portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting portland metro

Kucinch Speaks at People's Food Coop

I headed on over to the coop for a chance to hear Dennis Kucinich in an intimate environment. I'm from California and I already decided to register under the Democratic Party and I already voted for him in the CA primary. However, the primaries are coming up soon in Oregon and Kucinich is here in Portland to build up support for his campaign.

I had the chance to ask Kucinich his feelings about the roles of nonviolence and armed resistance.

My questions were if he considered breaking a window 'non-violent' and what his suggestions were for resistance to both US Imperialism abroad as well as repression here in the US.

My questions seemed to catch Kucinich a bit by surprise. I appreciated him saying that I was asking good questions that need to be discussed more in other forums, however I found his answers to be quite contradictory.

For example, he seemed to support the Zapatistas, yet stated that he did not support them taking up arms in self-defense.

Then, Kucinich said that he supports self defense, yet failed to provided any solid examples of how one might defend them self. He basically said that he supports the right of people to defend themselves with 'Moral Authority.'
One thing quickly led to another and I found myself on a road trip to Rose City, the beating heart of Cascadia. While checking email at the Red and Black Cafe, I heard someone say that Kucinich was going to be speaking in Portland. When I ask where and when, she replied, "Just down the street at the People's Food Coop.

So I headed on over to the coop for a chance to hear Dennis Kucinich in an intimate environment. I'm from California and I already decided to register under the Democratic Party and I already voted for him in the CA primary. However, the primaries are coming up soon in Oregon and Kucinich is here in Portland to build up support for his campaign.

Kucinich opened up his presentation by saying how nice it was to be speaking with people in a food coop similar to the ones he shops at in Cleveland. Kucinich was very friendly and personable in his presentation. He took the time to speak openly and honestly with young children, even bending down on his knees so that he could be face to face when responding to the child's observation that, "All this war is like the 60s again."

Kucinich feels that Oregonians have a chance to determine the direction of the Democratic Party in the upcoming primary election.

In response to a question about the Democratic Party's ability to challenge 'Big Oil,' Kucinich stressed the importance of creating sustainable systems within our communities.

The creation of a Department of Peace is a goal Kucinich, and he provided a brief breakdown of what such a department would look like. (For more information on the Department of Peace, check Kucinich's website)
 http://www.kucinich.us/issues/departmentpeace.php

One person in the audience used Argentina as an example of a country that has been through a very severe economic crisis and tried to compare the situation with the direction of the economy. Kucinich responded by mentioning that there has been a 3/4 trillion dollar switch in the budget deficit during Bush's Occupation of the White House. (* Kucinich did not use the term 'Occupation of the White House') Kucinich wants to cancel the tax cuts to rich and instead use money to create a fund so that all young people can go to college. He also wants to cut the Pentagon budget and mentioned that the US government (taxpayers) spends more money on weapons and 'defense' than the rest of the world combined!

Another person asked Kucinich about his thoughts on the situation in Iraq. Kucinich calls for the removal of US troops from Iraq and ultimately for self-government by the Iraqi people. However, Kucinich feels there needs to be an interim period where the United Nations takes control over the Iraqi oil resources as well as rebuilding contracts until the Iraqi people are ready and able for self-government.

A major problem in Iraq is that there is an unemployment rate of 80%. The unemployment is seen as a bigger problem than the political turmoil.
(I'm not sure why Kucinich would classify an unemployment rate of 80% as something other than 'political turmoil').

Kucinich is also concerned over Paul Bremmer's stated desire to privatize Iraq's top 200 services.

Kucinich would like to see the UN help Iraq create a constitution, while the current US administration would like to see an Iraqi constitution that guarantees a permanent US dominance of Iraq.

When asked about the difference between Bush and Kerry, and weather or not to vote for Nader (in the event that Kucinich does not win the Democratic nomination), Kucinich responded that he refused to 'get ahead of himself' in regards to his own campaign.

Then came my turn to ask Kucinich a question or two.

I started off by stating that I went to Miami to protest the FTAA and then to Fort Benning to protest the Western Hemisphere Institute of Security Cooperation (WHISC aka School of the Americas or SOA). Kucinich lead the room in clapping for my presence in Miami and Fort Benning. That was nice of them all, but it also makes me feel a little strange....

My questions were if he considered breaking a window 'non-violent' and what his suggestions were for resistance (to both US Imperialism abroad as well as repression here in the US).

Kucinich responded that breaking a window was an act of violence. Then, in classic pacifist style, he went on to feed the myths of Gandhi's and Martin Luther King's ability to lead people in successful social movements that yielded significant changes.

I then stated that Gandhi and MLK were not the only initiators of change and that other groups and individuals played had significant roles in both these social movements. These other groups and individuals were not bound by pacifist ideology. MLK Jr. himself acknowledged the role of armed resistance in conjunction with his strict ideology of nonviolence.

I mentioned that Pacifists are very contradicting in their support of armed resistance by the Zapatistas, for example, yet denounce others who may chose to venture outside the tight framework of Pacifist ideology.

My questions seemed to catch Kucinich a bit by surprise. I appreciated him saying that I was asking good questions that need to be discussed more in other forums, however I found his answers to be quite contradictory.

For example, he seemed to support the Zapatistas, yet stated that he did not support them taking up arms in self-defense.

Then, Kucinich said that he supports self defense, yet failed to provided any solid examples of how one might defend them self. He basically said that he supports the right of people to defend themselves with 'Moral Authority.'

.....Ok, 'Moral Authority' .....geee, thanks.

Unfortunately for me, my 'Moral Authority' failed the stop the really hard plastic bullet that a cop hit me with on my upper left thigh while nonviolently demonstrating on Biscayne Blvd. in Miami last November.
 http://ftaaimc.org/or/2003/12/3321.shtml

Kucinich's website lists many types of issues, yet there is not one about self-defense.

