they are not forgotten. They are proud of those that have made it

for challenging the world and getting more than most seem to get

away with. They can listen to the ghosts speak of changing the world and they all open up with

that little strand of hope they have left; the part that is still alive after all of the rest has died. The

ghosts are representative of the have-nots to the rest of the world. The ghosts tend to advocate

the best interests of them and their children in one way or another; the ghosts tend to have good

intentions especially in the beginning of their careers. All of these responsibilities lay within

their minds and hearts. They remain waiting for the right moment to come out; they lay hidden

for the moment as the ghosts approach the haves. Ghosts are the Trojan horse for the have-nots.

Ghosts will be allowed into the haves inner circles waiting for their moment to bring about

change; either in themselves or in the world. And whether or not they like it, ghosts are forever

connected with the have-nots cause no matter how hard they try to break that tie.

When a have-not gains an education, they learn how to be a have and are expected to become

a have, leaving behind the have-nots. No longer should the educated have-not drink beer with the

proletariat; instead they should go into the world and make a lot of money so they can become

consumers and start driving a BMW while living in the “better” upscale side of town. When the

educated have-nots become a consumer they gain acceptance by the haves. The haves see ghosts

as an individual in a capitalist world; never considering that ghosts have an emotional connection

to the have-nots. The haves do not think the have-nots are not deserving of wealth and prosperity

but they tend to see the have-nots as inferior unless they become a have. This has little to do with

racial or ethnic bias, however, and more to do with the notion that the have-nots do not work

hard enough or are irresponsible. These notions of have-not inferiority have foundation in

American society that tells us failure results from not working hard enough; never considering

local economies and health issues that take affect and result in harder times. What arises is a

group of good people being deceived by societal norms kept in place to make sure that profits

come first. The majority of haves are good people but have lived as Americans so long that

nothing makes sense to them unless you explain it in terms of money; how much is it worth?

What will it cost me the individual? Charity becomes a tax write off and serving thanksgiving

dinner to the needy is a way to dispose of the guilt of being successful. Many of the haves do not

deserve blame; they are the much like Germany’s general population who did not understand that

the Jews were being slaughtered right under their noses only that the Jew’s made a good

scapegoat for blaming. Germany of the 1940’s was a place that searched for an outcast and found

it in a long history of anti-Semitism. One can justify just about anything with the right kind of

propaganda. America has propagandized the haves into believing that everything is fine and that

if you are not prospering, it is because you are lazy and undeserving. Proof that the propaganda

is not working comes from the haves that are willing to see the damage.

There are also the haves that understand the human plight. They see the negative of the

extreme conditions that every American lives with. They also see the constant justification for

the extreme living in that it makes someone someplace a lot of money. And if that argument does

not work than the next argument is that the person making all the money is giving jobs to those

that need to scrape by. They understand that there are problems that need to be dealt with but

may suffer a bit from their image. To some extent they are ghosts too but they are not accepted

into the lower class because they look too rich or they cannot address the have-nots. The racial

and ethnic prejudice acts as a sword that cuts both ways; alienating those that ideologically are

the same but physically look different. This situation can be used to the advantage of the person

that wants information however.

Sometimes the haves can see ghosts and other times they go by unnoticed. They see ghosts as

a janitor or a manager at a fast food restaurant; ghosts have a façade that hides the truth behind

their intellectual capabilities. All the years of life in which college educated people had to be

white and male or had to be minorities that sell out play into this notion of the façade. When the

ghost is seen as a have-not they are treated like a have-not. It works the same in the other world

as well. The have-nots can talk to ghosts and relate to them in one way or another. They don’t

realize that ghosts are capable of fighting for the have-nots in the haves world. Ghosts get to hear

the true concerns of the have-nots. Ghosts are approachable; almost anonymous in the crowd.

Through their ability to interact, ghosts have an opportunity to learn so many things that affect

the population that never affect themselves. And if a ghost keeps their mouth shut they are often

never suspected of being a potential have.

Ghosts tend to have most things that a have acquires in life. Ghosts are educated and have

access to academic resources as well as contacts in the professional and academic world. Ghosts

can work for the have-nots by using their resources and are never questioned as a troublemaker

or a terrorist; yet. The ugly side is that ghosts hear the secret attitudes in the have world. Ghosts

see what matters most to the haves.

The authors of this book are ghosts. Because they are neither a have nor a have not and they

will not be rich. The authors are not going to drive the BMW but they are also not going to work

for the haves and make them rich so that the haves can afford one of their own. Ghosts are the

middle ground. Ghosts possess a view of both worlds but they are skewed. Ghosts see what

makes the haves tick and over the years colleges and universities have been educating ethnic

minorities in American society; the same class of society from which ghosts are primarily

created. In 1998 almost one-quarter of the University of California student body was made up of

minorities. At UCLA and Berkeley, Asians tend to outnumber whites; at Berkeley 38% of the

student body was Asian while 37% were white. 1

It is this group that are expected to learn

English language and European culture. Ghosts are asked to jump through the college application

hoops and please their admissions officers to gain the privilege of paying their tuition and

learning their ways. The college education of America teaches the potential ghosts to be

individualistic via grading on a curve and giving awards to sum cum laude of the class.

Sometimes the education of ghosts does succeed in the objective of the American education

system. Antonin Scalia is a prime example of a potential ghost that has forgotten his have-not

roots for the most part. But the teachers that teach ghosts learned from the haves with a heart.

They can help ghosts and the entire movement for humanism. Granted, some are unreachable but

most are the idealistic dreamers that we need to be otherwise they would not be teachers; they

would not believe in us. They would do what America tells them to do to be happy; make more

money. Somewhere in their soul a voice calls out for help that only a ghost can answer. A voice

not born of guilt but of obligation that ghosts owe to those that are struggling behind them; a

voice that the American system of education trains all of its pupils to ignore, bash and consider

not worthy of our help.

The need to unite a group of people that may not know they exist will be tough but it must be

done to bring about change. Ghosts have all been though similar situations and they have stories

of the impoverished that originate in many a hometown. There are also the ghosts who are better

off and still remember to give to the impoverished; who dare to see the working class poor as

more than work horses. Ghosts see the world a little differently and for that they are ostracized to

some extent. Ghosts, at times, are almost ashamed to express their ideas for fear that such ideas

would be stripped apart as nonsense. We should not feel that shame anymore if we call on each

other for support when one of us is in need. And now a dare to anyone who happens to be

reading this:

This collection of information is a dare to the reader. Take off your blinders that America has

persuaded you to put on; take them off for only a second. Look at the minorities that walk to the

bus stops or look at the children that play in the dirt if you can. If you cannot view America’s

working class in their natural habitat than look at them when they are working. Place yourselves

in their shoes for a second. Maybe you had a job like theirs a long time ago or maybe you work

along side them now as their manager or supervisor. Perhaps you are a member of the working

class; you already understand. For the rest, take a look and then go back to your normal ways. If

you can do this and not find a small spot in your heart that aches with pain than perhaps you are

what embodies the true American; but if you see the excess and the pain then maybe you have a

heart after all and are a victim of the American money machine as well.

It is hard to look at all of the different scenarios and create this one collection. It is so easy

for people to react in so many ways to each of the areas addressed here independently. Many

people react by aiming at solving these world problems individually but then they do not attempt

to understand other problems; they fail to see that they are all related and therefore the promotion

of all is like the promotion of one. They sometimes get caught up in factionalism causing stress

when this type of focus is somehow compared to other problems and it leads to a break down

among activists who, otherwise working together, could bring about much greater change if their

energies were not directed toward each other and instead aimed at the various problems humans

face. Some think that they are helping already. Employers who hire minorities to clean their

homes and wash their cars are somehow made to feel better that they have contributed to the well

being of the minority when in fact they have only contributed to the sustenance of that minority.

And there are some who are overwhelmed and think that they can do nothing to help: “So many

people, little old me?” The real challenge is to back up and look at the entire problem. The real

challenge is to come together and fight collectively. Once this occurs than nothing can stop a

leveling of the playing field.

Many people will see many problems. Many will suspect that these problems are all

interrelated. Many will try to figure out a precise manner in which the problems are related but

will fail perhaps due to lack of time or patience. Many others will have to contribute to problem

solving and soon perhaps the next generation of activists who see pieces of the puzzle will be

able to use these writings as ammunition to change the world for the better. Until then you can be

any one of the above type of people or you can do something about the many issues that are

being discussed in a way that will have a lasting effect. These writings will never contain some

sort of magic answer but perhaps it will inspire just one person to develop that magic answer and

change our world to what it should be.

Democracy – The good and the bad

Who sells democracy? This is not a willing endeavor that salespeople take on after reading

the classifieds. It is subtler than that. Americans sell democracy to each other in everyday life

without realizing it. The big campaign of patriotism in the post September 11 era is one example.

Americans told one another to stick together in the face of fear over what was to happen next. A

coming together of people in their time of need while clinging to a symbol for a sense of

belonging was the American way of giving to each other. It was America’s group hug that got

many through a tough time. Such notions of patriotism can be very valuable and powerful tools

to those that have an agenda. And while we would like to believe that this campaign of

patriotism is nothing more than a reaction by a group of good people that god has blessed (in

reaction to the evil of another group of people who have grown to hate the good guys) we should

look at this wave of mutual support with more scrutiny.

To evaluate the past teachings that have been given to those educated in American public

schools we should simply re-examine it. As with anything that we encounter in the world,

democracy has its strong points and its weaknesses. Overall, it appears that the democratic

system of government has done its job while not being perfect. My question is why is it that

American democracy is brought forth as being the best kind of government? Looking at

democracy objectively, one can point to many flaws that are reminiscent of other forms of

government such as dictatorships, monarchies and aristocracies. To further exemplify this point,

perhaps we should look back to democracy’s roots to see what exactly Americans have inherited.

Looking at democracy in the ancient world we see it has good components. The ancient Greek

society used democracy to maintain its order and to gain freedom from the constraints of the

priesthood. Greek citizens were to be well developed intellectually. This notion was justified on

the premise that democracy gave one the freedom to explore consciousness rather than be held to

the ideals adhered to prior to ancient Greek civilization; the idea of the individual was not a high

priority prior to Greek society’s hay day. Thus, Greek society boasted of a need to satisfy the

individual in terms of welfare and freedom. The above ideals are the good that we find in ancient

Greek democracy and are taught to college students in at least one community college in the

United States. According to one text in particular:

No other Western people had so strong a devotion to freedom or so firm a belief in the nobility of human achievement. The Greeks glorified humanity as the most important creation in the universe and refused to submit to the dictates of priests or despots. With only a limited cultural inheritance from the past upon which to build, the Greeks produced intellectual and artistic monuments that have served ever since as standards of achievement.

2

It seems that the rest of us may have missed our chance to live the good life. Reading on about

the great Greek society one begins to see that there are some differences between Greek and

American democracy buried in the back of the book. It is pointed out that the Greek citizen took

an active role in government unlike in America where government officials are employed full

time to devote all of their energies to the task of administration and maintenance of the law.

Another difference noted is the lack of female participation in the Greek democracy. The Greeks

believed that, “. . . biology made women weaker than men for the battlefield and relegated

women to the home for long periods of pregnancy delivery, and child-rearing.” 22 2

In totality,

the Greek society may have had very few weaknesses and much strength that was positively

embraced by American democracy.

Specifically, this book implies that Athens is the ideal upon which the United States built its

own democracy passing on the repressive city-state of Sparta. Athens was the city-state that used

democracy to benefit all of its members. It is from Athens that we can gain many insights as to

how a truly great society can function. In fact, it appears that America has a lot in common with

Athens. For one Athens was not the subject of a great number of conflicts among neighboring

peoples much like America. Also, the landscape of the area allowed for natural resources being

made available and in close proximity to the city-state also like the United States. Thirdly, a

good trade network was set up to keep the people in resources that were not available locally. All

in all the Athenian version of democracy was great which explains why the United States copied

it. But what about the bad part of ancient Greek democracy? As we will see, America borrowed

many of the bad characteristics of Greek democracy as well. At issue is how little attention these

negative characteristics are given especially in mainstream society and non-academic

information outlets.

In passing it is mentioned that an Aristocracy runs Athens. Also there is a mention of

economic duress that led to the detriment of farmers and other lower levels of society. There is

also mention of a potential for revolt by the poor farmers who were being forced into slave like

conditions due to their inability to pay back debts owed. A merchant named Solon was asked to

mediate and his solution was to relieve the poor of debt and give more power to the wealthy class

making money, not heredity, the key to ruling in Athens. What resulted was an emergence of a

disgruntled class of ousted aristocrats, a wealthy ruling class that set the rules and a poor class

that still remained poor and powerless. The end result is that roughly three-fourths of the

population of Athens was not allowed to take part in the governmental processes that navigated

the city. All of this information takes up very little space and instead favors pointing out the good

things. Why are the authors of this book showing us a skewed picture? Truth be told, the

American democracy of today is so much like Greek democracy that it is scary.

In spite of the negativity of Greek democracy, the chapter on Athens concludes, “So averse

the Athenians to being governed by a few men of wealth or reputation, so confident were they of

the political capacities of all their citizens, and so determined were they to ensure equality of

service, that they provided small payments when it became clear that poor people were declining

office because they could not afford the unpaid time.” 3

This conclusion ignores many of the

negative points briefly addressed in the body of the chapter. It is wonderful that the authors have

included much of the details needed to make a real assessment of Greek democracy but why

have they attempted to shadow the negative with glowing reviews of the positive?

Unfortunately this type of skewing is going on throughout the American system of education.

Only when we as students began to examine the change in ancient Greek government from a

democracy to a dictatorship do we begin to discuss the fall of the great empire. No one in

mainstream education suggests that Greek society failed from the beginning because all of the

great strides that were made by the ancient Greeks would not have been possible but for the

existence of a slave society within the Greek society. And when the textbooks fail to mention

Greek slaves they obviously fail to recognize their contributions to the Greek society as a whole.

Neglected or passed off as minor is the fact that Greek culture was built upon the slave

culture that supported everything in Greece. Without the slave society the ancient Greeks could

not have been able to go as far as they did with their thoughts. In fact, no democracy can

accomplish great strides in art and science without a slave class to support it. Some might argue

that it is too bad that American democracy has no slave class. Without it the ideals of Greek

society seem unreachable today. There is not a place for young men to sit and discuss the order

of the world and try to make sense of it. Today Americans are burdened with the cost of living;

rent, car payments, cellular phone, credit cards and more. Such is one perspective of American

society but there is another that is given little attention. Perhaps it is because America has a slave

society that makes all of this (the rent, car payments, cellular phone and credit cards) possible. It

is the American education system that makes it seem as if there is no slave society so that such a

class of people are not aware that they are slaves. The proletariat of America and their

camouflage placed over them by the American educational system need to be informed that they

are the slaves.

Now that you see the template upon which America and all of the western world base it

democratic values, a challenge presents itself to you to look at how the American democracy is

still very much the same as that of its ancestor.

A Means to Create the “American Dream”

Democracy was to be a government by the people and for the people. In America it began

and seems to still be a government by white males and for white males. It is democracy as a

hybrid that yearns to exist today. Modern democracy has developed into a set of ideals that

attempts to do away with all the evils of the world or at least attempts to make those evils more

humanitarian if possible. In the post civil rights movement America we have inherited, we see

that women can vote as well as blacks. We have learned to question the actions of the

government and sometimes we are called patriotic for it while other times we are called

terrorists. In any case, the democracy of antiquity has evolved. It is not a great leap to deduce

that the evolution will continue; perhaps that evolution can be persuaded toward idealism rather

than special interest. Nonetheless, a sense of apprehension remains concerning the have-nots

being tossed a bone to make them content with the order of the world.

Those that have not a say in the government qualify as a have-not. For many, they are

considered the “middle-class”. The “middle-class” is a blob of persons grouped together

although, sociologically, there is criteria for further classification. Specifically, the have-nots are

the working class poor; what we may think of when we hear the term “blue-collar”. For

continuity, they will be referred to as the have-nots.

Those who think they do have a say but do not are the have-nots and do not even realize it.

Historically the have-nots were those in shackles and enslaved by Americans. In the 1860’s it

became illegal to own a human being and these former slaves were set free to be the next

generation of have-nots. Joining the former slaves as have-nots are the working class

immigrants. From generation to generation the immigrant joined the new born children of the

last wave of immigrants to become the have-nots as their parents died. Meanwhile the haves

control the government and no one will ask why. The have-nots remain stagnate, generally, and

no one will ask why. Most importantly no one will volunteer an answer to these questions posed

here. Instead of putting these concerns to rest perhaps a more provocative question should be

posed; did slavery ever really cease to exist?

Creating the Slave Society Out of the Working Class

Greek society, the epitome of great society, had a slave class. Democracy, with the ugliness

included, came to dominate American culture as it emerged in the 17th

century. As the civil war

ended, slavery was abolished but replaced by a poor working class society. The lines between

slave or poor working class can be unrecognizable. It seems that today the very citizens that are

free and possessing unalienable rights are the very people that make up the modern American

slave system.

History tells us of a slave system that has evolved but not died. Sure slavery is abolished and

you have to pay everyone a wage but this did not start out as a living wage. During the industrial

revolution the United States was demonizing the immigrant but at the same time appealing to

them with the promise of dreams coming true; American dreams. No one mentioned to the

immigrant that the American dream that was being sold to them was the company owner’s

dream; one of wealth beyond his wildest dreams. (Women were not allowed to be a part of the

dream at this point.) One part of the dream was the need for cheap labor and the immigrant could

fit the bill nicely. The industrial revolution was a time of import; the working class poor were

imported fresh from the armpits of European society. They smelled, they looked and sounded

different than the rest of America and they wanted a piece of the American pie. American

industry saw the immigrant working class poor as a workhorse that could be easily bought and

sold at the whim of the wealthy business owners and they were.

Men like Andrew Carnegie and Leland Stanford built their fortunes on the backs of a slave

society. But they were not shackled in the body; instead they were shackled in the mind.

Knowing that the supply of workers was endless and the government was not yet in the business

of regulating labor practices, it was common for a working stiff to be seen as nothing more than

a piece of equipment. If the equipment broke than you replace it. Sure you could repair it but it

was cheaper just to bring in a new one since they came so cheap and so often. As a result of this

mind set the working class poor were exploited beyond belief.

The life of an immigrant to a newly industrializing American city is often a dreary

experience. Since the records of the peasantry can often be lost or non-existent, as well as

inaccurate, the stories are orally passed from generation to generation. Stories of great

grandfather’s struggles as a young man in America are not uncommon among family members.

These tails are based in reality, to some extent, since the memory and oral retelling are prone to

human frailty such as embellishment and forgetfulness. With these qualifications set in our

minds let us explore a tail of fiction based in reality.

The setting was dark and dreary. The horizon was usually vaguely visible due to the smoke

stacks that emitted soot. The soot would fall on the working town like drizzle and cover

everything that was green. The men were never really clean since they would take baths and

walk to work to be rained on with the pollution that came from their employer. To these men it

was the sweet sight of money that rained on them as they walked to work. Money would rain

upon them and dirty their clothes. Money would get in their hair and they would taste it as they

ate their homemade lunches during their break. They felt it in their aching pains that they took

home with them after each shift.

Once at work, the day began and did not stop for 12 hours. On any given day a man would

die from being badly burned by the molten hot substances used to manufacture steel. The men

killed would be taken away by ambulance while the rest would continue their work as if nothing

happened since stopping work might jeopardize their employment. Barring being maimed or

killed, the worker would finish the shift and walk to their homes. Usually the homes were rooms

in a boarding house that was served by a woman. The women would rent out the rooms and

provide meals for the working men in the morning and in the evening. After dinner the men

would usually go right to sleep and wake up just in time to do this all over again. The men would

do this for seven days. On the eighth day it was customary for the men to go in at their usual time

but they would not leave for 24 hours. When they got home in the morning they would eat

breakfast and go to sleep. They then would get up in the evening and return to work for another

shift. At the eighth day they would work for another 24 hours to return them back to a day shift.

That was the continued cycle of work. 4

We all know of stories such as the above and how as time went on the United States would

begin to lighten up on the migrant working class. Wages got better and hours were reduced to

increase safety and eventually children were no longer allowed to work. But the improvement of

the day-to-day life of the working class seems to be moving toward a gradual transition from the

shackling of the body to the shackling of the mind.

The attack on the immigrant psyche manifests itself via accusations of not being quite

American enough and these notions come up when the need for more slaves dries up. There are a

number of examples of this mind set such as the Chinese exclusion act; a congressional reaction

to too many railroad workers taking away work from those more American and, thus, more

deserving. Also, the great depression saw the deportation of anyone who looked Latino in

California in an effort to keep these less than American people from taking work away from

those that were more American. These ideas of when and how migrants are in good favor with

American society are best described by the following correlation between immigrant treatment

and minority treatment by the majority:

The deteriorating treatment and scapegoating of undocumented persons is vitally linked to the deteriorating treatment and scapegoating of persons of color, minorities, and women. One of the most powerful insights into the treatment of persons of color in the

United States is Derrick Bell’s theory of interest-convergence. Briefly stated, the theory holds that the treatment of African Americans, and by extension other peoples of color, will improve only when it is in the interest of the white majority.

4

Interest-convergence theory can best be exemplified by applying it to the real world in order to

make it clear that there is a situation in which a group of people are being singled out by another

to become a working class group. And while the quote above does address ethnic differences as

the basis of discrimination, such a discussion does not serve the purpose of these writings and,

therefore, will not be analyzed; the authors yield that argument to others more aptly qualified.

What emerges is a slave-in-the-mind society via physical retention of migrants and their children

in their place in American society and conditioning of the mind of those in that place in

American society to foster a belief that they are not part of a class system but are part of a

democracy. That being said, the haves tend to highlight only those portions of democracy that

are appealing to the working class. A member of the slave class does not realize that they belong

to it. Instead they will serve the democracy obediently while the majority are free to take part in

the management of the democracy; the majority are free to profit from the democracy.

Mainstream America lays out how to become more American both implicitly and explicitly.

Specifically for minorities to be treated better two things must occur; first the minority group

must assimilate and be American and second the minority group must be prosperous in their

position in America; that is to say produce a profit for those in American society. (Of course

these two items being satisfied are never a safeguard as is exemplified by the discriminant

actions of some people against Americans of middle-eastern decent in the post September 11

era.) Sure no one minds if the migrant does achieve some form of escalation in American

society; they can become shopkeepers or head multi-million dollar corporations. But for the

majority of those who assimilate, they are discussed as cogs on a gear in a money making

machine. And when the money making machine needs more gears it knows exactly where to get

them; the third world.

It is in times of American economic need for labor that the floodgates for immigration are

opened. This was the case after 1865 in America when the end of slavery and the Civil War

finally came. When America entered what historians call the reconstruction phase in history, the

call to immigrants to do the dirty work was heeded by the many who came to America looking

for a better life. The industrial corporations took part in an advertising campaign to secure its

new slave society by sending officials to Europe and Asia to set up recruitment camps; perhaps

what we in modern times would call a job fair. And the results are reflected in the numbers; “As

of 1900, the major source of new labor for expanding industries was southern and eastern

European immigrants. Indeed, between 1881 and 1920 the majority of the twenty-one million

immigrants emigrated from southern and eastern Europe.” 32 5

With new class of working poor ready for anything you dished out to them, many Americans

began to wonder what would happen if these new Americans should think to assert their rights.

What resulted was a backlash against immigrants to make sure that they stay in their place;

second class slave citizens. And when the need for labor drops again, there have been two

arguments that come up in American history to justify keeping the proletariat at a lower level

than the rest. Some argued racial inferiority of non-white anglos and others argued biological

inferiority of the potential immigrants. On a more practical level the majority also argues that the

immigrants will take work away from them. We have heard these arguments before and the

reason they are brought up here is to show the dance that takes place between the want for a

slave labor class that is large enough to sustain American prosperity but not too big as to take the

control of that American prosperity from the hands of those that currently hold it. (These

arguments appeal to the “middle-class” who feel threatened by too many immigrants.) In order

for immigrants to be made more docile, the “middle-class” tends to play on the fears of the

immigrant.

The brainwashing of new immigrants takes its toll on many making it unlikely that they will

cause any trouble. Couple this with the fact that many immigrants would face a death sentence in

their country of origin for making any kind of political waves. It is a mind game that America

plays on the immigrants. That is not to say that all immigrants are discouraged from becoming

more than a worker but it is known that any kind of immigrant leader who takes a stand against

the establishment is likely to pay the cost of doing battle with the establishment. In the post

September 11 era, these themes have returned from their grave to exact its revenge against one

person. The issue in dispute is the ideology of one immigrant and the possible effect it could

have on a group of people that, if giving a chance, could foster a major revolt against the status

quo but would probably only give more self esteem to members of an ethnic group. The haves do

not seem to have a problem with the latter but it is obvious that they fear the former.

The recent developments involving terrorist groups and the attack on the World Trade Center

in 2001 have given many who look culpable a reason to be fearful. But it is not those that can be

proven to have taken part in the terrorist attacks that are being attacked but rather those who

share physical characteristics with those that have taken part in the attacks. Hard working

Americans who have ethnic ties to the Middle East have been harassed, threatened with death

and in some cases killed in the post September 11 era. It seems that any American who happens

to be Middle Eastern are, and always have been, second-class citizens but it is only now that

such a notion materializes. Only in times of American vulnerability does the ethnic closet get

cleaned out. One second class citizen has attempted to speak and stay true to his ideals. And

while many people may not agree with his ideals it does not excuse the haves from sanctioning

this American for exercising his right to free speech.

Sami Al-Arian is a United States Citizen and teaches computer science at the University of

South Florida (USF). Al-Arian is also a Palestinian whose views are currently in conflict with

American ideals. Such a combination of physical characteristics, intellect and a platform upon

which to speak has made Al-Arian a target of the American media. By focusing on his ties to the

Middle East, the American media have made Al-Arian look like a terrorist while offering

circumstantial evidence that he is one. It is sad to state that Al-Arian may have been better off if

he had kept his mouth shut and went along with the anti Middle East sentiment that was

sweeping the nation when he was focused upon. On the other hand, it is the silent that are

enslaved and the vocal that stand up and fight who end up freer in the mind than any of us will

ever be.

On September 26, 2001, Al-Arian appeared on “The O’Reilly Factor” and answered to

accusations that he was using USF to aid terrorist groups and that he himself was a terrorist.

Specifically, Al-Arian was asked about his ties to Ramadan Abdullah Shallah. It was Shallah

who worked with Al-Arian at USF as a visiting professor in the past and it is Shallah who is now

the Palestinian leader of the Islamic Jihad. 6

What the media was referring to was an incident in

which Shallah was brought in as part of an effort by Al-Arian to bring together intellectuals from

the Middle East to the west so that cultural barriers could be broken down and tolerance, not

violence, would be fostered between the two groups. It is now being widely publicized that these

intellectuals are linked to terrorist activities along with Al-Arian himself. The evidence to

support these conclusions are laughable.

Debbie Schlussel has reported that Al-Arian is the front man in America for the Palestinian

Islamic Jihad. Schlussel apparently arrived at her conclusion via her interpretation of Al-Arain’s

effort to bring in Middle Eastern intellectuals to teach at USF. Schlussel calls these efforts

bringing terrorists into the United States. Let us assume for a moment that Al-Arian was bringing

terrorists into the United States for the purpose of sharing their ideas and their struggles with

American students. Also assuming that Al-Arian is willing to take responsibility for any violent

activities that the intellectuals take part in, there really is no harm in introducing their ideas into

the American system of education. It is a totally different matter if the sole purpose or if even

one of many of the purposes was to create havoc in the United States and Al-Arian had a

different agenda entirely. Nonetheless the baseless accusations continued to come in.

Also offered as evidence of Al-Arian’s guilt is a letter he wrote in 1995. The letter was

addressed to potential contributors to a “humanitarian” organization called Hamas. Only this

portion of the letter was read on the air during his appearance on September 26:

The movement’s financial situation is very difficult and it cannot fulfill its responsibilities toward its martyrs and prisoners . . . the link with the brothers in Hamas is very good and making steady progress. I call upon you to try to extend true support to the jihad effort in Palestine so that operations such as these can continue.

7

Unfortunately for Al-Arian, the above citing is enough to condemn him in the court of

American opinion. The result of the above links has caused him to be the subject of death threats.

Also USF president Judy Genshaft became worried that Al-Arian’s statements were causing too

much disruption on the campus and moved to fire him a few days after his appearance with

O’Reilly. Genshaft was concerned that Al-Arian was not distancing himself from USF when

discussing his opinion on the United States Policy involving the Middle East. In the end we will

see how far American society is willing to go in condemning him. But rather than risk ratings,

the media does not want to exercise some tolerance in an effort to allow all of the information to

come to the surface and a judgment be made based on all the facts available. Al-Arian will not

have such luck in the coming weeks. This hot potato will be eclipsed by another scandal in the

near future and all the following statements will end up on a back page of a newspaper. Perhaps

a look at evidence that makes his guilt fade into uncertainty at the very least should be examined

here.

As mentioned before, Al-Arian’s efforts to bring terrorists to America are nothing more than

an attempt to aid tolerance between the Middle East and the west. And in reference to the letter, a

report entitled “Near Eastern Groups and State Sponsors, 2001” explains that while the Hamas is

considered a group that takes part in many terrorist activities via links, it goes on to state that

those who donate to Hamas, “. . . appear to believe that their contributions go to charitable

activities for poor Palestinians served by Hamas’ social services network and are not being used

for terrorism”. 8

While it would be futile to argue that the above evidence totally exonerates Al-

Arian, it would also be hard to argue that the preceding evidence against him establish

conclusively that he is a terrorist. The bigger issue, however, is whether or not Al-Arian is just an

example to the rest of the Middle Eastern people with any position of power to get in line with

American thinking or pay the consequences.

It may appear that Al-Arian is a hero for those like ourselves who don’t quite fit into the

mainstream and are comfortable with that. We do not have to agree with his politics but we

would be best served by giving him support in his exercise of his right to free speech. In

response to USF’s attempt to fire him, Al-Arian has stated:

“I believe our fight is for a principle before it is for a job or a person. I feel that the American values that I got to practice and respect have been betrayed. That is not just a

sense of personal betrayal but more of a national betrayal. I’m very confident these

values will be restored. 9

Al-Arian is perceived as not being an American. He remains demonized as wishing to

circumvent the democracy he has come to enjoy and contribute to since 1975. The above

statements are likely to be ignored by mainstream media since there is no controversy in fighting

for a right. Perhaps such a willingness to ignore Al-Arian at his purest moment is serving the best

interest of the powers that be. Perhaps it is best that he stay demonized and fade into the minds of

American public opinion. Instead the mainstream media focuses on his ethnicity and his apparent

ties to terrorism. In using the American system of justice to defend himself many will likely be

angered about the invocation of his rights. These people must be forgetting that he is an

American or maybe he is not American enough. Others are brave enough to remember that he is

allowed to speak his mind without retribution and have come to his aid since this controversy

began.

On January 10, 2002, the USF teachers union voted to fully support Al-Arian against the

school concerning his firing reasoning that he is an American with rights to speak his opinion

without retribution from the status quo. Ray Weatherford, president of the union, stated that the

union believes USF did the wrong thing. He goes on to iterate that firing a tenured professor is

unjust because that professor somehow failed to insert a disclaimer before stating his or her

opinion. (This statement is in reference to Genshaft’s assertion that Al-Arian did not distance

himself from USF properly.) Also, the union has decided that when Al-Arian does challenge his

termination, he will be supported financially in pursuance of his rights. And it appears that Al-

Arian will need that support.

Al-Arian, in conjunction with The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a free

speech advocacy group, have made contact with Jonathan L. Katz, an attorney specializing in

first amendment rights. Katz initial reaction was that the case is a litigator’s dream. 10

All in all it

appears that Al-Arian is going to be a headache for Americans that think he should go away

quietly. And if he does go away quietly to the back pages of the major newspapers then we will

know that he has caused too much trouble. Expect the government and the media to forget the

issue or to bury the issue in order to draw the mainstream attention away from this nasty sore. So

why attack Al-Arian?

We have discussed why Americans attack those less American and the reasons stem from

fear and discomfort. In times of high confidence Al-Arian would not be a problem and instead

would be an American fighting for his rights as an American. Even more likely is that his

opinions and his ties to the Middle East would not be an issue at all. In the post September 11

era, regrettably, fear and discomfort make him culpable and that is enough to squash him without

evidence that points to his criminal behavior, if any. The reasons to attack people like Al-Arian

could widely vary but three come to mind now. First, in attacking and defeating Al-Arian, the

United States looks good to the gung-ho Americans that think America is white and male.

Keeping this image in the press will appeal to the majority. Secondly, defeating Al-Arian would

also make him look weak and restore that confidence that America so badly needs. This

argument has two reactions; the first is that it makes the bully feel like a bully again and it may

deter others who wish to stand up for their rights to back down in order to stay out of trouble.

Deterring others from seeking to enforce their rights when they are infringed nicely leads into a

third reason for America to attack Al-Arian. In keeping the troublemakers out of the limelight it

is a step to create the image that there is a streamline in American consensus. All of these

reasons lead to a less nervous America free of troublemakers like Al-Arian.

Maintaining the World Order

With Charles Sepulveda

In the past the American government has stated in would support a laissez faire system of

economy. America’s track record, however, indicates that this is not the case. On March 5, 2002

President Bush announced plans to use protective tariffs in favor of America’s steel industry that

have been experiencing a hard time competing against imported steel and foreign tariffs.

Opponents of the tariff are quick to point out that Bush is backing down from a stance to

promote free trade. Jon Jenson, chairman of the Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition, a

Washington-based manufacturers group, has the following opinion: “The tariffs and quotas

constitute a new tax on American manufactured products.” 11

Whatever ones stance is on the

above news, it is clear that the United States does not support free trade and probably will not

unless it serves the interest of the United States. Of greater priority is America’s agenda to

maintain its global supremacy over all other nations. Let us focus on some examples of the use of

American influence to maintain its supremacy as a world power. Then we will look at the

consequences of that maintenance as it relates to the rest of the world in ways that you may be

aware of or in ways that you may not have thought of. The breadth of the consequences of

maintaining such dominance is the real focus here. It is scary to take in the big picture in one

jump but the reader is dared to go on and hopefully connect what will be discovered with what

you already know.

In the contemporary world, national identity means nothing to corporations. They have

factories in several countries, and buy pieces and parts that are produced in numerous localities.

The corporations move to places where there are low levels of government restrictions on labor

practices and less environmental protective legislation. This has a profound effect on both the

workers and the environment. But it seems that this is the accepted consequence that

corporations and the general public are comfortable with. Since it is the corporations that have

begun the ball rolling in the first place with the sanction of the America government, it makes it

appear that the American government is just another corporation designed to make money; not

govern a nation in the best interest of its citizens. The corporations and the American

government are aligned together in a way that makes life in America much better than in any

other country in the world. The mainstream media, run by corporations, will depict America to

its citizens and to the world in this manner while highlighting the good that is spread throughout

the world at the hands of American humanitarian efforts; all done by placing real life slightly out

of focus. The result is that Americans either do not know or do not care that corporations really

run this country. On the other hand, if corporations run the country it is in the best interest of the

minority who have wealth and power to steer corporations toward the direction of their own

interest, mainly their wallets. To gain perspective on this idea we should look back to when

America was emerging as a global power.

The last time that America was truly destitute was during the great depression of the 1930’s.

During this time America was struck by banking failures, crop prices falling and natural disaster

such as the dust bowl. It was the manufacturing boom of the 1940’s that ended the depression as

Americans returned to work in an effort to supply the world with the weapons and supplies

needed to sustain a second world war. This economic boom was the beginning of a new era for

the United States as it became a world power rivaling only Russia until 1992. Such an emergence

was no accident however. Rather, America recognized its opportunity to gain the ability to be a

world power and seized it. Other significant nations were weak from the war and American

government officials chose to construct a plan to keep the power in America’s hands.

Given the situation that America found itself in after World War II, it was the idea of the

American government to work in its own interest to foster a power shift in their favor. Some

scholars have held the idea that American government officials, “. . . are the masters of the

private economy, mainly huge corporations that control much of the international economy and

have the means to dominate policy formation as well as the structuring of thought and opinion.”

12 It is out of this presumption that American government begins to use the corporation to

maintain the shift in power that took place after World War II. By using the money making

machines, corporations, to keep making money at home and abroad, the American supremacy is

maintained. But how do Americans convince the rest of the world that it is in their best interest

to allow the corporations to dominate? By using American influence to dominate the policy

formation of the world. If Americans can develop the rules in relation to the rest of the world

than Americans can be the major players in their own game. The bottom line is that since the

collapse of the former Soviet Union, America now brings the ball to the court and no one else

has a ball to play with. If you want to play the game you have to follow the rules that America

sets or you will not play at all.

That the rules are skewed in Americas favor requires little effort to deduce. The real concern

should be vested in how skewed the big picture really is. Americans constantly come up with

new ideas that have goals. These ideas are than very nicely packaged and presented to a group

that can help to get the idea moving. Once a group that is needed for the idea to move forward is

secured, there are usually some side effects that can be negative and they may directly affect the

group that helps get the idea going. In the end, if the idea is bad than the idea is discontinued.

But if the idea yields some benefit than the idea is continued. Depending on various

circumstances, the idea that brings benefits may be escalated to bring in more benefits. In the end

everyone benefits right?

In reality there is a primary beneficiary; America. If any other benefits happen to befall the

others involved in the ideas well great. If not well that is fine too. “The bad ideas may not serve

the expressed goals, but they typically turn out to be very good ideas for their principle

architects”. 13

Going further, it is even more accurate to say that the plans of the American

government are beneficial to only the American government and detrimental to others involved.

Let us look at The North American Free Trade Agreement for an example of a bad idea that

benefits the principle architect of that bad idea.

In January 1994, Canada, the United States and Mexico launched the North American Free

Trade Agreement (NAFTA). This formed the world's largest free trade area. The architects

designed it to increase trade and investment among the three countries. NAFTA contains a

schedule for tariff elimination and reduction of non-tariff barriers, as well as provisions on the

conduct of business in the free trade area. These include rules that affect investment, services,

intellectual property, competition and the temporary entry of business people.

In 1992, as NAFTA was being written, Mexico was in the middle of privatizing its state-run

enterprises. The Mexican government under President Salinas was turning a socialized economy

into an apt arena for capitalism via privatization. In America the trade agreement should have

been a major issue in the U.S. presidential campaign. But little was said other than it was good

for both Mexico and America and all three major candidates were in favor. Ross Perot’s opinion

on the matter is as follows:

The failure of Soviet communism has put an end to Leninist imitators in the American hemisphere. Castro is the sole holdout in this part of the world. We must continue to isolate Castro. Elsewhere in Latin America we must continue to encourage the transition

to market capitalism. We are profiting from the democratization and privatization of Latin economies. This is largely because we are the leading producer of goods used to

build nations, like telephone switches, trucks and aircraft. 14

He goes on to concede that Mexico’s workforce is underpaid and their environmental and

pollution regulations are laxly enforced. Bill Clinton went on to sign NAFTA in 1994 with these

problems still at issue. A major debate did brew within America over the possibility of

Americans losing jobs to cheaper labor in Mexico. Other problems were diverted from debate

such as migration, population growth, poverty, and drug trafficking, which have become realities

throughout the U.S. – Mexico borderlands.

Mexico and the United States economies were linked before NAFTA and have become

symbiotic since with the influx of corporations working on both sides of the border. NAFTA

expands trade opportunities, increases competition and improves the ability for corporations to

utilize local economies. All of these ideals were crafted by the writers of NAFTA and mainly

were written in favor of the United States. That is the reason that NAFTA was not an issue

during the 1992 election. All three of the major candidates agreed that America should remain

the superpower that it is at the cost of the third world. NAFTA need not be explained to the

American public, it need only be explained to the Mexican government. NAFTA is the product

of American engineering and is sold to Mexico as a design that will make all involved better off.

Already we should be suspect since Americans did craft the agreement. The results are now

beginning to indicate how harmful NAFTA really is to Mexico.

