History And Its Discontents

As y'all probably already know, if you're following this Cat's annual Book List & Review over at the sisterblog, we've been reading a lot of history over the past few years, and it has been extremely — extremely very — educational, indeed. We are shoved into schools, as children, not necessarily so much for the purposes of educating our eager young minds as to function as a sort of childcare-cum-penitentiary in which we are prepared for our future as obedient tools of the state. Learning to function in 50-minute segments, to slice-and-dice our attention into suitable spans, to absorb unquestioningly whatever the school system and our local school board shall deem it fit in their infinite lack of wisdom to shovel down our youthful throats.

No one questions this pablum, this feeding-tube of culture and knowledge that is piped directly into our veritable livers of learning, fattening us like those unfortunate foie-gras geese on things that mold our minds and early impressions, but travel under the radar, placing seeds in that fertile soil that are never questioned again.

Some of us are fortunate enough to be raised in homes that value education and the written word for its own benefits. But what about the hundreds of thousands of us who are lucky to complete twelve years of basic education, if that? Those individuals are wandering around with a worldview that is not even close to what those of us fortunate enough — or determined enough, or lucky enough — to educate ourselves further have developed.

Hell, even those of us who are educated better sometimes slip into the easy language of that early pablum. What have Americans been taught about the foundation of this country?

Tonight, PBS will be screening a documentary on General Custer, the stupid schmuck who has come down to us through the ages as the "hero" of "Custer's Last Stand." It's good to know that there are many white (and Black) Americans who have educated themselves on the true nature of this country's founding, and on the genocide of the Native tribes. But the local fishwrap carried a TV review column today by one Dave Weigand, who we must presume is an educated American. Educated sufficiently to find employ with the local fishwrap, in a time when nearly ten per cent of the nation's employable individuals are struggling to find employment. Here, for your enjoyment, are some gems from his recent review.

"After the war, Custer and his wife, Libbie, moved to Fort Riley, Kan., where Custer would head the 7th Cavalry as part of the government's effort to deal with the growing problem of Indians."

No, seriously. This is what passes for an educated reviewer's comment. What, exactly, does the writer mean by "the growing problem of Indians"? Were Indians suddenly becoming taller? Fatter? Experiencing a population explosion? The writer doesn't bother to explain what the term means. You, the reader, are left to figure it out for yourself, to ask your own questions, find out your own information, come to your own conclusions.

But this is a film/tv review, not a history examination or a job interview. We read movie reviews to be entertained, to be amused, to enjoy ourselves in a moment of leisure, slouched in our favourite chair. We're not going to bother to ask questions about what we're reading. So what do we do with this phrase, "the growing problem of Indians"? We file it away in our mental cabinets and the next time we're talking to someone or writing email or writing in our journals or blogs or FB walls, we might mention that "a growing problem with Indians" caused Custer's last stand. Suddenly, we've gone from being killed for killing other people and trying to steal their land to having "a growing problem with Indians" causing the death of an American hero. And this piece of information continues to colour anything we read or hear or see about Native Americans. We "know" that "the government" had a "growing problem" with "Indians." Even though we really don't know anything at all. No facts have been imparted to us, our store of knowledge about the Native people, or the white Americans of that day, the number of protagonists and antagonists, is richer by not one iota. Instead, what we have is an assumption that masquerades as fact. One of that family of statements that lives in the land of "Everyone knows" and "they say."

"While, in general, politicians in Washington hoped that the Indians could be contained, the sentiment in the West was to eradicate them, especially after gold was discovered in the Black Hills, on the Sioux reservation."

Again, we're not actually being given any information here. "In general" is a nice way of saying "I'm not going to tell you how many." Not that we need to know. And what does it mean, to "be contained"? Is that the same as being "killed"? Eradicated? Rounded up on reservations? Why not just admit that the Americans of the time longed to seize the land of the Native people? Because that IS what we're talking about, you know. It's not as if he doesn't say that exact thing in the very next sentence, either.

"As civilization advanced the frontier towards the Pacific ..."

This one got to me. The assumption that the greedy people who were simply looking for new frontiers to exploit,new forests to cut down, new natives to shoot and steal the land from, that these wretches and scoundrels and flim-flam men had any right to be seen as the forces of civilization, is nothing short of ridiculous, and outright offensive. Mind you, I'm not arguing the concept of the Noble Savage, here. The nobility, or lack thereof, on the part of the savage has no bearing whatsoever on the civilization or lack thereof of those who would exploit, rape, and murder him.