In this time of widespread state repression and violence, I feel that Kucinich should be taking a clear stand on Nonviolence and Self-Defense.

After the Kucinich's presentation ended, including the Q&A, he walked around the room taking time to shake hands with people. I appreciate Dennis Kucinich and his ability to look people in the eye with honesty and sincerity.

By the way, a handful of people came up to me afterwards and thanked me for bringing up those issues, and thanking me for going to Miami and Fort Benning, and offering their experience with the police, etc...

It is cool that people appreciate things that I done. Hopefully people continue to discuss ways to tackle this corrupt Empire that we call the US Government. While the US government is the crux of our problem, at least here in the US, we really must do something to defeat the system of Corporate Feudalism that has been created.


...supporting a diversity of tactics, including Kucinich,
~Bradley
the moral authority of not frightening my donors away 07.Apr.2004 03:54

what a good question

The Zapatistas are okay because they're mostly brown people in some foreign country, and they've been getting their asses kicked, and they're cooool, maaan! :-)

I'm just kidding.

Liberal politicians and pacifists occasionally say nice things about the Zapatistas because the Zapatistas say basically liberal things and make basically liberal demands (honest elections now!) and because foreign violence doesn't scare away American rich people. Rich American liberal campaign donors don't see the Zapatistas as a threat to THEM and THEIR privileges, and they don't see the Mexican army as the patriotic institution that's protecting them from the horrible unwashed masses.

"But Kucinich isn't --"

Yes he is. He's just another Democratic politician, and vegetarian food co-ops are just another Democratic voting bloc. Get over it. He's not going to tell you it's okay for you to defend yourself from police violence. He's going to tell you how noble it is to get your ass kicked by police violence. That's the narrative he's interested in.

I agree the line about "moral authority" is a disappointing peek behind the curtain. It's all just words. If the words don't really mean anything, well, they still fill up a sound bite, they might make sense to somebody, get him another vote somewhere, glad to meetcha, see you at the convention, 'bye now. On to the next vegan co-op in another town.

Get to it... 07.Apr.2004 07:34

Justice Evans

All this talk and criticism of "pacifists", this talk of non-violence...all of this finger pointing at how nothing changes without a little armed resistance....

Alright, already! Go resist. Take up arms, attack, take the offensive. Destroy property, hurt people...maybe even kill. Best of all, break a window.

BUT, good luck convincing Joe the egg delivery guy, or Thomas, the guy who patched my tire yesterday, or Clarissa, the woman who made sure my overdrawn checking account would not be closed...good luck convincing those people that what your doing has any resemblance to morality, or actual change.

You want a revolution so bad, then go have one. In the meantime, we'll stand strong and fight this fight and win, and we will do it fair and we'll have history to show that we did it and no one had to become a martyr.

egocentric boor 07.Apr.2004 08:59

we all had questions

A lot of people wanted to ask Dennis questions. Hard hitting stuff, like Diebold, boycotting touch-screen voting machines, and the role of iraq selling oil in euro, and it's affect on the dollar. We didn't have the chance because you sought to hijack the whole show into your long-term ego fest.
Well, I'll tell you something.
I admire Dr. King. I admire Malcolm X, and I'm barely old enough to remember both. You clearly are not. Dr King had greater sucess (pargmatically) than Malcolm because he had the wisdom to serve up a message people would listen to. You would do well to learn from his example.
As far as the rubber bullet etc.... you took from the storm troopers, and how to deal with the storm troopers when they attack, I suggest a tactic I learned from sf indymedia before last year's protest at UP.
"COP ATTACK: TURN YOUR BACK."
Shooting people in the back makes them look bad, and really helps your lawsuit when the time comes to get even.
Reducing it to a bumper sticker cliche, I'd advise you to redirect some of your energy from getting mad to getting even. Fewer people would wish you'd shut up that way, and you might do the world some good.

Kucinich is not at all a pacifist 07.Apr.2004 09:41

GRINGO STARS

Kucinich voted FOR the racist war against Afghanistan.
Kucinich voted FOR the crusading war against Kosovo, under Clinton.
Kucinich voted FOR financing a military uprising in Iraq, under Clinton.

Kucinich is not at all a pacifist.
He has actively supported war at least three times.

Calling ALL Portland Truthseekers 07.Apr.2004 11:18

out them now

OH MY GOD

Thank you Portland IMC cointel pro plants... thank you for exposing yourselves for all to see. All portland imc activists must now recognize that govt operatives are clearly controlling PDX imc. SF, San Diego and Seattle have already had 'internal conflicts' .... it is time now for all conscious Portlanders to take back the IMC!!!

Proof that PDX has been co-opted.

1. There is a very important election in 1 month- the last day to register is April 27.
Why is there nothing about this important date, or about the importance of getting EVERYONE registered.

2. As the 'alternative' to the corporate media, why have they banished the 'selection 2004' page, without providing a major link to highlight this. This is so obvious, they are trying to prevent any newbie imcers from finding info on this election.

3. And now, as a feature, they post this... ? Uh, dudes... we all want to end the drug war, prisons for profit, the war in iraq, all of these things, Kucinich is on the right side of all these issues, kerry is on the corporate side... end of story. and this is the feature you post? "I already voted in CA, now i moved here to vote for him again" What a crock.


The election in May is:
Kerry vs Kucinich .
Money vs People .

All oregonians that care about social and economic justice should be ACTIVELY getting people registered to vote. People should be driving to poor neighborhoods... tabling at grocery stores... Going to high schools...(i think if the kids will be 18 in Nov, they can vote now...?)

