Lessons in Moving the 99%

Last weekend I attended my first Sunday School—the Sunday school put on by the School for Unity and Liberation (SOUL) to be specific.  The 3 hour long session was called “Lesson’s in Moving the 99%,” and over 80 people packed into SOUL’s offices to participate.  If Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had been there, I imagine he’d have been humbly and intently listening to the next generation of organizers and youth, while of course silently celebrating his 83^rd birthday.

Sitting at the front of the 9-story high room in downtown Oakland were panelists Maria Poblet of Causa Justa Just Cause, Shaw San Liu of Chinese Progressive Association (CPA), Brooke Anderson of East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy, and Tina Bartolome of SOUL—four powerful women with deep insights and experience in organizing movements for social and economic justice.

Many important topics were covered, and here are some of them. 

SUCCESSES OF #OCUPPY

Anderson laid out five successes of #occupywallstreet: “1) It changed the national conversation from being about the debt ceiling and how much to cut services to bank accountability, class inequality, and wealth redistribution.  2) It has taken away the stigma of struggling economically. 3) It has named bigger targets, like Wall St., when we are so often only targeting middle-men. 4) It as put direct action at the forefront; marching can be more accessible than lobbying officials in Sacramento.  5) It’s gotten us out of our campaign silos.”

LABOR

Anderson educated us about the 2000 truck drivers at the Port of Oakland, 97% of whom are immigrants, who work 12-14 hour days often below minimum wage and without access to bathrooms.  They are fighting for the right to unionize, as was highlighted in their open letter released during the Port of Oakland Shutdown on December 12^th.

In general, “Labor needs Occupy,” Anderson said, reminding us that unions are severely limited because they can get sued and essentially destroyed for breaking laws.  (Davey D reported for example, that Goldman Sachs threatened to sue ILWU if they endorsed the port shutdown.) 

Citing the book Solidarity Divided, Anderson said that when asked who they were accountable too, U.S. union leadership said “our members,” but South African union leaders said they’re accountable to the entire working class.  

Shaw San Liu spoke about the base she organizes with CPA: service sector workers and the unemployed in SF Chinatown.   “Only 20 years ago, San Francisco had a large garment and manufacturing industry, the outsourcing of which dislocated mostly limited-English-speaking Chinese immigrant women.  Now you have many families living on very low incomes.  It’s the norm make only $1000-1200 per month working crazy hours.  Yet when you bring up minimum wage and overtime laws, many workers will tell you, ‘That doesn’t exist.  I don’t want to lose my job.  I am a foreigner in this country.’”

She spoke about how CPA organizers are sometimes perceived as the “left-wing nuts in China town” when they’re not even fighting for anything radical—just the enforcement of labor laws that already exist.  The #occupy moment has allowed them to put on turbo all the work they’d already been doing, she said, but amidst the euphoria that some of the #occupywallstreet actions have brought, “we’ve gotta keep fighting for the crumbs because people gotta eat.” 

WHITENESS and RACISM

Maria Poblet broke it down: “Communities of color have known these issues for a longtime—joblessness, cuts to the safety net, a lack of democracy or control—this is the product of an international economic system.”  She challenged the whiteness of the #occupy movement that too often acts as if the movement for economic justice is a new thing.   “People in the global south have been waiting for the U.S. to show up,” she said.  And closer to home: “Black people can tell you what long term divestment and unemployment can do to a community.”

She brought up the crucial role of the white working class, “which has traditionally been bought off by whiteness,” she pointed out.  “I am happy that the white working class now has a choice between the Tea Party and Occupy.  I hope they choose Occupy.   Can white working class people be involved in an antiracist movement?” she asked.  “The challenge is also for people of color to work with them.  This is a debate and development that needs to happen in the progressive movement.  What can we say that represents everyone yet is still radical and antiracist?”

One teenage girl expressed the raw and honest concerns of many when she said, “It just seems really white…People are talking about these problems like they’ve never existed.”

Shaw San Liu offered one constructive approach when she said, “We’ve also got to push past the discomfort.  A lot of people just haven’t been exposed.  A lot of people at the SF encampment were open to being schooled.”   Perhaps, it’s a more optimistic outlook, but important, especially, I’d say, for white antiracists, who have the responsibility of educating fellow white people.

But it’s never simple.  “It’s challenging to engage the masses when parts of the 99% are exploiting other parts of the 99%, when poor people are oppressing poorer people.  We’ve got to deliberate in not getting caught up in one action after another, but making sure everyday people have an understanding of and ownership of the movement.”  Speaking to a majority people of color audience, Shaw San Liu emphasized, “We need to be engaging our folks so our folks can help shape the direction of Occupy.”

