AMERICAN LEFT HISTORY

This space is dedicated to the proposition that we need to know the history of the struggles on the left and of earlier progressive movements here and world-wide. If we can learn from the mistakes made in the past (as well as what went right) we can move forward in the future to create a more just and equitable society. We will be reviewing books, CDs, and movies we believe everyone needs to read, hear and look at as well as making commentary from time to time. Greg Green, site manager

Tuesday, June 05, 2012

From The Anti-NATO Battleground In Chicago On May 20th-The Vets Throw Their Medals Away-A Transcript-"Honor the Dead, Heal the Wounded, Stop the Wars."

AMY GOODMAN: Today we bring you a Memorial Day special, "Honor the Dead, Heal the Wounded, Stop the Wars." That was the demand of veterans who gathered in Chicago May 20th at the site of the largest NATO summit in the organization’s six-decade history. The veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as well as women from Afghans for Peace led a peace march of thousands of people to the summit gates. Iraq Veterans Against the War held a ceremony where more than 40 veterans hurled their war medals toward the gates of the NATO summit.
ASH WOOLSON: No NATO, no war!
VETERANS: No NATO, no war!
ASH WOOLSON: We don’t work for you no more!
VETERANS: We don’t work for you no more!
ASH WOOLSON: N-A-T-O!
VETERANS: N-A-T-O!
ASH WOOLSON: We don’t kill for you no more!
VETERANS: We don’t kill for you no more!
ALEJANDRO VILLATORO: At this time, one by one, veterans of the wars of NATO will walk up on stage. They will tell us why they chose to return their medals to NATO. I urge you to honor them by listening to their stories. Nowhere else will you hear from so many who fought these wars about their journey from fighting a war to demanding peace. Some of us killed innocents. Some of us helped in continuing these wars from home. Some of us watched our friends die. Some of us are not here, because we took our own lives. We did not get the care promised to us by our government. All of us watched failed policies turn into bloodshed. Listen to us, hear us, and think: was any of this worth it?
CROWD: No!
ALEJANDRO VILLATORO: Do these medals thank us for a job well done?
CROWD: No!
ALEJANDRO VILLATORO: Do they mask lies, corruption, and abuse of young men and women who swore to defend their country?
CROWD: Yes!
ALEJANDRO VILLATORO: We tear off this mask. Hear us.
IRIS FELICIANO: My name is Iris Feliciano. I served in the Marine Corps. And in January of 2002, I deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. And I want to tell the folks behind us, in these enclosed walls, where they build more policies based on lies and fear, that we no longer stand for them. We no longer stand for their lies, their failed policies and these unjust wars. Bring our troops home and end the war now. They can have these back.
PETE SULLIVAN: My name is Pete Sullivan. I served in the Army National Guard for 12 years. And all I have to say is that this is not something that I’m proud of.
ERICA SLONE: My name is Erica Slone. I’m from Ohio. I served in the Air Force from 2002 to 2008. I’m an Iraq veteran. In the military is where I learned what integrity meant, and I believe I served with integrity. And at this point in my life, if I want to continue to live with integrity, I must get rid of these.
GREG MILLER: My name is Greg Miller. I’m a veteran of the United States Army infantry with service in Iraq 2009. The military hands out cheap tokens like this to soldiers, servicemembers, in an attempt to fill the void where their conscience used to be once they indoctrinate it out of you. But that didn’t work on me, so I’m here to return my Global War on Terrorism Medal and my National Defense Medal, because they’re both lies.
JERRY: My name is Jerry. I’m from New York City. I served in the Army from 2005 to 2009. I fought in Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. I, today, am giving back my Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, because I realized that after a while that it was just nothing but an idea made by a bunch of politicians, money-hungry politicians in Washington who will do nothing and have a complete disregard for human life and will do anything in their power to just make more money in the end. Now, if it’s just an idea, then therefore it was just an idea that sparked two wars that I had to fight in. And I don’t want any part of it anymore. And I choose human life over war, militarism and imperialism.
SCOTT KIMBALL: My name is Scott Kimball. I’m an Iraq war vet. And I’m turning in these medals today for the people of Pakistan, Iraq, Palestine, and all victims of occupation across the world. And also, for all the servicemembers and veterans who are against these wars, you are not alone!
CHRISTOPHER MAY: My name is Christopher May. I left the Army as a conscientious objector. We were told that these medals represented, you know, democracy and justice and hope and change for the world. These medals represent a failure on behalf of the leaders of NATO to accurately represent the will of their own people. It represents a failure on the leaders of NATO to do what’s right by the disenfranchised people of this world. Instead of helping them, they take advantage of them, and they’re making things worse. I will not be a part of that anymore. These medals don’t mean anything to me, and they can have them back.
TY: Hello. My name is Ty, and thank you all for coming out. I’m letting go and releasing this medal because love is the most powerful force that we can employ as human beings on this planet, and we cannot love holding weapons.
ASH WOOLSON: My name is Ash Woolson. I was a sergeant. I was in Iraq in '03, and what I saw there crushed me. I don't want us to suffer this again, and I don’t want our children to suffer this again, and so I’m giving these back!
MAGGIE MARTIN: My name is Maggie Martin. I was a sergeant in the Army. I did two tours in Iraq. No amount of medals, ribbons or flags can cover the amount of human suffering caused by these wars. We don’t want this garbage. We want our human rights. We want our right to heal.
JAYSON MISSOULA: My name is Jayson Missoula. I graduated high school in 2002. And thinking that we had to protect our borders, I wound up first enlisting in the Coast Guard. I spent four years on active duty. And in my time, I started to feel guilty, because my friends were going on multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan in other branches, and I was doing things as an 18-year-old, being led by men 10 years older than me, that the Secret Service recently got in trouble for. So then I get out, I go to college for a semester, and feeling guilty for spending time partying in the Caribbean and having to see humans—Haitians, Dominicans—floating in the water and wondering why they’re there, why are they leaving, and starting to ask these questions. All right, so then I go into the National Guard, sign up for a one-year contract, which they allowed me. They sent me to New Mexico to the desert for one month and then Vermont for two weeks. And after that, I was an infantryman, and then I was sent over to Iraq, and I spent just under six months driving a truck, playing god, after two weeks of infantry training. And we fortunately were redeployed home early. And since then, I’ve used my GI Bill to study political science and American studies, and it’s helped me humanize people all around the world, because one of the first friends I made is Palestinian, and I spent the summer in West Bank. For the first time, I learned a little bit what it feels like to be on the receiving end, when I was tear-gassed in a little village just south of Ramallah, Bil’in, I believe. But so, I apologize. One of my favorite new poets says, "Affirm life. Affirm life. Affirm life." That’s absolutely what we have to do. And the only medal I’m going to keep is the Humanitarian Service one I got for being in New Orleans, because that’s the only thing that we should be doing as humans.
DAVID VAN DAM: I’m David Van Dam. I was in the U.S. Navy. I’m a GI resister. I got a other-than-honorable discharge. And I want to say that their policies are other than honorable. And I’m honorable, and all the GI resisters that refuse to fight in unjust wars are honorable. This is in solidarity for all GI resisters of unjust wars!
MARK STRUDAS: My name is Mark Strudas. I’m from Chesterton, Indiana. I just want to say thank you for being understanding, inviting and wonderful—even these guys in black and blue. This is a Good Conduct Medal. Ha!
JACOB CRAWFORD: I’m Jacob Crawford. I went to Iraq and Afghanistan. And when they gave me these medals, I knew they were meaningless. I only regret not starting to speak up about how silly the war is sooner. I’m giving these back. Free Bradley Manning!
JASON HURD: My name is Jason Hurd. I spent 10 years in the United States Army as a combat medic. I deployed to Baghdad in 2004. I’m here to return my Global War on Terrorism Service Medal in solidarity with the people of Iraq and the people of Afghanistan. I am deeply sorry for the destruction that we have caused in those countries and around the globe. I am proud to stand on this stage with my fellow veterans and my Afghan sisters. These were lies. I’m giving them back.
CHRIS MOBERG: My name is Chris Moberg. I was part of the invasion of Iraq in 2003. And out of love and respect, out of the Iraqi people and the people of Afghanistan, I’m going to return these representations of hate and destruction back where they came from.
JACOB FLOM: My name is Jacob Flom. I was in the Air Force from '03 to ’07. And it's—I joined the military so I could pay to go to college, because the working class fights the ruling class’s wars. But I’m not fighting for imperialism anymore. I’m fighting against imperialism. And this is dedicated—this is dedicated to all the courageous people who are under attack by the FBI, Carlos Montes and the Anti-War 23.
RAYMOND KNAEBLE: My name’s Raymond Knaeble, and I’m here to return my medals. NATO, the U.S.A. government and Israel need to be held accountable for the war crimes, genocide, torture and drone attacks. I’m returning my medals! They can have them!
STEVEN LUNN: My name is Steven Lunn [phon.]. I’m a two-time Iraq combat veteran. This medal
I’m dedicating to the children of Iraq that no longer have fathers and mothers.
SHAWNA FOSTER: My name is Shawna, and I was a nuclear biological chemical specialist for a war that didn’t have any weapons of mass destruction. So I deserted. I’m one of 40,000 people that left the United States Armed Forces because this is a lie!
STEVE ACHESON: My name is Steve Acheson. I’m from Campbellsport, Wisconsin. I was a forward observer in the United States Army for just under five years. I deployed to Sadr City, Iraq, in 2005. And I’m giving back my medals for the children of Iraq and Afghanistan. May they be able to forgive us for what we’ve done to them. May we begin to heal, and may we live in peace from here until eternity.
PHIL: My name’s Phil. I’m from Atlanta. And the reason why I’m throwing my medal back is because we are the global 99 percent, and we refuse to be silent, from Egypt back here to Chicago!
MICHAEL THURMAN: Hello. My name is Michael Thurman. I was a conscientious objector from the United States Air Force. I’m returning my Global War on Terrorism Medal and my military coins on behalf of Private First Class Bradley Manning, who sacrificed everything to show us the truth about these wars.
GREG BROSEUS: My name is Greg Broseus. I’m from Columbus, Ohio. I now reside in the beautiful city of Chicago, Illinois, that today is not quite as beautiful, because NATO is here. And I’m here to return my medals, because I cannot stand in solidarity and peace with my brothers and sisters in Iraq and Afghanistan as long as I wear them.
SABRINA WALLER: My name is Sabrina Waller. I’m a United States Navy veteran. I deployed under NATO orders to Kosovo in '99. I'm also a mother of an 11-year-old. For over 10 years of his life, we’ve been waging war. And the only fight that I want to participate in is the fight to ensure that my son and his generation never have to fight another war.
MATT: My name is Matt [inaudible]. I served in the U.S. Army in 2004 in Iraq. I’m returning my medals today because, under the guise of freedom and democracy, I stole the humanity of the Iraqi people and lost mine. We are on the right side of history!
MATT HOWARD: My name is Matt Howard. I served in the United States Marine Corps from 2001 to 2006 and in Iraq twice. I’m turning in my campaign service—Iraq Campaign Service Medal and Global War on Terror Service and Expeditionary Medals for all my brothers and sisters affected with traumatic brain injury, military sexual trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder.
BRYAN REINHOLDT: My name is Bryan Reinholdt. I’m from Kentucky. I’m a former sergeant of the U.S. Army. Former sergeant of the U.S. Army, proud member of Iraq Veterans Against the War. And I’m taking these things off—all of them—encourage you to refuse to.
MARK: I’m Mark. I haven’t been too convinced of anything the last seven years, except for the fact that I’ve been hurting. And I have three daughters: Anell, Leah and Nora. And I’m convinced, looking out across this, this crowd of peace-loving people, that my daughters are going to have peace.
ZACH LAPORTE: Hi. My name is Zach LaPorte, and I’m an Iraq war veteran from Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Thank you. I’m giving back my medals today because I feel like I was duped into an illegal war that was sold to me on the guise that I was going to be liberating the Iraqi people, when instead of liberating the people, I was liberating their oil fields.
RACHEL McNEILL: My name’s Rachel McNeill. I served in the military for almost eight years as a sergeant. And i’m returning this medal today because it’s time to restore America’s honor and renounce this war on terror.
JACOB GEORGE: My name is Jacob George. I’m from the Ouachita Mountains in Arkansas. I’m a three-tour veteran of the Afghan war, paratrooper and sergeant. And I have one word for this Global War on Terrorism decoration, and that is "shame."
SCOTT OLSEN: My name is Scott Olsen. I have with me today—today I have with me my Global War on Terror Medal, Operation Iraqi Freedom Medal, National Defense Medal and Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal. These medals, once upon a time, made me feel good about what I was doing. They made me feel like I was doing the right thing. And I came back to reality, and I don’t want these anymore.
JOSHUA: I’m Joshua. I’m a member of IVAW, and I’m from Chicago. And honestly, friends, I’m here to tell you that I blame myself first. I should have done my homework, should have realized the lies before I participated in them. So this symbolic act, this throwing of the medal, is for all those people out there who are wondering why we’re doing it. Do your homework.
RICHARD STRODER: My name is Richard Stroder [phon.], and I’m from Auburn, Alabama. And I’m here to say that war is a racket!
TODD DENNIS: My name is Todd Dennis. I served in the United States Navy. I have PTSD. I’m returning my Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal because it was given to me, according to my letter, because of hard work and dedication and setting the example. I was a hard worker because I buried my PTSD and overworked myself in the military. And I’m throwing this back and invoking my right to heal.
MICHAEL APPLEGATE: My name is Michael Applegate. I was in the United States Navy from 1998 to 2006. And I’m returning my medal today because I want to live by my conscience rather than being a prisoner of it.
NATE: My name’s Nate. I served in the U.S. Navy from ’99 to 2003 and participated in the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. I was wrong to sign myself up for that. I apologize to the Iraqi and Afghani people for destroying your countries.
JOSHUA SHEPHERD: My name is Joshua Shepherd. I spent six years in the United States Navy. These are not mine. They never were. They’re instruments of control from this government. I will not continue to trade my humanity for false heroism.
BROCK McINTOSH: My name is Brock McIntosh. I was in the Army National Guard and served in Afghanistan from November '08 to August ’09. Two months ago, I visited the monument at Ground Zero for my first time with two Afghans. A tragic monument. I'm going to toss this medal today for the 33,000 civilians who have died in Afghanistan that won’t have a monument built for them. And this is for the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers.
JOHN ANDERSON: My name is John Anderson. I did two deployments to Iraq. And all of this destruction was not necessary. And now, we will bring it to an end, because another world is possible. We are unstoppable!
CROWD: Another world is possible!
JOHN ANDERSON: We are unstoppable!
CROWD: Another world is possible!
GRAHAM CLUMPNER: I’m Graham Clumpner. I’m an Army veteran. I spent a good amount of time in Afghanistan. And I just want everybody to look around, take a second and look around, look next to you right now. I’m talking to the police officers. I’m talking about everybody out here. There are thousands of people out here for something important. We’re hearing. We’re having a conversation for the first time in a long time—for many of us, for the first time. And I want to say that all of us, in some way or another, are trying to serve this great land that we live in, but it’s only great because of what we do with it. And sometimes we make mistakes. And the way we change that is we admit our mistakes and we take responsibility for our mistakes, and we change and we become better, and we do it together. So I’m returning my Global War on Terrorism Medal, because I don’t fight wars on adjectives.
VINCE EMANUELE: My name is Vince Emanuele, and I served with the United States Marine Corps. First and foremost, this is for the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. Second of all, this is for our real forefathers. I’m talking about the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. I’m talking about the Black Panthers. I’m talking about the civil rights movement. I’m talking about unions. I’m talking about our socialist brothers and sisters, our communist brothers and sisters, our anarchist brothers and sisters, and our ecology brothers and sisters. That’s who our real forefathers are. And lastly—and lastly and most importantly, our enemies are not 7,000 miles from home. They sit in boardrooms. They are CEOs. They are bankers. They are hedge fund managers. They do not live 7,000 miles from home. Our enemies are right here, and we look at them every day. They are not the men and women who are standing on this police line. They are the millionaires and billionaires who control this planet, and we’ve had enough of it. So they can take their medals back.
CHUCK WINANT: My name is Chuck Winant. I’m here on behalf of six good Americans who really wanted to be here but they couldn’t be. They couldn’t be, because when they came to the U.S. border, they’d be immediately arrested. And the crime they’d be arrested for was refusing to continue to participate in the crimes against the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. And these good Americans, who are exiled now from this country, who deserve amnesty, are Private Christian Kjar of the U.S. Marine Corps; Private Kim Rivera, Army, Combat Action Badge, refused redeployment to Iraq; Corporal Jeremy Brockway, U.S. Marine Corps, Combat Action Badge, refused redeployment to Iraq; Specialist Jules Tindungan, Combat Infantry Badge, paratrooper, refused redeployment to Afghanistan; Sergeant Corey Glass, Army, refused redeployment to Iraq; and Sergeant Chris Vassey, paratrooper, CIB, refused redeployment to Afghanistan. I have their awards in my pocket, and I’m throwing them back, mad as hell!
AARON HUGHES: My name is Aaron Hughes. I served in the Illinois Army National Guard from 2000 and 2006. This medal right here is for Anthony Wagner. He died last year. This medal right here is for the one-third of the women in the military that are sexually assaulted by their peers. We talk about standing up for our sisters—we talk about standing up for our sisters in Afghanistan, and we can’t even take care of our sisters here. And this medal right here is because I’m sorry. I’m sorry to all of you. I’m sorry.
ALEJANDRO VILLATORO: My name is Alejandro Villatoro, sergeant. I went to—took part of the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and Afghanistan 2011. Believe me, I was a soldier. I was a squared-away soldier, and I really believed in this mission. And I learned the Army values: loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity and personal courage. But after my experience, I realized that there is no integrity. Integrity: do what’s legally and morally right. And we failed. So there is no honor in these wars. There’s just shame.
AMY GOODMAN: Veterans of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam, hurling their war medals towards the gates of the NATO summit in Chicago. This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report, as we bring you this Memorial Day special, "Honor the Dead, Heal the Wounded, Stop the Wars." Back in a minute.
Mother of Iraq Veteran Who Committed Suicide: "Honor the Dead, Heal the Wounded, Stop the Wars"
download: Video Audio Get CD/DVD More Formats
Share

Printer-friendly
Transcript |

On a makeshift stage outside the NATO summit in Chicago, antiwar veterans fold an American flag that flew over NATO operations from Bosnia to Libya and which represents the flag that is “draped over the coffins of thousands of Americans killed in combat and thousands more who have committed suicide after they returned from service." They present the flag to Mary Kirkland, mother of Derrick Kirkland, who joined the military in 2007 and committed suicide in March 2010 after his second tour of duty in Iraq. “I am not ashamed that I have to tell people that my son committed suicide. I am ashamed of the military for failing to give him proper mental health treatment,” Kirkland says. The military originally reported that her son was killed in action. Click here to see the other parts of our 2012 Memorial Day Special: 1, 3, 4, 5. [includes rush transcript]
Filed under NATO, PTSD, Iraq, Afghanistan, Veterans, Healthcare
Guest:
Mary Kirkland, her son, Derrick, committed suicide but the military reported him as killed in action.
Related
• Scott Olsen, U.S. Vet Who Nearly Lost Life at Occupy Protest, Brings Antiwar Message to NATO Summit May 28, 2012 | Story
• Memorial Day Special: U.S. Veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan Return War Medals at NATO Summit May 28, 2012 | Story
• "Mind Zone": New Film Tracks Therapists Guiding Soldiers Through Traumas of Afghan War Mar 16, 2012 | Story
• Army Ranger Widow Confronts Rumsfeld over His Lies that Convinced Her Husband to Join the Military Aug 30, 2011 | Story
• U.S. Army Vets Join with Afghans for Peace to Lead Antiwar March at Chicago NATO Summit May 28, 2012 | Story
Links
• Iraq Veterans Against the War
• NATO Protest Website
Rush Transcript
This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.Donate >
Transcript
AMY GOODMAN: "World Wide Rebel Songs" by Tom Morello, singing at a concert in Chicago celebrating Woody Guthrie’s upcoming 100th birthday. This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, as we return to the makeshift stage outside the NATO summit in Chicago, where scores of veterans gathered to protest NATO’s wars.
ALEJANDRO VILLATORO: We’re going to begin our ceremony with a folding of the flag. This American flag flew over NATO military operations in Bosnia, Kosovo, Serbia, Afghanistan and Libya. This flag represents 60 percent of NATO’s funding and is responsible for immense militarization and intimidation, beginning with escalation of the Cold War. This flag represents the untold suffering and pain caused by NATO wars and occupations carried out by U.S. and NATO forces against the oppressed people of the world. This flag flew over Afghanistan, standing as a constant reminder to the Afghan people that they were being occupied by foreign imperial powers. This flag flew over Libya, and it came by the way of drones, bombs, bullets and grenades.
This flag is draped over the coffins of thousands of Americans killed in combat and thousands more who have committed suicide after they returned from service. Currently, 18 veterans commit suicide each day. We retire this flag and give it to those who often suffer silently in war, at home and abroad. Military families and Mary, who lost her military son to suicide, represents those who lose something that can never be given back. Mary mourns the loss of her son and to thousands of parents in this country.
AMY GOODMAN: After the ceremony where she was presented with the American flag, I spoke with Mary Kirkland, mother of Derrick Kirkland. Derrick joined the Army in 2007, since he was not earning enough money to support his wife and child. During his second deployment to Iraq, he attempted suicide for the first time. Mary Kirkland describes what happened next.
MARY KIRKLAND: He was on his second deployment in Iraq, probably like in the six-month mark. I don’t know exactly what caused it, but he ended up putting a shotgun in his mouth over there in Iraq, and one of his buddies stopped him. They got him help while he was there, then transferred him to the hospital in Germany, where he stayed about a week and a half. Then they sent him back to his home base of Fort Lewis, which is now Joint Base Lewis-McChord. He came back on a Monday after two failed suicide attempts in a three-week period, kept him overnight in the hospital for one night.
AMY GOODMAN: Where?
MARY KIRKLAND: There at Madigan Army Hospital at Fort Lewis. He met with a psychiatrist the next day who deemed him to be low to moderate risk for suicide, his only restriction being that he was not to be around any weapons, and cleared him for him to go basically in the barracks room by himself, which I found, after talking to the veterans, was illegal.
He tried to kill hisself again on Thursday night. He got back on the 15th and killed himself on the 19th. On the Thursday, on the 18th, he had bought some rum, so was drinking rum with his medications that they did just gave him, his antidepressants and sleep medicine, and cut hisself, had bloodstains all over his room. It wasn’t successful, so he got up Friday morning and bandaged hisself.
One of his things that he wrote before he went and hung hisself was "I feel invisible. I feel like I’m transparent." And nobody walked into the room on Friday to see the bloodstains. Derrick didn’t hang hisself until—the last time they had seen him was Friday night at 10:00, and they found him Saturday morning at 1:30. If anybody would have walked in that room on that Friday—but they didn’t even—the leadership wasn’t even checking on him.
So this mother got woke up Sunday morning at 6:30 to tell me that my son was dead, that I had let my guard down, 'cause he got back on Monday, he's back in the United States, he’s safe, he’s—and the Army called it a "miscommunication," is why my son is dead.
AMY GOODMAN: When did he enlist?
MARY KIRKLAND: He enlisted January of 2007.
AMY GOODMAN: And why did he enlist?
MARY KIRKLAND: He had a wife and child, and cook at an IHOP, not enough money, went to an Army recruiter that, you know, promised all the benefits, and you get this, and he just wanted to support his family.
AMY GOODMAN: What where those two tours like in Iraq that he served?
MARY KIRKLAND: The first one lasted 15 months. That’s when they had changed it, and they had to stay over there 15 months. Before he went, always laughing, always, you know, a jokester. Then, when he got back in June, he—you could—the sparkle wasn’t in his eye no more. "Yes, I’m the tough guy, I’m the soldier." That was right after he first joined that they took. But no, his eyes would sparkle, and he liked skateboarding, he liked playing guitar.
AMY GOODMAN: Did you want him to go into the military?
MARY KIRKLAND: At that point in time, I agreed with it, and actually it was because of Derrick that my other two younger—or, my daughter and my younger son had joined. Their father was in the Army. Their grandfather was in the Army and Navy. My father was in the Navy, with two brothers being in the Navy. You know, so he was kind of a—it’s a good thing, it’s an honorable thing, to go into the military.
AMY GOODMAN: What happened when he went for the second tour of duty?
MARY KIRKLAND: Well, in between getting home, he came home on leave and—I didn’t know what I know now about post-traumatic stress syndrome and the symptoms and, you know—but looking back, and, you know, like conversations like, "Mom, I’m the murderer." And I’d tell him, "No, Derrick, you’re in a war. You know, there’s a difference between being in a war and killing somebody and just going up on the street and killing somebody. That’s a murderer." And he had trouble sleeping, was drinking.
AMY GOODMAN: Was he drinking a lot before he enlisted?
MARY KIRKLAND: He drank, but not—you know, not overly drinking. Party-type drinking, you know, hanging out with his friends. And, of course, you have to realize I only got to spend probably about three days with him, while he was home on—in between the time of the leave. And like I said, I missed it. You know, I should have asked more questions or—I don’t know. You know, that’s the question I’m asking the veterans, you know, that I encounter. It’s like, what—what can I do to help? What can I do to help you?
AMY GOODMAN: When did you start asking the questions after Derrick died? What brought you here to this NATO summit?
MARY KIRKLAND: On March 27, 2010, is when we buried Derrick. And Derrick is buried at Marion National Cemetery, which is 50 miles—about 50 miles from Indianapolis. And as we was leaving, I stopped at a gas station, and I got a newspaper to see if they had anything wrote. And they had a picture with the Patriot Guards, and then the—underneath, it said that the Department of Defense states that Derrick was killed in action and that the family declines to comment. And that started two lies off right there. No, Derrick was not killed in action. He was killed because of failed mental healthcare at a Army base at Fort Lewis, you know. And I would have commented. From day one, I would have commented.
So, I had to, like, fight, because Derrick was still legally married, and at first they tried to put me off with, "Well, you’re not the next of kin." You know, you have to either get permission from his wife or hire an attorney. So, I mean, to be honest, there was a few drunken nights that I made phone calls, and I started getting some paperwork. But it just started with lies, you know, and how I feel is—and I asked them, you know, when I called to get some paperwork, I asked them, I’m like, "Well, the Department of Defense said that Derrick was killed in action." And they was like, "Well, it was probably a mistake from the newspaper, or they didn’t want to embarrass the family."
And, to me, I am not ashamed that I have to tell people that my son committed suicide. I am ashamed of the military for failing to give him proper mental health treatment. They don’t—they haven’t even treated our Vietnam veterans, you know, and now we’re in the next generation. I am here today because I don’t want my grandchildren, you know, after I’m dead and gone, to be having to march through the streets of Chicago.
AMY GOODMAN: Do you have a message for President Obama and for the NATO generals here at the summit?
MARY KIRKLAND: Actually, I seen it on a T-shirt. It was: "Honor the dead, heal the wounded, stop the wars."
AMY GOODMAN: Mary Kirkland, the mother of Derrick Kirkland. He committed suicide at Fort Lewis-McChord in Washington on March 19th, 2010, after two tours of duty in Iraq.

From The Boston Forum Howard Zinn Series Video of Richard Seymour on American Anti-Imperialism

Click on headline to link to video one of the Richard Seymour lecture.

Video of Richard Seymour on American Anti-Imperialism

Richard Seymour is a socialist writer from London England and runs the popular blog Lenin's Tomb. Seymour is the author of the Liberal Defense of Murder and the Meaning of David Cameron. This is video of Seymour's talk in Boston which was co-sponsored by the Howard Zinn Memorial Lecture Series and Haymarket Books. Seymour is discussing his latest book, American Insurgents which details the history of anti-imperialist movements in the United States,

Richard Seymour on American Anti-Imperialism: Video 1 of 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jO_so3oU8k

Richard Seymour on American Anti-Imperialism: Video 2 of 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOPaaO86tcY

Forum this Saturday In Boston: Stop the attacks on public education!

Forum this Saturday: Stop the attacks on public education!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From : Kevin Heaton
Sender : occupy-boston-socialist-discussion@googlegroups.com
Subject : Forum this Saturday: Stop the attacks on public education!
Reply To : occupy-boston-socialist-discussion@googlegroups.com
Tue, Jun 05, 2012 04:41 AM

***Forward Widely***

Don’t let Walmart tell us how to run our public schools:
A community forum responding to the corporate attacks

Saturday June 9th , 2012
10 am - 12 noon

Roxbury Community College
Academic Building Room 121

Increasingly, venture capitalists and deep-pocket
corporate foundations are moving aggressively to
remake our schools in their image.

Join us for a discussion of the Stand for Children
ballot initiative, charter schools, and ways to keep
corporate influence out and keep community
input – and quality – in our public schools.

Co-sponsored by TAG-Boston, Citizens for Public Schools,
Union of Minority Neighborhoods and MA Jobs with Justice

For additional information, contact MA JWJ: 617.524.8778

www.tagboston.org

Light refreshments provided.
Afterwards, march with us in the Pride Parade.

From Occupy Quincy-Citizens United

Occupy Fall River is working on the Budget For All referendum that's part of Fund Our Communities Not War and the 25% Solution. It's a lot of petitioning with little time left to accomplish it in time for the November ballot.

It's a non-binding referendum instructing the reps for the district voting in approval to push and vote for cutting Pentagon spending by 25%, ending the wars, increasing taxes on the 1%, and using that money to find our communities.
http://www.fundourcommunities.org/

We also got Westport to approve the MTA resolution against Citizens United, and we're waiting on Fall River and Somerset.

I think learning how to do referendums would be good for Occupy since it's one of the few elements of democracy we have, despite that it's extremely flawed. I've been advised that there's a movement to simplify the overly complicated process, and we'll look into that more after this campaign.

I found out yesterday that Fall River cuts its check with Bank of America, which may be the next issue we take up. I like how Occupy Buffalo was able to get the city to move some funds from the big banks. I think that could be pursued by other groups. There really are a lot of opportunities out there.

Direct action works, but we also have to make many of the changes within the system ourselves. As I've learned since October, no one's going to do this stuff for us, so we need political direct action as well. My two cents.

Solidarity,

-Justin Val

Occupy Fall River Media Committee

Facebook.com/j.val.r

On Jun 5, 2012, at 10:13 AM, deh43@comcast.net wrote:

The Quincy City Council passed the proposal 4 to 0. 4 for and 4 abstentions. Many thanks to all who participated. Time to get started in your own town.
Many thanks, again

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: deh43@comcast.net
To: "vfp al" , "paul atwood" , "PAULA BAKER" , "CINDY BROWN" , "dave collins" , "Bill Dalzell" , "Annette Donahue" , "Christine Higgins" , "JOE HIGGINS" , "MIKE HIGGINS" , "massoccupy" , "steve meacham" , "hillary moll" , "elena perez" , "Mary Slayter" , "allyson strachan" , "erin wiggin" , "Heather Yunger" , "PETE YUNGER" , "smedley brigade"
Sent: Saturday, June 2, 2012 5:16:35 PM
Subject: citizens united proposal

I have presented a proposal to the Quincy City Council to vote on the overturning of the Citizens United Decision. It is on the agenda for monday nights city council meeting at 8:00. Jain and I can use all the support we can get in this endeavor. If you can be there it would be greatly appreciated. If you cannot and know anybody in Quincy could you get them to e-mail their councillor to express their support for this proposal.

If anybody would like a copy of the proposal to adapt to their own city or town or need more information, please e-mail me and I will send it on to you. The following are my prepared remarks on the issue.

Dan Higgins, VfP, Occupy Quincy

The Case Against citizens United

Good evening ladies and gentlemen. I am pleased to have the opportunity to present to you on a matter of great importance to our democracy and therefore our community, a matter that is being addressed not only by cities and towns in our own great Commonwealth but across the nation as well. I am speaking of course of the 2010 Supreme Court Citizens United decision that has declarded that corporations are people and thus have the right under the consitution to make unresricted political payments. Citizens across this country disagree. Corporations are not people They are essentially ATM machines for political campiagns used to buy influence. Citizens United allows anonymous superpacs to feed a needlessly increasing appetite for money within the electoral process and provides unprecedented access for special interests over not only our elections but our elected officials. What chance does your vote or my vote have against a million dollars?

A dark cloud has descended over our democracy. We are returning to the gilded age of robber barons and an aristocracy of wealth. The gains our society has achieved over the last century are being undone as people lose their jobs, their homes, their pensions and their sons and daughters to endless wars, in a political and economic environment that favors the monied few at the expense of every day people like ourselves. Citizens United codifies this new social order. Across the country the democratic citizenry are outraged. We have lost faith in the ability, and the willingness of our elected officials to right these wrongs and are seeking to take direct action against this injustice and work together to overturn the Citizen United decision by calling for a constitituional amendment to do so.

I am sure you are famiiar with the old saw “Think Globally, Act Locally.” In this case, we must think NATIONALLY and act locally. In our own Commonwealth of Massachusetts over 50 cities and towns have adopted resolutions calling for the reversal of Citizens United. It is time now for the great city of Quincy, the City of Presidents, to once again serve its nation by joining in this effort and adopting this resolution on behalf of its democratic citizenry. The time to act is now.

I thank you for your kind attention.

Most sincerely,

Daniel E. Higgins

Hilton Boston Workers Persist to Form Union with UNITE HERE!

Hilton Boston Workers Persist to Form Union with UNITEHERE!

06/04/2012

Tula Connell

Congratulations to the newest members of UNITEHERE!—75 housekeepers, front desk attendants and others at the Hilton Boston Downtown whose persistence in the face of management roadblocks resulted in a successful effort to unionize. The workers waged nine months of sit-ins, pickets and talks with Hilton management before formally winning a voice at work Friday.

The workers get a $2 an hour pay increase and are eligible for health insurance through UNITEHERE! Local 26. Brian Lang, president of Local 26, said many of the workers have been enrolled in MassHealth, the public health insurance program for low-income residents. The contract also guarantees the workers job security if the hotel is sold and regulates workloads by union rules.

The Hilton workers join 900 other food service and hotel workers who have become Local 26 members in the past year, including employees
at Northeastern University, Harvard Law School, the Ames Hotel and the W Boston hotel. About 55 percent of hotel workers in Boston and Cambridge are unionized.

__._,_.___

Victory Against Repression: Carlos Montes Court Case Ends in Victory!

Markin comment:

We will take our victories, large and small, anyway we can get them.

Thanks to all your support and activism, Carlos Montes is declaring victory today! Here is the initial LA-CSFR statement on today's events.

Victory Against Repression: Carlos Montes Court Case Ends in Victory!
Los Angeles, CA - On June 5, 2012 Carlos Montes’ criminal court prosecution ended in a victory for Carlos and the movement.

Carlos Montes’ home was raided on May 17, 2011, by the combined forces of the LA County Sheriff’s Swat Team and the FBI, by crashing his door down at 5:00 a.m., with automatic assault rifles drawn, almost killing him.. He was charged with 6 serious felonies with a possible jail time of up to 18 years.

With local and national support, via solidarity protests, call-in campaigns to President Obama and U.S. Attorney General Holder, local rallies and protests, and an offensive legal strategy , two felonies were dropped - this was a first partial victory. However the District Attorney still stated that they wanted Montes to do at least 5 years in state prison for the 4 felony charges remaining.

The local and national Committees Against FBI Repression launched a petition drive and a “Call the D.A.” campaign, with phone banking and a robo call by Carlos to over 4 000 supporters, urging folks to call District Attorney Steve Cooley. The D.A.’s office was flooded with calls and letters.

Montes’ attorney made several motions to get charges dropped on various grounds, but the Los Angeles Superior Court judge rejected them. Preparations were made for a trial, knowing well the state judicial system is not ‘fair and impartial.’ Montes and his attorney Jorge Gonzalez got widespread support and media coverage including in the Democracy Now TV show, La Opinion and the Guardian UK newspaper.

The local D.A. on the case then sought for a resolution and proposed to drop three additional felonies, if Carlos pled out to one count of perjury. This proposal included no jail time, three years of probation and community service. Under advice from supporters, friends and his attorney Montes moved forward with this proposal.

This is a victory for Carlos Montes and the movement against police political repression. A trial had the danger of him being convicted of four felonies with jail time and the additional old felony - a total of 5 felonies. At this point Carlos is out of jail, will continue to organize against repression, for public education, against U.S.-led wars and for immigrant rights. He is already planning to attend the protest at the Republican National Convention on August 27, 2012 in Tampa, Florida.

Next steps: The local committee with supporters and rank-and-file members of SEIU 721 will hold a victory party to thank everyone who worked on this campaign and to help pay off legal expenses. It is set for Saturday, June 23, 7:00 p.m. Details will follow.

Carlos wants to thank all the people, organizations, unions and community people who worked and supported him in this struggle against police/political repression.

The struggle continues to defend the 23 other anti-war and international solidarity activists who are STILL under an FBI investigation for showing solidarity with the oppressed people of the world, especially the Palestinian and Colombian people. Stay updated via: www.stopfbi.net!

Los Angeles Committee to Stop FBI Repression
June 5, 2012

follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend

Copyright © 2012 Committee to Stop FBI Repression, All rights reserved.
Thanks for your ongoing interest in the fight against FBI repression of anti-war and international solidarity activists!
Our mailing address is:

Committee to Stop FBI Repression

PO Box 14183

Minneapolis, MN 55414

On The 100th Anniversary Of The 1912 Presidential Election- From The Pen Of Early American Socialist Leader Eugene V. Debs- The Coppock Brothers-Heroes Of Harpers Ferry (1914)

On The 100th Anniversary Of The 1912 Presidential Election- From The Pen Of Early American Socialist Leader Eugene V. Debs- Pioneer Women In America (1912)

On The 100th Anniversary Of The 1912 Presidential Election- From The Pen Of Early American Socialist Leader Eugene V. Debs- Capitalism And Socialism

Click on the headline to link to the Eugene V. Debs Marxist Internet Archive website article listed in the headline..

Markin comment on this From The Pen Of Eugene V. Debs series:

The Political Evolution of Eugene V. Debs

For many reasons, the most important of which for our purposes here are the question of the nature of the revolutionary party and of revolutionary leadership, the Russian Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 was a turning point in the international labor movement. In its aftermath, there was a definitive and I would argue, necessary split, between those leftists (and here I use that term generically to mean socialists, communists, anarchists, syndicalists and the like) who sought to reform the capitalist state from within and those who saw that it needed to be destroyed “root and branch” and new institutions established to create a more just society. This division today continues, in truncated form to be sure, to define the contours of the question. The heroic American pre- World War II socialist labor leader and icon, Eugene V. Debs, contained within his personal political trajectory all the contradictions of that split. As will be described below in more detail we honor Debs for his generosity of socialist spirit while at the same time underscoring that his profile is, in the final analysis, not that of something who could have led a proletarian revolution in the earlier part of the 20th century.

Debs was above all others except, perhaps, “Big Bill” Haywood in the pre-World War I movement. For details of why that was so and a strong biographic sketch it is still necessary to go Ray Ginger’s “The Bending Cross: A Biography of Eugene V. Debs”. I will review that effort in this space at a later time. For now though let me give the highlights I found that every serious labor militant or every serious student of socialism needs to think through.

If history has told us anything over the past one hundred and fifty years plus of the organized labor movement it is that mere trade union consciousness under conditions of capitalist domination, while commendable and necessary, is merely the beginning of wisdom. By now several generations of labor militants have passed through the school of trade unionism with varying results; although precious few have gone beyond that to the class consciousness necessary to “turn the world upside down” to use an old expression from the 17th century English Revolution. In the late 19th when American capitalism was consolidating itself and moving onto its industrial phases the landscape was filled with pitched class battles between labor and capital.

One of those key battles in the 1890’s was led by one Eugene V. Debs and his American Railway Union against the mammoth rail giant, The Pullman Company. At that time the rails were the key mode of transportation in the bustling new industrial capitalist commerce. At that time, by his own reckoning, Debs saw the struggle from a merely trade unionist point of view, that is a specific localized economic struggle for better wages and conditions rather than taking on the capitalist system and its state. That strike was defeated and as a result Debs and others became “guests” of that state in a local jail in Illinois for six months or so. The key conclusion drawn from this ‘lesson’, for our purposes, was that Debs personally finally realized that the close connection between the capitalists and THEIR state (troops, media, jails, courts) was organic and needed to be addressed.

Development of working class political class consciousness comes in many ways; I know that from my own personal experiences running up against the capitalist state. For Debs this “up close and personal” confrontation with the capitalist drove him, reluctantly at first and with some reservations, to see the need for socialist solutions to the plight of the workingman (and women). In Debs’ case this involved an early infatuation with the ideas of cooperative commonwealths then popular among radicals as a way to basically provide a parallel alternative society away from capitalism. Well again, having gone thorough that same kind of process of conversion myself (in my case 'autonomous' urban communes, you know, the “hippie” experience of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s); Debs fairly quickly came to realize that an organized political response was necessary and he linked up his efforts with the emerging American Socialist Party.

Before World War I the major political model for politically organizing the working class was provided by the Marxist-dominated German Social Democratic Party. At that time, and in this period of pre-imperialist capitalist development, this was unquestionably the model to be followed. By way of explanation the key organizing principle of that organization, besides providing party discipline for united action, was to create a “big tent” party for the social transformation of society. Under that rubric the notion was to organize anyone and everyone, from socialist-feminists, socialist vegetarians, pacifists, municipal reformers, incipient trade union bureaucrats, hard core reformists, evolutionary socialists and- revolutionaries like Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg who we honor to this day. The American Social Party that Debs joined exhibited all those tendencies (and some even more outlandish) of the German model. And as long as no great events acted to disrupt the “unity” of this amorphous formation the various tensions within the organization concerning reform or revolution were subdued for a time. Not forever though.

Various revolutionary tendencies within the workers’ movement have historically had opposing positions concerning parliamentary politics: what to do politically while waiting for the opportune moment to take political power. The controversy centered (and today centers around) whether to run for elective executive and/or legislative offices. Since World War I a very strong argument has developed that revolutionaries should not run for executive offices of the capitalist state on the principle that we do not want to be responsible for the running of the capitalist state. On the other hand running for legislative office under the principle of acting as “tribunes of the people” continues to have validity. The case of the German revolutionary social democrat Karl Liebknecht using his legislative office to denounce the German war effort DURING the war is a very high-level expression of that position. This question, arguably, was a little less clears in the pre-war period.

If Eugene V. Debs is remembered politically today it is probably for his five famous runs for the American presidency (one, in 1920, run from jail) from 1900 to 1920 (except 1916). Of those the most famous is the 1912 four- way fight (Teddy Roosevelt and his “Bull Moose” Party providing the fourth) in which he got almost a million votes and something like 5 percent of the vote- this is the high water mark of socialist electoral politics then and now. I would only mention that a strong argument could be made here for support of the idea of a revolutionary (and, at least until the early 1920’s Debs considered himself, subjectively, a revolutionary) running for executive office- the presidency- without violating political principle (of course, with the always present proviso that if elected he would refuse to serve). Certainly the issues to be fought around- the emerging American imperial presence in the world, the fierce wage struggles, the capitalist trustification and cartelization of industry, the complicity of the courts, the struggle for women’s right to vote, the struggle against the emerging anti- black Jim Crow regime in the South would make such a platform a useful propaganda tool. Especially since Debs was one of the premier socialist orators of the day, if perhaps too flowery and long-winded for today’s eye or ear.

As the American Socialist Party developed in the early 20th century, and grew by leaps and bounds in this period, a somewhat parallel development was occurring somewhat outside this basically parliamentary movement. In 1905, led by the revolutionary militant “Big Bill” Haywood and with an enthusiastic (then) Debs present probably the most famous mass militant labor organization in American history was formed, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW, Wobblies). As it name denotes this organization stood as, in effect, the nucleus of the industrial unionism that would win the day among the unorganized in the 1930’s with the efforts of the CIO. But it also was, as James P. Cannon an early IWW organizer noted in one of his books, the nucleus of a revolutionary political party. One of the reasons, among others, for its demise was that it never was able to resolve that contradiction between party and union. But that is an analysis for another day.

What is important to note here is that organization form fit in, very nicely indeed, with Debs’ notions of organizing the unorganized, the need for industrial unionization (as opposed to the prevailing narrow craft orientation of the Samuel Gompers-led AFL). Nevertheless Debs, to his credit, was no “dual unionist”, that is, committed to ignoring or going around the AFL and establishing “revolutionary” unions. This question of “boring from within” organized labor or “dual unions” continues to this day, and historically has been a very thorny question among militants faced with the bureaucratic inertia of the trade union bureaucracy. Debs came down on the side of the angels on this one (even if he later took unfavorable positions on IWW actions).

Although Debs is probably best known for his presidential runs (including that one from Atlanta prison in 1920 that I always enjoy seeing pictures of the one where he converses with his campaign staff in his cell) he really should be, if he is remembered for only one thing, remembered for his principled opposition to American war preparedness and eventual entry into World War I in 1917. Although it is unclear in my mind how much of Debs’ position stemmed from personal pacifism, how much from Hoosier isolationism (after all he was the quintessential Midwestern labor politician, having been raised in and lived all his life in Indiana) and how much was an anti-imperialist statement he nevertheless, of all major socialist spokesmen to speak nothing of major politicians in general , was virtually alone in his opposition when Woodrow Wilson pulled the hammer down and entered American forces into the European conflict.

That, my friends, should command respect from almost everyone, political friend or foe alike. Needless to say for his opposition he was eventually tried and convicted of, of all things, the catch-all charge of sedition and conspiracy. Some things never change. Moreover, that prison term is why Debs had to run from prison in 1920.

I started out this exposition of Debs’ political trajectory under the sign of the Russian Revolution and here I come full circle. I have, I believe, highlighted the points that we honor Debs for and now to balance the wheel we need to discuss his shortcomings (which are also a reflection of the shortcomings of the internationalist socialist movement then, and now). The almost universal betrayal of its anti- war positions of the pre-war international social democracy, as organized in the Second International and led by the German Party, by its subordination to the war aims of its respective individual capitalist governments exposed a deep crevice in the theory and practice of the movement.

As the experiences of the Russian revolution pointed out it was no longer possible for reformists and revolutionaries to coexist in the same party. Literally, on more than one occasion, these formally connected tendencies were on opposite sides of the barricades when the social tensions of society exploded. It was not a pretty sight and called for a splitting and realignment of the revolutionary forces internationally. The organizational expression of this was the formation, in the aftermath of the Russian revolution, of the Communist International in 1919. Part of that process, in America, included a left-wing split (or purge depending on the source read) and the creation, at first, of two communist organizations. As the most authoritative left-wing socialist of the day one would have thought that Debs would have inclined to the communists. That was not to be the case as he stayed with the remnant of the American Socialist Party until his death in the late 1920’s.

No one would argue that the early communist movement in America was not filled with more than its share of political mistakes, wild boys and just plain weirdness but that is where the revolutionaries were in the 1920’s. And this brings us really to Debs’ ultimate problem as a socialist leader and why I made that statement above that he could not lead a proletarian revolution in America, assuming that he was his desire. Debs had a life-long aversion to political faction and in-fighting. I would agree, as any rational radical politician would, that faction and in-fighting are not virtuous in and of themselves and are a net drain on the tasks of propaganda, recruitment and united front actions that should drive left-wing political work. However, as critical turning points in the international socialist movement have shown, sometimes the tensions between the political appetites of supposed like-minded individuals cannot be contained in one organization. This question is most dramatically posed, of course, in a revolutionary period when the tensions are whittled down to choices for or against the revolution. One side of the barricade or the other.

That said, Debs’ personality, demeanor and ultimately his political program of trying to keep “big tent” socialist together tarnished his image as a socialist leader. Debs’ positions on convicts, women, and blacks, education, religion and government. Debs was no theorist, socialist or otherwise, and many of his positions would not pass muster among radicals today. I note his economic determinist argument that the black question is subsumed in the class question. I have discussed this question elsewhere and will not address it here. I would only note, for a socialist, his position is just flat out wrong. I also note that, outside his support for women’s suffrage and working women’s rights to equal pay his attitude toward women was strictly Victorian. As was his wishy-washy attitude toward religion. Eugene V. Debs, warts and all, nevertheless deserves a fair nod from history as the premier American socialist of the pre-World War I period.

On The 100th Anniversary Of The 1912 Presidential Election- From The Pen Of Early American Socialist Leader Eugene V. Debs-

http://www.marxists.org/archive/debs/

Click on the headline to link to the Eugene V. Debs Marxist Internet Archive website article listed in the headline..

Markin comment on this From The Pen Of Eugene V. Debs series:

The Political Evolution of Eugene V. Debs

For many reasons, the most important of which for our purposes here are the question of the nature of the revolutionary party and of revolutionary leadership, the Russian Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 was a turning point in the international labor movement. In its aftermath, there was a definitive and I would argue, necessary split, between those leftists (and here I use that term generically to mean socialists, communists, anarchists, syndicalists and the like) who sought to reform the capitalist state from within and those who saw that it needed to be destroyed “root and branch” and new institutions established to create a more just society. This division today continues, in truncated form to be sure, to define the contours of the question. The heroic American pre- World War II socialist labor leader and icon, Eugene V. Debs, contained within his personal political trajectory all the contradictions of that split. As will be described below in more detail we honor Debs for his generosity of socialist spirit while at the same time underscoring that his profile is, in the final analysis, not that of something who could have led a proletarian revolution in the earlier part of the 20th century.

Debs was above all others except, perhaps, “Big Bill” Haywood in the pre-World War I movement. For details of why that was so and a strong biographic sketch it is still necessary to go Ray Ginger’s “The Bending Cross: A Biography of Eugene V. Debs”. I will review that effort in this space at a later time. For now though let me give the highlights I found that every serious labor militant or every serious student of socialism needs to think through.

If history has told us anything over the past one hundred and fifty years plus of the organized labor movement it is that mere trade union consciousness under conditions of capitalist domination, while commendable and necessary, is merely the beginning of wisdom. By now several generations of labor militants have passed through the school of trade unionism with varying results; although precious few have gone beyond that to the class consciousness necessary to “turn the world upside down” to use an old expression from the 17th century English Revolution. In the late 19th when American capitalism was consolidating itself and moving onto its industrial phases the landscape was filled with pitched class battles between labor and capital.

One of those key battles in the 1890’s was led by one Eugene V. Debs and his American Railway Union against the mammoth rail giant, The Pullman Company. At that time the rails were the key mode of transportation in the bustling new industrial capitalist commerce. At that time, by his own reckoning, Debs saw the struggle from a merely trade unionist point of view, that is a specific localized economic struggle for better wages and conditions rather than taking on the capitalist system and its state. That strike was defeated and as a result Debs and others became “guests” of that state in a local jail in Illinois for six months or so. The key conclusion drawn from this ‘lesson’, for our purposes, was that Debs personally finally realized that the close connection between the capitalists and THEIR state (troops, media, jails, courts) was organic and needed to be addressed.

Development of working class political class consciousness comes in many ways; I know that from my own personal experiences running up against the capitalist state. For Debs this “up close and personal” confrontation with the capitalist drove him, reluctantly at first and with some reservations, to see the need for socialist solutions to the plight of the workingman (and women). In Debs’ case this involved an early infatuation with the ideas of cooperative commonwealths then popular among radicals as a way to basically provide a parallel alternative society away from capitalism. Well again, having gone thorough that same kind of process of conversion myself (in my case 'autonomous' urban communes, you know, the “hippie” experience of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s); Debs fairly quickly came to realize that an organized political response was necessary and he linked up his efforts with the emerging American Socialist Party.

Before World War I the major political model for politically organizing the working class was provided by the Marxist-dominated German Social Democratic Party. At that time, and in this period of pre-imperialist capitalist development, this was unquestionably the model to be followed. By way of explanation the key organizing principle of that organization, besides providing party discipline for united action, was to create a “big tent” party for the social transformation of society. Under that rubric the notion was to organize anyone and everyone, from socialist-feminists, socialist vegetarians, pacifists, municipal reformers, incipient trade union bureaucrats, hard core reformists, evolutionary socialists and- revolutionaries like Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg who we honor to this day. The American Social Party that Debs joined exhibited all those tendencies (and some even more outlandish) of the German model. And as long as no great events acted to disrupt the “unity” of this amorphous formation the various tensions within the organization concerning reform or revolution were subdued for a time. Not forever though.

Various revolutionary tendencies within the workers’ movement have historically had opposing positions concerning parliamentary politics: what to do politically while waiting for the opportune moment to take political power. The controversy centered (and today centers around) whether to run for elective executive and/or legislative offices. Since World War I a very strong argument has developed that revolutionaries should not run for executive offices of the capitalist state on the principle that we do not want to be responsible for the running of the capitalist state. On the other hand running for legislative office under the principle of acting as “tribunes of the people” continues to have validity. The case of the German revolutionary social democrat Karl Liebknecht using his legislative office to denounce the German war effort DURING the war is a very high-level expression of that position. This question, arguably, was a little less clears in the pre-war period.

If Eugene V. Debs is remembered politically today it is probably for his five famous runs for the American presidency (one, in 1920, run from jail) from 1900 to 1920 (except 1916). Of those the most famous is the 1912 four- way fight (Teddy Roosevelt and his “Bull Moose” Party providing the fourth) in which he got almost a million votes and something like 5 percent of the vote- this is the high water mark of socialist electoral politics then and now. I would only mention that a strong argument could be made here for support of the idea of a revolutionary (and, at least until the early 1920’s Debs considered himself, subjectively, a revolutionary) running for executive office- the presidency- without violating political principle (of course, with the always present proviso that if elected he would refuse to serve). Certainly the issues to be fought around- the emerging American imperial presence in the world, the fierce wage struggles, the capitalist trustification and cartelization of industry, the complicity of the courts, the struggle for women’s right to vote, the struggle against the emerging anti- black Jim Crow regime in the South would make such a platform a useful propaganda tool. Especially since Debs was one of the premier socialist orators of the day, if perhaps too flowery and long-winded for today’s eye or ear.

As the American Socialist Party developed in the early 20th century, and grew by leaps and bounds in this period, a somewhat parallel development was occurring somewhat outside this basically parliamentary movement. In 1905, led by the revolutionary militant “Big Bill” Haywood and with an enthusiastic (then) Debs present probably the most famous mass militant labor organization in American history was formed, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW, Wobblies). As it name denotes this organization stood as, in effect, the nucleus of the industrial unionism that would win the day among the unorganized in the 1930’s with the efforts of the CIO. But it also was, as James P. Cannon an early IWW organizer noted in one of his books, the nucleus of a revolutionary political party. One of the reasons, among others, for its demise was that it never was able to resolve that contradiction between party and union. But that is an analysis for another day.

What is important to note here is that organization form fit in, very nicely indeed, with Debs’ notions of organizing the unorganized, the need for industrial unionization (as opposed to the prevailing narrow craft orientation of the Samuel Gompers-led AFL). Nevertheless Debs, to his credit, was no “dual unionist”, that is, committed to ignoring or going around the AFL and establishing “revolutionary” unions. This question of “boring from within” organized labor or “dual unions” continues to this day, and historically has been a very thorny question among militants faced with the bureaucratic inertia of the trade union bureaucracy. Debs came down on the side of the angels on this one (even if he later took unfavorable positions on IWW actions).

Although Debs is probably best known for his presidential runs (including that one from Atlanta prison in 1920 that I always enjoy seeing pictures of the one where he converses with his campaign staff in his cell) he really should be, if he is remembered for only one thing, remembered for his principled opposition to American war preparedness and eventual entry into World War I in 1917. Although it is unclear in my mind how much of Debs’ position stemmed from personal pacifism, how much from Hoosier isolationism (after all he was the quintessential Midwestern labor politician, having been raised in and lived all his life in Indiana) and how much was an anti-imperialist statement he nevertheless, of all major socialist spokesmen to speak nothing of major politicians in general , was virtually alone in his opposition when Woodrow Wilson pulled the hammer down and entered American forces into the European conflict.

That, my friends, should command respect from almost everyone, political friend or foe alike. Needless to say for his opposition he was eventually tried and convicted of, of all things, the catch-all charge of sedition and conspiracy. Some things never change. Moreover, that prison term is why Debs had to run from prison in 1920.

I started out this exposition of Debs’ political trajectory under the sign of the Russian Revolution and here I come full circle. I have, I believe, highlighted the points that we honor Debs for and now to balance the wheel we need to discuss his shortcomings (which are also a reflection of the shortcomings of the internationalist socialist movement then, and now). The almost universal betrayal of its anti- war positions of the pre-war international social democracy, as organized in the Second International and led by the German Party, by its subordination to the war aims of its respective individual capitalist governments exposed a deep crevice in the theory and practice of the movement.

As the experiences of the Russian revolution pointed out it was no longer possible for reformists and revolutionaries to coexist in the same party. Literally, on more than one occasion, these formally connected tendencies were on opposite sides of the barricades when the social tensions of society exploded. It was not a pretty sight and called for a splitting and realignment of the revolutionary forces internationally. The organizational expression of this was the formation, in the aftermath of the Russian revolution, of the Communist International in 1919. Part of that process, in America, included a left-wing split (or purge depending on the source read) and the creation, at first, of two communist organizations. As the most authoritative left-wing socialist of the day one would have thought that Debs would have inclined to the communists. That was not to be the case as he stayed with the remnant of the American Socialist Party until his death in the late 1920’s.

No one would argue that the early communist movement in America was not filled with more than its share of political mistakes, wild boys and just plain weirdness but that is where the revolutionaries were in the 1920’s. And this brings us really to Debs’ ultimate problem as a socialist leader and why I made that statement above that he could not lead a proletarian revolution in America, assuming that he was his desire. Debs had a life-long aversion to political faction and in-fighting. I would agree, as any rational radical politician would, that faction and in-fighting are not virtuous in and of themselves and are a net drain on the tasks of propaganda, recruitment and united front actions that should drive left-wing political work. However, as critical turning points in the international socialist movement have shown, sometimes the tensions between the political appetites of supposed like-minded individuals cannot be contained in one organization. This question is most dramatically posed, of course, in a revolutionary period when the tensions are whittled down to choices for or against the revolution. One side of the barricade or the other.

That said, Debs’ personality, demeanor and ultimately his political program of trying to keep “big tent” socialist together tarnished his image as a socialist leader. Debs’ positions on convicts, women, and blacks, education, religion and government. Debs was no theorist, socialist or otherwise, and many of his positions would not pass muster among radicals today. I note his economic determinist argument that the black question is subsumed in the class question. I have discussed this question elsewhere and will not address it here. I would only note, for a socialist, his position is just flat out wrong. I also note that, outside his support for women’s suffrage and working women’s rights to equal pay his attitude toward women was strictly Victorian. As was his wishy-washy attitude toward religion. Eugene V. Debs, warts and all, nevertheless deserves a fair nod from history as the premier American socialist of the pre-World War I period.