PDX has lots of 'anarchists' that are telling us not to vote... this is just plain stupid.
Ask them- Shouldn't we vote to end prisons for profit? duh!

Does every single person in NE Portland that is pissed at Kendra and James murders know that Kucinich will end the drug war? Kendra would be alive today if there was no drug war. She harmed no one. She was not a threat. She is Dead. Kerry will continue this stupid war on the people. There will be more shootings, more needless deaths.

There is no argument why PDX imc should not prominently feature

Last Day to Register is 'by April 27' (ie April 26) ?

The MAJOR differences between Kerry-Kucinich and
The MAJOR similarities between Kerry-Bush and

The fact that this election in May is just between Kerry - Kucinich
Nader is not involved. There are clearly elements here that wish to cloud the issue and get people to 'choose' Nader, then not bother to vote in May.

Front and Center: The Election in May is Kerry vs Kucinich!

Look at Portland IMC - re: this May election- are the editors openly promoting information that we know is buried by the mainstream? or are they burying it?

Are the editors promoting activism, methods to enlighten other Oregonians about this Incredible importance of this election. Are the promoting actively registering people and getting 100% turnout among all who care about social and economic justice.


Portlanders- Confront the phony 'anarchists' and take back our imc. Yeah, there's more than one operative (just one would stick out), there are several, so they can back each other with their stupid arguments.

Do you want to end the drug war or not?
Are you offering an alternative to the media or not? End of story.

Mixed feelings 07.Apr.2004 11:22

gerry

I felt Bradley's anger on several levels. My worst pepper-spraying occured at the FTAA protests in Quebec City, but is still highly illustrative of what's going on in the U.S. and what Kucinich failed to adequately address (although overall I was very impressed with him, including how he answered my son's question, and I will register as a Dem. for the primary despite what I'm about to say). I was leaving the protest area of Quebec, but had to take a short-cut through the courtyard of a small apartment building in order to catch the main road out of town (which was otherwise blocked off by riot cops, clouds of tear gas, etc.). Three Canadian university students (like me very unobtrusive looking) walked through at the same time. As we were having a conversation about the protests, pepper-spray cannisters came flying over the roof and hit us nearly point blank. Suddenly we were on all fours: gasping, writhing, and finally shaking our heads at each other as if to say "this shit is wrong."

The point is that this globalized police force was protecting any threat to private capital. So, while we protestors where delivering basically the same message as Mr. Kucinich (sustainability, connection to others, etc.), we were being stomped by the jackboots. He, similarly, is being boycotted by the mainstream press. So how can a Democratic party so tied into the corporate power behind all of this realistically take on a message antithetical to its own motives and power base? I can't see it happening and personally am moving to Canada, but it's a big tent for tactics, and I'm certainly willing to support Kucinich at the same time.

As for tactics, I did a good deal of research into the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s and, while the non-violent tactics espoused by Dr. King and others were important and did draw many suburban whites into supporting the movement, the riots were the catalyst for passage of the '68 Act, which in effect gave teeth to the '64 Act. So, I do not think violence can be dismissed out-of-hand as an effective tool for change. Plus, what are the paramters of "self-defense" in the situation where you want to make your voice heard in a democratic way, but are met with barb-wire, spray, tasers and whatever hideous high-tech weapons are in the works? In other words, is it permissible self-defense to make your voice heard by whatever means necessary in a system where your voice is supposed to be the driving engine of socio-political development?

Mixed feelings 07.Apr.2004 11:23

gerry

I felt Bradley's anger on several levels. My worst pepper-spraying occured at the FTAA protests in Quebec City, but is still highly illustrative of what's going on in the U.S. and what Kucinich failed to adequately address (although overall I was very impressed with him, including how he answered my son's question, and I will register as a Dem. for the primary despite what I'm about to say). I was leaving the protest area of Quebec, but had to take a short-cut through the courtyard of a small apartment building in order to catch the main road out of town (which was otherwise blocked off by riot cops, clouds of tear gas, etc.). Three Canadian university students (like me very unobtrusive looking) walked through at the same time. As we were having a conversation about the protests, pepper-spray cannisters came flying over the roof and hit us nearly point blank. Suddenly we were on all fours: gasping, writhing, and finally shaking our heads at each other as if to say "this shit is wrong."

The point is that this globalized police force was protecting any threat to private capital. So, while we protestors where delivering basically the same message as Mr. Kucinich (sustainability, connection to others, etc.), we were being stomped by the jackboots. He, similarly, is being boycotted by the mainstream press. So how can a Democratic party so tied into the corporate power behind all of this realistically take on a message antithetical to its own motives and power base? I can't see it happening and personally am moving to Canada, but it's a big tent for tactics, and I'm certainly willing to support Kucinich at the same time.

As for tactics, I did a good deal of research into the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s and, while the non-violent tactics espoused by Dr. King and others were important and did draw many suburban whites into supporting the movement, the riots were the catalyst for passage of the '68 Act, which in effect gave teeth to the '64 Act. So, I do not think violence can be dismissed out-of-hand as an effective tool for change. Plus, what are the paramters of "self-defense" in the situation where you want to make your voice heard in a democratic way, but are met with barb-wire, spray, tasers and whatever hideous high-tech weapons are in the works? In other words, is it permissible self-defense to make your voice heard by whatever means necessary in a system where your voice is supposed to be the driving engine of socio-political development, but cannot be heard otherwise?

