Cannot load blog information at this time.
Subscribe to Blog via Email
- November 2016 (21)
- September 2016 (3)
- August 2016 (9)
- June 2016 (7)
- May 2016 (3)
- March 2016 (1)
- February 2016 (4)
- January 2016 (1)
- November 2015 (1)
- October 2015 (2)
- September 2015 (1)
- August 2015 (2)
- July 2015 (6)
- June 2015 (2)
- May 2015 (2)
- April 2015 (4)
- March 2015 (5)
- February 2015 (2)
- December 2014 (4)
- November 2014 (8)
- October 2014 (6)
- September 2014 (4)
- August 2014 (5)
- July 2014 (6)
- June 2014 (12)
- May 2014 (22)
- April 2014 (18)
- March 2014 (12)
- February 2014 (6)
- January 2014 (7)
- December 2013 (6)
- November 2013 (1)
- October 2013 (8)
- September 2013 (6)
- August 2013 (5)
- July 2013 (6)
- June 2013 (8)
- May 2013 (15)
- April 2013 (7)
- March 2013 (6)
- February 2013 (11)
- January 2013 (9)
- December 2012 (10)
- November 2012 (15)
- October 2012 (20)
- September 2012 (12)
- August 2012 (7)
- July 2012 (7)
- June 2012 (3)
- May 2012 (10)
- April 2012 (6)
- March 2012 (10)
- February 2012 (9)
- January 2012 (7)
- December 2011 (18)
- November 2011 (16)
- October 2011 (10)
- September 2011 (13)
- August 2011 (13)
- July 2011 (28)
- June 2011 (19)
- May 2011 (19)
- April 2011 (22)
- March 2011 (13)
- February 2011 (15)
- January 2011 (17)
- December 2010 (18)
- November 2010 (8)
- October 2010 (14)
- September 2010 (13)
- August 2010 (9)
- July 2010 (5)
- June 2010 (5)
- May 2010 (9)
- April 2010 (3)
- February 2010 (1)
- January 2010 (1)
- November 2009 (2)
- September 2009 (7)
- August 2009 (3)
- May 2009 (2)
- February 2009 (2)
- December 2008 (4)
- November 2008 (1)
- October 2008 (21)
- May 2006 (1)
December 2016 M T W T F S S « Nov 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
In 1776 when the United States declared its independence, there were approximately 2.5 million inhabitants in the original 13 states. Of those estimates are that 1/3 sided with the revolution, 1/3 were neutral, and 1/3 were Loyalists supporting Britain. At the end of the war some 65,000-70,000 people fled to other parts of the British Empire (in the case of those who fled to a British portion of Florida, about 6,000 whites brought 6,500 Black slaves with them). Many Indigenous Americans, especially Iriquois also fled to British protection in Canada. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loyalist_(American_Revolution]Wikipedia on Loyalists]
Some fled outright reprisals and persecution. Many were dispossessed of their land. For example, Daniel Boone served on a July 1980 jury in then-Kentucky County, Virginia which confiscated land from two loyalists by deeming them to be British Citizens.
Following the Cuban revolution more than 1.5 million Cubans left the Island. The 1953 Cuban census showed 5,829,029 inhabitants. So whereas about 3% of the U.S. population fled our revolution, around 25% of Cuba’s population migrated.
There are some demographic similarities.
Wikipedia writes of the American Loyalists:
The departure of so many royal officials, rich merchants and landed gentry destroyed the hierarchical networks that had dominated most of the colonies. In New York, the departure of key members of the DeLancy, DePester Walton and Cruger families undercut the interlocking families that largely owned and controlled the Hudson Valley. Likewise in Pennsylvania, the departure of powerful families—Penn, Allen, Chew, Shippen—destroyed the cohesion of the old upper class there. Massachusetts passed an act banishing forty-six Boston merchants in 1778, including members of some of Boston’s wealthiest families. The departure of families such as the Ervings, Winslows, Clarks, and Lloyds deprived Massachusetts of men who had hitherto been leaders of networks of family and clients. The bases of the men who replaced them were much different. One rich Patriot in Boston noted in 1779 that “fellows who would have cleaned my shoes five years ago, have amassed fortunes and are riding in chariots.” That is, new men now became rich merchants but they shared a spirit of republican equality that replaced the elitism and the Americans never recreated such a powerful upper class as had existed before.
