Lessons from Obama Election…

Obama’s Election: Lessons for Defeating White Supremacy and Rebuilding Revolutionary Resistance

Posted: 18 Nov 2008 07:26 AM CST

By Michael Novick

The election of Barack Obama has been greeted in a variety of ways: elation and relief (tempered by fear of a racist backlash or assassination attempt) by supporters, particularly US Africans; predictions of enhanced recruitment opportunity by organized white supremacists; doomsday predictions by conservatives. On the left there have been “exposes” of Obama’s Zionism, militarism and dismissal of the particular needs of Black people or the working class. A group of DC anarchists has called for a disruption of his inaugural. – But any analysis needs to start from this reality: masses of people in the US feel they have helped make and change history by electing Obama. His victory is indeed historic in many ways. It required the largest voter turnout ever, and the highest percentage of registered voters to vote in decades. Obama gained a clear majority, the highest percentage by a Democrat since FDR except for Johnson’s landslide after the JFK assassination. He ran the most expensive campaign in history. He is the first “bi-racial” (called Black or African-American) president-elect, and incidentally the first child of an immigrant, the first Hawaiian-born, one of the youngest, and by far the least “embedded,” president. Moreover, his was the first victory by a self-proclaimed ‘anti-war’ candidate in the midst of a war. But Obama’s victory hardly signals that we are a “post-racial” society, as evidenced by the self-contradictory self-congratulation of those who proclaim that “by electing the first Black president” we have shown that we are “color-blind.” Exit polls showed that about a fifth of ‘white’ voters acknowledged that “race” was a significant factor. Interestingly, of those, 30% voted for Obama. One explanation of this is the fact that Obama’s race made his intellect acceptable. US voters would never have elected a ‘white’ candidate as obviously intelligent as Obama. Yet they accepted and understood that a ‘Black’ candidate would have to be twice as smart, twice as cool, as any ‘white’ to have a chance to succeed. Paradoxically but perhaps most essentially, Obama’s election is also a manifestation of the extent of the radical left’s weakness, irrelevance and inability to communicate. Over the past eight years of Bush misrule, what effective strategies or serious ability to develop a countervailing force or consciousness has the left or the anarchist movement manifested? In that vacuum, people made a judgment that Obama represented the best hope for the kind of change that could be achieved through electoral means. This was not merely because he was ‘Black,’ but because he was intelligent, calm, organized, and an effective and reassuring campaigner. McCain’s charges of ‘inexperience’ didn’t stick because Obama was attractive as a relative outsider not deeply corrupted by long tenure in Washington, DC or in office. His mild centrist critique of the Iraq war made ’sense’ in a context in which the anti-war movement had proven incapable of making a dent or marshaling an extra-parliamentary opposition and resistance to the war. Within the Democratic Party spectrum — and the anti-war movement has been tailing the Democrats for years — he was the electable ‘opponent’ of the Iraq war. To imagine that a proclamation of opposition to Obama’s inauguration as a capitalist and statist will do anything to overcome the left’s weakness, irrelevance and inability to communicate — in fact, that it will do anything other than deepen and intensify those failures — is the height of arrogance. I have a different take on what we have to do or learn in response to Obama’s victory. It starts with the perspective that the greatest on-going weakness of the left strategically and politically is a refusal to recognize the nature of this society as an Empire based on white-supremacist settler colonialism. Related to that is our greatest tactical flaw, an inability to practice authentic self-criticism, through which we learn from our errors and defeats in order to eventually overcome them and win. Our failure to do that has engendered a deep defeatism in masses of people — manifest as accommodation to Empire and unwillingness to struggle against or even make a sharp break with the system. One thing this election has demonstrated is how far into the past the revolutionary militance of the civil rights and Black power movements and the mass anti-imperialist opposition to the Vietnam War and domestic colonialism have receded. McCain’s inability to make the Bill Ayers smear stick to Obama was because not only Obama but most of the electorate was no older than 8, or perhaps not yet born, when Ayers was an armed-propaganda radical. That period of revolutionary optimism, when the Black Panther Party, the Black Liberation Army or the WUO were the tip of the iceberg of a massive upwelling of rebelliousness and armed resistance, is now ancient history. (Speaking of white privilege and class, Obama never would have associated with ex-BLA members, nor would any have been on the board of an Annenberg charity.) No amount of posturing could “Recreate 68″ (or even 2000) in Denver for the DNC or in DC for the inaugural. 