Daily Archives: March 1, 2017

During the height of the violent protests by the anti-war movement in the late 60s, a cartoon circulated that reflected the shock parents experienced at their long-haired, profanity-spewing communist-flag waving children. In an attempt to soothe said parents the cartoon had one wife telling her husband, Dont worry about it, honey. Why, even Max Eastman ended up writing for Readers Digest.

This implication that Eastman, once nearly thrown in jail for supposedly violating the Espionage Act by opposing World War I on socialist grounds, had now embraced the establishment depends heavily on which establishment one is talking about.

It is certainly true that by the 1940s, the former proponent of the Bolshevik Revolution had veered rightward, abandoning even socialism and embracing the anticommunism of the Readers Digest where he worked.

But if one considers the intellectual zeitgeist as one feature of the establishment, then Eastman was never part of it; indeed, he spent a large part of his life as a minority of one.

While American crowds cheered Woodrow Wilsons declaration of war in 1917, Eastman denounced Americas entry into World War I as simply to make money for the upper classes. When he continued to oppose the war through his writings for the anti-war left-wing Masses magazine, Eastman was prosecuted by the government for supposedly violating the Espionage Act, which made it a federal crime to agitate against the war (Eastman won the case).

In the early 20s, he was a frequent visitor to Bolshevik Russia and was very much the premature anti-Stalinist while other leftists praised Stalin. Eastman, by turns, caught the thuggish nature of the then-Party member Stalin early and warned that the Soviet Union would slide into dictatorship should Stalin take power.

Sidney Hook, an anti-Stalinist Marxist who nonetheless was frequently at loggerheads with Eastman, praised Eastman as a lone voice warning against Stalin:

Of all the forms of intellectual independence Eastman displayed in his life, nothing matched the courage he had to summon up when he stood practically alone on his return from the Soviet Union in 1924. He had brought with him the first hard evidence of the Stalinization of the Bolshevik regime. In consequence, he became a rebel outcast in his own country and a pariah in the radical movement that had been central to his life.

This isolation would be even more accentuated in the 1930s when intellectuals became Stalinists. As a result, Eastmans books were largely ignored, and it reviewed by leftists were denounced as reactionary.

By the late 1930s, Eastman had abandoned even Leon Trotskys brand of Marxism and was a decided anticommunist.

When he brought these views with him into the World War II era when the Soviets and the United States were military partners, and even rock-ribbed Republicans like Henry Luce were praising Stalin, Eastman remained a voice in the wilderness.

By now regarded by even liberal anticommunists as a senile reactionary, Eastman bucked the intellectual tide even further by supporting Senator Joseph McCarthys anticommunist crusade in the 1950s. While liberals denounced McCarthy by the term of red-baiter, Eastman defended both the Senator and that term:

Red Baiting in the sense of reasoned, documented exposure of Communist and pro-Communist infiltration of government departments and private agencies of information and communication is absolutely necessary. We are not dealing with honest fanatics of a new idea, willing to give testimony for their faith straightforwardly, regardless of the cost. We are dealing with conspirators who try to sneak in the Moscow-inspired propaganda by stealth and double talk, who run for shelter to the Fifth Amendment when they are not only permitted but invited and urged by Congressional committee to state what they believe. I myself, after struggling for years to get this fact recognized, give McCarthy the major credit for implanting it in the mind of the whole nation.

Now writing for William F. Buckleys pro-McCarthy National Reviewhe was an original contributing editorEastman in 1955 completely repudiated the revolution he once so fervently championed:

Instead of liberating the mind of man, the Bolshevik revolution locked it into a states prison tighter than ever before. No flight of thought was conceivable, no poetic promenade even, to sneak through the doors or peep out of a window in this pre-Darwinian dungeon called Dialectic Materialism. No one in the western world has any idea of the degree to which Soviet minds are closed and sealed tight against any idea but the premises and conclusions of this antique system of wishful thinking. So far as concerns the advance of human understanding, the Soviet Union is a gigantic road-block, armed, fortified and defended by indoctrinated automatons made out of flesh, blood and brains in robot-factories they call schools.

