Criminalizing panhandling again in Grand Rapids
The City of Grand Rapids once again is proposing a “ban” on panhandling in Grand Rapids, despite the fact that the ACLU has won a case against the city for a previously attempting to stop people from engaging in street panhandling.
In the name of public safety, 1st Ward City Commissioner Dave Shaffer, is proposing a new policy be adopted by the City of Grand Rapids, which would limit where and when people who are street panhandling can solicit financial support. (see new proposal)
However, this new proposal continues to sweep under the rug the harsh reality that there are plenty of people in this community that are struggling to survive. We know that Grand Rapids has the largest wealth gap in the state, according to a recent report from the Economic Policy Institute but such acknowledgements in Grand Rapids are hard to come by for a city that likes its claims to a booming housing market, ArtPrize and of course its Beer City status.
Now, I don’t want to over-simplify the issue of “street panhandling,” but the fact of the matter is that there are thousands of individuals and families in Grand Rapids who are living on the edge and thousands more who are one pay check away from ending up on the street. We cannot ignore or pretend that economic disparity in this community doesn’t exist and we must stop putting emphasis on charitable responses and start thinking about longterm strategies that actually create equity and respect the dignity of all people.
First, I use the term street panhandling, because it is important to acknowledge that the city leaders object to people in the street asking for financial assistance. Grand Rapids, like all municipalities, loves to give public money to the private sector is what are often referred to as tax breaks or subsidies. Just last week, the Grand Rapids City Commission awarded $29 million to a new theater and housing project in the downtown area. This is what we might call white collar panhandling, since those with economic privilege are taking money from the public. The major difference, besides the amount of money that is being given away to white collar panhandlers, is that the public usually finds out about the give-away after the fact. At least with street panhandlers, we all can chose to give or not give, instead of having someone else make that decision for us.
Now, people might argue that this is a good use of public money, because it creates jobs or serves a specific need, like housing and entertainment. We all know that the jobs argument is weak, since most of the jobs that will be created in the downtown theater/housing project will not pay enough to people so they could actually live in the housing units being constructed.
In addition, why is it that within this economic-driven world there always has to be priority given to what development projects will “give” us? Why can’t we say that participating in economic justice is a good, smart, just and compassionate thing to do just because it says we value the dignity of everyone in this community…….even if there are no strings attached?
Recommendations on what Grand Rapids could ban that didn’t mean shitting on people
Of course, I do not expect or think that this is what governments actually do. Therefore, those of us who give a damn about these struggles will have to be the ones to make these bans become a reality.
Back to Street Panhandling
The Grand Rapids City Commission will be hosting a Public Hearing on Tuesday, December 12 at 7pm during their regularly scheduled commission meeting. This would be a good time to communicate with those who run city hall, both before and during the commission meeting. However, again, I think we would be better off organizing to change things than simply appealing to those in power.
We’re Rich and We Do What We Want: A DeVos Family Reader
The following post is taken from the Introduction to the DeVos Family Reader, which can be downloaded at this link. The document is 350 pages and in six sections.
In Howard Zinn’s monumental book, A People’s History of the United States, he constantly juxtaposes the amazing things that people did to fight for liberation and the people behind the systems of oppression that social movements were fighting against.
This is exactly why I have spent years monitoring, investigating and critiquing the DeVos Family. They are the most recognizable and powerful manifestation of the systems of power and oppression in West Michigan. Now, I know there are plenty of people who share the belief that without the DeVos Family, Grand Rapids wouldn’t be where it is today. I fully agree with that belief, but for reasons that are the exact opposite of those who hold the most powerful family in West Michigan in high regard.
When Rich DeVos and Jay Van Andel founded the Amway corporation, they did so by embracing some of the most deeply entrenched lies about this country. Rich DeVos has written numerous books that promote his values. In his book Believe, DeVos, in talking about freedom, states, “that call of freedom went forth from a rugged wilderness, and Europe and Asia and Africa sent their sons of adventure to hew out a new society in a land of forests and savages.”
This statement from DeVos is essentially an affirmation in his belief of Manifest Destiny. For those who don’t know, the company that DeVos founded with Jay Van Andel, was originally going to be called The American Way, but was changed to Amway so as to abbreviate their take on Manifest Destiny.
In addition to believing in Manifest Destiny, Rich DeVos is also deeply committed to the values of capitalism, or what he likes to refer to as the free enterprise system. In his book Believe, DeVos states, “The free-enterprise system has outperformed, outproduced any other in the world. It is a gift of God to us, and we should understand it, embrace it, and believe in it.”