One study of the effects of NAFTA’s Chapter VII, discussing the agriculture of all three

nations, indicates that the benefits are not being found on Mexican soil. Particularly, NAFTA

was to allow Canada and the United States access to products originating in Mexico and in

exchange Mexico would open its economy to corn grown in the United States. 15

At the risk of

oversimplifying the situation, in Canada and the United States, labor-intensive products cost

more to produce because in these two nations a minimum wage is legally enforced thereby

causing the cost of products to increase. Conversely, Mexican wages are not very high, making

the cost to produce anything involving labor to drop. It is in the best interest of the United States

and Canada to be able to purchase labor-intensive products from Mexican companies to keep

costs down: The Mexican proletariat can be exploited to allow Americans and Canadians the

ability to buy nice clothes at a cheaper price than they would pay if the same clothes were

produced in their own country. So what does Mexico get out of this?

Although the wages of Mexicans are cheaper than that of Americans and Canadians, the

wage was to be a living wage so that the Mexicans would not starve to death. Also, if more

Mexicans were put to work, than employment rates overall would be lowered and more Mexican

laborers would have work to feed their families. The obvious red flag that pops up is the

sweatshop issue while the benefits to the United States are more apparent.

In return for allowing Mexico into the American/Canadian market the American corn market

was to be opened up to the Mexican market. Allowing the American corn market to cross into

Mexico was in the best interest of the United States; giving the American corn belt more

customers and aiding the United States farming industry. The Mexican benefit to this agreement

already seems to be ignoring labor issues while the American advantage to the deal is clearly a

benefit. It seems strange that there appears to be no threat of negative consequences of the

United States. As for Mexico, there does exist the possibility of a terrible detriment to their corn

industry.

The Mexican corn industry is a major part of its country’s gross domestic product. At the

time of the negotiations of NAFTA, Mexico’s corn industry used up 60% of all the land under

cultivation making it the most important crop that was included in NAFTA from the perspective

of Mexico because it is the single most important commodity in the Mexican economy. The

Mexican corn industry employs 8% of the total Mexican population and 40% of all Mexicans

working in the agriculture industry. These numbers account for a total of 3 million people.

Stating that allowing the American corn industry to compete with the Mexican corn industry was

going to affect a major sector of its economy is an understatement. How it takes effect only

makes the risk look all the more dangerous.

Firstly, the supply of corn would increase in Mexico and this would bring the overall price of

corn down. Secondly, the influx of American corn in Mexico would cause Mexican farmers to

cut back on production since it would be less profitable for these farmers to continue to produce

a crop that would bring in less money. The idea was that the farmers would instead devote more

cultivated land to other crops. Nonetheless, opponents of NAFTA have argued that this particular

section of the agreement is not providing the benefits that American and Canadian officials

stated it would and there are even more detrimental consequences that have taken place since the

implementation of NAFTA. 16

According to Dr. Alejandro Nadal of El Colegio de Mexico, the liberalization of the corn

market in Mexico is not bringing human welfare or environmental and social benefits. It was

arguments for such improvement in these areas that prompted many third world countries with

rural economies, including Mexico, to get on board for a liberalization of their markets. Instead,

statistics are painting a picture of failure for these areas of improvement. As expected, prices of

corn in Mexico dropped sharply after American corn was introduced into the market but

Mexican farmers are maintaining their past production levels and areas dedicated to the

cultivation of corn are increasing. Meanwhile the overall yields of corn producing lands are

decreasing. The obvious deviations from what the United States intended are also analyzed by

Nadal.

Nadal offers explanation for maintaining production level and increased usage of land for

corn by citing an increase in the amount of corn being consumed by cattle. Since there exists no

profit in diversifying crop production, the motivation for such diversity is lacking. Another

problem working against diversity is the make up of corn producers. Since many of the farmers

are not the profit producing large scale outfits that have the ability to venture into new crop

production and modern farming techniques, these smaller outfits have been forced out of

business causing the former agricultural workers to migrate to cities in search of employment in

Mexico and abroad. With these migrations goes not only the small farms but something that may

be even more valuable; knowledge.

For 5000 years corn has been grown on soil that today is known as Mexico. The result is that

corn has diversified into forty-one recognized strains of species that are capable of withstanding

the various types of climate changes that take place in Mexico. Along with this amount of

diversity are the people of Mexico who have grown corn for generations and passed information

about the techniques to grow corn from ancestor to descendant. The people who have for

generations grown corn for subsistence and later for surplus and resale to consumer markets

inherited this intimate knowledge of what type of corn to plant based on what type of weather is

present during the planting season. As these farmers are displaced by the influx of American

corn, they take with them the generations of knowledge that was handed down from their

ancestors. It is likely that the knowledge lost to the migration process would serve the world

population of the twenty-first century as it grows to record numbers. There are other more

practical consequences that affect the population more immediately however.

The expected drop in prices for consumers of corn-based products have failed to materialize.

This is due to “market imperfections and segmentation”. 17

Instead, Napal has documented the

price of tortillas rising since the implementation of the market liberalization. Further, it is

Napal’s opinion that the NAFTA architects did not use in depth analysis of the effects that such a

plan would have on the Mexican corn industry. Instead, many of the predicted outcomes of the

agreement are based on rough estimates and general models as well as unsound assumptions. For

example, the pre-NAFTA negotiators based their findings on an assumption that only the market

price of corn would alter the behavior of corn producers in Mexico; failing to recognize that

market pricing for alternate crops, interest rates and wage costs would also affect their behavior.

The reason for the lack of care given to predicting the long-term effects of the NAFTA plan is

being mainly attributed to a theoretical bias in favor of trade liberalization. But what should be

given a closer look is the benefit that the United States has been able to achieve by the NAFTA

agriculture agreement with Mexico.

The drafters of NAFTA try to include benefits for all involved in the agreement. Granted,

there are some benefits that Mexico has derived from the agreement. For example, there has been

income growth in Mexico since NAFTA was implemented. Of the 98 million Mexican citizens

about 30 million are classified as middle to upper class. Unfortunately these statistics assumes

some factors to be present. First it compares two cultural lifestyles without consideration of the

differences. It is assuming that farmers who were considered lower class wanted to move to the

industrialized cities to become middle class. It also assumes that the cost of living on a farm is

equal to that of a city. It also seems to make positive what in fact is negative. The farmers who

do end up moving to a city and earning more money do so because they can no longer subsist on

farming. As I mentioned before, the real problem with the new industrialization of the corn

industry is that many of the smaller farmers had to give up farming in order to survive. But the

benefit from the perspective of the United States is that Mexico has become the fourth largest

U.S. export market for farm products, which translates into about $5 billion worth of product

sold by the United States. The American bottom line is $5 billion. The Mexican bottom line is

having to pay $5 billion with the new earnings that they make in the city. Here the positive

consequence for Mexico is questionable but there exists little room for arguing that American

benefits are negative as well.

Another Mexican benefit is that there has been a development of a Maquiladora system in

Mexican cities. American and Canadian parts are sent to Mexico for assembly in Mexican

factories where labor is cheap and environmental protection laws are not enforced, minimal or

non-existent. The Mexicans benefit because American factories are putting them to work which

accounts for the increase in the income of Mexicans in recent years. But is this really a benefit

for Mexicans? Perhaps the extra money earned at the factories is spent on the extra costs of

living in the city. Also American companies are exploiting the labor of Mexico so that the

products can be made more cheaply and marketed more easily in America. These factories

employ 1.2 million Mexicans in 3,521 plants and account for 40 percent of all exports leaving

Mexico. More interesting is the number of factories dedicated to textiles. About 30 percent are in

the business of producing some kind of linens or garments. These factories make up a significant

portion of the consumers for American cotton, yarn and textiles. To keep this system convenient

for Americans, ¾ of these factories are located in the six Mexican border states. These factories

also provide revenue for American business since the workers end up consuming United States

food products. 18

So it appears that the American media wishes to portray the NAFTA

relationship is a symbiotic one but the evidence points to a parasitic relationship instead.

American drafters of NAFTA have ignored other factors such as the destruction of the

environment. It is only a matter of time before the pollution laid out in America’s backyard will

come back to hurt the Americans in the long run. So why exploit the working class of Mexico?

Why risk the destruction of the environment? The language that justifies this is the bottom line;

cheaper products to sell and market in the United States. The bottom line thinking tends to ignore

the long term effects finding justification in the enrichment of Americans that vote. Basically, the

look into the future of American policy making usually coincides with the distance between a

policy’s implementation and the next election for the politicians that represent constituents that

will be enriched by that policy. The above is but one example of America’s attempt to maintain

the world order.

Final thoughts on Section One

Connecting the dots of these newly introduced concepts will draw criticism from those that

fail to look up facts in history books and instead take their lessons from the spoon provided by

American government and corporations. The fact remains that these outfits have a vested interest

in lying; in covering up the reality of the situations. Democracy is a good form of government

when compared to authoritarian regimes but does have its downside that many fail to

acknowledge. The reason to place out of view the negative aspects of democracy are laid out in

the discussion of America’s rise to power. Its goals were clearly set by its policy makers with the

specific intent to attain and then maintain an economic dominance over all other nations. But the

means by which the United States gained control of the world were not limited to policy

formation.

American policy makers needed laborers; burden bearers to make the savage land livable and

profitable. American policy makers created an advertising campaign to other nations stating that

America could alleviate the overcrowding and poverty of the back alleys of the world. The

solution was to export the working poor from other nations to the United States. Once the

importation was complete a brainwashing began on those new immigrants. They were told of

dreams that were unlikely to come true. Such hope made the immigrant work hard and become

consumers; buying the products that American advertisers told them would bring happiness. The

song of optimism would often change to that of aggression toward the immigrant when times of

economic recession and overall fear of a loss of the comfortable American lifestyle emerged.

From the welcomed immigrants to the unwanted peasants that leached off of society became

those that would wash cars, serve food, take out trash and guard the haves while they slept. And

as soon as the economy needed more workers, the immigrants were welcome again and all was

forgiven. The idea is ingenuous; create a class of slaves and do not tell them that that is what

they are. With the detail of labor handled, America could turn its attention to preventative

maintenance.

The monopoly on power and wealth was well secured by the United States after the collapse

of the former Soviet Union in 1992. At that point, America was able to gain a strangle hold on all

that it ever wanted. American foreign policy is one of intervention with foreign government.

American assistance always has an ulterior motive and is usually in the interest of the United

States. The interests of the United States, however, are often short sighted; only going as far as

the next election or the end of the fiscal year. American policy makers focus on numbers that

reflect a return on an investment. American policy makers present the good in everything they do

while neglecting to point out the negative. Such a strategy works very well when the public that

sanctions the actions are so ignorant.

Today there are many reasons to believe the rhetoric that is preached, the freedom to move

about in a classless society, are in direct conflict with the underlying statements and implications

that the American government fosters. When one battles to reach the mountaintop, it is often said

that the battle is not over. Some might say that the battle has really begun arguing that it will take

even more effort for that individual to maintain supremacy at the mountaintop. What is now

going on in America is a subtle effort to maintain its supremacy. We all are aware of some

examples of the assertion made above but the way all the pieces fit together to make one large

picture is quite astonishing. Instead, Americans believe their government is right. They hold fast

to the notion that they were taught as children; lessons of god blessing America. The emotional

attachment to America’s song makes it difficult to believe that policy makers are acting

dishonorably; that they act like scoundrels. Thus, a tight network of elitists run the nation with

their own individual interests in mind. And when an entire government is made up of self-

interested politicians, you end up with a nation built on greed, lies and selfishness built on the

backs of slaves that believe the lies and fail to see the greed and selfishness.

Assault on the Working Class Poor

With Charles Sepulveda

It is no secret that corporations have found every way possible to work for the same money

that every citizen of America earns. There would be no issue if there were not a group of people

within America who would be better served if they were left alone to spend their money on more

important things than what marketers think they should spend their money on. Living paycheck

to paycheck and clearing the bills every month, the American working poor resemble any other

class of people in history that feel cheated by the more wealthy and powerful persons within its

society. In other societies, the working poor eventually become tired and must be dealt with so

that a revolt will not occur. Today the working poor have the potential to be the contemporary

time bomb waiting to explode but they are not. Instead, the working poor have been led to

believe since the day they were born or immigrated to America that they have freedoms. This lie

pacifies most of them into submission.

Being free to choose their elected officials and the kind of car they drive, America’s working

class citizens are daily proving a point without knowing it. They are not free to choose elected

official because they have two choices which usually are identical to each other. The population

will typically refrain from voting or picking between two candidates that they are not really

content with. Another example; when it comes to buying your choice of automobiles, ask

yourself if the poor are really free to choose? Tricky math has made it the norm to take five to

seven years paying off a car that is worth substantially less than when the first payment was

made. In contrast, the early 1900’s saw Henry Ford build cars with the notion that a person

should be able to buy cars with one month’s salary. And once a person is saddled with a car

payment, the choices begin to diminish; now one is tied to a job, insurance, smog fees and DMV

taxes. I do not advocate an escape from responsibility but I do wish to re-enforce the idea that

what Americans truly have is the illusion of freedom.

The illusion goes further when it comes to the work place and class mobility. Rather than

allow the working class to excel in any direction, they are assimilated and end up accepting

western European values. These values are passed on to their children for which the parents want

a better life than their own. Some of the children grow up and become doctors or business

people. They see what other businesses have done in the past and are compelled to follow the

paths of those before them to make money at most any cost. Here we see how values of

immigrant culture are not rewarded and, from generation to generation, they are given less

importance or given up entirely. The next generation learns the new value of competition and

money. The result is a cultural genocide perpetuated by marketing to those that are most

vulnerable to it; the immigrants and their children.

One reason that the immigrants and their children are singled out, aside from their consumer

dollar, is because of the need to mold them into Americans that will begin to behave as

predictably as those who have called the United States home for generations. Keeping the stream

of thought in line with the norm will make it easier to keep things as they are. Corporations will

still run the world and the United States will persuade the rest of the world to accept its policies

that benefit those in and connected with the United States. Corporations will need laborers and

consumers from the poor working class. Going after this demographic conditions these people

into working for them and buying their products. The most important products that corporate

America has to sell are ideas. These ideas will keep the mainstream in its place and serve the

purpose of its architects. The idea that everything is okay comes from the need for bliss to keep

the machine going. The American media serves this purpose very well.

The major media outlets are owned and operated by large corporations. Conservatives deem

the media as liberal when it fits their needs; the opposite is true as well. Because conservative

hard-line capitalists own these corporations and it is in their best interest to convey the

conservative perspective they do what they can to keep the mainstream right and, therefore keep

the media corporations in business. Maintaining the notion that everything is okay in America

and that other countries are not being harmed by American benefit makes the population less

likely to feel guilty about what is really going on in the world and the corporations keep making

money. The corporations care about what the media is representing because many of the viewers

are also the consumers of corporate products. Another way to look at it is this: as is true with any

other corporation, the media has a product to sell to a market. The media sells airtime to

corporations that wish to sell their products; the media is selling the audience to other businesses

that need consumers. The worst part of all of this is that the United States government approves

the media’s activities otherwise they would not be on the air.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is in control of what information stations

are legally allowed to air on radio waves and 58 TV stations. Private citizens who wish to create

a micro radio station in order to fulfill their need of freedom of speech are in actuality breaking

the law. The government only allows the media in which they feel is credible to have licensure to

operate. That’s not to say that there isn’t legal, Independent (alternative) media, but the lack of

resources, almost by definition make it difficult for these sources to exist in a market driven

society. The reason that these alternative media outlets are, by design, non-existent in the

mainstream is, in reality, a contradiction of the notion of freedom of speech. In fact, one expert

in the field holds that the very fear that the American government has concerns free speech:

[The alternative media] gain[s] significance in the same way that popular organizations do: [Alternative media] bring[s] together people with limited resources who can multiply their effectiveness, and their own understanding, through their interactions – precisely the

democratic threat that’s so feared by dominant elites. 19

Once again this is an example of American policy fostering American objectives. Keeping the

alternative media from revealing “dangerous” ideas will help keep the bliss in America. A

blissful America is a consumer America that buys almost anything that you ask it to buy. Perhaps

a hypothetical is in order to examine the assault on the working poor’s wallet.

Let’s look at an example of how the major media works on the 80% or so of the population

who are supposed to follow orders and serve the actual important people (the other 20%). An

average hypothetical Latino male (we will call Marty) aged 14 years old attends a high school in

California; his interests are girls, clothes, video games, cars and school in order of priority. A

normal day for him makes the media and its advertisers inescapable. When he goes to school he

is dropped off in his mother’s car. In the car there is a radio. The radio is tuned to the local hip-

hop station with advertisements from large corporations. The local radio station sells airtime to a

music distributor, a clothing manufacturer, an electronics manufacturer and a car company. The

local radio station needs to pay its staff with the revenue from selling airtime. In this sense the

radio station has been forced to step on the back of the companies it sells advertising to in order

to stay above the water line. Without the backs of the corporation, the radio station would drown.

The cost of advertising that is charged to the corporations are a significant enough factor that the

costs will be passed on to consumers such as Marty.

On this particular day Marty hears the advertising of an artist (advertising time sold to the

music distributor). Besides the popularity of his music, the artist featured is known for his

clothing style. Marty happens to own the music compilation they are advertising at the moment.

The next ad comes from the clothing manufacturer who are the makers of the style of clothing

the artist featured earlier typically wears in his videos. In this particular ad the clothing marketed

is a jacket. Coincidentally, the artist in his latest video wears the same jacket. After hearing the

ad Marty asks his mother if he can purchase such a jacket at a cost of $175.00. Mother argues

that the jacket costs too much and that he already has two other jackets that he never wears.

Marty retorts by stating that while watching a music video television station he has seen the artist

wear the exact style and brand name in his video. The mother agrees to consider the matter but

nothing more citing that $175.00 is a lot of money to spend on a jacket.

The next ad from the electronics company and is about a new video game that is coming out.

The local shop in Marty’s town is selling the new game at midnight on the morning of its release.

The game retails for $64.99 and features the characters of a recent major motion picture release.

His mother is hit with more arguments as to why the game should be purchased. She considers

the purchase option more viable but still has not ruled out the jacket. She begins to contemplate

fitting the $65.00 item into her budget. She can work an extra shift at the department store that

she manages and she can possibly take lunch to work for a few days a week to save money. It

seems very likely that she will purchase the game for her son. Marty’s mother states that if he

can do his homework more consistently and professionally that the purchase would become more

likely and he agrees. Here we have to stop and analyze what has happened.

Unbeknownst to either party, the two have been cornered by a marketing scheme that goes

well beyond the radio stations. It was no coincidence that the clothing manufacturer gave that

jacket to the artist to wear in the video. It is also no coincidence that the artist’s latest album was

marketed at almost the same time that the clothing store marketed its jacket. It should be no

surprise that the music industry will typically corner these people with a multiple front war to

gain access to the wallets of the consumers and it spreads across class lines. The reason to focus

on this particular family is because of the line of work Marty’s mother is in. She is the manager

of a department store meaning she does not make a substantial amount of money. In fact, her

logic about making the purchases entailed making her own sacrifices to give her son what he

desires. Marty’s mother never had a chance with her last paycheck; the corporations garnished it

before she even worked for it. The garnishment goes even further when it attacks the children

Marty has been babysat by television for quite some time now since his mother has to work

for a few hours after Marty gets home from school. Marty was putty in the hands of the

marketers of music, clothing, cigarettes and countless other products that major corporations

produce. On top of that, Marty had been listening to the radio whenever he was in the car since

pretty much every car has one. It is unfortunate that the corporations capitalize on these types of

situations to make their money and it is even sinister to see how much they have saturated into

the world of many teenagers. But the attack still has not ceased; the corporations will now attack

Marty’s mother.

Getting back to the family driving to school while listening to the radio we hear one final

commercial on the radio. The advertisement is about a new car for sale. Marty is very keen on

automobiles and is likely to be impressed by the new design and the powerful new engine even

at the age of fourteen. Also Marty’s mother is looking into the purchase of a new car since her

car is out of style in her mind. Herself being an avid television watcher, she has been conditioned

to believe style and comfort are a valid reason to go into debt. Consequently, the boy will grow

up and think like his mother does, the way advertisers want them to think, and continue the life

they live in debt and working their lives away to pay for their toys they really could not afford in

the first place. But the real picture goes much deeper.

This is an example of exploiting a class of people on top of corporations exploiting each

other for their consumer dollar. Radio stations step on several corporations. Each of these

corporations are being stepped on by manufacturers and those manufacturers are stepping on

many working class people not just for labor but also for their money. Notions of freedom to

choose; in reality the freedom to choose what the advertiser tells them to choose justify all of

this. In the end all of these notions are so ingrained in the public so well that they have intruded

on their value systems.

Think back a second to Marty’s reward system. He was promised a reward in exchange for

more work at school. And Marty’s mother was willing to sacrifice some of her work for a reward

for her son’s benefit. Where Marty’s mother gained her value system is not the main point here

but pay attention to the layout concerning Marty. He will place a value on the material

possessions he encounters in life. He will see the dollar as a reward for his hard work. Therefore

his hard work will translate into material wealth. Ingrained in generation after generation of

Americans is the notion that material wealth will lead to happiness within themselves.

Corporations want things this way because an entire culture that thinks products and jewelry

make life worthwhile are a culture that keeps the corporations making money. This value system

has lead to the development of three groups of people within the United States; the first to be

explored are the immigrant Americans, the second is women and children and the last are the

“middle-class”. Taken individually, we will examine how major corporations are taking

advantage of these three groups via manipulation in the name of the American god; money.

The Immigrant American

You’ve heard the old clichés: I came to this country in a cardboard box from some third

world country. I had ten cents in my pocket. Then I got a job as a shoe shine boy working for the

rich people who could afford the bus and the subway in some generic American City. Now I

have my own shoe store and I sniff the feet of the rich who can afford to by my shoes. (This is

the part where the person telling the story starts to sob.) Only in America; God Bless America!

And we believed it too! We thought that god blessed the nation that would allow such a jump in

status from shoe shiner to shoe seller. It made us think that one day we could sell shoes right?

But why does this American dream suddenly become un-American if you are not an immigrant?

Native-born Americans are not expected to run small businesses or drive taxis. Native born

Americans are taught from a young age that they are not only encouraged but they are almost

required to go to college. Not to say that native-born citizens of the United States monopolize

such an agenda, many immigrants go to college and succeed. And here we have generalizations

about the positive aspects of being immigrant Americans; become a business owner or go to

college and join corporate America. Is there a downside to all of this? Of course there are

negatives that come up but they are almost never discussed in mainstream America. Instead the

haves hold strong to the belief that immigrants should love it or leave it. Lets defy the haves and

look at the negative aspects of immigration. Keep in mind that the negatives only impact the

haves-nots and almost never impact the haves.

The jump that an immigrant is capable of making from their country to the status they

acquire in America is a positive aspect that is focused on by immigrants and natural born citizens

alike. But this is one detail among many other details that make up an accurate characterization

of the immigrant situation; many of these other details are ignored. One detail ignored is the

legal and traditional limitations on upward mobility that immigrants face as exemplified by the

shoe shiner to shoe store owner example. Another detail is the whole idea of citizenship itself

which seems to implicitly require that one turn their back on the culture they inherited. But the

most important and the most obvious detail ignored is the very origin of the need to immigrate to

America in the first place. Generally, the need to immigrate comes up in the first place because

America made the third world just that; a third world via its corporations. Instead immigrants

ignore these details and focus on something else.

Immigrants, perhaps generally, appear happy with the shoe store American dream holding

that the shoe store is better than the third world. But the United States was not built on the

premise that it is better here than anywhere else so be happy with what you get; it was built on

the premise that the rights of the people are first and foremost. What really seems to be

happening now is that American conservatives want the immigrant to love it or leave it. The

challenge is to stand up and demand that the immigrant get all that he or she does deserve and

not just the minimum. Not to say that here lies all of the answers; instead here lies a finger

pointing in a different direction. The suggestion is to take a look around at what has been

bestowed upon you as a new American and then stand up and demand that you receive all that

you deserve as an American regardless of how long you happen to be one.

Many an immigrant has come to America from countries with terrible human rights records.

As has been addressed before, the reason for immigrants to come to America is overwhelmingly

in the best interest of the United States as is exemplified with correlations made between labor

shortages and increased ease with which foreign persons find their immigration process. When

we focus on Latin America, however, there are too many coincidences for one to swallow easily.

Examining the dire need that the United States’ southern neighbors find themselves in makes one

wonder how such a situation could occur. Based on the established premise that the United States

does benefit from immigration of the poor from Latin America, perhaps we should look into

what caused many of the problems in Latin America that made immigration so appealing to the

Latin American peasantry.

We start off with the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 which quite generally held that the United

States would not allow territorial gains by European nations in the western hemisphere. Now

with the implementation of the Monroe Doctrine to Latin America there were more concerns to

deal with. The United States and Europe were investing in Latin America. With the loans and

investments made in Latin America came the default on those loans that prompted many foreign

investors from Europe to go into Latin America militarily and collect those debts. But to allow

military intervention in Latin America was the antithesis of the Monroe Doctrine’s goals. Thus,

the Theodore Roosevelt administration introduced the Roosevelt Corollary. 20

It held that the

United States would go in to enforce debts claimed by foreign nations. The Corollary kept

Europe out of America’s back yard; its ghetto if you will. With no other nation rivaling the

United States for territorial gains in Latin America, a new brand of colonialism began to occur.

Instead of invading and taking over nations, the United States opted to expand into these nations

via corporations that would exploit the labor and natural resources. But this type of thinking was

not unique to Roosevelt’s administration. Later presidents would also follow the exploitation

path set forth by the Monroe Doctrine. President Woodrow Wilson was of the opinion that if

there were any type of benefits that would flow toward the Latin American people, such a flow

would be incidental while simultaneously recognizing that such a notion may be selfish. 66 21

It

was this mindset that American policy makers went in with when planning out the logistics in

relation to the exploitation of Latin America.

It was in February of 1945 at the hemispheric conference in which the United States

proposed the “Economic Charter of the Americas”. The purpose of the charter was to eliminate

the nationalism of Latin American countries so that a more global atmosphere would set in and

American investors could benefit economically. American policy makers knew they had an

uphill battle to remove nationalistic principles from the minds of Latin American people and

their governments. Latin Americans preferred policies that put the population at large first;

meaning that the distribution of wealth was a tantamount requirement of the Latin American

governments. American policy makers set out to make the American investor the top priority for

Latin American policy while, at the same time, making it appear that such policies held Latin

American prosperity as the number one priority. 22

It seems that the planned worked well. Today

American investors are the top priority in Latin America and Latin American governments do

not seem to mind if their average citizens are being used up and tossed away when their

usefulness is gone. Let us take a closer look at Brazil and its relationship with American

investors as an example America’s self serving policy.

In Brazil there are child labor laws that make it illegal for children to work. The statutory

limit on children working is at least 14. However, in 1998 there were an estimated three million

children working under the age of 14. 23

These child workers typically start at the break of dawn

and did not stop until the sun sets; about14 hours a day. There injuries range from the loss of

fingers to the loss of entire limbs. On top of these hazards, malnutrition is emerging among these

children. The average child laborer of Brazil is taking in about 1,500 to 1,700 calories per day.

Compare this to 2,700 calories per day; the average recommended calorie intake for an adult.

(And the 2,700 calorie intake is not taking into account conditions an adult would face had they

worked 14 hours a day.) These children are employed as harvesters of sugar. They are facing

countless hazards from an industry that many American investors profit from daily. Connections

are made obvious via the maneuvering, both directly and indirectly, of the American

corporations that utilize Brazilian sugar.

In the year 2000, there was a massive surplus of sugar in the world market. It was estimated

in 1999 that the Brazilian sugar industry would produce a record 19.0 million tons of sugar; a 4%

increase over the 1998 output. This increase in production is part of a trend going on since 1993

in which Brazilian sugar production increased by 90%. The result was that Brazil became the

number one producer of sugar in terms of tons produced for the year 2000 accounting for 25% of

the sugar used in the world. 24

Many companies, large and small, are demanding sugar for their

corporations. Coca-Cola Bottling is one of many corporations that are in need of sugar to stay in

business. Their actions indicate a yearning to make more money by expanding into Latin

American markets that were previously not capitalized on. In late 2001 and early 2002 Coca-

Cola was busy at work doing just that.

On December 7, 2001, Coca-Cola began marketing more sugar-based products in Latin

America with its announcement that Burn would soon debut. Burn is an energy drink

manufactured by Coca-Cola and meant to capitalize on the energy drink market of Brazil. Coca-

Cola spent $2 million on the advertising and promotion of Burn. The money will be well spent

since Coca-Cola is entering a market that sold an estimated 10 million liters of energy drinks in a

market that has grown by 85% in the 2001 alone. 25

And while the ingredient label was not

available for examination at the time of this writing, the company website does warn that

diabetics take note of its sugar content. A second maneuver was launched very soon after the

Burn marketing scheme was announced. On January 17, 2002 it was announced that a

collaboration between Coca-Cola and Nestle was underway. In this deal Coca-Cola will

distribute Nestle products in the Brazilian market. The major competitors in the market prior to

Coca-Cola’s introduction were Ambev, who distribute Lipton, and Matte Leao. Executives that

represent Coca-Cola’s competitors were not surprised by the announcement. Ready to drink teas

grew 117.2% in volume and 178% in value between 1996 and 2000. 26

But Coca-Cola was not

done yet; less than ten days later it was announced that, under the name of Senzao, a new soft

drink would make its premier in Venezuela. During the press conferences for Senzao it was

specified that Coca-Cola would use raw materials that originate in Brazil. 27

It is by extension, or

induction, that one can see how the world’s number one supplier of sugar will play a hand in the

success of Coca-Cola’s new marketing schemes. Another safe assumption is that the Brazilian

sugar harvesting practices are not unique to Brazil. These exploitative practices are linked via

circumstantial evidence to a soft drink empire in Brazil and other Latin American countries

collectively valued at $350 million. 28

And while it cannot be conclusively argued that if

American investors would stop using Brazils sugar that all of these injustices would cease, what

is known is that the practices Coca-Cola engages in fosters the idea that these workers are

meaningless lives forced, via their circumstances, to work for next to nothing. It is these people,

and many from other Latin American nations, that end up in the United States and go through the

process of becoming naturalized citizens. And now it is befitting to see what an immigrant does

go through once they decide that they are tired of being exploited by their own government and

indirectly by Americans.

The process of becoming and American citizen is one that pits the would be citizen against

the country of their origin which is easy to do when your country of origin allows workers to be

treated as they are in Brazil. Perhaps because of this notion it is plausible that the naturalized

citizen is in a position to believe what the United States government tells them is true despite the

fact that at least one major corporation is capitalizing and therefore implicitly encouraging these

conditions. But when these notions are down played you end up with an immigrant who wants

anything other than a Brazilian work environment. The process is so overt that the very oath that

the naturalized citizen must take in order to be naturalized seems to tell of more than a simple

pledge of allegiance:

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God. 29

When a naturalized citizen is asked to renounce entirely any abjure an allegiance to their

previous nation of citizenship, the words entirely stand out. It implies more than the political

allegiance or the patriotic allegiance; rather it holds that you give your allegiance to a culture in

some cases; the inherited culture of the immigrant. A nation that is made up of and for

immigrants should not imply or overtly require anyone to give up any allegiance to a culture of

people. The next section talks about upholding the laws of the United States and the

Constitution. If this is the case than it is up to the immigrant to police its new nation for the

purpose of making sure that the laws it imposes on the population at large are also being adhered

to by the government that imposes them. The last section speaks about giving this allegiance

freely in spite of the bombardment that each and every immigrant has received about the United

States being the land of opportunity. This section can never be honored by anyone that is forced

to go through the channels of immigration. How can anyone be asked to freely decide on a

matter after they have been interrogated, questioned and conditioned to give an answer that is

biased. Such a notion is comparable to a prisoner that has a confession beaten out of them.

Perhaps a revised version of the oath that states explicitly what the United States wants from

immigrants is necessary for us to examine.

A new proposal for America; speak the truth when you ask others for a favor. A revised set

of words to swear by could be the following:

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty and culture, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies including those who seek to work against the interest of capitalism and the wealthy, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true blind faith and allegiance to the same the wealthy elite; that I will bear arms and spill my blood on behalf of the United States wealthy elite when required by the law wealthy elite; that I will perform noncombatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by the law wealthy elite; that I will perform

work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law wealthy elite; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion as a prerequisite to the possibility of someday joining the class of the wealthy elite; so help me God.

Speaking the truth to immigrants is the way to make sure you get exactly what you want from

them. They will be the slave class until they are able to pull themselves up from the dirt and

grime. Once they are up and about, they will then use others like a stepping-stone to make

themselves members of the wealthy elite. They will become capitalists and join the machine.

Why is it that the truth is not told? Because the truth would be too ugly and that immigrant may

think of a way to stop the capitalist machine from sucking in one more insignificant person. But

the capitalist machine is not isolated to working abroad. As you know, Coca-Cola operates in the

United States as well and with much the same effect on the third world even from here. Coca-

Cola is not working alone to make money; they are but one piece of an entire sugar industry that

seems to have stopped making sense long ago. It is the story of success in the face of adverse

conditions paid for with taxpayer money and built, of course, on the backs of immigrants.

It should be no secret that corporations on an international level are taking over the world and

reeking havoc on many aspects that Americans ignore either purposely, out of willful blindness

or out of ignorance. For the naturalized Americans it is imperative that such ignorance

transcends their psyche in order to avoid too many questions being asked; they tend to believe

the hype surrounding the idea that the corporation is a good thing. These beliefs are supported

with arguments of bringing jobs to those that would otherwise be jobless among others.

Nonetheless, there is the environmental assault on the world that our children will inherit. There

is the assault on humans that are exploited to make products for Americans to buy. All of these

atrocities are committed on foreign soil so that there is no reason for Americans and naturalized

citizens to wonder; it is an act of benign neglect of the American corporation.

Those that choose to leave the country that a particular corporation is invading tend to go to

the United States to become a slave for the wealthy without realizing it most of the time. Being

called to the United States with the promise of wealth and freedom that is masked by the ugliness

of exploitation. Joining such a machine or staying in the country of origin will benefit the United

States making any choice a moot one. The fact that the two plausible choices are pluses in

America’s favor, there are other ways of finding prosperity that we need not get into, fit into

previous arguments in this book about the architects of policies benefiting from those policies

and the results are no different here. Looking at the sugar industry in America will make this

point painfully clear.

The Coca-Cola bottling company is in the business of making soft drinks and is willing to

operate in many nations in Latin America and the United States. A law professor who taught in

San Diego brought these ideas to the attention of his students by challenging them. He asked his

students about this company and its relation to sugar. He encouraged his students to go to

Tijuana and purchase a bottle of Coca-Cola. Bring the bottle back to the United States and go to

the grocery store and buy another bottle of Coca-Cola (you must have both products in bottles to

avoid bias). Sit down at a bench and have a drink of the two side by side. Notice a taste

difference?

High fructose corn syrup is the difference. In America the price of sugar is substantially

higher than in Latin American Countries. For that reason, Coca-Cola has chosen to replace sugar

in its American distributed soft drinks with high fructose corn syrup. Thus, American distributors

of Coca-Cola are forced to use the chemist’s version of sugar to keep the cost at a manageable

level in America. Not a big deal to some individuals born after 1980 or so having never left the

United States since they may never have had a coke with real sugar in it. We should really be

asking ourselves why are the prices of sugar so high in America?

Unraveling the answer to such a seemingly stupid question can be quite perplexing but keep

reading because it will be the same song as we have heard before; with disastrous results to

come. As you know corporations run the sugar industry. Two corporations are the major players;

U.S. Sugar and Flo-Sun Corporation. These two corporations operate out of the Florida

Everglades; an environmentally sensitive area of Florida that is home to a variety of species of

animal and plant life. What’s more is that disaster originates from this area when growers come

and try to make the Everglades into agriculturally profitable land as its history tells us.

The Federal government and would be settlers tried to develop the Everglades as farmland

out of ignorance pertaining to the unstable nature of the environment. After the completion of the

Florida East Coast Railway in 1918 the settlers began arriving trying to tame the wild. What

resulted was the destruction of portions of the Everglades via slash and burn agricultural

practices that caused crop failure, fires and death of cattle. Also causing problems was the

abundance of water in the area. This became apparent when in 1926 a hurricane struck the

Florida coast and caused major flooding. It wiped out what was left of the farming community. It

seemed that the only way to make the Everglades suitable for farming was by altering the water

drainage system; in affect destroying the natural habitat in the process. A more logical choice

would have been to abandon the area all together which would have been in the best interest of

the United States but for one problem; the great depression came just three years later.

Now the interest that America had was putting its citizens to work. To accomplish this, the

government put people on the Federal payroll and had them doing anything and everything to

keep them in money. One of those projects came to Florida with the construction of the Hoover

Dike and a network of drainage canals to keep water levels low enough to allow agricultural

opportunity. After the end of the depression the sugar corporations came in and began

developing the Everglades for sugar growing. One problem was that the sugar corporations were

not willing to neither pay the local workers a fair market wage nor provide them with good

working conditions; they wanted cheap labor. To fulfill that desire, the sugar industry turned to

the U.S. Employment Service for help. The U.S. employment service was unable to fit the bill

since it recruited American workers from the South and these workers were also not willing to

put up with the abuses that the sugar industry was dishing out. By the 1940’s the sugar industry

was still determined to stay in business but it could not abuse its workers like in the past. The

next place to look for workers was abroad.

The Caribbean Islands became the next place that the sugar industry began harvesting its

laborers from. Caribbean workers would take the abuse and could not complain much because,

under the work agreement, it was very easy to send a complaining worker back from where they

came and these workers needed the money due to poverty in their homes. Beginning in 1943 the

United States government was negotiating the wages, contracts and issuing temporary visas for

scores of laborers from the Caribbean Islands to come to Florida and help produce sugar. The

system allowed the deportation of any worker that displeased their employer. This system of

employment lasted until 1995 when mechanized sugar production practices made it possible to

get more done for less cost to the sugar corporations. The preceding is just one example of the

history of the sugar industry’s operation. Their actions indicate that they are focused on the

making of money at the cost of others. The worst part of this whole situation is that it does not

stop at the cost of workers and capitalization on a few Islands in the Caribbean; it extends to the

entire third world. 76 30

American sugar growers wanted more from their American politicians;

more money at most any cost.

The 1970’s were the last time that the sugar industry was unregulated. During this time the

United States was importing about half of the sugar it consumed. Prior to the 70’s, when the

Spanish-American war came about, the United States began to give Cuba a special place on their

list of who to buy sugar from. As the years went on, American investors began to set up shop in

Cuba, making it possible in some cases for American sugar buyers to purchase from sellers in

Cuba who were actually American since many of these sugar suppliers were owned by American

investors. In 1955, at the peak of sugar purchases from Cuba, the United States brought in about

3.71 million short tons of sugar from the island. It seemed that the American sugar market was

not a bad way of making money but then Fidel Castro showed up in Cuba. By the early 60’s

Castro set up his government and nationalized the property that was formerly held by many

American investors. The United States retaliated by crossing Cuba off its list of who to buy sugar

from; contributing to the island’s status as third world. With Cuba off of the list and the losses

suffered by American investors in the air, the profits began to go to other nations making a mix

of American and non-Americans rich in the process. By 1977 the amount of sugar being

imported had grown significantly to 6.1 million short tons. 31

This displeased domestic sugar

growers who lost control of Cuba. The sugar lobbyists confronted American government to

develop a foreign policy that favored their sugar. It was around 1980 when the domestic sugar

interests were able to change these numbers to reflect a profit for their bank accounts.

Between 1978 and 1981 the United States was importing an average of 5 million short tons

of sugar a year. In 1981 Vice President George Bush made Proclamation No. 6179 in response to

domestic sugar interests complaints. The idea was to put in place a tariff/quota system that would

benefit the domestic sugar corporations. The system works in the following way:

Each sugar-producing country that trades with the United States is allotted a quota. Sugar imported within this quota is taxed at a low rate. Sugar outside this quota is taxed at a rate so big as to effectively prohibit the import of all but a few specialty sugars.