SELF DEFENCE VS PACIFICM 07.Apr.2004 12:37

IYANNA

it's all too easy for those of us who don't feel under imminent attack by the police or military to hand out advice about mlk jr, gandhi and turn the other cheek. how many more innocent people have to suffer and die before we say enough! if you were the mother of james jahar perez or an iraqi mother maybe, just maybe you'd get the picture. anyway, if you want peace, work for justice cuz unless they kill us all, there ain't gonna be no peace! and i don't know about you but i have a right to live and not in fear and misery either just as much as any body else. right now they're murdering poor blacks, poor whites and other minorities right here on the streets of portland. none of us are safe regardless of how white, good-black, peaceful, or rich. when you have a gang of trigger happy cops with license to kill shooting in the streets, your white, good-black, peaceful ass could just be in the wrong place at the wrong time. don't forget the lessons of history...first they came for the jews but i was not a jew....

learn the history of this IMC, "out them now"... 07.Apr.2004 13:10

GRINGO STARS

It was precisely the don't-vote anarchists you are demonizing who started this IMC and who keep the infrastructure working and occasionally make posts on how voting is playing into the capitalists BS. Read spArk and deva's comments - they are the people I speak of.

You have no idea about anarchists, do you? I suggest further study. I don't agree with every anarchist tenet, but their point about voting being yet another control mechanism is spot on.

You think that electoral politics is the end-all of politics? That viewpoint is MUCH more COINTELPRO than someone saying NOT to vote.

You are so jacked up on Kucinich when he has voted FOR war three times? Are you deaf? What part of that do you not understand? Why is Kucinich so fucking great after he has helped make possible the slaughter of thousands of Afghani civilians.

Personally, I am against war and make a principled stand against anyone who is pro-war. Kucinich is NOT anti-war. He is pro-votes. He voted for wars when it was popular to do so. He is a professional bureaucrat, a grinning stranger who has been pyal to the historically pro-war Democrat party since he was 23 years old.

But gee thanks for your McCarthy-esque paranoid comment above. Anarchist-baiting is as old as communist-baiting, and both are stupid.

GRINGO is a Liar and a Fraud 07.Apr.2004 13:48

Obmuj

He claims to be anti-war and pro-pacifism, yet he has called for a violent class war revolution here in the US. I don't know if he is a cointelpro type, but at the very least, he is a shit talking hypocritcal coward, and his one man crusade will fly like a Led Zeppelin. He offers nothing but unworkable solutions and idiocy, and obviously feels threatened by someone like Kucinich, who is willing to take a public stand for his beliefs an couples that with workable solutions.

yes, Kucinich will do GREAT while ignored by corporate media 07.Apr.2004 14:05

GRINGO STARS

I am against internacine wars, yes. Class war is ALREADY happening ,genius. I'm just for recognizing that fact and taking power from the ruling class. I have NEVER claimed to be pro-pacifist EVER because I am not passive. I certainly talk schitt, but schitt must be talked. A revolution only works with popular support. My solution is just as workable as yours. Kucinich winning in this plutocracy is actually less workable, come to think of it. The puditocracy is against Kucinich, yet Kucinich depends on the mass media in order to win. Doomed to failure.

We do not live in a plutocracy. I don't feel threatened by Kucinich. He is the least evil of professional bureaucrats. He at least claims to be anti-war. That's better than most, right? He is yet another part of the machine.

Study COINTELPRO and you will see that they target almost exclusively violent revolutionaries. They don't waste time on things that help their aims, such as passive-ists and electoral politicians. They concentrate on things that truly threaten the US empire; those who will use violence in self-defense.

GRINGO'S FARCE 07.Apr.2004 14:22

Obmuj

Kucinich is not at all a pacifist

by GRINGO STARS
---

Typical of your revolving straw-man arguments. I have yet to see anyone claim that he is a pacifist, yet you appear over and over to criticize him because he does not meet that definition. You claim to be anti-war, yet you support a violent 'class' war here in the US. You claim that Kucinich is an operative for the empire, yet simultaniously has no chance because he is ignored by the corporate media. You are either very confused, or full of crap.

You did post one thing that made sense: "A revolution only works with popular support." Since you have none, you are doomed to failure.

For now, that is true 07.Apr.2004 16:40

GRINGO STARS

Yes, right NOW there is no popular support for revolution. That will change.

Kucinich will (surprise surprise) lose the nomination for Democratic presidential hopeful. He will then humbly beg his supporters to vote for the duly-nominated Democrat (Kerry). He will fill the traditional role of the democratic "progressive" in that he will bring progressives into the fold, only to sell them out to whoever wins the nomination of his party. This will push some progressives into a more centrist position. Indeed, Kucinich has already traded Caucus votes for pro-PATRIOT act, pro-Iraq invasion Edwards in Iowa. Kucinich is playing the age-old role of bringing progressives back into the warmongering Democrat party. THAT is how he does his part for US empire (besides voting for the more popular wars abroad).

Forigive me, Kucinich has not used precisely the word "pacifist" - excuse me -well has he used the word "anti-war"? He HAS used the word "peace" many times, I know thta for sure. Whatever words he has used (and thank you for mincing words) - he is STILL a hypocrite. He has voted FOR THREE WARS. Go look it up if you don't believe me. He is supposedly the anti-war candidate but that is BULLSCHITT, just like a typical politician. There are thousands dead, thanks in part to Kucinich. And he has the chutzpah to call himself the anti-war candidate?

No matter how many times you personally attack me for my political beliefs, the facts still stand; KUCINICH IS A HYPOCRITE - A WARMONGERING ASSHOLE WHO DOESN'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT NON-AMERICANS DYING AS LONG AS IT GAINS HIM VOTES. Typical.

Look in the... 07.Apr.2004 16:46

mirror

gringo is a hypocrite - a warmongering asshole who doesn't give a damn about americans dying as long as it gains him popularity.

Anything to avoid the truth? 07.Apr.2004 16:55

GRINGO STARS

Keep talking about me as long as you want. Say anything that makes you feel better. You crack me up, always trying to attack the messenger. Anything to avoid talking about Kucinich's pro-war voting record, eh?

Just keep in mind that Kucinich has voted FOR WAR three times. Kucinich is not against war, like he always implies. Kucinich is a hypocrite. Kucinich is a professional politician, after all.

sorry this thread is deteriorating 07.Apr.2004 17:32

mom

i got that chance to talk a bit to Kucinich. I think/feel he is as honsest a politician as you get. Yes, he has changed his mind about things. How I wish that other people would change their minds... i.e. Don't we try hard to get SUV driving suburbanites to realize they need to make changes? Would we just go at them anyway if they did change their practices e.g sell the car, buy a bike, move closer in to their jobs etc..?
Why don't we respect and maybe applaud public persons who see the evidence, hear the public and make a conscious effort to change for the common good?
Bush is popular with narrow minded stuck in their ways voters simply becasue he does not change regardless of how much evidence there is to prove his positions wrong. I think we should encourage elected officials who take steps to move in a direction that is healthier for the world.
At the same time we have to organize locally. It is both/and not either/or.

Kucinich sold out as recently as the Iowa caucus 07.Apr.2004 18:30

GRINGO STARS

Trading caucus votes with a fellow Democrat who is STILL pro-PATRIOT act and pro-Iraq war (Edwards) does not bear out the "Kucinich knows better now" meme. Just because you get a sense that a politician means well speaks more about the professional skills of that politician than to the actual beliefs of that politician.

Can single personalities make any change in a system? Or do personalities get changed in those systems? IS it more useful to change the entire system? How does one take money out of our plutocratic system? Why do so many people pretend that we live in a democracy?

IDENTIFY the Cointel Pro operatives 07.Apr.2004 19:37

gringo + ?

Gringo:
Do you want to end the drug war?
If you do you vote for Kucinich this May.


PROOF of COINTEL PRO
Look at Portland IMC - re: this May election- are the editors openly promoting information that we know is buried by the mainstream? or are they burying it?

Are the editors promoting activism, methods to enlighten other Oregonians about this Incredible importance of this election. Are the promoting actively registering people and getting 100% turnout among all who care about social and economic justice.


Portlanders- Confront the phony 'anarchists' and take back our imc. Yeah, there's more than one operative (just one would stick out), there are several, so they can back each other with their stupid arguments.

Do you want to end the drug war or not?
Are you offering an alternative to the media or not? End of story.

can you brook NO dissent? Is anyone who disagrees with you an FBI agent? 07.Apr.2004 20:11

GRINGO STARS

So I'm COINTELPRO because I don't want to vote for someone who has voted for three disgusting wars? Are you so devoid of perspective that if someone brings up TRUE information that runs counter to your beliefs, you simply call them spies?

By the way, it is an anarchist orthodoxy to not vote, so referring to "phony anarchists" would be a reference to someone who claims to be an anarchist, yet votes. Study COINTELPRO and you will see that they have VERY rarely targeted peaceful activists, since that is a behaviour that the government encourages. The histrionic attribution of COINTELPRO to everyone who disagrees with your misinformed approach of taking part in a corrupt plutocracy will never gain you any credibility here, in the IMC (of many) that anarchists created.

To anyone who thinks they can "take" the IMC: a hearty fuck you. This is an open publishing system - media for people. Not just people that only you agree with. Only through open dialog can people reach informed conclusions. The corporate media failed at being any kind of marketplace of ideas.

How is this election important? You think Gore wouldn't have started two wars? You're duped.

GRINGO STARS not COINTELPRO 07.Apr.2004 21:52

GRINGO is a Liar and a Fraud

Just a self important blowhard of a dumbass, with dillusions of granduer, and no ideas. He is pro-war, pro-straw-man, and anti common sense. He has an obsession with trashing Dennis Kucinich, even though Kucinich has no chance of winning the Democratic nomination. He will argue his invalid points until he is blue in the face, and when his arguments are exposed as garbage, he changes them and then stacks up new straw-men to attack. His other favorite tactic is citing propaganda pieces compiled from right wing news sources, and posting them over, and over, and over.

Wow 07.Apr.2004 23:20

GRINGO STARS

Please tell me that not all Kucinich supporters are so cracked out on The Cult of Personality as you are.

Since when is pointing out the truth dismissed as "trashing" someone? Kucinich has many excellent platform points, and yes, I would love for the insane "drug war" to end. But to portray himself as a man of peace, to accept awards given in peacemakers' names, and yet also having a pro-war voting record is something easily percieved as hypocritical.

So you won't make insane ad hominem on me linking me to the FBI, but you will just portray me as a "lone nut" so to speak? How big of you. I guess the "right-wing" article that I reference is the International Socialist Review? This thread has been both humorous and illuminating. Here I was thinking Kucinich people are the most cognizant of electoral activists, only to find that some are of the close-minded variety that somehow treats Kucinich as Thee Holy Saviour. As if King Arthur has arisen again to save us and bring Camelot back. Please tell me you aren't typical of Kucinich supporters!

The Dennis Kucinich phenomenon
Candidate of the left?
By Katherine Dwyer
 http://www.isreview.org/issues/32/kucinich.shtml

The Dean Deception
By Keith Rosenthal
 http://www.isreview.org/issues/32/dean.shtml

Anybody but Bush?
by Alan Maass
 http://www.isreview.org/issues/30/anybodybutBush.shtml

Eight Years of Clinton-Gore
The Price of Lesser-Evilism
By Lance Selfa
 http://www.isreview.org/issues/13/clinton-gore.shtml

The Democrats and War
Not a real lesser evil
by Sherry Wolf
 http://www.isreview.org/issues/26/democrats_war.shtml

GRINGO 08.Apr.2004 01:19

!