As for Cuban exiles, Wikipedia [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_exile] says:
More than 1.5 million Cubans of all classes and racial groups (but majority is white upper and middle class background) have left the island for the United States (especially Florida), and other countries.
One big exception were the “Marielitos” who arrived in the U.S. in 1980. As Wikipedia explains:
Out of more than 125,000 refugees, a number from as low as 7,500 to as high as 40,000 were believed to have criminal records in Cuba, though many of their crimes would not qualify as crimes under U.S. law. Some 1,774 of the refugees were classified as serious or violent criminals under U.S. law and denied citizenship on that basis. The majority of refugees were young adult males, 20 to 34 years of age, from the working class: skilled craftsmen, semi-skilled tradesmen, and unskilled laborers. In 1984, the United States and Cuba negotiated an agreement to resume normal immigration, and to return to Cuba those persons who had arrived during the boatlift who were “excludable” under U.S. Law.
I wrote of this phenomena, i.e., both Cuba and the old Soviet Union cleaning out their mental asylums and prisons at: http://janbtucker.com/blog/2013/09/22/national-instant-criminal-background-check-a-gaping-loophole/
Like Cuban exiles who have become an important constituency influencing American politics, Loyalists became a significant influence in Canadian affairs [Wikipedia]:
The postnominals “U.E.” are rarely seen today, but the influence of the Loyalists on the evolution of Canada remains. Their ties to Britain and their antipathy to the United States provided the strength needed to keep Canada independent and distinct in North America. The Loyalists’ basic distrust of republicanism and “mob rule” influenced Canada’s gradual path to independence. The new British North American provinces of Upper Canada (the forerunner of Ontario) and New Brunswick were founded as places of refuge for the United Empire Loyalists..
From Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_Will_Absolve_Me]:
“History Will Absolve Me” (Spanish:“La historia me absolverá“) is the title of a four-hour speech made by Fidel Castro on 16 October 1953. Castro made the speech in his own defense in court against the charges brought against him after he led an attack on the Moncada Barracks. Though no record of Castro’s words was kept, he reconstructed them later for publication. It became the manifesto of his 26th of July Movement. The words “history will absolve me” are the concluding lines of his statement to the court.”History Will Absolve Me” (Spanish:”La historia me absolverá”) is the title of a four-hour speech made by Fidel Castro on 16 October 1953. Castro made the speech in his own defense in court against the charges brought against him after he led an attack on the Moncada Barracks. Though no record of Castro’s words was kept, he reconstructed them later for publication. It became the manifesto of his 26th of July Movement. The words “history will absolve me” are the concluding lines of his statement to the court.
Castro’s speech contained numerous evocations of the “father of Cuban independence” José Martí, whilst depicting Batista as a tyrant. According to Castro, Batista was a “monstrum horrendum … without entrails” who had committed an act of treachery in 1933 when he initiated a coup to oust Cuban presidentRamón Grau. Castro went on to speak of “700,000 Cubans without work”, launching an attack on Cuba’s extant healthcare and schooling, and asserting that 30% of Cuba’s farm people couldn’t even write their own names.
In Castro’s published manifesto, based on his 1953 speech, he gave details of the “five revolutionary laws” he wished to see implemented on the island:-
The reinstatement of the 1940 Cuban constitution.
The right of industrial workers to a 30% share of company profits.
The right of sugar workers to receive 55% of company profits.