47% of high school seniors in the US today were registered to vote in time for the election, and I suspect an overwhelming majority of them cast their first ballots. They were born while the first George Bush was president! Who better to speak to them than Anti-Racist Action, which has historically been an attractor of high schoolers? Yet ARA’s current ability to do outreach, education, agitation and organizing in high schools (or prisons, factories, community colleges or the military) is miniscule. The DC call relates that anarchists opposed and disrupted the last two inaugurations, and therefore should do the same again. This flawed reasoning lacks a material analysis of the consciousness of masses of people in relation to the electoral process and the presidency. Bush’s two stolen victories undermined the authenticity and legitimacy of the electoral process and of the imperial presidency. For his first inaugural, he was anointed president by the Supreme Court after having lost the popular vote. For his second, he was plagued by an unpopular war and evidence of vote flipping and vote suppression. Protesters and disrupters were speaking for millions when we denounced the inaugurals and the presidency, and our message fell on receptive ears. The current situation is far different, and blaming it on the voters is another example of the left’s lack of self-criticism and ability to grow. Obama’s victory signals a new lease on life for the presidency, electoral politics and the two-party system. Obama won by a clear majority, in which voter suppression was a negligible factor and in which all minor parties together barely hit 1% of the vote, including McKinney, Nader, Barr and Baldwin combined. His inauguration, even apart from the historicity of his “Blackness,” is being welcomed by the overwhelming majority of the US population as proof of the “mystery and majesty” of electoral democracy. In that context, a disruption wouldn’t express the unease of the general population in a radical and uncompromising way, but would be taken as an alienating slap in the face. It wouldn’t be seen as a call to a higher form of direct democracy, but as a rejection of the popular will expressed through a peaceful, honest and democratic election and transfer of power. Now is the time for a sober reassessment of how to grapple with these new realities. Obama did not merely collect millions of dollars from hundreds of thousands of people — he established a relationship with them. He organized effectively tens of thousands of volunteers, and turned out tens of millions of people to vote. Why has the left or the anarchist movement been incapable of inspiring, stimulating or organizing anywhere near that level of support, involvement, voluntarism or participation? How can we start to do so? Obama accurately read the demographic, technological and ideological changes that are taking place in the U.S. and effectively offered himself and his campaign as a vehicle for implementing or realizing some of the aspirations those changes have generated. Obama seized on the opportunity of the latest and deepest capitalist economic crisis to develop a compelling narrative of how a lack of regulation, a lack of attention to the ‘middle class,’ and an arrogant unilateralism in ‘foreign policy’ weakened the economy, national security and the fiscal stability of the state. Neither the statist left nor the anarchists are anywhere close to having the intellectual, political or organizational capacity to challenge that narrative or that definition of “change.” Unless and until we engage in a thoroughgoing self-criticism and re-orientation towards an anti-colonialist politics of decolonization as the basis of an effective anti-capitalism, we will be playing with ourselves on the sidelines of history. We need to put forward and undertake effective organizing strategies, not merely demands, for self-determined direct action against economic and environmental devastation, mass incarceration, militarism, occupation and anti-immigrant hysteria. We need to participate in building self-reliant communities of resistance. It is only oppressed and exploited people who can make revolution, and save the planet by saving ourselves. Go to the 25% of ‘homeowners’ who owe more on their mortgage than their home is worth and unite them with the homeless. Go to 30% of “War on Terror” veterans who report no earned wage income, and who have massive unemployment rates, and help unite them with GI resisters, with teens resisting recruitment, or with millions of prisoners and their families. Then we can begin to make some history of our own. The editorial above appears in the November-December 2008 issue of “Turning the Tide: Journal of Anti-Racist Action, Research & Education,” Volume 21 Number 6. A free sample copy of the entire issue is available by writing ARA-LA, PO Box 1055, Culver City CA 90232, emailing antiracistaction_la@yahoo.com, or calling 310-495-0299. Subscriptions are $18 a year in the US, $28 institutional/international, payable to Anti-Racist Action at the above address. Comments and responses are most welcome.