The above statement is the perfect encapsulation of what the patriarch of the family, Rich DeVos, believes and is firmly committed to. The DeVos Family is a deeply religious family, regardless of how one defines religious beliefs. The family comes out of the Calvinist tradition and are members of the Christian Reformed Church. However, the DeVos Family, in many ways embraces a form of Christian Reconstruction. Those who practice Christian Reconstruction theology believe that society should be governed by biblical values, rather than secular values. This is exactly why the family has for decades developed relationships and funded organizations that are deeply committed to homophobia, anti-reproductive rights, patriarchy, white supremacy and free market capitalism.
The DeVos Family not only supports these religiously motivated values by their support of certainly organizations, but by their deep commitment to influencing public policy. The family has been one of the largest donors to the Republican Party for several decades now, at the federal, state and local level, as is documented in this collection of articles. In addition to supporting the Republican Party and GOP candidates, they also contribute to organizations that are committed to influencing public policy. In West Michigan, the DeVos Family has been involved in the financing, planning and development of groups like the West Michigan Policy Forum, the Acton Institute and the Right Place Inc. These groups all embrace the capitalist economic system and public policy decisions, which benefits and expands the power of those who make up these groups, including the DeVos Family.
What is ironic about the candidates and public policy that the DeVos Family endorses, is that those same policies end up negatively impacting communities of color, those who identify as LGBTQ, those experiencing poverty and immigrants. The irony is that the DeVos Family foundations end up contributing millions to West Michigan non-profits that provide services to the very same people who are negatively impacted by these neoliberal economic policies.
These are the kinds of themes that are explored in the DeVos Family Reader. In addition, we look at how the local news media has reported on the most powerful family in West Michigan, which has played a role in creating public misinformation. We also look at the strategic function of ArtPrize and what impact it has had on West Michigan. We argue that in many ways, ArtPrize functions has a great PR tool for the DeVos Family and its goals. In fact, such a belief was confirmed early on in the evolution of ArtPrize, when Sam Cummings, co-founder of CWD (of which the DeVos Family is part of) said, “Our long-term goal is really to import capital – intellectual capital, and ultimately real capital. And this (ArtPrize) is certainly an extraordinary tool.”
Lastly, we look at Betsy DeVos’ ascent to the White House as Secretary of Education in the section listed as Betsy DeVos Watch.
As I stated at the beginning of the introduction, I have spent years monitoring, investigating and critiquing the DeVos Family. This is an ongoing project and the DeVos Family Reader will continue to be updated. The contributions to the DeVos Family Reader have come from a variety of sources such as the Grand Rapids People’s History Project, an Indy newspaper from the 90s called The FUNdamentalist, Media Mouse and the Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy.
Also, as stated before, I believe that in order to promote collective liberation and social justice for those most marginalized, we have to understand and resist the systems of power and oppression in this community. Looking into the history and practices of the DeVos Family, provides us with a clear example of how systems of power and oppression function in this community. I am deeply indebted to those who have been involved in this struggle and it is my hope that the DeVos Family Reader can be a useful tool in the ongoing struggle for justice.
According to the Acton Institute, Thanksgiving is about Capitalism
Organizations that are ideologically driven will often create narratives that serve their own purposes. This is exactly the case with a recent Acton Institute blog post, by Rev. Ben Johnson.
The titled of the post is, The other capitalist thanksgiving story: how trade saved the Pilgrims, and the US.
This article by Rev. Johnson is full of misinformation and clearly creates a narrative to serve the Acton Institute’s ideological framework of celebrating capitalism.
The article begins by stating, “by now the Pilgrims’ disastrous experiment with collectivism in Plymouth, Massachusetts, is well-known, in free market circles if not among the young.”
The Acton writer wants to prove from the get go that collectivism or communalism doesn’t work, because the Pilgrims were a failure at it. One could hardly call the settler colonialists, living in what would later be named Massachusetts, an experiment in collectivism. The failure of the settler colonialists was due to their lack of agricultural knowledge in terms of their ability to feed themselves. They had to rely on the generosity of the Wampanoags, Pequot, Mohegan and Narragansett nations.
The Acton writer then goes on to state:
“At the beginnings of the system that we today know as capitalism, the Pilgrims were true economic pioneers,” wrote Peggy Baker, director emerita of the Plymouth Hall Museum. “Their adventure was one of spirituality, of settlement, and of finance.”
Again, Rev. Johnson pieces together a narrative to fit his ideological justification for capitalism. Cherokee scholar Ward Churchill (A Little Matter of Genocide) has a much different take on the relationship between the Pilgrims and the surround Native nations at the time of the so-called first Thanksgiving.
