The End of the GOP and the Rise of the Greens

The End of the GOP and the Rise of the Greens.

                                                        Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka

The Green Party seems to be the only viable electoral party in the center left.

The Green Party US is moving to the left. At its 2016 Convention it adopted not only an anti-business, but an anti-capitalism platform. A surprising and bold move for the Greens in the USA.

This anti-capitalist platform is likely to mean a furious fight for the hearts of the Greens. Although the Greens have always rejected any corporate contributions, unlike the Republicans and the Democrats, there are many in the Greens who do not have a clear anti-capitalist agenda.

Does the anti-capitalism platform mean that the Greens will want communism or something less, such as the so called social democracies of Western Europe? Perhaps a third way will come about. We will have to see what develops.

In many ways this future struggle within the Greens has the same feel as that which occurred in the late 1960s in SDS. The split in SDS was over how to defeat capitalism.

 The Greens nominated favorite and native daughter to Massachusetts, Jill Stein. For Vice President the Greens nominated Ajamu Baraka, human rights activist. Mr. Baraka is somewhat like Tim Kaine; neither overshadows their respective Presidential candidate.

                                                       Cornel West and delegates

At the Greens Convention was a good number of former supporters of Bernie Sanders. For the most part they were younger and more enthusiastic than the longtime Greens. Former Sanders supporters have made their presence known to the Green-Rainbows in Massachusetts.

It was not clear whether the former Sanders supporters at the Greens Convention were actual delegates or just unofficially attendees.  This seems to bode well for the Greens who will likely pick up many younger former Sanders supports and increase its draw as a political party.

The labor vote has not come easily to the Greens. This might have been due to the ties of labor bosses to the Democratic Party. I suppose at some point the Wall Street bosses friendship with the Democratic Party could lead to Labor’s defection to the Greens.

The Democrats under President Clinton destroyed the safety net and signed bills that led to mass incarcerations. Hillary Clinton has paid only lip service to Black Lives Matter.

During the 1930s the Black vote went from the Republicans to the Democrats when we Black people saw that the Wall Street bosses had no plan to end the Great Depression and racism. It is likely something similar will take place in the future.

The Democratic Party was a coalition created by FDR to nullify the Wall Street bosses. Those bosses caused the Great Depression of the 20^th Century and the Great Recession of the 21th Century. Today the Democrats are in bed with Wall Street once again while pretending to be pro- labor.

Like Kucinich in 2004, Bernie Sanders has proven himself to be fake.

The Republican Party has split into three parts, fascist, libertarian, and the Charlie Baker moderates. It is no longer a coherent entity.  Only the fascists have the potential for growing, blaming immigrants and using racism. The Libertarians are just in the wrong century. The moderate Republicans are moving into the Democratic Party where they are being openly courted.

Like the Know Nothing Party of the 1800s the GOP is disappearing. It seems that the Greens are becoming the new FDR coalition.

The Muck of Racism

The Muck of Racism

Modern day racists have grown sophisticated. They are able to hide their racism behind political correctness and the pretext of law. We have seen this in Worcester.

The mainly White dog park people are treated better than the mainly Hispanic dirt bike park people.

This type of so called color blind racism has reared its ugly head in Dudley MA where the Town has blocked the practice of a religion. It is, to almost everyone, clear that the underlying cause of the Town’s opposition to an Islamic cemetery is racism and anti-Islamic prejudice.

However, an activist in the Muslim community found it hard to accept that the people of Dudley could be as racist as the media depict them. She felt that the people of Dudley were actually concerned with traffic.

I mentioned to her that the traffic in a fairly large cemetery like Hope Cemetery had no issues and that a small cemetery such as is proposed for Dudley would likely have no traffic issues either.

She finally said that if the cemetery was for Swedes or Jews the Town was not likely to have opposed it.

