Archive for the ‘Class Warfare’ Category

coon

I know I really don’t disgust these issues on my blog, but there has been small annoyances that I haven’t properly addressed. I’ll try to make this quick and just so we’re clear, I’m talking about black coons in America in this blog. So what is a coon? My definition would be someone who backstabs his own people to get into the good graces of the dominant society. This person will talk down to other blacks and use ignominies to further align themselves with the dominant society. The payoff for their blind allegiance can be tv time, radio hosts jobs, book deals and popularity among other xenophobes.

These specified pockets of blacks who turned their backs on their own would rather prove ways white supremacy and racism doesn’t exist. They promote the same code words and slander that racists use to blame the problem of our state of being solely on ourselves. While I don’t see 100% blame can be put on just blacks, I also can’t say whites are the only participants in our own destruction. Since the days of Ptolemy I in ancient Egypt when he stole the land and self-proclaimed himself a god there have been “sellouts” who saw joining up with the enemy rather than fighting against them.

Today, there is a definite audience out there that will listen to a black person who holds other blacks accountable to the point where there is no exception. Within the last few years you have seen more and more black personalities on the rise such as Ben Carlson, Raven Symone, Tommy Sotomayor, Jesse Lee Peterson, Charles Barkley, Michael Jordan, Whoopi Goldberg, Steve Harvey and more but I’m not trying to name them all. The reason these figures have been allowed to gain power in society and other aren’t is simply because they stay on the narrative that racism is a made up fixation that is used as an excuse by urban ghetto community’s way of life.

In many and almost all cases of police brutality the victim somehow gets transformed into the aggressor and the officer is simply just doing his job. I know there cases where black people are clearly in the wrong and we have the tendency to holler out racism before knowing all the facts. Case in point, when Daniele Watts(Django) accused a cop of being racist, some people automatically jumped to the side of her story, but when the tape came out and it clearly showed her as a liar and agitator, she was arrested correctly. In other cases such as the one this week where a high school student was dragged by excessive force, we once again manned our battle stations in the race war. Blacks on one side and whites on the other. The American coon see this chances to throw another person under the bus to advance their own worth among the so-called “elite” class.

When you’re constantly putting down your own people instead of providing a solution you have become not only part of the problem with race in America, honestly, I don’t want you at the table when we meet up for a solution. Some would argue that from birth we are taught to hate ourselves and praise white people and for that I can agree, but I would also argue is that it takes real discipline to yourself in a state of mind that portrays you inferior. Within the last three years alone, I found out more about myself online than my combined years of schooling. It is this self-taught education that commands me to try and expose this knowledge to the masses and do better for my African brothers and sisters.

When these coons give identical views as conservatives who would rather see you behind bars than empowering yourself, I feel you traded in your black soul for their alternate reality. As far as I’m concerned they can stay on the side they’re on. We don’t want you back. I can’t say we don’t have our cluster of problems, but we have to build with each other to fix it and draw strength from our old nation building ancestors and the ancient ones who built Egypt as one of the greatest empires on earth, still to this day. I say that to say that we can do it again, starting now.

Advertisements

 

riots

Whenever I hear about the words peaceful protest and civil disobedience I think of tree hugging hippies that chain themselves to a tractor singing hymns. Answering violence with peace to me never seemed like a good idea. The only example I had to relate to the boycotting of the buses orchestrated by the NAACP and MLK Jr. Martin Luther King Jr was inspired Mahatma Gandhi’s philosophy Satyagraha, which means adherence to truth. I am not against civil disobedience as a whole. I just feel that this cannot be the only course of action when you face corrupt governments, dictators, rebel armies, extremists and other psychopaths who would scowl at any measure of trying to make peace without the use of lethal force.

riot

For the most part I get it, using brutality against brutality ends in more bloodshed. Honestly though, after peace talks have failed, strikes that don’t grab anyone’s attention and interventions between the two parties have not and most likely will not agree, it’s no longer a matter acting “civil.” Take for instance back in 2011, in an attempt to overthrow Hosni Mubarak’s 30 year reign, protestors formed mass non-violent demonstrations.  900 of the protestors were killed during these demonstrations.In a twist of irony the Egyptian army who would not open fire on the crowd, which signaled the turn around in the protest that lead to Mubarak’s downfall. The army was not eager to relinquish power and ended up throwing the protestors in jail. Another protest in Libya against the military might of Muammar al-Qaddafi was met with rebellion after the peaceful demonstrations did not work. The turmoil was finally resolved after nine months of bloodshed that resulted in a body count with a range from 10,000 to 30,000 people.