In short, Weigand appears to conclude that Custer was done in by "manifest destiny," without ever bothering to explain that "manifest destiny" is that doctrine that justifies the bloody imperialistic genocide of the Natives, the First Nations of this land, and the theft of their land, as well as the war with Mexico to take by force that land that now constitutes the whole of the present-day United States of America. I guess it sounds a lot less appealing to say that Custer died because he believed that Native Americans should be exterminated and their lands stolen by force. I can't imagine why.

Stumble It!

Arizona Racist? You Decide

OK, remember when the State of Arizona and its Queen of Prunes, Jan Brewer, passed SB 1070? That hideous piece of legislation that basically criminalizes all brown people who might cross the State borders or dwell therein? And Jan Brewer even dragged Scary Failin' away from her special-needs child to come help whitewash the law?



Less than a month after that, Brewer signed into law HB 2281, which will ban ethnic studies in that benighted state. No more Native American history classes for the half-million Native Americans living in Arizona. No more Mexican history classes for the 2.x million American citizen Latinos who comprise one-third of the state's population.

Meanwhile, the state has begun targeting teachers "with heavy accents." The state has not specified which accents it finds unacceptable. However, the fact that Latinos are being audited, and white teachers are not, makes one go "Hmmm."

Given that during the 1990s, Arizona hired native Spanish speakers from Latin American nations for its bilingual-education program, one can't help but wonder what the difference is between those apparently well-qualified yet accented speakers then and now.

The year George Bush was elected, Arizona voters passed an English-only bill, and bilingual teachers switched to English-medium classes. Those teachers have, apparently, been teaching their students just fine for two decades. But what a coincidence! Now that SB 1070 is law, their performance has miraculously degraded in a mere matter of weeks to an unacceptable level. These teachers will be "reassigned" (to what? If their accent is deemed to be incomprehensible to their students, what purpose is served by reassigning them, and where will they go? And if it is not incomprehensible, what purpose is served by such reassignment?) or fired. Of course, the fact that Arizona is facing a dire shortage of teachers is not even mentioned. Does that rate another "Hmm"? Hell fuckin' yeah. In fact the number of "Hmms" these actions have, and should, cause has us all here sounding like fucking hummingbirds.

Together, the Latino and Native American population of Arizona comprise approximately half the total population. And that, apparently, has some Bush cronies really worried. Apparently, Arizona racists like Russell Pearce, AZ state senator who thinks Latinos breed like bunnies, is hoping that by creating this legislation he will force undocumented migrant workers out of the state, and bugger all the documented American citizens who end up thrown in jail or out of the country because they don't have their papers on them.

And before y'all get all self-righteous on us with "That would never happen, the law says no racial profiling," go read these here links and then make up your mind.

Let me tell you just how bad things are right now: Some fucking witless bunch of teabaggin' ball-slurpers in fucking Ohio has announced a contest. Winners are invited to spend a week in Arizona "chasing aliens," and are reminded to "bring their green cards" with them.



This is why we all need to protest whenever shit like this happens, people. The idiot who dreamed up this incredibly insulting racist shit got his quantity of assholes increased by several as irate citizens contacted his radio station. The station manager has since apologized for this piece of shit (who has yet to offer his own fucking apology, by the way). So keep it up. You might not think you're being heard, and you might not think that you make a difference. But you are, and you do.

Without your calls and emails and letters, these fuckers would just have carried on being the fucking fuckety fucked fuckacious assholes that they've always been and will always be. At least now they know we're listening and if they don't want multiple rectal orifices, they'll quit spewing shit out of them.

Mind you, this is far from over. Just this month, artists painting a mural at a school in Prescott were told by the principal to lighten the skin colour of the pupils that they painted in the mural to a lily shade of white. Excuse me, what the FUCK? WHAT? These are actual real fucking live fucking children who attend this fucking school, the mural is part of revitalizing the downtown area, funded by a private organization and depicts the actual fucking children for christ's fucking sake!



How crazy fucking insane do you have to be to insist that black and brown children who attend this school be depicted as white? FTA:

City Councilman Steve Blair spearheaded a public campaign on his talk show at Prescott radio station KYCA-AM (1490) to remove the mural.

