Zuky

Photos — Spring Afternoon

It's a glorious day in southwestern Connecticut, so I snapped these pics of sunlight, grass and flowers, towering trees, stone walls and steps, and of course, a rickety old basketball rim...

Wednesday Music — Tina Turner

[ Live versions of "I don't really want to fight no more" and "Simply the Best" ]

Father Michael Pfleger Takes Fox News To School

[ via Resist Racism ]

Poem — Li Bai

Drinking Alone by Moonlight
by Li Bai (701-762 CE), adapted from Stephen Owen translation

Here among flowers, a flask of wine
with no close friends, I pour it alone

I lift cup to bright moon, beg its company
then facing my shadow, we're a party of three

The moon has never known how to drink
my shadow does nothing but follow me

With moon and shadow as companions a while
this joy I find must catch the spring while it's here

I sing, and the moon sways and lingers
I dance, and my shadow flails wildly

When sober we share friendship and pleasure
then utterly drunk, each goes his own way

Let us join to roam beyond human cares
and plan to meet far beyond the river of stars

ICE Raid Updates

Via the Raid Response Network (thanks to Michael Mandel):

To: Interested NGOs, CBOs, Raid Networks, Other Interested Parties
Re: ICE coordinated raids in Texas, Arkansas, Florida, West Virginia, Tennessee, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio
Date: April 16, 2008

Agents of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) today [April 16] engaged in coordinated raids at Pilgrim Pride poultry plants in Mt. Pleasant (Texas), Batesville (Ark.), Live Oak (Fla.), Moorefield (W. Virginia) and Chattanooga (Tenn).

Pilgrim's Pride poultry (meat-packing) plants have about 55,000 employees and the company operates dozens of facilities mostly across the South and in Mexico and Puerto Rico. It is the nation's largest chicken producer.

Workers at the raided plants in Batesville (Ark.) and Live Oak (Fla.) are members of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW). The workers at the plant in Chattanooga (Tenn) are members of the Steelworkers.

45 immigrants were arrested at the plant in Mt. Pleasant, Texas. 100 people were arrested at the plant in Chattanooga (Tenn). About 100 immigrants were arrested at the plant in Moorefield (W. Virginia). About 20 workers were arrested at the plant in Batesville (Ark.), and about 26 in Live Oak (Fla.) (total approximately 300 arrests).

Julie Myers, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement assistant secretary, told The Associated Press as the raids were under way that the enforcement action was aimed at those involved in identity theft. She defended the raids saying: "Identity theft is a horrible problem that can ruin a person's good name."

A spokesman for Pilgrim's Pride claims that the company uses the government's voluntary E-Verify program to check identity documents of new employees, but that system does not detect workers using someone else's valid identification.

The company was informed about the raid before it took place and reportedly cooperated with ICE in the planning and execution of the raid.

ICE conducted several other raids today. Shipley Do-Nuts dough factory in Houston was raided resulting in the arrest of 30 workers. Other raids today in western New York; Bradford, Pa.; Mentor, Ohio; and Wheeling and New Martinsville, W.Va. targeted immigrants working at Mexican restaurants. The owner and 10 restaurant managers were arrested and accused of employing unauthorized Mexican immigrants in seven restaurants in the four states. Authorities also arrested 45 immigrants during these raids.

We currently represent the UFCW in the case entitled UFCW v. Chertoff pending in federal court in Texas. The lawsuit challenges the manner in which ICE conducts raids by temporarily detaining US citizens and lawful residents during raids so as to maximize the number of unauthorized workers located and arrested, and failing to permit prompt access to legal counsel for those arrested as suspected unauthorized workers.

If you know of lawyers in the areas mentioned above willing to visit arrested workers to assess their cases, and possibly to also interview US citizens detained during the raids and who may be entitled to file Federal Tort Claims Act claims for damages, please let me know. Thanks.
_____________________

Peter A. Schey
President and Executive Director
Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law
256 S. Occidental Blvd.
Los Angeles, Ca. 90057
Telephone: (213) 388-8693 ext. 104
Facsimile: (213) 386-9484
Email: pschey@centerforhumanrights.org
http://www.centerforhumanrights.org
http://www.legalizationusa.org
http://www.immigrantchildren.org
http://www.casa-libre.org/
http://www.vocesunidas.org
http://www.unityblueprint.org

Thursday Photos — Oriental?

Restaurant sign on a white-owned Philadelphia establishment, via Manish at Ultrabrown:

Demonstration by female commandos of the Philippine National Police Special Action Force, via Angry Asian Man:

[ No, I'm not advocating unnecessary, misdirected, or disproportionate violence; this is merely a playful juxtaposition of one image that degrades people of Asian descent and one that celebrates our bad-assness. ]

Tuesday Jazz — Sonny Rollins and Don Cherry

American jazz builds upon the same lineage of West African rhythms which inform the Afro-Cuban rumba I posted yesterday, adapted into a new form in combination with European instrumentation and chord-melody structure, as well as a dramatic whittling down of percussive texture to a smoothed-out emphasis on varied accents and pockets rather than continuous undulations of hits. Here's Sonny Rollins on sax, Don Cherry on trumpet, Billy Higgins on drums, and Henry Grimes on bass, live in Rome in 1963:

Monday Music & Dance — Afro-Cuban Rumba

For the past couple years I've been listening to my boxing buddy Jose talk about (and play amazing recordings of) Afro-Cuban music and dance and Yoruba religion. I'm enthralled by the music's relentless emphasis on fantastic poly-rhythmic intricacy rather than harmonic variation. And it's fun to draw rough but occasionally useful parallels between Yoruba religious iconography and the Asian spiritual traditions with which I'm more familiar. Indeed, Jose plays Afro-Cuban music as we work out in the local boxing gym; he actually moves along with the rhythms as he shadow boxes, hits the heavy bag, or works the double-end bag. He says, "Whoever has more beats, wins."

Personally I'm partial to the part of the following clip where they prepare food while singing and dancing (starting around 3:15).

NYC Asian American Student Conference (Updated)

The 2nd NYC Asian American Student Conference takes place at NYU this Saturday, April 12. This year's conference theme is "redefine"; a broad range of subjects will be up for discussion. I'll be speaking on a panel entitled Challenging the Mainstream: Asian Americans in the Ethnic Blogosphere, along with Carmen Van Kerckhove (Racialicious), Jenn Fang (Reappropriate), William Lee (Fallout Central), Jen Wang and Diana Nguyen (Disgrasian), and Phil Yu (Angry Asian Man). The workshop description reads:

Since its advent, the internet has been a crucial medium through which APA activists channel their thoughts and opinions about progressive issues. From it, the growing phenomenon of writing web logs, or "blogging", has allowed activists and ethnic commentators to challenge mainstream media's opinions of society. The Boston Globe has called such blogs "places where people of color gather to refine ideas or form thoughts about race relations, racial inequities, and the role pop culture has in exacerbating stereotypes." In this workshop, you will learn how you can begin your own such process of blogging as a form of activism in order to challenge mainstream media and its dialogues upon race and Asian Americana.