LONG TERM ORGANIZING vs. SHORT TERM UPSURGES

Poblet also centered the relationship between spontaneous upsurges and conscious, long-term community organizing.  "The first is vibrant.  It names what is wrong.  It feels like it’s coming from everywhere and going everywhere.  It rising and it falls; I know because of my involvement with the immigrants rights mobilizing in 2006.”

“The second is based around campaigns, naming the solutions as well as the problems, long-term base building, and developing leaders. “

“Neither are enough by themselves.  They both need each other.”

Both Shaw San Liu and Poblet shouted out the mental health medicine that Occupy has been.  “It makes you feel like you’re not crazy,” Poblet laughed.  Shaw San added, “It vindicates the movement building we’ve been sticking out our necks for for so long.”

HOUSING

More than half of Oakland residents in danger of foreclosure are longstanding neighborhood residents, Bartolome pointed out.

Poblet shouted out the house that Causa Justa helped occupy at 10^th and Mandela in West Oakland (which was raided at the end of December) as a pilot project for housing rights organizations nationwide.  “Housing shouldn’t be sitting empty with families are being evicted en masse.”

INTERNATIONALISM

“This is the failure of the neoliberal economic model coming home to roost.  This system has been causing massive migration, informal economies, mass social movement all over the world.  People in the global south are waiting for the U.S. to show up.  We’re got to remember that we still are the 1% to most of the world,” said Poblet, reminding us that her home country of Argentina went to a major financial crash 11 years ago that was worse than the current one in the U.S.

CULTURE

We unfortunately didn’t get to talk about this much, though Shaw San brought it up.  Let me just link you here.

ELECTIONS

How do we creating policy, such as taxing the 1% and a moratorium on foreclosures, without co-optation?  How do we have a systemic critique without disengaging from traditional structures, like the electoral system?  These were tension Poblet put on the table.

While the speakers didn’t mince words about the injustices perpetuated by the Obama administration, they warned against disengaging from the Democrats too much.  “People who always vote will vote.  People who have a critique always disengage…We have more and more correct ideas [on the left], but less people doing anything about them,” Poblet said.  She spoke about pushing elected officials with movements from below, especially having a strategic understanding of elected progressives.  Former community organizer John Avalos pushed SF mayor Ed Lee first as a supervisor, but then as mayor candidate, to enact millions of dollars worth of public services, Poblet said.   “Electoral politics is a tool—one of many tools.”

DISCUSSION & ENCOUNTER: TOWARDS A UNIFIED MULTIRACIAL WORKING CLASS

“We need places for discussion, in addition to the convergences.  We need to be aligned.   What would an International Working People’s Union of the 99% look like?”  Poblet challenged the group.

Shaw San Liu spoke about the Progressive Workers Alliance, an alliance between black, Latino, Asian-Pacific Islander, and queer workers she helped form in SF last year.

What would it take to include the white working class on that list?

In the end, Poblet warned against disengaging from the movement that has swelled nationally: “Anyone who puts blast on Wall St. can be on our team.  This is a laboratory for our development as a movement.  As funky as the dynamics can be, stay involved, write, reflect,” she said.

Foreward movement.

UPCOMING ACTIONS

Join the Ella Baker Center Book Club.  This month we are reading “Hillbilly Nationalists, Urban Race Rebels, and Black Power.”   It’s about multiracial, working-class coalition organizing in the 1960’s between the Black Panthers, Young Lords, and Young Patriots (poor whites). 

Occupy Wall Street West

Friday, January 20

ALL DAY

SF Financial District (meet at Justin Herman Plaza at 6am, noon, 5pm)

THIS IS NEXT BIG BAY AREA OCUPPY WALL STREET ACTION.  Come out and hit the streets any time of the day.   The big action at 5pm (for those getting out of work/school) will be anchored by the folks I’ve quoted in this post!

“Share the Fortune” led by the Colorful Mama’s of the 99%

Saturday January 21^st

Bank of America, Oakland Chinatown

10am (meet at Lincoln Park, 11^th and Harrison)

It’s the weekend before the lunar new year, and the time to “clean the crap out of your house, life, and Wall St.”  It will also be extremely cute!

The Death of Kenneth Harding and Holding SFPD and the Media Accountable

Much has been unfolding around the death of 19 year old Kenneth Harding in Bay View Hunters Point on July 16th, and whether or not he was killed by the SFPD.  Here is my understanding of the facts.