In a broadcast last month, according to the Daily Courier in Prescott, Blair mistakenly complained that the most prominent child in the painting is African-American, saying: "To depict the biggest picture on the building as a Black person, I would have to ask the question: Why?"

You would, you fat wrinkled rapidly aging bigot. Jesus. Holy quacking duckshit! What kind of people are these. It never occurred to me (or to any of you, I'll bet) to ask the question "Why" someone decided to paint a black face in a mural. Of course, the principal is now claiming this was simply a question of art, not actually whitening the children. Yeah, right. Just like your fucking laws aren't racist, Arizona.

You'll be happy to hear that the parents and teachers love the mural as it is. Upon questioning, the principal admitted that he had received a whole three complaints about the mural. As for those miserable fucks who drove by to scream epithets like "Nigger" and "Spic" at the kids who were helping on the mural, you ought to be ashamed of yourselves, but you're troglodytes, so you aren't. Fortunately, there's not as many of you as you thought. You pigs. Oh, wait, that's a terrible insult to pigs which are actually very nice animals.

At any rate, a big thank you to those of you who complained. Steve Blair has been fired from the radio show. Your right to free speech has not been infringed, Mr. Blair. You're free to get on your soapbox in the local park anytime and yell your hate speech. You're not free to use the public airwaves to felch the haters though. So fuck you very much, and may you live the rest of your life in a bitter oblivion, you anal afterbirth.

Stumble It!

Boycott Arizona!

ICHC

By now, the only people who haven't heard of SB 1070, Arizona's Immigration Bill, are the acephalous. Because, you know, this feckin' thing has been teh Talking Point of every rightwing nutjob windbag since the first of them crawled back into the slime from which the rest of us fled.

While we would never incinerate that you, dear visitor, might be one of the impaired, we will, nevertheless, post a link to that foul piece of legislation, just so you can cast your seasoned and cynical eyeball over it.

One of the major talking points bandied about by the aforementioned RWNJs (Right-Wing Nut Jobs, for those of you who were not paying attention) is that the Arizona legislation is Teh Good and Totally Not Stinky Because It's Exactly Teh Same as Teh Nanny-Nanny-Boo-Boo Federal Legislation, So Suck It Lib H8ers.

Yeah, right. Here for your perusal is the Federal legislation, also known as the Immigration and Nationality Act, Title 8 of the U.S.C.

While the Arizona law refers extensively to Federal law, it goes way beyond what Federal law envisioned as appropriate in criminalizing the presence of undocumented migrant workers.

And it is a great danger to the civil liberties of American citizens and especially to American taxpayers.

For example, Title II, Chapter 7, Article 8 G states:

G. A PERSON WHO IS A LEGAL RESIDENT OF THIS STATE MAY BRING AN ACTION
37 IN SUPERIOR COURT TO CHALLENGE ANY OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A
38 COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE THAT ADOPTS
39 OR IMPLEMENTS A POLICY OR PRACTICE THAT LIMITS OR RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT
40 OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL
41 LAW. IF THERE IS A JUDICIAL FINDING THAT AN ENTITY HAS VIOLATED THIS
42 SECTION, THE COURT SHALL ORDER THAT THE ENTITY PAY A CIVIL PENALTY OF NOT
43 LESS THAN ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NOT MORE THAN FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR
44 EACH DAY THAT THE POLICY HAS REMAINED IN EFFECT AFTER THE FILING OF AN ACTION
45 PURSUANT TO THIS SUBSECTION.

Pardon the formattage, it's from a PDF and this is just what Blogger does to it.

What does this section do? It allows any fucking nutbag who is a citizen *or resident* of Arizona to sue any police officer and any police department if they think such officer/department is not enforcing this law stringently enough.

I don't recall Federal law containing any such provision. Note that since police departments are funded by taxpayers, it is the taxpayers who must pay all costs associated with such lawsuits. Now why would the legislators of Arizona want to screw the citizens because they get a woody from h8n' on "teh illegalz"?

And how many cities are so wealthy that they can afford to cough up between $1K and $5K per day, if successfully sued?

It also permits the same mentally deficient RWNJs to sue any city or other state-level entity that adopts a "sanctuary" policy. Which, frankly, sucks. But what the abovementioned language means for the law enforcement personnel who have to put it into practice in the streets is that if you call the cops because, oh, I dunno, you're being raped or murdered? And someone else calls reporting a suspected "illegal alien"? You're shit outa luck, because the PD won't get sued if it doesn't immediately show up to save your injured ass. It will fershure get sued if some litigious asshole made the "illegal alien" call and found out that the police failed to respond or did not respond swiftly enough.