32

What results is the import of only a small amount of sugar from the sugar producing countries.

Now when the country imports sugar within the quota rate the tariff is typically between zero and

4.38 cents per kilogram. Going beyond the quota causes the tariff rate to balloon to between

18.26 and 39.85 cents per kilogram. 33

Now the domestic sugar corporations could rely on an

artificially inflated sugar price averaging 22.5 cents per pound while the rest of the world is

selling the same sugar for about one-third to one-half of that amount. What does all of this cost

the United States?

What the sugar industry does is essentially put up a protectionist regime that allows the

destruction of the Florida Everglades for an otherwise unprofitable venture. Although the

Everglades are not the only place that sugar is grown in the United States, it is the least

hospitable place to do it in. There is no competitive advantage to be gained from growing in the

Everglades. The soil is not suitable for sugar growth and because of this, massive amounts of

fertilizers are required to sustain the Florida sugar industry. As mentioned before, the Everglades

are really too wet for agriculture and the draining of the area is also necessary. Putting aside the

costs of fertilization, drainage efforts and other costs still yields a hefty number. Totaling the

costs of government subsides and tariff/quota programs, according to the U.S. General

Accounting Office, the cost to consumers amounted to $1.9 billion for the year 2001. 78 34

Now

with all of the facts in our minds it is time to look at how they apply to the immigrants of the

world.

The effect that the American sugar industry’s monopoly has on the rest of the world is

immeasurable. Including the preceding detailed example about Brazil, other nations such as

Mexico, Uruguay, Cuba, Guatemala and Thailand are among the third world countries affected.

But the United States has not singled out the third world; also affected are Australia and the

European Union nations. It appears that all that produce sugar must pay for the deeds of the

American government and the domestic sugar interests. Out of all of these countries we see,

there is a direct consequence on the Caribbean Islands and these effects are not unique; a

generalized situation can be accounted for in most all of the sugar producing third world

countries. But for those in the Caribbean, the people were exploited for their labor and brought to

the Everglades for the opportunity to work for relatively large amounts of money; relative to

their domestic poverty. The sugar industry knew that these laborers were in poverty and

capitalized on the situation to make profits in America. We know that these immigrants want to

come to America because their country is poor. We know that these immigrants view America as

the land of opportunity. So lets assume that one of those workers from Florida immigrates to the

United States and goes to Florida. He will get a better wage and work less hours but he will also

spend a lot of his money on the crap that advertisers want him to buy. This is the

Americanization process. Why is the immigrant so grateful? The answer is unclear. Instead

another question pops into view.

Why are the sugar producing nations poor? Why are they a part of the third world? Why is it

that the immigrants of these countries have the yearning to come to America? Because American

interests want things this way. First the Reagan administration fixed the price of sugar in

America and the world so that the sugar industries of these third world nations would be harmed.

This caused a need to lower production or the price would fall; either way it translates into hard

times for the workers of those nations. These nation’s workers then have to look elsewhere for

work and some go the United States to find it. And when the United States economy is willing to

allow these people to clean up the mess that they have made, the immigrants are not only willing

but are also grateful. The United States has contributed greatly to the trashing of the third world

and then imported its workers to be a part of the slave society in America. (This is the part where

I start to sob) God bless America. But to be fair, the blame also does belong on the Latin

American governments.

In contrast to Latin America’s economic stagnation there is the “east Asian miracle”. Such an

idea is based on the rhetoric that is pushed by American interests except the rhetoric is followed

with action that fosters real positive results. The basic ideals involve government intervention in

the economy to promote and enhance the transfer of technology, the relative equal treatment of

humans while stressing education and health. These ideals were incorporated into the industrial

planning and the coordination of the governmental maneuvering that led to the East Asian

economic growth. These ideals proved to be very successful and by 1996 it was evident with the

unprecedented economic growth in the area. Although the crisis of 1997 may fuel the critiques in

saying that such idealism failed, it still remains that no other region has ever seen so many move

out of poverty in such a short period of time. In the end, the western pressure of business as usual

may be the real cause of the 1997 crisis and these thoughts are forcefully argued by many

critiques including Joseph Stiltz; the chief economist of the world bank. 80 35

In contrast to East

Asia is the Latin American track record; Latin America has a terrible track record when it comes

to equality. And imports are generally meant to appeal to the rich of Latin America not the

common people. Also the exemptions that the rich have, in general, from taxation and other

socially serving programs makes the burden fall to the general population. 36

No, in all fairness

the United States is not the only party at fault but it does its best to redistribute the blame and

does next to nothing to stop the biases. But why would the United States step in when it has so

much to gain from the way things are? Perhaps the haves should keep their mouths shut but

another sector of Americans owe it to themselves and to their children to stand up and take a

stand.

An open letter to immigrant Americans: You will come to America and you will be

brainwashed. You will be told that people that aim to assert your rights are going to harm you in

the end. If you do not assert your rights and join forces with those that wish to make change for

all people, you will almost certainly be hurting your own families and you will contribute to the

decay and exploitation of the third world. The alternative, of course, is to become that which

stocks you; an exploitative being that is concerned with the bottom line. Perhaps some

unforgiving perspective from a man who knows what it is like to fight against the system and his

own people along the way:

An immigrant is like a dog without a home. The dog will be grateful for anything it receives. An immigrant does not criticize the government. The immigrant does not have the values and moral conviction an indigenous person has.

37 Reies Lopez Tijerina.

Mr. Tijerina is harsh with his words but they do have some truth to them. His analogy with that

of the homeless dog should not be taken as disrespect but meant as insensitive reality. It is hard

to be homeless and when you are given anything that resembles a home you are grateful. For that

reason the immigrant is biased in some cases and turns against those that would like them to

have more. The last line of Mr. Tijerina’s quote is not accurate however. The moral value and

conviction is not reserved for the indigenous; it lies in all that choose to invoke it for the

betterment of human kind.

Stand up for what is yours. Look around and be sure you understand that you are being

enslaved over and over again both physically and especially mentally. This is the land of

opportunity but only for those willing to assert their rights as naturalized citizens. Anything less

from you is unpatriotic. Anything less is a slap in the face of all those you left behind in your

country to find a better life in America. Don’t let them die in vain; make sure that you don’t let

your children walk into the American shackles blinded by the rhetoric. Join those that would help

your cause and remember above all that if it were not for the United States your country would

be a lot better off and maybe you would be as well.

Women and Children

With Roxanna Pina

Today in America there is a sickness brewing. It is an overt assault on the Women and the

children of the United States. We are all aware of examples such as the way a woman is

supposed to look like to the assault on children from tobacco companies that need more smokers.

But there are also a lot of smaller assaults that we don’t pay much attention to. It is a

combination of advertising campaigns and social norms that reinforce each other. What results is

that little is allowed to change for the betterment of the human and instead the interests of

corporations are held as a higher priority. These ideas start with the system of public education in

America where children are subjected to a biased set of rules that give preference to euro centric

histories and the idea of capitalism itself. The new immigrants and native born Americans

reinforce these ideas at home. These are the same ideas that were taught to the adults during their

childhood by their parents or the INS worker who handled the cases of the immigrant. At home

and at school is not enough however; the corporations make sure that these ideas that are pro-

capitalism and pro-European culture are blasted at all people during any moment in which they

finds themselves on a break from school or family.

As a child you are taught in America that if you work hard then you will prosper. Granted,

there is nothing wrong with hard work but no one ever told us that we should work hard for

ourselves and not for someone else. There was no other measure for ones sweat except that of an

income based on the American dollar. All that seemed to matter was that you as an individual

would be good at a job and that you would be paid well. What seems to be lacking is that the

definition of a good job does not take into account any kind of social strategy to make the world

a bit friendlier. Very little emphasis indeed is placed on elevating some under privileged group of

people or leveling the playing field so that those with less financial backing or political influence

may have the same opportunities as those who are not in possession of such luxuries. No one

seems to consider the cause of a woman’s failure in the business world as being nothing more

than an indication of her lack of a work ethic. Such notions of working hard to overcome the

impossible are being pressed into our minds as we go through school or pass across into

American borders so profusely that we never consider the idea as an impotent one. Closed

minded notions of blindly working hard and expecting the good life need to be challenged since

they lead to many ills in American society and lay the blame solely on the individual when

failure arrives at the door. The above notions are applicable to many groups of people in

America but let us look at its effect on women in America.

Women work hard at the gas station, the restaurant, at their own education or the office job.

What do women get from working hard? What are the benefits? American society pushes ideas

like, “It feels good to earn a living”. Hence, women show our children by example the need to

work hard in order to “feel good”. Some women end up working very hard trying to uphold the

virtues of the model worker as defined by their employers. Herein lies the problem; those that

told these women what the ideal worker should be like are persons who have a vested interest in

the work ethic of an employee. Employers told women that working hard would result in

promotions and raises. First you work hard and then, maybe, if your lucky, you get the

promotion and the raise. It is the carrot on the stick that many women, and men, are brainwashed

into following. One may have seemingly gained the carrot but in reality there never was one to

begin with.

Individual cases should bring forth questions as to the interest the employer has in having

one live up the standard of a “hard worker”. The employer wants more money built on the sweat

of an employee. Once the employer gets his or her profit then, maybe if you are lucky and the

employer does not have to spend that extra profit on a new pool or college for their kids then,

and only then will you get that carrot. And such rewards usually are not as sweet as they first

appeared. We are discussing dead end jobs and hard working individuals both male and female.

We are going into the psyche of the “hard worker” to discover that the ideas here are counter-

productive to a single group of people; women and children. We will see that American society

is enforcing these counter-productive ideals because it is in their best interest to enforce them.

All of these ideas can be traced back to an origin; that of the American system of education.

In the American system of education there are a number of ways that children are taught to

obey rules that do not serve their best interest. On the surface it appears that minorities are being

channeled into blue-collar occupations while whites and Asians go into the white-collar world

and earn much more money while serving their community. These are just generalizations

however and there are going to be exceptions to these findings. Yet statistical data should compel

all of us to take a second look at the education system in America so that we can all better

understand why only a minority control the majority.

In October 1999, the New England board of Higher Education and the College Board

released a study addressing minority representation in college entering classes. The results of the

study showed that too few blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans are reaching the highest

levels of education achievement. The four-year study cites a number of factors including racism

and low expectations from teachers. 38

Based on these factors we must ask ourselves who has the

best interest in keeping minorities in classes that do not promote acceptance to four-year

universities and instead promote trades such as welding or construction. It is the education

system that is supplying the next generation of laborers and the laborers are being chosen based

on their ethnicity. These children grow up and have their own children fall into the same cycle as

the first generation; a working class society is feeding itself and the cycle appears to have no end.

But public education outfits are not the only institutions that foster one group’s stagnant

behavior. Culture lends to this phenomenon as well.

In Latino families there are gender biases that are meant to keep women in their place; a

place defined by cultural norms found in Latin America families. Thus, the education of young

women is not the priority in traditional Latino families. Many times the chauvinistic traditions of

past generations have caused friction within Latino families causing obvious hindrances upon the

females. It leads to a lack of encouragement from home for the young females; encouragement

that causes any type of equalization in America to be hindered by preventing more minorities

from gaining education and influence. It is this type of thinking, along with racial tracking in

education that causes a higher dropout rate among minorities. Figures from the Department of

Education in 1997-1998 show that 8.2 percent of Hispanic students, 6.1 percent of Black

students and 5.3 percent of Native American students dropped out of high school during the

1997-1998 school year. In contrast, only 3.5 percent of Asians and 2.6 percent of whites dropped

out. 39

This is the result, in part, to a cultural difference between European culture and other

cultures. Specifically, Latino culture views education as a possibility. European culture tends to

look at education not as a matter of if but a matter of when and what school. With these

differences being taught to women, the fallout on Latino culture, or any male dominant culture,

affects the children that learn from their parents about keeping gender rules separated and

different. And playing on all of these cultural traits and American educational biases are the

advertising companies of America.

Advertising is a big industry in the United States. One of the reasons that it is so big has to do

with the industry’s ability to appeal to the working class citizen. Many have been given the

notion that in order for one to enjoy the benefit of that hard work one must spend their hard-

earned money. These notions come from family and the public education system. The result is,

over the period of a few hundred years, an entire nation of people have been conditioned into

blind consumerism. Advertisers also make plenty of suggestions about what items should be

purchased. Today the advertisers have run amuck to the point that a lack of advertising may

seem odd to viewers of television and readers of magazines. All of this plays into the upbringing

we have been subjected to. Think back to when mom and dad told us we should all go out and

get jobs to buy the stuff that advertisers want us to buy. Then we got credit cards and went

shopping for the latest fashionable items as dictated to us by celebrities. We learned what is

fashionable by turning on MTV and we forgot or did not know why celebrities wear the clothes

that they do; because they receive the clothes for FREE from manufacturers that know you will

be watching and you will buy whatever they wear. Things end up coming down to a question of

“who do you work for” and the answer is not your boss. You can see that there are many others

who are working just as hard as you to get your money. People end up working for corporations;

they end up being consumers as they are conditioned to do so. Advertising campaigns work

extremely well; so well that we must question who’s will we follow when we spend our

consumer dollars.

As for those that fall through the cracks, failing to consume, we see a stigmatization through

societal norms. And it seems that women and children are a major category of those that are

vulnerable to such onslaughts. Women and children get hit with a separate set of rules reserved

only for them when they stop being consumers. They are demonized for not working hard

enough. But the myth of not working hard enough is just that; a myth. When members of

American society are falling on hard times, they are at times sick; addicted to drugs and need

help to rid themselves of such addiction. But for those that are hard working individuals and

have a hard time remaining employed due to corporate layoffs and economic recession, there

emerges a stigmatization of their character for not working hard enough. Such notions ignore the

reality of American life.

Hard work does not necessarily equal prosperity in America. Other factors, such as the

economic health of a region or a country will affect the prosperity of the working poor. The

bottom line is that there is nothing wrong with a family asking for and receiving help from a

government that they fund with their income taxes when times get tough. Many myths are

floating around about the welfare system in America. Conservative politicians argue that such

programs are a waste and advocate abandoning the system all together while more liberal

politicians wish to keep the system in its current state or increase the spending modestly. Both

liberals and conservatives agree that the stigma of being on welfare must remain.

In the interest of American corporations you find the need to keep AFDC a shameful place to

be. Analysis of the education and working conditions of these members of society are largely

ignored or not conducted at all. Labor options for those who are likely to receive aid can be

compared to slavery when viewed through the context of the great wealth in America.

Nonetheless corporations wish to maintain that fine line between working poor and

homelessness. Without the working poor there is no blood to oil the corporate capitalist machine.

Without the lifeblood of the capitalist machine, workers, the machine starts to wane.

Instead the American government wishes to push aside many facts about the working poor

and recipients of AFDC. Let us forget that the working poor make only enough money to scrape

out a living and necessity keeps them going back each day to earn their right to live. Let us forget

that about two-thirds of all welfare recipients are children. 40

Let us forget about the conditions

that the poor children in America receive. AFDC children are twice as likely to suffer from

stunted growth, severe mental and physical disabilities, fatal accidental injury, iron deficiency

and sever asthma. 41

Also lose sight of the fact that AFDC children are twice as likely to never

finish high school and that their standardized test scores are significantly lower than non-AFDC

children. 90 42

But another alarming factor we are asked to look away from is the fact that AFDC

children are not a microcosm of American society at large. In 1993 46 percent of Black children

and 41 percent of Latino children were living with families that earned income below the poverty

level. 43

We are taught to ignore these factors because it is the best interest of corporate America

to demonize the welfare recipient. By making them a statistic and not a human, they make it

easier to coax them back into the working class poor level of society. Corporate America needs

slaves and the slaves might as well be the poor, uneducated, disfigured, sick who learn from their

parents and teachers that they are not normal because they do not work hard enough. American

corporations can take these children because we ignore the above and write them off as bums

that refuse to work or are drug addicts. Corporations depend on your ignorance to make

themselves rich. Sadly, the working poor themselves are disillusioned by the myth.

The working poor tend to be content with poverty as part of their everyday life. In the case of

immigrants, they make comparisons between their former lives in their homelands with their

current lives in the United States. Typically their lives are relatively better today than yesterday

and they fail to complain. Perhaps out of a sense of gratefulness, the working poor keep their

mouths shut and move forward taking for fact what is in reality a campaign meant to keep them

working. They learn to ignore their own existences. They fail to see the truth about themselves.

At what point did the enslaved begin to loose sight of their shackles being placed upon them?

Rather than fight back, the proletariat of America has walked into the trap set by the powers that

be. Upon what basis does ones right to live become justifiably exchangeable for near slave labor?

How did the powers that be convince a class of free people into agreeing to a modern age of

indentured servitude? The promise of American dreams coupled with the motive to deceive

smuggled in labor.

The campaign to bring workers to the United States has worked too well. Because of this,

corporations are willing to use the attraction that immigrants have with American opportunity to

lure them into the United States; the promise of jobs and prosperity are the attraction that many

immigrants cannot turn away from. Being that companies are willing to hire the immigrants with

no documentation of their status as legally able to work is evidence of their priority ladder that

places profit over people. A prime example of this attitude is exemplified by the Garment

industry of the world.

The garment industry is expected to generate about $89 billion in the 2000. 44

Part of that

money will be generated on the backs of women in the United States. Perhaps due to cultural

labor division and the promise of prosperity in the United States, women from Latin America are

willing to come to the United States for employment in the garment industry. These women

come to America and have no example upon which to judge what type of work environment is

appropriate. They are a clean slate that can be subjected to extreme conditions once they are in

America.

A general description of a garment work environment includes the 12 to 14 hour day. But

what is not often discussed in the mainstream is the subjection of these women to invasive

medical procedures that include pregnancy tests, sexual assaults and their physical coercion to

remain working for their employers. These workers do not have access to health care nor are

they afforded the opportunity to take sick leave. They are subjected to work environments that

are unsafe and lack ventilation. They are psychologically abused; threatened with deportation if

they attempt to quit or seek help from the outside. 92 45

So they continue to toil day after day

with no end in sight and go home after their 14-hour workday. But relatively speaking, these

workers have it easy.

In 1995, one of the most horrific examples of sweatshop indentured servitude was discovered

in El Monte, California; a suburb of Los Angeles. Upon a raid of a warehouse by the police,

authorities discovered 80 Thai, mostly women, working in a sewing factory. The group was not

only working in this location but also called the sweatshop home. Further investigation of the

situation revealed that the group was forced to work for 20 hours per day, 7 days a week and

earned 35 cents an hour. Employees were not allowed to leave the warehouse and to ensure no

one escaped, the building was secured like a prison; featuring razor wire fencing along high

walls that surrounded the compound. Attorneys from the American Legal Center became

involved and quickly discovered that these workers were living in fear. The workers were told

that if they resisted or tried to escape they would be beaten. When one individual was caught

fleeing, the person was beaten and photos of the beating were displayed as a warning to the

others. In addition, families of the workers were threatened with harm and all contact with the

outside world via mail and phone calls were monitored and censored by the employers. For those

that were there from the beginning, their nightmare lasted an unbelievable seven years. 46

And

while this example is the most extreme that the authors could find, there are more typical

examples to examine. All in all, the conditions that place profit over people are slowly being

combated with litigation.

In conjunction with about 70 other Latino workers found laboring in a downtown Los

Angeles sweatshop for two dollars an hour, a lawsuit was filed against all the employers

involved with this network of factories. In criminal court, five of seven employers served prison

terms while two others fled to Thailand. Meanwhile, civil litigation was filed against

manufacturers that bought garments from the sweatshops involved herein. Mervyns,

Montgomery Wards, B.U.M. International and L.F. Sportsware will reportedly pay out $2

million dollars to former sweatshop laborers in exchange for the dropping of the lawsuit. 47

For

the above group affected, there is light at the end of the tunnel but for many other sweatshops

that go on undetected, when does the end come? Perhaps when these immigrant workers have

American born babies and they grow up and get jobs like the rest of America they will finally be

free of any manipulation.

Of course if you have been paying attention to what you have been reading you will know

that this is hardly the case. What does any woman in America, immigrant or native-born citizen,

end up going through during their lifetimes? Research indicates that women are likely to suffer

psychologically over their body images; especially if they already suffer from depression.

Specifically, body dismorphic disorder is described as follows:

A chronic and debilitating mental health problem characterized by a preoccupation with an imagined defect in appearance. In addition to core concerns about appearance, body dysmorphic disorder is marked by severe disruptions in self-- esteem, time-consuming repetitive behaviors (e.g., comparing, mirror checking, camouflaging, excessive grooming, skin picking, reassurance seeking), and avoidance (e.g., of social situations, mirrors, bright lights). It is also associated with high levels of occupational and social disability, including absenteeism, lost productivity, unemployment, and marital dysfunction, as well as frequent use of medical and plastic surgery services. 94

48

Based on this definition, researchers set out to discover the prevalence of body dysmorphic

disorder among women. The study also took into account other forms of depression that the

sample women had a history of suffering from. The sample group consisted of 976 women

between the ages of 36 and 44. Of the total sample, 658 had no prior history of depression. The

authors of the study state that the results indicate that in women in this age group, 0.7 percent are

of extreme enough a nature to warrant diagnosis with body dysmorphic disorder. In total, eight

women were discovered to have the disorder. The average age of development of the disorder

was 20.1. Five of the women diagnosed stated that they began to suffer from the disorder

between the ages of 11 and 14. The other three women exhibited these symptoms in their 30’s.

Researchers cite the age group of the women as limiting their ability to make a general

conclusion about the population of women at large yet they suspect that a study of younger

women would result in the number of women suffering from the disorder to rise. 49

All of this

anxiety over ones body image can be traced to many factors. We won’t be able to go over every

conceivable source but the most prevalent ones will be examined.

To begin with there exists an organization run by the United States government called the

National Institutes of Health. According to its this mathematical equation is called the body mass

index or BMI. A BMI over 30 is considered a sign of obesity. Thus, if a person is 5-foot-6

website, its goal is to uncover new knowledge that will lead to better health for everyone by

conducting research, supporting research of non-federal scientists, helping in training of research

investigators and fostering communication of medical information. In 2001, the NIH had a

budget of $20.3 billion. 50

On the premise that the NIH is in favor of the promotion of good

health for all, it put together a method of determining who is obese in the United States. The

method of determining who is obese is arrived at by taking a person’s weight in kilograms and

dividing it by the height in meters squared. The result of and weighs 185 pounds, that person is

fat. Also, if a person is 6 feet and weighs 200 pounds or more, that person is fat. 51

Although the

authors of these writings are not medical experts, common sense seems to us that the above

figures do not constitute a fat person. So what initially prompted the NIH to come up with this

math equation? Perhaps special interest is lurking in the pages of the NIH study.

In Ohio, and other states, the concern was that too many diet pills were being prescribed. The

Ohio medical board having previously banned more dangerous drugs, such as amphetamines,

believed that too many other prescription diet drugs were being prescribed when they were not

medically necessary. But the question still remains as to why the BMI was set so low as to allow

almost anyone complaining of weight issues to still qualify for prescription of weight loss drugs.

Initially, it was the suspicion of the author’s of these writings that pharmaceutical companies

were somehow involved with the BMI being set so low. And while no incriminating news

articles were found linking pharmaceutical 96 companies to the NIH, there is compelling reason

to question the impartiality of the NIH nonetheless.

It was initially believed that the NIH, in conjunction with pharmaceutical companies, funded

the development of the BMI after some medical experts, with good intentions, began to worry

about diet drugs being dangerous. Such collaboration would make the impartiality of the NIH

suspect in coming up with a balanced number that did not reflect the interests of pharmaceutical

companies and their need to sell more drugs. Indirectly, the NIH itself can be linked to corporate

funding that might bring the impartiality of the NIH into doubt.

In the past the NIH has contributed to and received corporate money to research areas and

develop biotechnology meant to promote “better health for everyone”. Yet we already

understand the interest of corporations; even those corporations in the biotechnology industry.

One example comes from Integra Life Science Holdings Corporation. Integra is currently listed

in the list of Standard and Poor’s top 500 stocks. In April of 2001, the stock was valued at about

ten dollars a share. In the year following, the company stock has risen in value to twenty-nine

dollars per share. Stockbrokers are estimating that the stock should rise by 48 percent in the next

five years. 52

In November 2000, Integra received funding from the NIH through its division the

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. In total, the grant from the

NIH totals $750,000 to be used in a two-year period for the purpose of generating tissue

regeneration products. 53

This grant was reported in November but probably hit the Wall Street

floor before then. Although the grant may be unrelated, we should take note that between August

and December of 2000, the Integra stock price rose from thirteen dollars per share to eighteen

dollars per share. 54

From the standpoint of research and discovery, the link between the

government run NIH and corporate America has proven to be the least likely or the most illusive.

Much more analysis of the connection will need to be conducted by experts in the biotechnology

field; much more expertise than is possessed by the authors of these writings. What should be

noted, however, is the convenience that the BMI happens to support the prescription of more

drugs for dieting purposes and this situation also promotes other staples in American society.

Another set of corporations that are very interested in the image of the female is the fashion

industry. Their ability to cleverly market clothes, make-up, plastic surgery, cleansing products,

hair care products, beauty services and hair removal products warrants their interest in the

demeaning of the natural female at every opportunity. Imagine what would happen if the female

suddenly stopped caring about her hair and make up as well as her dress? An entire industry that

fuels movies, magazines, salons and health spas would be greatly impacted. It is for this reason

that advertising is geared towards women in a very oppressing manner. They keep women

constantly preoccupied with the way they look and their weight. Advertising focuses more on a

woman’s size than her health. Examples of this phenomenon are varied and numerous but space

and time limits our review to one.

In November of 2001, the National Organization for Women expressed concern of the Food

and Drug Administration’s lack of attention to the dangers involved with the use of breast

implants. Citing the FDA’s approval of saline breast implants for use in women undergoing

elective breast implant surgery, the Organization pointed out 98 that the manufacturers own data

indicates a danger in implanting their product into the human body. Of the women who had

undergone mastectomies and opted to have saline implants placed in their body, 73 percent

suffered from complications within three years. Also the National Cancer Institute, a division of

the National Health Institute, is reporting that women who do have breast implants are twice as

likely to develop brain and lung cancer than women who are not host to implants. 55

Are we to

assume that women are aware of these risks? Or have the social norms on the United States

being used to blind women of the risk; opting instead for the pursuit of beauty to the benefit of

the corporations that manufacture implants.

Basic sociological principles hold that gender stratification is a trait of all human societies.

Of the most importance comes class and race followed by stratification based on gender. Gender

roles are a set of behaviors that are considered appropriate for a particular gender. Some

behaviors are not man enough or are not lady like. It is when women’s roles are thought to

require some sort of male supervision that a bias occurs. Whatever the case may be, in the United

States the above are the socially accepted norms. The norms that place women in one role and

men in another are being monitored by corporations to sell their products. The reason to pay

attention to this form of stratification in American society is because, as sociologist Cynthia

Epstein puts it:

Human beings have an immense capacity to be guided, manipulated, and coerced into assuming social roles, demonstrating behavior, and expressing thoughts that conform to socially accepted values.

56

Therefore, gender roles become so ingrained in the person that for many years it was argued that

gender roles were biological manifestations of one gender’s inability to conduct themselves like

the other. 57

This argument is flawed because it was mostly assumed that women could not act

like men; no one ever wondered why a man could presumably act like a woman and only receive

ridicule. What results is a tendency to take for granted the state of being without questioning its

validity.

For many, it is the norm for young girls to emerge from puberty with a goal to reach; the goal

of looking like a woman. The example of a woman is most often found in the media’s depiction

of women in film, television and other outlets. Societal standards for what a woman should look

like tend to emphasis a thin body structure. Women generally accept the body image emphasized

by the media and strive to look that way although achieving the same thin look is impossible for

many to achieve. And to make matters worse, the depiction of women in the media is following a

trend of getting thinner while the real women of the world are getting heavier. What results is

dissatisfaction with a woman’s personal body size termed “anormative discontent”. 58

This

problem is compounded by the natural progression of puberty itself.

Adolescence is a time of self-discovery and a yearning to nail down an identity. During this

time there is an increase in a person’s self-awareness, self-consciousness and a yearning to gain

social acceptance. Young women who find themselves in this situation tend to look for examples

to follow. With the bombardment of media related devices ranging from commercials, music

videos, movies, television and video games comes the example that many strive to follow yet are

physically incapable of achieving. It should be of no surprise that these women are suffering

from some form of dissatisfaction with their bodies and try to lose weight. Such is enough

motivation for many women to engage in 100 unhealthy dieting practices that lead to anorexia

and bulimia. 59

The above observations by those in the field of psychology have been prompted

to conduct further research about the subject of a woman’s self-body image.

Recently a group of 306 girls with a mean age of 16 were given questionnaires asking them

to rate the concerns they have in life in order of priority. At the top of the list was academic

success and intelligence yet there are other factors that warrant further scrutiny. Many women

were also pointing to slimness as a major import in their lives and these women that tended to

emphasis a slim body were linked to body dissatisfaction and disordered eating. The conclusion

of the study was that women who were emphasizing the thinness of their body should be

persuaded to de emphasize their concerns in order to improve their overall health. 60

There still

remains the consequences of such distractions that women are subjected to.

Women have been tricked. The American corporation and the media have all come together

to give women a lifestyle obsession of their own. Without their full attention placed in one

direction, instead there is a diversion of attention given to work, sex, image, prestige and the

future. The scare tactics of the corporation are meant to keep women occupied with their dress

size. This type of diversion keeps women from properly concentrate on more important issues

such as how they can empower themselves at the workplace, in academics, or in their personal

relationships with men. It keeps the social norms in place and every corporate outfit is making

money because of it.

No one ever considers challenging the norms. No one ever seems to give respect to the

female in society who has so much influence in the future. Arguments that call for a reverse

discrimination against men only serve to keep women bitter and angry against everyone. Instead,

there needs to be a realization of the position women hold in society currently. As unfair as some

women see it, women are the child bearers and child raisers of the world. They teach the children

the social norms of the now. The children grow up with the teachings of their mothers and take

them to the playgrounds and to the work place later in life. The time for change has to come at

birth and must continue throughout life. The time for change is also the time for challenge. By

teaching children that they do not have to conform to gender roles you begin to break down

everything that corporate America depends on for your child’s consumer dollar. By showing

children that they need not watch the commercials, we as parents begin to show our children that

there maybe something more to television than a great toy. There is much more. 101

And when the little boys and girls grow up with clean slates and the ability to independently

think than maybe one day a boy will grow up and not expect his wife to cook him dinner.

Perhaps when a little girl grows up she will not wait to be asked out on a date by a boy she likes

and instead she will approach him. It begins with violations of the norm and it ends in an

evolution for humankind. A future that has women leading the way along side men. A future that

has men raising children alongside women. In this future you will have no reason to buy breast

implants and have facial hair removed because the boys won’t care if it is there or not. In this

future the boys will not have to behave aggressively and treat women as objects because they

will have grown up being taught to think critically and see women as humans first and females

second. And when a boy can finally act like he feels and a girl can do as she 102 pleases, we can

only hope that the knowledge that we as parents put in these children will lead them down the

path of humanism, generosity and self determination. To begin the evolution, we must begin the

destruction of the old rules. And since women have most of the control when it comes to child

raising we should let the children decide where we go next.

Are the Working Poor “Middle-Class”?

In today’s society there are layers. And if the previously mentioned items about the very top

of society and the very bottom of society are true then the question becomes “why has the middle

not stepped in to halt the madness”? The middle class has nothing to lose by stopping the

corporate machine. Unless the corporation that they work for is the one they cause to go out of

business than there really is no interest in keeping the corporate machine in place. The reason for

middle class America comes in two forms. The first form of blindness comes from a diversion of

their attention. By pointing to other things in life, the middle class follow the rules and orders of

the corporations, via advertising and marketing, so that they are more concerned with themselves

than the plight of the less fortunate American slaves. But the ability to divert their attention

comes from the fact that many in the middle class world simply cannot identify with the poor.

Middle class America is on a road to bliss paved by the marketing schemes of every corporation

in the world.

To begin, there seems to be some problem in identifying those that belong in middle class

America. There is no income level or some kind of formula that officially exists since there

really is not supposed to be any kind of class lines in America in the first place. The United

States Census Bureau offers a glimpse of what could be middle-class while being careful not to

explicitly define one. Based on statistical data obtained during the 1999 census, the middle class

income bracket should fall somewhere between $25,000 and $75,000 per year. The middle-class

family has children and two incomes. The adults in middle-class America have college degrees

and hold professional jobs; living paycheck to paycheck. 104 61

And while this description is a

bit vague maybe it doesn’t matter.

No one is really asking the question since everyone thinks that they are in the middle-class.

For rich Americans, they don’t want to be arrogant and assume that they are rich so they consider

themselves middle-class. As for poor Americans, they don’t want to think of themselves as poor

and so they conclude that they are middle-class. And besides, American society does tend to

stigmatize the poor at least; when a poor person announces that they are poor and are

comfortable with it many Americans immediately think of welfare or Jerry Springer. Others tend

to wonder why any person would want to be poor assuming that poverty is a bad place to be. All

in all, people in America are more comfortable considering themselves middle-class and the rest

of corporate America recognizes that comfort.

Middle-class America is a group of people that make up the majority of buying power. 62

For

that reason, the corporations of America focus a lot of their attention at this demographic. In

much the same way the media works to make life look docile to the Americans, the advertising

companies of the world have an agenda as well. We all realize that corporations use marketing

corporations to sell their products to middle-class Americans. There are many examples of

middle-class America being drawn into new trends in hopes that they will pay for goods and

services with their $25,000 to $75,000 income. One example of the marketing of services comes

from the new wave of salon type establishments meant to pamper the male in a setting that is not

too feminine. An industry of all male salons is cropping up in America due to the new efforts

that men are making to beautify themselves. In conjunction with the male salons came the

cosmetic corporations that would like a piece of the action. And those that are best to report on

the new trend are those that are asked to market those products and services to men.

Products and services are being marketed to men in magazines of many sorts. One magazine

in particular has accepted the invitation of journalists to discuss the emerging male beauty trend.

Sara Mason is the editor of Skin Inc. Magazine. It is her opinion that men now comprise 30

percent of the spa clientele in the United States; this figure is up 20 percent from 10 years ago.

And with the increase in demand for male beauty specialists and services comes the description

of what a typical venue would look like. In Denver, Colorado, a beauty service establishment

recently opened for business. “Gentleman’s Quarters” offers a manlier spa and beauty salon. It

features cherry wood floors with forest green walls. The walls are decorated with antique items

that are meant to garner the interest of men such as an odometer from a Model “A” Ford. The

services provided by Gentleman’s Quarters range from a haircut to the works; shoulder massage,

shampoo and conditioning, scalp massage, hot towel wash, manicures and pedicures. 63

All of

these services are not being marketed to the poor. The reason that they are not exclusively for the

rich is because the wealthier members of American society will likely pay a person to come to

their home and perform the above mentioned services. No, these services are for those that think

they are middle-class. But goods and services are not the only items marketed to this peculiar

group.

When it comes to politics, the reason to be considered middle-class is because you have a

vote and are more likely to use it. Thus the government is not likely to exclude anyone that does

not want to be included. Unless there is a reason why you cannot vote than even you can be

middle-class. Such inclusive strategic maneuvers are prevalent in local politics across the United

States. In Oxnard, California, city administration is calling for the opinions of the local middle-

class population for feedback on how to improve the city. The City of Oxnard recently sent out

three thousand surveys to the local residents and asked them about various situations in the

community. The survey asks about local issues like the expansion of the Oxnard Airport, the use

of College Park, the growth rate of the city and more. The residents are also being asked to rate

their police, fire, library and utility services. 106 64

The feedback is expected to be tabulated by

April of 2002 and based on the results the city is already planning a marketing campaign to those

that have concerns.

The City of Oxnard is already preparing some television spots on local network and cable

channels in the area. The television spots are geared at the local residents as well as those who

live in nearby communities and are meant to play up the charm of the city. Currently two

commercials are being produced. One of the commercials will focus on a number of

characteristics; particularly the city’s temperate weather, strong agricultural industry, its

restaurants, and its proximity to the Pacific Ocean. Meanwhile a second commercial will spend

time emphasizing the city’s ethnic diversity, local residents commenting on the quality of the

city libraries, cultural events and recreation opportunities. 65

It is clear that the middle-class will

be the main demographic that these commercials are geared towards by the actions, but more

importantly, the associations that Oxnard city officials are making in the private sector tell a

more interesting tale.

The reason for the City of Oxnard to launch this advertising campaign is to combat an image

that does not appeal to middle-class America. Being that Oxnard’s majority ethnic group is

Latino (66.2%), along with that large number comes the stereotypes of barrios and gang warfare

or overcrowding and poverty. 66

Whether or not the presence of Mexican-Americans in such

prevalent numbers has anything to do with its current perception among the neighboring Ventura

County cities is another debate entirely. Yet, its history has helped to create the perception of

Oxnard as poor and “Mexican”. During the early 1900’s, Oxnard was founded as a farm town. It

follows that since it is a farm town, a sizable workforce was necessary to sustain the farm

industry. It also follows that since the majority of farm laborers are migrant workers, there is a

sizable Latino population in Oxnard. 67

Due to that history, Oxnard’s neighbors view it as a less

than desirable place to live. Many of the middle-class ends up living in Ventura or Camarillo

rather than in Oxnard. The City itself admits that they are concerned with the image of Oxnard in

the surrounding communities citing the illusion of poverty, overcrowding and crime. To combat

the negative perceptions the city has consulted the aid of the Economic Development

Corporation. The ECD is a non-profit private organization that was hired to change the

perception of Oxnard from negative to positive. And right to work the ECD went. 68

Steve Kinney is the Executive Director of ECD. He is already hard at work trying to change

the image of poverty, crime and overcrowding in Oxnard. According to Kinney, the City of

Oxnard currently has a population of 170,000. This population count is the highest of all other

cities in Ventura County. But Kinney does state that the city does have room to grow while he

cites no evidence to back up his claim. Kinney also states that Oxnard is continually attracting

more upper middle-class families with its high-paying technology jobs. This statement is backed

up with the fact that in 2001 the technology industry in Oxnard grew the greatest at a rate of

2,600 new jobs. The main companies that are arriving in Oxnard include Broadband

Technologies, PTI Technologies and Phillips Medical Systems. And as for crime, the latest

statistics indicate that Oxnard is the fifth safest city in America as compared with other medium

sized cities. 108 69

The big plans to make Oxnard more attractive beg the question of who are the

middle-class people; Oxnard is obviously pandering to a group that they have failed to define.

And while the local governments of the United States continue to promote their ad campaigns

targeting the middle-class, national politics are no different.

As recently as the Bush administration’s tax relief plan introduction in 2001, we have seen a

focus on the middle-class by politicians yet even they struggle to define the parameters in

concrete terms. In fact, when Scott Stanzel, spokes person for the White House, was asked who

belongs in the middle-class club he responded with a question:

What do other politicians say it is? [He later regrouped and responded as follows: The middle-class is made up of] people and families who work hard to make a living, pay taxes and put their children through school.

70

The real question is why the American political machine cares to define the middle-class at all.

Other experts in the field of economics point to a less than admirable agenda; to win elections.

James Newton, the director of the Keller Graduate School of Management believes that:

The government probably considers you middle-class if you pay taxes. From a politician’s standpoint, you’re middle-class if you are worth pandering to.

71

With this in mind, the ability to pacify the middle-class allows for the wealthy Americans to stay

in power and control the destiny of everyone’s money. It gives credence to arguments that hold

American government responsible for letting out an overly optimistic view of that state of affairs

in America and across the globe while still failing to define who is a middle-class member.

Perhaps a more sociological approach will bring light to the matter and finally answer the

question as to why American government doesn’t care who the middle-class people really are.

In sociology, the definition of social class contrasts with the views of the average American.