The Islamic Society is suing the Town in Land Court, challenging the interpretation that a Special Permit is needed to change agricultural land to a cemetery. The Islamic Society is arguing that a Special permit is not required by the State statute,

The Town’s argument is that a Special Permit is required. However the Town is also arguing it has the right of first refusal for the sale of the property. For this reason it argues the Islamic Society has no “standing” and cannot even apply for the Special Permit.

The Town’s pretext has now become that it did NOT deny the Islamic Society a Special Permit. It only informed the Islamic Society it was not legal for the Islamic Society to apply for the Special Permit. The Town informed the Islamic Society of this technicality eight months AFTER it had made its application.

It took the Town lawyer that long to come up with its color blind regulation.

The ACLU has entered the case based on the First Amendment guarantees against government interference in the practice of religion. Although it is bringing its case to Federal Court. The right to religious freedom is also found in State statutes and ironically in the by-laws of Dudley MA.

When I was on the Board of Directors of the Civil Liberty Union of Massachusetts the ACLU lawyers brought a lot of resources to a case. Recently the ACLU defeated the Worcester ordinance against panhandling. It is unlikely Dudley will be able to match the forces amassing against it.

The Islamic Society proffered a settlement of a cemetery with reduced acreage of 12.5 acres. The Town rejected this offer and now the Town is in court.

It might make better sense for Dudley to take another look at this compromise. If it does not it will likely have to pay millions in legal fees. The lawyers who overturned Worcester’s panhandling ordinance sent the City a bill for one million dollars.

More importantly Dudley might be able wipe some of the muck that its racist actions have brought to it.

Body Cameras For Worcester Police

Body Cameras for Worcester Police

Several years ago Chief Gemme, now retired, announced that the Worcester Police Department was investigating the policy of the use of body cameras for on duty patrol officers. Like with most “policy” issues in the City of Worcester the investigation was conducted in secret.

Advocates of the policy of using body cameras pointed out that body cameras protect both the public and the police officers. The information provided by the video is considered indisputable, unlike oral testimony. 

With body cameras the actions of a member of the public is clearly shown and this protects police officers from false or unsubstantial complaints. Also the actions of the police is clearly recorded protecting the public from poorly trained police officers or officers who are racist.

Body cameras are used in at least 42 large departments nation-wide and many more smaller departments.  Boston is initiating the use of body cameras on a trial basis this year. Leicester MA and the Brookfield already use them.

The overall results have been that the number of complaints made by the public are down and the number of arrests is also down. Both statistics point to a reduction of frivolous activity by the public and police. Such interactions over what many of us would call frivolous often leads to escalations.

The City Council has essentially abrogated it duty and responsibility to set policy for the Worcester Police Department. The City Manager and City Council are just rubber stamps for whatever the Police Chief and his cronies tell them.

There is no transparency in terms of complaints by the public. There is no significant external oversight over use of funds. Several City Councillors have passed resolutions in effect saying “support the cops, right or wrong”

A group of residents are petitioning the City Council to have public hearings on changes to Worcester Police policies. The petition will be given to the Worcester City Council at the August 16, 2016 City Council meeting.

Hopefully if approved by City Council, the public hearings will real and honest. The hearing should not be like the joke of City Manager Augustus’ hearings in 2015 in which the police chief did not appear and the notes were lost.

The ACLU has come up with a set of rules, a policy for the use of body cameras by the police. The Boston Police Department has adopted 80 percent of the ACLU’s proposals.

These proposals include when the cameras should be turned on or off, who gets access to the videos, verification of the cameras’ operation, etc.

These proposals certainly could be used as a basis for the City Council establishing a body camera policy for the Worcester Police Department. The City Council should also conduct an audit about any money received via grants for a pilot program for body camera use.

I been to a lot of City Council meeting and seen a lot of petitions describing good policies for the City. I have seen that most of these petitions were filed or thrown away. The petition regarding changes to Worcester Police policy is too important to be ignored.

Given the tensions between the public, especially people of color and the poor, and the police, there is a real need for the protection of our rights.