Also in Syria in 2011 the civil war between Alawites, Christians and Drutes  against Assad’s barbarous regime that claimed close to 5,000 citizens a month for 7 months. That’s around 35,000 lives taken and this was supposed to be peaceful protesting. Even in American history, peaceful resistance resulted in lives lost. The Native Americans were forced off their land at gunpoint. After the Supreme Court ruled that they do not own land back in 1823, Native Americans made attempts to stay on their land. President Andrew Jackson enacted The Indian Removal Act, after the Supreme Court (Worcester vs Georgia)upheld their right to stay on the land. Jackson’s motives were,based on his acquirement of gold during the gold rush era. 4,000 Native Americans lost their lives on the Trail of Tears and this shows that even political and judicial victories will never overrule greed, corruption and disregard of human life.

riotsss

The greatest example that comes to mind for my case, not to abide by civil disobedience is Mahatma Gandhi. He wanted India independence from Britain. He fought to end discrimination and the heavy taxes on his people. During Gandhi’s time in South Africa he witnessed and experience deep seeded racism against himself and his people. This inspired him to rally allies and gather for a rebellion. However, during 1947 riots against Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs resulted in over half a million deaths, which is suspected to be more according to Jens Arup Seip in addition to over 100,000 imprisoned. India eventually gained independence in 1947. The irony in his non violent protests is that Gandhi was not against violence in his own words he argued, Gandhi explains his philosophy and way of life in his autobiography The Story of My Experiments with Truth. Gandhi realized later that this level of nonviolence required incredible faith and courage, which he believed everyone did not possess. He therefore advised that everyone need not keep to nonviolence, especially if it were used as a cover for cowardice, saying, “where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence.”

I’m not against peace talks, and strikes I just know the rebellious spirit of the founding fathers still lives in the American spirit. Oppressive forces in this country are the militarized police in place of the British Red Coats. One thing that we need to keep in mind is the insatiable thirst for blood that was inherited from the mother country. It is not in our nature to understand peaceful resolve in my opinion without it being a secondary thought. We fell heir to the predatorial, rapacious,avaricious manner of the plunderers of the villages of our authoritarian rulers. The ones who were more domineering than anyone else.

 

[contact-form][contact-field label='Name' type='name' id='cee0f2b0-69b6-4cb0-897f-480fb21e33b6' class="GINGER_SOFTWARE_mark">/][contact-field label='Email' type='email' id='6ba50393-b3f8-40c8-aa6d-724532dd0b70' class="GINGER_SOFTWARE_mark">/][contact-field label='Website' id='a9f7f8fc-a249-4e60-bfe1-5f65fd21e4e1' class="GINGER_SOFTWARE_mark">/][contact-field label='Comment' type='textarea' id='1b1cedbb-19e9-476b-bfa6-efcfb02ccdcf' class="GINGER_SOFTWARE_mark">/][/contact-form]

 

I can't breathe

Last Saturday was one of the most amazing experiences of my life on earth to date. I decided I wanted to be a part of history and march along fellow supporters to end this domestic terroristic sub-culture that tosses out cases of black men getting killed with no penalty or punishment of the police officer. Even now there are details behind the shooting and killing of Mike Brown that the prosecutor suppressed that directly conflicts with the narrative that suggests Darren Wilson’s life was in danger at the time of the shooting.

Man in chains

The march began at Washington Square Park, I got there around 3pm because I got off at the wrong stop and missed my scheduled train into Penn Station from LI. I remembered being nervous I was going to miss the crowd, but when I finally got into the city and arrived at West 4rth street I felt relieved. I could see large pockets of people gathering and soon saw the protests signs and heard the megaphones and the chants against racism and support for Eric Garner and Mike Brown.

Once I was inside the park I saw different organizations and that were there for this day. Among the most vocals were members from LRP-COFL.org, Answer Coalition.org, National Liberty Alliance, 100 Blacks for Law Enforcement. I also bought a newspaper called Revolution,  which covered protests from NY to Mexico and all around the globe. I was only in the park for about ten minutes gathering newspapers and fliers when the crowd was moving toward the streets. It was there that I saw the awesome power of our civil liberties at work.