Arizona, you sure you want this shitty law?

And that's just the peripheral stuff.

Here's the real reason why this law seriously sucks hind end:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

This, boyz'ngurlz, is the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. It is part of what is called The Bill of Rights.

For decades now, the courts have chipped away at various provisions of the Bill of Rights, but none so brutally and continually as the Fourth Amendment. See, the Fourth Amendment prevents the government from violating its citizens rights to a great degree. It says "... no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause, ..." et cetera. This means the cops can't haul your ass to jail for looking, or dressing, or even acting funny without swearing under oath that they have a good reason to believe that you're a dangerous criminal. They can't bust down your door, they can't enter your home, they can't stop you when you walk down the street, they can't do shit to you without that little piece of paper signed by a judge and sworn to under oath. So if the cops lie to get that little piece of paper, they're guilty of perjury and you have the right to sue their asses off.

However, this law amends Section 13-3883 of the Arizona Revised Statutes to permit the police to arrest without a warrant, not just for dangerous felonies and suspected terrorism, which we would probably all agree is justified by the demands of public safety, but also for mere misdemeanors. Under this law, the cops can come into your house and demand to see everyone's papers if there's too many people in your house, or you're violating some noise ordinance, or there's a car on blocks in your yard.

The po-pos can impound your vehicle if you give someone a ride without inquiring for evidence of their immigration status. Isn't that nice? Give your elderly neighbour a ride to church? Bam! Go to jail, do not collect, etc. Give your friend's kids a ride home from school? Tough shit for you if they were born someplace else and are "undocumented." Wifey in the car had a little nip of alcohol? If she's under 21, off you go to teh jailhouse. What's even worse, the law specifies that your insurance company has no duty to pay any charges that you might rack up during this period. What, not even while you're pleading your innocence and wrongful arrest through the courts? Nice.

This law also shifts the burden of proof regarding entrapment charges to the defendant. If the cops entrap you into doing something illegal (we all know the honourable po-pos would never do that, right?), this law says it is up to you the citizen to prove that they entrapped you. As a rule, the burden of proof has been on the prosecution because the Government has vast resources and power, compared to the average citizen. It is less costly for the Government to prove that it has clean hands than for you, joe citizen, to prove that it does not.

Nowhere in the Constitution or in Title 8 of the USC does it say that an American citizen must carry identification on their person at all times. But SB 1070, the Aryanzona law (as it's popularly known among the bright sparks of the InnerTubes) says that if the cops stop your ass for, I dunno, crossing against a light? Walking your dog off leash? Parking in the wrong zone? — they can ask you for ID, and if you don't have any, it's off to the hoosegow with you, buddy.

Don't take my word for it. Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, AZ, has done this several times. In his opinion, it's totally cool to throw all the brown people in jail and release the US citizens later. Does this sound like the Fourth Amendment is being respected and obeyed at all in Aryanzona?

And when did AZ flatfoots become experts in determining the ethnicity of a brown person, let alone their possible immigration status? Because, you know, stuff like this happens all the time.

By now you're probably sick of hearing about this. I'm certainly sick of writing about it. In honour of the humongous fucking headache this issue has given me, I'd like to leave you with this very enjoyable video clip.



And for the last word, we turn to the Native inhabitants of this land:



We'll be blogging on this issue regularly. Stay tuned.

Stumble It!

Politics: Helping Americans in Need

No, it's NOT South Dakota.

OK, Haiti is rapidly falling off the radar, which is terrible. And we have plenty to say about that situation.

Meanwhile, the recent winter storms are cruelly mistreating a group of Americans who have been ignored and mistreated and exploited as much as the Haitians, and it's hardly being reported.

Why the fuck is that? Don't First Peoples make good news? The Sioux in South Dakota are fucking freezing their asses off, without power, without water, without transportation in one of the worst fucking storms, and where the fuck is the reportage??

Here's the skinny from the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe:

Eagle Butte, SD (January 30, 2010) - The Cheyenne River Reservation located in the State of South Dakota, homeland of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, is currently facing an emergency situation due to an ice storm that crippled the electrical and water infrastructure. Though the ice storm has passed, the water and power system remains challenged and several Reservation communities have been without power for over ten (10) days. Moreover, a bitterly cold weather system is expected to come in by Sunday evening.