“Once they’d achieved self-sufficiency, of course, the Pilgrims set about destroying their native saviors with a vengeance, finishing the first part of the job by 1637. Richard Drinnon, among others, has described the link they forged between total destruction of the indigenous way of life on the one hand and of the very habitat of New England on the other. By 1675, when the colonists of what was by now not only Plymouth, but Massachusetts and Connecticut colonies as well, turned from the now-obliterated Pequots and Western Niantics to tackle the adjacent Wampanoags and Narragansetts, the wholesale and systematic destruction of villages and croplands was standard tactical fare.”
Thus, if by trade and capitalism, the Acton writer means wipe out the indigenous communities, take their land and eliminate trade competitors, then yeah, this is what happened.
However, Rev; Johnson does not mean the same thing as Ward Churchill. In fact, Rev. Johnson spends the rest of the article praising the “durable colony” because of the trade and commerce they created, which was assisted by the government shifting from government restriction to government promotion of trade. Thus, another ideological point is supported by Johnson’s narrative, which states that government should not regulate, but promote trade.
What is glaringly omitted in the rest of the Acton blog post is the murder of neighboring indigenous communities and the theft of their land. Indeed, Rev. Johnson cannot tell this part of history, because it would disrupt the ideological narrative he has created, one that ignores genocide.
The Acton writer concludes his blog post with the following paragraph:
By the time the two colonies were combined as the Province of Massachusetts Bay in 1692, trade and commerce had created a durable colony, assuring the survival of the Pilgrim experiment. The Puritans’ romanticized role in America’s founding would give the nation the tradition of Thanksgiving and may be, at least in part, responsible for its status as the most religious nation in the West. And John Winthrop’s description of the colony as “a shining city upon a hill,” echoing down through the words of a patriotic (and Calvinist) president, continue to shape America’s global image as an inviting beacon of liberty, faith, and human rights – the intangibles that underlie the prosperity we pause to celebrate every Thanksgiving.
This is a fitting ending to Rev. Johnson’s ideological narrative, especially the use of “a shinning city upon a hill” and the claim that the US is a beacon of liberty, faith, and human rights. What Rev. Johnson is essentially describing here is what is referred to as the Doctrine of Discovery.
Native Scholar Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz has a much different description of what the Doctrine of Discovery is, which she addresses at length in her book, An indigenous People’s History of the United States.
According to the centuries old Doctrine of Discovery, European nations acquired title to the lands they “discovered,” and Indigenous inhabitants lost their natural right to that land after Europeans had arrived and claimed it. Under this legal cover for theft, Euro-American wars of conquest and settler colonialism devastated Indigenous nations and communities, ripping their territories away from them and transforming the land into private property, real estate. Most of that land ended up in the hands of land speculators and agribusiness operators, many of which, up to the mid-nineteenth century, were plantations worked by another form of private property, enslaved Africans. Arcane as it may seem, the doctrine remains the basis for federal laws still in effect that control Indigenous peoples’ lives and destinies, even their histories by distorting them.
In the name of capitalism, the Acton Institute justifies the distorted history of Thanksgiving and the Pilgrims and perpetuates a settler colonial narrative that continues to impact Indigenous people to the present.
Betsy DeVos Watch: The Shock Doctrine, Puerto Rico and Public Education
It has been over 2 months now since Hurricane Maria hit Puerto Rico. The devastation left thousands homeless, many without power and thousands more which have sought refuge in various parts of the US.
While this is considered old news in the hyper-up to the minute US news cycle, it is important that we all not forget about Puerto Rico, especially since the island is at risk of ongoing efforts to privatize everything from electric power to education.
On November 8, US Secretary of Education visited Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. DeVos stated, “The dedication shown by educators, administrators and local leaders to getting students back in the classroom, and their lives back to normal, was evident at each stop. The U.S. Department of Education will continue to assist them in every way we can.”
This is an interesting statement from Secretary DeVos, especially since there is no evidence that she met with teachers during her brief visit. In fact, teachers were protesting her visit for fears that Betsy DeVos would implement a kind of shock doctrine as it relates to public education on the island.
According to one source, Members of the Federación de Maestros de Puerto Rico rallied at the headquarters of the Department of Education in San Juan to demand a meeting with (Puerto Rican Secretary of Education) Keleher. The FMPR union has charged Keleher with deliberately keeping many of the island’s schools closed, even after teachers and other volunteers have cleared them of debris and cleaned them, because she intends to permanently shutter them.
Last week, independent journalist Vijay Prashad wrote of the ongoing crisis in Puerto Rico:
“Of Puerto Rico’s 1,113 schools, only 119 have reopened. The teachers’ union, Federación de Maestros de Puerto Rico, has suggested that the government has slowed down rebuilding of schools in order to push for their privatisation. They say that the plans for the rebuilding of Puerto Rico are similar to what was done in New Orleans after the devastation of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, when schools fired teachers and created a network of private charter schools. The Federación worries that much the same will happen in Puerto Rico. The failure to reopen schools is one sign of such a plan.”