Protest

What was silence, turned into chants organically into the crowd that crescendo into overwhelming applause and cheers. “Hey hey, Ho ho, these racist cops have got to go!” “Hands up, Don’t Shoot!” “Show me what democracy looks like, This is what democracy looks like!” “No justice, No peace!” “Eric Garner, Michael Brown,shut it down, shut it down!” I could see the faces of the onlookers and police by the barricades. Some were there just to see what the fuss was about, others showed support on their way to work or wherever they needed to be. Often they chanted with us and gave more power to the message that #Alllivesmatter even if the court system doesn’t see it that way.

The feeling was incommunicable in words. There was an inseparableness that I felt that I only experienced online until this point. I’ve seen past rally’s and protests and knew people of all economic and racial backgrounds were there. I even knew about the global support for Ferguson and Eric Garner, with the different hashtags #crimingwhilewhite, #blacklivesmatter, #Icantbreathe, but to witness first hand and be a part of the warm fellowship left me in state of awe.

I was surprised by this generation’s resilient and remonstrance spirit. All I have been told and thought is since first hearing about Michael Brown, is that this was gonna wash over America and end in a another church hymn with the packaging of we shall overcome during a pastor’s congregation meeting. This generation, to me now shows the spark of the young Malcom X’s, Martin Luther King’s, Cesar Chavez, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Stonewall Inn protests for Gay Rights. I was also humbled by the compassion of the buildings and businesses on the streets we marched on. Many of them held signs and banners that gave this movement life, “#BlackLivesMatter” and the diversity among the crowd couldn’t have been a better representation of what this country should stand for more often.

I remember feeling like since we’re all here for once cause, then I surely can stand up for another cause, even if it was not my own. I don’t have to be gay to stand alongside someone who is and fight for them. I don’t have to be an immigrant to know that they also deserve to be treated better in this country. During the marching and chanting, it become a jovial occasion, realizing the power of force and the message we are sending around the world and to Washington and every political office in this country, that change is coming, so either help us do it or get thrown out of office for someone who will.

I saw mother pushing baby strollers and fathers holding their children on their heads so they could see the signs and helicopters passing over us. I saw old, young, any color of race and nationality and sexual orientation. I saw some Latino sisters and brothers chanting along with us in Spanish and with a sign written in Spanish, which I couldn’t make out entirely, but I did see one part I recognized #Alllivesmater!

There were moments of silence, but the energy never wavered, even after hours of walking and I really didn’t even know where we were going, but I wasn’t going to stop. A gentleman finally told we were heading for the first precinct. “What do we want? Justice. When do we want it? Now”, “I Can’t Breathe” were also very powerful outcries in the crowd. One man who introduced himself as David asked to interview me during the march. He asked a couple of questions about me and why I was there to support and if I have any personal stories that fit the profile of being discriminated against. I told him the story of being pulled over at 2am for a broke license plate light, that ended in a 35 dollar ticket. I didn’t know about a license plate light to know I needed one at the time. I know it wasn’t a story that ended in a violent beating with night sticks or even getting shot over it, but I felt they pulled me over because I was driving while black through a prominently rich white neighborhood on my way home from work.

By the end of the day I was tired, hungry, cold and had been holding myself from going to the bathroom for almost four hours, but I didn’t want to leave. It wasn’t until I reminded myself that I had to work later that night, that I finally trotted back to the subway to make it for my shift. I don’t know if anyone took pics of me, since I didn’t have a camera phone, but I recorded audio of the event on my phone. I plan to go to at least two more protests this year. My agenda this year now to support the fight against climate change and a wage increase.

Lady Justice

“With Liberty and Justice for all”, It’s these words that necessitate the constitution that is the embodiment of the American spirit and gives us the right to live freely with the same level of humanity and law. So why does it today we no longer uphold this tradition that has been around for centuries. If you remember the plot of Shawshank Redemption when the main protagonist’s character was set up to go to prison to work in the jail. Picture that same scenario all across the country. It’s seems that the justice system in this country has become one sided and truly works for the fortunate and not less fortunate. If you don’t believe me how many bank CEO’s do you know went to jail for the financial crisis during the recessions beginning.