I'm looking forward to speaking about this so-called "blogging" thing. If you're around and interested, drop on by!

UPDATE: Thanks to David Zhou and Marilla Li and all the other terrific organizers who poured their energies into making the NYCAASC a lively, well-run, enjoyable event. I had fun hanging out and chatting with everyone I met there, and the panel session was interesting, entertaining, and substantive thanks to the great questions from attendees It's always great to see and feel the vibrancy and diversity, and the passionate cultural and intellectual ambitiousness, of our young Asian American community. Much respect to all of my fellow panelists, all important voices that the world needs to hear and is better for hearing. And of course it was a pleasure downing mojitos and chorizo afterwards with Carmen, Jenn, and Phil. Let's do it again sometime. Dude, chillax. ;-)

For folks who might be visiting this site for the first time in the wake of the conference, here's a small selection of posts which might be of interest:

Immigrant Dreams and Nightmares in the White Supremacist Cauldron
The Voracious Genius of Xu Beihong
Angry Asian Gathering
Musical Yellowface
Food, Racism, Capitalism
The Hmong in America

Ganbei!

PHOTO UPDATE (via David Zhou): Because yeah I know everyone always wants pics: (1) blogger panel, with (from left) Diana, Jen, Phil, Carmen, Jenn, me, William; (2) Jenn talking, Carmen and me listening; (3) the mojito crew; (4) all panelists along with organizers Marilla and David.

Mujerista

Weekend Dance — Yang Li-ping, "Peacock Spirit"

Yang Li-ping is a dancer of Dai ethnicity from Yunnan province, and she's been a pop sensation in China ever since she won a national dance competition in 1986. Her dancing is an innovative yet essential interpretation of traditional Dai folk dance, inspired by the movements, rhythms, and feelings of nature: flowers, birds, bamboo in the breeze, water in moonlight. Yang draws heart-skipping contrasts between gracefulness and angularity, between fluidity and jerkiness, between smoothness and tension, somehow evoking both time-lapse-photography tendril-growth and slow-motion watery ripples. The effect is stunning. Please bypass and/or ignore the first 25 seconds of noise in the clip below, in order to be awed and elevated by what follows — it's worth it.

April 4 Remembrance — 1968 and 1972

On this day, we remember the passing of two great Black leaders: Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., gunned down mysteriously 40 years ago today, in 1968; and Rev. Adam Clayton Powell Jr., the remarkable Harlem pastor and groundbreaking Congressional representative who died of prostate cancer exactly 4 years later, in 1972. The picture above was taken during a rare joint press conference at the Abyssinian Baptist Church in 1965. Both of these men were capable of delivering roaring truth-soaked sermons whose withering denunciations of racism and social injustice make Jeremiah Wright look downright docile; yet the two could not have been more different in terms of personal style and political tactics. King was as humble, measured, and contemplative as Powell was brazen, bull-headed, and confrontational. Perhaps this helps explain why King has crossed over in the mainstream imagination as a beloved (watered down, co-opted, safely dead) civil rights icon, while Powell remains a shadowy, divisive, often-overlooked figure.

As a New York pastor in the 1930s, Powell tirelessly fought against discrimination while operating food pantries, job referral services, and literacy classes through his ministry; it's said that he once literally gave a poor man the shoes off his own feet. As a hard-charging member of Congress from the 1940s through the 60s, he desegregated Capitol Hill itself, launched Medicaid and Head Start, raised the minimum wage, passed anti-lynching laws, banned the N-word from the floor of Congress, outlawed poll taxes, and much, much more. As chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, Powell passed more legislation in a single session of Congress than any other committee in US history, a record which still stands. Adam Clayton Powell Jr. deserves a uniquely prominent place in the anti-racist pantheon for his immeasurable contributions to the uplift of the community he loved, for his spectacular political career, and for the sheer exuberance and unapologetic verve he brought to the fight for social justice.

Tony Chapelle writes in The Black Collegian:

During the middle girth of [the 20th] century, Adam Clayton Powell Jr. was the equivalent of the rap group Public Enemy, the protest politician Jesse Jackson, and the Congressional Black Caucus all in one.

Like Public Enemy, Powell "dissed" white America for its racism and hypocrisy, with one of his clearest refrains being akin to "You Can't Trust 'Em." When he demanded changes in society, Powell, as Jackson would years later, commanded so much attention in Washington and with the media that he became known as "Mr. Civil Rights." And as the first African-American congressman from the northeast, and for decades the only militant African American on the Hill, Powell had the guts to push through laws that forced America to stop locking African Americans out of industries and institutions.

He didn't behave like most African-American politicians. "I'm the first bad Negro they've had in Congress," he bragged. He made more enemies on Capitol Hill than perhaps any legislator before or since.

[ Read it all ]

Weekend Music — Janis Joplin, "Half Moon"

Friday Music — Tibet

Think you know something about Tibetan society? Let's take a look.

Pop group Acha Tsendep...

Young female monks of Nagi Gompa monastery...

Pop-folk singer Kelsang Metok...

As a lifelong student of Tibetan spirituality and culture, I'm obviously not happy about recent news out of Tibet. Of course, daily life in China bears no resemblance to the racist caricature of Oriental totalitarianism that exists in much of the Western imagination; just as traditional Tibetan life bears no resemblance to projected fantasies of Shangri-La. But the ongoing unrest in Tibet does tell me that officials in Beijing and Lhasa must do a better job of providing the autonomy and the resources needed for Tibetans to pursue their aspirations. Indeed there are pockets of unrest not only in Tibet but throughout China, and Beijing has its hands full trying to balance an overwhelming array of complex concerns; but there's really no choice, Beijing's legitimacy depends upon keeping China's teeming, diverse, far-flung citizenry more or less satisfied with the deal they're getting.

One thing I can say with complete certainty is that Tibet will not gain independence from Beijing, any more than the southwestern United States will gain independence from Washington DC and return to Mexico. Certainly, Beijing has a stronger claim to Tibet than Washington does to the Southwest. Tibet signed a suzereignty treaty with China in the 12th century, during the Yuan dynasty, a treaty which was subsequently renewed by the Ming and Qing dynasties and continually strengthened with close cultural ties and intergovernmental appointments. In the vacuum that followed the collapse of the Qing dynasty in the early 20th century, an independence movement sprouted from Tibet's feudal aristocratic class and took root in the political chaos of the time (leaving aside CIA meddling). However, after the establishment of the People's Republic of China, Beijing predictably re-affirmed the nation's territorial integrity, as would any government in the wake of civil war; Tibet is a spectacularly massive autonomous region of vital strategic importance. Not only does it serve as a crucial buffer zone against potentially hostile missile-wielding neighbors, but the epic flow of water out of the Himalayas gives life to China's great river systems and irrigates the farmlands which feed a billion Chinese mouths. This is not something which Beijing is going to place at risk, period. Chinese leaders do not take these things lightly, unlike the many Westerners who casually think they know what's best for the rest of the world. Frankly, the sheer arrogance of US citizens who self-righteously condemn China even as their own nation bombs and occupies countries halfway around the world with bloody impunity is staggering.