The concerns raised by the teacher’s union in Puerto Rico, and many others, about the potential privatization of public education on the island are real. Author of the Shock Doctrine, Naomi Klein, believes that all we need to do is look at the recent example of Hurricane Katrina and how that catastrophe provided an opportunity to privatize the public education system in New Orleans.
Bill Quigley, who has been writing about and monitoring the impact of Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans, has written a great deal about how the Shock Doctrine was applied to public schools. In a very thorough and thoughtful article from 2007, Quigley writes:
Before Katrina, the process of creating a charter school was legally required to first have the approval of parents and teachers. Supporters of this experiment, many if not most of who do not have children in public schools, repeatedly argue that this experiment creates “choice” for at least half the parents and students. The irony is that few parents had any choice at all in creating the experiment involving their children.
The very first public school converted to a charter was done on September 15, 2005, while almost all the city remained closed to residents. The school board did not even hold the meeting in New Orleans.
While President Bush may have been slow to react in other areas after the storm, he made a bold push right after Katrina to help convert public schools to charters.
On September 30, 2005, the U.S. Department of Education pledged $20.9 million to Louisiana for post-Katrina charter schools. The federal government offered no comparable funding to reestablish traditional neighborhood or district schools.
In early October 2005, Governor Blanco issued an executive order which waived state laws which required faculty and parent approval to convert a regular public school to a charter school. The Orleans School Board then used this waiver to convert all 13 schools in the less-flooded Algiers community of New Orleans to charter schools without parent or teacher approval.
Then all four thousand public school teachers in New Orleans, members of the largest union in Louisiana, were fired – along with support staff.
US Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos had made it clear that these types of changes to public education are exactly what she would like to see continued and expanded while she holds her post within the Trump Administration. This is a story that we need to continue to follow and monitor that could be devastating for the students, teachers and parents in Puerto Rico.
Rewarding Developers again: Grand Rapids gives $29 million of tax credits to new movie theater complex project
Yesterday, the Grand Rapids City Commission decided to give $29 million of public/taxpayer money as a subsidy to the new movie theater project, which will be located right behind the arena.
The $29 million is specifically for brownfield reimbursements, which will include, according to the City Commission packet for November 28:
- Baseline environmental assessment activities
- Demolition
- Site Preparation
- Infrastructure Improvements
- Brownfield Plan Amendment/Work Plan Preparation and Development
- Prepaid Brownfield Plan Administrative Fee
Jackson Entertainment is the LLC listed for this project, but it is really a Loeks Theater Inc project.
According to the MLive article, “the development is expected to create more than 500 jobs.” However, looking at the packet for the City Commission meeting most of the jobs are part-time and do not pay livable wages (either $11 or $12 an hour).
The MLive article also lists the projected cost of the 187 unit apartment building.
- Studios: $875 to $1,060 per month
- One bedroom: $1,150 to $1,450 per month
- Two bedrooms: $1,600 to $1,725 per month
This means that most of the jobs that are connected with this new project will not allow those part time employees making $11 – $12 an hour, unable to afford to live in the apartments being built.
A previous MLive article, reported that this project will generate $369 million over a 10 years period. However, the article never really talks about who will be the primary beneficiaries of this $369 million over a 10 year period. Those who will be the primary beneficiaries are: Loeks Theater Inc, 616 Development and the surrounding businesses – restaurants, bars and retails store owners. I say owners, because they will profit the most, not those who do the actual work at these places.
$29 million for Affordable Housing?
Of course, the most disconcerting aspect of the decision by the City of Grand Rapids was to give $29 million in tax breaks/subsidies to the developer. Once again, the public had no say in this decision to give away massive amounts of public money to the private sector.
Equally disconcerting is the fact that in recent years the city has approved hundreds of millions of dollars in tax subsidies to developers across the city, while only committing $1 million for Affordable Housing.
If the city just used the $29 million dollars of public money that was given away for this new development project, imagine how many affordable housing units could be created for individuals and families struggling to survive. If we estimated that the construction cost of a home for a family of four would be $150,000 each, that would mean that we could provide 193 families affordable homes equal to the tax credits just offered to the movie theater complex.
Last Friday, MLive posted a short piece about how the 49503 zip, which is in Grand Rapids, is the fastest growing income in the state of Michigan.
The article provides some data and makes it clear that the 49503 zip code is not the wealthiest zip code in Michigan, but that it has had the highest increase based on percentage. MLive states:
“Average income in the ZIP code, which includes downtown Grand Rapids, increased by 31.8 percent between 2014 and 2015 filings, the data shows. The average income reported in 2015 was $93,995.75.”
The article also provides additional data and acknowledges that there are, “about 33 percent of residents in 49503 fall below the poverty level.”
