The U.S. Press and repression in the Obama Era: A new Awakening or political theater?

We are supposed to take seriously the outrage coming from members of the corporate press in response to the revelation that the Obama administration’s ever expanding use of executive powers to intimidate and crush dissent had turned its focus on the U.S. press.

But those of us who have consistently struggled to defend the human rights of the victims of the repressive national security state over the last few years have a few very simple questions for the press – where was the outrage or even concern when the target of the State was the “usual suspects” of Black, Brown and poor folks and their ‘radical” sympathizers?   Why was there so little concern expressed by the Press when Obama’s national security apparatus conducted raids on oppositional organizations, expanded the infiltration of lawful organizations and increased domestic electronic and communication surveillance?  And when this administration shamelessly claimed the power to be the judge, jury and executioner of anyone that ended up on one of its kill lists, including U.S. citizens, why didn’t this incredible abuse of State power garner at least some serious concern from the press, let alone outrage?

Of course only the most unprincipled sycophants of the Obama administration would disagree that focusing the repressive state apparatus on working journalists and the outlets they work for is a dramatic abuse of Executive power.  Yet in the run-up to this moment of outrage the press seemed reluctant to seriously consider what was so obvious to many of us. That the Obama Presidency, from the beginning,  was  clearly committed to maintaining  and even building on the trajectory of expanding Executive power which began during the Bush administration that narrowed the range of constitutional and human rights of individuals and groups in the U.S.

The liberal press was so caught-up in this cult of personality that was so much a part of the Obama phenomenon,  it did not see or choose to ignore that the Obama administration’s approach to civil liberties turned his administration into act three of the Bush administration.  So While the Obama administration used the espionage act to clamp down on whistle-blowers,  its’ Department of Homeland Security coordinated the national repression of Occupy Wall street and its’ lawyers defended the Bush administration’s position that opposed allowing individual suites against the government agencies and telecom companies accused of engaging in warrantless electronic surveillance,  the only voices of concern came from the marginalized radical press.

And even though the press was warned that the legal theories advanced by the Obama administration in the criminal investigation of WikiLeaks could be easily applied to criminalize the acts of mainstream journalists,  the press choose instead not to defend Julius Assange and Wikileaks.  For the bourgeois press, it appears that they believed that since they gleefully parroted the government line on issues from Libya to the need for deficit reduction, the government would never turn its repressive attention on it.

 

But now with the attack on Associated Press and the designation of James Rosen as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the government’s persecution of Stephen Kim, some mainstream journalists are finally giving a little more attention to the dangerously expanding power of the national security state. When many of us were attempting to educate the people on the threat posed to civil liberties and human rights by the National Defense Authorization Act, the corporate press never made the connection that under the NDAA’s allowance of the indefinite detention of Americans that one day it could apply to members of their profession.

Even today with the new outrage from the press on the abusive use of power by this administration, the  press still does not seem to understand the dangers inherit in the unchecked power of the State.  It gave scant attention to the recent declaration by the administration that it has the right under the morally dubious “Authorization for use of military force” legislation passed by the U.S. congress, to wage global war for a period into infinity. And the press still dutifully presents anonymous government sources in a one-sided, pro-war perspective on the situation in Syria.

It has only been those of us from the margins who have been trying to signal the alarm to the American people that the country is perilously close to normalizing police state practices.  We raise the alarm primarily because we understand and have experienced first-hand the awesome power of the State’s repressive apparatus.  And while we know that we are the first to be targeted – the message communicated with the designation of Assata Shakur as a “most wanted terrorist” was clear for us in the radical Black movement- we also know that we are not going to be the only targets this time around.

So even with all of the limitations, we welcome the questions that are finally being raised by some elements of the corporate press.  We certainly don’t have illusions that the corporate media will help the people to understand the economic and political stakes in play during this period but the increased attention by the press with the imperial Presidency of Barack Obama might reveal to some members of the public the extent to which their democratic and human rights have been undermined over the last decade under President Bush and now President Obama.