The confiscation of holdings of those found guilty of fraud under previous administrative powers.Castro’s speech contained numerous evocations of the “father of Cuban independence” José Martí, whilst depicting Batista as a tyrant. According to Castro, Batista was a “monstrum horrendum … without entrails” who had committed an act of treachery in 1933 when he initiated a coup to oust Cuban president Ramón Grau. Castro went on to speak of “700,000 Cubans without work”, launching an attack on Cuba’s extant healthcare and schooling, and asserting that 30% of Cuba’s farm people couldn’t even write their own names. In Castro’s published manifesto, based on his 1953 speech, he gave details of the “five revolutionary laws” he wished to see implemented on the island:- The reinstatement of the 1940 Cuban constitution. A reformation of land rights. The right of industrial workers to a 30% share of company profits. The right of sugar workers to receive 55% of company profits. The confiscation of holdings of those found guilty of fraud under previous administrative powers.
How will history judge what Fidel accomplished as an older and old man in contrast to this idealistic vision of his youth? History goes on and we will probably never have a clear and concise answer…there will always be debate and controversy.
For background on my views and observations on Cuba and Fidel, see my prior blogs:
My story about the late exiled Black Panther Bill Brent explains how my agent located him in Havana and we got him back in touch with American comrades. The Ciro Hurtado blog discusses how I was influenced by building my own shortwave radio in Junior High that allowed me to tune in Radio Havana. The other blogs discuss how Cuba might claim to be Marxist but how it is really left wing Communitarian whether the left wants to admit it or not.
That said, here’s my favorite Castro story. My Uncle Ed was stationed at Guantanamo with the Navy on January 1, 1959 when the triumphant Cuban revolutionary forces entered Havana. He and his shipmates were eager to get to Havana to meet this now famous revolutionary hero who’d just overthrown a brutal dictator.
The first time they got leave they headed off to Havana. Try as they might they couldn’t get close enough to even see him from a distance. Every time the great orator Fidel gave a speech hundreds of thousands would be out in the streets and they would be blocks or even miles away listening on loud speakers. After several of these experiences, they gave up and despaired of ever seeing him.
Then one day they walked out of a bar and who’s there playing baseball in the street with some local children? Fidel! So Uncle Ed and his friends got to meet him and got their photos taken with him!
I used to live in the Oakwood section of Venice (otherwise known as “Ghost Town” to the locals) so it’s always kind of like coming home when I get to hang out with a crew of old hippies at Palms Court which fetes periodic gatherings. Today was Thanksgiving at Palms Court.
The Bourgeois’ Dilemma
By Rodolfo F. Acuña
The other day a colleague called it to my attention that I was wearing New Balance so in some way I was breaking a boycott. I pointed out that they were the only shoes I had. In retrospect I was becoming so gringo. I have never been for the indiscriminate application of boycotts. In 2010, the early stages of Arizona assault on immigrants and then on Mexican American Studies I questioned the call for a boycott of Arizona. I felt that it isolated Tucson and prevented friends for going there to show their support by visiting the Wall and standing in solidarity. Not all boycotts were like the Farm Worker Boycott.
Relating this to the New Balance Boycott, I will certainly not buy that brand again just like I won’t buy at Walmart. However, I believe it would be stupid for me to throw away a pair of shoes that I wear for health reasons. Having diabetes, shoes are a big deal! You’d know if you had it. New Balance is one of the few brands that have triple width shoes. In my estimation if would be a bit more strategic to pass out buttons emphasizing not to buy New Balance. While I respect the sentiments of Debra Messing and Swae Lee, they are not my teachers.
In the 1960s I pointed out to a group of activists that we should dispense with introductions because they consumed so much time. We should substitute the intros by wearing combat ribbons like generals do telling the world which demonstrations we had attended, with stars for each time we had been arrested. Maybe a platinum star for each time we had been fired from our jobs. Not buying the products of our enemies would be and should have been taken for granted. Instead of throwing away the product the emphasis should be on not buying it. This, however, would take work; you would have to organize trips to the boycotted places. The truth be told, liberals don’t much cotton to work. It is easier to tell people to throw away things.