However, the MLive article doesn’t ask the logical and important question as to why the 49503 zip saw such a significant increase of income.
You can see where the borders are for the 49503 zip code, which includes all if downtown and other corridors that have been significantly gentrifies over the past decade. I would argue that there are 3 contributing factors to the increased income for the 49503 zip code. First, is the number of professional people moving into the area and occupying all the newer $1500 – $3,000 a month housing units. In fact, most of the housing units that have been constructed in the past 10 years have benefitted the professional class and in some cases caused the displacement of those experiencing poverty or working class families, like the project on Michigan Street from 2016.
A second reason, is based on the fact that Grand Rapids already has the largest wealth gap in the state of Michigan, based on a 2016 report from the Economic Policy Institute.
The second reason is related to the third reason, which is the fact that there are some extremely wealthy people living in the 49503 zip code. The DeVos Family are the richest in the 49503 zip codes, based on the address they use when submitted campaign contributions. We all know they have multiple houses in more than one state, but the DeVos Family does use 49503 as their address for political contributions, based on data from the Center for Responsive Politics.
Here is a sample below of the largest political contributions from the 49503 zip code. As you can see everyone listed here and many more are all members of the DeVos Family.
While not surprising, it is too bad that MLive didn’t bother to ask such a basic question as to why the 49503 zip code has had the largest increase in income. But then again, this would raise questions about wealth and poverty and that is something the commercial media tends to avoid looking into.
Grand Rapids, Development and Equity in a Market-driven economy
On Friday, MLive ran a story based on new recommendations from the Rose Center for Public Leadership in Land Use that would promote greater equity with development projects in Grand Rapids.
These recommendations are necessarily new, as they come out of a report that was presented to Grand Rapids by the Rose Center in March 2017, which we reported on.
The MLive article lists nine recommendations from the Rose Center, but before we address those recommendations, it is important to state a few things up front.
First, a major problem with these recommendations are that they are rooted in idea that we can achieve equity within a market-based system of capitalism. There is just no historical evidence that equity can be achieved within a system of capitalism. In fact, within a market-based system we can be guaranteed that there will be greater inequity – class, racial and gender inequity.
Second, the recommendations keep using the incentives and incentivizing. Instead of using the term incentivizing, why don’t we name what it incentives are, which are taxpayer subsidies or the transfer of public money into private hands. When a developer proposes to build a new condo project, the city offers subsidies or the transfer of public money into private hands. These “incentives” suggest that the private sector cannot make these development projects happen without public funds. This is simply not true, rather it means that a private development company will see more immediate returns on their investment. We all need to have a more serious discussion on whether or not the public wants to see more of their money subsidizing the private sector.
Now, lets turn to the 9 recommendations.
- Incentivize development beyond downtown – For me, this sounds like they want to expand the same kind of development process used in the downtown area and expand it to other parts of the city. For those who have not bought into the market-based mindset, the development that has occurred in recent decades in downtown GR has primarily benefited the wealthier sectors of this community and at the same time further marginalized those experiencing poverty and communities of color, particularly in the Heartside area. This first recommendation simply means they want to duplicate the downtown development model in our neighborhoods.
- Create a community land trust – This recommendation is misleading, since they are talking about what the city government could do to purchase/access more land for “affordable housing.” Community Land Trusts are really born out of resident-led efforts to protect areas of land from developers and gentrification. Instead of just talking about the city getting access to more land for housing, how about the city encouraging residents to look into creating community land trusts that would give residents more control over the future of neighborhoods that are threatened by private developers.
- Stop putting so many incentives towards parking lots and garages – This recommendation makes sense, since they emphasize more public transit and not promoting a car culture. However, this recommendation needs to take into consideration that there is also a history of white supremacy and contempt for the those experiencing poverty to create walkable communities that primarily benefit white professionals and white members of the “creative class.”
- Require developers using public incentives to use local businesses – I get the intent of this recommendation, but just because a business is local, doesn’t mean what they do promotes justice and equity. Amway, Rockford Construction, Wolverine Oil & Gas, Meijer, Wolverine Worldwide and Universal Forest Products are all local companies, but none of them are about creating greater equity in the community.
- Put an equitable economic development strategy in writing – This recommendation seems to be about promoting greater transparency. While I am in favor of increased transparency it doesn’t really address whether or not equitable economic development can occur.
- Consider creating a city Department of Transportation – I’m not sure that creating more government entities is the solution. What if people who live and work in the city have more say in developing more efficient and just ways for people to move about in this city. Such an effort should also be led by those who are the most marginalized in our car-dependent culture – those with disabilities, people experiencing poverty, communities of color.