Nevertheless, the problems facing Tibet and China are real. Tibetans and Han Chinese must not allow Westerners to goad them into deepening inter-ethnic conflict. The social, cultural, political, and economic aspirations of Tibetan people must be proactively addressed with concrete steps by Beijing toward reconciliation and increased Tibetan self-determination. It's time to get serious about UN-mediated diplomatic dialogue between Beijing and Dharamsala, to get past the bitter accusations for the sake of solving today's problems. My hope is that the emerging generation of forward-thinking leaders in Beijing will come to see the wisdom of a more transparent and open-minded approach to "the Tibet issue", an issue which is clearly not going away on its own.

Tuesday Music — Sinéad O'Connor

[ "Fire On Babylon" and "You Do Something To Me" ]

Raid Response Network Hotline

From NJ May 1 Coalition organizer Eric Lerner:

Dear friends,

The Rapid Response Network has had its first successful response to a raid. Thursday night, at 6 PM, a woman called the hotline from her home in Elizabeth, saying that ICE agents were outside, demanding to be let in. The RRN phone volunteer reassured the woman that she had a right not to let the ICE agents in without a search warrant. Although the agents were waving various papers around through the window, they did not show any such warrant. The owner of the house was also brought to the phone and assured that she too had the right not to admit the ICE agents. The woman called her husband, warning him not to come home until the agents had gone. After some 20 minutes, the ICE agents gave up. No one was detained and the Hotline worked as intended. Thanks to the phone volunteer!

The Hotline is now being very widely publicized on TV and radio and there have been broadcasts on the Hotline by both Telemundo and Univision. As a result we are getting in a lot of calls. The hotline needs more volunteers—they must speak Spanish and we prefer those who are bilingual. Training is available. If you know anyone who qualifies and might be interested, please have them contact us.

We have also learned that in some cases ICE agents are hanging out on corners and challenging people to show their papers on the street. In cases like this, the Rapid Response teams would be very useful and we need to start setting them up in the most affected communities.

Even though the hotline number has been widely publicized in the mass media, it is still important to put up the posters in immigrant neighborhoods. It serves as a reminder and, we hope, will have good psychological affect in breaking the atmosphere of fear. New posters, with small corrections to the Spanish spelling, will be available for download tomorrow from www.njmay1.org.

~ ~ ~

For immediate release
March 14, 2008
NJ May 1 Coalition
Contact: Eric Lerner 973-736-0522

In response to widespread immigration raids, a coalition of immigrant rights activists has announced the launching of a Rapid Response Network Hotline that will give help to those confronted with the raids.  The RRN Hotline, sponsored by the NJ May 1 Coalition and the New Jersey Civil Rights Defense Committee is a 24-hour free number covering New York and New Jersey that will provide immediate contact with Spanish-speaking volunteers.  In the event of a raid, the volunteers will calmly inform callers of their basic rights, especially the right not to admit the ICE agents to their homes without a warrant signed by a judge and the right to remain silent. The hotline number is 1-800-308-0878.

“Most of the ICE raids on homes and workplace are fishing expeditions—ICE does not know who has documents and who does not,” explains Eric Lerner, a member of the NJ May 1 Coalition.  “Immigrants are detained and deported mainly as a result of information that they are frightened into providing the agents. If immigrants call the hotline as soon as they hear that knock on the door, the volunteers will explain to them their rights so that they don’t inadvertently give out information that leads to detention.”  Experience with Rapid Response Networks in other cities has shown that even immigrants who are aware of their rights can panic when confronted with armed ICE agents and forget those rights. The hotline provides a reassuring, knowledgeable individual who can remind the caller of their rights and encourage them to use them.

“If we don’t let ICE agents in our homes, if we don’t speak with them, we can stop the detentions and deportations” a poster advertising the hotline states.

Rapid Response Network organizers emphasize that the hotline is designed to be used during the raids, as soon as ICE agents are seen or heard, not after detentions occur, because it is far easier to prevent detentions than to get people out of detention. They also emphasize that the hotline is only for raids and related emergencies, like employers threatening to call ICE agents. Routine immigration inquiries are to be directed to the long-existing NY Immigration hotline (212) 419-3737 in NJ or, in New York, (800) 566-7636.

The hotline will be publicized throughout immigrant neighborhoods by eye-catching posters, which also inform immigrants of their basic rights. The hotline is aimed initially at the Spanish-speaking section of the immigrant community as that is where the raids have mainly focused. Calls in English can also be handled.

The NJ May 1 Coalition and cooperating organizations throughout New York City and NJ are now starting to originating the second stage of the Rapid Response Network, which involves setting up Rapid Response Teams in every locality to respond to the raids. These teams would be sent by the phone volunteers to the site of an ongoing raid and will act as witnesses, recording the actions of the ICE agents. Experience in cities such as Los Angles with these teams has shown that their presence can deter ICE agents from violating immigrants’ rights, such as by breaking down doors. In addition, in some cases, the presence of witnesses, alerting the community to an ICE raid, causes a crowd of neighbors to gather, protesting the raid, often leading ICE agents to leave the area.

Participating groups are soliciting volunteers for the Rapid Response Teams, who will be trained.  No language skills are needed; but since the witnesses may be confronting ICE agents, the teams will consist only of citizens and those with valid visas or permanent residency. Additional Spanish-speaking phone volunteers are also encouraged. Those interested should contact info@njmay1.org or 973-736-0522. Posters and other materials are available at www.njmay1.org.

The Speech — Dual Consciousness on the Presidential Stage

At its core, Tuesday's speech amounted to a groundbreaking big-stage exposition of dual consciousness that I regard as the most sophisticated and important piece of mainstream political oratory and speech-writing of my adult life.

No, it did not entirely satisfy me as an anti-racist. The speech contained several elements that I found somewhat troubling or perhaps less than honest. But this was not an anti-racist speech. This was a campaign speech by a popular national politician who stands a mere two electoral steps away from the US presidency, whose candidacy has come under threat of fatal derailment by white fear of "black rage". Context matters, and just as one must grasp the socio-cultural context of Jeremiah Wright's words in order to understand and appreciate them, so one must grasp the context in which Barack Obama took the podium on Tuesday morning in order to appreciate what he was trying to do and say.

Obama was not trying to dissect, deconstruct, or even confrontationally criticize the white racism which has so animated and shaped this nation's history and which continues to cast heavy shadows across much of our society's daily life. He did invoke the "original sin of slavery" and the struggles of the abolitionist and civil rights movements; he did frame racism in institutional rather than interpersonal terms; but this was not the center of his message. Rather, it seems to me that he was trying to advance racial dialogue, one modest yet pivotal step, by using his own life story as a window into dual consciousness. By outlining and juxtaposing features and pitfalls of both the black experience and the white lens, Obama appeared to be trying to nudge these perceptual prisms just a little bit closer to one another, toward a mutual recognition encapsulated at the end of the speech by an anecdote about a young white woman and an elderly black man connecting as human beings at a meeting on the campaign trail.