Liberty

For every Bernie Madoff, there are hundreds of lower income individuals who fight against a system that entraps them into a cycle of prosecution without enough just cause and receive a sentence before the ink dries that are handwritten by the arresting officer. If you look at the stats since 2007 spending on correctional facilities outweighed public defense, $14 dollars for every $1 dollar spent on public defense. According to the National Association of Criminal Lawyers a public defender on average has 7 minutes in New Orleans to review a case and cities like Atlanta have 59 minutes on average to look over the preliminaries in the case. It boils down to there are not enough public defenders and not enough money to help the poor and unprivileged, so they fall by the waist side and expected to pick themselves up.95% of cases met by public defenders are plead guilty simply because the resources and time simply are there. It’s hard to fight for a defendant when the same systems outspends you 3.5 billion to 300 million in favor of the police and facilities.

constitution

If you’re not convinced yet that the deck is stacked think about this. The US is only 5% of the world’s population,but we have 25% of the world’s prison population. 1 in 31 adults have been under some form of correctional control. African Americans have it worse than a lot of other ethnic groups. They make up 1 million out of the 2.3 million incarcerated population. To grasp the incentives prisons get for inmates, correctional facilities receive $70 billion a year and these are the numbers back in 2008. Those numbers have absolutely gone up.

Some socio-economic groups don’t have to worry about jail time as much as others. For individuals like Ethan Couch, who is a 16 year old boy who was given 10 years probation for killing four people and paralyzing one after a joyride gone wrong. He got such a soft sentencing because of  affluenza or believing that this kid is so spoiled and rich he doesn’t know the difference between right and wrong. My question is, doesn’t this make him a borderline psychopath and should be psychoanalyzed. Another case is Robert H. Richards  IV who was convicted of raping his 3 year old girl and sexually abusing his 19 month son at the same time. This was only brought to light since Richards ex wife brought a civil suit against him for the abuse of the son after the case of the daughter got such a light sentence. Oh!!! I forgot to mention Richards did not serve one day in jail, since the judge determined he would not farewell in jail. Truly the justice system has been up for sale for sometime now.

[contact-form][contact-field label='Name' type='name' id='c325351f-f4b1-410c-8916-f1ea0209e819' class="GINGER_SOFTWARE_mark">/][contact-field label='Email' type='email' id='e47bc29d-8f72-4346-be3a-290f632a3f37' class="GINGER_SOFTWARE_mark">/][contact-field label='Website' id='b7b9cf27-9c7f-4add-918d-86de0d8ace98' class="GINGER_SOFTWARE_mark">/][contact-field label='Comment' type='textarea' id='aece2412-3ec5-497a-a459-2fb8e2fbb8ce' class="GINGER_SOFTWARE_mark">/][/contact-form]

 

corp

Corporate personhood is the legal concept that a corporation may be recognized as an individual in the eyes of the law. This doctrine forms the basis for legal recognition that corporations, as groups of people, may hold and exercise certain rights under the common law and the U.S. Constitution. For example, corporations may contract with other parties and sue or be sued in court in the same way as natural persons or unincorporated associations of persons. The doctrine does not hold that corporations are flesh and blood “people” apart from their shareholders, officers, and directors, nor does it grant to corporations all of the rights of citizens.

That was a statement I got online pertaining to the corporations having the same inalienable rights a person may have.  In this blog this week we’ll talk about the benefits and setbacks that this brings up. The word “person” has been a target of discussion since under the fourth amendment the U.S. Courts protect corporations with certain prejudices. Opponents of corporate personhood are looking for the state laws and state constitutions to amend these rights through restrictive circumspection. With the understanding that corporations are groups of people and under the constitution these “people” need to be protected like any other groups of people need to that act as a collective unit. Using this ideology, it creates a legal fiction where corporations be sued and in turn they can also sue, provide a single entity for easier taxation and regulation. It also breaks down complex transactions that would involved usually thousands of people while protecting the shareholders as well as the right of the association.

So why is anyone of this a bad thing? So far there really doesn’t seem to be apparent downside. Corporations should have some rights and be treated like a person. After all, people are behind the decision makings of the business, the workforce is composed of men and women and businesses as a whole serves the wants and needs of the population. Well, let’s see there is one thing you wanna keep in mind.Corporations don’t have the same morals, ethics and values that most of us were taught as we were younger. The game changer in this story is Citizens United vs Federal Election Commission in 2010 which was a supreme court case that sided with corporations and allowed them to fund political campaigns and super pacs with no regulations or demarcated line in the sand.

One case that shows an example of how businesses were and still protected was Dartmouth College vs Woodward in 1818 where the Supreme Court made their decision about a case that rings parallel to this blog. “The opinion of the Court, after mature deliberation, is that this corporate charter is a contract, the obligation of which cannot be impaired without violating the Constitution of the United States. This opinion appears to us to be equally supported by reason, and by the former decisions of this Court.” Seven years later the Dartmouth College verdict the Supreme Court decided on “Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts v. Town of Pawlet(1823)  Chief Justice Marshall said this seven years later about the decision which was similar to the one with Dartmouth College. “The great object of an incorporation is to bestow the character and properties of individuality on a collective and changing body of men.”

