Category Archives: activism

activism, culture, event, film, jerz, mso, musings, politics, video, writing

Remarks on Proposed Middle School De-leveling.

Context: The Maplewood-South Orange School District, which I attended my entire public school career, is in the process of de-leveling the middle school. The district belongs to a community with many wonderful and unique characteristics: suburban, easy public access to NYC, artistically vibrant, and both racially and economically diverse. But the leveling system reveals an uglier side, as the school is blatantly segregated along racial (and socio-economic) lines.

You can read the district’s proposal here. A paper profiling three case studies of successful elimination of “curricular stratification” can be found here. Its focus is on how to de-level, but the endnotes contain an overview of the literature on why, with two decades of papers discussing the benefits of heterogeneous grouping. Our district is in communication with one of the district’s profiled, and seems to be following the steps outlined in the paper.

Finally, I was inspired to prepare these remarks after attending a discussion of alumni last week. It was a powerful post-mortem on our public school experiences. Hearing first-hand the vastly different experience some of my peers had in the very same schools has motivated me to get involved in this issue (again). The discussion was hosted by a filmmaker and fellow district alumnus Cris Thorne, who is working on a documentary called Deleveling the System. Excerpts of the discussion are online here and here. Additionally, I highly recommend Cris’s earlier documentary (produced as a high school student!), One School, for more background.

Finally, I should note that I was unable to read the complete transcript, because I had prepared for the standard 3 minutes of public comment and found out upon arrival that we were restricted to two minutes.

My name is Rebecca Rojer, CHS class of 2005.

As a k-12 alumnus of this district, it is clear to me that the leveling system is not colorblind. In both the classrooms and the hallways, white students are consistently given the benefit of the doubt, while black students are assumed to be trouble-makers and low achievers. Students enter school with different degrees of preparedness, but the leveling system calcifies these differences into inequalities.

Worse, the leveling system turns prejudice into self-fulfilling prophecy. Low expectations correlate to low performance. For example, women perform worse on math exams after being told there is a genetic difference in math ability between the sexes.

There is clearly a place for grouping students by skill-level and motivation. But it is not always beneficial, even for “top” students. This is especially true of the turbulent and vicious middle-school years, where academic success is better predicted by behavior and obedience than by aptitude.

There are many styles of learning – fast, slow, deep, shallow, literal, abstract, disciplined, intuitive – yet we conceive of “high” and “low” achievers through standardized tests that are valued precisely because they simplify everyone onto a single metric. When testing becomes the end game of education, we all suffer. Excessive reliance on testing dehumanizes students and ultimately sabotages their education. Students who feel valued and respected are more apt to learn. The infuriating paradox in our district is that top-level classes are discussion based, encouraging of critical thinking and debate, while lower-level classes too often focus exclusively on test prep.

Education is about empathy, respect, creativity, and citizenship as much as it is about literacy and arithmetic. These values reenforce each other. Knowledge is power, and schools should empower students. Let’s teach compound interest alongside the history of redlining and predatory lending. Education is about life, not the GEPA.

There is much to be gained by heterogenous classes. One of the best ways to learn something is to teach it to a peer. And one of the best ways to be challenged, is to be confronted by someone who’s experiences and values are different from your own. That is what I most cherish from my education in this district. And for that, I really have to thank a group of my classmates, some of whom who are here tonight, for literally stopping classes my senior year to create a conversation among students in different levels.

Lets not forget, we’re all in this together. Today’s students are tomorrow’s voters, workers, mortgage-signers, taxpayers, parents, neighbors. Your children’s lives are affected not just by their own education, but by the education of everyone who participates in this society. To fret about the rigor of your special snowflake’s 6th grade social studies curriculum in light of massive, structural inequality is short-sighted and just plain wrong.

There is a wide-spread assumption that integrating classes will destroy our education system and wipe out our property values. Students can feel this very early on, and it is exactly this kind of attitude that perpetuates inequality. The best way to lift your property values is to do what’s right: work towards a system that benefits all students instead of only half. Lets reject the politics of fear, and instead move forward with empathy, creativity, and determination.

activism, economic doom, ows, politics

Rocky Anderson 2012

So I was really looking forward to writing-in “Mike Check” on my ballot next November, but looks like now there’s a chance to vote for a breathing person, albeit perhaps just as symbolically.