Now, you won't be surprised to hear that I still see an asymmetrical equation. On the one hand, we have marginalized black perspectives with legitimate grievances grounded in documented history and measurable injustice; on the other hand, dominant megaphone-wielding white perspectives steeped in denial and dismissal of the empirical impact of racism on present-day inequality. Perhaps Obama's cautiously-delineated positioning between these centers of gravity is itself a meta-symbol of where the needle currently falls on the dial of socio-political power. In any case, he described in non-judgmental terms the bitterness, resentment, and conflict emanating from these respective viewpoints as inescapable features of today's political landscape. Right or wrong, these are real forces at play. It was as though Obama sought to suddenly turn on the lights in a crowded darkened room and force us all to see each other eye to eye for one blinking moment. That's a feat that no policy paper, legislation, or executive order can accomplish.

It was a speech that he probably knew all along he'd have to deliver at some point. After all, it would be impossible for US society to elect an African American president without first directly addressing unresolved issues of race and making some sort of breakthrough on this front. Obama seized the moment with a steady hand and a gutsy sense of timing, not only to defend his candidacy, but to use this unprecedented platform to elevate mainstream racial discourse. He spoke over the heads of the pundits and shills and other self-humiliating peddlers of pap. He spoke directly to citizens who remain capable of conducting thoughtful, responsible discussion on complex, delicate, deeply-felt matters. He spoke as though his audience were grown-up and intelligent. And he spoke with an unaffected, unpretentious solemnity suggesting that the substance of this speech was and is larger than any one candidacy or election. What began as a challenge to Obama's campaign became a challenge to America. He seemed to be essentially saying: I have built my career and my candidacy as a unifying public figure with one foot on each side of the racial divide; yet at the end of the day I am a black man in America, with unshakable ties to the black community; and if our society is not ready to deal with that, then let's end this charade and admit that we have not come nearly as far as many proclaim; however, if we are ready to take another step on the long march toward freedom, then let's move forward together.

So let's see how far we've come. It doesn't matter if fake-news bobble-heads don't get it. It doesn't matter what pollsters say. What matters is that Obama stepped up in the midst of crisis and gave us a moment which will shine in history as a political milestone; a moment in which it somehow seemed possible, if only for a flashing instant, that centuries of heartbreak and blood and cruelty and division might someday be healed by the quest for social justice and subsumed by our common humanity. Whatever happens in this topsy-turvy silly-season election, it was a moment that just might have made it all worthwhile.

[ Cross-posted at APA for Progress and The Unapologetic Mexican ]

Five Years

Retrospective — Iraq War Series 1998-2005

St. Patrick's Day (Night, Morning After) Music — The Clancy Brothers

Having just returned home from a nearby pub, where there was much rejoicing, I'd like to post some music in keeping with the festivities. I'm thinking Clancy Brothers. Intertube pickings are slim, but here's a brief yet energetic clip from the astounding Martin Scorsese documentary "No Direction Home" about Bob Dylan, in which brother Liam's sheer physical energy practically rips the strings off his guitar as he strappingly celebrates the legacy of the martyr Jack Duggan:

Yeah that's an abrupt and unfortunate cut-off to that clip. From I recall, Dylan goes on to say that "after about 20 pints of Guinness", Liam once turned to him and declared, "No hate, no fear, no surrender!" Or something like that. Frankly, I'll have to look it up; in any case, these guys were a major influence on Bob Dylan. Here are the full lyrics to that rousing rebel song:

There was a wild colonial boy, Jack Duggan was his name
He was born and raised in Ireland in a place called Castlemaine
He was his father's only son, his mother's pride and joy
And dearly did his parents love the wild colonial boy

At the early age of sixteen years, he left his native home
And to Australia's sunny shore he was inclined to roam
He robbed the rich, he helped the poor, he shot James McAvoy [a corrupt colonial judge]
A terror to Australia was the wild colonial boy

One morning on the prairie as Jack he rode along
A-listenin' to the mockingbird a-singin' a cheerful song
Out stepped a band of troopers, Kelly, Davis and Fitzroy
They all set out to capture him, the wild colonial boy

"Surrender now Jack Duggan for you see we're three to one!
Surrender in the Queen's high name! You are a plundering son!"
Jack pulled two pistols from his belt and proudly waved them high
"I'll fight! but not surrender!" said the wild colonial boy

He fired a shot at Kelly which brought him to the ground
And turning round to Davis, he received a fatal wound
A bullet pierced his proud young heart from the pistol of Fitzroy
And that was how they captured him, the wild colonial boy

Not your usual colonial song. And I like it.

On an altogether different note, let's cap off the night (morning) by flipping to the opposite end of the spectrum: give it up for Tommy Makem and the Clancy Brothers, hosted by Pete Seger, singing a tragic love ballad called "The Butcher Boy", a heart-crusher designed for filling your cup and weeping:

Weekend Pinoy Power

UPDATE: In a close, electrifying, punishing, technical fight that ended in a split decision, Manny Pacquiao won the WBC superfeatherweight belt from Juan Manuel Marquez. It was a spectacular showcase of craft, heart, and sheer fighting spirit. After 12 tense, grueling rounds, both fighters' faces were heavily marked up with swollen bruises and nasty gashes around the eyes. Marquez put on a tremendous display, giving Pacquiao more trouble than any other fighter in recent years; but in the end Pacquiao's superior firepower made the difference, as he landed the heavier shots, scoring a big knockdown in the 3rd (with a bone-jarring short left to the chin) and wobbling Marquez badly early in the 10th. Shortly after the fight, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo released a statement declaring: "Manny Pacquiao has again brought immense glory to the Flag and Filipino people with his hard fought victory today. Once more, he has inspired us with his big fighting heart, his determination and grit. [...] He is truly one of our nation's heroes who can unite us even in times of divisiveness. An icon of the masses, Manny Pacquiao mirrors the champ within every Filipino, here and abroad."

~ ~ ~

The Armed Forces of the Philippines has declared a unilateral ceasefire in its fight against communist insurgents during tonight's long-awaited rematch between Filipino crossover megastar Manny Pacquiao and unsung Mexican technician Juan Manuel Marquez. Most readers here will know that I consider Pacquiao to be the most exciting fighter in the world today; he may not be as slick as Floyd Mayweather, but his unearthly speed and power are riveting, and when he climbs through those ropes, it's on. Personally I think that Pacquiao has improved considerably in the last 4 years, while Marquez has slowed down a step; this combination could be a real problem for Marquez tonight. Here's a compilation of Pacquiao highlights, set to some good ole cheesy rock n roll. Go Manny!

The Obama-Clinton Show

When I first posted about Barack Obama in July 2004 after his now-fabled speech at the DNC, one astute observer in the comment thread wrote, "Part of his power lies in the way he frames the issues. He tilts the landscape against the opponents of change." Bingo. Obama's power comes from his ability to tilt the landscape against opponents of change. Exactly what that change will look like once he's in the Oval Office shuffling policy papers remains a bit of a mystery; but as I see it, I'd rather roll the dice with Obama than suffer 4 more years of dismal certitude under either Clinton or McCain. With Obama, at least we can entertain the possibility of progress in DC.