Average Americans tend to simplify the idea of social class with thoughts on persons who are

rich and others who are poor; and then there is the middle. Sociologists, on the other hand, are

less likely to simplify the matter while more likely to argue among each other over what criteria

should be used in identifying who belongs with what class. One prevailing approach to social

class definition involves the correlation between an individual’s wealth, power and prestige. 72

Given these parameters, it should be of no surprise to anyone exposed to European culture that

the primary dimension of the three listed above is the wealth characteristic. Thus, to gain a better

view of American social classes one must examine American wealth and its distribution.

For the purpose of this analysis, wealth will be a measure of income and property. In the

United States, there is about $23 trillion worth of property for a nation to share. (Property is

defined as real estate, corporate stocks, bonds, and business assets.) Yet the distribution of that

property is skewed in favor of the rich. Of the $23 trillion, about sixty-eight percent of it is

owned by ten percent of the nations families. And as one examines the top one percent of

American property holders, one realizes that the top one percent hold more wealth than the

bottom ninety percent. 73

Of course, it is to be expected that income is distributed in much the

same fashion. In an average single income family, the annual income is $23,000. For a family

that has two incomes, the number increases to $41,000 annually. 74

Going further, the top twenty

percent receives about half of all the income in the United States. The bottom twenty percent

earn about 4.4 percent of the income in America. One theme that appears to be constant is that

the rich are growing richer while poor are growing poorer as indicated by a six percent increase

in the top twenty percent and a 1 percent decrease in the bottom twenty percent in a period of

fifty years. 75

Wealth, however, is only one measure upon which to base a person’s classification

in American society.

The second characteristic to examine is power. The power holders in the United States are

also monopolized by a select few yet justified by a separation of powers system of government.

The idea of represented government, as in the Congressperson that you choose votes for you in

Congress, has been criticized. What emerges is a “democratic façade” that conceals the real

source of power. Elites put forth an ideology that everyone in the United States is making a

choice and that they are the real power when the reality is that the power lies solely in the hands

of those elites. This promotion of free will and choice not only perpetuates the elite control but

also legitimizes it in the minds of those that buy into the “democratic façade”. 76

And assuming

that the “democratic façade” is real, then there must be consideration given to the idea that in

power lies the power elite. 77

The power elite is a group of people that hold the majority of power in a society and make

the big decisions that dictate the direction that society will take. In the United States, the power

elite is a group of white males who are millionaires. These individuals are like-minded in that

they share the same interests as far as wealth and power go but also on a more social level. This

group interacts with each other, they vacation at the same spots, they attend and hold

membership to the same private clubs, they live among each other in the same type of

neighborhoods and so on. Given that these men are isolated among themselves and only interact

with each other, it is not surprising that they do not see the rest of the world. They take for

granted the position they have in life and learn not to see themselves as selfish or even that well

off. Instead, they reinforce their view of the world among themselves; rationalizing their deeds

among each other and finding other explanations for the ills of the world. What results is a

network of club members that are wealthy and powerful. These men use their influence to work

behind the scenes with politicians, many of whom are wealthy men with “old money”, and gear

American policy to their will. The idea of power seems to come with wealth. And the possession

of power and wealth brings forth one more trait.

It is almost automatically assumed that with money and power comes prestige; the idea that

who you are is somehow awe inspiring in and of itself. When looking at prestige more closely,

one realizes that it is related to the position in life that one occupies. Sociologists, and layperson

alike, will make the correlation that money and power bring prestige. And since money and

power can be acquired by ones occupation, it should follow that with occupation one may also

find prestige. To be certain, sociologists have broken down the characteristics of a person who is

regarded as being prestigious. Four traits come to mind; a persons occupation will bring prestige

in relation to the occupations pay, the amount of education required to secure the occupation, the

amount of abstract thought required to conduct the occupation adequately and the degree of

autonomy and personal freedom that one who holds the position is afforded. 112 78

But once

prestige is gained, there must be a way to show off the quality.

With the money, power and prestige comes a yearning to show it off. Groups of people that

are gaining wealth are likely to spend their wealth on items meant to show the world that they are

rich while others mean only to present the façade that wealth and power belongs to them.

Prestige can come in the form of persons wearing designer labels and purchasing luxury

automobiles. For others, the idea of associating themselves with prestigious labels is enough.

While some are able to both buy the designer labels and expensive cars as well as associate

themselves with prestigious names, others are not able to afford the luxury yet still associate

themselves with labels. Examples of making associations with prestigious labels include

residents of Los Angeles who state their city of residence as Beverly Hills yet must write down

their real zip code in order to get their mail in the San Fernando Valley. Another example comes

from the trade of imposter designer watches; fake Rolex’s and knock off fragrances available at

Venice Beach for pennies on the dollar. And what about those that are willing to pay for tuition

at Ivy League universities when education is really what you make of it. Certainly you are not

smarter if you go to a seemingly no name college and graduate first in the class than if you go to

the Ivy League and do the same. The difference is the price; the price of a status symbol to

display to others. 79

Now that we have examined the three most important measures of an individuals wealth we

can begin to look at one more aspect; the idea of an individuals status in relation to each of its

component indicators. Typically, an individual has the same status of wealth, power and prestige;

they are all interrelated. But there are those that have an imbalance in the level of status

indicators making them status inconsistent. The inconsistency can be minor or major depending

on an individual’s situation. But the assumption here is that typical Americans will try to

maximize their status by focusing on their highest-level status indicator and downplaying their

lowest level status indicator. On the other hand, those that are wishing to discredit others will

likely focus on the individuals lowest level status indicator and take attention away from that

individual’s highest status indicator. It is based on all of the above factors that one can begin to

develop a system to classify humans in American society.

The capitalist system in the United States has led to the development of a stratification of

humans within its society. After sociologists gather information, apply that information to the

three prong characteristic analysis outlined above and take into account the notion of

inconsistency, we can begin to develop a system that segregates persons into classes based on

their status indicators. One model based on status indicators was developed during the early to

mid 1990’s. 114 80

It contains six levels of social stratification. The following is a breakdown of

that six level system:

Social Class

Education Occupation Income

Capitalist Prestigious university Investors and heirs, a few top executives

$500,000 and up

Upper Middle

College or university, often with

postgraduate study

Professionals and upper managers

$90,000 and up

Lower Middle

At least high school; perhaps some college

or apprenticeship

Semiprofessionals and lower managers,

craftspeople, foremen

About $40,000

Working Class

High school Factory workers, clerical workers, low-paid retail sales, and craftspeople

About $30,000

Working Poor

Some high school Laborers, service workers, low-paid salespeople

About $18,000

Underclass Some high school Unemployed and part-time, on welfare

About $10,000

81 See note for further details of sources.

Based on the above chart we can see who we are talking about when we begin to analyze the

class structure within the United States.

At the top of the list is the capitalist class made up of new money and old money. Members

of this group are so wealthy that they have more than the bottom 90 percent combined. This

group will pass on their influence and wealth to their heirs perpetuating a continuous cycle of the

monopolization of this class level. This group makes up the power elite and controls the media,

corporations and businesses of the world. This group is capable of shaping the direction the

United States takes in the future and have wielded their influence to shape America’s direction in

the past. The new money that enters this class are suspect because they are not old money; new

money lacks prestige. The groups that are old money are even registered in the Social Registrar,

a white pages of the most prestigious and wealthy one-tenth of one percent. New money can gain

access to this club by going to the “right schools” and marrying old money. 82

The upper middle class is shaped by education. Those that gain education are likely to join

this group. This group manages the companies run by the Capitalist group. Once in this group,

the individual has “made it” in American society although they do not carry the prestige of the

capitalists. The parents of this group urge for education of their children so they can remain in

this group. 83

Next is the lower middle class. These members follow the orders of the upper middle class in

their occupations. The lower middle class is affected the most by inflation and taxation. They

generally enjoy a good life. This group tends to blend in with the working class. The line is

blurry but in general the lower middle class has more prestigious jobs and earn more money.

The working class is made up of skilled blue and white-collar workers. Working class

members have jobs that have more supervision and are more routine oriented. The working class

has less education than the lower middle class members. To gain income, the working class must

gain seniority at their places of employment. 84

The working poor are the unskilled laborers, temporary workers or seasonal laborers.

Sharecroppers, migrant workers, house cleaners and day laborers make up this class. This group

is not likely to vote nor read about American politics. They generally feel that no matter who is

elected to office, their situation will remain the same. This group may find work full time but

may still have to depend on government subsidies to make ends meet. This group lives paycheck

to paycheck; usually just one week away from being homeless. 116 85

The lowest group is the underclass. This group is associated with the inner-city and has

virtually no connection to the job market. This group tends to rely on government subsidies such

as welfare and food stamp programs. The homeless population of the America is included in this

class. 86

And now a discussion about what we can learn from this classification system; basically

what the capitalist class already understands.

Since the capitalists are in possession of most of the wealth and power they are able to

control the corporations and the government. Because of this, and that fact that they are the

architects of their social policies, the government is put together to serve their interests alone.

The problem comes up when the rest of society are fed up with the way things are run in the

United States. One way of pacifying the masses is to give them the idea that representative

government is a good way to run the nation; the “democratic façade”. For the top one percent,

the way to keep their wealth in their hands lies most importantly in the handling of the rest of the

United States. In order to obtain the control of the people, the top 1 percent utilizes their interests

in government, corporations and the media to create a fools paradise.

In government, the top 1 percent keeps things in their favor by influencing the political elite

that run the United States. Any and all policies that are endorsed and carried out by the American

government are always beneficial to that government. Looking back on the discussion about the

architects of policy being the main beneficiaries of that policy, it is made clear how and why

such a system is in place. Another way to push their interests is to unite the citizens of the United

States under one umbrella of shared interests. For this purpose, the American government

purposefully fails to define who belongs in the middle-class. Rather, everyone is encouraged to

be in the middle-class; especially during election season. Public interest is geared toward this all-

inclusive idea so that no one feels left out. In local government, the middle-class is also appealed

to in order to keep the local elites in power and able to serve their top 1 percent interests.

And for those that are not in the middle-class group, they become stigmatized. The homeless,

the poor and the criminals of America are giving a bad name and made to seem as if they do not

work hard enough to be in the middle-class. All social reform, homeless assistance, welfare to

work, subsidized housing, are meant to push the underclass to the very next level; the poor

working class. Meanwhile, the middle-class is taught to look down upon the under class while

giving support to the capitalist class. What results is an undefined mass of people that are

considered middle-class. Those that are not middle-class are urged to join it or work to maintain

the image of a united front. And along with the unity against the underclass and in favor of the

capitalist class comes more manipulation to maintain not only union but also occupation.

It just so happens that the capitalist class is in control of the corporations of America. The

corporations, thus, serve at least two purposes. One is to maintain the wealth of those in charge

of the corporations and another is to keep the middle-class occupied with a lifestyle obsession.

Corporations begin to market homes, credit cards, household items, furniture, timeshares, food,

anything to create an image. Also images are marketed in the form of exercise videos, diet

supplements, beauty aids, and clothing. In addition, health is also used to create a sense of

urgency to maintain livelihood; dead people cannot buy much more than funeral related items.

We have commercials meant to market drugs, supplements and other devices. All of these

interests are marketed to the middle-class so well that those who are members of the working

class tend to use the same items as those who are members of the upper middle-class. They all

are concerned about their hairstyle, the car they drive, the house they live in, the magazines they

read and the fast food that they consume. In the end there is no need to worry about crime or

poverty. The pursuit of happiness comes in the form of increasing ones income in order to move

into a bigger home and drive a more expensive car. The rating of ones lifestyle tends to coincide

with the amount of money they earn in a year. The “middle-class” is taught that the more one

makes, the happier they will be; an empty guarantee. But how does corporate America keep

“middle-class” America from being distracted by the reality in the world?

In order to keep “middle-class” America pre-occupied with their lifestyle obsession, there

must not be bad news. And if there is bad news than it must be far enough away so that “middle-

class” America can feel safe enough that they continue thinking that cell phones and luxury cars

matter. And given that corporations run the news and the capitalists run corporations, it is no

surprise that the media itself is skewed in favor of the interests of the capitalists. The war on

terrorism has no clear objective. It is relying on the idea that “middle-class” Americans should

feel safe to shop and spend in the consumer economy. It is based on the idea that “middle-class”

Americans should invest in the New York Stock Exchange and have faith that prosperity will

return. All of these ideas are vague and tend to hide the real objective behind the war; to take

control of oil in the middle-east so that car companies can continue to produce gas guzzling

SUV’s and oil companies can bring the gas prices down to a manageable level. Americans think

they are a democracy yet they attempt to take over the world like they are dictators. This is why

American government must pacify the “middle-class” into supporting their actions. And for the

most part, the media plays a huge role in being pro-American based on little to no evidence to

support their conclusions.

These writings have chronicled instances when the truth about issues has been obscured in

the interest of the capitalists. Professor Al-Arian here earlier is discussed to show how someone

is singled out and made a scapegoat to make sure that the “middle-class” finds their attention on

a side note example of bad news. With the attention on a harmless professor in Florida, the

government is free to maneuver about and harass individuals who are dissenters to governmental

policy; such as documented by the visits to individuals that do not concur with American policy

by the FBI. American media likes to focus on dog mauling cases and three strikes laws being

ruled unconstitutional or mothers that drown their five children in bathtubs while the power elite

continue to make decisions that will increase their wealth and, if things work out okay, will

possibly improve life for the masses but even if that does not happen it does not matter.

We have examined why the American power elite in any form does not emphasize

sociological explanations for stratification in American society. We have explained exactly who

belongs into what class in American society. We have seen how a unity among these groups into

one group makes for a safer America for the power elite to continue functioning in their interests.

Should the middle-class break up and work in their own interests, there is enough people in the

bottom half to cause a revolt and force change. They will not until they recognize that they are

not “middle-class”. They are the most likely to revolt if they were not preoccupied with a

lifestyle obsession and a set of news outfits that emphasize a few stories of extreme nature. And

given that at every turn we are subjected to more brainwashing in the form of commercialization

via entertainment, education, immigration proceedings, and all other routines that the “middle-

class” commonly take part in, there is going to be great difficulty in making the victims of this

marketing scam realize that they are being scammed.

The American “middle-class” wants to exist so bad that they are willing to ignore that they

have been brainwashed into believing in themselves as a class. But such an idea goes against the

grain of what American democracy is supposed to be; classless. The idea that a person can work

hard and become a member of any income tax bracket is a lie meant to perpetuate the power

elites monopoly. In the end there is little that one can do that can serve themselves while not

serving the power elite’s interests. But with awareness that one is not a member of the “middle-

class” will come the questions that break up the façade of union and camaraderie among

themselves and those that earn more money and live in more expensive neighborhoods. The need

to be united should come more in terms of shared interests in the group and not how the group

can operate in the interest of the power elite. By not shopping at the corporate wholesalers and

going back to the mom and pop operations one can begin to be free again. By not buying into the

lifestyle obsession that is peddled at every opportunity one can begin to think for themselves and

live life as they feel fit; in the interest of their own well being. By rejecting the idea that money

is the key to all happiness, by not rating ones home by its value, by not rating ones job by its

income, there comes a sense of sanity that has not been felt for many for a long time. We all

think that there is more to life than shallow wealth and petty fixes for the urges we have been

nurtured to develop; it is time we all agreed that they are petty and that they are not necessary.

Failing to Conform

In American society, as with any society, there is a price to be paid for failing to conform

with the norm. Sometimes it is a small price like the strange look that a misfit will get from the

crowd as he walks down the street to buy lunch. Other times the price is very expensive and can

cost one their lives like a gay man who does not act masculine enough and falls victim to the

rage of other men that have been raised to hate those that are different than themselves. Today

American society has an artificially maintained set of norms that are meant to stay in place for

the comfort of the wealthy elite. We have examined the basis for such notions by making

correlations between ancient Greek democracy and American democracy. We have researched

the ideas of immigrants coming to America to be slaves. We have touched on the consequences

of corporate America’s maneuvers; consequences that indirectly lead to immigration to the

United States. The point is that there is no room for the non-conformists of the world and they

are dealt with in the harshest manner possible.

There are many groups of people that are non-conformists. Some of them are seemingly

harmless just like the trench coat mafia that allegedly became involved in the Columbine High

School shootings. Other non-conformist groups are considered a real threat like the Chicano

gangs that sell drugs and fight over neighborhood pride in the streets of Los Angeles. But there

are also non-conformists that question the actions of the government. There are those that have

well reasoned arguments that fly in the face of American governmental policy and also make the

lives of corporate managers a little less comfortable. And much like Nazi Germany once did to

Jewish populations, American governmental interests must do away with the non-conformists

that pose the most threat. Those that would make too much sense and sway an entire nation out

of the dark ages and into the light. Those such as Martin Luther King who questioned the Jim

Crow laws of the south are at first hit with resistance but than gain the support of the moderate

elite which leads to change for the better. But his struggle is only one of a thousand struggles that

are now going on today. Why do we not hear about them?

Maybe some of us have and already realize that it is in the best interest of the corporations

that deliver the news to the world to keep those that dare shine light on the ugliness in America

in the shadows. But for those that do not, you will see that there is a strong economic benefit in

keeping the American public docile and calm. And while it is possible to go into many different

aspects of non-conformism, we must limit ourselves to a few examples in order to maintain our

over all focus on the big picture. Hence, we will focus on only three classifications of a non-

conformist all related to the working poor in ways that maybe we haven’t thought much about.

As a member of the working poor it is conceivable that they will end up being working poor

for their entire lives or they will go down one of the three non-conformist roads drawn here. The

working poor have the potential to remain working poor. However if luck and health give out

than the working poor can become the homeless. As a homeless person the poor are not much

use to corporate America and are to be dealt with in as inexpensive a fashion as possible. It is the

homeless that give America a black eye and must be explained away as sick or lazy. But the

working poor can also become fed up with a double standard of living and take action. When this

happens the working poor become activists. It is as activists that the American media will harm

their cause and push for their shunning and, at times, criminalization. The activist can then go

back to being a member of the working poor or they can move onto the punishment phase for not

conforming. It seems that rising to the level of criminal is a distinction reserved for only the most

dangerous activists. And by dangerous it is meant that they can do the most harm to American

society and the wealthy elite. They speak the truth and they are not to be shut up and put away

forever. They are loud and they get attention. They gain a following and they do provoke change.

It is when change comes that these criminals go back to being activists: American society has

pacified them with concessions. One thing that all of these non-conformist group members seem

to have in common; they all believed that they were free.

There remains one freedom that is not blasted at individuals on billboards and in presidential

speeches; the right for Americans to control their own government. The government has instead

fed the public a platter of freedoms and given them an entity to hate. Do not let your hate

consume your ability to reason. Rather allow your reasoning to consume your ability to hate.

One modern example of this notion came after the September 11 attacks. By simply recognizing

that you may be consumed with hate over the attacks you can come to the realization that your

hate has been utilized to support government action against a target pointed out by the American

government. Think about why the American government may be so adamant about going to the

Middle East to regain control of terrorist activities. Questioning the true intention of American

intervention in the Middle East defies the norm but must be done.

What was operation enduring freedom about? If memory serves us all correctly, the plan was

to kill Osama Bin Laden for a crime he may or may not have committed. Sure, evidence exists

that Bin Laden was behind the attacks of September 11 but we are not here to debate whether or

not he was. Instead we should focus on the shifting objectives of the operation. Today the

objective seems to be turning into an invasion of Iraq, the ousting of Saddam Hussein and the

domination of south central Asia. Is it not funny that the operation changed gears so quickly and

seemed so well orchestrated? So well organized the plan is that many are heralding the

effectiveness of the American military machine as genius for coming together so strongly and so

quickly after the September 11 attack. Perhaps too quickly. . .

Consider the corporate benefit of a war in the Middle East. The oil reserves in the area, if

controlled by the United States, would bring much stability to American corporations including

the auto industry and oil companies. Consider the current presidents interest in gaining control

over oil in the Middle East; a man whose fortune was derived from the oil fields of Texas. A man

who owes many favors to many oil companies that have contributed millions to a campaign to

put him in the White House. Now consider a news article that states the following:

President George Bush's claim the U.S. invaded Afghanistan to "defend democracy" and/or "stamp out terrorism" is certainly not the whole story. The Pentagon had drawn up plans to invade Afghanistan, and U.S. Special Forces were operating in Kyrgyzstan, well before 9/11. Over the past five months, the U.S. has established permanent military bases in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and facilities in Kazakstan. In short, a constellation of air and army bases designed for long-term strategic control of the region, under the command of the newly activated U.S. 3rd Army. 126

87

The next question should address the news article above. Why would a journalist make these

accusations up? Is there anything to be gained from the lie other than fifteen minutes of fame or

is there a real truth behind the above remarks. We should also consider what, if true, the above

statements have to do with the interests of the American government and the American

corporation.

Given the situation that the American president finds himself in, as indicated above, we can

consider the objectives referenced by the news article above. Consider that Saddam Hussein is in

control of a lot of oil. Consider that removing Hussein from power in Iraq, and giving that power

over to American government and corporations, would allow Americans to gain control of the

second largest source of oil in the Middle East. 88

That much oil in the hands of an American

government must be quite eye opening when you consider the profits that could be attained, the

votes that could be secured and the political campaign contributions that could be generated. But

don’t stop looking at operation enduring freedom just yet.

Consider the fact that the establishments of U.S. military bases in Afghanistan coincidentally

are following the new “silk road” into south central Asia. The silk road is a planned pipeline that

would carry oil and gases from Asia south into Pakistan. Consider the interests that the United

States government and American corporations would have in such an endeavor. Consider what

all of the above mentioned parties are neglecting not out of stupidity but more likely out of

convenience. The warnings have been given to the United States government officials.

Warnings that they not get involved in Afghan tribal and ethnic politics, not to set up

permanent military bases, not to push further into Central Asia, not to convert Pakistan into a

pawn of the American government. 89

Such intervention is a Vietnam all over again; drawing in

more and more time while losing sight of any sense. But it does serve the American corporation

so the rest does not really matter. This truth will not be leaked to the media for publication

however; the media corporation machine would rather push the pro war propaganda and call it

news. The media brings the American people into focus on what it wants you to see. The above

has been obscured purposely so that the general population will blindly support the retributive

punishment of a nation with circumstantial evidence proving said nation’s guilt. The focus has

been shifted away from dissenters.

On March 12, 2002 a group came together to announce that they would put on a campaign to

support the war on terrorism. Americans for Victory Over Terrorism, or AVOT, is a group made

up of powerful neo-conservatives. Their objective is to “take to task those groups and individuals

who fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the war.” 90

Full-page ads began appearing in the

New York Times on March 10 making associations between radical Islam and other past

enemies that the United States government has singled out; communism and fascism. The ad also

stated that war dissenters are really pushing a “blame America first” agenda of some sort and

using the war as an opportunity to push that agenda further. The ad also revisits McCarthyism by

naming persons that are “threatening”. Among those listed are Jimmy Carter, Maxine Waters,

Dennis Kucinich, Robert Kuttner and Lewis Lapham; the reason they are listed is because they

have made criticisms about the war on terrorism. 128 91

Such actions are guilt by association

tactics that are baseless. An analysis of the motives behind AVOT would bring light to this

situation.

AVOT is headed by a group of rightwing business people including former Secretary of State

and drug Czar William Bennett. The group's Senior Advisors include former CIA director R.

James Woolsey; former Reagan Pentagon official Frank Gaffney; William P. Barr, attorney

general under George Bush, Sr; and mega-political donor Lawrence Kadish. 92

All would gain a

lot business if oil in the Middle East came under the control of the American government. Thus,

all of the above named business people would support the maneuvers American armed forces are

currently enacting. So strongly are their beliefs that they will gain from the war is evidenced by

their willingness to create a coalition to discredit the dissenters and spend $128,000 to launch an

advertising campaign. 93

It is in their best interest to keep the dissenters from making too much

noise. It is in their best interest to make the general public hate Islam like they hated

Communism and fascism.

Hate is motive for supporting retaliation much like Nazi Germany’s motivation for the

elimination of the Jew. The American population will be no better than those that attack the

American civilians if they do so out of hate. The attitude of destroying the dissenting opinion to

cover up the above truths are operating well. Support of the war effort is high while dissenters

are being called traitors or mislead. The traitors are the activists and the criminals. The mislead

are strong, educated people that have nothing to gain personally from supporting either a war or

a cease-fire. The activists and criminals do not wish to harm you; only making you aware is the

agenda. With awareness will, hopefully, come action and with action will come change. Those

that would hold the Germans of the 1940’s responsible for not questioning their government’s

action would be hypocrites if they fail to question the acts of the American government today.

Those that would call Senator Joseph McCarthy’s actions to rid the government of communists

an act of blind persecution, condemning his actions, would also be hypocrites if they also support

the actions of the American government to stifle or discredit the voices of the dissenters. This

can all end now if the majority is shown to be captured by their greed and their self-interest. We

can stop the greed and the self-interest with the destruction of the myths used by the American

government and the American corporation.

Activists

With Charles Sepulveda

Like has been argued before, Americans have grown up believing that they are free. We have

all heard how great our freedom is in comparison to that of other countries. But these freedoms

are set against the backdrop of American social norms and any deviation warrants a

stigmatization of the deviator. It was in the post September 11 era that such stigmatizations

became painfully clear. We learned that we had the freedom to buy an American flag and put it

in windows of our cars and homes. We learned that we had the freedom to watch the news come

in from only a handful of mainstream cable shows. We had the freedom to choose one nation to

blame and bomb in retribution for attacks on American soil. We had the freedom to favor god

over Allah. And the scariest thing of all was that we were free to watch as the American

Government pushed aside the civil rights of the American citizens to make sure that we are

“safe” from terrorist activities. And sometime between the fall of the World Trade Center and

today we have lost the freedom to choose and are left with the freedom to conform; we have no

choice at all being that nonconformance with the status quo is likely to cause stigmatization of

that individual.

A democracy is power by the people, for the people. We are supposed to have a right to let

our voices be heard, and yet the majority remains silenced by scare tactics and lack of media

coverage. The current times in the aftermath of the 9/11/01 terrorism are a time in which we all

need to look out for our freedoms being attacked. Not so much by terrorists, but by American

governmental interests. Attorney General, John Ashcroft justifies anti-terrorism bills that are

meant to terrorists and erode national unity while diminishing resolve. Do lost protect United

States citizens, but also infringe on our civil rights with arguments about a need to focus on

honest, reasoned debate, and not fear-mongering. Aschcroft believes that those who scare peace-

loving people with phantoms of lost liberty are only enacting tactics that aid liberties really give

strength to American enemies and pause to American friends while encouraging people of

goodwill to remain silent in the face of evil? Ashcroft’s own thoughts on a need to focus on

honest reasoned debate is a thought lost on himself as evidenced by his willingness to ignore the

please of those who wish to protect civil liberties and placing them in a generalized group of

those that would aid terrorism. Such assumptions ignore the well-reasoned debate that civil

liberties champions advocate. Let us explore what is ignored.

It appears that we are just short of making the very questioning of the American government

a terrorist act. Republicans, Democrats, and all the rest on the Left and Right question what the

American government is doing with the best of intentions. Ashcroft would have everyone believe

that those that ask questions about the loss of civil liberties are “those who scare peace-loving

people”. The people who ask that the American government not be allowed to arbitrarily stop

and search anyone who happen to look like what a terrorist should look like are not trying to

scare peace loving people because doing so would be to scare themselves. Those who want to

stop the desecration of civil liberties love peace just as much as those who want to have more

freedom to stop the terrorist attacks. We must remember that no one in the American government

advocated the arbitrary stopping and searching of white males in their 30’s when Tim McVeigh

bombed the Oklahoma Federal Building. Why should it be any different now?

It seems that the underlying message may be that the aiding of terrorism comes from the

financial and moral support of groups that do not believe in the American system of

globalization. American policy on such support is being targeted and stopped by any means

necessary. The fearful American government will do anything to stop an ethnic group from

getting to the level of militant aggression against the United States. Such developments should

bring up questions about whether or not your government is tossing around the idea of placing

American ethnic groups into concentration camps. Although it is only speculation now, it still

remains true that the only way for that to happen is if you give up your civil liberties. If you

think that all ethnic groups are to be segregated and watched like the Japanese American’s were

after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, then the government by the people and for the people is really

the government by white people and for white people: the only safe group of people left in

America are fast food eating, SUV driving upper middle class people. Are these the patriots of

today? Patriots did not start out as this; they themselves started a revolution of their own.

We are all taught by the American system of education that the founding fathers of this

nation were patriots. They questioned the British crown and started a war that ended English

rule. Today, those that question government are not advocating that the American government be

overthrown only that they move carefully. Those who question what the government is doing

during wartime are patriotic in the sense that they are upholding the virtues of the constitution

and many of those citizens hope to secure the Bill of Rights for all Americans. If more people

had stood up to the government instead of being complacent during WWII, the Japanese would

not have been unfairly interned in camps. They were American citizens who had their

constitutional rights hijacked by their own government. The Bill of Rights amended the

Constitution of the United States of America to include rights and civil liberties to the citizens of

America. One of these rights is Freedom of Speech and this has become a proud virtue for

Americans. Questioning the government’s role in protecting these rights is not a terrorist act but

is in fact an act of patriotism. Furthermore, taking away the rights is an act of terrorism.

Benjamin Franklin once wrote, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little

temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Now Ben Franklin is not the perfect model

to follow since his argument is moral rather than rational. Nonetheless, even he concluded that

such safety would be temporary. The real issue here is the consideration of the cost of temporary

safety.

It all begins with a statement that conflicts with the interests of national security. Sometimes

it takes even less than a statement. The mere insinuation that there may be a thought that does

not conform to the mainstream is drawing more and more attention in the post September 11 era.

These are not the actions of activists for the most part but the actions of normal people that live

seemingly average lives. It is the American government that has launched a campaign to prevent

further acts of terrorism on American soil that have lead to over zealousness; acts which may be

crossing the thin line between investigation of leads and harassment of American citizens.

David Cole is a first amendment scholar and warns that abuses by the Federal government

directed at political dissenters are tantamount to 134 the trampling of free speech. He goes on to

recommend, “The FBI should investigate any credible leads where federal criminal activity may

be undertaken. But it should avoid investigating any political conduct.” 94

Nonetheless, John

Achcroft has maintained his stance on weeding out those that would present any threat real or

imagined from the American landscape at the cost of any civil right. That being said, the FBI is

hot on the trail of most any person who happens to utter the wrong opinion.

In the post September 11 era Federal agents have subjected many Americans to

interrogations based on minimal provocation or evidence of criminal activity. A.J. Brown is a

student at Durham Technical Community College in North Carolina. Two agents from the FBI

visited her one day to pursue an investigation about the presence of “un-American” material in

her apartment. Ms. Brown, aware of her rights, refused to let them inside her apartment since

they had no search warrant. At the doorway, the agents and Ms. Brown spoke for 40 minutes

and, according to Ms. Brown, the agents took note of whatever they could see from her doorway;

namely a poster of George W. Bush. The poster depicted Mr. Bush holding a hangman’s noose

in his hand while a text bubble read, “We Hang On Your Every Word”. 95

That is all the

information available from Ms. Brown and the FBI. The strange thing is that the FBI must have

had even less information. Without some sort of evidence beyond someone reporting Ms. Brown

as having “un-American” material we find that her threat is very real and very seriously taken.

And while it appears that no real infringement of Ms. Browns rights have come out of this

encounter, it begs the question of how close the government is willing to get to that fine line

between investigation and harassment before it crosses it. Or has the government gone too far

already?

In San Francisco agents visited Barry Reingold on October 23, 2001. Reingold was

wondering why a couple of agents would be interested in the information held by a 60 year old

retired phone company worker. The agents spoke with Reingold in the hallway of his apartment

complex and asked if he had worked out at a certain gym. It was after that question was asked

that Reingold realized the reason for the visit; it seems that Mr. Reingold works out at this gym

and discusses politics with others. Reingold harkened back to a time when, in the post September

11 era, the discussion at the gym turned to Osama Bin Laden and his horrible, murderous ways.

Reingold responded that he agreed with the Bin Laden assessment but went on to discuss his

opinion of George W. Bush. Reingold stated, “Bush has nothing to be proud of. He is a servant

to the big oil companies and his only interest in the Middle East is oil.” This statement provoked

others in the gym to remark on his disloyalty as an American. Apparently one of the patrons

went so far as to make contact with the Federal government and report Reingold’s “evil doings”.

96 And how much further are we going to let this go before we stand up and fight back?

In spite of the shocking reports, the future of activism is going down a road that is not new.

(Perhaps what should shock us is that the Federal government has not learned from its past

mistakes.) Such activities and resulting visits from the FBI are reminiscent of the red scare of the

1950’s when communism was a bad word. Barry Steinhardt is the associate director of the

American Civil Liberties Union and finds the above examples disturbing. Mr. Steinhardt

believes, “All of this speaks 136 of the new McCarthyism. It is a frightful trend: that people are

doing nothing more than expressing the freedoms that we are fighting to preserve – and find

themselves with the FBI at their door”. 97

It brings much apprehension to those that would wish

and work for change. It makes one wonder how far the government will go to stifle the voices of

the dissenters. It also makes us wise to understand the past deeds of this American government.

Understanding the past atrocities bestowed upon activists in our history can only serve us with

what to expect from the American government as we forge forward for change. Respectfully

submitted for your consideration; Reies Lopez Tijerina.

Once there lived a man that, like many of us start out, no one ever heard of. He became upset

with the way “his people” were treated in their own land. At first, he made a lot of conservatives

upset but soon the conservatives were scared. In the end, the brief period of recognition that he

gained in the late 60’s seems to have been forgotten today. Only a few of the mainstream people

know who he is and acknowledge that he existed. It seems modern day historians do not know

where to put this man in the context of their work and choose to ignore him all together. And

now, in the post September 11 era, we are in a state of siege in which any mention of a non-

conformist could result in consequences we wish not to see. Nonetheless he must be

acknowledged.

Mr. Tijerina was a minister in the 1950’s and broke from his church to start his own

separatist society with those he affectionately referred to as “the brave ones”. The reason for his

departure was to ensure that his children and those children of the brave would wake up and see

that they were being brainwashed by an American education system that refused to recognize the

contributions of Native American and Chicano culture to the rest of America. Tijerina found that

his utopian society was not to be allowed by the American government or his neighbors. The

brave ones and Tijerina went off to be alone. They pooled their money and bought land in the

vicinity of Eloy, Arizona that he referred to as The Valley of Peace. Mysteriously, the homes

they built suffered vandalism while they were away picking cotton. Tijerina believed that the

neighbors and the police of the area were in cahoots to look the other way when crimes were

committed against his people and circumstantial evidence tends to suggest that he was right.

Also, the school board of the area became involved with his situation citing that the children of

the brave ones were to attend a public school; ignoring the fact that Tijerina sought and obtained

permission to teach the children of The Valley of Peace at home. Tijerina tried to present his case

to the courts but they were not listening. Precedent of private, at home schooling was offered

such as the Quaker and Amish societies in New England but they were ignored and the children

were ordered to attend public school. It was then that Tijerina lost his faith in the American

system of Justice but he did not give up on his vision for a Valley of Peace.

The several attempts to stop the Valley of Peace residences from continuing to teach their

children at home gained Tijerina attention from the working class poor. Tijerina, an uneducated

man, soon became a trusted and respected person in his circle of peers and was often asked to

help out with the legal problems faced by individuals. It was because of his reputation that

Tijerina was sought for advice over most any legal issue. Thus, it was not unusual when a local

woman asked for Tijerina’s help in getting her husband out of jail. He investigated the case and

persuaded the courts to release the man from custody. It was two days later that Mr. Tijerina was

arrested for attempting to free his own brother from prison based on evidence that seems to not

exist. Mr. Tijerina later wrote about this encounter:

I was released on a $1,000 bond. My appointed lawyer told me that the local politicians did not want me around. He advised me to leave the state of Arizona; otherwise, they would kill me. He also told me that the Anglo that I had helped get released from jail and his wife would testify against me. “Leave while you are still alive,” my lawyer told me.

98

Mr. Tijerina was making enemies with his presence even at this early stage in his life. It was not

even an operation of activism that led to his incarceration and his brave ones being driven out of

the Valley of Peace. Nonetheless, the options of where to go next were considered especially

after Tijerina was contacted by a group of IndioHispanos. They told Tijerina of the ways in

which lawyers and judges had failed to enforce land title claims made by their ancestors. It was

not just a few isolated cases however; it involved thousands of people and millions of acres. Just

prior to the incident in Arizona, Tijerina visited these people in New Mexico and offered to help

them if he could. As it turned out the people from New Mexico were going to have to help him

stay alive. He and his brave ones voted to leave Arizona and go to New Mexico and join forces

with the group of IndioHispanos that felt ripped off and intimidated by those that currently

occupied their ancestral lands. In the meantime Tijerina was developing many biases towards

Anglos and a kinship toward any minority that were victimized by those Anglos. His concern for

what he called “his people” was born out of his belief that Anglos were aligned to defraud those

in the southwest that were the descendants of the original settlers there. In this sense, those

interested in maintaining their monopoly over the land and wealth of the southwest drove

Tijerina into a life of activism.

Mr. Tijerina was a criminal before he was an activist. If it had not been for the political

influences on his brave ones in the Valley of Peace, perhaps Mr. Tijerina would be there today

teaching his grandchildren and toiling in the cotton fields for food. Mr. Tijerina’s mistake was

that he worked against the interests of the wealthy landholders of the southwest. Mr. Tijerina

helped those that would seek shelter after crossing the Mexican-American border illegally. The

Valley of Peace boasted some one hundred sixty acres of refuge from labor exploitation,

deportation and American public education. Such a sanctuary was not in the interest of the local

politicians and landowners. It is too bad they did not allow Mr. Tijerina his modest sanctuary. It

is too bad that their greed drove him to New Mexico. It is conceded that Mr. Tijerina, the savior,

was bad for the local power and wealth holders but Mr. Tijerina, the activist, was gone and

would soon invoke national headlines in the newspapers that read, “Revolution in New Mexico”.

Perhaps frustrated, perhaps tired of being pushed around but especially sick of all the

manipulation of the people, Mr. Tijerina set out for New Mexico to dodge the threats he was

warned about by his public defender in Arizona. In this sense he was a criminal; a fugitive from

justice. His plan was to wait out the statute of limitation on the charges of aiding in the attempt

of a convict to escape from prison. But the real action he was embarking on involved his entry

into the world of activism. Mr. Tijerina felt that he had a yearning to help and chose the

following words to express that yearning:

The tactics of scaring a community . . . to hide and mask the practices of discrimination and injustice done against those early settlers weren’t going to work on me. This was and is my hardest job: to clean up and awaken the consciousness of my brothers; to rescue them from their inferiority complex; to remove their fear.

99

His words express his yearning to fight back against the perception of an indestructible enemy;

one that had mastered its image so well that there was little else to do except keep up the image

of superiority and reap the benefits of that image. It is in this same vein of thinking that today we

stand motivated to move against a common enemy. But a united front against the single most

powerful enemy, both image wise and real, will yield quite a fight from that enemy. And in

battling such a large enemy there are tactics that go by undetected by most activists groups

today. Tijerina was successful, in part, because of his ability to see past the differences between

his supporters. Instead he was more focused on the common interests of Chicanos and

indigenous Americans.

Tijerina did something that activist groups of today seem to have a problem doing; he united

his cause with those that shared his interests. Even if the interests of another group was remotely

in common with his own he knew that power of unity was much greater than the need for

complete conformity. That is one lesson that activist groups can learn from history today; to keep

the momentum going forward toward the greater goal and avoid factionalism that will lead to a

fracture in the effort and a failure in the cause as a whole. Tijerina and his Chicano movement

united with Native Americans to fight for the ancestral lands that were to be granted to those that

originally settled the land in the southwest. With this union came a consensus upon which to

move forward. Out of this union came a scare that would make landholders in the southwest

nervous to say the least.