Anderson, candidate of the newly formed Justice Party (the website currently leaves much to be desired, but is clearly a work in progress) is genuinely anti-war, upfront about his opposition to the war on drugs, a staunch defender of civil liberties & and the environment, and— perhaps most importantly— committed to getting money out of politics. He will not accept any campaign contributions in excess of $100, stating “We launched the Justice Party because the entire system is so corrupt … It’s so diseased. We know that the public interest is not being served by anyone in the system right now, particularly the two dominant parties who have sustained this corrupt system and who are sustained by it.” Remember: Obama took more money from Wall St. than any other candidate, and despite widespread, systemic fraud, no major banksters have yet been prosecuted, much less sent to prison.

As a progressive former Democrat in Utah, the most reliably conservative state in the country, Rocky Anderson is no stranger to long odds or short shrift. Among other things, Anderson has been a fierce opponent of the Iraq invasion, supports gay marriage and is an ardent environmentalist. (Think former London mayor Ken Livingstone surrounded by conservative Mormons.)

As the former mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah’s capital and largest city, he also has a knack for framing an agenda in search of the broadest possible audience. “We don’t talk about gay liberation in Utah,” he told me in an interview in 2005. “We talk about healthy families and strong communities and say that in the most intimate aspects of our lives the government ought to butt out.” He served two terms before bowing out voluntarily.

In the next year, he’ll have to harness both that experience and savvy for the task he has now set himself: launching a new political party, the Justice party, and running for president in 2012.

His agenda is a familiar one on the left. Broadly speaking, he wants to break the hold of corrupting corporate influence on the two main parties and give a voice to ordinary working people. It also chimes with the general thrust of the Occupy movement, even though the latter has steered clear of engagement with electoral politics.

“The more time has gone on, the more it has become clear that we’re not going see change in this country with these two parties,” he says. “There are lots of good individuals in the Democratic party, [but] without Democrats voting the way they did in Congress, we wouldn’t have invaded Iraq. We wouldn’t have suffered as a nation because of these Bush tax cuts.

“Obama received more money from Wall Street than any presidential candidate ever. And they got a great return on their investment.”

This would represent the first attempt to apply the principles of the Occupy movement within the electoral area. Anderson points out discussions about launching the party preceded the emergence of the Occupy Wall Street. But while there are no organisational links, he says there is plenty of common ground. “There is clearly a convergence of interests regarding the concerns we have and the concerns of Occupy Wall Street. There’s little I’ve heard from the Occupy movement that I would disagree with and I think there’s little we support that they would disagree with.”
…

Anderson believes progressives have been paralysed by the fear that they’ll be accused of acting as a Trojan horse for the right; and their inaction has resulted in growing cynicism and political and economic deterioration.

“As long as the fear of being a spoiler prevents people from moving in a direction that will change the corrupt system that’s in place, then we’ll never see change in this country,” he says. “At least, we’ll never see changes move in a positive direction. The choice people have now is to either support a very different way that would signal a revolution and vast correction of the systemic problems in our government – or they can carry on going in the same direction they have been going all these years that’s resulted in so much tragedy for people in this country and the world.”
…

“It’s a perfect storm for an alternative party that would be a major force in American politics,” says Anderson. “The system’s completely broken. Everyone in this country knows that’s why we’re not seeing policies coming from the White House or Congress that really serve the interests of the American people. They keep selling out. Not because they’re bad people, but because they’re part of the system.

“We don’t only have a two-tier economic system in this country. We have a two-tier judicial system, where the rich and powerful don’t have to worry about violating the law. Not one person from Wall Street has been arrested, charged or convicted for what has happened during this financial crisis.”