- Advocate for state policy change for popular incentives – This recommendation makes tax credits for developers an incentive that should be pushed at the state level. However, instead of focusing on more transfer of public money to the private sector, how about returning to a state policy that would promote rent control. A statewide rent control policy would do more to benefit those being priced out of neighborhoods than promoting more “incentive” programs. The realty sector would fight having a rent control policy in place, but tenants could begin by creating a union that would give them power to fight for rent control and other issues, while not having to wait for a state policy.
- Create a new position in city hall to facilitate engagement – This recommendation makes it clear that the city currently does a poor job when it comes to community engagement. Creating such a position will not necessarily mean more people will be involved in future planning. If you look at the Planning Commission right now, it is made up of too many people who benefit from development projects and not those who are most impacted from such projects. The problem is that the city too often gives private developers too much power. Instead of just creating a community engagement position, there needs to be a commitment to giving neighborhoods and residents more power in determining the future of their communities.
- Start a citizen’s learning institute – This recommendation seems rather patronizing to me. People need to be informed about what is happening in their neighborhoods and what the city process is when developer approach them, but that shouldn’t require a citizen’s learning institute. Besides, what good does it do for people to have a better understanding of how the city too often sides with private developers in this process. Ultimately, people need to feel empowered to take more ownership in their neighborhoods and this is already happening, despite what developers and the city government are doing. Just look at the pushback from the AmplifyGR development plans.
Again, it is important to emphasize that market-based solutions will not create more equity in the city. In fact, this is a sentiment that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr shared.
Grassroots Responses to Big Philanthropy: Grand Rapids Activism in the Shadow of Amway, ArtPrize and DeVos
Last week, I was asked to be part of a panel discussion for a conference being held in downtown Grand Rapids and organized by the Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and Voluntary Action (ARNOVA).
The organization itself doesn’t seem to be focused on systems of oppression and collective liberation, but the panel I was asked to participate in was headed in the right direction.
The title of the panel session was, Grassroots Responses to Big Philanthropy: Grand Rapids Activism in the Shadow of Amway, ArtPrize and DeVos. The title was reflective of something that I have spent a great deal of energy on, both monitoring the DeVos family, providing analysis of their type of philanthropy and how we need to counteract the insidious nature of the millions this family distributes in order to serve their own interests.
As I write this, it is Giving Tuesday, which seems appropriate, considering the fact that so many non-profit organizations are hoping to cash in on funding from philanthropic organizations that often contribute to the harm they are responding to.
The Problem of Philanthropy for Social Movements
Based on the research of the group INCITE!, which produced the book, The Revolution Will Not Be Funded, it is important to provide a framework for thinking about the nature of philanthropy and foundations.
According to INCITE, “The non-profit industrial complex is a system of relationships between:
- the State (local and federal governments)
- the owning classes
- foundations
- and non-profit/NGO social service & social justice organizations
With these kinds of relationships, it often results in the surveillance, control, derailment, and everyday management of political movements. The state uses non-profits to:
- 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
Now that we have a framework around thinking about the function of philanthropy and foundations, I can talk about what was discussed on the panel. I will keep the comments and observations to what I shared, since I do not have consent from the other panelists.
There were a few questions posed to those of us on the panel. The first question was, What does activism and community organizing mean to you and your organization? While doing introductions I said that I was only representing GRIID and the Grand Rapids People’s History Project. However, I did say that I was currently involved in doing some food justice organizing, working with the GR Rapid Response to ICE project and Movimiento Cosecha GR.
My response to the first question was that it was deeply critical for us to think about the work we do in terms of building dynamic social justice movements and that our organizing needed to be strategic and reclaim radical imagination. I stated that these movements must be led by those most impacted – communities of color, immigrants, queer communities, those with disabilities, etc. I also stated that those of us in these movements, who bring a great deal of privilege, need to make sure that our involvement needs to make sure that the voices of those most marginalized need to be elevated and that whatever actions we take should center around the voices/input of those most impacted from systems of oppression.
I also said that we need to create, when possible, independent, autonomous groups that seeks to get to the root of whatever issue(s) we are organizing around, through the use of Direct Action and horizontal organizing models.
The second question posed to those of us on the panel was, From your perspective, how does activism and community organizing function within Grand Rapids?
My response began with a comment from a friend of mine who in not originally from West Michigan. She stated that “Grand Rapids does charity real well, but it doesn’t do justice for shit.” I followed up that comment by saying that this fits into what people often called West Michigan nice. West Michigan nice is in many ways a dominate ethos in this community, which essentially means don’t rock the boat, don’t challenge structural injustice and don’t bite the hand that feeds the non-profit industrial complex.