Justice Black and Justice Douglas dissented from the Supreme Court’s 1957 decision in United States v. United Auto Workers, 352 U.S. 567 (1957), in which the Court, on procedural grounds, overruled a lower court decision striking down the prohibition on corporate and union political expenditures:

We deal here with a problem that is fundamental to the electoral process and to the operation of our democratic society. It is whether a union can express its views on the issues of an election and on the merits of the candidates, unrestrained and unfettered by the Congress. The principle at stake is not peculiar to unions. It is applicable as well as associations of manufacturers, retail and wholesale trade groups, consumers’ leagues, farmers’ unions, religious groups, and every other association representing a segment of American life and taking an active part in our political campaigns and discussions. It is as important as an issue has come before the Court, for it reaches the very vitals of our system of government. Under our Constitution, it is We The People who are sovereign. The people have the final say. The legislators are their spokesmen. The people determine through their votes the destiny of the nation. It is therefore important — vitally important — that all channels of communication be open to them during every election, that no point of view be restrained or barred, and that the people have access to the views of every group in the community.

Thus the two justices would have adjudicated the case and upheld the lower court opinion striking down the ban on corporate and union spending.

Although it is now well settled law that the 14th Amendment extends to corporations, the extent to which it should attach to corporations has continued to draw criticism from liberal legal theorists.

The laws of the United States hold that a legal entity (like a corporation or non-profit organization) shall be treated under the law as a person except when otherwise noted. This rule of construction is specified in 1 U.S.C. §1 (United States Code),[14] which states:

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise–

the words “person” and “whoever” include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;

This federal statute has many consequences. For example, a corporation is allowed to own property and enter contracts. It can also sue and be sued and held liable under both civil and criminal law. As well, because the corporation is legally considered the “person,” individual shareholders are not legally responsible for the corporation’s debts and damages beyond their investment in the corporation. Similarly, individual employees, managers, and directors are liable for their own malfeasance or lawbreaking while acting on behalf of the corporation, but are not generally liable for the corporation’s actions. Among the most frequently discussed and controversial consequences of corporate personhood in the United States is the extension of a limited subset of the same constitutional rights

Corporations as legal entities have always been able to perform commercial activities, similar to a person acting as a sole proprietor, such as entering into a contract or owning property. Therefore, corporations have always had a ‘legal personality’ for the purposes of conducting business while shielding individual shareholders from personal liability (i.e., protecting personal assets which were not invested in the corporation).

The federal statute has many difficulties and in it for example a corporation is allowed to own property and enter contracts. Corporations can sue and be sued and held liable under civil and criminal law. Since the corporation is considered the legally the “person”, individual shareholders are not legally responsible for the corporations debt and damages beyond their investment in the corporation.Individual employees, managers, and directors are liable for their own malfeasance or lawbreaking while acting on behalf of the corporation,but are not generally liable for the corporation actions. Corporations have always had a “legal personality” for the purposes of conducting business while shielding individual shareholders from personal liability. Corporations also invoke rights that groups hold as well as individuals such as the right to petition, to speech, to enter into contracts and to hold property, to sue and to be sued. However, they may not exercise rights which are exclusive to individuals and cannot be exercised by other associations of individuals, including the right to vote and the right against self-incrimination.

In another blog Noahopinion the author praises corporations for using their money towards funding political campaigns. They said corporations advance the interests of democracy and equality by allowing the little guy to accomplish task that would have only been possible by folks like the Koch brothers, for example fund campaigns. “Ending corporate personhood would not stop billionaire individuals like the Koch brothers or George Soros from using their wealth to affect the political process, but it would hamper small grass-roots organizations which choose to use the corporate form. Ultimately, the long tradition of corporate personhood represents not a threat to democracy, but a support of it.”

About two years ago Chick-Fil-A a popular food chain that has close religious bonds with Christianity held a position to ostracize gays and the LBGT community as a whole because they were going against God. The mayors in these towns banded together and held their own position and obstructed any new Chick-Fil-A’s from being built. Dan Cathy the CEO of the company said that the company’s first amendment rights were being violated even if they were discriminating against a group of people based on their own sacrosanct views and interpretations of their religion.