“Rocky Anderson’s Radical Third Way” – The Guardian

From wikipedia:

As Mayor, Anderson rose to nationwide prominence as a champion of several national and international causes, including climate protection, immigration reform, restorative criminal justice, GLBT rights, and an end to the “war on drugs”. Before and after the invasion by the U.S. of Iraq in 2003, Anderson was a leading opponent of the invasion and occupation of Iraq and related human rights abuses. Anderson was the only mayor of a major U.S. city who advocated for the impeachment of President George W. Bush, which he did in many venues throughout the United States.
…

Formerly a member of the Democratic Party, Anderson expressed his disappointment with that Party in 2011,[16] stating “(t)he Constitution has been eviscerated while Democrats have stood by with nary a whimper. It is a gutless, unprincipled party, bought and paid for by the same interests that buy and pay for the Republican Party.

For those of you who still believe voting for a third party is akin to voting for the republicans, I kindly point you to Michael J. Smith’s unfinished Stop Me Before I Vote Again— in particular What’s the matter with… liberals? and What is to be done?— and remind you that, in fact, voting for a democrat is nearly akin to voting for the republicans.

I respect those who continue to vote for Democrats for fear of what the Republicans would do to reproductive & LGBT rights, not to mention the legacy of republican judicial appointees. But, it’s quite clear that the Democratic party has been shifting steadily rightward since the 80s. Without a genuine liberal/progressive (both measly words with dubious histories – I am happy that Anderson selected the word “Justice” for his party) threat to the dems, they have no incentive to stop that drift. Which means the few rights you think you’re protecting by sticking with the dems could easily be discarded a few years from now– take the Obama administration’s recent decision to override the FDA on Plan B– just as any non-sham commitment to civil liberties, peace, education, healthcare, and economic justice has been completely rejected by the Dems. So even those who still believe there’s something to be salvaged in the Democratic party ought to consider the role third parties can play in shifting the center back to somewhere left of Reagan.

Personally, there’s no way I can support a president or a party who refuses to prosecute financial criminals despite the destruction they’ve perpetrated; who believes education and prisons ought to be privatized; who quietly ignores the consequences of our “war on drugs” and our obscenely high incarceration rate; who “ends the war” while exponentially increasing the number of drone strikes on countries we’re not even at war with; who is bought and owned by corporate interests including wall st., pharma, big agriculture, and the military-industrial complex; who authorizes the murder of Americans citizens without due process and then refuses to veto a bill stating that all of America is a battleground, thus authorizing the indefinite detention of anyone, including citizens, without a charge or trial … these, to me, are all deal breakers. I will not compromise on these issues out of fear that the other guy is worse.

And so I look forward to having a real candidate to vote for (that is, presuming he can make it on the ballot, unlikely), rather than a symbolic write-in or abstain. Its worth noting that around half of America’s eligible-to-vote population stays home (or more likely, is stuck at work) each election. Not voting could be construed as apathy. Or it could be construed as disapproval of both candidates – of voting “no” on the system itself. So when one considers that half of the population is effectively rejecting the system, it leaves a lot of potential for mobilization around a new paradigm. I’m not at all optimistic, but I’m certainly not delusional enough to vote for any more Democrats.

activism, books, economic doom, ows, politics

Economics as a moral question

So, “Does the system behave the way we want it to behave?” is ultimately a moral question, one that we are banned from asking. In economics, this is exactly the sort of a question we’re not allowed to ask, because economics is supposed to be a positive science, not a normative science. The difference is clear: positive statements should describe things as they are (“facts only, baby”), whereas a normative statement describes things the way we want them to be.

Let’s take Milton Friedman, who was, of course, the biggest proponent of positive economics. He wrote the famous essay “Economics as a Positive Science.” In that essay, on the first page, you will find the following sentence: “Economics should be a positive science.” Now, please tell me if that is a positive or a normative statement.

Interview with Tomas Sedlacek, author of The Economics of Good and Evil: The Quest for Economic Meaning from Gilgamesh to Wall Street

HT NakedCapitalism

activism, art, ashleyamber, film, made by me, politics

ASHLEY/AMBER now on the Internet

I am so pleased to write that as of the past month, my short film has become outdated. Ashely/Amber is now a relic of another era.