FREE 2009 Calender


click image for link

Elected Representatives….

In America, the good old USA we threw out the tyranny of Kings, Queens, Religious Leaders and all manner of those claiming superiority over the general population of the sovereign individual.

As English men and women when our King sent his troops into our streets, our homes and our businesses we rebelled and revolted. As Britons we killed British soldiers, sent by our King, the self appointed Government Authority of the day.

http://hcaa.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/queenelizabethii.jpg http://aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/satanic_pope.jpg

These are mere characters playing a role,

a role you and I rejected as we proclaimed

the authority of Governance and Jury Nullification !!!

Today we seem attracted to those who held us in contempt and slavery as subjects of the crown. As well as a leader of a religious cult, the Catholics’ Pope. Who the hell is he to claim superiority to individual sovereigns. You and I are guests on this planet as much as anyone else. So screw those who think they have some right to hold us as slaves, rule and dominate us by some decreed of royalty of some manner. It is preposterous that anyone especially those who have purposely been held in poverty at the whim and will of psychopathic ruthless cold blooded killers who demand we independent sovereigns fight for them against some other asshole’s subject slaves who foolishly take up arms against their own class of fellow individual sovereigns.

Totally irrational unreasonable and against all common sense it was a great declaration of sovereign individual independence that the British colonies rebelled and declared themselves sovereign individuals with a Government Authority resting in the hands of themselves instead of a self appointed ruthless or kind Fascist Dictator formerly known as a KING, QUEEN or PRIEST.

While the concept of a Republic where Presidents chosen among sovereign individuals to represent them at occasions, signings and gatherings while the final total control rest with the sovereign individual through the concept of JURY NULLIFICATION.

You see, if you and I as sovereign individuals are the Government Authority then our ‘Elected Representatives’ can not pass LAW or LAWS. A KING, QUEEN and/or PRIEST passes LAW or LAWS. As they make the false claim of royal linage blessed by some God Concept to rule on its behalf over the rest of us. WE SOVEREIGN INDIVIDUALS OF 1776 rejected this false idol and proclaimed that the individual was sovereign and could generate the LAW or LAWS and therefore could rule themselves as nature had intended.

We are, you and I, natural born sovereign individuals. We govern ourselves and we are the only legitimate Government Authority. We do have ‘elected representatives’ for events and as consultants who pass LEGISLATION that may be used as a template for the LAW and/or LAWS.

JURY NULLIFICATION ensures that our ‘elected representatives’ do not have the power of KINGS, QUEENS and/or PRIESTS who proclaimed their word was LAW and/or LAWS. The word of a single sovereign individual is as much the LAW as any other single natural born sovereign individual. Later this will be amended to include clones, test tube humans, etc. As nature will have provided us with Science techniques and technology to serve us, all of us, as sovereign individuals.

How do we empower the sovereign individual through JURY NULLIFICATION. A Judge seeking to serve masters in some form, money masters, leaders, and a police state instructs a jury that its sole purpose is to decide if the accused sovereign individual is proven guilty by the evidence based on reason doubt. This instruction is a lie and is bold faced treason.

The Congress merely passes Legislation. Since Congress, the members of Congress, the President of the United States are not KINGS, QUEENS and/or PRIESTS, their word is not LAW. If our elected representatives words were LAW we would be subjects and they would rule over us. Our elected representatives represent us they do not rule over us, we are the rules, we are the LAW, we are the Government of the United States, we as sovereign individuals are the Government Authority, not some wind bags in Congress or the Courts or the President of the United States !!!!!

Your duty on a jury is not only to determine guilt of a violation of a Legislation, your job as the ultimate Government authority is to judge the legislation and determine if you feel the legislation should be determined to be treated as a LAW or LAWS. If you feel the legislation is wrong or too harsh then you can determine that the legislation is not LAW and therefore the accused is not guilty as no LAW has been broken. You as a jury member, as the Government Authority upon the land can and must make this determination and since by all common sense and reason a single sovereign individual being the Government Authority as the LAW OF THE LAND, it only requires one jurist to declare the charged as innocent.