As supportive of the Cold War as Buckley, Eastman typically parted company with conservatives on the magazine. Against Buckleys fervent Catholicism, Eastman remained an atheist (the magazines increasingly pro-Christian viewpoint would force Eastman to leave it in the 1960s). Always willing to entertain second thoughts, the free marketeer (Eastman helped publish the libertarian Frederich Von Hayek) now believed the conservative movement had been taken over by reactionary forces who confused the quest of social justice with Communist treason.

His final gesture of independence from the movement he was now part of occurred when he opposed the Vietnam War.

At first glance, Eastman would seem to be merely a knee-jerk rebel. But there is a consistent strain in his thinking that traced back to his days as a political leftist radical. The theme he lived by was provided in, of all places, The Masses magazine, when he wrote that the mission of the periodical was to be directed against rigidity and dogma wherever it is found.

And that was Eastmans creed, be it on the Right or the Left.

View original post here:

Max Eastman: Curmodgeon - The Liberty Conservative

Approximately 50 protesters stage a die-in on a street outside of the Pentagon City Mall in Arlington, Virginia, on November 29, 2014, to show solidarity with protesters in Ferguson, Missouri. (Photo: Joseph Gruber)

An Arizona bill that sought to prosecute protest organizers like racketeers is officially dead after widespread outcry forced state lawmakers to put that effort to rest, marking a victory for the national resistance movement currently facing a rash of legislation aimed at stifling dissent.

Arizona House Speaker J.D. Mesnard announced late Monday that the bill,SB 1142, would not move forward in the legislature.

"I haven't studied the issue or the bill itself, but the simple reality is that it created a lot of consternation about what the bill was trying to do," Mesnard, a Republican,toldthePhoenix New Times. "People believed it was going to infringe on really fundamental rights. The best way to deal with that was to put it to bed."

Indeed, the legislation, which would have expanded state racketeering laws to allow police to arrest and seize the assets of suspected protest organizers, made national headlines last week afterpassingthe GOP-led Senate.

However,according toTheArizona Republic, the bill's "fate was sealed over the weekend" as Mesnard "fielded phone calls from the public to complain about the bill. The House leader's personal cellphone number is listed on his personal website. As he listened to the callers, Mesnard realized their belief that the legislation was intended to curb free-speech rights outweighed any merits its supporters might put forward. He carefully read the legislation and by the time he returned Monday to his office, where there were more than 100 messages about the bill awaiting him, he decided he would kill the measure."

The so-called "Plan a Protest, Lose Your House Bill" was the most recent state-level attempt to crackdown on the growing protest movement and opponents celebrated its defeat.

"Thanks to everyone who spoke out against this terrible proposal!" the ACLU of Arizonawroteon Twitter. "Continue fighting for our civil liberties!"

Arecent analysisby theWashington Postfound that "Republican lawmakers in at least 18 states have introduced on voted on legislation to curb mass protests," which includes bills that would "increase punishmentsfor blocking highways,ban the use of masksduring protests, [and] indemnify drivers whostrike protesterswith their cars."

AsCommon Dreamshas previouslyobserved, most of these anti-protest bills have sprouted up in Republican-dominated states that have seen a flurry of demonstrations and civil disobedience.

In Minnesota, where people protested the police killings of Philando Castile and Jamar Clark by blocking roads, measures aimed at raising the penalties for obstructing traffic are gaining traction. Numerous bills wereapprovedby public safety committees in both the House and Senate last week, despite vocalopposition.

Running down some of the other pending legislative efforts,The Atlantic's Matt FordwroteTuesday:

Tennessee lawmakersintroducedtheir own civil-liability bill in February. [...]

Iowa'sSenate File 111would make blocking highways a felony offense with a possible five-year prison sentence.

In Washington, a version of the highway-protest bills came in response to environmentalist-led demonstrations that had targeted the oil industry. State Senator Doug Ericksen introducedSenate Bill 5009, also titled the Preventing Economic Disruption Act. It allows prosecutors to seek longer sentences against defendants who commit crimes that cause "economic disruption," which it defines as obstructing commercial vehicles or interfering with pipelines or oil-related facilities.

Meanwhile, public opposition has already defeated numerous other attempts, such asNorth Dakota's "civil liability" bill,aVirginia effortthat would have brought potential jail time for attending a protest, and now Arizona's SB 1142.

As Lee Rowland, a senior attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, explained to thePost, the new bills are "not about creating new rules that are necessary because of some gap in the law." Rather, Rowland said, the intent is to "increas[e] the penalties for protest-related activity to the point that it results in self-censorship among protesters who have every intention to obey the law."

The laws as well as the impulse to label protesters as "paid" or "professional" agitators are simply "standard operating procedure for movement opponents," according to Douglas McAdam, a Stanford sociology professor who studies protest movements.

"For instance, southern legislatures -- especially in the Deep South -- responded to the Montgomery Bus Boycott (and the Supreme Court's decision inBrown v. Board of Education) with dozens and dozens of new bills outlawing civil rights groups, limiting the rights of assembly, etc. all in an effort to make civil rights organizing more difficult," he wrote in an email to thePost. "Similarly, laws designed to limit or outlaw labor organizing or limit labor rights were common in the late 19th/early 20th century."

The Atlantic's Ford also concluded that "[t]he proposals as a whole point to a more enduring dynamic: As mass protests return to the political zeitgeist, so too will efforts to clamp down on them."

See original here:

Outcry Kills Anti-Protest Law in Arizona, but Troubling Trend Continues Nationwide - Truth-Out

Kendrick Lamars 2015 album To Pimp a Butterfly became a zeitgeist. It seemed to arrive right on time and embodied the spirit of American social consciousness amid the growth of a progressive fight for civil rights in the 21st century. Alright became the theme song for a movement, while Lamars visit with President Obama and his visceral Awards performance helped make TPAB a cultural a keystone of conversations about race in America (which is in part why the album is going to be preserved in Harvards archives). As arguably one of the most influential artists in music today, Lamars next album is more than highly anticipated.

Thundercat & Kendrick Lamar Stay In The Groove On Walk On By (Audio)

The Compton artist (Lamar himself identifies as a writer, not a rapper) has kept a generally tight lip around the details of his as-yet-unnamed follow-up project. However, he did unveil the conceptual framework and mindstate behind it in a recent interview with the New York Times T magazine. To Pimp a Butterfly was addressing the problem, he says. Im in a space now where Im not addressing the problem anymore. However, he does seem to feel theres an oversight that needs to be addressed. Were in a time where we exclude one major component out of this whole thing called life: God. Nobody speaks on it because its almost in conflict with whats going on in the world when you talk about politics and government and the system. This is what goes on in my mind as a writer.

Kendrick continues to describe the thought processes informing his approach to the new album, which include visualizations of the daughter he may have some day, and how being the father of a future woman is something he grapples with on a philosophical level. One day, I may have a little girl. Shes gonna grow up. Shes gonna be a child I adore, Im gonna always love her, but shes gonna reach that one point where shes gonna start experiencing things, he says. And shes gonna say things or do things that you may not condone, but its the reality of it and you know she was always gonna get to that place. And its disturbing. But you have to accept it.

R.A. Shows That Even Rugged Men Change With Fatherhood (Video)

Its then that he expounds upon not addressing the problem anymore. You have to accept it and you have to have your own solutions to figure out how to handle the action and take action for it. When I say the little girl, its the analogy of accepting the moment when she grows up. We love women, we enjoy their company. At one point in time I may have a little girl who grows up and tells me about her engagements with a male figure things that most men dont want to hear.

Learning to accept it, and not run away from it, thats how I want this album to feel, he says.

In a video package for the magazine, Lamar says he makes music because of its powers as a form of self-expression, but also because it allows him to be a voice for those that cant release their frustration on the mic, you know. They gotta do it on the streets. He adds, I wanna put my stories and their stories together for the world to hear.

There is no news yet about when Heads can expect a new Kendrick Lamar album, but from the words he speaks in this interview, its likely to be a powerful token of artistry and once again, it will be right on time. As he says, Its very urgent.

Visit link:

Kendrick Lamar Gives A Glimpse Into His Mindset As He Approaches His New Album (Video) - Ambrosia For Heads