During the grape boycott, my understanding was that the purpose was to hurt the grape growers economically. It was not to have us run to our refrigerators and throw all of the grapes away. It was to go out and picket the super markets where the sales we made. No one thought of regurgitating them and purging our bodies of the evil substance.
It kind of irks me because so much of our politics is for show. It reminds me of the 1960s when we purposely dressed down because everything seemed to be for show. I remember that students were ridiculed for dressing up to go to classes. They were “bourgie.”
We all followed this trend often without questioning. In the eighties I remember going to a meeting for the “Save the Van Nuys GM Plant open” at the machinist hall in Burbank. During the meeting the machinist rep whispered to me, “Rudy, I want to show you something after the meeting.”
After the meeting we went out onto the parking lot. Leroy led me to a brand new white Cadillac convertible. He had just bought it. I self-reflected that in activist circles this would be labeled “bourgie.” I thought to myself, “Leroy has been a worker all of his life. He has been involved in the labor movement. His labor had made this possible whereas I as a university professor apologize for wearing Rayburn Sunglasses.” That is the difference between the factory worker and the so-called cultural proletariat.
I am getting old and find myself getting cranky and I guess nit picking. But I get impatient between those calling for symbolic acts versus substance. At the university professors’ advocate but few will sacrifice for a cause. They will picket and even strike for higher wages but ignore increases in student tuition. They turn the other way while neo-liberal policies decimate the blue collar class. Privately they will complain about the administration but when confronted by administrators they get sick smiles on their faces. I got my fill during the UNAM (Universidad Autonoma de Mexico) controversy when many Chicana/o Studies professors were unwilling to go to the edge of the proverbial class and to go over it to fight for faculty governance. It is easy to say I am boycotting but another thing to sacrifice. Instead professors smile at despicable people like the College of Humanities Dean Beth Say. Perhaps I should throw away my used New Balance shoes, go barefooted and smile.
I’m thinking of conducting a Go Fund Me crowd funding campaign to cover the costs of investigative reporting on the Donald J. Trump global empire of business interests and I want to know if my readers are willing to contribute to the costs involved. I’m calling this project “Operation Chernaya Rabota.” I won’t explain that unless you ask but a select few of my closest colleagues, cohorts and collaborators will know exactly the historical inspiration for this terminology.
Detectives Diary is uniquely positioned to investigate this topic. As an example of what we’re capable of check out our reporting of The Small Freaky World of White Collar Crime.
I served seven terms as Chair of the Board of the California Association of Licensed Investigators (CALI), the world’s largest private detectives’ membership organization. Prior to me nobody ever served more than three terms as chair or president, so I must have been doing something right. It also gave me life long access to Private Investigator and other data base circles and resources throughout the world. Some examples of the people that I would consult with and use for these projects:
- “Cousin Igor”–I call Igor “Cousin” because our grandmothers were both Jews from the region of Gorodieshe, Ukraine. All Ashkenazic Jews are at least fifth or sixth cousins of each other so we have to be related. The first licensed investigator in the whole former Soviet Union and ex-KGB, Igor knows where all the bodies are buried in the entire former “Eastern Bloc.”
- Phil and Yin–from Britain, they’re world travelers and are more in tune than anybody in the world about who can do what wherever in the PI world.
- Owens International–an international data base firm that specializes in international business credit reports (competitor to Dun & Bradstreet) they have done incredible and efficient work for me tracking down information on a very shady Russian firm that enabled us to effect service of federal process on them bypassing the Hague Convention.
Here’s the kind of investigation we’d like to do:
First we order an Owens International Report on the companies that Trump owns or partners in. For example he has a partnership in Azerbaijan. What kinds of conflicts of interest does that pose? How will it influence America’s relationship with Armenia, Azerbaijan’s arch-enemy? An Owens report for an Azeri business costs $219.00 (which is what we need to crowd fund because we’re doing this in the public interest).