First, here is the video of Kenneth Harding dying in broad daylight, on the ground, blood pouring out of his body, as he makes feeble attempts to move.  Several police train their guns on him and create a barrier to holding back an increasingly upset crowd.  (WARNING: this video is very graphic and triggering.)



I first saw this video on July 17th and was very upset and disturbed by it.  To watch how the police acted while this teenager was dying from a gunshot wound is painful and infuriating.  If you have enough humanity left in you that to watch this is unbearable, we need more of you.

But let's look at what led up to this moment--the part that isn't on tape.

Harding was riding a Muni train when uniformed SFPD officers began doing fare checks.   The officers detained Harding (for not having proof of paying the $2 fare), and then Harding ran from them.

The SFPD claimed that their officers fired at Harding in self-defense after Harding had turned around--while fleeing--and shot at them.  Therefore they admitted to having fatally shot Harding, but claimed that is was only because he had shot first.

The police claim that they have witnesses, but as pointed out by journalist Davey D, no eye witnesses have spoken to the media saying that Harding was armed and had fired a shot.  Yet at least a half dozen eye witnesses have spoken to media saying they did not see Harding fire a shot.

The SFPD initially said that Harding's gun was found later that day, thanks to a cell-phone video from a person at the scene.  The SFPD said that the gun must've fallen out of Harding's hand, but that the officers didn't see it at the time.  Here is the video of the SFPD press conference on July 18th.


SFPD Press Conference Regarding Officer Involved Shooting on 3rd Street from San Francisco Police on Vimeo.

From about 3:03 to 3:36 in the video above, police chief Greg Suhr shows the cell-phone video (as part of a newscast) and points to a man in a striped hoody picking up the gun, which is several yards from where Harding had fallen on the ground.

But here is the cell-phone video of the man in the hoody picking up the gun.  The way the newscast edited the video is misleading.  There does appear to be a gun on the ground, at the right hand corner of the screen at 0:15.  What do you think?  (For a still click here or see below).  But at 1:20 the man in the striped hoody is picking up a cell phone, not a gun.  Why would the SFPD lie about that?

A gun in the bottom right corner?

The SFPD said they "continued to work as many citizens that would come forward" to track down the gun (which they didn't notice on the ground at the time).  They said they they later obtained it at somebody's home.

Then on July 19 and 21, the SFPD came out with more press releases.  These press releases did two things: 1) they created a body of scientific evidence to back their story, and 2) they changed their story.

Their evidence includes the audio and map of the 10 shots fired (which they can do with a triangulation technology called Shot Spotter).  This evidence offers more details, but it can't prove who was doing the shooting shooting.

Their evidence also includes gun residue on Harding's right hand and a .380 caliber round found in his pocket.  If this is true, it's very convincing evidence that Harding was armed.  But let's not jump to conclusions.

The way the press release is worded indicates that the "analysis" that found gun residue was conducted by SFPD, and there appears to be no indication that is was confirmed by an independent source.  The .380 caliber found in his pocket was found by the SF Medical Examiner's staff.  But keep in mind the SFPD had made no mention of this piece of evidence for over four days since the shooting the took place.

All of this must be understood in context where, only several months ago, the SFPD was forced to throw out 57 felony cases for falsifying evidence, as Davey D has consistently reminded folks.  

Furthermore, the SPFD has completely changed their initial story and is now saying that Harding shot and killed himself.

The police carry .40 caliber guns (according to the SFPD).  The bullet found lodged in Harding's head, which entered through is neck, was .38 caliber.  But keep in mind that while the SF Medical Examiner's office indicated that path of the bullet through Harding's body, it was the SF Police Crime Lab that identified the bullet as .38 caliber.  To the best of my knowledge, this hasn't been confirmed by an independent source.

The SPFD also said the gun they had obtained  was a .45 caliber.

If this evidence is true, neither the "reclaimed gun," nor the police officer's guns, were the guns that killed Harding.  How convenient.  Harding's gun (if he had one) is still missing, and the police officers are no long culpable.

But again, this is all only if the bullet in his head is actually .38 caliber, which hasn't been confirmed by a third party, and if the police also don't have other guns that aren't .40 caliber that they may have used.