Tijerina’s plan was to have the United State and Mexico enforce the treaty of Guadalupe

Hidalgo. The treaty specified that ancestors of the original settlers of the southwestern region

were to inherit the land and hold title to it. The current landholders knew that the key to there

wealth was that private holding of the land. It was used to grow cotton and raise cattle. And the

proletariat, the Indiohispanos, were the burden bearers that made the land profitable for the

landholders. The kicker is that if the treaty were to be properly enforced, the current landholders

would lose their land; having to give it up to the proletariat. The proletariat would then be the

key wealth holders and the current landholders would have their ancestors exposed for what they

were; thieves. What Tijerina was suggesting was inconceivable to all that listened; he wanted the

landowners that were making money to give up their cash cows. He wanted the politicians of the

region, the puppets of the landholders and landholders themselves, to just walk away from their

fortunes and apologize for the wrong their ancestors had done. Tijerina scared everyone

including those that stood to inherit the land. Tijerina had to fight to unite and deprogram years

of manipulation out of those that stood to inherit the land. His methods were not unique.

Tijerina, after his union with Native Americans, formed Alianza Federal De Mercedes; an

organization built for a purpose that seems to have been lost on the public and can be assured is

shrouded in mystery today. It is best to recognize what the organization was not; it was not a

communist group, it was not an organization to gain all the disputed land titles, it was not an

attempt to give the southwest back to Mexico, it was not an attempt to overthrow the government

in the southwest and it was not an attempt by Tijerina to rip off the members of the organization.

In his memoirs, Mr. Tijerina tells us of an organization that had one goal in mind; to provoke the

American government, either state or federal, to investigate the land titles in dispute. All of the

other ideas about what the organization was about were the elite controlled media’s inventions to

discredit and kill the idea for the government to investigate Alianza’s land claim. It seems that of

all the people that Mr. Tijerina scared, which was probably everyone, he scared the wealthy elite

most of all as made evident by their reaction to his organization. But how was the Alianza really

working toward their goals? Or, to ask it another way, what were the politicians and landholders

of the southwest afraid he would discover?

Tijerina investigated the land grant claims by visiting the archives of the cities in New

Mexico. He was dumbfounded when he realized that many of the archival materials were lost in

one way or another. He concluded that the wealthy elite had conspired to destroy all records of

their thievery. The evidence is circumstantial but the reputation of the alleged thieves as well as

the gain they would achieve by conspiring to steal the land does make them look culpable at the

very least. All in all it appeared that the alleged thefts were done well because they were covered

up very nicely. For Tijerina, circumstantial evidence was enough given that he had developed his

biases towards Anglos. Thus he was not deterred by a lack of evidence or any other discouraging

events. He moved forward demanding the attention of anyone who would listen.

On July 2-4, 1966 the Alianza conducted their first public protest. They organized a march

from Albuquerque to Santa Fe in an effort to bring the attention of the media and the population

to their requests for the American government to investigate their land grant claims.

Unfortunately the local media of New Mexico was run by the wealthy elite and choose to ignore

the protest. Their next attempt at gaining attention came on July 11, 1966 when Mr. Tijerina led

the Alianza to speak with Governor Jack M. Campbell to discuss the land grant claims. At this

point the Alianza membership was growing more and more frustrated with the way they were

being treated by the politicians of New Mexico. Their frustrations were shared by the wealthy

elite that wished for them to return to their docile state of perpetual laboring. The Alianza did not

go away, however, and only gained more momentum as their protesting activities grew more

alarming to all involved.

The next protest involved the community of San Joaquin. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo

was meant to ensure that the original settlers and their descendants of the land in the San Joaquin

area would be allowed to subsist on the ancestral lands. Instead the land was taken over by the

current landholders. One of the landholders was the Federal government. The Federal

government had taken over a major portion of the ancestral lands and converted them into a

national park. Tijerina and the Alianza set their sights on the park as a new way of bringing

attention to the situation; the Alianza was now aspiring to take on the Federal government.

The idea here was to raise awareness in the San Joaquin area about the hijacking of the land

from its rightful owners. According to research conducted by Tijerina, a committee created by

the House of Representatives on July 22, 1854 investigated the land title. Perhaps due to records

being lost or legal maneuvering by the parties involved it took 144 nearly 20 years for the

committee to make any kind of final recommendation to congress. Hence, on February 14, 1873

the committee issued the recommendation to confirm the rights of the families that occupied the

land. Notwithstanding the confirmation of rights, the United States government approved the

granting of this very land to Thomas B. Catron and others prior to the confirmation of rights

while simultaneously stalling land grant hearings over the same disputed land with others that

applied citing the committee’s conclusion over the rightful occupation of the land by settlers and

their decedents. 100

Out of these events was born bitterness for the treatment of the families of the

original settlers of the land. Those that lost out on the land felt cheated by the American

government’s system of justice and by those that gained the land. A kinship emerged between

the descendents of the settlers and those that would push to have an investigation of these claims

launched. An act of symbolic reclaiming of stolen land was the plan to revive the awareness of

the people of San Joaquin.

On October 15, 1966 the Alianza and the people of San Joaquin seized the Echo

Amphitheater from the federal park officials by force and held it for the weekend. Once on the

Federal land, Tijerina and his followers began to place troopers under citizen’s arrest for

trespassing on the land. On October 22, 1967 law enforcement sent in James Evans to take

control of the situation. He had a reputation of being a white supremacist. Tijerina believes

Evans was called in to intimidate the people. If intimidation of the Alianza members and the San

Joaquin people was the plan then the plan did not work. Rather than instill fear in the people,

they pushed him aside and arrested more forestry agents. A court was put together by Tijerina

and his people and a trial held for these agents. They were charged with trespassing and found

guilty. They were sentenced to 30 days in jail and fined $500 but that sentence was suspended in

lieu of their agreement to leave the land and stop trespassing. In the end the Alianza made their

point and left the Echo Amphitheater voluntarily by the end of the weekend. The press, however,

did not mention the Alianza side of the story and stuck to the wealthy elite side of things. In the

end criminal charges were levied against Tijerina and Alianza members but not San Joaquin

residents. To Tijerina this was a show of respect for the rights of those people to occupy the land.

101 Unfortunately for those in need of justice, the respect Tijerina recognized in the actions of law

enforcement officials and the criminal justice system would be short lived. Tijerina and the

Alianza grew more agitated than ever over the American governments failure to investigate the

land grant claims. It seems that their logic was that the government would honor such a small

request and that there was little to fear over an investigation. When the American government

failed to act, the Alianza members grew more agitated. Their most militant act born out of

frustration would prove to be the most demanding on their freedom.

The pursuit of justice for a minority group has historically proven to be long and hard. For

the Alianza there was no deviation from historical precedent. Thus, they pushed through the

barriers to obtain some sense of justification from the government that they believed conspired to

steal land from its correct owners. As the Alianza kept asking questions and getting more and

more attention, the landholders became more and more agitated but mostly more fearful that

Tijerina’s request would reveal the thievery that took place hundreds of years before. On April

21, 1967 146 Tijerina met with Governor David F. Cargo. Representing all the people of the

southwest, Tijerina asked for help in provoking Congress to investigate land grant claims. Mr.

Cargo stated that he would do what he could. To the Alianza members it was another attempt to

pacify the movement to uncover the truth. They grew tired of the excuses and empty promises

made by politicians they contacted both in person and otherwise. The frustration mounted as they

headed forward in time. Soon, however, the frustration would grow not from neglect but from

legal maneuvering by those interested in killing the land grant movement all together.

Next the Alianza went to Tierra Amarilla New Mexico to bring attention to three land grants

that they wished to have the government investigate. On May 14, 1967 the Alianza organized a

rally to discuss what coarse of action to follow in gaining official oversight of these disputed

lands. All of these activities led to a court order that demanded Tijerina to turn over a list of the

members of the Alianza. To keep the records confidential the Alianza went underground

although officially Mr. Tijerina resigned as the president of the Alianza and disbanded the

organization all together. These events frustrated the people even further; the former Alianza

wanted to be recognized and not stopped at every turn while the powers that be wanted all of

these questions to cease being asked. 102

But the questions did stop for a moment as Mr. Tijerina

prepared for a confrontation with the wealthy elite.

Around the beginning of June 1967 Alfonso Sanchez was searching for Tijerina to serve him

with the paperwork ordering that a list of the Alianza membership be turned over to the courts.

Sanchez was a local district attorney that had aspirations for the Governor’s mansion of New

Mexico. He chose to go after Tijerina with a smear campaign. He wanted the publicity from

hunting down Tijerina to gain him votes when he ran for governor. He also painted the picture,

along with help from the local media, that Tijerina was a communist and a con artist who was

only using the people involved with the Alianza for his personal gain. Other accusations

insinuated that Tijerina was defrauding the Alianza members and taking their money. Not

surprisingly, none of the accusations had validity as far as can be discovered from the record. But

since the law enforcement of the southwest needed no proof to smear Tijerina’s image, they

pursued him wherever he reared his head. For Sanchez, the trail of Tijerina would take them to

Coyote New Mexico.

Sanchez knew that Tijerina was in the area of Coyote to attend an Alianza convention held

there. He sent thirty-five police officers to find him while simultaneously announcing, via the

media, that anyone who attended the Alianza convention would be arrested. Police agents

stopped all cars going toward Coyote with the intent to search for Tijerina. Tijerina felt that the

searches were meant not to find him but to intimidate the passengers going to the convention. In

spite of the local authority’s efforts, the meeting took place and the consensus at the meeting was

that Sanchez was being used by the powers that be like a pawn and they decided that the Alianza

would use its political influence to remove him from power when the time presented itself. 103

In

the meantime, the group arranged to meet again in Canjilon on June 4, 1967. The local

authorities knew that something was going to happened and kept watch.

The police kept up their check of every car that passed through and arrested many of the

Alianza leadership, confiscated guns from anyone that looked brown, confiscated any material

they found related to the San Joaquin occupation and generally spread the word that Tijerina was

their prime target. The radio brought news that eleven Alianza members would be charged with

various crimes in Tierra Amarilla. Meanwhile the meeting took place in Canjilon and the radio

continued to provide news. According to Tijerina, the radio announced that Sanchez would be at

the courthouse in Tierra Amarilla that day at 3:00 p.m. Tijerina quickly hatched a plan to place

Sanchez under citizen’s arrest for violating the civil rights of all those people that the police

harassed on the road due to his order. The Alianza members in Canjilon quickly concurred with

Tijerina and they began to plan the arrest of Sanchez that very day.

And seemingly out of thin air the plan was set in motion. One Alianza member was sent to

the Tierra Amarilla courthouse to report on the number of police that were present. Rosita

Tijerina, daughter of Reise, was to take in the first wave of people that would take Sanchez into

custody and to prevent all hell from breaking loose. The last thing that Tijerina, nor any of the

Alianza members, wanted was for someone to be hurt. Next, a caravan of cars was put together

to take an army of Alianza members to the courthouse to conduct a raid. The cars parked

strategically to make sure that the contact sent ahead was correct on the number of police

present. Then Rosita went inside with her wave of people. She was to go in and make sure that

everything was secure and then give a signal to the rest of the Alianza members to begin the raid.

A shot rang out and Rosita appeared a moment later with the signal to enter. Just then the twenty

members stormed the courthouse. Upon entry the Alianza attempted to keep everyone in the

courthouse present so as to keep the raid a secret. But one person, Eulogio Salazar, jumped out of

a window and a shot was fired. Tijerina says he saw blood on Salazar and knew right then and

there that this would haunt him and the Alianza cause. Salazar ran toward his car but was caught

on foot by Tijerina and others. They explained to him that an ambulance would treat him better

but he said nothing. Tijerina then ran back into the courthouse to find his entourage storming the

rooms upstairs and finding them empty. One door would not open so the members attempted to

break it down. Just then a shot came from the other side that nearly hit some of the members.

The agitated members shot through the lock and broke the door in to find a deputy terrified and

attempting to put his gun away. One of the members hit him in the face and knocked him to the

ground. Tijerina asked him for Sanchez and the deputy told them that he would not be showing

up as was announced on the radio. Upon hearing this, the group left the courthouse. The

courthouse raid was over but the affect of the raid was not yet felt across the United States.

Soon after the raid was over major news outlets began to report the incident. A national

audience was now being coveted. The National Guard was being called out to stop the

“criminals”. Salazar was found alive and told a policeman that the Tijerinas shot him; apparently

referring to the Alianza since some of the members were blood relatives of Reise including his

daughter Rosita who shared the name Tijerina. Reise states that later the police changed the

Salazar testimony to indicate that Reise Lopez Tijerina shot him. Meanwhile the raiders went

back to Canjilon and seven of the major players in the raid were set up with equipment and food

so that they could hide out in the mountains. Tijerina had a radio and commented that he heard a

change in the voices 150 of the reporters. To him the reporters no longer mocked his movement;

they were now scarred. The fear of Tijerina and the Alianza was made evident by the fact that

eight hundred national guardsmen would search for the group. Also the media found a new

nickname for Tijerina; they called him King Tiger. The world was now paying attention to the

plight of the Alianza. Headlines began to be sprawled across major newspapers reporting that a

Revolution was taking place in New Mexico. The goal was achieved and the world would

hopefully see the truth. Some five days later Mr. Tijerina turned himself into authorities in

Albuquerque. 104

The story of Tijerina the activist would soon become a story about Tijerina the criminal. The

period between his arrest and his trial saw his release on bond. He continued to work against the

Federal government via the March of the Poor and, most notably, an attempt to place chief

justice Warren Earl Burger under citizen’s arrest. A few details seem to be in dispute over two

trials for the same incident at Tierra Amarilla. After an acquittal in the first trial a second trial

was held in which Tijerina was convicted and sentenced to a hefty prison term. In spite of

arguments citing double jeopardy and collateral estoppel, which were persuasive to two separate

judges, the Supreme Court of New Mexico adopted a third judges decision which allowed the

conviction in the second trial to stand. 105

A few years in prison passed when he was released on

July 26, 1971. 106

According to Tijerina, he was released by the White House but he expected to

have another state related sentence kick in. When that did not happen he realized that the State of

New Mexico did not pursue the matter any further. From then on it appears the State and Federal

government were done paying attention to Tijerina. Such a move did not kill the Alianza

movement.

Tijerina continued to work for his cause after his release from prison. He also took time to

pen his memoirs in Spanish. Those memoirs were translated into English and reads like a diary

of events with editorial like commentary. In spite of his impact on the political landscape of

America, Tijerina has been largely forgotten. Some have speculated that such ignorance is

blatant while others argue that it is out of confusion as to methodology in addressing this volatile

character. Jose Angel Gutierrez, when writing the introduction to Tijerina’s memoirs felt this

way about the matter:

There is very little formal study in any institution of higher learning of the land recovery movement led by Tijerina and of the Chicano Movement. The man lives but has been relegated to that historical abyss of forgotten heroes.

107

Whatever the cause of his neglect, Tijerina remains active after all of these years. On October 19,

1999 he presented his archival material to the University of New Mexico. He also met with the

senior staff of then Governor George W. Bush addressing the land grant issue in Texas on

November 5, 1999. 108

Although there is no evidence to support this conclusion, circumstantial

evidence and the track record of the American media tells us that this “forgetfulness” was

probably orchestrated to serve the interests of the United States. Such a benign neglect, however,

can be used in favor of a movement to address the interests of the poor people of the world and

of the United States. It was such benign neglect that factored into the revolution against England

by the then English subjects colonizing the Americas. And while the story of Tijerina and 152

his struggle needs to be addressed by those that wish to make change today, his story also serves

as an example of countless lessons we need to learn.

Unfortunately the tie that breaks us still exists today as it did in the time of the Alianza

struggle and perhaps it always will. The problem of factionalism always comes up in the

grassroots organizations. Perhaps because of the factionalism that infests grassroots

organizations these groups have historically shown promise in making change for the better but

end up fizzling away. And such problems are not exclusive to the organizations of the poor; the

reform party of the mid 1990’s suffered its fair share of factionalism after it had an ideological

split. In 1992 Ross Perot ran for president and, in the process, drew thousands of supporters from

Denver. In 1992 voters from Colorado gave Perot 23 percent of the vote. 109

This was a very

strong showing for a candidate that backed out in the middle of the 1992 election only to come

back after causing the rest of the followers to lose faith in the leadership. But putting aside the

commitment issues that Perot had in 1992, we are left with a strong foundation in which to build

up a change in government. In spite of good intentions and a strong foundation, however, the

reform party today is often thought of as a joke. The reason for this image has a lot to do with

media representation of the reform party activities and the way the major parties have played up

factionalism within the organization.

Had the reform party remained strong and united, while accepting the differences of the

factions, the momentum of the united front could have made a difference in the landscape of

modern American politics. Today the party is split into a reform party and a Colorado Freedom

party. The Colorado Freedom party is supporting Pat Buchanan yet they insist on using the

reform label. The use of the reform party label caused the reform party of Colorado to pursue

litigation to prevent Buchanan from using it in future political campaigns. 110

The result is a

media depiction of the reform party as being supported and affiliated with Buchanan. The media

also depicts Buchanan as a racist bigot; which some in the reform party believe as well. Thus, the

American public lost faith in the reform party as a whole; forgetting that there is two and only

recognizing one disorganized movement. But, conveniently, the factionalism of the reform party

does serve the interests of the American government. It keeps the government working with only

two parties and gives the American public the illusion of a choice without having to produce a

real choice. So why did the reform party fracture?

Abortion has broken up a party that was likely to bring change and shake up the American

political landscape. According to Dan Charles, the head of the Colorado Freedom Party, the

majority of the people who were members of either faction of the reform party were people that

voted for Buchanan. 111

The Perot group of 1992 avoided the abortion issue all together in an

effort to keep the people united for a stronger assault on typical American politics. Sadly, the

issue is being used by the haves to detract from the real issues and keep the reform party

members divided. Such a development is a learning lesson for all groups and organizations that

dare take on the status quo.

The issues that came up in the reform party movement are going to come up in any

organization that wishes to change the landscape whether the organization moves to affect

politics, safety, freedom or any other issue. The fear comes from the belief that the affect of

change on those who currently hold the power could be the difference between the good life and

the poor house although in reality it generally is not that dramatic. And while the reform party is

used as an example of what happens when one issue is brought out to divide the people, it is not

an endorsement of the reform party whatsoever. One thing that can be assured, however, is that

anyone that reads this book and needs a way to weaken those that stand by these writings and

examples will be using this reform party example to divide us. Please do not allow such a use of

diversionary tactics to break any movement we become involved with into pieces.

Another problem that activists groups encounter once they have a power base is the labeling

that the mainstream will try to place on us. Sometimes the labeling causes the rest of the world to

conclude that there is no cohesion among protestors and only a mob with conflicting agendas.

Rarely does the media depict a protest made up of several activist groups as sharing goals or

even working together. The collective effort is labeled a mob; disorganized, irrational and

dismissible. Tijerina ran into these types of problems. One small variation of the labeling issue is

the branding of a group with a negative label as the Alianza was throughout its hey day of

activism. Tijerina wrote about the labeling of the Alianza in his memoirs in relation to it being

used to kill an idea and discredit a coherent and rational argument:

All the Anglos . . . knew that I was not a communist, that I had not even read Marxist literature. Anglos had preached this anti-communist gospel for more than twenty years. They had the community conditioned and regimented against communism. To say that someone is a communist is the easiest way to kill or destroy that person.

112

We as a movement for change should expect this type of labeling. To be called terrorists is and

should be the norm from those that wish to call our rational and coherent arguments into doubt.

Expect to be labeled the ingrates of the United States. Expect to be ostracized from American

society to some extent. Those of us who are active in the reform of American governmental

policies may already understand the stigma of being an activist. Now that you are prepared, we

move forward to the next level.

Many concepts have been gone over here. Some of them will be new to you while others will

have an even greater depth of knowledge than the authors of these writings. Whatever our level

of knowledge may be there is always more to learn. Think back, for a moment, to the “middle

class”. A group of people that have not been concretely defined for the purpose of harnessing

their power to keep a power elite in control of everything. The same concept can be utilized here.

The birth of a new group that fails to distinguish itself among its many parts and only moves

forward on the momentum of its common goals. Such is the dream that would make change in

the world a reality. A group of men and women, all ethnicities and sexual orientations, all causes

under one umbrella. A group that does not see the difference only the big picture and the need to

move forward in unison toward those that would deprive humans and animals of their freedom,

their dignity, their environment and their serenity. And when activists of all causes come

together and take back the power, then the discussion will begin on what direction the world will

take. Then the differences will emerge and a plan for the future laid out by the activists that had

the courage to fight the mighty power elite when we were a scattered bunch that lacked cohesion.

Criminals

With Charles Sepulveda

A challenge; spend some time comparing the financial situations that typical criminals find

themselves in when they are arrested. Look at the death penalty and its administration upon the

indigent defendant. And for the criminals that live; there is a special place for them too in

corporate America. Perhaps this is a motive to criminalize the drug problem in the United States.

Also explore what happens to the wealthier criminal. Then focus on the white-collar criminal and

their relation to the rest. And finally look into the ugly world of political prisoners in United

States. Those, like ourselves, that chose to fight back and not give up that have ended up paying

for their insurrection with their freedom; perhaps a fate worse than death. Above all expect to

lose your lunch as you see with what disregard the American system of justice casts aside the

constitution and other laws in an effort to protect its own national security.

Today in America it is largely true that money is the key to a good defense when it comes to

the criminal justice system. Already, based on the premise of money being the key to justice,

many of the populace in America today simply cannot afford justice. To a great extent, justice is

simply a luxury that many in America can’t fit into their budget. But there is more to the criminal

justice system than meets the eye. With the need for money comes the prevailing attitude that

Americans hold in relation to criminal justice. There is the also the opinions about who

constitutes a criminal. Then there is the media that plays on these ideas; especially during an

election year. What results is a set of situations that defy the premise upon which capitalism is

based. The reasons for this departure from the bottom line dictating the actions of the criminal

justice system are largely related to the emotion of the human being. A look at two theories of

criminal punishment are needed to explain the American societal norms that, among other things,

involve forgetting about the cost of punishment and worrying more about the extent of

punishment.

There is no evidence to offer you, nor are there any resources to conduct a survey as evidence

for the following statement. It is based solely on the mainstream media and their take on criminal

punishment. It is based on the fact that the majority of states in America still execute prisoners.

The above qualifications being taken into consideration, it seems that the most adhered to theory

of criminal punishment in America is some form of retributive theory. Retributive theory holds

that a person who breaks the rules of society based on free choice should be punished and that

the punishment is justified because of the individual’s free choice to break a societal rule. It

should be noted that there are various forms of retributive theory. Assaultive retribution involves

the morality of hating a criminal. 113

Thus, the adherent to assaultive retribution would hold

individuals to punishment even if the punishment would bring no good to the society at large;

simply because the criminal was a criminal and deserved to be hated would be enough to morally

justify that criminals punishment no matter how severe. An example of assaultive retributive

thinking is “. . . even if civil society resolved to dissolve itself. . . the last murderer lying in the

prison ought to be executed . . . [because of] . . . dessert of the murderous deeds”. 114

Retributive

theory sounds like a philosophical rational that allows those that would adhere to the death

penalty to be placed under its umbrella. Retributive theory would go over very well with the

Bush administration of 2000. And while democrats in the United States may not be extreme

retributive theory adherers, it is apparent that both major parties in America are for the death

penalty and their ads for re-election often state this to show that they are tough on crime. After

the election is over we all forget about crime for the most part. It is the case of “out of sight, out

of mind” and Americans that do have influence like to keep things this way. Lets look at what

they ignore.

There are many criminals that are in prison today for crimes that they have not committed.

Many of whom are now being vindicated after spending years behind bars; the vindication comes

in the form of DNA testing that exonerates their character. One man, Herman Atkins, addressed

a group of lawyers at San Diego’s California Western School of Law. The subject was the

wrongful conviction of innocent men. Atkins can truly represent the plight of criminals in

American prisons who should not be there at all. Atkins spent 11 years in prison for a crime he

did not commit. In 1986 a woman, who is to remain anonymous, was raped. The police arrested

Atkins and she pointed him out as the man who raped her. Also blood evidence proved that he

was among the 4.4 percent of the population who could have committed the rape. But some 11

years after he was convicted and sentenced, DNA testing proved that he could not have been the

rapist and he was set free. In fact, 101 men have been set free due to DNA testing that has proven

they did not commit the crimes they were convicted of. Still more cases are being reviewed by

law students involved in the Innocence project. 115

They have a lot of work to do and a lot of

social norms that have been reinforced by law enforcement, the media and politicians that seek

reelection to overcome. It can be quite perplexing to see how blindly and irresponsibly

retributive theory is used to promote fear in order to serve petty agendas.

The underlying factor in most of these court cases involve the conviction of someone; anyone

that looks culpable. The main focus of the District Attorney’s office seems to be more concerned

with putting a body behind bars not necessarily the guilty party. This idea is backed up by the

local power elite in their actions. They need not concern themselves with the guilt of persons

charged with crimes especially if they are poor. This consensus is reflected in the way money

and resources flow to public defenders and district attorneys in the United States. In North

Carolina there are major problems with funding for the public defenders office. The initial

problem is backlog for the public defenders office. In two of the counties, the worst in the state,

there is one part-time public defender. Thus, the backlog of cases on the skeleton staff is

horrible. Cases are 1 ½ years old or more before they can be handled by the public defender. But

the situation does get worse because in 2002 public defenders in North Carolina statewide stand

to lose about $6,000 for the next fiscal year. Why are they being neglected?

James Loggins, public defender of Lancaster County, has some speculation on the matter that

make a lot of sense. First there is the obvious; the public defenders office is on the bottom of the

list when it comes to funding public services. The fact is that no one really cares about a person

charged with a crime until it is their son or daughter being charged. And this neglect is not

expected to end anytime soon. According to local attorney Phillip Wright, the public defender is

last on the priority list due to American societal norms that give not sympathy to the accused.

Politicians are more likely to spend money to crack down on crime and not spend money to

represent them in court. One example of the bias comes from Lancaster County’s ability to

contribute $49,000 to the solicitor’s office and $22,000 to the public defender’s office for the

2001 fiscal year. In fact the bias goes deeper and usually can be traced directly to the adversary

of the accused.

In Pennsylvania the budgets between district attorney’s office and the public defenders office

reflect favoritism in the favor of the prosecutors. This bias is also evidenced by the availability of

resources. And this bias is made evident by the inherent goals that the district attorney’s set for

themselves; the goals that are pushed for by the public at large. Basically the public wants to put

people in prison and also want money spent on this goal. The County of York in Pennsylvania

will serve as a good peek into the world of the criminal justice system. By first looking at the

death penalty we see that Pennsylvania is still very much in good favor with the public. That

favoritism toward the death penalty is reflected by the number of people currently on death row

in Pennsylvania; 135. For most Pennsylvania residents and prosecutor it does not seem to matter

that executions do not take place that often. In the last 20 years Pennsylvania has executed three

men. A man on death row died of AIDS recently; dying while waiting to be executed.

Nonetheless the public wants more and the prosecutors pursue and gain death sentences after

conviction for capital crimes. Prosecutors admit that the goals of the district attorney’s office

tend to push for seemingly more than the right decision.

York County district attorney Stan Rebert says that the job of district attorney has to do with

pulling out all of the stops and seeking convictions as severe as possible. Rebert’s staff is to look

for intent to kill in the murders of York County. Once that element of the crime is established

than the defendant is charged with first-degree murder; punishable by death. But Rebert cut the

formalities of the indictment process and admitted that in most cases of murder first degree is

charged; especially if a weapon is involved. And if intent to kill and a weapon do not allow for

first-degree murder charges there are the 18 aggravating circumstances that allow the charge to

stand. These circumstances range from the victim being a public servant to the victim having a

restraining order against the accused. And in addition to seeking out the death penalty so many

times while not following through with the execution that often, the district attorney’s office is

also using tax payer dollars excessively as evidenced by a look at the distribution of resources in

death penalty cases.

Typically, according to Rebert, a death penalty case is assigned not to one prosecutor but to

two; increasing the cost of prosecuting the accused. And if more help is needed the district

attorney, at least in the state of Pennsylvania, is open to ask for help from the Pennsylvania

Attorney General’s office for research and assistant. Rebert stated that the typical process of

invoking the Attorney General’s office involved the post-death penalty appeal litigation process.

In total the prosecutors of York County have an abundance of legal resources from extra help to

appeals processing and legal research capabilities. Can we assume that the public defender of

many of the accused are fortunate enough to have all of the resources the district attorney boasts

of available to them?

A loaded question that requires an answer in the negative. But we can go further and prove

that the system is biased just by looking at the public defender’s office operations. Chief public

defender Bruce Blocher states that the office will assign two attorneys to the cases of the accused

when the death penalty is a possibility. But the attorneys are not on the same level of expertise;

one attorney is usually experienced with the death penalty and the second is usually there to

learn. In addition to the defense teams breadth of expertise comes the assistants team. A lone

investigator, that may or may not seek help with the hiring of a second part-time investigator,

typically is the staff that a person charged with a capital crime and represented by the public

defenders office can rely on for legal representation. According to Blocher, if the public defender

does run into a snag with a death penalty case, the state has nothing to offer. And it seems that

the only time that a private attorney is appointed to a death penalty case with an indigent

defendant is when the public defender has some sort of conflict of interest.

The private attorney that is appointed to defend the indigent client is typically on his or her

own. And while many attorneys state that the judge is usually understanding and willing to allow

more time for the lone attorneys, we must remember that these attorneys still do not have the

same type of resources as the state government that is working against them. In addition to the

lack of resources and human power comes the likelihood of hiring an attorney that has extensive

experience. Unable or unwilling to pay fair market, the state will only pay 50% of the fair market

value for a death penalty defense attorney, the attorneys that do take the cases do so reluctantly

or not at all because of the lack of pay. 116

Proof positive that the American system of justice is

not only for sale but financed as well as sanctioned by the various forms of local power elites.

The retributive theory of punishment for crimes seems to be here in the examples cited

above. Attempt to appeal to retributive theory advocates that the death penalty costs too much

and you will get nowhere. Bring up the fact that litigation costs are greater than housing a

criminal for life and you will get sneers from death penalty advocates. Talk about the fact that

many on death row are now being let out because of DNA testing that scientifically proves that

they are not guilty and it will be heeded by only yourself; not the haves. Reflect on the biases

that the criminal justice system hands out to criminals. Think of the resources that a typical

district attorney’s office has available to their cause and than compare it to the dismal budgets

afforded to the public defenders office. Retributive theory does little to make any sense out of

punishing the criminal and really serves no purpose to society; it can only serve the animalistic

hungers one feels when they yearn for revenge. It is a shame that the need for vengeance is so

important for the petty people that happen to run America. So petty are they that they care not to

look at criminal punishment differently until their own children are caught up in its web.

A second argument made to justify the incarceration of individuals that does not sit well with

the American public and their unimportant notions for revenge comes from utilitarian theory.

Utilitarian theory of criminal punishment is based on the greatest good for the greatest number.

But the consequences of implementing utilitarian principles in modern criminal punishment

would make it an ideology that many Americans would not like in place. It would place a cost

effective priority on criminal punishment and also create a fair environment for the accused to

stand trial under. The accused would be granted an equally funded defense as provided for the

state since it would be in the interest of keeping innocent people out of prison. Also the death

penalty would no longer be available for punishment since it would have little deterrent effect on

criminals that are already in a state of mind that rational thought would not be able to permeate.

And besides, the cost to the public would far out weigh the benefit of paying for an individual’s

appeal litigation and the cost of the execution itself. For all these reasons utilitarian theory would

not sit well with the American public. But to show that utilitarian theory does not fit into the

American norm it is best that we apply one aspect of utilitarian theory to see how well it fits or

how well it is left out of the loop all together.

To deter a person from committing a crime is a logical reason for locking that person up.

Deterrence is a form of utilitarianism. 117

To deter others from following in the footsteps of the

criminals before them is a logical way of meting out a sentence. The good thing about deterrence

is that, to some extent, Americans do feel comfortable with its application. Americans wish to

stop the child molester and deter their actions with imprisonment. They wish to deter those that

would kill with a life sentence for that individual criminal. This is called specific deterrence in

that only the person that is committing the crime is prevented from acting again. More broadly is

the notion of general deterrence in which the public at large are said to look at the fate of those

found guilty of criminal offenses and sentenced and agree that such a fate would not be in their

best interest. But how does deterrence theory work if applied to a biased system of justice?

It seems that in order for deterrence theory to work one must have a state of mind first. A

state of mind is established by the actions of an individual. If a person is swinging a baseball bat

in a crowded street then that person has the mental state describable with many adjectives. The

list to describe that mental state can range tremendously but the law does have its own set of

adjectives. In a perfect world, criminal law would deal with our baseball bat swinger by looking

at his or her mental state. If the swinger intended to strike a person, does not matter whom, then

our swinger has a guilty mind. Such a break down appeals to the rational mind; that is it assumes

that the swinger has all his or her mental capacities. The way to deter people from swinging a bat

in a crowded street is to punish those with a guilty mind who do commit this deed. Punishment

will serve society specifically by preventing the individual from swinging the bat for the time

being. Looking further into the future, perhaps the swinger will go back to society and remember

that if he or she does swing the bat again, the punishment will be at least as severe as the first

time. More generally, the punishment of the swinger is an example to others that think about

doing the same thing. Now most Americans would support the above theory and would go

further and state that the above is the norm in America today. But quietly behind the façade of

justice lurks a deviation from the above example.

The problem is that deterrence only works when the parties being charged with crimes are

treated fairly and innocently until proven guilty. Persons charged with crimes are almost never

treated innocently. Whether or not they are treated fairly is less obvious but does warrant

scrutiny as well. Current day prosecutors seem to place the mental state of the criminals they

charge with crimes at the very bottom on their totem poll of priorities opting instead to place

“convicting anyone” at the top. It seems that if modern day prosecutors were given the bat

swinger case they would find the first person they get into their custody with a bat in his or her

hands. Based on the possession of the bat, the person charged is set up like they were guilty via

interrogation and information gathering. Left for last is the question ‘did the person intend to

swing the bat in a crowd?’ If the answer is no then the person may be the wrong person to charge

with a crime despite circumstantial evidence pointing toward his or her guilt. (The idea that the

person did swing the bat and did not intend to swing it is another matter entirely that will not be

discussed). The bottom line is that you cannot deter people from being in the wrong place at the

wrong time. Or, more closely related to the swinger, you can’t deter a person from being in

public with a baseball bat at the time that someone else is seen swinging a bat in a crowd from

being near the scene of the crime. But, as we have discussed earlier, the mere discussion of

mental state is just the beginning.

Given the fact that many public defenders are severely at a disadvantage in terms of

resources one must ask themselves how the criminal justice system lost sight of a sense of

fairness in the first place. Losing sight of such an important aspect of the law makes a mockery

of a criminal justice system that, in theory, could be so much better. Without a better balance in

resources deterrence theory is failing although it can be so much better while retributive theory

prevails. One more aspect that should be considered is the fact that many defendants in death

penalty cases are being dealt with by the public defender in the first place. The idea of the

criminal justice system is that every defendant, even the indigent one, has a right to a defense

administered and organized by an attorney. This notion was first recognized in the Supreme

Court case of Gideon v. Wainwright in which Gideon was convicted of a crime after he was

basically representing himself with his less then stellar education. The Court held that a man with

little education was capable of representing himself for years prior to the Gideon ruling. After the

Gideon case, the duty of the state to provide defendants with adequate legal counsel became the

norm. And while this milestone is a wonderful start we must remember that the case was

completed some 30 years ago and many changes still need to be made. In theory, the state cannot

be in compliance with the Gideon ruling if the defense they offer to the indigent defendant comes

from an overworked, under funded organization such as the public defenders office. Looking

past these critiques is easy, however, when money is involved. When persons that stand to get

rich have their way, all of the above problems with the criminal justice system go away because

they are not discussed. Remember that utilitarian theory asks for the greatest good for the

greatest number while corporate America asks for the greatest good for the executives that run

the corporation; the rest be damned.

The problem with utilitarian theory is that it does not sit well with at least one class of the

prison population that provides a benefit for the majority and a profit for some corporations. The

greatest good for the greatest number can be interpreted as imprisoning drug addicts and then

making them slaves for the benefit of consumers. But this take on the matter ignores the

argument that being a consumer as a strikingly similar to that of being a slave. (On a side note,

the argument also assumes that the savings a corporation will get from using prison labor will be

passed on to the consumer.) Instead we should apply utilitarian theory more directly serving the

inmate, thereby taking away the majority of prison inmates, the drug addicts, and placing them in

drug treatment programs. This would cause too much harm to corporations for them to allow it to

happen so easily but the greatest good, treating drug addiction, for those the most closely

affected, and the greatest number, would be the epitome of utilitarian theory. But rather than be

pessimistic let us instead explore the world without a criminalized drug addict.

Drug addiction is a serious problem in America. Many are quick to point out that drug

addiction leads to crime and, therefore, drug addicts deserve to be put in jail or prison for lengthy

periods of time. Based on this premise, the criminal justice system is adhering to the call of the

wealthy by placing drug addicts behind bars in order to keep America safe. But, at the same time,

the criminal justice system is being asked to deal with drug addicts with less and less funding

due to popular demand from the wealthy. In essence those that fear drug related crime are

demanding that drug addicts go away cheaply and for lengthy periods of time and, in the case of

Florida, the wealthy are getting there wish. But first, a great way to deal with drug addicts in

Florida, we look at the good in the criminal justice system.

The residents of the state of Florida have a large drug problem. Either they are addicted to it

or they are victimized by it while others are simply scared of it. Statistics show that nearly 1/3 of

the crimes committed in the state of Florida are drug related. 118

This being the case, there is a big

interest in doing something with the drug-addicted members of the Florida citizenry. To combat

this problem, the Miami-Dade County court system put together the first drug court in the nation

in 1989. 119

During that time, Circuit Judge Jeffrey Rosinek, who presides over the drug court,

has seen his fair share of criminals that are addicted to narcotics. When asked about statistics that

indicate that over the last 10 years more inmates have been admitted to the Florida prison system

than any other charge thereby making up 29 percent of the total inmate population currently

imprisoned in Florida, Rosinek believes that the number is actually much higher. The fact that an

inmate is charged with a drug related offense does not mean every inmate with a drug problem of

some sort is accounted for. Rosinek puts the number around 70 percent when offenses such as

burglary and theft are committed because of an offender’s drug problem. 120

This being the

situation, measures have been taken to not simply place addicts in prison because when they get

out they are, in most cases, still addicted.

To combat the drug addiction plague in Florida, the criminal justice system has put together

programs meant to beat the addiction and return addicts back to society once they have

completed a court appointed program usually through the drug court or, in other counties, regular

court. The good news is that the system of drug rehabilitation is working. Records indicate that

in the 1998-1999 fiscal year, 77.5 percent of the drug addicts who successfully completed an out

of prison drug rehabilitation program were not returning to prison. Further, of the inmates who

went through drug treatment programs while imprisoned, 70.5 percent did not return to prison.

What is even better news is that the drug court in Miami-Dade County can boast of even greater

success; 96 percent of the offenders that come through the court the first time do not return on

drug related charges. 121

So all is great in Florida and the rest of the nation should follow their

lead; except Florida has maneuvered to stop leading.

In spite of the glowing review presented above there is a concern that the power elite has, as

was alluded to before, with spending tax dollars on things they cannot make money on. Thus,

$13 million in State funding will be cut from the drug rehabilitation programs of Florida state

prisons. In all, 55 prisons hold inmates in Florida’s state prison system and of those 55 only 4

will continue to provide drug rehabilitation services with help from federal aid that matches the

state funding. In addition, the 20 state run rehabilitation centers throughout Florida will be cut by

34 percent. Prior to these cuts the state of Florida spent $41 million on drug and alcohol

rehabilitation out of a total of $1.3 billion available to the department of corrections. Out of that

$41 million, $11.3 million were used for in-prison treatment services. After the cuts are made,

$7.5 million will be deleted from the in-prison treatment services offered. In addition, residential

treatment centers are being cut back by $3.3 million and $2.4 million will be cut from outpatient

programs. 122

But to a certain group within the population of Florida, it does make more sense to

keep incarcerating prisoners rather than treat their drug addictions. There are many ways to keep

the voting public content but there seems to be one way to make them truly happy; save them

money.