Not that I'm quite on board the chugging honking whistling freight train of Obama-mania, even if I confess that I sometimes get misty during his momentous speeches (I get caught up, you know how it is). I still have reservations about some of the compromises he has had to make to get to where he is; I have serious problems with the fundamental structure of the Democratic Party; indeed I'm likely to end up voting for a third-party candidate like Cynthia McKinney (calm down, my state is safely blue). Moreover, I tend to view the whole spectacle of presidential politics as a grand charade during which tremendous national energy gets spent endlessly chattering about which pre-approved palatable public figure is to be the next temporary PR/sales representative of the global neo-imperialist gangster state. Nevertheless, I think that on the whole, the Obama phenomenon is a positive development in US politics. I hesitate to call it a full-fledged "grassroots movement" at this stage, but it's certainly more of a groundswell than his rivals' stiff-throated calls for upstanding in-the-know citizens to shun the dark horse and goose-step in line with an orderly dynastic succession. Obama's essential message is one of populist empowerment, whereas Clinton and McCain's messages are fundamentally deflating and paternalistic in philosophical orientation, aimed more at appealing to unresolved childhood issues rather than lofty visions of social uplift and liberatory self-determination. Clinton and McCain go around trying to drain the air out of rooms which Obama has pumped up with hope.

~ ~ ~

That's my elevator-chat breakdown of today's big-stage electoral scene. You may have noticed that I didn't mention the explosive issue of race in this little exposition; because in my view, race is not the primary driving factor in this election. Of course race is ever-present in US society; but as far as I can see, Obama's success in the Democratic primary has occurred not because of, but in spite of, his being Black. So prodigious are his political, oratorical, and organizational skills that he has to some extent leap-frogged the color line and somehow overcome an attribute which is ordinarily a handicap in the socio-political machinations of mainstream society. He has implemented Sun Tzu's strategic advice and turned a nominal weakness into a social strength.

Needless to say, there are white folks who believe that African Americans have it easy in the US, being the beneficiaries of a foolishly generous edifice of handouts and quotas on the upwardly mobile speedway. This worldview is the result of the cognitive indoctrination according to which white people are socialized in US society, wherein the systemic advantages, privileges, and conceits of whiteness are rendered invisible, as are the systemic injustices and entrenched obstacles facing people of color. Thus, the gradual erosion of white privilege and racism, and the ever-increasing autonomy and visible success of people of color, are seen by some white folks as somehow unnatural, an indication that "politically correct" white liberalism has gone too far in its self-flagellation and that whites are now being discriminated against. As twisted and upside-down as it is, this view does not necessarily indicate any spiritual failing or moral flaw on the part of the individual who sees the world through this lens; it indicates that they were socialized in racist society and remain locked in their conditioning, and that they must undertake a certain amount of anti-racist education and reflection if they wish to free themselves from this erroneous and dehumanizing perceptual prism.

~ ~ ~

It seems to me that one of the principal sources of confusion when it comes to racial disourse is the stunning lack of clarity and consensus regarding the exact meanings and definitions of the words "racism" and "racist". Those of us who spend significant time doing anti-racist work end up developing a variety of nuanced concepts surrounding these words, but many people never explore those meanings and instinctively respond to talk of racism with strong emotions and weak understandings. Racism is a complex multi-dimensional interdisciplinary subject which cannot be reduced to an absurdly-shallow bifurcation of the populace into laudable "not racists" and condemned "racists". Racism is an overarching, interlocking set of economic, political, social, and cultural structures, beliefs, and actions which systematically advantage one racial group at the expense of all others. A statement, thought, belief, assumption, or action can be described as racist when it plugs into the overarching grid of racism, like a node which lights up once it plugs into its compatible network, thus transcending an individual act of bigotry or prejudice and fusing into broader institutions and societal forces.

As for defining what makes an individual person "a racist", I think it's a pretty fuzzy area, and not a particularly fruitful intellectual direction. Most anti-racists are much more concerned with identifying, understanding, and dismantling racism, than in exposing any individual as "a racist", whatever that means. Clearly, there are hate-crime types out there who organize their lives around advancing white supremacist violence and such; but most of the racism that people of color deal with in our day-to-day lives — especially those of us who interact with a lot of white liberals — is far more subtle and covert, more of a background buzz than an in-your-face threat. White liberal racism tends to manifest in unspoken assumptions, attitudes, and social dynamics which normalize and center white privilege, while deprioritizing, marginalizing, and dismissing the voices, perspectives, experiences, histories, cultures, agendas, and initiatives of people of color. White liberals who engage in these behaviors aren't "racists" in the same sense as the hate-crime types, but they are nevertheless participating in the replication and perpetuation of racism. Pointing this out is not "playing the race card"; it is accurate socio-political observation. Pointing this out is not the same as running around indiscriminately shouting "racist!" at every white person within earshot in some kind of rageful frenzy; it is constructive anti-racist critique aimed at illuminating an important but dimly-lit pattern, for the purpose of healing wounds which continue to bleed our society and our own humanity.

~ ~ ~

In February 2007, I wrote that "we might as well brace ourselves for a full year and a half of cringeworthy foot-in-throat racial punditry. With Obama in the presidential spotlight, talking heads and politicians and scribes across the land will have countless opportunities to comment on race and thus chomp on their feet; I'm expecting serious feasts of pale toes." And yes, Geraldine Ferraro has recently indulged us with probably the best example yet, not only with her initial knee-slapper about what an advantage it is to be a black man when running for president, but even more so with her petulant reactions to the flare-up: refusal to listen, flagrant denial, white victimization, shallow invocation of anti-oppression cred, and so forth. Isn't that how it usually works? If the white liberal blogosphere has taught us anything, it's that lots and lots of white liberals act this way when persons of color talk about racism.

Unfortunately, what I didn't quite envision a year ago was that the most egregious statements would come from feminists making false correspondences between racism and sexism. All forms of oppression do share certain characteristics, but each one operates along a different axis of life. Sexism often operates in the most intimate settings, as sexist men often live with, marry, and rely upon women; but racism tends to flourish on a more coldly institutional level, as racist white folks seek to structure their lives precisely so that there is no intimate contact with other races. Neither of these situations is more or less desirable than the other; they function across different dimensions and cannot be lined up for analytically-honest comparison or correspondence; as is true of all forms of oppression. Yet the Clinton campaign has generated a depressingly vocal line-up of white feminists who draw wrong comparisons and conclude that sexism is a more virulent force than racism in today's society. Some white feminists insultingly assert that women of color are betraying their gender by voting according to race, denying the possibility that there are other factors in this election. If the argument is that feminists should always vote for feminists, then I'm curious how many white women cried "betrayal!" in 1972 if women did not vote for Shirley Chisholm's presidential run (which garnered 152 electoral delegates, while the Mondale-Ferraro ticket in 1984 won a sorry 13 electoral college votes). Indeed, I wonder how many white women supported the truly historic presidential "dream ticket" of Victoria Woodhull and Frederick Douglass, who joined forces to run for the White House in 1872 and whose radical platform included women's rights and abolition of slavery and racism. The most prominent white feminists of that era distanced themselves from the Woodhull-Douglass ticket, not only because they decided that anti-racism was a secondary issue but because Victoria Woodhull controversially advocated women's sexual freedom.