An example I gave had to do with the issue of hunger in this community. Two of the largest organizations responding to hunger are Feeding American West Michigan and Kids Food Basket. In both cases, these organizations do a great job of providing food charity, but they are in no way interested in doing food justice. All one has to do is look at their funding sources and who sits on their boards. I interviewed the director of Feeding America a few years ago and he bragged about the fact that they were increasing the amount of food that their organization was distributing on a yearly basis. When I said that this just means that more people are food insecure and that the goal should ultimately be to end hunger, this non-profit director said that this was not the focus of their organization.
The third question deal more directly with the function of systems of power. The question was, How do you and/or your organization navigate government power structures and big philanthropy?
This question got to the heart of the title of the panel as it was presented to those attending the conference. Using the DeVos Family as the lens at which to respond to this question, I began by saying that I think it is important to recognize that the DeVos Family not only is the most powerful family in West Michigan, but that their religious values and ideological framework is what informs and determines their wealth and power.
I then stated that the DeVos Family contributes more to influence government policy in Michigan more than any other family in the state, based on documentation from the Michigan Campaign Finance Network. The kinds of policies they have been promoting, both through their family campaign finances and groups like the West Michigan Policy Forum have resulted in making Michigan a Right to Work state, attacking teacher and other public sector pensions, denying same sex parents from adopting from the largest adoption agencies in the state, changing the tax system to benefit the wealthiest and changing state law to allow larger campaign contributions.
All of these policies have caused a tremendous amount of harm and negatively impacts the most marginalized communities in the area. The DeVos Family then provides substantial grant funding through their numerous family foundations, funding that is often used by non-profits to respond to the harm the DeVos Family has caused. The difference is that the funds used within the non-profit sector are based on conditions, which allows the DeVos Family to engage in a form of social engineering and population management.
In addition, the non-profits that are receiving funds from the DeVos Family Foundations are then put in a position so as to never criticize the family’s political funding. This means that in addition to engaging in population management, non-profit/social service organizations are also managed for fear of losing their funding. Therefore, the DeVos Family philanthropy plays a significant role in the two pronged strategy of ideological warfare they engage in through their wealth. (See Part I and Part II of an article that further explores this dynamic.)
One recent example is the DeVos creation of the group AmplifyGR. In this case, through their partnership with Rockford Construction, they have purchased a great deal of land in the Boston Square and Cottage Grove areas in southeast Grand Rapids. The DeVos Family then created their own non-profit, AmplifyGR, which then seeks to impose a development/gentrification plan on these neighborhoods. The DeVos Family makes it more probable that they will be able to achieve their goals, since there are many non-profits in the target area that have been major recipients of DeVos foundation money.
What the DeVos Family did not expect is for the community to push back against their plans to re-develop the area. AmplifyGR has recently canceled the previously schedule “community engagement” meetings to re-assess their plans. However, the public should not take this as a victory, but rather a temporary setback. No doubt the family will use its vast influence and resources to rethink how best to achieve their goals. One thing is clear though, the resistance to AmplifyGR’s plans has come because of grassroots and autonomous organizing outside of the shadow of big philanthropy.
Acton Institute constructs a video to paint those protesting their annual event as “uncivil”
On October 18, an estimated 25 people confronted Acton Institute supporters as they entered the DeVos Convention Center on their way to the organization’s annual event.
The purpose of the action was to challenge the Acton Institute’s keynote speaker, Betsy DeVos, and to make those attending the event feel uncomfortable. Some of the people attending the Acton Institute Gala are part of the Grand Rapids power structure, since many of them are business people who also push the same kinds of neoliberal policies, like privatization and attacks on the public sector, that the Acton Institute so aggressively promotes.
We recently posted a critique of the October 18 talk given by Acton co-founder, Rev. Robert Sirico. Besides mocking those who protested the event, Sirico made the claim that his organization doesn’t believe in class struggle, they believe in “class encounter.”
Last week, the Acton Institute posted a video that seeks to continue to mock those who confronted the people who paid $175 a plate to attend their event and to construct an image that their members support civility.
Here is the text that accompanies the video that Acton posted:
On October 18 2017, United States Secretary of Education and former member of the Acton Institute board of directors Betsy DeVos addressed an audience of nearly 1,000 people at Acton’s 27th Anniversary Celebration at DeVos Place in Grand Rapids, Michigan. DeVos has been one of President Donald Trump’s most controversial appointees to his cabinet, and her appearance in Grand Rapids attracted protests similar to those she has encountered at other speaking engagements across the country. In conjunction with the Acton Institute, AnneMarie Scheiber Dykstra of Free to Speak Pictures spent some time examining the claims of the protestors about DeVos’ agenda, contrasted it with the Secretary’s actual words, and looked at the potential real world impact of expanded educational choice.
Virtually nothing that is included in this text was accomplished in the video. It is a weak and simplistic depiction of what happened that night and what DeVos and Rev. Sirico both had to say.
What is even more offensive is that the video features the commentary from the superintendent of Potter’s House Christian School, John Booy. Booy has a long history of supporting the kinds of educational policies that Betsy DeVos has advocated over the past several decades. Potter;s House Christian School has also been the recipient of significant funding from the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation.
What Booy had to say in the video is particularly offensive because he wants to claim that those protesting the Acton Institute event are not civil and that somehow civility is a virtue. In addition to referring to the protest as a circus, he said, “what we are trying to teach out students is to have peaceful, intelligent discourse.” Of course those who are part of the power structure who have a tremendous amount of privilege will always want to portray people who are fighting for justice as uncivil. It is my contention that there is no point in having civil discourse with people who impose policies that negatively impact people who are the most marginalized in our society. I don’t want to appeal to the morality of those who support the Acton Institute. They have made it clear that their morality is far superior than the rest of us. Therefore, our intent was to make those who attended the Acton Institute event uncomfortable for forcing their morality on the rest of us.
Here is the constructed video that the Acton Institute recently posted, so you can draw your own conclusions about what it is they were trying to communicate. Ironically, the video is entitled, Finding Virtue in a Noisy World.
Cosecha GR escalates Turkey Boycott Campaign, invites others to join
Over the past fews days Movimiento Cosecha GR has escalated their turkey boycott campaign by holding actions at places where people go to buy turkeys and turkey products.
On Sunday, several members of Cosecha GR went to one of the local Gordon Foods stores, holding signs and passing out information on the boycott. The flyer they were handing out read:
Why boycott turkey this holiday season?
1. Many immigrants in the poultry industry work in harsh conditions and make poor wages. Their status often means that their labor is exploited and their rights are abused.
2. Immigrant families are living in fear: disrupted, detained and deported. A small disruption in your holiday traditions this year can be a powerful move for solidarity.
3. When we stand together we can impact the economy. In turn, we can demand changes in working conditions.
Movimiento Cosecha demands dignity, respect and permanent protection for all immigrants.
Last night othe members of the immigrant led group went to the Meijer store on Alpine to do the same thing and demonstrate the collective economic power that immigrants and allies can have in order to make change,
Cosecha GR also recently made a video that communicates the spirit and intent of the Turkey Boycott, which you can watch here below. The group has produced videos in both Spanish and English to reach as many people as possible.
An Invitation to Participate in the Turkey Boycott
Here is a list of a few things that people can do to support the Cosecha GR Turkey Boycott Campaign.
- Sign the pledge to be part of the campaign. Part of the language from the pledge makes it clear about why Cosecha GR is calling for the boycott.
Recognizing that all the food that is on our tables during these end of the year festivities has been cultivated, harvested and processed by immigrant hands, we invite you to make the sacrifice of not eating turkey to honor the work of immigrant workers and we invite, when you are together with your families at the Thanksgiving dinner, Christmas or New Year to remember that our immigrant brothers and sisters whose families may not be together because they have been separated and won’t be able to celebrate because their family members have been deported.
- You can become involved in the turkey boycott campaign and assist in organizing actions. Contact Cosecha GR by going to their Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/cosechagr/.
- You can have the important conversations with family at holiday meals about the Turkey Boycott.
- Encourage your faith community to participate in the Cosecha GR Turkey Boycott. They have put together an invitation to the faith community, which reads as follows:
Invitation to the Faith Community to Boycott Turkey
PROBLEM:
For the past year, the immigrant narrative in our country has been of the negative connotation and for the immigrant community way of life has been full of fear, persecution and exploitation. One of the issues that we are highlighting on this campaign is the abuses in the poultry industry.
The turkey production line is constantly producing more than one bird per second and the workers are not being replaced in their work stations to go use the restroom so they have reached the point that they have to go to work wearing adult diapers because they are being exploited and violated on their basic rights.
CALL TO DO JUSTICE:
We are called to welcome the stranger, to stand by their side and to shine the light on the immigrant injustices. Recognizing that all the food that is on our tables during these end of the year festivities has been cultivated, harvested and processed by immigrant hands. We invite you to make the sacrifice of not eating TURKEY to honor the work of immigrant workers and we invite you, when you are together with your families and in your congregations at the Thanksgiving dinner, Christmas or New Year to remember that our immigrant brothers and sisters whose families may not be together because they have been separated and won’t be able to celebrate because their family members have been deported.
IMPACT:
This is the time for immigrants to be recognized for their contributions to the US economy and to West Michigan in particular, so by participating in the TURKEY BOYCOTT we are accompanying them on their struggle and bring to light that their consumer power is worthy and their labor power counts.
- You can share all of this information through your social media networks.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 