In America today there is a public out cry when the deeds of China and their use of prison

populations for a labor force are discussed. It is of no surprise to many of us, however, that the

United States is guilty of the same offense; the same offense that offends Americans so much.

The 13th

amendment of the constitution of the United States reads as follows:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime whereof a party shall have been duly convicted shall exist within the United States.

123

Herein lies a loophole that is being utilized by corporations to make money. It is a possible

reason why funding for drug rehabilitation programs are being cut. It is a reason why prison

populations are increasing steadily. It is a reason to forget about the individual yielding instead to

a profit.

Today there are approximately 2 million persons imprisoned in the United States. This is an

increase of more than 3 times the individuals imprisoned in 1980. 124

In California it is breath

taking to see with what lightening speed prisons are being built. It took about 150 years for

California to build its first twelve prisons yet it has since built 21 new prisons in the last 20 years

while working on another five and planning to build another 10. 125

With all of the new prisons

come a new labor source for corporations that offer goods or services related to administration,

food service, construction, education and health. And not taken into consideration is the impact

that the emergence of private prisons has to offer the whole picture. Not only are the private

prisons going to be interested in housing prisoners but they will want more and will want to keep

them longer. No matter how you figure the situation there are many reasons to keep prisoners

locked up for as long as possible; incarceration will produce a profit for corporations.

To begin with, prisoners are an ideal source of labor. They are in prisons for a fixed number

of years making them a steady source of labor. Prisoners do not strike, quit, join unions nor do

the corporations that utilize their services become burdened with workers compensation

insurance, health benefits or unemployment insurance. All in all it is now possible in the United

States to run a legal sweatshop without ever leaving the country. There is also a relaxation of

health and safety regulations since the Federal Health and Safety Standards and the National

Labor Relations Board Policies do not apply to prison laborers. And if these benefits were not

enough there is always the price of a laborer per hour to consider. Without the mandate for a

minimum wage it is unclear what exactly sets the pay scale for prison labor. In any case the

average prison laborer can expect to earn between 30 and 90 cents per hour. 172 126

And while

there do not appear to be any abusive treatment of employees, and assuming that prisoners have

sanitary conditions and their room and board are taken care of, there still remains the conflict of

interest that may arise with keeping inmates incarcerated not to serve society or to punish those

that break society’s rules but instead to keep the laborers employed as prisoners. A frightening

proposition is that it looks as if that such a trend has already began to occur.

As appears in Florida, trends in criminalization of drug addicts and other non-violent

offenders are showing a lengthier sentencing period. Also, as mentioned before, is the prospect

of the poor ending up as criminals for longer periods. This list should be amended to include the

mentally ill as well as combinations of all three of the traits previously mentioned. One analysis

of the prison populations indicates that out of the 2 million prisoners only 150,000 are armed

robbers, another 125,000 are murderers and 100,000 are sex offenders. That leaves another

1,625,000 prisoners that are generally non-violent offenders. 127

A further analysis of statistical

data indicates that new laws are geared toward making the population increases last longer with

mandated prison sentences. One example is the three strikes law of California enacted in 1994.

Just a few years after three strikes took effect, population analysis of prisons in California

indicated that 85 percent of those sentenced to life in prison are being sentenced based on non-

violent third felony convictions. And, to make matters worse, of the total receiving the

mandatory life sentence for a third felony, 80 percent of the convicts were African America and

Latino. 128

Looking more critically at mandatory sentencing laws does bring the validity of their

logic into question and points to a more sinister effect.

Whether intended or not, a number of mandatory sentencing laws can be pointed to as

discriminating against minorities. In the 1980’s 25 percent of the prison population was made up

of drug related offenders. Since the enactment of mandatory sentencing laws the ratio has

increased to 60 percent in 1998. And while the population demographics shift to that of the drug

related offender as the majority there is also the basis for the mandated sentence as singling out

members of minority ethnic groups. Whether or not Congress, the enactors of mandatory

sentencing laws, were aware of these numbers is not being debated here. But the fact is that in

1995 the U.S. Sentencing Commission reported that 52 percent of all crack users were white and

38 percent of all crack users were black. The peculiar thing is that in spite of the estimated usage

along race lines only 4.1 percent of those sentenced for crack related offenses are white while 88

percent of those sentenced are African Americans. Another issue, assuming for a moment that

crack is the drug of choice for the poor, is the notion that something racially biased is going on

when it comes to mandatory sentencing procedure. Crack and powdered cocaine are virtually the

same drug. Crack is powdered cocaine mixed with baking soda presumably to make the

powdered cocaine go further and, therefore, more affordable to the lower income drug addict.

Yet in spite of the fact that crack should deductively contain less narcotics, the fact remains that

mandatory sentencing for possession of crack is more severe. Currently an individual found in

possession of 5 grams of crack is to be handed a 5 year sentence. But for some reason a person

caught with 500 grams of cocaine is the necessary element for that individual to earn the same 5

years. 174 129

Without any evidence we can only assume that the racial bias is coincidental but

the fact still remains that the interests of drug addicts seem to be put on hold and the interests of

corporations in need of cheap labor are placed in higher priority. The ways in which a person can

be enslaved are, for the most part, under wraps; given little attention. Publicizing such a situation

could cause the consumers to think too much about who they are talking to when they order

items over the phone.

At the risk of being incorrect, lets assume that when ordering items over the phone

consumers are under the impression that their credit card and social security numbers are being

given to trustworthy employees of the corporation they are doing business with. That goes for the

largest corporations as well. When individuals call to book a flight, the customer has a number of

corporations to choose from. Some might have chosen Trans-World Airlines as their choice of

transportation service providers. And when the person traveling made the booking on the flight,

giving over a credit card number and other information that is needed to book a flight; valuable

information that could be used to defraud the rightful owner of their monetary possessions if

used properly, that person must have had some degree of trust in the employee on the other line.

Little did that person know that the trusted employee on the other line of a Trans World Airline

flight booking could very well be a prisoner.

It should be no surprise that many corporations are using prison labor to increase their profits

or, maybe, pass the savings on to the consumer but the surprise should be that when you talk to a

representative on the phone it could very well be a switchboard run from the confines of a state

prison or a private institution. The list of big name corporations that are taking advantage of the

prison labor population include Motorola, Microsoft, Victoria’s Secret, Compaq, IBM, Texas

Instruments, Honey Well and Boeing. 130

It does appear that, for the moment, there have been no

credit card fraud or identity theft cases to report. It is possible that cases of these matters are

isolated incidences but none have been located to document here. Nonetheless concerns are still

prevalent with this type of operating procedure. A final payment of attention is needed, however,

to make the picture complete. Some indication of what happens to the criminal with access to

monetary wealth has been hinted at but there remains slightly more to ponder.

At times quite hidden from public view is the notion that money can make a difference when

it comes to criminal punishment. Already mentioned is the discrepancy in mandatory sentencing

procedures in relation to cocaine and crack cocaine. However, the nature of crime can lead to an

individual being handled rather differently. With the exception of a few people, the average

white-collar criminal has little to fear when caught. Some defense attorneys have confessed that

the crimes committed by their clients are almost a fair trade for their clients ability to leave a

prison a short time after entering all the more wealthier; at least that is the white-collar criminal’s

perspective. We are all made aware of the appeal to the masses that politicians make when they

run for election. The statement that they are tough on crime, pursuing murders and sex offenders,

makes them a superior choice when compared to others that push for rehabilitation and the

notion that a criminal can mend their ways. It seems today that the notion of a potential public

servant going after the white-collar criminal is somewhat laughable. It doesn’t make them look

tough and it doesn’t make them seem strong; quite frankly it doesn’t seem to be gaining them

votes. Perhaps that is why no one seems to be tough on white-collar crime on the level of a

promise during election season and let alone when it comes time to make legislative adjustments.

Looking at a comparison of white-collar criminal treatment and other criminal treatment yields

an eye opening moment of truth; why has none of this changed?

The day of the bank robber getting rich and going off to the Caribbean probably never

existed. The likelihood of getting caught and the lengthy prison terms make it less attractive to

those that wish to get rich quick. There is another way to get rich quick and it involves the use of

technology and anonymity. Along with the ease with which to commit this type of crime there is

also the alluring possibility of getting slapped on the wrist if caught. In 2001 identity theft was

the number one consumer complaint in the United States. The Federal Trade Commission logged

204,000 complaints and blamed 43% of these complaints on identity fraud. Based on these

numbers the FTC estimates that 750,000 people a year are the victims of crimes involving

identity theft. 131

The reason that identity theft is on the rise has to do with its ease. The FTC

believes that the majority of information used in identity theft cases comes from the compromise

of confidential business records. The FTC cites the ability of office personnel, ranging from

temporary office workers to executives, to have access to confidential files that are often left

around desks by their owners during lunch or after hours. But identity thieves are the tip of the

iceberg. They may be able to get control of one person’s financial matters. There are certainly

those that deal in theft from the people in wholesale.

Those that would take advantage of a number of people’s financial situations are the most

likely to also be slapped on the wrist in spite of the fact that they affect the most people. The

reason that the bulk defrauder is likely to commit their crimes has to do with the weakness of

current incentives to being honest. The obvious incentive, based on deterrence theory, has to

come from the sentencing of other white-collar criminals. In the past, the white-collar criminal

was simply not being punished very severely. A look at a region in the United States that

documents the sentencing of white-collar criminals points to the idea that such criminals have no

incentive to be honest.

Federal courts in the southern district of Texas, the same district that has jurisdiction over

Enron, tell a tale of white-collar criminals with minimal levels of punishment. During the 2000

fiscal there were 162 defendants, classified as white-collar criminals, convicted of fraud. Of

those 162 defendants, 115 received a prison sentence. Another 23 received probation for their

crimes. The remaining 24 were to receive some combination of a fine, confinement outside of a

prison (such as house arrest) and probation. 132

Now going back to the 115 defendants that were

receiving prison terms, only 53 received a sentence of 12 months or less. (In fact, the average

sentence was 18.2 months). We must also keep in mind that when a convict is doing time there

are deductions for good behavior and there is a strong likelihood that the prisoner will spend

their sentence in a minimum security prison. There is also a strong likelihood that the prisoner

will finish their time in a halfway house near the end of their 18.2 months behind bars. 178 133

And while statistics indicate that there are major discrepancies between the sentencing of a

possessor of 5 grams of crack and the thief of a pension plan, perhaps a look at an individual will

make the point even more appallingly clear.

Recently a chief financial officer of a major corporation, Aurora Foods, was caught up in a

scandal that involved fraud. This officer pled guilty to securities fraud and other related charges

in order to avoid the trial and the possibility of harsher sentencing. At the sentencing of this

individual, the judge handed down 57 months for his crimes. On the surface it appears that this

particular person is getting what they deserve, a harsh sentence for a crime that could potentially

affect millions but that is not the case as close analysis indicates. The fraud that this person took

part in involved an underreporting of corporate expenses totaling $43 million dollars. 134

This

underreporting means that the $43 million was free to escape to any bank account that this

executive desired. Not a bad trade for 5 years in prison. Not a bad trade when you consider the

possibilities of parole. Not a bad decision for this man to make when the alternative, stealing a

car, could bring a similar sentence of 5 years. The car, if insured, will be covered and replaced

somehow but the $43 million is likely to never return. Even if Aurora retrieves ¾ of the amount

that still leaves a nice nest egg for this CFO to come home to. Not bad for a days work in the

fraud industry.

All in all it seems that a poor person is likely to be funneled into a cell to work for a

corporation while a wealthier defendant will afford the luxury of a team of council and escape

America’s worst punishments. Or the defendant will be smart enough to commit a white-collar

crime and run away with millions while getting a slap on the wrist; a nice trade. But there is one

more type of criminal that needs to be dealt with. One that the American government will deny

even exists is the most elusive of all criminals to pinpoint but such a criminal must be hidden

from the public view because their very existence makes a mockery of the rhetoric behind

American democracy. The political prisoner exists in America. The political prisoner is the ugly

blemish that does not go away and often is not angry or bitter only resilient and defiant to the

end. The political prisoner is the worst kind because their reputation is tainted with the lies and

the cover-ups that the United States is so good at conducting; making it seem like they do not

exist at all. And now a submission in relation to the making of a political prisoner.

On June 23,, 1975, a complaint was filed by two ranch hands concerning residents of the Pine

Ridge Indian Reservation. The complaint alleged that three Indian youths had been drinking with

them when the Indians attacked them. The complaint specifically accused Jimmy Eagle of

removing and stealing a pair of their cowboy boots at knifepoint. Agents Williams and Coler

were, according to the FBI, assigned the complaint and instructed to search for Jimmy Eagle.

Already there is something not routine going on here. Normally, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (or

BIA) patrolmen would handle a theft of this sort. Instead, a petty misdemeanor that should have

been a matter for tribal courts was transformed into a felony based on little to no 180

investigation by the FBI. Many suspect that the FBI had an ulterior motive for picking up this

investigation themselves. Nevertheless, the FBI was soon looking for Jimmy Eagle on the Pine

Ridge Indian Reservation. It would not take the FBI very long to encounter some residents of

Pine Ridge.

It was a boisterous night on June 25, 1975. Thunder and rain visited the Pine Ridge Indian

Reservation. There was an AIM (American Indian Movement) camp on the property inhabited

by the Jumping Bull family. AIM was present via invitation; they had been asked to come and

protect the people from the GOONs (Guardians of the Oglala Nation) who had been backed by

the FBI to rid the reservation of AIM activists and to harass their supporters. In the time span of

three years over sixty traditional residents of the reservation were murdered and not a single one

of these deaths resulted in a conviction. Residents as well as scholars who document this period

aptly named this time period “The Reign of Terror”. Apparently, the lives of Native Americans

did not warrant prosecution. A double standard would soon emerge as the land of the law.

The next morning, the thunder and rain had given way to the sounds of birds and the cooking

of breakfast by the women in the camp. This serenity would be short lived. A series of loud

noises erupted shortly after sunrise. Ivis and Angie Long Visitor heard the sounds. They lived up

the hill to the northwest about four hundred yards away from where the noise was originating.

She just thought they were “firecrackers or something”. 135

They looked down the hill and saw

two white strangers next to two cars. She automatically assumed they were lawmen, and saw one

removing a gun case from the trunk of his car and the other was shooting his handgun in their

direction. Angie Long Visitor’s reaction was more instinctual than anything else:

“We didn’t know what to do at first, we just closed the door and stayed in there for awhile. We was so scared! We just grabbed our kids, and we just started runnin’ real fast!”

136

It is hard to be sensitive to a situation like this when they occur so often in ones community. It

had been the norm for these types of gun battles to erupt from time to time and the only recourse

was to duck and wait them out.

Everyone would later learn that a shootout between the FBI and AIM was erupting on private

property within the boundaries of the sovereign Lakota Nation’s reservation of Pine Ridge, South

Dakota. Three men lay shot to death on the earth of the plains. One of the largest manhunts in

US history ensued in order to bring justice for the deaths of the two slain FBI agents. This

manhunt is in contrast to the 60 deaths of Native Americans that had gone by unpunished for the

last three years. Why is the death of an FBI agent more important than the deaths of 60 Indians?

What were the Native Americans up to that brought them so much attention? One person that

may have answers is Leonard Peltier.

Peltier heard the first gunshots and dismissed them as someone practicing in the woods far

off. Then he heard screams. He tells the story of that morning in his own words,

My heart nearly leaped out of my chest. Our spiritual camp had abruptly become a war zone. I instantly thought of all the women, children, and old people there at our tent

camp, and of our elderly hosts, Harry and Cecilia Jumping Bull, at their house up the hill. This is why they’d called us here – to save their lives. I pulled on my boots, grabbed my shirt, and a rifle, and rushed out of the tent.

137

Peltier rushed to aid the Jumping Bull family. All the while bullets were flying just inches from

his body. He had no way of telling who was firing at whom. He discovered that the Jumping

Bulls were not at home and had in fact left early that morning. He made his way to some

temporary cover by a stand of trees and saw two cars, “those shiny ones that always meant

trouble for Indians” that were parked in a field out toward the road. 138

The first shots he heard

came from the vicinity of the "shinny cars", but by the time Peltier had made his way to the stand

of trees by the Jumping Bull house he felt surrounded.

Soon there were hundreds of FBI, local law enforcement, GOONs, and white vigilantes ready

to capture the guests of Jumping Bull. Peltier and the other Indians of the camp believed that

they would be killed. Stories of Wounded Knee were relived in their minds. Surrender was not a

possibility. Their ancestors surrendered in 1890 and even the elders and the women and children

were murdered. Peltier later recalled:

I felt absolutely certain that our own fate would be the same. They would hunt us down through the creek beds and gulleys, every man and woman, every Elder and child, and shoot each one of us as they’d done back then in 1890. After all, their buddies were dead, and we were Indians. When a white man is killed, even if he brought it on himself, all Indians are guilty. Isn’t that the way it’s always been?

139

What happened after the shots were exchanged was nothing less than a brutal murder.

At some point not long after noon, [one] agent ….had passed out from shock and loss of blood, and his partner, less seriously wounded, had thrown his gun down and stripped off his white shirt. Perhaps he waved it as a white flag in sign of surrender; in any case, he apparently attempted to rig it as a tourniquet on the shattered arm of the downed agent. In the next few minutes, one or more people approached the cars and killed both white men at close range with one or more high-powered rifles.

140

The deaths of the two agents convicted Leonard Peltier even before there was a trial. Upon his

capture, he was tried and found guilty of murdering the two agents. Without evidence or

examination of the FBI’s motives, Peltier was sentenced to two consecutive life sentences in

prison. He is still serving his time. The sentences were handed down in spite of the fact that there

still remained many unanswered questions about the incident at Pine Ridge. Who killed the

agents? Did Peltier have a high-powered rifle? Was there a ballistic match between his weapon

and the bullets that killed the agents? Did the bullets come from friendly fire? Did Peltier have

the opportunity to kill the agents? The FBI has not produced a single credible witness who can

say they saw Leonard aim his weapon at anyone. From documents released in the 1990’s under

the Freedom of Information Act we learned that that the FBI had people in place twenty minutes

before the two cars drove onto the Jumping Bull property. 141

What was going on? Why would

the FBI have so many people in place to apprehend a person that stole a pair of boots at

knifepoint? Whatever happened to Jimmy Eagle? These questions go on unanswered.

To understand the events surrounding the imprisonment of Leonard Peltier it is necessary to

examine the crimes of the FBI. For the purposes of this book, it is not relevant to examine every

detail and the enormity of such a task could fill several books. However, briefly there is one

incident that the FBI was involved in that should be brought to the attention of the readers;

witness intimidation.

One such event involved a young Indian woman, characterized as possessing a mental

handicap, by the name of Myrtle Poor Bear. She, being a poor and unknowing woman, was

intimidated into saying she was Leonard Peltier’s girlfriend and that she had actually seen

Leonard kill the agents. This testimony, in the form of three contradictory affidavits, were used

to extradite Peltier from Canada; the place he sought refuge from shortly after the Pine Ridge

incident. The truth was Poor Bear wasn’t on the Jumping Bull property at the time and had never

even met Peltier. After the fact, the FBI admitted that she wasn’t there and has since tried to

blame her for lying to them. Can we believe that this woman freely volunteered three affidavits?

Can the FBI be so ignorant as to not recognize that three contradictory affidavits offered by a

woman of less than average intelligence was not a solid basis upon which to demand the

extradition of an alleged criminal? Too many questions and too little answers remain.

Later statements made by Poor Bear surfaced after Peltier was convicted and sentenced. Poor

Bear had known about the death of a female AIM leader named Anna Mae Aquash. When the

FBI got a hold of her body, they cut off her hands for identification and sent them to D.C. Poor

Bear said that the FBI had intimidated her by telling her they’d do the same and worse to her.

“Several years ago, evidence was uncovered that flatly proved the government had suborned this

witness and coerced her false affidavits.” 142

After the three affidavits were called into question

by the alleged activities of the FBI, elected Canadian officials began demanding Peltier’s return

to Canada. They have expressed shock at the U.S. government’s willingness to produce such

fallacies in order to gain his extradition. But none of this has changed Peltier’s current living

conditions. He still resides in an American prison. He still maintains his innocence and he still

does what he can for the cause of humanity. Perhaps his stance on humanitarian issues should be

examined; it may draw a strange correlation between his vocal opposition to American

governmental policy and his continued run-ins with the law as well as his peculiar lack of

convictions for any crimes prior to the incident at Pine Ridge.

When Peltier was only nine years old he was taken away to the Bureau of Indian Affairs

boarding school in Wahepton, North Dakota. The first thing that was given to all of the Indian

children were haircuts. Then they were strip naked and doused with powdered DDT. This

experience parallels that of an inmate on his entry into a prison. Leonard considers his

experience at this Federally funded school his first imprisonment, “…it was for the same crime

as all the others: being Indian.” 143

This treatment and the resulting reaction Peltier harnessed

would foretell the future for him.

Leonard’s second crime was practicing his traditional religion. When he was 15 he attended a

Sun Dance that was held secretly because piercing was involved and was illegal at the time. On

his way out of the Sun Dance grounds, BIA police arrested him and a few friends. They were

jailed overnight for supposedly being drunk. The reality was the BIA wanted to arrest some of

the Sun Dancers. More run ins would follow.

That wasn’t Peltier’s last night in jail at the age of 15. That winter he was arrested for

siphoning diesel fuel from an Army reserve truck to heat his grandmother’s house. He was

arrested for this act and spent a couple of weeks in jail. Between the ages of 15 and 26 Leonard

had 186 stayed clear of law enforcement agencies. By the late 1960’s and early 70’s Peltier had

developed a political and spiritual platform in opposition to the ideals of the American

government. He joined the fight for civil, human and Indian rights. He took part in the takeover

of the BIA building in Washington D.C. and the take over of Fort Lawton, near Seattle. For his

part at Fort Lawton he was briefly jailed. After all of this the government failed to convict him of

a crime.

In 1972, Peltier was living in Milwaukee and had become employment manager for the local

AIM. He found jobs for Native people and worked in an alcohol rehabilitation program. It

appeared that Peltier was living a life of a humanitarian. Criminal life seemed to be behind him.

He was no longer antagonizing the government like he did as a youth during the Washington

D.C. office occupation. In short, Peltier was focusing on helping his people rather than bringing

too much attention to their plight. It does not appear that Peltier was posing a threat to any

governmental position any longer.

He and a few friends went out to eat at a local restaurant one afternoon when a couple men at

a nearby table began staring and pointing at them. This was quickly followed by snorting with

laughter, racial slurs, and innuendos. When Peltier and his entourage attempted to leave, the two

men stood right outside the front door blocking their way. They obviously wanted a fight and

were going to get one. Leonard recalls,

Before I could get off a single punch, the barrels of two .357 Magnums were pointed right at my head. The two bros split and I reeled back into the restaurant, figuring they might hesitate to shoot me in front of witnesses.

It turned out those two men were plainclothes police officers. They immediately put cuffs on

Peltier and threw him into a paddy wagon that was waiting outside. Peltier was frisked and they

found an old Baretta on him that was non-operable. They claimed he had pointed the gun at them

and pulled the trigger but it had jammed. He was charged with attempted murder. Once in the

wagon they began beating him; all while his hands were cuffed behind his back. Then it was off

to jail to await arraignment proceedings.

He spent 5 months in jail before his arraignment. He jumped pre-trial bail and slipped out of

town. He became a hunted fugitive on false charges. That is exactly how the FBI operated when

dealing with activists. They are targeted, set up, arrested, beat up, charged fraudulently, dragged

off to court and finally to jail. Leonard wouldn’t have a trial for the attempted murder charge

until after the Pine Ridge inncident and he was already in prison. In 1978 he was tried and found

not guilty. “Government misconduct had been so overt and clumsy in that case that the jury

acquitted.” 144

This decision lent some legitimacy to the claims that the American government

was conspiring to set up the activist for his politics and not necessarily for his crimes.

Documents that later became available to the general public support such a sinister plot.

Documents have been uncovered under the Freedom of Information Act that reveal the FBI

plot to have local police put AIM’s leaders in jail if possible. They were to be “neutralized”. The

FBI would do what ever was necessary to ensure that AIM’s leadership would become criminals.

Leonard Peltier is a criminal. It appears that for the American government being an Indian in

itself is not a crime but being an Indian 188 that wishes to instill pride in others and himself

concerning his heritage are dangerous activists that need to be stopped before such a radical idea

catches on. This is just one example of how an activist suddenly transforms into a criminal. The

trick is to convert back from a criminal to a free citizen; no cure is available just yet.

In sum, there appears to be scanty rationale for the FBI coming onto the Pine Ridge

Reservation in 1975. Couple this with the fact that for years the FBI was in unison with the

Tribal authorities to rid themselves of any radical Native American movements within the Pine

Ridge Reservation limits. The capture of Peltier for the murder of two FBI agents based on little

to no evidence that has since been called into question also lends to the notion that something

illegal and corrupt is occurring. This suspicion is also shared by at least one North American

governmental agency that has expressed shock and outrage over the way the American

government has conducted itself involving the Peltier case. All of this is backed up by the recent

release of documents in accordance with U.S. legislation; documents that corroborate the

accusations of Native American residents and activist groups. So why is this not on the front

page of every newspaper in the country? This question can only be answered with an inductive

approach to the following questions: Who controls the media? Why would the controllers of the

media want this news buried? What is their connection with the FBI? How much effort would be

needed to bury this news? Who would stand up and fight for the oppressed? And from the

authors we demand that you the reader ask yourself the question: Will you stand up and fight for

the oppressed?.

Once again there is a world with the “middle-class” that does all of the dirty work and the

power elite tell the “middle-class” what to do. In the case of the criminal, it is the power elite that

tells the “middle-class” what to fear. The power elite told Americans to consider blacks as

inferior, three-fifths of a person for the purposes of population count. And when it served the

purposes of the Union, President Abraham Lincoln declared that all slaves were free. His

proclamation did not have any legal weight. If president Bush today were to announce that all the

property that once belonged to Native American tribes were to be returned to their ancestors, the

announcement would not have any legal effect. The president is not the king and, therefore, the

president cannot free slaves, repatriate land or marginalize a group of people that want answers

with procedure and bureaucratic oversight red tape. Lincoln’s proclamation was meant to boost

the morale of the Union while demoralizing the rebels during the civil war. His proclamation

also garnered the support of Blacks in the north and the south. President Lincoln subtly redefined

“middle-class” to include free and enslaved Blacks. Much like the power elite today are placing

those that would hurt their interests appear to be criminals and therefore contrary to the interests

of the “middle-class”.

Homelessness

With Mary Lou Gonzalez and Charles Sepulveda

The above word congers up ideas of what the homeless do and where they live. It makes us

think of many things such as drugs, laziness, hard times, abuse, domestic violence, bad luck,

poor education, poor health and the list goes on. For some of us the homeless are just a crowd of

people that you drive by on the way to work or on the way home. For others, the homeless have

names and faces; they shine your shoes or they wash your windshield. Then there is the most

elusive bunch of homeless people. Those that try very hard not to be seen yet they are not the

most difficult to understand. For those of you familiar with the homeless population in America

we urge that you read through our stereotypical depiction to the very end when we uncover

something more. For those of you not familiar, please expect the usual and get ready for a

surprise that may threaten your very way of life.

America has a desperate homeless problem. Many of our homeless are that way because they

choose not to live the life of a capitalist slave. Shunned by the mainstream, these citizens of the

United States are ostracized by your government. Why? Ever wonder why it is illegal to give

money to homeless people? Perhaps the reason is that America wishes to place the homeless out

of the sight of the rest of America so that the problem will go away. The homeless represent a

scar that America wishes the rest of the world not to see. These homeless people belong to many

of the groups of non-conformists that would make the pretty picture of America doing fine and

being content among itself fall apart if you ever listened to them for a second. In most cities and

towns there are vagrancy laws which makes it illegal for someone to sleep on the ground or in

their car on public property within city limits. These laws also exclude the homeless from

panhandling in front of businesses. The reason for these laws is to prevent a customer from being

scared away by the sight of the homeless. Many examples indicate that the interest of business

takes precedent over that of the human.

In order to promote business and tourism, cities pass resolutions and laws that force the

homeless to move beyond the view of the public. One rationale for these laws is that the very

sight of homelessness could deter tourists from buying; finding the existence of the homeless

disturbing. On March 22, 2002 police officers in Las Vegas, NV began informing homeless

people on a downtown sidewalk that they would have to leave by the following Sunday. This

new law will supplement existing laws against homelessness such as a pedestrian interference

law that prohibits sidewalks from being even partially blocked; blockage by another human body

counts as an obstruction. Las Vegas City marshals were expected to hand out fliers to an

estimated 200 homeless people living in temporary housing such as tents, cardboard shelters, and

sleeping bags. Then, after notice was served, enforcement would follow. Such practices are

reminiscent of the typical solution for the homeless problem.

Instead of dealing with the homeless problem cities such as Las Vegas tend to further

marginalize the homeless by trying to hide their existence. Such a solution is no solution at all.

Rather it is a cover-up that makes the homeless nothing more than a mailbox that needs re-

painting. Experts in the field of civil rights, such as Gary Peck, the executive director of The

American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada suggest that the city and Metro Police’s efforts are

just another way to make it harder for the homeless to exist in Las Vegas. Peck goes on to state:

They can play any game they want, but it's pretty evident they are talking about 40 available [shelter] beds and there are hundreds of people on the sidewalk."

145

The hundreds of people that Peck speaks of need to go away; that much is established. Rather

than take appropriate action, the homeless are treated much like an abundance of insects; shooed

away and justified with the belief that they are worthless. But the homeless have their advocates

and they are considered human by a few people.

The advocates of the homeless are coming strong with procedural challenges to the laws and

demanding due process for the issue. The debate is going on about what the intentions of the city

truly are and what is the appropriate action that should be taken. Allan Lichtenstein, an ACLU

attorney, filed a restraining order to stop the police from removing the homeless and "prevent

Metro from arresting people or threatening arrest for conducting life-sustaining activities until

we can have a full hearing in this matter." 146

Lichtenstein is taking action and speaking on behalf

of the homeless who are in desperate need of a voice since the city has taken drastic action

without considering their plight. Nonetheless, Las Vegas city officials argue that they are not out

to dehumanize the homeless population. Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman said it is not their

intention to arrest the homeless, but they will if they don’t relocate and clear the sidewalk for

people who deserve to use them. Mayor Goodman went on to state, "It has to come to an end. It

has gotten to a point where we have a real health hazard and an impending economic disaster." A

more in depth analysis of the interest of Las Vegas is warranted.

Goodman was questioned about the City actions to solve the homeless problem. City officials

in favor of the ordinances have cited two reasons for their supporting them; one is that the

homeless are living in conditions that may have consequences on their health. A second reason is

that they are an economic burden on the city by their ability to unintentionally deter consumer

shopping. Goodman seems to have no direct comment on the prioritization of the rationales for

the vagrancy laws. His only statement concerning the matter was, "We can't stop people from

being nomads, but if they're violating the law, we can arrest them." 147

This type of reasoning

only blames a division within government for the overall failure to do anything that would help

solve or at least improve the homeless problem. Rather, the interest of business is the real interest

being served.

It is the business owners who tend to run the cities of the United States. The business owners

either are the political representatives or are in control of those that are the political

representatives of local government. Since the local government also stands to benefit by serving

the businesses, via re-election and campaign contributions, it is in their best interest to serve the

interest of business people. This rationale is in addition to the fact that many businesspersons are

also political representatives. In any case, the interest of business must take precedent over the

interest of the human. Unfortunately for the homeless, the issues that make them “failures” are

often ignored since it would cost too much money to look more deeply. Rather, the solution to

homelessness is a sweeping of the people under a rug. It makes the homeless remain but under

some sort of camouflage that hides their true identity. Making it illegal to be homeless is the

most cost effective way 194 to deal with them. They end up in jail or they stay out of sight so

that they don’t end up in a jail cell. The tourists of cities don’t see them and the consumer dollar

is spent. For this reason, many of the characteristics of the homeless population are over looked.

The time has come to look at the homeless not as a cockroach but as a human again.

Some homeless people are mentally and/or physically incapable of providing housing or

taking care of themselves. When it comes to housing, one must be of a certain age to hold a job

and a legal residence making it impossible to be compliant with many vagrancy laws if you

happen to be a child. An ever-growing segment of the homeless population around the world is

made up of children and teenagers; many of which are runaways. Runaways tend to believe that

they have no choice but to run away from abusive parents, a lack of parental guidance or a

feeling of smothering by parental oversight. Large portions of these teenagers begin doing drugs,

and selling their bodies in order to buy drugs, but also just to survive. And with the access to

every chemical invented by science available, there is no leap of deduction needed to see why

these children need help that simply is not available.

Being that the children of the street end up dead or addicted to some type of chemical, it is

easy to see how these dependencies lead to a need for professional help concerning not only drug

addiction but also concerning mental disorders. Mental health issues combined with drug and

alcohol abuse problems make the situation even worse but not for the obvious reason of having

two major health problems. Rather the issue of bureaucratic procedure seems to take affect. In

Sydney, Australia the NSW Association for Adolescent Health’s executive officer Georgie

Ferrari said treatment programs currently make it difficult for young people to get help for both

problems at the same time, "Drug and alcohol services say this is a mental health issue, but

mental health then says we can't treat them until their addiction is sorted out." What results is

that the children do not get treated at all. With no treatment the children are left to fend for

themselves. And studies indicate that the combination of substance abuse and mental illness

increases the risk of young people remaining homeless. One who is homeless can hardly be

expected to find time to attend school and they end up dropping out. Many of the homeless

children end up descending into crime and the juvenile justice system of justice. These children

end up maturing with a different perspective on life.

If a homeless child can grow up into a homeless adult, than it must be considered that a

homeless adult will have an even greater time somehow re-adjusting to some sort of mainstream

life of working and living from paycheck to paycheck. Couple the idea of homeless people also

having chemical abuse problems and you end up with a new set of rules for a sub-society.

Considering that it is generally illegal to be homeless in most major cities, the majority will

move once they are forced to, a few will probably have to be arrested. More than likely they will

find a new neighborhood to move to since homeless shelters are not adequate to contain the

entire American homeless population. Rather, the homeless will look to each other for help and

develop a sub-culture.

Homeless people tend to live in groups for protection, and for normal human social needs.

They begin to develop a sense of isolation from the rest of mainstream America. They do not

trust outsiders and only each other. They develop support groups and rivalries among each other.

They learn to survive together; their existence becomes more of an unexplainable innate

yearning to survive. Yet, from the perspective of mainstream America, there probably is no

reason to survive. In spite of any of these survival tactics, a homeless person will usually die

alone and in the cold of night.

Members of the “middle-class” rarely consider the death of a homeless person. Instead, there

is a preoccupation with the self that prevents their energy from being diverted to another person.

But the truth can be found in most any major city in America. One place that does not want to

include the homeless in their tourist information booklets is Santa Cruz County, California.

During the year 2001, twenty-nine of its homeless citizens died. Homeless deaths are

predominantly male and last year was no exception with 74% being male. A total of 7 women

died homeless in Santa Cruz County during that same year. Ten of the confirmed deaths occurred

outdoors or in a vehicle. Twelve died in some sort of medical facility. Someone took one into

their home during their hour of need. One died in jail. And one was a homicide victim. Drug

overdose remained the biggest single cause of death among other ailments. Of all the homeless

deaths in 2001, seven died of acute drug overdose, five from some form of cancer, three suffered

a trauma related fatality, two fell victim to liver disease, two suffered from stroke, two had

infections that could have been treated had they received medical attention in a timely fashion,

one suffered internal bleeding, one fell victim to homicide, one took their own life, and one died

due to causes unknown. 148

All of these numbers point to human beings and all of these numbers

get lost in the back pages of newspapers or are only noted in passing on the evening news. For

the homeless to get help they need to become human in the minds of the “middle-class” again.

In order for the homeless to receive some sort of help, they must gain the attention of the

“middle-class”. Unfortunately, since there is no profit in helping the homeless, they will go by

unnoticed. They will be ignored until they ask for change from a member of the “middle-class”.

But the “middle-class” have been conditioned to believe that they are not human. Instead, the

solution to the homeless are dealt with in as cheap a manor as possible without giving the plight

of a homeless person a second thought. The notion that homelessness is a self-made situation is

the rationale for blaming the homeless and then not helping them. The “middle-class” have been

convinced that the homeless do not deserve help, that they are not hardworking, or that they are

lazy and that they should find a job. Yet no one will hire a person that has a drug problem or a

mental health issue that needs to be solved. Very few will help the homeless with their drug or

mental health issues and those that do gain help must have one issue sorted out before the other

will be dealt with since very few facilities are capable of catering to both simultaneously. But

that is not to say that all “middle-class” Americans do not care; rather they lack the

understanding of the homeless to begin to help. There are a few ways for the “middle-class” to

become informed about the plight of the homeless.

One way to make the homeless come to life is to volunteer time in support of a solution. By

going out to shelters and helping or by serving meals to the homeless one can look into their

population and see a few facts that the above leaves out. But there is a far more stressful way for

the “middle-class” to learn about the homeless. For those that are “middle-class” but are really

the working poor, there is the possibility of them joining the homeless for dinner on a more

permanent basis.

A new trend in the United States is the make up of the homeless population. They tend to

have jobs. They tend to have children yet they do not have a place to call home. How does this

happen? Remember when we talked about the working poor who live a paycheck away from

homelessness? Well those that are living this way sometimes have some bad luck and that

paycheck-to-paycheck situation turns into a housing problem. Hours get cut, expenses from the

doctor or the dentist come up or perhaps an unexpected situation such as a robbery or a theft

leads to that paycheck being spent on food and the rent is given a break till next month. But

often, landlords are not sympathetic to the problems of the working poor and the 3 day pay or

vacate notices must be enforced. A family could end up on the street in as soon as a week when

the next paycheck doesn’t show up on time or is spent on food or utilities instead of rent. With

nowhere to go, the homeless families are forced to seek shelter anywhere they can find it.

If the families that end up homeless have no family or friends to stay with then they end up

an unknown statistic. That is to say, many families do end up homeless; far more than can be

tabulated because the circumstances may permit one family to live with friends or relatives for a

time while they get back on their feet again. For these people, we will never know where they

end up or for how long they struggle to regain a home. For these people, we can only imagine

what happens to them and hope that their families are able to provide them with adequate help.

They are the lucky ones since they seem to have a temporary solution. But what about those that

do not have such a luxury of a nearby friend or family member who is capable of helping?

For those that have nowhere to turn, they end up in homeless shelters along with the

homeless that are visible everyday asking for change and offering to wash your windows. But for

these families, they are new to the homeless population. They have to go to work in the morning

and get their children to school before then. They must face a world that looks down on the

homeless like lazy people that do not work. They feel ashamed that they ended up in a homeless

shelter. They are not alone. Barbara Anderson runs a sixty bed shelter near Louisville and serves

on the board of a national homelessness group. Her experience with the homeless in the past has

indicated to her a change in the homeless demographic from the stereotype we have of the

mentally ill homeless individual to the homeless family. The homeless are more often than not

made up of people that work 40 hours a week and earn $6.50 an hour. 149

They have decent

clothes and drive decent cars. They just don’t have a place to call home anymore due to recent

trends in rental markets and property values.

Today in the United States a major housing crunch is going on. The cost of housing is rising

faster than the wage of the working poor. The result is that an unexpected expense could put a

family in a homeless shelter in less than a week. But the results are not isolated to just one major

U.S. city. New York, Chicago, Washington and Oakland all report that their homeless shelters

are seeing more and more families come for help. These people are seldom documented since

few of the cities compile statistics on who asks for help. 150

Statistical data in New York reports that homeless shelters within its boundaries averaged

28,029 people a night. This figure is up 30 percent from last year and not far from breaking the

record of 28,737 set in March of 1987. And in recent times, New York shelters began to keep

tabs on whom they were helping. In September of 2001, statistics showed that 20,655 of the

homeless were members of a family. Of those helped out in September, 11,594 were children.

And of those that were asking for shelter, 6,252 of them were entire families; up by 1,000 from

the year before. 200 151

So why is the homeless family population increasing?