The bottom line is that race is indeed at play in this election as it is in all facets of US society, but this fact is neither here nor there. Let's get real: being either a woman or a man of color is a historically-proven obstacle to the presidency; but these factors aren't insurmountable in this day and age. I don't believe that either race or gender is the single determining attribute in this campaign. I believe that those who reduce the Obama campaign to the notion that "Black man prez is cool right now" are masking racist sentiments which remain largely unexamined. Such people are sinking in the tides of history; the times have passed them by. A new tide is washing across this country, carrying a strange glimmering hope for progressive, redemptive, constructive change. I'm inclined to ride it and see where it goes.

[ Cross-posted at APA for Progress ]

New York State Awaits Its First Black, Blind Governor

In the aftermath of the most meteoric pulpy career implosion in modern politics, the state of New York is now lined up to swear in its first African American governor, Lieutenant Governor David Paterson, who will also be the first blind state governor in US history. Right now, the good ole Sheriff of Wall Street is probably negotiating the terms of his perp walk; but there's a new sheriff waiting in the wings, and I'm looking forward to tracking what he does to clean up this mess and put Albany back on track.

Tuesday Music — Joan Armatrading, "Show Some Emotion"

Weekend Music — STL featuring Michelle, "Taking It Back"

Now that the Odinga and Kibaki factions have reached a political arrangement, in honor of those who stood up and fought against the theft of an election, here's to peace and justice in Kenya...

Friday Music — Lupe Fiasco with Matthew Santos, "Superstar"

Racist Asshattery from the University of Colorado

University of Colorado Chancellor Bud Peterson has issued an official apology in the wake of the controversy and outrage surrounding a "satirical" piece that ran in the Campus Press entitled "If it's war the Asians want...it's war they'll get". The editors of the paper have kinda apologized as well, and the matter is being reviewed by the dean of the school of journalism. What's missing from both of these "apologies" is the word "racism", which suggests that this is more about PR damage control than genuine dialogue. Turns out the racist asshat who wrote the piece has a troubled history, which probably isn't all that surprising. For your infotainment and general reading displeasure, here's a bit of his latest:

I'm such a fool for not realizing it sooner. I can't tell you how many times the Asians have treated me like a retarded weasel and I've forgiven them. But now I know that Asians are not just "a product of their environment," and their rudeness is not a "cultural misunderstanding."

They hate us all.

And I say it's time we started hating them back. That's right-no more "tolerance." No more "cultural sensitivity." No more "Mr. Pretend-I'm-Not-Racist."

It's time for war.

But we won't attack their bodies or minds. We will attack their souls.

The first step, or "Phase 1," is to find them all. Anyone who is interested in signing up to volunteer can do so by e-mailing me. Next Sunday at noon, we will all meet at Farrand Field. Each volunteer will be issued an extra-large butterfly net.

The hunt will then begin.

When I blow my whistle, we will scatter in every direction and catch as many Asians as possible. Make sure to pay special attention to the Rec Center, the UMC, the math and engineering buildings and Lollicup. If you're not sure if someone is an Asian, give them a calculus problem to do in their head. If they get it right, net 'em.

Captured Asians will be dragged to my apartment on the Hill and hog-tied. Once they're all secured in my living room, "Phase 2" will come into effect.

So what exactly is being satirized here?

Answer: nothing. It's raw racist hate speech. Pretending that it's satire is simply an attempt to mask the glaring fact that the University of Colorado has allowed its campus paper to serve as a megaphone for racism. That's what happened here, and the longer editors and school officials deny it, the more clueless — and culpable — they show themselves to be.

Democratic Primary Politics in the Boxing Ring

Somehow, professional prizefighting has a peculiar power to channel the political passions of an era. In 1938, when African American hero Joe Louis fought German Nazi hero Max Schmeling for the heavyweight championship in an overflowing Yankee Stadium, people all around the globe tuned it to witness the epic confrontation between democratic idealism and Nazi fascism (although, needless to say, this democratic idealism was sorely lacking in the actual lives of African Americans at that time, who were facing Jim Crow and a nationwide wave of lynchings). Hitler himself had promoted the fight and roused his army in the wee hours so that troops could listen to the live broadcast of what he surely hoped would serve as a symbol of Aryan conquest. It's also said that all of Harlem tuned in that night; throngs turned out in the streets in their sharpest outfits, gathered around radios on stoops and in bars and in barbershops. When Louis jumped inside on Schmeling at the opening bell, took him apart with devastating short combinations, knocked him to the canvas within the first minute of the fight, and knocked him out for good at 2:04 of the first round, the US and indeed anti-fascists the world over swelled with pride and hope. It was probably the first time that white Americans and black Americans cheered for the same boxer and celebrated the same outcome. Meanwhile, Hitler yanked the fight off the air and put Schmeling on army paratrooper duty.

Of course, now that I've invoked the most legendary politically-charged fight in all of boxing history, nothing else I talk about is going to sound all that riveting. And that's probably appropriate, because this weekend's fight didn't exactly encapsulate anything quite so dramatic as WWII. No, this affair was on a smaller scale. Nevertheless, it was somewhat intriguing: a middleweight rematch between Kelly "The Ghost" Pavlik and Jermain "Bad Intentions" Taylor [pictured above: Pavlik on left, Taylor on right]. Now I don't think I need to mention that there's a racial component happening here; I mean, Pavlik's alias "The Ghost" refers to his complexion; while Taylor is applauded by the sports media for saying "sir" and "ma'am". Basically, in boxing there's almost always a racial, ethnic, or nationalistic thing happening. By its very nature, the fight game tends to stir lurking primal emotions, and promoters relentlessly play on social tensions in order to bring out crowds and generate drama.

So obviously, given the heat of the current Democratic primary race, Pavlik vs. Taylor suddenly transformed into a proxy for Clinton vs. Obama. Adding a regional twist to the story, Jermain Taylor is also known as "The Pride of Little Rock, Arkansas", and Kelly Pavlik is a working-class hero from Youngstown, Ohio. The Obama camp, in keeping with its usual strategy of cautious distance from unpredictable energies, has stayed away from the scene and remained silent about the fight. Not the Clinton clamp. Hillary jumped right in with Pavlik, ditching the Pride of Little Rock in favor of projecting solidarity with working-class Ohio. Last year, when Jermain Taylor had just taken the undisputed middleweight crown from the legendary Bernard Hopkins, Bill Clinton visited Taylor's training camp, shook the champ's hand, beamed with Arkansas pride, and busted out the quip, "What you've got with the two of us here is a boxer, and a punching bag." Then Pavlik knocked out Taylor in 7 rounds last September. So this time around, with the Ohio primary hanging in the balance, the Clinton love flowed strictly toward the opposite corner. After touring a GM factory in Lordstown, Ohio, on Friday, Hillary Clinton reached under the podium and produced a pair of blue boxing gloves signed by Kelly Pavlik, declaring that "we need a fighter and a champion in the White House again!"