Therefore, the Tribe continues to operate an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) to coordinate communications, relief efforts, and resource distribution. The phone numbers for the EOC have been changed to (605) 964-1313 and (605) 964-1314 and the location has moved to the Cheyenne River Sioux Cable Television office on Main St. in Eagle Butte, South Dakota.

Though some communities have a water supply, please be advised to boil all water before drinking. The Tribe has organized an emergency water distribution to the East End of the Reservation today. Tomorrow, an emergency water distribution will be coming into the West End communities. More information will be forthcoming regarding emergency water distribution to the communities outside of Eagle Butte over the next week. Any resulting sewage or pipe damage from the breakdown in the water system should be reported to the Emergency Operations Center.

Emergency shelters in Eagle Butte, Cherry Creek, La Plant, Swiftbird, Red Scaffold, Takini, Bear Creek, Timber Lake, and Whitehorse have been converted into Emergency Shelter/Distribution Centers. These Centers will distribute goods and supplies that are essential to surviving the winter and the impending cold front. A large amount of supplies will be delivered to these Centers tomorrow.

The Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) has been opened up for business for all qualifying residents of the Reservation. Please call the office directly to address your energy needs.

As of Sunday, January 31, 2010, the (605) 964-7711 and (605) 964-7712 telephone numbers will revert to their regular use for the Indian Health Service Ambulance Service and will direct callers to the new phone number for the EOC. For all other emergencies such as medical or law enforcement emergencies, please call 911.

Contact:

Randolph Runs After, Information Officer, Incident Command
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
(605) 964-1313,

Anita Thompson, LIHEAP Director
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
(605) 964-8384 office

Note that this is dated a little less than two weeks ago. We all know we've had a Snowmageddon since then.

Are you out there? Can you help? Write a letter to your local paper? Call your local news station? Ask your Congresscritter why there isn't more noise being made and help being sent to a people who have had their entire country stolen from them? OK, maybe you can't phrase it that way. Those motherfuckers get awful testy about Teh People communicating honestly with their reps.

But if you can get off your ass and do something for some suffering people right close to hand, then, please. Please do. And please, if you can find it in your heart to organize a group, to raise funds, to engage in some kind of activism ... because we're all real good at getting on the Internet and typing our way into carpal tunnel, but that's not going to do shit for these folks.

For a full report on charities that are assisting, maps of the worst-hit areas, Congresscritters who really really need to hear from you, go here.

The linked post will tell you how to pay a reservation family's heating bill, or who you can send warm clothing to that might really need it, or, fuck, a zillion other things you can do to help. Let's not forget our own. Charity begins at home.

Stumble It!

B.A.D. Bloggers

Over at The Grand Panjandrum, a recently discovered Doctor of Divinity points out (with linked video clip) that Maria Shriver is using the words of a Hopi prayer in her endorsement of Barack Obama.

Casa de Los Gatos is still neutral on the issue of who to vote for, especially now that Paul Krugman has shown that Hillary Clinton's "health care plan" - of which we thoroughly disapprove - is more likely to result in near-universal health care coverage than Barack Obama's plan. Krugman then proceeds to debunk Obama's plan as such.

We still don't want health coverage, dammit. We want health CARE.

Surf over to The Grand Panjandrum's for more amusing political tidbits.

Stumble It!

Bringing Democracy to Wounded Knee

Image from http://www.peacebuttons.info/E-News/peacehistorydecember.htm

Here's what the column "2day in History" in today's Oakland Tribune says:

In 1890, the Wounded Knee massacre took place in South Dakota as an estimated 300 Sioux Indians were killed by U.S. troops sent to disarm them.

Well, that's kind of a sanitized description of what happened. And, yes, there's disagreement about what happened. But here are some things that aren't mentioned and are agreed upon:

• The troops were sent to disarm AND move the Sioux to Omaha, Nebraska.
• It's not agreed what started the shooting. Some say it started with the Indians; others say it was the soldiers. But what is agreed is that chaos and cruelty followed. It left 290 Sioux men, women, and children dead. Approximately 25 soldiers were killed and historians agree that most of these were killed from "friendly fire."
• The soldiers fired on non-combatants.

Can you imagine yourself raising your rifle and aiming at an unarmed woman or a child ... perhaps many children? And your comrades are doing the same thing?

Stumble It!