The Media
Lastly, it is infuriating to see how a lot of the media covered this, often leading their stories with the fact that Harding was a "person-of-interest" in the murder of a pregnant teen in Seattle, Washington, as well as the fact that he was on parole for attempting to promote teenage prostitution.  As horrible as these crimes are (whoever did them), they have nothing to do with this case.  The police were chasing a black teenager who hadn't paid his Muni fare.  Period.  They did not know anything more about his background.  Furthermore, a "person-of-interest" is not even a suspect.  And the mother of the victim of that murder has said her daughter was not actually pregnant.  This kind of sensationalized information works to block people's instinct to empathize with Harding as a victim of a shooting.  It gets readers stuck on the fact that he's an "incorrigible violent criminal" who's "a menace to society," a racialized stereotype so deeply ingrained into our collective psyche.  But please, let's not let that blind us to what actually happened.

"The community" of Bayview Hunters point is often mentioned as outraged and traumatized by the event--rightfully so.  But failing to to actually quote a variety of these individuals--especially those who were eye witnesses--serves to marginalize them as just "a community" who are emotional about the shooting, but don't have anything factual or objective to offer to the case.   This is incredibly insulting.  If anyone should be charged with injecting irrational emotion to this conversation, it should be the media that lead their stories with Harding's possible criminal past before actually talking about the facts of what happened.

The Investigation
Who initially made the public announcement linking Harding to a criminal past?  The SFPD Homicide Detail, which is one of the 4 agency's doing an investigation of this case (see video of press conference above).   Yes, one of the agencies supposedly providing an objective investigation into what happened is the one suggesting that Harding could be a murderer, when in reality he was not even a suspect: he was a "person of interest."

Who are the other three agencies investigating this case?  1)  SFPD's Internal Affairs, which is also not really independent because it's part of the SFPD.  2)  The District Attorney, George Gascon, who was the head of the SFPD until six and a half months ago!  and 3) the Office of Citizen Complaints.

These are the facts.  Major thanks to independent reporter Davey D for being the main source for many in shining a light on this case.  Keep shining a light on SFPD and the media.  Hold them accountable.

Oakland Small Schools Movement

The parent-led movement for small, autonomous, community based schools in Oakland is incredibly inspirational, visionary, and practical.

Check out this film I put together with Dave Room of Bay Localize for OCO (Oakland Community Organizations) in May.

Futures Elementary School

"The Story of Futures" is a movie I filmed and edited.  This film is several weeks outdated now, but I am sharing it anyway.  Look out for a second film about Oakland schools and budget cuts soon.

We Are One: Nationwide Rallies for Worker's Rights

In the Oakland sunshine at lunchtime on Monday, union folks and their allies came out in full-force for a rally at city hall.   Even though I wasn't there for long, the people power invigorated my whole body and spirit!

If that was only a fraction on the Madison, Wisconsin protests, I can't imagine how exhilarating it all must have been there.  

It hammered home for me the power and joy of working people when they are united for the livelihood of all.  It was a beautiful and powerful thing to witness.  Now I get why the right-wingers are so afraid of unions. :)

Futures Elementary Faces Mass Layoffs

Originally posted on the Ella Baker Center blog:

"When they say anything say 'why is it?'

Class is in session 'til the teacher gets a pink slip

Forty to a class, no wonder we delinquent

Half the school district never make to commencement"

-Blue Scholars, "No Rest for the Weary"

As we witness the United States military begin to fire missiles on the people of yet another foreign nation, budget cuts continue to wreak havoc at home. This month, the Oakland Unified School District sent out layoff notices to 538 teachers — 22% of the teaching staff.   But what does that actually mean?  As some teachers will tell you, “It is not about us losing our jobs. It is about students losing hope in their own future.”

Take the case of Futures Elementary in East Oakland (where I have been assisting on a campaign to challenge the layoffs). Before 2007 it was Lockwood Elementary, which suffered from violence, drug-dealing, eight principals in eight years, and incredibly high teacher turnover.  Since it transformed into Futures four years ago, it’s become a success story.  Not only have test scores risen, but the teachers, staff, and parents have collaborated to create a nurturing environment where all of the kids can grow.

One parent said, “My five year old son is terrified of police.  When he sees a police car, he sits back in his seat.  But once he walks through the doors of Futures, he will talk and shake hands with the campus police officer.”   When I visited Futures, I was astounded by the amount of care and learning that they’d created.  I witnessed students volunteering to tie each other’s shoes and making paintings about how much they loved their school.  I saw kindergartners sit in a circle on the floor practicing mindfulness.  One student raised her hand to express her “loving kindness,” which she shared with her peers duck-duck-goose style, tapping each of them on their head.

Oakland’s current budget plans would destroy all of this.