Some are blaming the 1996 welfare reform act for removing a support system and making it

easier for an already stretched poor working class to make it in the United States. The welfare

system that was meant to place everyone in some kind of job, many times a dead end job, have

caused the income levels of the poor to increase just enough so that they will no longer be

eligible for their subsidized housing programs. When the housing subsidy is pulled, the poor are

forced to leave when their rent becomes due in full. According to Dennis Culhane, a professor of

social welfare policy at the University of Pennsylvania:

There’s no question that housing prices have been going up several times the rate of inflation, and that is clearly having an impact on their exiting the homeless system.

152

And these results are being reflected with longer stays in homeless shelters for everyone. In the

1990’s the average stay in a homeless shelter was about five months. Today that average has

gone up to 11 months. 153

The working poor know that this is happening and the homeless

shelters know as well. Yet they are the only ones directly interested in doing something about it.

With no help from the rest of the “middle-class” there is only the working poor to fend for

themselves until the unthinkable occurs and the “middle-class” are without home.

One specific group within the “middle-class” are rental property owners. Their interest has

always been to rent their properties for fair market value. Recently, it has become more difficult

for those on subsidies to find property owners that view their business as profitable. More

precisely, the federal Section 8 program provides a subsidy for low-income families to bridge the

gap between their low income and the price of living in a given city. The subsidy pays the

difference between the fair market rental value of a property and what an indigent tenant can be

reasonably expected to pay. (Typically, a tenant’s rent equals one third of their monthly income).

The fair market value of a housing unit is determined by the Department of Housing and Urban

Development. The problem is that the housing market is skyrocketing and going far beyond the

fair market value determined by HUD. The landlords find it much more economical to rent to a

non Section 8 recipient since they will get more money in rent that way. 154

It is great that the

government is trying to help out but it does not matter if the working poor has a subsidized

housing certificate that no one will take.

You end up with a group of poor working class people that are trying to stave off

homelessness with fruitless balancing acts. The working poor try to pay one bill and let another

go hoping that things will get better in the next month. The rent gets paid in March but the phone

bill will wait till April. And in April they pay the phone bill, a two month bill, and they can’t pay

the electricity. Finally, the unthinkable happens, and the rent can’t be paid because all the

utilities are going to be turned off if they do not pay them immediately. 155

The working poor end

up homeless for an average of 11 months and then they get a house and the same thing happens

again if they are still living paycheck to paycheck until they die or get a raise. This is the real

picture of the working poor that no one in the United States can make sense of. This is the ugly

truth that bothers so many people into assuming the worst about the homeless and not coming to

terms with that fact that everyone has the chance of getting into this situation if a little bad luck

happens to befall them.

The American system of capitalism attempts to solve the homeless and mental illness

problem in the way that it attempts to solve many problems; by throwing as little money at it as

they can get away with. The concept can come in the form of the person who feels bad about the

homeless and attempts to help them with a few dollars that they have in their wallets and purses.

But the issue still remains that the homeless may not use the money to buy food. A failure to

discover more about the homeless also perpetuates the unknown. The question remains where the

money they get will be spent? What results is that many members of the “middle-class” will use

the idea that the homeless will spend cash on drugs and alcohol as a rationale for not giving

anything to them. Of course, the idea that one should get to know another person who happens to

be homeless is unthinkable for many. Besides fear of the unknown there is fear of robbery or

some other assault upon the person trying to help. Perhaps these fears are grounded in reality

since many homeless persons tend to be mentally ill in any case. And while the individual

assistant to the homeless may feel threatened, used or unsympathetic to the plight of the

homeless, the group or organization could possibly have a much more positive impact on the

problem. But the bigger issue is the turning away from the ugly truth about homelessness.

The fact that the members of the “middle-class” are potentially homeless persons is

unthinkable to many. But if we all think about it, too many of us are living paycheck-to-

paycheck to make our way through this struggle we call life. We are all so used to it that we even

call it a positive thing called capitalism. We call it free markets that promote the fair prices for

items in the United States. Then we go to the sweatshops for our clothes and we go to the third

world for our sugar. We drive the third world into further poverty and we add more and more

people to the working poor when they immigrate to the United States to work for you or along

side you. This is a good thing. This is America. This is your America; blindfolding yourself with

the help of the government so that you do not see that the homeless in America look exactly like

the person looking into the bathroom mirror as you brush your teeth in a race to make it to your

job on time.

Connecting the Dots: Following the Trail

Many ideas have been discussed throughout the pages of this text. All of the ideas separately

are not novel in nature. It is in the connection of these ideas that we find the novelty. To the

authors, it seems too easy to connect the ideas laid out yet there appears to be no other collection

on the ideas discussed. Perhaps all that are involved as non-conformists are thinking what this

text outlines. Whatever the case may be, there does exist a lot of evidence to support the

conclusion that the United States has been controlled by special interests since its birth. From the

time of colonial slaveholders and wealthy men in the Americas to the times of industrialists

working in the interest of factories and cities to the times of American interests in oil there has

always been a power elite that few are either able or willing to acknowledge exists. For the

power elite there needs to be a place for everyone in order for them to remain docile. Yet the

knowledge that one is in his or her place is enough to cause that one to question everything. A

delicate balance between knowledge and ignorance must be maintained if the power elite is to

remain the legitimate dictators of the United States. The truth is, in American society there is a

place for everyone and yet there is no admission that system of classifying people really exists at

all. What we are left with is two worlds; the theoretical and the practical.

Theoretically we are free to move from group to group; earning as much money as we want

to based on the amount of hard work we are willing to perform. Reality tells us that those with

money and influence will have an easier time breaking into the world of prestigious schools.

Once those schools are entered, the network of friends and working acquaintances make the

transition from school to the workplace all the more easily attained. The workplace, made up of

those who attended the prestigious universities, are those that will run the corporations and open

their doors to whomever they see fit. They all tell themselves and each other that they are there

because they are the hardest and smartest workers; rationalizing their failure to acknowledge

those that do not attend prestigious schools happen to not control the government and the world.

Perhaps an example of theory and practice is appropriate.

It is theoretically possible for a woman to have a child out of wedlock, give up that child for

adoption and then go to community college, get straight A’s and gain acceptance to Yale. Upon

entering Yale that woman will than graduate with a 4.0 and go into the Harvard School of

Business. She will meet the right people and get the right job upon graduation. Theoretically

possible but it is not practical. She will have torn out her heart when she gave up her baby. She

will more likely raise the child and go to the college in her area. She will not be allowed to join

the power elite because she is unwilling to give up her child. She is only one example of what

could theoretically happen and what is more practical. The power elite depends on the bottom 99

percent to be practical. They have built and maintained their empires on the prediction that all

the bottom 99 percent will feel the tug at their hearts and follow it to its end; staying home and

raising the child while enduring the pressure of being a single mom with little education and

enough heart to work for it; all the while feeling shame and guilt for their failure that lurks just

around the corner. Hence, they have devoted a lot of energy to be there when the practicality

emerges via the convenient location of their interests in the same places that practicality does.

We first looked at how democracy was really not a hypocritical juxtaposition of rhetoric

coupled with elitist special interests. Slavery, social stratification, segregation, manipulation,

assassination and lies are all a part of ancient forms of democracy and it should be no surprise

that these characteristics have emerged in modern day American democracy. Instead, there

should be more focus spent on finding alternatives to the current form of government available to

humans today. There should be more of a focus on the idea that maybe there is no need to

continue what is being played up as the epitome of human existence. No one is willing to use

their democratic freedom to think beyond the idea of democracy itself. No one is willing to

invent their own ideas upon which to establish societal organization. Democracy is not a lost

cause, but it is a mythical creation for the purpose of keeping in line the “middle-class” so that

they will continue to serve the interests of the power elite. If there is any doubt about the above

argument then perhaps a test of the current situations in America are warranted. By all means, do

not take the authors words for truth; do what the American government fears you will do. Think

for yourself and consider the alternative perspective offered herein.

Consider that the United States’ goal was to create a monopoly of power and resources; to

capitalize on wealth and exploit the rest of the world to gain that power. The founding fathers of

this nation passed their wealth, power and prestige onto their heirs and their heirs kept to the

same goals of taking over the world. Although these writings only trace the objectives of the

power elite to the late 1940’s, it is made evident that the main concern of American policy

should be American interests at most any cost. With that in mind the United States moved

forward and drew in a slave class upon which to build its wealth. Immigrants were encouraged to

work for the American government and its corporate interests with empty promises of wealth and

prosperity knowing full well that the relative imbalance that already existed in the United States

would be enough to satisfy the unemployed poor of other nations in the world. Once these

immigrants gave birth, their children were also subjected to an onslaught of media and

advertising interests; meant to pacify and control the American population. All the masses

became concerned with what was depicted to them in television and magazines; hairstyles,

music, movies, celebrities, fashion, automobiles and an occasional tax write-off via a donation to

the local public television station. But the media had a special place in its heart for not only the

immigrant but for all the working class poor.

The image of a demonized welfare recipient was driven home to all that had a television. The

idea of working hard to make a good life in America was pitched to every immigrant that came

to the United States although the United States had a major part in the creation of the third world;

the main source of American immigration. The reason for causing the masses to immigrate was

because the spoiled masses in the United States would not continue to do certain jobs and so the

immigrants are allowed to take these positions here. But the immigrants will not come unless

they are persuaded to by the conditions in their country becoming worse while the conditions in

the United States grow more pleasant. What results is a slave system that requires no shackles

and only an education of the correct rhetoric for the perfect amount of time. But to be sure, the

women and children of the United States (those without fathers and husbands) had to be dealt

with.

The women who find themselves in situations that would be better off if they had a domestic

partner to assist them find themselves demonized for their bad judgment in their choice of sex

partners. Cold arguments concerning adoption or abortion of unwanted pregnancies are pushed

upon a group of young women that do not know what to do with their lives; they only know that

they are ashamed that they are on government aid. They are conditioned to go to work for

minimum wage and join the poor working class. Their children are put into education systems

that make it nearly a moral crime to wind up like their parents have and they move forward into

society believing that they are less then good enough. It perpetuates a cycle of working class

poverty that will fuel future economic growth as a need for labor increases. The end result is

more mind entrapment to foster the interests of the corporations that need more human power to

make a profit. And once one does emerge from the shame of AFDC there is membership into a

psuedo-country club available to anyone that has a job with an hourly wage and a weekly

paycheck.

The blending of anyone that makes more than the poor into the “middle-class” is a necessary

step to ensure the stability of the power elites foundation of power and control. Many political

scientists consider the “middle-class” anyone that bothers to vote. The politicians understand this

and create a belief that they are all members of this group while, sociologically, there is much

difference between the group that are voting and believing in the “one vote makes a difference”

song and dance. Sociologists tell of a different story. While politicians appeal to the masses and

fail to identify criteria for admission to the “middle-class”, sociologists have no interest in

painting a false picture and tell a tale of various levels of classes in America today. They put the

politicians and the corporations’ owners and CEO’s at the top of the social ladder calling them

the power elite. The power elite are the smallest group yet control the majority of wealth in the

United States. Given that they are in control, all the rest of the population must be controlled in

order to maintain their empire. This is the reason that CEO’s that run the media will attempt to

depict a vague description of what is “middle-class”. By placing everyone into this category, the

masses are more easily manipulated into moving in favor of the power elite and against any

interest that the power elite tell the masses to move against. And with the list of those that wish

to work against the interest of the power elite growing, there is a need to keep the “middle-class”

united against those that would poison their paradise. Thus, there is a problem with finding

enemies among those one thought would be friends and a failure to find friends due to an

assumption that certain groups will not work in others interests. This is what the power elite

wants. This is what the non-conformists are up against.

Non-conformists fail to conform with the direction the power elite wants them to move. They

are the unruly bunches that are dealt with via their depiction among the “middle-class”. They get

labeled as criminals, homeless and activists among other names. The non-conformists can be

harmless like James Dean or John Lennon and others can prove to be very destructive like Abbie

Hoffman and Geronimo Pratt. Not to take away from the former two listed; subjective analysis of

their life work is not warranted here but they were not going to cause an uprising against the

power elite that would have a lasting affect for the most part. It is the harmful ones that are the

most dangerous to the power elite and are discredited via the media, the courts and among close

followers. The power elite work to ensure that the image of many of these non-comformists is

one of disdain. The “middle-class” can never accept a non-conformist because that would

threaten the sanctity of the power elite’s foundation for their rule. Non-conformists are instead

used by the power elite to display irrationality; to be made examples of when one does not join

the “middle-class”. When one works against the interests of the power elite, they are in danger of

becoming such examples of what not to do and are often dealt with both harshly and deceptively;

leaving a lot of room for speculation about the facts behind their demise as free persons or as

among the living. Many times, the non-conformists do exactly as they are expected; much to the

delight of the power elite.

Irrational activity that is displayed by non-conformists serve the interest of the power elite.

Timothy McVeigh, Ted Kazinski, Osama Bin Laden and members of the Symbionese Liberation

Army have all proven to the “middle-class” that all members of the non-conformists are a bunch

of radical extremists who do not care for the lives of the victims they have killed. They are

considered crazy and the others that are truly pushing for a change for the better in American

society are lumped in as crazy along with the true killers of the world. On an academic level, we

can be sure that something that each of the above people mentioned had a good, rational reason

for being distressed by the American government. That means that we may agree with some of

their logic yet we are all appalled by the actions they took in attempting to find an end to their

means. All of this is lost on the “middle-class” when all non-conformists are lumped into the

group of crazy fanatics that are willing to blow up the world to do something that no one

“middle-class” understands. It is our job to understand that the “middle-class” is not the group of

people they are taught they are. They are not special to the power elite and they are not against

the causes of the non-conformists. They are the backbone of any movement in America.

Recognizing this is the first step to changing anything. The next step is bringing them to the side

of reason and change for the better. These goals are easy to accomplish since everyone in the

“middle-class” is yearning for change. All that is needed is a catalyst to make the “middle-class”

stop paying attention to all of the corporate and media run ideas. We must gain the “middle-

class” and move them away from the power elite if we are to move in any direction. But looking

within our own movements we find that we are also making mistakes in not finding allies among

ourselves. A unity among the “middle-class” cannot come until all agree; a unity among the non-

conformists must be achieved.

The power elite, via the media, has manufactured the belief that all activists groups are

inconsistent among each other and have no rational solutions for the ideas they hope to bring

forth. Being that the activists are also falling for this hype at times, it makes sense to bring about

a more open venue and stop looking for more enemies among us. There is one group of enemies

and they are the power elite. The rest are enslaved by them, unsure of them, or willing to work

against them. As for the activists, there are many common goals shared by the various groups

that do not have to interfere with the goals of each other. Many times there have been incidences

in which minority groups of Hispanic decent, such as Mecha and Hermanos Unidos, find

themselves at odds over the direction they should take as groups in fostering growth for their

minority group. Many times, these divisions occur over personal disputes among its leadership

and membership; neglecting the fact that they are assembled for the purpose of moving forward a

common goal. The members of these groups do have a lot of heart and really do want to create

change. They lack a little direction but that is to be expected since its membership often goes off

into the white-collar world and become “middle-class”. What does need to stop is the overt

criticism of each other’s groups as “less than good” and in its place a support for each other’s

goals along with a willingness to lend help in each other’s causes. Fighting among each other is

what the power elite wants. Working among each other to bring about change is what we want

and need. Finding common ground among each other is the first step but it has greater

implications when you consider a broader spectrum of activists groups.

The branching out of activists into circles among each other is the best way to affect change.

Today, there is no group large enough that will be able to make much change in the way of

bringing down the power elite. Instead there are splinter groups that could be working among

each other to gain influence. The example of the reform party as a failure to unite is a prime

example of this situation. By coming together, many feel that their cause is being watered down

but in actuality, by not coming together there is no need to have a cause at all since it will not

gain much momentum beyond the level of grassroots activism. The competing interests of life, as

pushed by the power elite, to become “middle-class” and move ahead toward individual wealth

always takes precedent over any kind of unity and change among the non-conformists. Stopping

this trend will stop the perpetual cycle of attempts and failure followed by a union with the

enemy later in life.

The banning together of all activists, from gays to ethnic minorities to the proletariat, are

likely to raise eyebrows and cause discomfort to the power elite. It is based in that unity that

change can occur. But none of the unity written of here can occur when there is brute frustration

with the status quo and nothing more. A time of enlightenment must be reached or the demise of

the United States will not only kill the democracy that is but will also take with it the seeds of

change as well.

Seeing the big picture is key to any kind of progress. Looking at the above examples and

fine-tuning them will benefit us all. Critiquing and discrediting the ideas here will weed out what

needs no attention while focusing on the ideas that have merit will garner focus on the future

aspirations of the non-conformists. Slandering these writings in whole because there are some

mistakes, to be discovered after its release into the public domain, will only serve the purposes of

the individuals making the slanderous statements. Expect the power elite to attack first but do not

join them and aid their interests further. Instead, we should come together and move forward

from these writings as a starting point. It should be the beginning of a new partnership of

humanists that work for and expect change in the world. Once we work together, we begin to

gain tremendous focus for the goals we hope to achieve in unison. More writings should follow

and more rationality will take root in the minds of the “middle-class”. As the momentum of

support moves us forward and the power elite out of power, the “middle-class” will begin to

realize who they are and what they want. Unfortunately, once the “middle-class” begins to see

itself in its component parts, there may be a group in the upper range that identifies more with

the power elite than the cause of the humanists and we will lose more supporters in favor of

capitalism and monopolistic business practices. It is not their fault; material wealth is the key to

keeping the power elite in power. Yearning for the shiny objects of the world will make us stay

individuals and keep us clawing at each other for slightly more movement toward the top.

Perhaps with the realization that the power elite is not easily accessible, the entire “middle-class”

will reject their legitimized rule all together.

So now what? A move toward a vacuum that seems to be emerging in America. With

planning and action, the humanists of the world can move forward and create what many have

failed to; a utopian society that is based on humanism and generosity; leaving behind the archaic

failure that is American democracy. Expect a long hard fight and expect to be defeated. Then

again, there is always a repetition of history that should be explored; a societal evolution may be

just around the corner.

The Future of America

A great many things can be learned about the future by the analysis of what has transpired in

the past. A careful balancing of traits from previous occurrences are compared with the

characteristics that make up today’s events and can foretell what is to happen tomorrow. This

type of analysis is never an exact science but it does give some level of predictability to what is

to happen in the near future. Such ideas are the foundation of an entire business industry in

which stockbrokers buy and sell commodities based on information that they have gathered from

past performances of securities. Much like the stockbrokers would like us to believe that they are

psychic, the rest of us take comfort in knowing that the past has some influence on what happens

in the future possibly because we as humans are comfortable in following the good ideas of the

past or possibly because the nature of our existence is built out of routine. And if brokers can

predict what stocks will rise and fall, it should follow that historians that have studied the rise

and fall of past empires are likely to give us a glimpse of the future of the American capitalist

empire.

In antiquity, many civilizations flourished and then demised due to circumstances beyond

their control. One example is that of Mayan civilization. Its demise has been, at times, reduced to

simplistic explanations of a conquest by the Spanish of the old world. Yet a closer look warrants

a re-assessment of such statements. Rather, the decline of Mayan civilization involved processes

that were already in play long before the arrival of conquerors. Scholars believe that external

pressures only intensified the stresses that Mayan society had within itself from its origin along

with the traits it had developed over time. Some of the internal stress came from population

increases. Near the end of the Mayan civilization, the population was reaching all time highs and

was more and more densely populating its cities. It was the pressure put on food supplies that

were the primary affect of population growth and population density increases. 156

Feeding the ever-expanding population of the Maya was becoming more and more difficult.

First to consider is the need for more laborers and more labor managers required to increase

production. Given that these two needs were satisfied, there seems to be little that the growth

managers could have done to increase production without creating negative effects in other

aspects of farming. Scholars believe that farm management must have extended the time that

land was used to grow and shortened the time it was allowed to re-generate its nutrient content.

Another inevitable move may have been to deforest more of the area to produce more farmland.

Along these same lines comes the consequence of population density increasing in the Mayan

cities. This occurrence increased demand for materials to maintain the cities. Demands for

household firewood, timber for construction, and fuel for producing plaster that was used to

cover almost all civic and public buildings of the cities likely led to the further deforestization of

the Mayan woods. What resulted was the degradation of the Mayan environment. 157

The people

out grew their land.

What resulted was a lack of resources to continue supporting the civilization’s existence.

Food became scarce, which was helped along by rainfall shortages beginning to emerge near the

end of Mayan civilization, farming intensified, which led to temporary food shortage relief

followed by disaster when the land stopped producing food. What resulted was chaotic warfare

that broke out among some of the cities and within them among individuals. To put off the

inevitable, the Mayan government may have attempted to import what was needed by its people

in the way of food and resources but that would only have transferred the stress felt by one

community to another. It was impossible to stop the demise; only to slow it down.

Anthropologists believe that the importation led to the temporary relief of the food shortage

problem while amplifying other tribulations. With the strain of regions being transferred to the

entire civilization, the gaps between social classes and economic classes were only widened

further. The wealthy aristocrats were having more and more of a hard time keeping the peasantry

at peace. As the problems of poverty and insurrection began to present itself, all of the pressure

of the concerns of the entire civilization began to fall on the shoulders of those aristocrats in

charge. The administration of cities kept the elite busy tending to the maintenance of their wealth

and the governing of the cities. Their needs were only to be satisfied by more and more output

from their laborers who harvested the crop but, like has been stated, the laborers could only do so

much with land that was stretched to its limits. But the strain on the city officials was not the

only stress we find.

Mayan civilization was dependant on a number of networks between its cities. A breakdown

in communication would lead to a slow down in all of the Mayan economies that existed in each

city. A disruption of exchange and distribution networks is an obvious way to disrupt the entire

civilization. When a city was unable to import its food needs from other cities due to a network

breakdown, the city then became susceptible to its local crop failure. Any number of problems

would sprout up around a network breakdown if the local economy could not provide the

resource. Another problem came with the dependence that Mayan civilization had used to base

its powerful aristocratic influence. If the network of rule was broken, then the rest could easily

come apart. Their need to maintain communication with other cities was important to keep the

religious system and the flow of luxury goods in line. Without the resources to maintain their

ceremonial practices to legitimize their rule, they could not rule comfortably over the masses.

A failure of one or more of the local rulers to attend the ceremonial marriages and

inauguration proceedings was going to have an effect on the entire network of the ruling elite. If

no one could attend a local ceremony from distant cities, there was almost no point in having the

ceremony at all. The lack of ceremonies being carried out made the construction of large art, a

centerpiece in communicating the strength of the aristocracy, a thing of the past. Then writing

systems began to suffer. With the public left to find their own way due to the lack of public

activity, the center of Mayan life, there was no need to keep any power vested in the aristocracy

any longer and their power waned. To fill the void came the intrusion of other cultures. Although

specific affects on individual cities vary due to proximity to the rest of the world, a general

analysis is that the vacuum was slowly being filled by the interactions that Mayans began to

develop with other cultures. Coastal regions developed ties with maritime traders while those

that were isolated from other cultures felt the decline later in time.

While the Mayan culture did not disappear all together, their culture was changed forever.

All that once ruled were gone and with them went their base of power; their architecture, their

wealth and their art. It was left to decay along with the cities that once flourished and sustained

them. Major cities fell into ruin and farmers in the area remained and lived off of the land for

subsistence. With the demand of the aristocracies and the cities off of the back of the farmers, the

quality of life was at least as good as it was prior to the decline of the cities although

anthropologists believe that it probably improved.

We have briefly examined two major strains on Mayan civilization; 1. a severe over use of

the local resources and 2. the demise of the networks that communicated news and allowed for

trade among the other major cities. 158

In the end the civilization did not demise’ it only returned

to the countryside under peasant control. It seems to have given up the need for an aristocracy

and merely done away with them. The parasitic aristocracy was too much of a drain and needed

to be removed. This is the evolution that would benefit the Mayans of the past. Perhaps an

evolution in modern day America is needed.

Today in the United States there appears to be some revisiting of the ways in which Mayan

society once was. The aristocracy of the Mayan civilization that ruled were a minority and

controlled the majority. Their association with a royal name legitimized their power and their

network was created so that their heir would always be in power. But what happens when the

aristocracy becomes too greedy and needs to limit itself? It fails to see the need for limitations

and the civilization that it feeds off of will evolve them out of the civilization all together. What

is preventing the same thing from occurring in the United States today?

There are a couple of things that are missing within the American civilization today that were

present in Mayan civilization long ago. The first thing missing is the strain of resources. It is the

“middle-class” that is largely in control of the United States and it is that same “middle-class”

that is controlled by the power elite. For the “middle-class” to come to its senses and see that

they are being manipulated, they must see that those that are exploited are somehow connected to

the “middle-class”. This can come from the connection that many will still have with their ethnic

backgrounds. Latinos in the United States are the prime targets for this type of awakening. There

are many obstacles in the way that are going to prevent any association among Latinos of

different nationalities among each other; especially those Latinos that think of their nationality as

superior to other Latino nationalities. If a Latino is Mexican, there is a lot more ease in

overcoming this since many of the exploited are Mexican in the first place. It is others that are in

Latin America that will be more likely to turn the other cheek unless someone from their own

country is being exploited. But the exploitation need not take place in the United States. Stepping

away from nationalistic pride and pointing to an entire continent that is being used to make

American business interests wealthier will be the key to bringing the Latino group to the side of

humanism and away from the “middle-class”. It is in the Latino population that the numbers may

be beneficial to a movement against the power elite.

With the projections that many sociologist and statisticians are making, the number of

Latinos is growing rapidly. Since 1990, the Latino population has grown by 61 percent to arrive

at 35.3 million in 2001. And what’s more is that the numbers are considered to be

underestimations. 159

These great movements toward expansion of the Latino population have

already caught the attention of the power elite. With the number continuing to grow, there are

many corporations in the United States that are moving toward their consumer dollar. According

to a September 2001 report from Woodcrest Capital LLC, companies should be expected to

spend about 20 billion in marketing to the Latino population based on the numbers represented

by the census. 160

It is time that humanists move in their direction as well. It is the belief of the

authors of this book that if one is made aware of the conditions, one will not be able to look

away forever and that one will eventually move from awareness to activist. Out of this group can

be planted the seeds of the notion that the power elite are not needed by the masses and they

should be surgically removed. It will be all that much easier to appeal to this group when one

considers that many of the immigrants to this nation are here because they are unable to make

ends meet in their countries of origin. These immigrants are faced with a choice, to join the

“middle-class” or to become the movement that all humans need. Allowing the $20 billion to

attack them completely will make them lost to our words. It is a daunting task but it should be

attempted. This is just one section that can be appealed to. Many other segments of the

population also want change but are afraid of its consequences. Quite frankly, it is easier to

believe that big brother will protect us. More truth and more reality are necessary to bring about

other segments of the population. To garner more attention to the humanist cause there is also the

matter of American natural resources.

There is the idea that the United States is out growing its limited natural resources. An overt

example of this phenomenon is the great dependence that the United States has on oil. The

immediate problem is that the price of oil is skyrocketing as Middle-Eastern countries band

together and use the ideals of capitalism against American interests. Once this resource becomes

too costly or runs out in the United States, there will only be what is left in the Middle East.

Businesspersons in the Middle East are all to aware of this and via OPEC are constantly

adjusting their production of oil. In January of 2002 OPEC cut is production back to 1.5 million

barrels of oil per day stating that the cut back would be in effect until June of the same year. Just

prior to this oil cut, non-OPEC nations were producing oil at higher levels, which caused the gas

prices in the United States to drop to levels not seen in 4 years. Non-OPEC nations faced the

threat of a price war with OPEC nations and agreed to cut their production as well. OPEC’s

target price per barrel is between $22 and $28 a barrel. 222 161

Such maneuvers by oil producers’

leaves American interest helpless to do much more than keep buying oil-based products.

And keep buying is what Americans do. So ingrained in them is the notion that consumerism

solves every problem in the world that Americans do not see that they are stripping themselves

of a way of life in part because of their thirst for oil. In May of 2001, it was reported that

American gasoline refineries were operating at 95 percent capacity as compared with the year

2000 when some were not producing any oil due to closure for want of an increase in demand.

162 Another factor to be considered is the demand for automobiles that are not fuel-efficient.

Every year an average of 16 million new poor gas mileage vehicles are added to the market via

the sale of sport utility vehicles. 163

The demand for more oil is overwhelming the producers of

oil to the point that even OPEC is beginning to lose some of its blame for causing gas price

increases.

For the most part, the price of oil has been at about $28 per barrel since 1999. In fact, in late

2001, the price of crude oil was down to about $20 per barrel; that was before the non-OPEC

nations were threatened with a price war if they did not cut back production. All in all,

Americans tend to blame the oil producers of the Middle East who are gouging the consumers

for crude oil but evidence is pointing to vast increases in demand. But lets assume that all oil

producing nations were to increase their crude oil production to meet the demands of the

American public; is that the kind of world we want?

However shortsighted the “middle-class” wants to be, the fact remains that oil is running out.

Fossil fuels are not going to last forever and it is already running out in the United States.

Domestic oil is available in very small amounts and only in fragile environmentally protected

areas of the U.S. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, The Rocky Mountains and the beaches of

California and Florida are the only places left to drill. 164

And even if the power elite chose to

drill in these areas, this solution does not solve the issue of the oil running out. Instead it

prolongs the agony of looking into the special interests that oil companies have in keeping the

United States hooked on oil.

Everyone wants to believe that consumerism is the answer but the fact is that there is a power

elite that own and operate corporations designed to make money by selling a product or a

service. Oil companies are no different. Auto companies are also after the consumer dollar.

Together they have built up a thirst for power and aggression; all of it is harnessed by slowly

depressing ones gas pedal. Watch the gas gauge as it quickly descends from full to empty. All of

that power and aggression is now being coupled with luxury in the form of sport utility vehicles

that feature leather seating and huge wheels that require very expensive low profile tires that

really are not designed for off road use. With the majority of SUV’s remaining in the city, it is no

wonder why the pleasure of driving has been lost to the congestion and frustrations that makes

up the driving experience in most any American city. Yet there is more in the form of over using

the environment.

Another serious issue that the United States is facing comes in the form of deforestization of

its woodland areas. In the Pacific North West there are a number of companies that benefit from

the cutting down of forests in an effort to fuel the many uses for lumber. In opposition to the

logging outfits are the environmentalists who wish to prevent further clear-cutting from taking

place. As more and more forests disappear in the United States, some environmentalists are

taking a more business like approach to preservation.

In 2002, a group of environmentalists agreed to purchase a 162.5 square mile property near

Seattle, Washington for the sum of $185 million. 165

According to the plan, the non-profit group

Evergreen Forest Trust of Seattle is set to take title to the property from a logging company for

the above price. Evergreen would than conserve the most sensitive 20 percent of the property and

allow logging to continue in the remaining 80 percent with the stipulation that none of the

property would ever be allowed to be purchased by private parties for the purpose of building

homes. The plan has much appeal since it is so down the middle; and with this middle of the road

approach there will be those that believe it does not go far enough. In any case, governmental

agencies see it as a cheap way to conserve the forest from being overrun with homes, the timber

company expects to profit from the purchase since they will still be able to exploit the trees, with

the ability to continue logging comes the continued provision of jobs although the numbers are

likely to fall slightly and environmentalists are able to combat urban sprawl. 166

In the end, the

plan does have its dissenters.

There are those environmentalists that disagree with the middle of the road plan to purchase

the land citing that the logging will continue and that this will lead to the death of the forest

itself. There really is no point in attempting to prevent homes from being built in an area that

becomes a dessert as the forest is more slowly cut away than in previous years. What seems to be

happening is the reorganization of assets that serve the interests of the logging corporations.

Currently, the United States has an estimated 787,000 square miles of productive timberland. Of

that total, 29 percent is owned by the public in the form of some type of conservatory or

biological research area, 13 percent is owned by the forest industry and an estimated 10 million

private parties own the remaining 58 percent. 167

The point of focus should be the 13 percent that

is owned by corporate interests.

Corporations are usually large companies configured to maximize profits and avoid the label

of being a monopoly. In the modern day and age of corporate mergers, the forestry industry is no

different. Their interests are being served by their constant merging of interests. It is with the

mergers that companies begin to re-evaluate their holdings and try to trim up their budgets in an

effort to maximize profits. It makes sense for logging companies to focus more on the

manufacture of paper based products than it does to keep their money invested in the ownership

of large tracts of land. This is what the company that sold its land to Evergreen is doing. By

taking the capital from the sale of the property in Seattle and re-investing it into the company and

its ability to manufacture more paper products, the company is increasing their ability to sell

more products, and therefore deforest what little resources are left more quickly. Basically, $185

million dollars is being taken from Evergreen in return for a purchase agreement for the property.

And the property is to remain logging friendly. Environmentalists are going into the business of

logging yet they are not legally supposed to make a profit because they are non-profit

organizations. Given these sets of parameters, what is the future of the two organizations

involved here?

The corporation will likely make an agreement with Evergreen for the ability to continue

logging on their former property. And since Evergreen cannot turn a profit than the cost to allow

the corporation onto the land would only be able to equal the cost of operating the conservation

efforts, property taxes and other associated costs. The corporation could end up saving money if

their taxes were greater than those paid by Evergreen. Also the corporation will no longer be

responsible for the upkeep of the property; those costs will be taken on by Evergreen. In the end,

the corporations may end up paying even less for the right to clear-cut forests since they cannot

pay Evergreen and other environmental conservation groups more money than would cause them

to turn a profit. Evergreen has been taken advantage of and they are not alone.

There are a number of conservationist groups that are recognizing this time of corporate

mergers as a grand opportunity to reclaim the wild. Some of the property has not been on the

market for a century states Bill Ginn, the head of the Nature Conservancy’s Northern Forest

Program. As a result, there are a number of groups attempting to purchase land from the forestry

industry. In New Hampshire, environmentalists are putting together a plan to purchase 171,000

acres of forest at a cost of $33 million dollars from its current corporate owner. The

environmental groups of Washington State have compiled $45 million dollars to go towards the

purchase of 18,500 acres of land. The New England Forestry Foundation has raised $28 million

in funds to purchase 1,190 square miles of land from its corporate owners. In this particular deal,

logging will still be permitted and only development will cease. 168

And while the details of each

and every instance of forest purchase cannot be accessed, it is likely that they all contain some

kind of clause that allows the corporations to go in and continue reaping benefits from the land

for years to come. If logging is continued, than the environmentalists have only attained an

empty victory; and organizations that use lumber can only make more money.

Currently in the United States there continues to be the overuse of lumber in a manner that is

only going to create further overcrowding in American cities and it goes without saying that

deforestization will continue. This trend is often played up in the mainstream media as a positive

sign of economic growth. What is ignored is the question of how much growth cities can take as

well as how much the forest can give without dying out completely. Instead, the news of the

mainstream plays up the notion of how this particular trend is keeping workers employed and

hints at a possible move out of the economic recession of early 2002. The industry spoken of is

housing construction and the growth it has exhibited thus far is noteworthy to say the least.

In February of 2002, the United States Department of Commerce began reporting statistics

that indicate a rise in the number of new home construction nationwide. According to the report,

the construction of new homes and apartments climbed from December to January by 6.3

percent; arriving at 1.68 million units for February 2002. The Department added that such an

increase makes the housing construction boom the highest since February of 2000. 228 169

The

increase in demand for housing mirrors the national numbers when you look at one locality. The

inland empire, comprised of Riverside County and San Bernardino County are boasting of a high

demand for housing in their areas. The Construction Industry Research Board stated that permits

to build houses were up from the year 2000 going into 2001 by 25 percent to 27,574 this year.

Based on these numbers, the sales of homes are expected to rise by between 15 and 20 percent

over this time last year. 170

These numbers have been represented in the media as an indication

that the economic recession of early 2002 is coming to an end without giving a second thought to

the environmental ramifications of such a surge in housing construction. Without further

analysis, the “middle-class” is left to believe that consumerism is leading to an end of economy

stalling; the pacification of this group continues.

In the end we have an oversimplification of the many factors that contributed to the evolution

of Mayan civilization. Those characteristics are present in modern American society as

exemplified with the above documentation concerning the evolution of American society and the

overuse of the resources available to it. The correlations between Mayan civilization and

American civilization are not meant to predict that the end is near; only that an evolution is

pending or perhaps already taking place. All that any of us can do is watch it happen. The power

elite will try to stop it while the non-conformists will point it out and try to help their individual

causes get through it while the humanists will see it for what it is; an opportunity. After going

through the details of these writings many will have to look at the facts that point out how little

the power elite is needed. How easily they could be evolved out of American civilization yet

how hard it would be to convince the “middle-class” that such an evolution is possible or even a

good thing. Yet, in the past, the aristocracy was feeding too much on the fruits of the Mayan

civilization’s labor and they were cut from the civilization all together. Another concept that

causes out growth comes from over usage of natural resources to the point that the civilization

can no longer feed itself. One example of that comes from the over usage of oil by the consumer.

A second example comes from the overuse of the land via deforestization and the sprouting of

new homes in record numbers. It is just a matter of time before all of the resources run out.

A final correlation is warranted. Looking back on Mayan civilizations inability to keep the

masses faithful with the performance of its leaders, it is likely that this development could also

precede an American evolutionary outgrowth; a lack of faith in the power elite. The “middle-

class” already do not trust their government. They feel over taxed and underrepresented all while

feeling ignored. This distrust has been magnified by the recent events of the 2000 election that

left many feeling that the presidency was not a legitimate election. In the post September 11 era,

the distrust was replaced by fear but as that fear wanes the distrust will inevitably return. The

failure of the power elite to legitimize their control is likely to be exasperated further by the

proceedings concerning Enron and the irrational war on terror. In the end, there will be no

acceptance of responsibility; only the success will be played up for popularity points.

There is a final setting that should be looked at to give everyone a better perspective of what

the United States has become. The United States is a corporation with stockholders and a lack of

liability for the shareholders when failure occurs. The stockholders need money to invest in the

company. The investors provide money to elect its congresspersons and presidents. This is called

soft money. The CEO’S of America are its congresspersons and presidents. They report to the

power elite for their orders. Many times, they themselves are the power elite because it is their

family money that gets them elected to their office. The “middle-class” are the workers for the

corporation. They get ripped off all the time. They pay too much in taxes. They pay for taxes in

gasoline, in registration fees, in sales, in property and in tuition. The government uses this money

to reimburse its top executives so that they can live in luxury while the “middle-class” is taught

that they should work harder and buy more items. The drug addicts, criminals, activists,

homeless and all other non-conformists are the thieves. We are sought in every corner of the

company. We are not allowed to eat in the break room with the “middle-class” and certainly are

not allowed anywhere near the power elite. The power elite wants us in the “middle-class” but

for one reason or another we are not. In many cases, it is impossible for us to join the “middle-

class” because of our addictions, our convictions (both legal and philosophical) as well as our

traditions that we hold dear. We are the miscellaneous of the world that is lumped into the

garbage and everyone in the “middle-class” is taught that we are dangerous or annoying or both.

We won’t die. We won’t go away quietly. We won’t accept what is supposed to be the norm;

the idea that the power elite controls us. We won’t be controlled by subliminal means so we are

chastised and controlled by force. We are locked up in prisons, beaten on the streets, told that we

will never be able to find good jobs that pay a lot of money. We are assassinated by the least

likely to kill us while the real culprits lay in the shadows that are created to hide them so

deviantly. We are swept under the rug and expected to be forgotten because we think too much

and we are too loud. We are Malcolm Little, Cesar Chavez, Tupac Amaru Shakur, Martin Luther

King Jr., Ernesto Guevara, Reies Lopez Tijerina, Leonard Peltier and Rosa Parks. We are tired of

being told to shut up. We are tired of the old arguments that we have it better here than any other

place in the world or that we are fighting a lost cause. Why do we not die? Why has the above

list of people been subjected to prison and unnatural death? Why is it that even in death we

cannot be silenced? Rather, we live on to motivate the next generation; and corporate American

will sell our stories and our images on t-shirts. Not unless the “middle-class” joins us. Not unless

you join the “middle-class” and we wake them from their dream so that they may see our

nightmare.