We have twelve Government Authorities and require only one to state “NOT GUILTY”. This is as it should be since each jurist is a Government Authority and do not decide the matter as a group. We are not a Republic of Groups we are a Republic of sovereign individuals. We hear the case as a group to save time and money yet since each jurist is the Government it only requires one to find the accused innocent. The authority of the single sovereign individual rules !!!!

We decided and declared it so many years ago. It can be no other way otherwise others could rule over us and we rejected the idea and the claim that someone else could rule over us. That is absurd and was only maintained by brute force and our own selling us out. We must return to the rule of the sovereign individual. We must once again assert our responsibility and our duty. When we sit on a jury it is the Government sitting and reviewing, considering and deciding the LAW, the guilt or innocence of the Law and of the accused. A different set of Government Authority might decide the case another way just as today a Judge and the courts claim that right, it is not the right of the judge or the courts, you and I are the Government. They are advisers of the Law, they are not the law nor are they sitting as the Government, that is you and I as jurist who have the authority, the responsibility and the duty. You and I are the Government.

We seem to have forgotten that you and I are the Government and those who seek the claim are our elected representatives who you and I have the ultimate authority of jury nullification over these servants of the sovereign individual.

you and I rule !!!


EU Set to Move ‘Internet of Things’ Closer to Reality

An Orwellian future in store for the internet

Old-Thinker News | October 31, 2008

By Daniel Taylor

If the world-wide trend continues, ‘Web 3.0’ will be tightly monitored, and will become an unprecedented tool for surveillance. The “Internet of Things”, a digital representation of real world objects and people tagged with RFID chips, and increased censorship are two main themes for the future of the web.

The future of the internet, according to author and “web critic” Andrew Keen, will be monitored by “gatekeepers” to verify the accuracy of information posted on the web. The “Outlook 2009” report from the November-December issue of The Futurist reports that,

    “Internet entrepreneur Andrew Keen believes that the anonymity of today’s internet 2.0 will give way to a more open internet 3.0 in which third party gatekeepers monitor the information posted on Web sites to verify its accuracy.”

Keen stated during his early 2008 interview with The Futurist that the internet, in its current form, has undermined mainline media and empowered untrustworthy “amateurs”, two trends that he wants reversed. “Rather than the empowerment of the amateur, Web 3.0 will show the resurgence of the professional,” states Keen.

Australia has now joined China in implementing mandatory internet censorship, furthering the trend towards a locked down and monitored web.

The Internet of Things

Now, the European Union has announced that it will pursue the main component of Web 3.0, the Internet of Things (IoT).

According to Viviane Reding, Commissioner for Information Society and Media for the EU, “The Internet of the future will radically change our society.” Ultimately, the EU is aiming to “lead the way” in the transformation to Web 3.0.

Reporting on the European Union’s pursuit of the IoT, iBLS reports,

“New technology applications will need ubiquitous Internet coverage. The Internet of Things means that wireless interaction between machines, vehicles, appliances, sensors and many other devices will take place using the Internet. It already makes electronic travel cards possible, and will allow mobile devices to exchange information to pay for things or get information from billboards.”

The Internet of Things consists of objects that are ‘tagged’ with Radio Frequency Identification Chips (RFID) that communicate their position, history, and other information to an RFID reader or wireless network. Most, if not all major computer companies and technology developers (HP, Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, etc.) are putting large amounts of time and money into the Internet of Things.

Cisco and Sun Microsystems have founded an alliance to promote the Internet of Things and further its implementation.

South Korea is at the forefront in implementing ubiquitous technology and the Internet of Things. An entire city, New Songdo, is being built in South Korea that fully utilizes the technology. Ubiquitous computing proponents in the United States admit that while a large portion of the technology is being developed in the U.S., it is being tested in South Korea where there are less traditional, ethical and social blockades to prevent its acceptance and use. As the New York Times reports,

“Much of this technology was developed in U.S. research labs, but there are fewer social and regulatory obstacles to implementing them in Korea,” said Mr. Townsend [a research director at the Institute for the Future in Palo Alto, California], who consulted on Seoul’s own U-city plan, known as Digital Media City. ‘There is an historical expectation of less privacy. Korea is willing to put off the hard questions to take the early lead and set standards.'”

An April 2008 report from the National Intelligence Council discussed the Internet of Things and its possible implications.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

%d bloggers like this: