Undocumented Immigrants are still being targeted for deportation, despite the 100 Day Moratorium, even in Kent County
On January 22, President Joe Biden signed an Executive Order announcing a 100-day deportation moratorium. However, deportations can still occur under the following conditions:
- You entered the United States on or after November 1, 2020;
- You are engaged or suspected of engaging in terrorism or espionage, or U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) believes you pose a danger to national security; or
- You choose to be deported.
However, despite the Executive Order signed over two weeks ago by President Biden, there are undocumented immigrants who are still being deported. On February 1st, it was reported in numerous dominant news news sources that undocumented immigrants were still being deported. From US News and World Report:
A federal judge last week ordered the Biden administration not to enforce a 100-day moratorium on deportations, but the ruling did not require the government to schedule them. In recent days, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has deported immigrants to at least three countries: 15 people to Jamaica on Thursday and 269 people to Guatemala and Honduras on Friday. More deportation flights were scheduled Monday.
Now, there have been reports, like the one in Teen Vogue on January 25th, that ICE officials may not be complying with the Biden administration’s deportation moratorium. Such reports might be true and ICE officials may be refusing to comply with the 100 Day Moratorium on deportations. However, what is important for those who want immigration justice, is that we need to first and foremost center the lived experiences of the undocumented community and their families.
If the undocumented immigrant community is continuing to experience fear, continuing to be arrested, detained and deported by ICE agents, then those of us who claim to be allies/accomplices in their struggle should do whatever we can to challenge this ongoing form of state repression.
ICE Violence in Kent County
Since the beginning of COVID, the level of ICE activity in West Michigan has reduced. Fewer people were contacting GR Rapid Response to ICE and some people were being released from detention centers because of the high risk of contracting COVID in confined spaces, like detention centers, jails and prisons.
However, since the 2020 Election, specifically since the Biden Administration put in place the 100 Day moratorium on deportations, we have been in contact with some undocumented immigrant families that are facing deportation. Like most of us, these members of our community were confused and angered by the fact that they were being targeted for deportation, when a moratorium on deportations has been in place since January 22. One Guatemala I spoke with, told me that their faith in politicians has virtually disappeared, since this person can’t understand why they are being targeted for deportation, while there is a deportation moratorium.
In addition, the Kent Community Bond Fund has also received several recent requests for financial assistance to bond members of the undocumented community out of detention, which is a significant change since last March, when the COVID Stay at Home orders were put in place in Michigan.
Lastly, to add to the harm against the undocumented community, last week the Senate voted to not provide COVID Relief funds to undocumented immigrants. There were 8 Democrats who voted no on supporting undocumented immigrants, with both of Michigan’s Senators – Peters & Stabenow – voting with the GOP on this matter. This is so infuriating, especially since so many in the undocumented community do work that has been deemed essential since the beginning of COVID. This is exactly why groups like GR Rapid Response to ICE and Movimiento Cosecha GR have been making it clear that despite the new US administration, we cannot relax on demanding justice for the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants living int he US. La Lucha Sigue!
The Devil is in the Details 2/9/2021: Cannabis monopolies and more corporate committee appointments for Grand Rapids
This is our third installment of this posting, which takes a critical look at Grand Rapids politics and policies, based primarily on the public record, such as committee agendas and minutes.
There are two issues we want to focus on today, Cannabis monopolies and the continued corporate representation on local government committees.
Cannabis monopolies?
We noted in our first installment of this series in early January, the City Planning Commission approved several more recreational cannabis permits to SB VB Grand Rapids, LLC, FPAW Michigan, LLC and AEY Capital LLC. SB VB Grand Rapids LLC is registered in Michigan with its company address being in Plymouth, Michigan. M. Scott Bowen, a former City Commissioner and Grand Rapids and lawyer, was representing SB VB at the Planning Commission meeting in January.
FPAW Michigan, LLC is owned by Michigan Supply and Provisions, and owns several recreational cannabis facilities in cities across Michigan. AEY Capital LLC also has cannabis facilities across the state, with Sterling Heights, Michigan listed as the address for this business.
At the February 11th Planning Commission meeting, there will be public hearings for three more recreational cannabis facilities in Grand Rapids, all owned under the name of Green Skies – Healing Tree LLC. Green Skies – Healing Tree LLC will be represented by Victor Kattoula for all three public hearings. Green Skies – Healing Tree LLC also has numerous facilities in Michigan and in Grand Rapids. The address given for the business is also Sterling Heights, Michigan.
So, it seems that all three public hearings for recreational cannabis facilities during the February 11th, Planning Commission are for businesses that are not based in Grand Rapids. How is this promoting equity in Grand Rapids, and why doesn’t the city have stronger rules around limiting recreational cannabis facility ownership, which should give priority to local and businesses that are Black owned or owned by other individuals from communities of color? Wasn’t there lots of talk about how the decriminalization of cannabis would lead to undoing the harm of the War on Drugs, which disproportionately impacted Black and latinx communities? Why aren’t people more pissed off about this trend?
Corporate representation on GR Government Committees
The other issue we want to draw attention to today, is the re-appointment and new appointments of people from the corporate world to Grand Rapids government committees. There are three notable examples, based on the agenda for the February 9th City Commission meeting.
Mayor Bliss appointed John Van Fossen to serve another term on the Economic Development Corporation/Brownfield Redevelopment Authority. Van Fossen is the Senior Director of Government Affairs at Meijer, and prior to that he was doing similar work with government affairs for several other entities in the corporate world, based on his LinkedIn account. He also sits on the Economic Development Corporation, which serves as the defacto board for the Brownfield Development Authority. According to the City of Grand Rapids, the purpose of the Economic Development Corporation is to:
The Economic Development Corporation (EDC) assists enterprises in locating or expanding in the City of Grand Rapids by establishing project areas and providing financing and other assistance for both industrial development and some non-profit projects. The goal of the EDC is to alleviate and prevent unemployment and to strengthen and revitalize the City and State economy.
While the first part of this description is true, we all should question whether or not such an entity will actually alleviate and prevent unemployment. In addition, why is a Grand Rapids City government committee working to strengthen and revitalize the City and State economy? If this is really true, do we want people who represent corporations sitting at the table?
The second example is the re-appointment of Dante Villarreal to the SmartZone Local Development Finance Authority. Villarreal is the Vice President of Business & Talent Development for the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce. Some of you may remember his role of defending the decision to have Kent County Cares Act money for businesses hurt during COVID to go through the GR Chamber of Commerce, instead of allowing groups like the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce share that responsibility. During the January meeting of the SmartZone Local Development Finance Authority, Villarreal voted with his colleagues to extent a contract with the DeVos-created Start Garden to manage the City’s Equitable Economic Development and Mobility Strategic Plan. Start Garden will get another $362,500 for their services through June 30, 2021. Who sits at these tables matters!
The third and last example of who sits on government committees from the corporate world is
Lawrence Zeiser, who was appointment to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Zeiser works for the Wolverine Building Group and also acts as an independent “Management Consulting Professional.”
You can see just by these three examples that there is significant corporate representation on Grand Rapids government committees, specifically committees that have an impact on economic and so-called development issues. And like most local government decisions, this information flies under the radar for most residents, even though public money subsidizes virtually all of these projects.
DeVos controlled Amphitheater Project using public money will be voted on at the February 9th Grand Rapids City Commission meeting
On Friday, MLive reported, “that the Grand Rapids-Kent County Convention Arena/Authority (CAA) approved an option agreement with the city to purchase part of a 17-acre stretch of property along the Grand River.”
In October, we reported that Grand Action 2.0 was planning to move forward with a proposal to build a large amphitheater in downtown Grand Rapids.
We also reported that the land in question for the proposed amphitheater, was owned by the DeVos family, specifically the old Charlie’s Crab restaurant and the adjacent land & parking area. One of the properties is owned by 63 Market Avenue Holdings LLC, which was not verified by local news sources, but 63 Market Avenue Holdings LLC is in the same address that houses the DeVos businesses and the various DeVos family foundations – 126 Ottawa Ave NW, Grand Rapids.
On November 10th, we reported on updated details about this proposal, which is even more insidious. During the Grand Rapids City Commission’s Committee of the Whole meeting on Tuesday morning, the City approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), whereby the Amway Hotel Corporation, 63 Market Avenue Holdings LLC, the Grand Rapids-Kent County Convention/Arena Authority and the City of Grand Rapids, have agreed to enter into a private-public agreement to build a 14,000 seat outdoor amphitheater. You can read the details of this agreement from our previous article on this topic, which means that the City of Grand Rapids will spend over $6 million to move offices they have on Market Avenue, just south of the off ramp of US 131, in order to make space for the proposed amphitheater.
Friday’s MLive article cites someone from the Convention Arena Authority and it’s partnership with the City on this project, but fails to mention the other entities involved in the project, which we listed above, which includes the Amway Hotel Corporation and 63 Market Avenue Holdings LLC, both of which are controlled by the DeVos family.
The MLive article also states that the City Commission will be deciding on this project and its use of public money, at their February 9 meeting. However, while the City Commission will be voting on this matter, they will be discussing it at the February 9 Committee of the Whole meeting, which is where these decisions are usually made. The Agenda Packet for the Committee of the Whole meeting, on pages 10 – 12, provides further details about the project and then Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The Committee of the Whole recommends the adoption of the MOU, which suggests this is merely a formality and the City will once again use public money to support a project that the Convention Arena Authority will likely control.
It should also be reiterated that the Convention Arena Authority, which manages the Van Andel Arena, DeVos Place and the DeVos Performance Hall, is made up of a seven member Board of Directors. The representation of that board consists of 6 people from the corporate world and Mayor Bliss, which should tell you about who really benefits with this kind of representation.
At the Grand Rapids City Commission on the evening of February 9, they will be voting to approve this project. This matter is part of the Agenda for that meeting, so public comment for this project – where public money will again be used for private benefit – will be towards the beginning of the City Commission meeting.
GRIID Class on US Social Movements – Part II: The Civil Rights Movement/Black Freedom Struggle
Over the next 8 weeks, we will be posting a summary of the class we are facilitating on US Social Movements. These posts will include a summary of the discussion, the questions we presented to frame each social movement that is discussed, a timeline and additional books that are relevant to each movement.
For the second class on US social movements, we discussed chapter 17 from Zinn’s book on the Civil Rights Movement/Black Freedom Struggle, a chapter entitled, “Or Does It Explode?” The chapter begins with a powerful poem by Langston Hughes. However, many of the participants commented on how similar the current Black Lives Matter movement is so similar to what was happening in the 50s, 60s and 70s. We discussed the similarities and the differences, and several people pointed out how systems of power and oppression have figured out more effective means of repression, while promoting diversity.
Some people commented on how heartbreaking all of this information was, which is a very normal and human response to systemic oppression. We also did discuss the amazing courage and commitment of this movement, from the work of people like Ida B. Wellls to Ella Baker, Dr. King to Fred Hampton, along with the countless individuals who participated in the Freedom Rides, the lunch counter sit-ins, the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the Deacons for Defense, the Poor People’s Campaign and the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense.
In the class we used a timeline of the 20th Century, which had critical points of the Civil Rights Movement/Black Freedom Struggle on the top, along with other important aspects of that century, which were connected to this struggle, which were listed on the lower half of the timeline shown here.
In addition, each of the participants were provided with a list of questions to help frame and facilitate a more focused discussion. We will list all 8 of the questions and a brief overview of what was discussed for each question.
- What are the systems of power and oppression that existed during the period of history being discussed, and more importantly, what were the systems of power and oppression that the social movement was confronting, challenging or seeking to dismantle? People responded to this question with the idea that people were fighting for greater equality and against segregation, but also that there was a growing sense during the evolution of the movement that equality and anti-segregation were not enough and that a broader sense of racial justice, equity and abolition of White Supremacy became the work of campaigns like the Poor People’s Campaign, SNCC, the Black Panthers, the League of Revolutionary Workers in Detroit and so many others who moved to adopt more militant direct action responses.
- What else was happening in the country or around the world that may have influenced how both the systems of power/oppression and the social movement responded? People talked about the anti-Colonial Movements around the world and how that influenced what was happening in the US. Again, the post-WWII Universal Declaration of Human Rights framework was important, plus US imperialism displayed in Vietnam, which got people to ask the fundamental question – why should I fight for so-called freedom abroad, when I don’t have it here. The example of boxing greater Muhammad Ali was discussed and his act of draft resistance. There was also some discussion about how Neo-liberall Capitalism was gutting public funding, along with the simultaneous shift from the war on poverty to the war on crime and the war on drugs, which were both designed to suppress Black dissent.
- In what way(s) did the social movement organize itself. Centralized, decentralized, autonomous, etc? Here, people did acknowledge that the movement was fairly decentralized and autonomous, except for larger actions like the 1963 March on Washington or the Poor People’s Campaign, which needed greater buy-in for these actions/campaigns from organizations all across the country.
- What were the goal(s), strategies and tactics of the social movement? It was difficult for people to identify one goal, but people did have a good discussion about the shift from civil rights to human rights, since human rights go further than the concept of civil rights. There were numerous strategies employed during this period, from education, coalition building, training in tactics, and direct action. Tactics included boycotts, marches, sit-ins, riots, voter registration, creating new political parties, civil disobedience, and self-defense.
- How did the system of power/oppression push back against the demands and gains made by the social movement? The system pushed back by adopting repressive programs like COINTELPRO, using infiltrators, pressuring groups to not be too militant, withholding funding, jailing people, using surveillance and the creation of non-profits as a means of diverting revolutionary energy to a more managed professionalism. There was additional discussion around how large foundations like the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations were giving lots of money away to get movements to shift from direct action to adopting a more social service model.
- Were their intersectional aspects of the struggle the social movement was engaged in? There was always a race, class and gender critique within the aspects of the Civil Rights Movement/Black Freedom Struggle. In addition, people identified the Vietnam War Resistance and how the draft impacted the Black Community, the formation of the original Rainbow Coalition and the growing emphasis on economic issues, even challenging Capitalism.
- How did the social movement impact other existing or future social movements? The Civil Rights Movement/Black Freedom Struggle clearly influenced the American Indian Movement, the Chicano Movement, the Young Lords and the anti-war movement. People also talked about how the current Black Lives Matter Movement has been influenced by the Civil Rights Movement/Black Freedom Struggle, although the current movement is not simply mimicking this period, instead the Black Lives Matter Movement is more committed to an abolitionist framework.
- How was the social movement compromised or co-opted, and by which external forces were they compromised or co-opted? Again, people discussed the role of non-profits, some of the more mainstream civil rights groups and even partisan politics, which did little to advance the goals of the Civil Rights Movement/Black Freedom Struggle.
Additional reading resources:
Ella Baker & the Black Freedom Movement: A Radical Democratic Vision, by Barbara Ransby
How Long? How Long?: African American Women in the Struggle for Civil Rights, by Belinda Robnett
Captive Nation: Black Prison Organizing in the Civil Rights Era, by Dan Berger
We Will Return in the Whirlwind: Black Radical Organizations 1960-1975, by Muhammad Ahmad
Radio Free Dixie: Robert Williams & the Roots of Black Power, by Timothy Tyson
The Deacons for Defense: Armed Resistance and the Civil Rights Movement, by Lance Hill
Many Minds, One Heart: SNCC’s Dream for a New America, by Wesley Hogan
Hillbilly Nationalists: Urban Race Rebels and Black Power, by Amy Sonnie and James Tracey
The Black Panthers Speak, by Philip Foner
When Affirmative Action Was White, by Ira Katznelson
The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America, by Naomi Murakawa
Creating A Movement with Teeth: A Documentary History of the George Jackson Brigade, edited by Daniel Burton Rose
The Speech: The Story Behind Dr. Martin Luther King Jr’s Dream, by Gary Younge
Lessons From Freedom Summer: Ordinary People Building Extraordinary Movements, by Kathy Emery, Linda Reid Gold & Sylvia Braselmann
A More Beautiful and Terrible History: The Uses and Misuses of Civil Rights History, by Jeanne Theoharis
Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism, by James Loewen
Detroit I Do Mind Dying: A Study in Urban Revolution, by Dan Georgakas & Marvin Surkin
The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America, by Richard Rothstein
Going Down Jericho Road: The Memphis Strike, Martin Luther King’s Last Campaign, by Michael Honey
Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents, by Isabel Wilkerson
We Want Freedom: A Life in the Black Panther Party, by Mumia Abu-Jamal
The Blood of Emmett Till, by Timothy Tyson
How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, by Walter Rodney
Truth and Revolution: A History of the Sojourner Truth Organization 1969 – 1986, by Michael Staudenmaier
Race, Rape, and Lynching: The Red Record of American Literature, by Sandra Gunning
Martin & Malcolm & America: A Dream or a Nightmare, by James Cone
From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America, by Elizabeth Hinton
Race for Profit: How Banks and the Real Estate Industry Undermined Black Homeownership, by Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor
The Fifty-Year Rebellion: How the US Political Crisis Began in Detroit, by Scott Kurashige
Hitler’s American Model: The United States and the Making of Nazi Race Law, by James Whitman
This Nonviolent Stuff’ll Get You Killed: How Guns Made the Civil Rights Movement Possible, by Charles Cobb
Black Power : The Politics of Liberation, by Kwame Ture and Charles Hamilton
Films:
Negroes with Guns
King in the Wilderness
Freedom Riders
I Am Not Your Negro
The Black Power Mixtape 1967 – 1975
Slavery by Another Name
Why I think Ryan Kelley’s announcement to run for Governor in Michigan can be a benefit to the anti-racism/Black Lives Matter movement
There has been a fair amount of coverage lately in West Michigan-based news media about one of the co-founders of the American Patriot Council, Ryan Kelley.
Most of the news coverage has centered around his involvement in the January 6 attack on the US Capitol by White Nationalists, particularly whether or not Kelley entered the building or not. Frankly, I’m not as invested in whether or not Kelley entered the US Capitol on January 6, since I think the more important question is the role that he and fellow American Patriot Council play in fostering a political climate for White Nationalists and White Supremacy, something I pointed out in regards to his connection to some of those arrested for attempting to kidnap Governor Whitmer last Fall.
In addition, Ryan Kelley has been in the news because there is an effort to get him removed from the Allendale Township Planning Commission. Those involved in that effort have tried to get him removed because of his defense of the Civil War statue in Allendale, because of his connection to the Whitmer kidnapping plot and now because of his involvement in the January 6 White Nationalist attack at the US Capitol. Getting Ryan Kelley removed from the Planning Commission would be a win, but the more important goal should be to expose and undermine the American Patriot Council and all groups and institutions that promote White Supremacy.
In some ways, I think it is beneficial to the larger anti-racism/Black Lives Matter movement that Ryan Kelley has decided to run for Governor of Michigan. I say this, because it provides the anti-racism/Black Lives Matter movement an opportunity to talk about, challenge and confront White Supremacy in our communities. Having Ryan Kelley run for Governor will not only provide us with an opportunity to expose him and the American Patriot Council, it will expose those who contribute to his campaign. More importantly, Kelley’s decision to run for Governor should force all other candidates to take a much more radical stance on racial justice and if they don’t, the anti-racism/Black Lives Matter movement should pressure them to do so. Look, we can not be content with with saying, “at least the candidate we will vote for, isn’t a White Nationalist” or “at least our candidate didn’t participate in January 6 attack in the US Capitol.” Movement politics should also work towards moving politics towards a more radical and transformative position instead of being content with business as usual.
With Ryan Kelley entering the race for Governor of Michigan, the anti-racism/Black Lives Matter movement should begin articulating what a vision for racial justice could look like in Michigan and then refuse to back any candidate for office, unless they adopt the platform and vision they put forth. The problem with a lesser evil voting mentality is that we fail to recognize the power we have when using the vote as one of the tactics in movement work. We should not be begging candidates to adopt more progressive platforms, candidates should be begging movements for their platforms and voters should be telling candidates that they will not vote for them unless movement platforms are adopted by candidates. Stop giving your power away!
Is rejoining the Paris Accords really cause for celebration? The Climate Justice Movement says otherwise
Thank you President Biden for making one of your first priorities to rejoin the Paris Accords! This has been an important issue to Mayors across our country as we believe it is critically important for the United States to being a part of leading the world on climate action.
Grand Rapids Mayor Rosalynn Bliss posted these words on her Facebook page recently, words that are worth examining in this post.
On an emotional level, I get why Mayor Bliss, and anyone else for that matter, would celebrate the fact that the Biden Administration is rejoining the Paris Accords. The level of climate denial in the Trump Administration was off the charts, so returning to the Paris Accords seems like a step in the right direction.
However, just undoing some of the Trump era policies is a pretty low bar. More importantly, as many political commentators have pointed out, the status quo that existed before Trump is what led to Trump. This is especially the case when it comes to Climate Change, Climate Justice and the Paris Accords.
The context of the above comment from Mayor Bliss, is rooted in her role with the Climate Mayors statement, which also celebrated a return to the Paris Accords. But what do we know about the Paris Accords and what does the rejoining of these accords by the Biden administration actually mean for Climate Justice.
Patrick Bond, a South African writer and Climate Justice activist, wrote an important assessment of the Paris Accords, just after the Biden Administration had announced it was rejoining. There are many points that Bond makes in his recent article, but one point he makes is worth including here:
My additional concerns are about how during the 2010s, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) policy was manipulated by Biden’s climate envoy John Kerry (Secretary of State from 2013-17) and other staff from the Obama-era State Department and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (including former pro-fracking EPA head Gina McCarthy, now Biden’s senior climate advisor). From Copenhagen’s 2009 United Nations Conference of the Parties COP15 to the 2016 Marrakesh COP22 – and especially at Durban COP17 in 2011 and Paris COP21 in 2015 – their corporate neoliberal agenda held sway. This group’s climate-policy imperialism did enormous harm and it’s vital to recall why.
Bond goes on to identify what the major short comings of the Paris Accord are:
The Paris Climate Agreement failed to:
- adopt sufficiently deep and binding global emissions reduction requirements, fairly distributed (in contrast to voluntary 2015 Nationally Determined Contributions that will cause at minimum 3-degree heating by 2100 – with only vague hopes of ratcheting up ‘ambition’), combined with a make-believe 1.5 degree aspirational target which is simply a talk-left distraction, while walk-right pollution continues unabated;
- establish accountability mechanisms including penalties (e.g. ‘border adjustment tax’ climate sanctions);
- apply carbon taxation judiciously and democratically (not regressively and top-down, as imposed in France and Ecuador in 2018-19), and dispense with failed carbon trading and offset gimmicks (implicit in most scam-riddled ‘net zero’ and ‘carbon-neutral’ claims, within the resurgent emissions-trading markets);
- respect historical ‘polluter-pays’ responsibilities for the ‘climate debt’ to cover ‘loss and damage’ and to compensate for poorer countries’ unused carbon space;
- ensure a job-rich Just Transition away from carbon-addicted economies (thus entailing new commitments to localized, labor-intensive production processes that had been eviscerated by neoliberal globalization);
- allow poor countries to adopt climate-friendly technology without Intellectual Property restrictions;
- convincingly incorporate and cut military, maritime and air-transport sectoral emissions (three areas long considered by imperialist powers as illegitimate for regulation); and
- compel fossil fuel owners to cease new exploration (and most current extraction) and simultaneously revalue their ‘unburnable carbon’ as ‘stranded assets’ accordingly (instead of allowing an extremely chaotic global commodity market and unreliable fossil financiers to bear this burden).
Essentially, what Patrick Bond and other Climate Justice proponents argue is that the Paris Accords are largely a market based solution to the Climate Crisis.
In addition, one thing that is problematic about the Paris Accords is that the agreement was created without consulting frontline communities in the fight for Climate Justice, particularly indigenous community and groups like the Indigenous Environmental Network, which made the following statement about the Biden Administration’s decision to rejoin the Paris Accords:
“We stand by our principles that such justice on these stolen lands cannot be achieved through market-based solutions, unproven technologies and approaches that do not cut emissions at source. Climate justice is going beyond the status quo and truly confronting systemic inequities and colonialism within our society.”
Frontline Climate Justice groups have been making these kinds of statements for several decades and they have consistently been against the Paris Accords because it isn’t a strong enough framework to fight the Climate Crisis. What follows is their assessment of the Paris Accords back in 2015:
The Paris Climate Agreement of December 2015 is a dangerous distraction that threatens all of us. Marked by the heavy influence of the fossil fuel industry, the deal reached at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) never mentions the need to curb extractive energy, and sets goals far below those needed to avert a global catastrophe. The agreement signed by 196 countries does acknowledge the global urgency of the climate crisis, and reflects the strength of the climate movement. But the accord that came out of the UNFCC’s 21st Conference of Parties (COP21) ignores the roots of the crisis, and the very people who have the experience and determination to solve it.
Our analysis of the Paris Agreement echoes critiques from social movements around the world, led by those most impacted by both climate disruption and the false promises that governments and corporate interests promote in its wake. In order to effectively develop and support our next organizing steps, we must have a clear and honest understanding of the challenges and conditions we are facing. We have five core concerns with the content of the Paris Agreement:
The Agreement relies on voluntary versus mandatory emission cuts that do not meet targets scientists say are necessary to avoid climate catastrophe.
The Agreement advances pollution trading mechanisms that allow polluters to purchase “offsets” and continue extremely dangerous levels of emissions.
The Agreement relies on dirty energies and false promises including hydraulic fracturing (fracking), nuclear power, agro-fuels, carbon capture and sequestration and other technological proposals that pose serious ecological risks.
The operating text of the Agreement omits any mention of human rights or the rights of Indigenous Peoples and women.
The Agreement weakens or strips the rights of reparations owed to the Global South by the Global North.
Again, we cannot be content with just returning to the business as usual norm. We really need to listen to those on the frontlines of the Climate Justice Movement!
Sponsored Content and Greenwashing: MLive provides a platform for Enbridge to promote themselves as sustainable
On Friday, January 29th, one of the first items that showed up on MLive’s newsfeed was this item from the Enbridge Corporation, shown here below.
Now this item does say Sponsored Content, yet it is in the normal newsfeed line up. Everything that runs as an advertisement on Live, states that it is an advertisement. In addition, the ads on MLive are stand alone, often to the side and in now way could be confused as part of their regular newsfeed.
It is also instructive that the item from Enbridge is identified as Sponsored Content. Why not just call it an ad, since that is exactly what it is. The so-called Sponsored content from Enbridge is paid for, just like ads are, so why confused readers or blur the lines with the deceptive term sponsored content. All ads are content and all ads are paid for, just like the Enbridge sponsored content that appeared last Friday on MLive.
The Sponsored Content is a Lie
If one were to click on the Sponsored Content that the Enbridge Corporation paid for on MLive, you would go to this link.
The sponsored content from Enbridge is simply a propaganda piece talking about how the company will reduce greenhouse gas emissions in their production process. The paid content by Enbridge also wants you to believe that their involvement in the One Future coalition demonstrates their commitment to sustainability.
While some people might welcome the Enbridge Corporation’s claim to work towards sustainability, their claims should be called out as nothing more than a lie. The Enbridge Corporation’s very existence is to extra and transport fossil fuels, like nature gas and oil. How is it even possible for a company that makes billions off the trafficking of fossil fuels to in any way at all be sustainable? It can’t, but that doesn’t stop the company from engaging in the fraudulent practice of Greenwashing.
Enbridge is the primary transporter of Alberta Tar Sands oil, which many environmental groups and climate justice groups have identified as the most polluting/greenhouse gas emitting project on the planet.
It’s bad enough that MLive takes money from the Enbridge Corporation, but it is even more insidious to allow them to promote themselves as practicing sustainability. The only way for the Enbridge Corporation to actually practice sustainability, would be to shut down every operation they current are involved in and to undo the harm they have caused for decades, particularly with Indigenous communities all across North America.
White Liberals, Kids Food Basket and the Non-Profit industrial Complex in Grand Rapids
It has been a few days since the Kids Food Basket legal threat against Black organizers was made public by Defund the GRPD, the Grand Rapids Area Tenant Union, Justice for Black Lives, Movimiento Cosecha GR, GR Rapid Response to ICE and the Grand Rapids Area Mutual Aid Network.
As a matter of transparency, I am involved in many of the groups that posted the legal threat from KFB, groups that are all working to create systemic change and promote collective liberation.
It has been instructive to see the reactions to the criticism of Kids Food Basket and even more instructive to see people continuing to defend Kids Food Basket even after the groups listed above posted the legal threat that was directed at two Black organizers in Grand Rapids. As Breannah R. Alexander Oppenhuizen stated, in her article for Candor Media, the legal threat by Kids Food Basket against two Black organizers was a form of violence.
Also instructive is the fact that I have written five articles over the past decade, each of which have challenged the purpose of Kids Food Basket, which engages in Food Charity, not Food Justice. I have never received a threatening letter from lawyers representing Kids Food Basket.
Now, as someone who tries to be an accomplice with Black, Indigenous and immigrant organizers in Grand Rapids, anytime Whiteness and White Supremacy is called out, it offers those of us who are white an opportunity to think about and reflect upon our own complicity in White Supremacy and structural violence.
When far right groups show up in Grand Rapids and attempt to intimidate people, it is important for those of use who carry lots of privilege to show up and make sure that Black, Indigenous and immigrant organizers do not have to deal with armed, white nationalists. This is one way that white people can concretely practice solidarity with affected communities. However, there are others ways we can show up to challenge White Supremacy, particularly since White Supremacy is so deeply embedded in our society. And just for clarification, when I think of White Supremacy, I use the definition that has been used by long time writer and organizer Elizabeth Martinez:
White Supremacy is an historically based, institutionally perpetuated system of exploitation and oppression of continents, nations, and peoples of color by white peoples and nations of the European continent, for the purpose of maintaining and defending a system of wealth, power, and privilege.
One can see how with this definition, White Supremacy is part of our political system, it is part of capitalism, the legal system, religious institutions, the corporate media and the non-profit sector.
Now, as white people, if we are serious about dismantling White Supremacy, then you can see how there is no shortage of work. In this article though, we are going to examine how White Supremacy is part of the non-profit sector and specifically Kids Food Basket. To have an honest investigation, we are going to use the framework for what non-profits are, based on the fabulous work by the feminist group, INCITE! Over a decade ago, the group INCITE! held a conference on the Non-Profit Industrial Complex and out of the that conference came to book, The Revolution Will Not Be Funded: Beyond the Non-Profit Industrial Complex. In that book, they identify the function of non-profits, which also have a relationship with the government (must apply for a 501-c3 status, given by the State) and the Capitalist Class, which controls the majority of the wealth and also creates foundations as a way to hide some of their wealth from being taxed and to generate their own PR. INCITE! Identifies these 6 functions:
- Monitor and control social justice movements;
- Divert public monies into private hands through foundations;
- Manage and control dissent in order to make the world safe for capitalism;
- Redirect activist energies into career-based modes of organizing instead of mass-based organizing capable of actually transforming society;
- Allow corporations to mask their exploitative and colonial work practices through “philanthropic” work;
- Encourage social movements to model themselves after capitalist structures rather than to challenge them
The issue that Kids Food Basket organizes around is child hunger and poverty. However, instead of addressing the root cause of child hunger and poverty, Kids Food Basket provides food charity. They get businesses to send them volunteers on a regular basis to put together sack lunches, which makes the volunteers feel good about themselves and it’s great PR for the entities sending volunteers.
Then Kids Food Basket relies on donations and grants to “feed children”, which lets individuals get off the hook from taking responsibility for child hunger and more importantly it allows large donors to influence how the money gets used. The DeVos family gives hundreds of thousands annually, which allows them an influential role in determining the work of Kids Food Basket, and since KFB doesn’t challenge the root causes of poverty, wealthy funders like the DeVos family are happy with what KFB does. The DeVos family spends millions during any given election cycle, to buy politicians who will keep the minimum wage low and who will make sure that the tax system benefits the super rich. If issues like these were being addressed by KFB, which are important for addressing the root causes of poverty, then the DeVos funding would likely go away.
Kids Food Basket also has substantial corporate representation on their board, such as Meijer, Amway, Huntington Bank, Williams Group and Rhoades McKee, the law firm which sent the threatening letter to the two black organizers. Having corporate representation on the board is beneficial, since these people represent the interests of the companies they work for, which is to say they will make sure that addressing root causes of poverty are avoided. For example, Meijer, a major food cartel, doesn’t pay most of their store employees a living wage, yet the wealth of Hank & Doug Meijer currently stands at $10.2 Billion, according to Forbes. The Meijer family alone could contribute thousands of dollars to the families of the children who receive KFB food charity and it still wouldn’t make a dent in their wealth.
However, the larger issue is how all the energy, resources, staff and volunteer hours are spent by Kids Food Basket, could be used to come up with real ways to address child hunger and poverty, ways that would address the root causes of that poverty. Remember, White Supremacy is about maintaining and defending a system of wealth, power, and privilege.
Feeding children can be a powerful strategy for grassroots groups to use if they want to end poverty. The Black Panther Party for Self-Defense had a powerful breakfast program, but this was a program where they directly fed children in their communities, which also included an educational component. More importantly, the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense didn’t just run a breakfast program, they had a 10 Point Program that reflected clear demands in order to achieve the kind of liberation they wanted to see in the world, which included economic justice.
What We Want Now!
- We want freedom. We want power to determine the destiny of our Black Community.
- We want full employment for our people.
- We want an end to the robbery by the capitalists of our black and oppressed communities.
- We want decent housing, fit for shelter of human beings.
- We want education for our people that exposes the true nature of this decadent American society. We want education that teaches us our true history and our role in the present day society.
- We want all Black men to be exempt from military service.
- We want an immediate end to POLICE BRUTALITY and MURDER of Black people.
- We want freedom for all Black men held in federal, state, county and city prisons and jails.
- We want all Black people when brought to trial to be tried in court by a jury of their peer group or people from their Black Communities, as defined by the Constitution of the United States.
- We want land, bread, housing, education, clothing, justice and peace.
This is what it means to work for the root causes of injustice, including child hunger and poverty. For those of us who are White, instead of being so quick to defend Kids Food Basket and how they promote White Supremacy, maybe we need to ask ourselves what are the root causes of hunger and poverty in our community and then work like hell to fight for the necessary changes needed, but only if those most affected want us to join the fight.
Over the next 8 weeks, we will be posting a summary of the class we are facilitating on US Social Movements. These posts will include a summary of the discussion, the questions we presented to frame each social movement that is discussed, a timeline and additional books that are relevant to each movement.
The US Abolitionist Movement, is not only the first significant social movement in US history, it is the foundational movement for all other movements. W. E. B. DuBois referred to the salve revolt as the first “general strike,” and the early labor movement also referred to working for Robber Barons as “wage slavery.” In addition, the some within the early suffrage movement, saw the direct connection between the dismantling of chattel slavery with the liberation of women. Angela Davis, in her monumental work, Women, Race and Class, that the Abolitionist movement laid the foundation for an intersectional analysis of race, gender and class.
For this first week, everyone read chapter 9 from Howard Zinn’s, A People’s History of the United States, which deals specifically with the Abolitionist movement. Zinn doesn’t waste anytime juxtaposing the radical demands of those who were enslaved to the systems of power that were defending slavery. Participants in the class noted some of the more dynamic aspects of the Abolitionist Movements, which had nothing to do with reform, but everything to do with ending the brutal practice of slavery.
In the class we used a timeline of the 19th Century, which had critical points of the Abolitionist movement on the top, along with other important aspects of that century, which were connected to slavery, which were listed on the lower half of the timeline shown here.
In addition, each of the participants were provided with a list of questions to help frame and facilitate a more focused discussion. We will list all 8 of the questions and a brief overview of what was discussed for each question.
- What are the systems of power and oppression that existed during the period of history being discussed, and more importantly, what were the systems of power and oppression that the social movement was confronting, challenging or seeking to dismantle? The most obvious system of oppression was the legal protection of humans owning other humans, or what was referred to then as chattel slavery. This system was a private system, consisting of hundreds of plantation owners who used slave labor. People also identified Capitalism as another system of oppression, since Capitalism drove the demand of cash crops like cotton and tobacco, which were central to the plantation system. Capitalism and slavery was the focus of important book by Edward Baptist, The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism. In addition, people identified the legal system, the political system, religion and the use of slave patrols, which were designed to enforce hunt down slaves who fled the plantations.
- What else was happening in the country or around the world that may have influenced how both the systems of power/oppression and the social movement responded? Here, the class relied on the timeline to see what else was happening in the US and around the world that had a direct impact on the Abolitionist Movement. People identified the Haitian Revolution as being an inspiration for the Abolitionists, which is precisely why the US has been punishing Haiti ever since. We also discussed briefly the thesis of Matthew Karp’s book, This Vast Southern Empire: Slaveholders at the Helm of American Foreign Policy, which investigates members of Congress that supported slavery and how that impacted the relationship between the US and countries that endorsed slavery and those that didn’t. The US wars against Indigenous peoples was also discussed, along with the relationship between Settler Colonialism and Chattel Slavery. Lastly, there was discussion about legislation that benefited the Capitalist Class, such as the Homestead Act, the construction of the Transcontinental Railroad as integral components of Capitalist expansion and how workers were organizing against such dynamics.
- In what way(s) did the social movement organize itself. Centralized, decentralized, autonomous, etc? The Abolitionist Movement was mostly decentralist and autonomous. To this question, most of the conversation centered around the limited means of communication available, but people also talked about the benefits and limitations to not having a well connected movement.
- What were the goal(s), strategies and tactics of the social movement? The main goal was to end Chattel Slavery. Some strategies were education, media, mutual aid, but the primary strategy was Direct Action. Tactics that were used were rebellions, escaping, burning the plantation, finding temporary housing for those who fled, speeches, using force, writing editorials, sharing testimony from those formerly enslaved, organizing and arming people against the plantation system.
- How did the system of power/oppression push back against the demands and gains made by the social movement? The system pushed back by passing the Fugitive Slave Act, by increasing the terror tactics against those who were enslaved, organizing white armed thugs into slave patrols, undermining the provisions of the Reconstruction period, passing the 13th Amendment (which now gave the state power to incarcerate and evolve slavery), and white people organizing themselves into terrorist groups like the KKK.
- Were their intersectional aspects of the struggle the social movement was engaged in? There was always a race, class and gender critique within the aspects of the Abolitionist Movement.
- How did the social movement impact other existing or future social movements? The Abolitionist movement deeply impacted the early labor and suffrage movements, particularly because of people like Frederick Douglass, Sojourner Truth, and the Grimke sisters.
- How was the social movement compromised or co-opted, and by which external forces were they compromised or co-opted? The political system coopted the movement by making promises that were never fulfilled – 40 acres and a mule, or by getting them to believe in the Reconstruction policies, which were then taken away through political deals, particularly the deal knows as the Compromise of 1877, which was an informal agreement between southern Democrats and allies of the Republican Rutherford Hayes to settle the result of the 1876 presidential election, in exchange for withdrawing US troops from the south, thus ending the Reconstruction era.
Additional reading resources:
A People’s History of the Civil War: Struggles for Meaning and Freedom, by avid Williams
The Long Emancipation: The Demise of Slavery in the Unite States, by Ira Berlin
The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery an the Making of American Capitalism, by Edward Baptist
How Capitalism Underdeveloped Black America, by Manning Marable
Gateway to Freedom: The Hidden History of the Underground Railroad, by Eric Foner
John Brown’s War Against Slavery, by Robert McGlone
Five for Freedom: The African American Soldiers in John Brown’s Army, by Eugene Meyer
Complicity: How the North Promoted, Prolonged, an Profited from Slavery, by Anne Farrow, Joel Lang and Jennifer Frank
This Vast Southern Empire: Slaveholders at the Helm of American Foreign Policy, by Matthew Karp.
And the Spirit Moved Them: The Lost Radical History of America’s First Feminists, by Helen LaKelly Hunt
Women, Race & Class, by Angela Davis
West Michigan Far Right Watch for the week of January 20 -27: American Patriot Council exposed and Acton defends revisionist history
Welcome to the next installment of West Michigan Far Right Watch, where we keep tabs on the far right in this area and provide a summary of what they are up to and what kind of messages they are promoting in this community. As a matter of clarification, when we say the Far Right, we mean those in the streets who fight to defend White Supremacy, those who promote far right ideology, and those with political and economic power.
We have 2 examples for this installment.
American Patriot Council co-founder, Ryan Kelley, as been in the news lately, since activists have been exposing him for his participation in the January 6 riot at the US Capitol. Local TV stations have reported on this, like WXMI 17, just as we reported on it last week. We also noted in our post from last week that his role in the January 6 riot at the US Capitol is in direct violation of one of the core values of the American Patriot Council, based on what is posted on their website, which states:
- We condemn acts of violence, especially to achieve political gain.
- We do not tolerate lawless behavior or illegal actions.
However, for today’s post we want to draw your attention to the American Patriot Council’s most recent blog post. The blog post is entitled, Biden Wastes No Time Beginning Plan for Economic Ruin. The blog post is short and not well written, but what it demonstrates is that the American Patriot Council is just another White Republican hate group that condemn anything the Democratic Party does. In other words, the American Patriot Council is just another hack partisan entity.
The other issue we want to draw your attention to is a recent post from the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty. Last Friday, the main Acton editor, Rev. Ben Johnson, wrote a piece that lamented the now defunct 1776 report, which came out of a conference that former President Donald Trump hosted in September, designed to counteract both the 1619 Project and the work of radical historian Howard Zinn.
The Acton blog post defends the Trump administration’s position on US history, with a point by point argument, which does nothing more than say they agree with the 1776 Report. The report itself is a joke and it’s primary objective, apart from being a form of revisionists history, is the argue that the US was founded on freedom and liberty, not on genocide and slavery, as historians like Zinn, so accurately point out.
At the end of the Acton article, it provides a direct and downloadable link to the 1776 report. This report is painful to read, but it does provide us with more clarity on the ideological framework that so many Americans base their identities in.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 