Know Your Enemy

We end with an intimate look at the George W. Bush administration. With the Bush

presidency well accepted, there is nothing more to do but understand it as best we can. Although

it got started in a shaky way, it all ended up working out alright for them. With the legitimacy of

the presidency well established, there was not much more to do but continue to abuse the system

and put the interest of the soft money contributors ahead of the interests of the “middle-class”.

But with so many items that we can discuss, it is hard to nail down what to include and where to

begin?

We start with a narrative about a leader in the past that seems to be mirroring the actions of

the American government today. While some of the numbers and the vastness of the movement

of the past are not compatible with the Bush Administration’s actions, there is still at least an

entire 2 years left ahead of us to see where the Bush Administration will lead the United States.

(Then, there is the possibility of re-election). Perhaps the past will help us see.

Below is a description of a world leader from our recent past. I have left out his name

because I do not want to prejudice our readers. Let the facts flow freely into our minds and keep

in touch with the actions of today’s ruling class. With that in mind we move forward.

One historian has divided this leaders rule into two phases. The first phase marks his non-

threatening rise to power. In this leader was seen the demands of a reasonable head of state

despite many characteristics about his outlook that were not democratic such as his party’s

repression of opponents and discrimination against ethnic minorities. Besides, under his rule

most of the nation he presided over was hyped up by the fact that their economy was prospering

after years of recession. And with the success came the tunnel vision of the rest of the world; a

world that failed to recognize his writings or their ability to pass his writings off as rhetoric. The

future was laid out in book form but no one wanted to believe what they read.

If one had read his memoirs, one would have realized early on that his goals were quite

ambitious. His goal was to unite his country and expand its borders to include all that were of his

own ethnicity. Such a plan would mean that a few other nations in his vicinity would have to be

annexed. The plan was also meant to take over other nations with those that were not of his

ethnic background. These people were to be the burden bearers of his nation.

At the time of his taking power, his nation was lacking confidence due to economic crisis yet

the masses wanted to be strong again. It is this type of crowd that will accept almost anything to

get back to their former glory; even the ranting of a mad man. He began to take credit for the

rejoining of his nation with a smaller neighbor that was of the same ethnicity. The reunion of the

two was actually set up 16 years before but he took credit for it and used it to bolster morale of

the people. He built up his country’s military and announced that that an air force was back in

action soon after this nation’s reunification. It is during this time that his first phase of leadership

ends and the beginning of the second phase commences.

By this time, this leader was beginning to frighten others in his vicinity. It is the fear that

makes this a new phase for his leadership. Other nations that had knowledge of his military build

up were powerless to stop it or keep up with it due to their own domestic problems with their

economies. This leader was spending 23.5 percent of its national income on its military. This is

in comparison with its neighbors spending between 9.1 and 5.7 percent. This gap in spending

was recognized by its neighbors and so they wished to not anger the leader so they chose not to

protest his build up or his aggressive behavior on their continent. Thus, his occupation of another

neighboring nation went by un-protested by his neighbors. Hoping that this leader would calm

down on his own, the world watched as he grew more and more hungry while devouring more

and more territory.

This leader started to give support to his ethnic group even when they were a clear minority

to the relative population in their own nations. What this did for all that were members of his

ethnicity was create a nationalistic pride about a future in which all of these people would be

united under one nation that this leader would hold power over. One group of minorities in a

neighboring state were clearly making a lot of noise but there was a big group of resistance in

that nation’s joining with this leader. Nonetheless, he bullied the leadership into resignation and

ordered his army to occupy the state. Within days, the nation was annexed and was now a part of

his nation. This move was justified because of the popularity of nations clinging to nationalism

as an ideology of justification. Thus, if any group of minorities were not under one flag and one

leader, the world did not see it as a problem but could understand the annexation of smaller

nations for reasons based in nationalism. This leader used that ideology to make his invasion

legitimate. Many hoped that he would quit but that did not happen.

The same method of operation was being exhibited in yet another nation as soon as this

leader was finished with the last. He would hype up those that were of his ethnicity in another

nation and urge them to push for unification with him. Then he would start a military effort to

bring about the unification. Such was the case again when, this time, the state of one nation

mobilized in expectation of his military maneuvers. Other nations in the area began to urge this

leader to not agitate the situation or they would be forced to act. The problem was that these

other nations that wanted to avoid war were weakened and this leader was gaining strength from

his domestic policies. It also bolstered his ability to afford a war and so he pressed for agitation

nonetheless. Also, support for a war against a nation that was making problems with other

nations seemed so far removed that the masses did not show much support for intervention. To

others in the vicinity of the aggressive leader, it was a problem a world away that did not concern

them.

The nations that hoped to avoid war and this leader were all invited to a conference to

determine the fate of this latest nation under his attack. Ironically, the leadership of that nation

had nothing to do with this conference as they were not invited. The major nations agreed to

allow this leader to take control of the state as long as he would stop his aggressive behavior.

The leaders of the other nations believed and hoped that this aggressiveness would end due to

their thirst for annexation being quenched. That was not going to happen however; just as peace

was in sight, this leader moved in and took yet another nation as his own. Members of his ethnic

group were ecstatic. 171

Does this remind you of anyone?

What we have is a George W. Bush only in the past. Perhaps the Bush administration is

similar to the first phase of the above leaders career. The aggressiveness and yearning of the

above leader to unite his ethnic people is much like that of the modern day regime that moves in

the interest of his people; the power elite. We begin with September 11. Although it is not clear

how much the White House knew about the likelihood of attack prior to it, it is interesting what

this attack did for the Bush Administration. It took attention away from the election of a year

prior in which a lot of doubt was cast on the democratic voting system in the United States. It

unified both parties in the United States against a common enemy that no one is sure even exists

let alone who that enemy truly is. But the war on terror that emerged from the attack served even

more interests for this administration.

Beginning with the U.S. Patriot Act of 2001, of which little attention has been given, an

assault on civil liberties began. The main concern with the Act revolves around the expanded

abilities the government has in obtaining information. In short, persons are easily selectable as

targets; and in the post September 11 era one set of traits warrants more attention. Bisher

Tarabishy is the president of the Muslim Student Association at the University of South Florida;

the same University that once employed Sami Al-Arian. Tarabishy had this to say about the

Patriot Act:

Our civil liberties have taken a beating since the war on terrorism, and the terrorism issue is being used to curtail our civil liberties. The Patriot Act is infringing upon individual liberties. [It] significantly boosted the government’s law enforcement powers while cutting the checks and balances system that Americans rely on to protect their individual liberty.

172

Looking at the Act’s amendments more in depth better substantiates the above statement. The

parameters of the amendments that the Patriot Act allows can be used against anyone that the

government deems it should. Given all of the scared people in the government, it is possible to

use the Patriot Act to imprison all that protests.

One example is the protest of the Patriot Act in Westwood California on April 6, 2002. At

this protest, a group assembled at the Westwood Federal Building holding signs, wearing t-shirts

and garnering the support of those that drove by on Wilshire Boulevard. And with those that

were supportive there was also a group that was not supportive. They may have even felt

intimidated by our presence. Under the Patriot Act, this presence may be enough:

The term “international terrorism” means activities that (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; . . .

173

Under the current rules for crimes our activity would only have to appear to be intended to

intimidate or coerce the civilian population in an effort to influence the policy of a government.

We did intimidate a few to drive by and flip us off as we stood on the curb. We did coerce a few

to lean out of their cars and exclaim racial slurs at us. Our protest to influence the United States

government’s policy under the Patriot Act would only have to scare some of the right people and

we are then facing 10 years in prison. Granted, there is a provision that our freedom of speech

cannot be infringed but the problem still exists that the definition of what a terrorist is can mean

anything that prosecutors see fit. Currently it seems to mean Middle-Eastern persons.

Tarabishy is of the opinion that in the post September 11 era, it is open season on anyone that

looks like they are from the Middle East. He goes on to say:

Since the attacks, there is a blind association between terrorists and Muslims and Arabs. What used to be innocent until proven guilty is now guilty until proven innocent,

especially if you are Muslim or Arab. 238 174

This been said, there is also a backlash being felt in the green card holding communities with ties

to the Middle East. In the post September 11 era there have been a number of immigrants that

feel threatened somehow because they are not citizens. Josephin Cianciulli is one such

immigrant. She has a bachelors degree and works with the mentally ill yet she is concerned with

rumors that, “. . . they could detain you for simple things, like not paying a parking ticket.” 175

She is not alone. Between October and January there have been a record number of individuals

applying for United States citizenship. The numbers indicate that there is a 72 percent leap from

this period last year. In sum, the INS has received an astonishing 275,600 applications for

citizenship. 176

Some cite the fact that the Immigration and Naturalization Services have recently

cut their fees for the service. Others, however, lay the blame on the post September 11 era style

of investigation and scrutiny of anything Middle Eastern.

Rather, the United States government has begun to enforce its immigration laws in an

aggressive manner for fear that one of those that are left in the nation will be the next suicide

bomber. Naturally, only those of Middle-Eastern decent are receiving this aggressive behavior;

all in the name of national security. But remember that there is not a need for new immigrants;

remember that in times of fear and economic decline immigration is stalled and when the need

for laborers is high the borders will be opened. But what is different this time around is the

nature of the fear and the depth that the United States government will go to in order to keep

anyone not American enough from enjoying the freedoms that the United States has to offer.

They seem like second-class citizens.

Today there is reason to believe that as many as 2000 people are in the custody of some form

of law enforcement agency that take orders from the United States. Most of these people have

not been charged with a crime and for some, their location is a mystery. Reminiscent of the

Argentine practice of disappearing persons that criticize the government, the United States seems

to have a lot of explaining to do.

As of February 26, 2002, one Rabih Haddad remains in the custody of the United States

government. On December 14, 2001, he was taken into custody by the Immigration and

Naturalization Service. Since then he was detained near his home of Ann Arbor, Michigan and

later transferred to a facility in Chicago. At first, his family was able to visit him for four hours

per week. Recently, that time has been cut down to four hours per month and even then it gets

tricky. On at least one occasion, his wife and children were turned away with no offer of an

explanation. The reason for his incarceration for more than two months must lie in some form of

hard evidence. There must be some reason that this person is being held. Yet there is no

indication that United States government is going to charge him with a crime.

The government has little in the way of evidence as far as the public can see. Out of all the

organizations that have been involved with his incarceration, only one has given a statement as to

his status as a possible focus for indictment; The Treasury Department suspects that he is linked

somehow to Osama Bin Laden. There is nothing more in the way of evidence that is offered by

the American government. Instead we are only left with the culpability that Haddad must have

exhibited. His ties will tell the answer; but they tell no such tale. Haddad is head of the Global

Relief Foundation; one of the nations largest Muslim Charities. Haddad himself is a well

respected religious man and community leader. But, for whatever reason, he is detained with no

charges being brought and therefore no way for him to arrange for his exoneration. He must wait

while his reputation, his charity and his life goes to waste. He is not alone.

The American government has orchestrated a raid against any person affiliated with the

Global Relief Foundation. On December 14, 2001, the same day of Haddad’s arrest, three other

offices that help run the Foundation were raided. The FBI raided the Chicago headquarters and

seized any and all information including paper files and computers. Two other offices in Albania

and Kosovo were also raided in similar fashion. In the foreign raids, NATO was in charge of the

raid and they did there job so thoroughly that, in addition to seizure of all documents and

computers, the NATO troops even ripped open Ramadan presents and took Mohamad Chehade

into custody for several weeks. Chehade stated in court papers that he was never shown a search

warrant. So far there have been no charges of any personnel working for the Global Relief

Foundation. It is believed that Haddad may have overstayed his tourist visa but such an offense

hardly warrants this treatment. Nonetheless, his due process rights have been suspended and the

government is citing the U.S. Patriot Act as their blanket of protection for his treatment. Perhaps

he is a lucky one. At least his family knows where he is.

The Justice Department was releasing numbers as late as November of 2001 when it

suddenly stopped doing so. At last count, some 1,200 individuals were being detained in the post

September 11 era. Estimates by human rights groups believe the number now could be as high as

2,000. The problem is that no one knows what to make of these people since we cannot be sure

who they are or where they are. A few cases have emerged after the miscarriage of justice is over

with. Al Badr al-Hazmi is a radiologist from Texas who was recently released from government

custody. He was held for two weeks with no contact with the outside world. The FBI released

him stating that they had made a mistake. Two Pakistani immigrants were held for 49 days. They

were finally charged with overstaying their visas. Tarek Mohamed Fayad was arrested in

California and extradited to New York. His lawyer could not find him for a month. These are

only a few and there are more to come.

John Ashcroft has announced the “absconders apprehension initiative” order. Under this

order, some 6,000 Arabs are being focused on for their crimes. Everyone one of these people

have visa violations. Every one of them should expect the same treatment as long as the “middle-

class” looks the other way as they go to work and wonder who is going to kill them and deprive

them of their television and cellular phones. It makes the notion that there are 300,000 other non-

Arab person in the United States today that have visa violations moot. It does not matter because

those that do not look like they are from the Middle East are trustworthy. Expect more secrecy as

Ashcroft closes the proceedings of immigration court to the outside world. 177

The secret court of

the twenty-first century is right here in the United States. That doesn’t matter however; these

Arabs and Muslims are nothing more than criminals. They are not “middle-class” any longer.

They are not called on to vote or to buy products. They are everything that America wants you to

hate. You can do as they say or you can start asking questions yourself.

Here we have evidence that the Bush administration considers one group of people less than

equal. It is outright discrimination against an ethnic group that is being targeted and scapegoated.

But it is all justified by the interest of National Security. The nation that must remain free of

danger is enough to invoke shows of support for the administration that would suspend civil

rights. There also remains the idea of the expansionism and ambition in the Bush administration.

There also remains the ambition exhibited with the war on terror. The excuse to enter the Middle

East and take over Afghanistan. The need to run a pipeline from South Central Asia though

Afghanistan and into Pakistan. The need to take over Iraq so that the oil fields can be siezed by

American interests. These notions have been examined already. The ideas not examined have to

do with the neighbors that think the Bush administration has gone from being reasonably

demanding to outright insane in their ambition, their drive and their goals.

The dissenters have been silenced at home. Those that see what is going on abroad are also

dissenting. Some are calling on the Blair government of Great Britain to stop this madness but,

much like Bush’s likeness, our mystery leader did the same and intimidated everyone with

military spending. Today the United States Government is building the largest war machine ever.

Military spending will come up to $379 billion with about $50 billion dedicated to the war on

terror alone. 178

Just like our mystery leader, a great military spender is the Bush Administration

in preparation for a hostile take over. This great ambition against “terror” is expected to reach 40

to 50 nations and could last for 50 years according to Dick Cheney. 179

A great many wars for the

interest of the power elite. A great many ways for the power elite to secure its oil. All they have

to do is take the civil rights of anyone away that opposes the Bush Administrations great

ambition.

On February 10, 2002 Madeleine Albright expressed her opinion about the Bush

administration’s ambition to take over and destroy the axis of evil. She believes that the

administration is out of its mind. 180

Hubert Vedrine of France has stated that Bushes views are

simplistic. The idea that all of the world’s problems are solved with the extinguishment of

terrorism is laughable. The governments of Spain, Italy, the EU, and Asia have also expressed

deep concern and criticism over the Bush agenda. South Korea was especially angered by the

axis of evil statement since it worked in opposition to better relations with North Korea. The

efforts to take out Yassir Arafat and the Palestinian government are also heavily criticized by the

EU. And even in the face of arrogance comes the irrationality of a war against Iran and Iraq.

Iraq and Iran have interest in the future of Afghanistan. Yet it is when they express their

interest that the idea of taking over these nations is also discussed by the United States. Out of

fear of terrorism, the threat of Iraq and Iran are bolstered to gain American “middle-class”

support to be the first to strike. Yet there are others in Afghanistan that no one seems to mind.

Reportedly, Russia has virtually taken over Northern Afghanistan and India ranks close behind in

involvement. Clearly there must be some shared interest that the United States has with these two

nations occupying this one. We have already discussed the ulterior motive for an invasion of

Iraq. It is not hard to figure out why Iran would fall under this same argument as well.

The war on terror is a farce. Not only are we given hypocritical arguments concerning the

liberation of people but the “middle-class” is also told that everything is going great. The

propaganda machine that is the Bush administration also coincides with the mystery leader that

has been addressed. The shock of the modern states that are likely to suffer for Bushes

maneuvers ring a bell of recognition; the deeds of the past are here again only to be rung more

loudly and its consequences may go further. What more is there to do than fill in the blanks?

The mystery leader came to power in 1933. The first of his two phase career took place

between 1933 and 1935. During this period he was seen as a reasonable man although he

believed that his countrymen should be united under one nation and that others were less than

human or subhuman. In 1935 the people of the Saar region voted to rejoin his nation. He took

credit for this “victory” and used to boost the morale of his countrymen. During that same year

he revealed that his nation secretly built an air force. This was a violation of prior agreements

between his nation and other neighboring nations. He was getting dissenting attention from the

rest of the world but they would not do anything to stop him because of the economics of the era.

With their own domestic problems to deal with this leader was free to move into phase two of his

career; the openly defiant leader emerged.

In 1936 he sent troops into the Rhineland, in violation of past treaties with neighboring

nations. At this time he also began to build up his nations army. This is when he spent 23.5

percent of his nations income on military buildup or $3 billion. Other nations recognized the

build up of the military and this made them nervous but cautious. The end result was that they

did not move against him for fear that his large military would crush them. All they could hope

for was his appetite for imperialism be satisfied. Other nations began to have relations, especially

concerning the ramifications of the events taking place over the invasions of neighboring states.

France, Great Britain and Italy came together to figure out what to do. Meanwhile, this leader

was openly supportive of a coup attempt against Austrian Chancellor Engelbert Dollfuss in 1934.

It was obvious to all that something was going to happen but no one could tell how far it would

go just yet.

This leader kept planning to unify his countrymen under one nation. In March of 1938 the

Chancellor of Austria resigned. Many historians believe that the resignation was a result of the

provocations of this leader and his interests. Upon the resignation, troops from his country

marched into Austria and seized the state. On March 13, Austria was annexed into its conquerors

nation. The move was legitimized by the fact that the majority of Austrians shared the same

ethnic heritage as its invaders. Next his attention was turned to the Sudetenland, a part of

Czechoslovakia.

In May of 1938 Czechoslovakia mobilized their troops along the border with the aggressive

state in anticipation of an invasion. France and Britain warned the aggressor to stop but the

warnings went by unheeded. It did not matter because Britain was not willing to support France

in retaliation for the invasion. The public opinion in Britain was that this leader was only trying

to achieve goals that are set forth by national identity. And British public opinion was also that

Czechoslovakia was far away and had nothing to do with their own sovereignty. The Soviet

Union was willing to intervene but only after France did so. And with France unwilling to do so

without the aid the Britain nothing was done aggressively. Instead the Munich Conference was

held in the summer of 1938 in which all agreed that Sudetenland would be voluntarily turned

over to the aggressor nation. Ironically, Czechoslovakia was not involved in the decision nor

were they invited to the conference at Munich. The aggressive behavior continued when, in

1939, an invasion of the rest of Czechoslovakia was initiated. The neighbors had had enough. 181

The invasion of Czechoslovakia by the aggressor was the last straw. Britain and France were

outraged since they lost a potential ally. To the leaders of the aggressive nation, it became clear

to them that France and Britain would not go to war over smaller eastern nations. One such

country that fit this description was Poland. The Polish government was approached by the

British and French governments about an alliance. The agreement was made that if the aggressor

nation should invade Poland, both France and Britain would come to their aid. The Soviet Union,

on the other hand, could not align with Poland due to Polish opposition to any alliance with

Russia and instead they aligned with the aggressor nation. The reason for the alliance was that it

would serve the interests of both nations; they both wished to avoid a two front war. The

aggressor nation knew that France and Britain lacked the military strength to pose a threat to

their Polish invasion. On September 1, 1939, the invasion began. 182

The similarities between this

leader and the Bush administration are frightening.

All of the pieces fit. A leader that has swept himself into power on the strength of fear has

emerged at least twice in recent times. Both leaders have a problem with certain minority groups

within their nations and have used their executive power to make life difficult for them.

Although the hatred may lack in the current government, the interest is served by the pursuit of

money rather than a perfect race. Those that are American enough are the hero’s. Those that are

blind enough to allow all of this to happen are the patriots. Those that dissent are terrorists and

terrorists must be stopped at all costs. Fear and the use of any means necessary to protect the

“middle-class” are what is used to gain access to the worlds supply of oil. The difference today is

that the events that will follow the aggression of the Bush Administration will not result in

another war since there remains only one dominant government in the world. Unlike the past,

there are not other world powers to deal with, that has been assured by the Monroe Doctrine and

other policies that make American interests come first and other interest materialize by pure

coincidence.

No one can stop this modern day fascist government. That is to say no one but the masses.

The people that run the nation are the key to ending the madness of King George. The way to

stop all of this is to stop listening, stop buying, stop pretending that everything is okay. Critical

thinking is very important for the survival of the human race. Bombs are not the answer and the

annihilation of a few Middle Eastern countries is not the answer either. No one ever stopped to

consider that the Islamic fundamentalists are frustrated and scared as well. They see the fascist

government that we are all trained to look past. It is all justified as the greatest government in the

world. And that it is since it was set up to serve the interests of the power elite and there has been

little else done but accomplish that goal. Know your Enemy and know his strategy or you will be

the next victim.

So now what? We move ahead with clear minds. We come together and we finish what has

been started here in these writings. We investigate each chapter and look for mistakes and then

clarify our thought process and move forward. We present our ideas to the young and to the old.

We remain solid and we move ahead with the one weapon they cannot kill; our minds. We keep

our interests in focus and we move against those that would put our interests last. We wait for the

next set of writings and we grow into unity like the world has never before seen.

Notes

1 Trow, Martin, Public Interest, Spring 1999, pp 64-85.

2 Lerner, Robert E., Meacham, Standish and Burns, Edward McNall. Westerns Civilizations. Their History and Their Culture. Volume I/Thirteenth Edition. 1998 W.W. Norton & Company. Page 87.

The authors of this writing only out of convenience looked at the Western Civilization book. There exists no statistical data that this particular book is used throughout colleges and universities in the United States. There is not meant to be an implication that this book represents all college and university curriculum. The book is currently in use at Allan Hancock College in Santa Maria, California. The book has been in use by the teachers of a Western Civilization class since at least 1996 in various editions. The reason that the book is included here is mainly to illustrate that, randomly, a textbook that teaches the history of Greek society is likely to romanticize the nature of Greek democracy. Based on the educational experiences of the authors of this writing, we are of the consensus that in the academic world teaching approaches tend to romanticize Greek society from the earliest stages of education up to university level study. Certainly, once the academic has reached a level beyond the lower division college course, the truth becomes less obscured as professors and scholars delve deeper into the subject of Greek democracy. It should also be noted that there are far less students taking upper division course work in subjects relating to Greek democracy and even less that work one on one with a professor while the lower division coarse, specifically the one offered at Allan Hancock College, is not only offered to a large group of students but is one of several classes that satisfy the general requirements for a degree in various disciplines of study in the humanities discipline.

3 Lerner. Page 95

3 Lerner. Page 98.

4 Bell, Thomas, Out of this Furnace. 1976 University of Pittsburgh Press.

A class offered at the University of California, Los Angeles presented this book as reading material. The class title was the Gilded Age and explored the ideas of an emerging working class during America’s industrial age. It was meant to chronicle the period of 1877 to 1900; from reconstruction till the end of the 19th century. While the book was fiction, it is as accurate as possible to document the true living conditions of immigrants who worked in manufacturing factories during this time. This book focuses on one mans struggle to bring his family to America. He loses a close friend to an industrial accident, has an affair with another woman, opens a butcher shop, loses the shop, and has to go back to the factory for work. While I attempted to secure another copy of this book at the University of California, Santa Barbara, I failed since the book is held on two-hour reserve indicating that the book is used for some sort of class as of winter quarter 2002. 250

4 Perea, Juan F.. Immigrants Out! The New Nativism and the Anti-Immigrant Impulse in the United States. 1991 New York University Press. Page 3.

5 Perea, Juan F. Page 20.

6 Graham, Kevin, Oracle (University of South Florida), October 11, 2001.

7 Meehan, Ryan, Oracle (University of South Florida), October 5, 2001.

8 Meehan, Ryan

9 Powers, Scott, The Orlando Sentinal, January 15, 2002.

10 Persuad, Babita, St. Petersburg Times, January 11, 2002.

11 Vieth, Warren. Bush to Impose Tariffs on Steel in Rescue Move. Los Angeles Times, March 6, 2002.

12 Chomsky, Noam. Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order. 1999 Seven Stories Press. Page 20.

13 Chomsky, Noam. Page 26.

14 Perot, Ross. United We Stand: How We Can Take Back Our Country – A Plan For the 21st Century. 1992 Hyperion. Page 105.

15 Chakravarthi, Raghavan, South-North Development Monitor, October 25, 2000.

16 Chakravarthi, Raghavan, South-North Development Monitor, October 25, 2000 citing Dr. Alejandro Nadal’s study, “The Environmental and Social Impacts of Economic Liberalization on Corn Production in Mexico”.

17 Chakravarthi, Raghavan

18 Coyle, William T., Transportation Bottlenecks Shape U.S. – Mexico Food & Agricultural Trade. Agricultural Outlook September 2000.

19 Chomsky, Noam. What Uncle Sam Really Wants. 1992 Odinian Press.

20 Barone, Michael. Special Report; Power & the American Presidents; Cover Package. A Big Stick. U.S. News & World Report. February 25, 2002.

21 Chomsky, Noam. Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order. Page 22.

22 Chomsky, Noam. Page 23.

23 Canada & the World Backgrounder. December 1, 2000. Volume 66, Issue 3. Kids without a childhood.

24 International Agricultural Trade Report. June 1999. Brazil Leads Surge in World Sugar Production.

25 Penteado, Claudia. Allnews ADWI.

26 South American Business Information. Thursday, January 17, 2002.

27 South American Business Information. Friday, January 25, 2002.

28 South American Business Information. Sunday, January 20, 2002.

29 United States Immigration Information website.

30 Schwabach, Aaron, Environmental Law Reporter. 31 ELR 11500 – 11501.

31 Schwabach, Aaron, 31 ELR 11502.

32 Schwabach, Aaron, 31 ELR 11502.

33 Schwabach, Aaron, 31 ELR 11503.

34 Schwabach, Aaron, 31 ELR 11499.

35 Chomsky, Noam. Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order. Page 33.

36 Chomsky, Noam. Page 33.

37 Tijerina, Reies Lopez. They Called Me “King Tiger”. My Struggle for the Land and Our Rights. 2000 Arte Publico Press. Page 236.

38 Hart, Jordana. The Boston Globe, Monday, March 6, 2000.

39 Hart, Jordana.

40 Albelda, Randy, Folbre, Nancy and The Center for Popular Economics. The War on the Poor. A Defense Manual. 1996, The New Press. Page 26.

41 Albelda, Randy, Folbre, Nancy and The Center for Popular Economics. Page 27.

42 Albelda, Randy, Folbre, Nancy and The Center for Popular Economics. Page 27.

43 Albelda, Randy, Folbre, Nancy and The Center for Popular Economics. Page 27.

44 Elias, Ingrid Evjen-. The Daily Californian – UC Berkeley. Oversight Can End UC Berkeley’s Role in Labor Exploitation. March 23, 2000.

45 Elias, Ingrid Evjen-.

46 El Barco, Mandalit. All Things Considered. L.A. Sweatshop Settlement. October 14, 1997.

The above is a transcript from a news report that originally aired on television at the above date. Any and all other citings from this transcript should be considered having originated from that transcript.

47 El Barco, Mandalit.

48 Otto, Michael W., Wilhelm, Sabine, Cohen, Lee S., and Harlow, Bernard L. American Journal of Psychiatry. Prevelance of Body Dismorphic Disorder in a Community of Sample Women. Volume 158, Issue 12, December 1, 2001.

49 Otto, Michael W., Wilhelm, Sabine, Cohen, Lee S., and Harlow, Bernard L. American Journal of Psychiatry.

50 Webpage for the National Health Institute. www.nih.gov

51 Sloat, Bill. The Plain Dealer. Legal Definition of Overwieght? Standard targets weight-loss drugs. March 24, 1998.

52 Research provided by Linda Lerma via here on-line stockbroker located at www.csfbdirect.com.

53 Biotech Business. Integra Gets Grants to Develop RGD Technology. Volume 13, Issue 11. November 1, 2000.

54 www.csfbdirect.com.

55 Congressional Testimony by Federal Document Clearing House. Breast Cancer and Brain Cancer Issues – National Organization for Women. November 15, 2001.

56 Kornblum, William. Sociology – The Central Questions. Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Page 223.

57 Kornblum, William, Page 221-224.

58 Journal of Genetic Psychology. The Impact of Adolescent Girls Life Concerns and Leisure Activities on Body Dissatisfaction, disordered eating, and Self – Esteem. Volume 162, Issue 2. June 1, 2001.

59 Journal of Genetic Psychology.

60 Journal of Genetic Psychology.

61 Turnbull, Lornet. The Columbus Dispatch. What is the Middle-Class? August 12, 2001.

62 Turnbull, Lornet

63 Paul, Noel C. The Christian Science Monitor. A Cut Above; For many men, a visit to an upscale grooming salon replaces the old shave and a haircut. January 2, 2002.

64 Saillant, Catherine. The Los Angeles Times. Ventura County Oxnard Seek Public’s Input Government: Survey of residence on high profile issues will help guide leaders’ decisions. March 15, 2002.

65 Saillant, Catherine.

66 Becerra, Hector and Alvarez, Fred. Los Angeles Times. Census Reflects Large Gains for Latino Population: East L.A. has the highest concentration in the U.S. while Santa Ana, El Monte and Oxnard are in top 10. May 10, 2001.

67 Becerra, Hector and Alvarez, Fred.

68 Saillant, Catherine. The Los Angeles Times. Ventura County Oxnard Seek Public’s Input Government: Survey of residence on high profile issues will help guide leaders’ decisions. March 15, 2002.

69 Saillant, Catherine.

70 Turnbull, Lornet. The Columbus Dispatch. What is the Middle-Class? August 12, 2001.

71 Turnbull, Lornet.

72 Henslin, James M. Essentials of Sociology. A Down to Earth Approach. Third Edition 2000, A Pearson Education Company. Page 178.

73 Henslin, James M. Page 178. Based on Statistical Abstract 1997: Table 750.

74 Henslin, James M. Page 179. Based on Statistical Abstract 1997: Tables 728, 732.

75 Henslin, James M. Page 180.

The page in the above referenced text contains statistical data and graphs that indicate a division of wealth into five sections ranging from the top twenty percent to the bottom. Since 1945, the distribution of wealth has remained constant among the 20 percent sections. What has changed is the amount of income received by the top twenty percent and the bottom twenty percent. Every decade, with the exception of the ten year period starting in 1955, the top twenty percent gain a slightly greater share of the American wealth while the bottom 20 percent remain at about the

same level as the decade before or lose a little from the previous decade. Keep in mind that the lose of income for the bottom twenty percent is not taking into account the affect of inflation in the American economy.

76 Henslin, James M. Page 181. Also see Daniel Hellinger and Dennis Judd (1991).

77 Henslin, James M. Page 181.

The term “power elite” was coined by C. Wright Mills in 1956 to describe the few that made the big decisions in American society.

78 Henslin, James M. Page 182.

79 Henslin, James M. Page 183.

80 Henslin, James M. Page 184-185.

Sociologists Dennis Gilbert and Joseph Kahl (1993; Gilbert 1997) developed a six-class model to portray the class structure of the United States and other capitalist countries.

81 Henslin, James M. Page 185.

Source: Based on Gilbert and Kahl 1993; income estimates follow Duff 1995b.

82 Henslin, James M. Page 186.

83 Henslin, James M. Page 186.

84 Henslin, James M. Page 186.

85 Henslin, James M. Page 186-187.

86 Henslin, James M. Page 187.

87 Margolis, Eric. The Toronto Sun. War on Terror Masks Bush’s Grand Strategy. March 10, 2002.

88 Margolis, Eric.

89 Margolis, Eric.

90 Lobe, Jim. Alternet. March 12, 2002.

91 Lobe, Jim.

92 Lobe, Jim.

93 Lobe, Jim.

94 Axtman, Kris, The Christian Science Monitor. Political Dissent Can Bring Agents to the Door. January 8, 2002.

95 Axtman, Kris.

96 Axtman, Kris.

97 Axtman, Kris.

98 Tijerina, Reies Lopez. They Called Me “King Tiger”. My Struggle for the Land and Our Rights. 2000 Arte Publico Press. Page 16.

99 Tijerina, Reies Lopez. Page 22.

100 Tijerina, Reies Lopez. Page 67.

101 Tijerina, Reies Lopez. Page 68.

102 Nobokov, Peter. Tijerina and the Court House Raid. 1969, 1970 the University of New Mexico Press. Page x.

103 Later, Sanchez did present an opportunity to be stopped by the Alianza. When he ran for governor of New Mexico it was the Alianza that proposed an endorsement of his opponent that year. Mr. Tijerina, a bit of racist, resisted the endorsement because Sanchez’s opponent was an Anglo. Nonetheless he agreed and Sanchez was stopped from winning; many citing the Alianza influence as the key factor that turned the tide against Sanchez. Some newspapers ran stories about a quote Sanchez gave to the media just after the seizure of the courthouse. The quote stated that Sanchez would stop Tijerina. Now, with Tijerina being given credit for the electoral defeat of Sanchez, many newspapers used the quote and wrote about Sanchez making a big deal about stopping Tijerina but, in the end, Tijerina stopped Sanchez.

104 Tijerina, Reies Lopez. Page 77-87.

105 State v. Tijerina. 86 N.M. 31, 519 P.2d 127 and State v. Tijerina. 84 N.M 432, 504 P.2d 642. 2002 West.

106 Tijerina, Reies Lopez. Page 169.

107 Tijerina, Reies Lopez. Page xii.

108 Tijerina, Reies Lopez. Page xii.

109 Brown, Fred. The Denver Post. Denver & the West After Ross, a rocky road for Reform. June 15, 2001.

110 Brown, Fred.

111 Brown, Fred.

112 Tijerina, Reies Lopez. Page 22.

113 Dressler, Joshua. Page 17.

114 Dressler, Joshua. Page 16.

115 Moran, Chris. The San Diego Union Tribune. Innocent Man Now Out of Prison Addresses Lawyers. January 20, 2002.

The Innocence Project of California Western School of Law in San Diego was put together to train future criminal lawyers on the use of evidence in criminal cases. The idea was for the law students to take information from past criminal cases and review them for mistakes. Out of this Project came the DNA testing abilities of modern science that allowed for the testing of left over biological evidence left behind by the perpetrators of crimes. Students would choose which cases they wished to review, have the biological evidence examined and, in at least 101 cases, have the convictions of people overturned due to DNA proof that the individuals incarcerated for these crimes were in fact innocent. Of course, many of the persons in prisons are guilty and DNA evidence will prove their guilt. Nonetheless it does deserve a note somewhere that many people in American prisons are the victims of overzealous prosecution. To learn more about the Innocence Project at California Western School of Law please visit the school website at: www.cwsl.edu.

116 Smith, Sharon. The York Daily Record. Resources play factor in Death Penalty Cases. The Public Defender’s office seeks help from a non-profit agency, the Defenders Association. February 7, 2002.

117 Dressler, Joshua. Page 14.

118 Miller, Carol Marbin. The Miami Herald. Florida Slashing Care for Addicts. January 27, 2002.

119 Miller, Carol Marbin.

120 Miller, Carol Marbin.

121 Miller, Carol Marbin.

122 Miller, Carol Marbin.

123 Schwartz, Michael. University of California, Los Angeles Daily Bruin. Slave Labor Means Big Bucks for U.S. Corporations. January 31, 2001.

124 Schwartz, Michael.

125 Schwartz, Michael.

126 Schwartz, Michael.

127 Schwartz, Michael.

128 Schwartz, Michael.

129 Schwartz, Michael.

130 Schwartz, Michael.

131 Gillin, Eric. The Street.com. Protecting Yourself Against Identity Theft. February 27, 2002.

132 Freeman, James. The Washington Post. Get Tough on Corporate Crime. January 22, 2002.

133 Freeman, James.

134 Freeman, James.

135 Matthiessen, Peter. In The Spirit of Crazy Horse. Penguin Books, New York. 1991. p. 155

136 Matthieson p. 155

137 Peltier, Leonard. Prison Writings : My Life is my Sundance; edited by Harvey Arden. 1999 St. Martin’s Griffin. Pg.124

138 Peltier, Leonard. Pg. 125.

139 Peltier, Leonard. Pp. 127-128.

140 Matthieson pp.157-158

141 Peltier, Leonard. Pg. Xvi. Preface by Former Attorney General Ramsey Clark. For more information on documentation and the FBI papers please visit www. FreePeltier.org.

142 Peltier, Leonard pg.142.

143 Peltier, Leonard. Pg. 78.

144 Peltier, Leonard. Pg. 107.

145Paul, Keith. Las Vegas Sun. ACLU Seeks Injunction to Stop Action. March 22, 2002.

146 Paul, Keith.

147 Paul, Keith.

148 Johnson, Becky. santacruz.indymedia.org. 29 Homeless Deaths - 29 Too Many. March 24, 2002

149 Swanson, Stevenson. Chicago Tribune. Homeless shelters filling up with the working poor. High housing costs wear down families. August 19, 2001.

150 Swanson, Stevenson

151 Swanson, Stevenson.

152 Swanson, Stevenson.

153 Swanson, Stevenson.

154 Swanson, Stevenson.

155 Swanson, Stevenson.

156 Henderson, John S. The World of the Ancient Maya. 1997 Cornell University Press. Page 236.

157 Henderson, John S. Page 236.

158 Henderson, John S. Page 237-239.

159 Duplessis, Jim. Business. New Voices Arriving for New Residents. March 10, 2002.

160 Duplessis, Jim.

161 Ford, Neil. African Business. Nigeria Dumps Fuel Subsidies. February 1, 2002.

162 Moomaw, William R. The Boston Globe. Focus. Who Can Stop Gas Pains? Don’t look to Washington. Instead check the face in the rearview mirror. May 13, 2001.

163 Moomaw, William R.

164 Moomaw, William R.

165 McMahon, Patrick. U.S.A. Today. Logging Deal Might Save Forest; $185m plan is among creative ways groups are battling sprawl. March 28, 2002.

166 McMahon, Patrick.

167 McMahon, Patrick.

168 McMahon, Patrick.

169 Hunsberger, Brent. KRTBN Knight Ridder Tribune News: The Oregonian. Oregon Unemployment Rate Highest in Sixteen Years, Losses Hurt Rural Areas the Most. February 25, 2002.

170 News Services w/ contributions from Associated Press and Rick Burnham. The Enterprise Press, Riverside, Ca. Rise in Home Construction Positive Sign; Economy; The increase in building raises hopes that the economy is on the road to recovery. February 20, 2002.

171 Spiegal, Steven L. and Wehling, Fred L. World Politics in a New Era. 1999 Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Page 106-113.

172 Icardi, Kelly. The Oracle (U. South Florida). U. South Florida: First amendment expert ti analyze U.South Florida professor’s case. March 28, 2002.

173 United States Codes Annotated. Title 18 – Crimes and Criminal Procedure. Part I Crimes. Chapter 113B Terrorism.

174 Icardi, Kelly.

175 Casimir, Leslie. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Immigrants rush to become citizens. March 31, 2002.

176 Casimir, Leslie.

177 Gumbel, Andrew. The Disappeared. February 26, 2002.

178 Pilger, John. The Mirror. The Colder War. January 29, 2002.

179 Pilger, John.

180 Margolis, Eric. Allies Backing Away From Bushes Policies. February 10, 2002.

181 Spiegal, Steven L. and Wehling, Fred L. World Politics in a New Era. 1999 Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Page 106-113.

182 Spiegal, Steven L. and Wehling, Fred L. Page 113-114.