Did you go to the Nader rally to support a real anti-war pro-people candidate, or were you busy with your idiotic campaign of spamming cut-and-paste Socialist Review compilations of Right Wing newspapers? Either way, you are a shit-talking do-nothing motherfucker who failed even to fill the Roseland Theater with your revolutionary forces. You are a fucking joke, and you should not be criticizing anyone.

Do you have pink hair by any chance?

thanks for the ad hominem 08.Apr.2004 16:11

GRINGO STARS

When you can't take the facts about your Saviour, just attack anyone who disagrees, I guess. (no I don't have pink hair)

Transformation 08.Apr.2004 19:39

Imagineallthepeoplelivinglifeinpeace

Gringo does not seem to allow for people to be human beings. Kucinich is not perfect, and like many of us, he has made mistakes and has undergone transformations on some positions and policies throughout his life and career. He is not today the same man he was when he voted for those past military actions. He is definitely pro-peace and anti-war today. In Congress, he led the opposition to the war on Iraq.

Did it ever occur to you that Kucinich could be working so hard today to get out his message about his proposed Department of Peace as a form of making amends for past decisions?

This is a very good man. Having Kucinich be America's president is a revolutionary, progressive dream - one that will hopefully come true in years to come. It is amazing and wonderful that he is still operating within the government at all, and that we get a chance to vote for him - and thus vote our values and hearts - in the still-upcoming primaries and caucuses.

As for breaking windows, what exactly does that change for the better? And do you really think Kucinich is dumb enough to be cornered in any way by espousing law-breaking on his campaign trail?

Breaking windows is kids' stuff. Courageously running for president to openly oppose the current ruthless, fascist Bush regime takes a spiritually and politically advanced man.

I'm an anarchist and I vote 08.Apr.2004 23:16

Bear

Who says anarchists don't vote? I vote. I'll vote for Kucinich in the primary. I think there are many other forms of political and social action that are much more effective than voting, but even if voting only does a little bit of good once in a while, I figure I might as well. And, part of anarchism is thinking for yourself, which means you don't have to buy into other people's definitions of what a "good anarchist" is. If I wanted to have people tell me how I ought to think and act and be, I'd hook up with mainstream society!

Trust is earned 08.Apr.2004 23:35

GRINGO STARS

It's not like Kucinich used to shoot up drugs or something, which could easily be chalked up to a youthful mistake that hurt only yourself and those closest to you, but when your mistakes cost almost twenty thousand lives, all told, that is something which deserves public genuine apologies.

His switch from lifelong anti-choice activist to "pro-choice" promptly before his bid for presidency is also suspect. Call me cynical.

It's not like he went joyriding or broke into a rec center or some other such hijinx. He helped send civilians to their death, and thousands more mutilated for life. If he truly was anti-war, WHY did he give caucus votes to Edwards? Edwards is pro-Iraq war. So is Kucinich more anti-war or more politicking?

Sure, Bear, maybe some anarchists join the marines for all I know. Whatever you want to call yourself is great, I guess.

personally I'm no anarchist, but since the question was asked why break windows? If windows were not broken at the Seattle '99 WTO riots, the mainstream press would never have covered the protests. Even with their negative spin, the mainstream press was forced to explain that some people are VERY much against the WTO (and bravo for Kucinich for recognizing the WTO for what it is), a viewpoint that most people weren't aware even existed before the windows were broken.

I should remind people that in Seattle '99, the cops began beating protestors up BEFORE the windows were broken, and not the other way around like the corporate media has propagandized. The Seattle IMC has a wonderful documentary on that event, which spawned IndyMedia, by the way. Without anarchists, there would be no IndyMedia. There might be some other thing, but IndyMedia was started by mostly anarchists.

Also, corporate criminals only understand when they are hit hard in the moneybelt. Nike's insurance premiums went up after repeated riots in different cities broke Nike store windows. Go figure. Business entities usually only react to criticism only if it costs them money.

Throwing tantrums (rioting) IS kids stuff, you are right. Protests are tantrums. Kids stuff. Being unsatisfied with the way the world is run is childish. Trying to change the world to suit your own morality, rather than adapting yourself to the world, is downright toddler-like.

Sensible people never change the world, because they just adapt to society, no matter how sick that society is. Only nonsensical people ever dare to change the world to suit themselves. Activists are pretty childish, eh?

how come you attack Kucinich so frequently? 09.Apr.2004 00:22

mom

Sometimes, Gringo, you say things that make sense and I stop to read your sources. But, when anyone posts about Kucinich you go wild posting negative comments. You could be a Kerry or Nadar supporter who doesn't want competition --- or simply someone who likes to fight.
It is as if you believe you can bury us in enough posts to come around to your way of thinking. Calm down. Get some rest. We can't change the world overnight
and I do believe you are old enough to know that.

You wrote that you think Kucinich is quilty of 20,000 deaths because of his past votes. I would like to add that I think that people who did not vote in the last election or who voted for Bush are also guilty of the deaths the man has caused, as well as the corruption and violence. It is too easy to claim that voting does nothing and therefore you can exonerate yourself from guilt.
If you live in this country, pay taxes or use services ... including the roads and utilities, than you are a part of the system. Offer some ideas for what you personally do for change --- other than denounce everyone else.
Kucinich is a good man. Not a perfect man, but a good one.

window breaking, what happened in '99, etc. 09.Apr.2004 02:04

blah blah blah

>personally I'm no anarchist, but since the question was asked why
>break windows? If windows were not broken at the Seattle '99 WTO
>riots, the mainstream press would never have covered the protests.