Paulo Freire, the radical Brazilian educator, reminded us that taking action against oppression is only possible when the people have developed critical consciousness.  In this strange and surreal period that characterizes U.S. politics where right-wing libertarians seem to be aligned with left-wing radicals to defend bourgeois rights against the encroachments of an oppressive state  supported by liberals and traditional conservatives,  the more debate that takes place and information disseminated the more possible that people will be shaken out of the Obama induced fog and recognize that they are living through one of the most repressive periods in the history of this country. Those of us on the frontline of the fight to defend democracy and human rights hope that with this new critical consciousness more people will be prepared to act to defend themselves and their fundamental human rights.

“Operation Ghetto Storm”: The New Face of U.S. Fascism

http://mxgm.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/13_04_01_Cover_rev3-1.jpgThe Malcolm X Grassroots Movement (MXGM) has just released a follow-up to its controversial report Every Thirty-six Hours, published last year, which was a gruesome compilation of killings of Black people in the U.S. MXGM characterized these killings, which took place in streets, houses, gated-communities and alley-ways across the country at a pace of one every thirty-six hours as “extra-judicial executions.” The new report, Operation Ghetto Storm, updates this figure, saying that Black people are now being killed by some representative of the state or a paramilitary vigilante at a rate of one every twenty-eight hours.

Even though Every Thirty-six Hours was widely disseminated through social media and received some coverage from  a few alternative news outlets, both reports have failed to generate much interest, moral outrage or comment from mainstream news outlets, human rights organizations or even the self-elected “leaders of the black community.”

The silence of liberals, both black and white, is understandable. After all, allegations that the police are murdering Black people across the country with little, if any, concern by relevant federal bodies such as the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division – all during the administration of the country’s first Black President — must be difficult and embarrassing to explain. And for  an administration that relies on “soft-power” rhetoric in support of  human rights and  democracy as an integral part of its strategy to maintain and advance U.S. global hegemony, I am sure that the administrations  calculation is that the less attention to racial oppression in the U.S. the better.  The administration prefers that attention is given to more “important” and human rights violations taking place in whatever nation/state it is currently targeting for destabilization, such as Syria, Iran and now North Korea.

But for those of us who have to live the nightmare of systematic domestic repression and  build opposition to it, silence is a luxury we cannot afford.  The MXGM reports exposes the massive human rights violations that take place in the U.S. and contradicts U.S. efforts to project itself as a champion of human rights, even as it subverts governments around the world, engages in high-tech State terrorism through its’ Drone warfare, and its intelligence and police agencies infiltrate, monitor and disrupt lawful domestic oppositional groups and kills its own citizens.

In the introduction to the report Kali Akuno,  National Coordinator of MXGM, offers an  explanation as to why there has been an escalation of state sponsored violence in black communities and the relative acceptance of that violence by the broader society.

 “What Operation Ghetto Storm reveals is that the practice of executing Black people without pretense of a trial, jury, or judge is an integral part of the government’s current overall strategy of containing the Black community in a state of perpetual colonial subjugation and exploitation.”

Akuno’s explanation is right on point. There is an edifice of control and domination that has been built in the U.S. which functions by criminalizing whole sectors of society it deems to be “dangerous” or “undesirable” — in particular our young people. But Kali raises an even more ominous point. He suggests that the targeting of Black people, as a vulnerable but potentially significant oppositional force to the prevailing U.S. political elite, is part of a broader strategy of repression that is slowly permeating all aspects of life in the U.S.

“ The United States settlercolonial government has built the most fullspectrum network of repressive enforcement structures in human history. They include the Police, Sheriff’s, Rangers, Customs, FBI, Homeland Security (including INS), CIA, Secret Se rvice, prison guards, as well as the numerous private security and other protective services. It has also created the largest and most invasive surveillance system in human history. This system includes everything from satellites, police, FBI, and DHS operated surveillance drones, and electronic tracking and monitoring via our cellphones, computers, tablets, email, Facebook, Twitter, and chipfilled passports, driver’s licenses, and identification cards.”

What Kali is describing here are the developing tactics of  a post-modern fascism in the U.S. The essential point that both reports  emphasize is that – the escalation of brutal police violence is not an aberration, the circumstantial result of particularly vicious policing or bad apples on the police forces, but a systemic response to a social crisis and a surplus population in which the control and containment of that population is the  main concern for state forces.