• Mother Jones’s Adam Serwer (7/26/12): “Blocking construction of Chick-fil-a restaurants over Cathy’s views is a violation of Cathy’s First Amendment rights.”

• Salon’s Glenn Greenwald (7/26/12): “But that is not the case here; the actions are purely in retribution against the views of the business’ top executive on the desirability of same-sex marriage.”

• Boston Globe editorial (7/25/12): “But which part of the First Amendment does Menino not understand? A business owner’s political or religious beliefs should not be a test for the worthiness of his or her application for a business license.”

The underline issue is that Dan Cathy and his family manages a charity called Winshape foundation that dispenses millions of dollars towards anti-gay organizations. The sponsoring of these funds from Chick-Fil-A itself , but  large majority comes from CFA properties which is a affiliate of Chick-Fil-A . In 2010 CFA was 11.5 million to fund there causes. “You can’t have a business in the City of Boston that discriminates against a population,” said Boston Mayor Tom Menino in an interview with local press. The article goes after liberals who want to defend against corporations with their prejudices against group they don’t agree with. These same corporation have set a precedent to discriminate against minorities, bribe politicians, busting unions and funding dark money campaigns. If a corporation uses general treasury funds to finance political advocacy is this wrong? It’s a question that comes down to whether you believe corporations have rights akin to human beings.

One thing the author did not post on the original article is that the company required the operators to declare their marital status, number of dependents, and involvement in the church, other organizations as well. Employees can be fired for what they feel is “sinful” behavior. Despite being sued a whopping twelve times and currently has a lawsuit for gender discrimination. Equality Matters  LBGT funded group for equal rights  says Chick-Fil-A funds anti-gay campaigns, and anti-gay media which have been going on for years.

A few cases that helped evolve corporate personhood are: Trustees of Dartmouth College vs Woodward, Munn vs State of Illinois, Santa Clara County vs Southern Pacific Railroad, Lochner vs New York, Marshall vs Barlow to name a few cases that contributed to the laws that enable corporations and their personhood. Citizens United vs FEC is a case that sparked outrage and a campaign to overturn the courts decision called Move to Amend. Another case Nike vs Kasky was used as a talking point to expand the argument against corporate free speech “We used Nike to advance public understanding and legal arguments against granting corporations constitutional rights. Our work included filing a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, doing talk shows and placing op-eds around the country, and direct actions.” There are groups challenging corporate personhood: Free Speech, The programs on corporations, law and democracy, Alliance for Democracy, The Community Environmental legal defense fund and The American Independent Business Alliance.  Initiatives challenging corporate rights: Anti-corporate Farming Law, Corporate personhood Ordinances and The Wayne Township Ordinance.

Image

Do you like where you are financially in life currently? Are you happy with the exchange of power and wealth gap between the poor and the rich? What do you think is wrong with this country’s overall look at the way it handles its finances? I ask these questions because a person by the name of Karl Marx, the father of socialism and communism who was an economic theorist and philosopher. Marx theorized that capitalism would inevitably impoverish the globe, all the while dollars were a focus on too much profiting the money into their own back accounts. It seems that the social classes are at each others throat and economic crisis seems unavoidable. “Accumulation of wealth at one pole is at the same time accumulation of misery, agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality, mental degradation, at the opposite pole,” Marx wrote.

Some say he may be right. A study done in September by the Economic Policy Institute says that the median annual earnings of a full-time male worker in the US in 2011 was at $48,202 which was smaller than it was in 1973. Between 1983 and 2010 74% of the gains in wealth in the US went to the top richest 5%, on the other hand 60% suffered a decline, the EPI calculated. What would Marx say today? “Some variation of: ‘I told you so,’” says Richard Wolff, a Marxist economist at the New School in New York. “The income gap is producing a level of tension that I have not seen in my lifetime.” Tensions between the social classes are on the rise, the perceived split between the “99%” and the “1%” with us the regular every day working class being the “99%” and the “1%” being the top portion gets the crumbs after the rich are done with them. A Pew research Center Poll released in 2012 says two-thirds of the respondents believe the US suffers from “strong” or “very strong” conflict between the rich and the poor. This is a 19 point increase from 2009 making its ranking the no. 1 reason for division in society.