- After we get the Owens report, it will provide us with leads to follow up, such as Freedom of Information Act requests to federal agencies like the State Dept, Commerce Dept, Treasury Dept etc. and to have private investigators in that region of the world follow up with onsite investigative sleuthing. That too will involve costs.
When the investigation is complete we’ll analyze it’s implications for U.S. policy. I did 22 units of graduate work at CSUN with a 4.0 GPA and one of my areas of concentration was International Relations, so I actually know something about the subject, unlike President-elect Trump.
- You’ll see our investigative results and our analysis right here in the pages of the Detectives Diary.
Want to get involved with Operation Chernaya Rabota? Let me know whether you’re interested in crowd funding the effort or participating with other resources you might have.
It is pretty conclusively established that Lt. General Michael Flynn, who’s slated to become National Security Advisor to President Elect Donald Trump, is a lobbyist for Turkey. That brings up an important question: does he deny Turkey’s World War I genocide against 1.5 million Armenians? See:
Nobody, but nobody gets hired by the Turkish government who doesn’t tow their line that there was no genocide, that Armenians revolted and that anybody killed was just unfortunate collateral damage. It’s nonsense. First the Turks drafted 500,000 Armenian men of draft service age, had them build fortifications and then killed them, leaving the remaining women, children and old men virtually defenseless.
My own party, the Peace & Freedom Party, does not have clean hands on this issue either, having recently re-elected (recycled) Kevin Akin, another anti-Armenian flack whose son is the chief foreign policy wonk for Senator Ron Wyden. Wyden, who was once described by Counter Punch as to the right of Ariel Sharon, frequently tows the pro-Turkish line of the Israeli government. See my critique of Akin’s bigotry against Armenians at http://janbtucker.com/blog/2010/05/04/konversations-with-kevin-akin-2/
Stop the Pipeline from going through sacred Native American land.
There is no reason to threaten the water supply or use sacred Native American land. The pipeline will be 1,170 miles when it’s done – just make it a little bit longer. Go around the land. Maybe it needs to be 1,300 miles long? Whatever it is – let’s respect the sacred land, let’s respect the needs of Native Americans.
It’s Thanksgiving, let’s be thankful. We’ve taken enough from the Native Americans. We took 99% of their land and 90% of their lives On Thanksgiving, November 24, 2016, of all days, we ask the US government for peace, protection of nature and the precious resource of water.
· Spread the word, use social media to post before Thanksgiving Day
· Post a glass of water on your thanksgiving table and take a pic – post on Thanksgiving
· Take out your phones at the Thanksgiving Table and everyone call, email, tweet, fax or otherwise contact:
- Your congressional representatives
- Jack Dalrymple, Governor of North Dakota 701.328.2200: phone
- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Email: email@example.com)
- Army Corps of Engineers (Twitter to: @
* If you can please call, email, tweet, fax or otherwise contact between 3 pm and 7 pm in your time zone so that the people you are emailing know it was from your Thanksgiving meal.
My hat is off to Dr. Tara Rose who came up with this idea. Tara and I are fellow members of the Inglewood South Bay Branch of NAACP and she is a true humanitarian.
For something else important for reflection and education this holiday season, check out the 13th Annual Red Nation Film Festival going on right now till the 21st of November in Los Angeles:
Update: the letter I just faxed to North Dakota Governor Dalrymple
I hate to say anything nice about Rudy Giuliani but the Democratic Party’s criticism [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/josh-rogin/wp/2016/11/15/giuliani-was-paid-advocate-for-shady-iranian-dissident-group/?utm_term=.bcf8e32e5639] of his ties to the MEK (Mujahadin e Khalq) is serious hypocrisy: then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took MEK off the list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO) in 2012 just before the 2012 November election just in time to curry favor with the Iranian expatriate community: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/09/198443.htm
I had long advocated this step. MEK should never have been on the FTO list in the first place! I wrote about this in at least two past blogs:
and more importantly at:
In the latter blog I wrote that:
In order to be listed as an FTO, the group has to have committed at least one of a whole list of violations of federal law, with some nexus to having harmed America or Americans. I did Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act requests to the Justice Department, Department of Defense, FBI, CIA, and State Department to try to elicit any evidence they had that MEK had EVER violated one of those laws. Their response: NADA, NOTHING, ZIP.