The historical antecedent for this development is clear.  African Americans have been the most consistent force for social justice throughout  the history of this country and since fascism is a particular response to capitalist crisis there is a certain perverse logic in the fact that African Americans would be the initial targets of an incipient new fascist practice.

Neoliberal restructuring of the domestic economy had a devastating impact on the African American working class. The intense contradictions of global capitalism that exploded as the current crisis that began in 2008 for the broader population, only magnified an ongoing  economic crisis of more than four decades for African American workers.  With the completion of the transformation of African Americans from a rural, land based labor force to an urban based labor force  that was completely dependent on capitalist wage labor by the 1970s, African American wages have stagnated or declined, depending on the sector, for more than 40 years.  When broken down by gender, the plight of African American women, also burden with the economic reality of being the sole provider for children, has been nothing less than tragic.

But it is not just stagnate and declining wages that confront African Americans.  Today the current reality facing African Americans is that black, unskilled and semi-skilled, low wage labor is superfluous , redundant, not needed, making our very physical existence a social problem in which draconian control methods and mass incarceration has emerged as viable solutions with tacit support from the broader U.S. society. Criminalization of our people and the continued militarization of the spaces where we are confined is an essential component of the containment strategy.

The open season on black bodies and the lack of interest from the broader society, silence from liberals and even many leftists, is graphic testimony to the precarious situation in which  we find ourselves. But more insidiously, what we are experiencing in our communities appears to be the harbinger of a new white, cross-class hegemonic racial bloc that is now unacknowledged but yet is the basis of support for U.S. war-making abroad and the relative silence on domestic racial repression. The essential ideological glue for this new racial bloc has a familiar historical basis in the unearned material privileges of white supremacy. Its’ essential recognition is that in order to secure and maintain white privilege, certain populations must be controlled and subordinated nationally and globally.  Could this be why it appears that very few are moved by the MXGM report?

It is important to make clear  for folks still looking for the ‘brown shirts” to emerge that fascism in the U.S. is not taking the same form as “classical fascism” that emerged in the particular circumstances of Europe gripped in the capitalist crisis of the 30s. That is why so many, and even many on the left, are sleeping while the foundations and actual practices of a particular “American” form of fascism is developing.  A fascism that with its ability to selectively repress dangerous populations- African Americans, in particular African American males, inner city Latinos, undocumented migrants, Arab and Muslims and radical elements that have not surrendered, while also adhering to the requirements and practices of a liberal “democratic society” for the rest of the society, is a new form that will be particular to the political, ideological and institutional context of the  U.S.

The killings and beating of black people, black mass incarceration  the terrorism of targeted repression of migrant workers from Central and South America and Muslim and Arab communities by the national security apparatus are the canaries in the cage for U.S. fascism.  While the particular class forces have not yet congealed and the social policies and legal framework are not in place or consolidated for a new American fascism, Every thirty six hours and Operation Ghetto Storm should be dramatic reminders of what we face if progressive forces fail to recognize the historical writing on the wall and come to terms with the war that is being waged against all of us.

As African American revolutionaries MXGM has taken up its’ responsibility to educate, organize and build resistance.  And even in the social context of the U.S. where the marginalization of “Blackness” and Black people has become normalized and Black human rights defenders find ourselves in the cross-sights of the repressive apparatus,  we will follow MXGM’s lead and continue to raise the contradictions and call for a new kind of revolutionary politics to meet the challenges and opportunities the contemporary situation offers.

And as we observe liberal and left forces in this country continually falling  prey to the subtle but pervasive influences of Eurocentric white supremacy and U.S. exceptionalism that results in many of those elements finding themselves on the same side with U.S. imperialism from Libya to Venezuela, we understand our tasks as Black revolutionaries in defense of our communities as having a historical urgency and importance that is unique to this period of capitalist/colonialist decline.

So for us, we will continue resisting and struggling, because we still have a decolonized vision for this territory called the United States and also because we know  that if we don’t build an effective movement collectively, the technology of control and terror that this State can deploy will make Dante’s inferno seem like a desirable alternative.