The district-wide layoffs are determined by seniority. The last hired is the first fired.  Because all of the Futures teachers are relatively new to the district, 100% of them received layoff notices. To paraphrase a former Lockwood Elementary school student, “How can you expect us to function in a school when there’s a new staff—with new rules—every year?”  Speaking also about the teacher-layoffs he’s currently facing as a high school student, he added, “Honestly, I don’t want to come back to a school where I’m not going to know the teachers anymore.”

Parents, though, are starting to organize. Seniority-based lay-offs are not the only way to go.  Districts will skip over high-need teachers  such as those who teach special ed.  There is also a clause in the California Ed Code that says disproportionate layoffs are unconstitutional because they deny children their right to equal and equitable education. Parents and the ACLU won a lawsuit against Los Angeles Unified earlier this year on these very grounds.  The story is by no means over.

With these budget cuts, we’re witnessing the school to prison pipeline in action, and it’s up to us to make that clear.  Parents will tell you that if you shut down and disrupt the education of their children, you’re only setting the stage for more incarceration further down the road.  Instead, we should be dedicating more funding, especially to preschool and elementary school. It is at these early ages when children form their relationship to the institutions and society around them.  An investment in them at these early ages pays back a thousand fold down the road.

When so many of our public schools are failing children, it’s schools like Futures that are on the front lines providing the hope and care children need to reach the potential that is inside them.  Now is the time to stand up to protect their future. Sign the petition to let the California public vote on tax extensions, which, if passed, would minimize the worst of the budget cuts.

Books not bars.

Schools not jails.

The People's Hearing on Racism and Police Violence

One of my favorite films about globalization is the fictional narrative Bamako.  The entire film is set in a courtyard of Bamako, the capital of Mali.  Amidst the comings and goings of daily life, folks hold a people’s tribunal on the devastation of neoliberal free-trade polices on the global south.  Farmers and lawyers from Mali give testimony and argue against representatives from the World Bank.  It is incredibly powerful, and I highly recommend it. I'm reminded of it because of a similar type of "people's tribunal":

I had the privilege of attending the People’s Hearing on Racism and Police Violence this weekend in Oakland, which was open to the public.   From 9 to 5 on both Saturday and Sunday, at least 100 people at any one time sat in the gym of Edna Brewer Middle School listening to people speak about their experience with police brutality.  The amount of truth-telling and synergy in the space was off the charts!

Often individual’s stories of police violence are isolated, but at this event, everyone’s testimonies overlapped to create one powerful collective narrative.  Family members of Derrick Jones, Raheim Brown, and Gary King testified, as well as a close family friend of Oscar Grant.  A black panther spoke about being incarcerated as a political prisoner and tortured. Young organizers at the forefront of the Oscar Grant movement spoke about how Cointelpro tactics are alive and well today, documenting their own stories of repeated police harassment.  

Another testifier emphasized that the police are becoming increasingly embedded in people’s daily lives: the local police, probation, and parole systems in black communities, ICE in Latino communities, and the FBI in Arab and Muslim communities.  “When men are dealing with this level of violence in their daily lives, it comes into the home, which results in domestic violence.  But it’s not domestic violence; it’s state violence.”  Another organizer spoke about her first experience with police violence as an 8 year-old girl, and how political organizing saved her life.

Meanwhile, free childcare, free food, and free mental health services were available to anyone and everyone.

Four sessions were held in total: Racial Profiling, Police Killings, Cointelpro and Beyond, and Organized Resistance.  For each, about 7 people gave testimony on stage, while about 7 jurists (lawyers) shared the stage with them and asked questions.  The public had a chance to ask questions as well.  

Audience members were also encouraged to go to a breakout room and share their own experiences with police brutality.  The jurists’ legal summaries of the event, combined with video documentation of the testimony, will create a body of evidence of systemic police repression in Oakland.  This will be presented to international bodies documenting human rights abuses and the executive branch of the federal government, demanding that it “adhere to its obligations under the CERD Treaty and create a National Plan of Action to Eliminate Racism and Racial Discrimination.” 

History was made last weekend in Oakland, but history is never over.

WEBSITE (where videos of the testimony are now available): peopleshearing.wordpress.com

  

A version of this was posted at the Ella Baker Center blog.   I would also like to ask the question that one of the jurists did at the event: What does it take for middle class, predominantly white communities -- who don't know police violence as part of their/our daily lives -- to become sensitized (or perhaps even outraged) by police repression?  This, of course, is a big barrier to social change.