That was the backdrop going into Saturday night's main event. So what happened once the bell rang, all the hype faded away, and it just came down to Pavlik and Taylor standing in a ring with wrapped fists? Unlike their first meeting, it was a close fight that went the distance. Taylor showed marked improvement since his last fight; he's a natural athlete with good speed and rhythm, but the problem is that he still doesn't have the fundamentals of straight power punching. His spine bends and his elbows flair out when he hits. Not so with Pavlik, whose punches are straight as arrows and explode out of a planted stance with clean lines all the way through. He's not all that athletic or fast, indeed he has slightly plodding feet, but he sticks to fundamentals: step, step, slip, throw the old one-two, all night long. And simple fundamentals are the most reliable asset, because they remain intact even once fatigue and pain set in. Pavlik pulled away toward the end of the fight and won by unanimous decision.

Now what does all this mean for the Obama-Clinton race? Hard to say. I mean, I love boxing and all, but I'm not sure it's quite that metaphysically aligned with socio-political currents as to offer any predictive templates. I guess my personal reaction was that I wasn't particularly impressed with Clinton's appeal to Pavlik fans in Ohio; it kinda brought up the whole "unprincipled pandering" meme which so many people criticize about the Clintons. Then again, I've been a fervent Clinton critic since the mid-90s, so I'm not exactly the target audience. I suppose the bottom line remains that Pavlik won and Clinton had lined it up to give her a little boost. Who knows, maybe Clinton's political machine, like Pavlik's plodding but steady style, will manage to make adjustments and keep plugging away until things start coming together toward the end of the fight. Though if Clinton does somehow manage to win, I'm betting that it'll be by controversial split decision. Personally I think it would a good idea for Obama to make an appearance with Pavlik in Youngstown to congratulate him on his win. If Taylor had won, mind you, I'm not sure I'd give the same advice; but I think shaking hands with Pavlik stays on the message that he's been working throughout his campaign. And when it comes to staying on message — unity, hope, change — Obama strikes me as the one who wins on fundamentals.

The Wall Street Journal and Mommybloggers on the Democratic Primary

One thing I like about the business press is that it's always about the money, which I generally find to be a more valuable angle in understanding the world than the sort of touchy-feely "human interest" angles you tend to find in standard fake-news rags. In fact I basically get my news from a trusted combination of alternative indie media and corporate business press. Maybe it's because I'm a tech entrepreneur; but I much prefer to read a headline such as "Shell Oil Struggling To Protect Niger Delta Investment From Environmental and Union Activists" followed by a bunch of dollar amounts and executive strategies; rather than something like "In A Remote Village, An Intractable Problem Lingers" followed by a bunch of decontextualized imagery of pitiable struggle between custom and modernity.

So here's how the Wall Street Journal sums up the currrent action in the Democratic primary:

The Clinton campaign is betting that going toe-to-toe with Mr. Obama on the airwaves in Texas and Ohio, where Mrs. Clinton enjoys wide leads in the polls, will deny him the sort of uncontested opening that helped him narrow similar deficits in previous states. But doing so will be expensive.

Mr. Obama was up in Super Tuesday states first, and moved into following states first as well, says Evan Tracey, a campaign-media analyst at TNS Media Intelligence. "If money wasn't an issue, [the Clinton campaign] wouldn't have let him have head starts in a lot of these states," he said. To date, according to Mr. Tracey's calculations, Mr. Obama has spent around $36 million on TV ads, while Mrs. Clinton has spent just less than $30 million. The disparity has become more evident in the past two weeks, when the Obama team has outspent its rival by more than $5 million. Neither campaign would comment on their ad spending.

While Texas and Ohio are seen as demographically favorable terrain for Mrs. Clinton, who has shown strength among Hispanic and working-class voters, high-priced media markets in both states may cut against her dwindling resources. "Those two states could be an $8 million to $9 million proposition easily, and I doubt they have that much to spend," said Steve Murphy, a partner in Murphy Putnam Media Inc. and former strategist for Bill Richardson's campaign.

Clinton campaign officials denied that money problems will constrain their ability to field ads. "We have raised roughly $1 million a day since Feb. 1 and will have all the money we need to be competitive through March 4 and beyond," said spokesman Jay Carson.

Meanwhile in an entirely different corner of the media universe, here's an open letter to Hillary Clinton from influential (white middle-class) "mommyblog" Queen of Spain (via Culture Kitchen):

I truly believed you would be the best person for the job, and I had this nagging thought in the back of my mind that is now at the forefront. The thought that drove me on Super Tuesday to Vote for Senator Obama and the thought that is the driving force as I write tonight: Senator Hillary Clinton divides this country.

It’s not fair. It’s not right. And under just about ANY other circumstance I would go to the mat for you. However we are a wounded and deeply divided nation. We are a nation at war. We are a nation at odds with each-other. It’s ugly. I thought you could get people past it. I really did.

When I told myself it was gender that got people going, I refrained from asking and wanting you to step aside. Simply on principle, I wanted to see you run and win because they said it couldn’t be done. Because it was my belief, this was all about being a girl.

It’s not, and I was wrong.

I firmly believe while the gender issue has given you a handicap I hope we all one day overcome, it is NOT the reason people have a gut reaction to you or your campaign or your legacy.

Enter the Senator from Illinois, and what I think could be your true legacy. If you were to step aside now, shockingly early and shockingly un-Hilllary-like, you could galvanize an entire nation behind your party. If you were to throw your weight, and your tremendous political clout behind Senator Obama you could still change the world and make your mark in a way no one would expect and everyone would admire.

I don’t want to see you throw in the towel because the fight is too hard or the mountain too tall. I am asking you to throw it in because history is on the line. It is not the history either of us expected, however it is an equally important, momentous, earthshaking change in this country we sorely need.

Do something no one would ever expect. Do something extraordinary. Do something that changes politics as usual and changes history.

I could have never predicted having to chose between what my husband called “the lesser of two goods, not the lesser of two evils” when it came time to cast my vote.

It was agonizing.

But in the end, with no major policy difference and valid reasons on BOTH sides, I had to go with the candidate who I thought could best bring our nation back together. Who could cross party lines and gender lines and racial lines.

I wanted it to be you, but it’s not. For some reason you still get people very riled up, and not in the good way.

There is no way around it-it sucks. But after 7 years of nothing but fighting and head shaking and feeling like we’re living in two Americas, I can’t do it again. Not even if my team is in office.

I really hate asking you to do this, but I want you to please step down and let this nation heal.

I probably don't have to explain that I'm not actually endorsing either of the worldviews expressed in the two preceding excerpts; but there they are, a small but telling slice of what's out there, guiding thoughts and conversations and ballots.

Justice for Mike Cho

An open letter from Sheena Chou via Angry Asian Man:

My friend, Michael S. Cho [pictured] was shot and killed on December 31, 2007 at around 2:00 PM by two La Habra, CA police officers. The police officers said that they were responding to a vandalism call but showed up with guns drawn. A surveillance video shows Michael walking slowly towards the police officers and slowly walking away. He was shot after he had walked away. The two La Habra police officers shot Michael over 10 times. The La Habra police chief, Dennis Kies, said that Michael had a tire iron and that the police officers shot at Michael because he had made a "motion to attack" the officers.