The American protest movement has found it’s fighting spirit. Throughout the nation, the people are out in the streets. Normal people, by which I mean people who’ve never lived in a nudist cooperative house in the Bay Area, are debating the merits of consensus-based decision making and self-governance. We are openly asking: should we play by the rules, control our image, present a simple & easy message? Or is protest not just a means to an ends, but an assertion of democratic sovereignty, which therefore must accommodate the messiness of many opinions, values, and approaches?

The Occupy Movement has thus far negotiated this dilemma beautifully, adopting as its slogan a simple and appealing statement that asserts the rule of the people. The means is the end. We are the 99% and we want a government that represents us. So we assemble in the streets, and represent ourselves. But beyond the initial catharsis of overthrowing our apathy and helplessness, can we keep this going? I hope so, and I hope my film can contribute in some small way, if only to remind us of how impossible this moment felt half a year ago.

This film is dedicated to the occupiers.

activism, economic doom, hope, politics

Declaration of the Occupation of New York City

http://nycga.cc/2011/09/30/declaration-of-the-occupation-of-new-york-city/

As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.

As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known.

They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.
They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give Executives exorbitant bonuses.
They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.
They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.
They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless animals, and actively hide these practices.
They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.
They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right.
They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay.
They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.
They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health insurance.
They have sold our privacy as a commodity.
They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press. They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit.
They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.
They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them.
They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.
They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives or provide relief in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantial profit.
They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit.
They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.
They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt.
They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad. They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas.
They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts. *

To the people of the world,

We, the New York City General Assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert your power.

Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate solutions accessible to everyone.

To all communities that take action and form groups in the spirit of direct democracy, we offer support, documentation, and all of the resources at our disposal.

Join us and make your voices heard!

*These grievances are not all-inclusive.

activism, economic doom, mmt, politics

“What the Country Needs is a New New Deal”

Compelling & accessible argument for a Jobs Guarantee program from L. Randall Wray & Stephanie Kelton:

The truth is simple and contrary to these views. Business will not hire more workers until it has more sales. Consumers will not spend more until they’ve got more jobs. A private-sector recovery requires 300,000 new jobs every month. But the private sector doesn’t need 300,000 new workers per month to meet prospective sales.

The new jobs can only come from the federal government—the only economic entity that can afford to hire. Obama’s 1 million infrastructure jobs is a nice down payment, but it is only three month’s worth. New workers will create the sales that firms need to justify new hiring. Still, we must think bigger if we are to create 20 million jobs.

…

There is a way to do that: The government could serve as the “employer of last resort” under a job guarantee program modeled on the WPA (the Works Progress Administration, in existence from 1935 to 1943 after being renamed the Work Projects Administration in 1939) and the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps, 1933-1942). The program would offer a job to any American who was ready and willing to work at the federal minimum wage, plus legislated benefits. No time limits. No means testing. No minimum education or skill requirements.

The program would operate like a buffer stock, absorbing and releasing workers during the economy’s natural boom-and-bust cycles. In a boom, employers would recruit workers out of the program; in a slump the safety net would allow those who had lost their jobs to continue to work to preserve good habits, making them easier to re-employ when activity picked up. The program would also take those whose education, training or job experience was initially inadequate to obtain work outside the program, enhancing their employability through on-the-job training. Work records would be maintained for all program participants and would be available for potential employers. Unemployment offices could be converted to employment offices, to match workers with jobs in the program, and to help private and public employers recruit workers.

Funding for the job guarantee program must come from the federal government—and the wage should be periodically adjusted to reflect changes in the cost of living and to allow workers to share in rising national productivity so that real living standards would rise—but the administration and operation of the program should be decentralized to the state and local level. Registered not-for-profit organizations could propose projects for approval by responsible offices designated within each of the states and U.S. territories as well as the District of Columbia. Then the proposals should be submitted to the federal office for final approval and funding. To ensure transparency and accountability, the Labor Department should maintain a website providing details on all projects submitted, all projects approved and all projects started.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/with_300_billion_the_president_can_reduce_unemployment_to_zero_20110908