In countries like China, France and Holland, where capitalism is the law of the land. The land is now facing the backlash of the air bubble, vacuum that decades of greed and power have set. In those societies much like our own the poor and middle class are disheveled told “Pick yourself up by your bootstraps,” all the while watching the top percent shave away the “boot strap”. Some countries have had enough, in Holland planned to hike the income tax rate as high as 75%. The idea was shot down, but the determination to is to show they are on the side of the “common man”.  In China the social divide is more evident even though it is being marked as “workers paradise” by the US since it has cheap labor. 8 out of 10 workers believe that the “rich get richer while the poor get poorer”. “People from the outside see our lives as very bountiful, but the real life in the factory is very different,” says factory worker Peng Ming in the southern industrial enclave of Shenzhen.“The way the rich get money is through exploiting the workers,” says Guan Guohau, another Shenzhen factory employee. “Communism is what we are looking forward to.” Unless the government takes greater action to improve their welfare, they say, the laborers will become more and more willing to take action themselves. “Workers will organize more,” Peng predicts. “All the workers should be united.”

China is at a point of social unrest, even though that has been some attempt to help the conditions for the workers. Increase in wages, tougher labor laws for more protection, but workers say this is still not enough and government is on the side of big business, not the workers. China’s proletarian dictatorship is under scrutiny and the populace has become distrustful. Communists “openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions,” Marx wrote. “The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains.” Protesters, says Jacques Rancière, an expert on Marxism at the University of Paris, aren’t aiming to replace capitalism, as Marx had forecast, but merely to reform it. “We’re not seeing a protesting classes, call for an overthrow or destruction of socioeconomic systems in place,” he explains. “What class conflict produces today is called to fix systems so they become more viable and sustainable for the long run by redistributing the wealth created.”

According to an article in Rolling Stone there are five specific indications that show Marx was right about capitalism over 100 years ago. The first thing the article mentions is the Great Recession, in which Marx explains this is a by-product of greedy, relentless profit driven businesses. In the pursuit of this company’s mechanized their workplaces, producing more goods, but squeezing wages from workers so much purchasing the products they created seems unimaginable. Marx coined the phrase “fictitious capital” -this can be interpreted as stocks and credit default swaps. The housing market crash came from decades of the subprime borrowing scheme.

” A contriving and ever-calculating subservience to inhuman, sophisticated, unnatural and imaginary appetites.” Marx made this reference when he talked about the way capitalism focused on high value for essentially frivolous products. In the article Rolling Stone makes reference to the IPHONE 5, but really any product made in this technological age can be counted in as a product we never endingly look to upgrade or keep adding advancements to the original. It’s like our hunger for the next “newer” product mirrors our own unsatisfactory discontentment with keeping things the way they are. As human were never satisfied and we keep looking for the goal or marker to reach instead of finding appeasement with what we accomplished.

Globalization was also apart of Marx’s theories about overproduction leading to searches for new markets.

“The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe,” he wrote. “It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere.” Marx wrote about this back in 1848 when the concept was hundred years away. He was right about what happened and why it happened. The never-ending pursuit of cheap labor and new markets along with an unrelenting demand for natural resources.

Marx believed with that the market power was more centralized in large monopoly firms as businesses “eat up” each other. This might have struck his 19th-century readers as odd: As Richard Hofstadter writes, “Americans came to take it for granted that property would be widely diffused, that economic and political power would decentralized.”  Mom and Pop shops are taken over more and more by elephantine corporations like Wal-Mart and small banks have been taken over by the likes of J.P. Morgan. Start up are constantly being vacuumed into megacorps.

Last Marx believed that wages would be held down by a “reserve army of labor,” in which he explains by using classical economic techniques: Capitalists prefer to pay as little as possible for labor, which is easy when the worker pool is overflowing with available candidates. In this market, Marx predicted that when the recession hit says that high unemployment would keep wages stagnant and workers are less likely to challenge it in fear of losing their jobs. “Lately, the U.S. recovery has been displaying some Marxian traits. Corporate profits are on a tear, and rising productivity has allowed companies to grow without doing much to reduce the vast ranks of the unemployed.” It’s no surprise that the best time for equitable growth is during times of “full employment,” when unemployment is low and workers can threaten to take another job.

As Robert L. Heilbroner writes, “We turn to Marx, therefore, not because he is infallible, but because he is inescapable.” Today, in a world of both unheard-of wealth and abject poverty, where the richest 85 people have more wealth than the poorest 3 billion, the famous cry, “Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains,” has yet to lose its potency. To me Marx as pragmatic as he was prophetic in his messages. While his accuracy is not spot on the mark with all the woes of or economy. He probably didn’t get to see unions, importing, exporting of goods, the bailouts and the healthcare system setting the parcity away from undeniable collapse. We still look as Marx’s work and believe that the key into his style of cuneiform is realizing what he indicated to us over a century ago. Rome wasn’t built-in a day,but it can end in a much shorter time than one.