Ajamu Baraka is a long-time human rights activist and veteran of the Black Liberation, anti-war, anti-apartheid and Central American solidarity  Movements in the United States.  He is currently a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies. Baraka is currently living in Cali, Colombia.  www. Ajamubaraka.com

 

The assassination of Dr. King and the suppression of the anti-war and peace perspectives

http://americanstatehypocrisy.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/martinlutherkingjr.jpg“Memory, individual and collective, is clearly a significant site of social struggle.” (Aurora Levins Morales)

“As I have walked among the desperate, rejected, and angry young men, I have told them that Molotov cocktails and rifles would not solve their problems. I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they ask — and rightly so — what about Vietnam? They ask if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government. (Beyond Vietnam – A Time to Break Silence,” Rev. Martin Luther King, Riverside Church, April 4, 1967)

April 4th is an anniversary that I suspect many people in the U.S., including those in government, would prefer that people ignored. On that date 45 years ago, James Earl Ray, supposedly acting alone, murdered Martin Luther King Jr. on a balcony of the Lorraine Hotel in Memphis, Tennessee — silencing one of the great oppositional voices in U.S. politics.

Unlike the celebrations organized around the birthday of Dr. King, with which the U.S. government severs Dr. King from the black movement for social justice that produced him and transforms his oppositional stances into a de-radicalized, liberal, integrationist dream narrative, the anniversary of the murder of Dr. King creates a challenge for the government and its attempt to manage the memory and meaning of Dr. King. The assassination of Dr. King raises uncomfortable questions — not only due to the evidence that his murder was a “hit” carried out by elements of the U.S. government, but also because of what Dr. King was saying before he was killed about issues like poverty and U.S. militarism .

The current purveyors of U.S. violence will find attention to Dr. King’s anti-war and peace position most unwelcome, especially with a black president that has been able to accomplish what U.S. elites could have only dreamed of over the last few decades – the normalization of war-making as a legitimate tool to advance the geo-political interests of the U.S. and its’ colonial allies. So reminding people of Dr. King’s opposition to U.S. warmongering and the collaboration of liberals in that warmongering then and now, produces a strange convergence of political forces from both ends of the narrow U.S. political spectrum that have an interest in suppressing King’s anti-war positions.

http://www.biography.com/imported/images/Biography/Images/Galleries/Martin%20Luther%20King%20Jr/martin-luther-king-jr-stopwar-sized.jpgThe Suppression of the anti-war and peace movement and the pro-war coalition: then and now

When Dr. King finally opposed the war on Vietnam he incurred the wrath of liberals in the Johnson Administration, the liberal philanthropic community, and even a significant number of his colleagues in the clergy. The liberal establishment was scathing in its condemnation of his position and sought to punish him and his organization, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), in a manner similar to their assaults on the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), when it took an anti-war and anti-imperialist position much earlier than Dr. King and SCLC.

In today’s popular imagination of the anti-war and peace movement in the 1960s and 70s, the culprits have been re-imagined as the radical right, symbolized by President Richard Nixon. But it was the Kennedy Administration that escalated U.S. involvement in Vietnam, despite the liberal mythology around his supposed reluctance to do so, and it was Democrat Lyndon Johnson who dramatically expanded the war. When Johnson pulled out of the 1968 presidential race, Hubert Humphrey, the personification of contemporary liberalism, was slated to be the favorite to win the Democratic nomination. Humphrey, along with the rest of the liberal establishment, was firmly committed to Johnson’s war strategy, even in light of growing public opposition.

It should also be remembered that the Chicago police riot of 1968 against anti-war demonstrators took place at the Democratic National Convention, where the protestors were directing their fury at the Democratic Party — which has controlled the Executive Branch during the escalation of almost every major military experience by the U.S. State from the Second World War onwards.   The notion of democratic weaknesses on matters of “national defense” owes itself to the historical amnesia of the U.S. population and the successful propaganda campaigns of the more aggressive foreign interventionist elements of the radical right over the years. Continue reading