The '99 WTO protests are kind of a bad example, because, atypically, the preceding non-property-damaging street blockade actually did DELAY the start of the WTO meetings by several hours, which was newsworthy by itself and which lent some weight to the subsequent criticism of the window-breaking as unnecessary for publicity generation. The window-breaking kids hadn't expected the planned street blockade to "work" -- in fact, the street-blockaders didn't either. The blockaders expected to be mass-arrested in an hour. The whole scene was apparently a gigantic surprise to everybody.

In response to the critiques of window-breaking at WTO, the next big demo after that, in D.C. in April 2000, didn't include any plans for property destruction by anybody. And, you may realize, nobody remembers what the protest was about. Probably you've forgotten there even was a mass protest in D.C. in April 2000. Somebody who was at both protests told me later, "At least in Seattle, running away from the tear gas gave us something to do," meaning by comparison the D.C. protests seemed pointless and ineffective even at the time. Thus the pendulum swung more to the middle for the rest of 2000 and early 2001, with the subsequently-created doctrine of "green zones," "yellow zones," and "red zones," and "respecting a diversity of tactics."

People have also forgotten that property destruction was taken up as a tactic on the West Coast in the late '90s specifically in response to the grotesque abuse that obviously nonviolent non-property-destroying locked-down protesters received at the hands of law enforcement at a series of sit-ins in Humboldt County, Calif., in 1997, as documented, for instance, at

 http://www.change-links.org/PepperSpray.htm
 http://treesit.org/havc/campaigns_videos/fire_in_the_eyes/Peppertranscript.html

and elsewhere

So the real answer to the question, "Why break windows?" was always, "Because sheriffs stick Q-tips covered with caustic chemicals in young women's eyeballs, one eyeball at a time."

Kucinich, and all politicians are entirely besides the point 09.Apr.2004 02:38

GRINGO STARS

Thanks for the info, *blah blah blah*

Although Kerry and Kucinich have a history of supporting war, at least Nader doesn't. Who knows what he'd do if he could? He talks the same line as Kucinich.

But all this is pointless. Vote fraud in the US is endemic. Your vote will not be counted right. Selection 2000 proved that. Gore won. But Bush was appointed. Gore is a warmonger too, and would have attacked both Afghanistan And Iraq. Kerry wants a bigger military than Bush. Mainstream demopublicans will be cogs in the machine. Kucinich is the lesser evil, true. But as someone who can't stand imperialist war, I refuse to ever respect anyone who has helped make imperialist wars possible. Kucinich has a lot of explaining to do to Afghani and Kosovan families.

You electoral activists, although well-meaning, are wasting your time. Electoral politics is a black hole of precious time and energy that progressives could be using to organize independantly of the corrupt political machine. Boycotts, strikes and direct actions are historically proven ways to work on specific issues.

Engaging in cosmetic Personality Politics does nothing. The face on the cog changes nothing. Even a truly progressive president couldn't change a thing in the face of the real powers in this country. The president is a mere figure head, an anchorman for the businessmen who run this country/world. A progressive who got elected would get murdered within the week, for one thing. The ruling class is not afraid to do massive violence and cover their tracks with a complicit corporate media. Class war is ALREADY being fought, but only the ruling class seems to know this.

And although voting and then going about your business might assuage your conscious, it doesn't do a thing. Bang your head against that wall until its bloody if you want, but you've been warned by plenty of people on this site how futile this is.

Kucinich and Nader people are the best of the white-male-leader supporters. You are the most right-on out of the people entranced with Personality Politics. So Kucinich people can easily be radicalized because they are already progressive, although they might not have all the information about how corrupt the electoral system is yet.

The thing that pisses me off about Kucinich is that he is such the supposed prince of peace, but with such a pro-war voting record I strongly suspect that he is merely yet another typical politician. He wants votes and he has found his "niche market" so to speak. A quick turnaround on war and abortion and VOILA! now he's a progressive.

Even if he somehow is, people don't change the system "from within" - the system changes them. Always.

Presidential power 09.Apr.2004 08:42

Imagineallthepeoplelivinglifeinpeace

Gringo writes: ... the president is just a figurehead, an anchorman for the businessmen ...

No, historically that is untrue. Presidential powers (esp. by veto, cabinet appointments, and Supreme Court justice nominations) are substantial. It is only recent presidents (Bush the Greater, Clinton, Bush the Lesser) that have been so way in the pocket of corporations. Bush the Lesser is indeed a true corporate puppet and figurehead, given his quite limited mental and moral capacities. Indeed, you'll find him vacationing at his ranch in Crawford, TX whenever big things are happening.

Kucinich would be a completely new kind of progressive president for the 21st century. If you doubt it, remember that he paid for his activism by losing his position as major of Cleveland and was black-listed out of politics completely for 10 years following his veto of the sale of Muny Light, refusing to privatize the peoples' electric power system, thus saving ordinary Clevelanders mucho bucks on their electric bills - electricity, a vital resource that, like water, ought to be free or very low-cost.

Someone has to have a foothold within the system of power in order to shake it up and turn it around to good for the people. Kucinich is that man. If not in 2004 than soon after. I've met him. You can trust him. Of course the Democratic Party he functions in (and against) have become more Republican every day. Read what Kucinich says about that, each and every day. Follow his struggle on his website at  http://www.kucinich.us. His struggle is our struggle, Gringo.

LGBTI and Our Allies Should Vote Kucinich 09.Apr.2004 08:56

Bet Power

Please read my article, "A Transman Meets Dennis Kucinich," on the national Kucinich for President website at:

 http://www.kucinich.us/lgbt/ ... the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender page with link to article and lots of other good info

 http://www.kucinich.us/lgbt/transman.php ... the article page itself

From which other presidential candidate can you find such support for, and commitment to, the queer community and diverse racial, social, economic/class, and gender communities as from Dennis Kucinich, I ask you?

All lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders, intersexed, and our straight allies should vote for Kucinich in the remaining state primaries and caucuses! Why? Even though Kerry has the Democratic nomination already? Yes, vote for Kucinich and gather for him/us progressive delegates to take our queer agenda, racial and social and economic justice agendas, and anti-corporate-globalization agendas to infiltrate them into the Democratic Party platform at the DNC in July. This is our last remaining hope to work within the system for change. Get up off your fear and despair and take a chance on hope and take action for change! Vote Kucinich!

Thanks.

Bet Power

On Non-Violence 09.Apr.2004 12:14

Steve Argue

Bradley you are right in stating that other forces played a leading role in the movements that MLK and Ghandi are often credited for. Militant Black nationalists, socialists, and the world anti-imperialist movement were all critical in the gains made against Jim Crow segregation. For the US government, MLK moved from being the "respectable" Negro leader to being a problem that needed to be neutralized when he began speaking out against US involvement in the Vietnam War and began to get involved in union struggles, thus beginning to unite powerful forces and ideas.

In the case of India formal independence was granted, but a tight colonial leash was kept in place. Ghandi's credentials for non-violence and anti-imperialism are destroyed by his support for Britain in the First World War. In fact he traveled the countryside urging peasants to join the British military to go to war. This is in stark contrast to revolutionary socialist leaders of the time such as Eugene Debs, Rosa Luxemburg, V. I. Lenin, and Leon Trotsky who were all facing government repression for their effective internationalist opposition to the war.

Kucinich himself does not even oppose the occupation of Iraq. He instead wants to see Iraq occupied by the UN. It is worth remembering that the US war against the Korean people in the 1950s where the US killed around 5 million Koreans, was done under a UN flag. Likewise the starvation blockade against Iraq under the two Bushes and Clinton that killed up to 2 million Iraqis was done under the auspices of the UN. In contrast to Bush's supposed unilateral occupation and Kucinich's support for a multilateralist "solution" (individual rape versus gang rape), socialists say US out of Iraq! UN stay out!

The Zapatistas have not met their objectives because they have refused to make their struggle one for power. Instead, they destroyed the 1994 momentum for revolution by getting bogged down in useless negotiations. Since then they have managed to sabotage their remaining revolutionary momentum by supporting the PRD (a capitalist party that came out of the long ruling PRI) and by failing to use their guns to protect the communities that have identified themselves as Zapatista from the government and its death squads.

To the ruling class damage to property is violence. Yet they regularly carry out the most horrible violence.

From a strategic standpoint breaking a window rarely has any positive impact. For the ruling class such damage costs them very little and certainly doesn't scare them. For people in the public sitting on the fence on the issue such an act is likely to push and scare away people we need to convince. Likewise, breaking windows is seen in the eyes of large sections of the public as all the excuse that is needed for the police to bust heads. To keep our movements as safe and as legal as possible I suggest people refrain from such activity. Instead of doing small scale damage to property for political demands I advocate the large scale damage to profits that can be done through political strikes by the working class. And instead of playing revolution in the streets on a miniature yet dangerous scale, I advocate politically preparing the public for the real thing.

Liberation News:
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Liberation_News/

 http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news

Leonard Peltier For President
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Peltier_for_President/

Steve Argue put it perfectly 09.Apr.2004 12:53

GRINGO STARS

Kucinich's aims are opposite of mine. I want Iraq to NOT be occupied. By anyone, UN included. Kucinich wants Iraq to continue being violently occupied, but by the UN instead of the US because we'll lose less soldiers that way. Wow. What a politician, eh? Protecting US citizens and a big fuck you to anyone else, apparently. Do you see why I get so pissed when otherwise well-intentioned people hold Kucinich up as some kind of "progressive"?

Nope, you got it wrong 09.Apr.2004 15:21

Imagineallthepeoplelivinglifeinpeace

Steve Argue and Gringo, you got it wrong about why Kucinich wants the UN to take temporary control of Iraq while getting the US the hell out. You WAY mischaracterize his position and what he would do about ending the occupation, if president. Kucinich says the answer is that the US completely withdraw and the UN handle Iraq's oil assets ONLY until the Iraqis are self-governing. The UN would also help the Iraqis write their own constitution and protect the Iraqis in electing their own government. This is a proper use of the UN and certainly would be an amends for the UN's horrible role in past sanctions.

Read Kucinich's actual thinking about the UN and Iraq (and not your own distortion) in this interview conducted just yesterday, particularly the response to the question, "At this point, how could we get out?" ....

Again, he would transform the use of the UN and bring it truly in line with its original intended purpose: protector and peacekeeper of the world's nations united in peace not war.

 http://www.mountaintimes.com/mtweekly/2004/0408/kucinichwords.php3

Do you think that the Iraqis are babies or "primitives" or something? 09.Apr.2004 18:22

GRINGO STARS

Why do Iraqis need "help" writing a constitution? Maybe they don't even want one. If they need help, don't you think they'd ASK for it? Occupation is occupation, whether the occupying army's helmets are beige or blue.

I don't care WHY Kucinich wants the UN to occupy Iraq. The fact that he does (and Nader wants the same thing so I'm not keen on him either) is enough. The US and the UN and everyone who is not Iraqi should get out of Iraq immediately. Period. Let Iraqis run Iraq. What a concept, eh?

Kucinich Speaks to the Little People 21.Apr.2004 21:06

~Bradley

Here are a few photos from Dennis Kucinich's presentation at the People's Food Coop in portland.

There are some more photos of this event posted on Santa Cruz Indymedia
 http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/8469

Thanks for the feedback above. Some of the comments really made think, while others made me laugh.

i hope to be back soon!
a window of light
a window of light
youth participation
youth participation
eye to eye
eye to eye