In the last three parts of this blog I wrote about politicians using inflammatory language to ignite their base, spark controversy and to gain power. One important thing that I didn’t touch on yet is who benefits from these statements? More importantly what industries actually utilize racism to make money?

One industry that is making money off of human misery as well as racism is the US prison system. You would never think companies that specializes in furniture, communication, medical services, transportation, food, clothes and construction would benefit from the rising population of inmates in prison. Prisoners are treated more like raw material for manufacturing rather than human beings. The term used most frequently to describe this trend of using highly exploitable cheap labor is called “prison-industrial complex” .  Scholars and professional activists alike view this as the continuation of slavery. Think about it no union, minimum payment, no insurance, no strikes and the workers are all full-time and never late. Accusations of abusing poverty-stricken communities and incarcerating people for minor crimes is a ploy to exploit these individuals as “free labor”. The race that is the most denuded to this system of imprisonment is African-Americans. According to The Huffington Post an article was written stating that there are more blacks in jail now that slaves at the height of slavery. Blacks make up only 13% of the US population, but we also makeup 40% of population in jail. If all this information is true wouldn’t it make sense that businesses big and small alike profit from free labor to build their products. How guilty do you feel knowing a prisoner was forced to manufacture an item for a business. I would assume that most don’t care since prisoners are often viewed as sub-human, second class citizens. Don’t get me wrong If they did a crime they should be punished, but to be turned into slave worker that’s a whole other story. By the way these prisons not only contain black people, but people from all walks of life.

Another industry that benefits off the backs of racism is the gun industry. Another article I read in The Huffington Post goes over three gun magazines that are sold nationwide. The author of the article noticed one ostensible theme was all of the people in the magazines were white. Only a sliver of models in the magazines were of color. one example they read a magazine called Guns and Weapons Magazine for the Oct. 2012 issue. They counted 131 white people to 2 black people in this issue. No Hispanic or Asian what soever in this magazine. They found a similar theme for two other magazines for guns as well. The argument here is it is apparent there is a culture of racial paranoia in this country. Depicting whites as the everyday gun-toting citizen who uses their gun for hunting or for protection. The NRA has used fear and racism to boost gun sales. Under president Obama gun sales have gone up all because the NRA presidents says Obama is coming for the guns. He also takes advantage of anyone who has ill will toward Obama our first African-American president. The use a twisted sense of patriotism to make those feel they have a duty to carry a gun. A law was just passed in SC permitting licensed gun carriers to carry their weapons in schools, restaurants, playgrounds and other public places. Why do you need guns in these places? What are they afraid of? If your carrying a gun who or whom are you targeting for? All it takes is a gun fear, and the misguided on your side to give the authority to pursue YOUR OWN sense of justice against whoever.

Last the media are the most guilty of all. It doesn’t take a genius to know that race plays a part in everyday news. The murder of Trayvon Martin and how the media took sides gave Americans viewpoints that were down the middle. If you watched fox news Trayvon was a thug teenager, who not only smoked weed a lot, but also was a troubling maker, because he got in trouble at school. If you watch MSNBC it painted George Zimmerman as a wild man vigilante who took matters into his own hands  and executed Martin after profiling him. The country become divided after the acquittal was announced. Individuals took sides and look toward their news channel for updates. It wasn’t before long that facts became distorted and stretched to fit their own bias narrative. NBC used audio clips to make it look like Zimmerman was racial profiling Martin. While fox news used pictures of Martin they obtained from his facebook and other sources that show him smoking weed, smiling with a grill in his mouth. The imagery was used to paint Trayvon as a “bad apple” another one of societies youth that it is now too late to save.  When you demonize the other side and separate yourself from them the lines begin to draw. This overall is what the media and those in power want. If you’re in a state fear and afraid that a shadowy black man, or brown man or white man who is made out to become a boogie man is after you. Just in the nick of time a leader comes forward to protect you might be more susceptible to the charm. It’s how George Bush was re-elected. He used the fear of the US becoming under attack by another 911 and the war against Al-Quaida to make the population think any day could be the day we get bombed again. Remember the color coded terror alerts that used the color green, blue, yellow and orange to keep us in a state of hyper vigilance? The media was that tool to keep the terror cycle continuing while Bush maintained power. Would he have gotten his second term without the use of fear and the media?