You can read about the incident here.

And watch the surveillance video here.

I do not know if or why Michael had a tire iron. Unfortunately, the only person who can answer that is no longer with us. I do know, however, what kind of person Michael was. He attended church regularly. He was the kind of friend you knew you could always depend on, someone who always had other people's best interests at heart. His soul was kind and he was always good-natured. I also know that he was born with a leg disability that caused him to walk with a limp. I know that if I (at 5'2" on a good day) wanted to get away from Michael, all I would have to do is walk fast. The La Habra police department is saying that Michael was shot because he made a "motion to attack," but how can he attack if he can't run or walk properly? Why did the cops show up to a vandalism call with guns drawn? Was it necessary to shoot to kill? Why was it necessary to shoot at all when there are Tasers, bean bags and pepper spray?

I cannot fully express how I feel about all this. I am deeply saddened to say the least. I still cannot believe that Mike, a beautiful person who taught blind and disabled children art and art history and who is always the first person to buy a homeless man a meal, has been taken away from us. I will not pretend to know and understand all the legalities with force used by police officers, but it has felt wrong, excessive, unwarranted to me since I first heard about the shooting. I attended a community seminar put on by Korean Community Lawyers Association where former Commander Paul Kim, who was on the board that reviews LAPD's use of force, analyzed the cops' actions and confirmed my suspicions. Though he is now retired, he has reviewed thousands of these cases and is very experienced and familiar with police use of force laws and regulations.

Please help my friend, Michael Cho, not become just another statistic by forwarding this email to your friends, signing the petition and showing up to the vigil(s). I know I'm asking a lot but this is such an important matter. It's not just a Korean American or Asian American issue; it is a Human issue.

Justice for Mike Cho

Google Group

Facebook

Sign the Justice Department Petition

Monday Music — Katie Melua, "Shy Boy"

Weekend Blessing — Buddha Vajradhara

Friday Music — Ali B, Yes-R, Akon, "Ghetto Remix"

Chinese New Year — Happy Year of the Rat!

The Obama Campaign and the Asian American Vote

Here's a chart published last November [Correction: Jon points out in comments that the chart was produced last June] showing the racial diversity of presidential campaign staffs:

What's wrong with this picture?

I was frankly alarmed at the time that Obama had basically no Asian Americans on board. What happened to the whole "I grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii" thing? In contrast, look at Asian representation in the Clinton campaign. That was her secret weapon, the trump card in the back pocket that nobody noticed. In the 3 frenetic months since then, I'm assuming that the Obama camp has taken steps to add Asian American voices to their campaign machinery; but last night we learned that it hasn't done enough. Asian Americans voted for Clinton by a margin of 3 to 1. The result: Clinton took California.

There are surely a variety of factors at play, but I think the most important is old-fashioned nitty-gritty political organization. Obama has the big-stage razzle-dazzle down, nobody can touch him on that front; but the Clintons have been operating in Chinatowns across the country for almost two decades, from Flushings to Monterey Park. They have fundraising operations hustling in basement offices strewn with Chinese language mailers and pamphlets in Japanese and Korean. In 1996, Al Gore had his infamous Buddhist temple fundraiser. Last year, it was Hillary Clinton and Norman Hsu. These incidents are obviously embarrassing for the campaigns, and they give fodder to anti-Asian xenophobes who see all Asian money as possible influence-peddling by communist China; but they also indicate the depth of the Clintons' political apparatus in the Asian American community. And quite frankly, the fact that the Clinton campaign has stayed right there in the community despite the scandals and the scrutiny, instead of backpedaling and distancing itself from Asians, wins even more loyalty. Even with the occasional gaffe, the Clinton campaign has managed to build bridges and swing deals. That's nuts-and-bolts politics. That's why the Clintons are the Clintons.

I had a bad feeling in December when my father forwarded me a poorly-written email from the 80-20 Initiative backing Clinton and haughtily dissing Obama. To some extent, I see 80-20 as a conservative power-brokering outfit run by an older generation of elitist Asian American community leaders who are utterly unhip and out of touch; yet they're the biggest Asian American PAC in the country. Last night they flexed and today they're gloating. And to be honest, they kind of deserve to gloat. Unhip or not, they did what they said they'd do: they delivered votes. They're probably drafting business arrangements with the next Clinton administration right now.

Don't get me wrong, I still think Obama is on track to overtake Clinton nationally and eventually win the nomination. There's still time to make a few course corrections. I think Asian Americans for Obama have just received a jarring wake-up call that euphoria doesn't necessarily win elections. Personally, I consider last night's showing among Asian Americans to be the result of a strategic blunder by the Obama campaign, perhaps an oversight, perhaps a calculated trade-off. My guess is that Obama got young, highly educated Asian American voters (e.g. bloggers); but that wasn't enough. It's not enough to have the soaringest rhetoric of them all. It's not enough to have Kelly Hu and Kal Penn on board. Beating Clinton requires an intervention, because Clinton already has the machinery in place in the Asian American community to get out votes; and intervention requires lots of unglamorous organization-building, working phones in dank offices with bare walls and exposed wiring, knocking on doors in Chinatown alleyways, building a daily relationship with reporters working for Asian-language newspapers, talking to bus boys and sweatshop workers and old ladies playing mah-jong and, yes, the fogies of the 80-20 set who, like it or not, wield undue influence in the community. But how can a campaign do this type of work without Asian Americans on staff? It can't.

UPDATE: See also an excellent analysis from Jeff Chang at HuffPo.

Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (1917?-2008)

Super Tuesday Music

With time running out, it's Obama for the come-from-behind win...!

More Tracy Chapman — "New Beginning"

Friday Music — Tracy Chapman, "Talkin About A Revolution"

Kenya — Another Front Line of Resistance

From what I gather, the political violence roiling Kenya is not nearly as brow-furrowingly unfathomable as our fake news outlets would have you believe: a presidential election between a populist reformer named Raila Odinga [pictured], and a corporate-backed incumbent named Mwai Kibaki, has been stolen. Unlike in the US, a lot of citizens in Kenya are not okay with this. So Kibaki's corrupt regime is holding onto power through repressive state violence, presumably to the satisfaction of the multinational conglomorates with whom he has been wheeling and dealing and putting down carefully laid plans involving his country's resources and markets.

The progressive challenger, Raila Odinga, is the son of famed revolutionary leader Ogingo Odinga and has successfully galvanized a multi-ethnic coalition of the poor, the marginalized, and the dispossessed, who are desperate for progressive change and who turned out to vote in impressive numbers. So Kibaki simply rigged the election in plain view and is enforcing the crooked result with a campaign of violence and intimidation against Odinga's supporters. I don't think this is simply fueled by some mysterious ancient tribal rivalry between the Kikuyu and the Luo, or any of the other regional ethnic identities (though the British did do their best to foster inter-ethnic hatred during colonization, and of course this continues to play a role); I think this is about corporatist globalization and the staggering inequality, displacement, and deprivation it so often produces.