The Catch 22 is, when the State Department designated MEK as an FTO, it failed to give the organization notice as required by the law itself. They contested the designation and the Supreme Court threw it out on the technicality that no notice was given. So the State Department promptly re-designated MEK as an FTO and gave it notice. By this time, not trusting the U.S. government to play fairly, MEK had moved out of the country. When it was re-designated, it didn’t bother to contest the issue for a second go-round.
Rudy Giuliani is undoubtedly a pig, a racist, and a sexist, but on this issue he’s been on the right side.
SAME PAGE/MISMA PAGINA COALITION
San Fernando Valley/Northeast Los Angeles NOW (SFV-NELA NOW), California League of Latinos And Chicanos (CALLAC), Miss Revolutionaries, Bring Hollywood Home Foundation (BHHF), United For Education Coalition (UFE), L.A. Progressive, California Leadership Institute (CLI), Todos Unidos (TU)
Endorsements by the SPC are considered important prizes in Los Angeles area elections. During the 2012 election cycle, both of SPC’s endorsees, Representative Brad Sherman and long-shot Steve Fox went on to win their races. Running 10% ahead in the polls, Sherman sent a last minute mailing to every Democratic and Independent registered woman in his district touting the SFV/NELA NOW endorsement and went on to beat his opponent, Rep. Howard Berman, by an astounding 20 points on election night. During the 2013 Los Angeles Municipal elections, all four of the major Mayoral candidates sought and were interviewed by SPC for endorsement. In the runoff, with the exception of SFV/NELA NOW which made a triple endorsement in the primary which became a runoff dual endorsement, all other SPC endorsing groups endorsed Mayor-elect Eric Garcetti for the runoff.
A 2006 professional poll commissioned by then-Assembly member Cindy Montanez demonstrated that amongst San Fernando Valley endorsing organizations, the voters considered the SFV/NELA NOW endorsement to have the highest integrity. SPC attributes the credibility of their endorsements to their strict non-partisanship (member organizations have made past endorsements of Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Greens, and Peace & Freedom Party candidates) and conflict of interest policies to insure that interested individuals cannot participate or must limit participation in specific races, even based upon a mere appearance of impropriety.
SPC recognizes that our joint candidate questionnaire is one of the most difficult in California because it is completely subjective and cannot be “scored.” Some candidates bristle at having to answer questions that have nothing to do with the office they are running for. This is because in the era of “term limits” politicians play musical chairs with greater frequency. You may be running for dog-catcher today and state legislature two years from now. We do not want to help your career if you are diametrically opposed to our positions on critical issues.
In addition to your questionnaire response we request that you provide us with a copy of your most recently filed FPPC Form 700 Statement of Economic Interests or any equivalent federal filing.
Additionally, SPC will chart your progress in office to “hold incumbents’ feet to the fire” by comparing the promises and representations they made during the endorsement process to your performance in office. SPC will seek periodic face to face meetings with those elected to review their efforts to implement their promises and to help build public support for the reforms they have demanded and we expect you to pledge yourself to such periodic review following the election.
Joint Candidate Interview Committee of the Same Page/Misma Pagina Coalition 2016-17 Candidate Questionnaire
For candidate convenience, the Same Page/Misma Pagina Coalition will jointly consider candidates’ questionnaires and jointly interview candidates. SFV/NELA NOW, Bring Hollywood Home Foundation, Miss Revolutionaries, UFE and CALLAC will make their own independent endorsements; CLI and Todos Unidos do not endorse as 501(c)(3) non-profits, and L.A. Progressive likewise does not endorse, but participate for purposes of political education, for the public. The process begins with your submission of responses to the questionnaire which you can download from: http://janbtucker.com/resources