therealnews--2020-07-31--EU Shares Blame For Amazon’s Destruction, Research Shows

EU countries are responsible for promoting deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions in the Brazilian Amazon by importing and consuming agricultural products contaminated with illegal deforestation , new research has found .
Published in research journal Science , the study points out that “ as much as 22 % of the soy and upwards of 60 % of the beef exported annually to the EU may be contaminated with illegal deforestation.
” In a classic example of doublespeak , the EU has also been vocal about boycotting products from Brazil over spiking deforestation , and even threatened to withhold ratification of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Mercosur , the South American trade bloc .
Among the concerns the EU has raised is that “ increasing greenhouse gas emissions resulting from deforestation and forest fires in Brazil could cancel out EU climate change mitigation efforts.
” The revelation comes as a major embarrassment for the European Union leaders who have criticized Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro ’ s far-right government for turning a blind eye to unprecedented levels of illegal mass deforestation .
Environmental nonprofits and Amazon watchdogs have vigorously reported that the Bolsonaro government ’ s move to dismantle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegal loggers and miners to move deep into the Amazon forest , where the Indigenous tribes are sheltering in isolation as a safeguard against the COVID-19 pandemic .
But despite its criticism of Bolsonaro ’ s environmental policies , the EU is still Brazil ’ s largest trading partner .
Because of the ongoing consumption of Brazil ’ s deforestation-contaminated agri-products , researchers say the EU should share the blame for promoting deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions .
Talking to The Real News from Belo Horizonte in Brazil , lead researcher Raoni Rajao @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s agricultural exports are linked to deforestation , illegal or not , and to what extent .
“ Because on the one hand , Brazil has one of the highest levels of tropical deforestation in the world .
But on the other , the agribusiness claims that it ’ s mostly clean and it ’ s not involved in deforestation in any legal activities .
So , there was a missing research that shed better light on that , ” Raoni explained .
The research found about 2 % of medium-sized and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of all illegal deforestation taking place in the Amazon and the Sahara , and around 20 % of Brazil ’ s beef and soy exports to the EU are linked to illegal deforestation .
Explaining the reasons behind illegal deforestation , Raoni said there ’ s a big economic incentive to convert timberland to farmland because it is much more profitable , in addition to its use for agricultural purposes .
“ And since there has not been a proper and stronger law enforcement , especially in the last five years or so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activities has become higher and higher.
” The researcher criticized the EU ’ s threat to boycott Brazil ’ s products as ineffective .
“ First of all , because if you do boycotts because of around 20 % of the exports that are contaminated , you end up punishing 100 % of the farmers and even those who are not doing anything wrong .
Secondly , if the EU stops buying from Brazil , the result is that Brazil is going to be selling more to China and the United States , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to sell more to the EU .
And so that just shuffles part of the trade .
But that does not solve the problem.
” Raoni says the proposals put forward by various reports and policy papers call for Brazilian companies to provide private certifications showing their products are sustainably and legally produced .
But it will not solve the problem , he says , because the companies exporting deforestation-contaminated products will either sell those products within Brazil or export to China .
“ So basically , you move the problem , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So I think what you could do now is to support Brazil and to demand transparency and institute transparent and universal solutions for tracking supply chains.
” Responding to the question of how best to tackle the problem of deforestation-contaminated products , the researcher said some international companies have been trying to get rid of deforestation from their supply chain for many years .
But some of their big clients such as supermarkets and restaurants don ’ t want to get involved , and that becomes the key hurdle , Raoni explained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capitalism has a green heart .
Quite the contrary .
But what has happened is that since consumers are becoming increasingly concerned about this , that has become also one of the concerns of the markets.
” In June , under pressure from international multinational companies and governments , Brazil ’ s far-right president Jair Bolsonaro announced a 120-day ban on fires set to intentionally clear Amazon rainforest for agriculture .
According to nonprofit Amazon Watch , the massive fires that raged across the Brazilian Amazon in 2019 were a direct result of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear land for agribusiness .
During June this year , the number of fires in the Brazilian Amazon have increased 20 percent compared to last year , representing a 13-year high .
Deforestation spiked for the 14th consecutive month in June , government data shows , leading to further pressure on Bolsonaro , who is widely seen as responsible for the worsening destruction of the rainforest on his watch .
What makes the effort to rein in illegal deforestation and mining ever more difficult is the nexus of the land-owning elite , local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the police and military—who hold the levers of power in the country .
“ That makes things very difficult , especially in situations where some of the people which are supposed to be in office to defend the public good , they ’ re also there to pursue their own interest , ” Raoni added .
It is the first time that research has provided hard data highlighting the extent of Brazilian exports that are linked to deforestation , illegal or not .
The study has also exposed the doublespeak of the European @ @ @ @ @ @ @ biggest consumers of the deforestation-contaminated products they criticize Brazil for producing .

EU countries are responsible for promoting deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions in the Brazilian Amazon by importing and consuming agricultural products contaminated with illegal deforestation, new research has found.
Published in research journal Science, the study points out that “as much as 22% of the soy and upwards of 60% of the beef exported annually to the EU may be contaminated with illegal deforestation.”
In a classic example of doublespeak, the EU has also been vocal about boycotting products from Brazil over spiking deforestation, and even threatened to withhold ratification of the 2019 trade agreement between the EU and Mercosur, the South American trade bloc. Among the concerns the EU has raised is that “increasing greenhouse gas emissions resulting from deforestation and forest fires in Brazil could cancel out EU climate change mitigation efforts.”
The revelation comes as a major embarrassment for the European Union leaders who have criticized Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro’s far-right government for turning a blind eye to unprecedented levels of illegal mass deforestation.
Environmental nonprofits and Amazon watchdogs have vigorously reported that the Bolsonaro government’s move to dismantle and defund environmental protection agencies is encouraging illegal loggers and miners to move deep into the Amazon forest, where the Indigenous tribes are sheltering in isolation as a safeguard against the COVID-19 pandemic.
But despite its criticism of Bolsonaro’s environmental policies, the EU is still Brazil’s largest trading partner. Because of the ongoing consumption of Brazil’s deforestation-contaminated agri-products, researchers say the EU should share the blame for promoting deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions.
Talking to The Real News from Belo Horizonte in Brazil, lead researcher Raoni Rajao said the study responds to whether Brazil’s agricultural exports are linked to deforestation, illegal or not, and to what extent. “Because on the one hand, Brazil has one of the highest levels of tropical deforestation in the world. But on the other, the agribusiness claims that it’s mostly clean and it’s not involved in deforestation in any legal activities. So, there was a missing research that shed better light on that,” Raoni explained.
The research found about 2% of medium-sized and big farmers are responsible for 62% of all illegal deforestation taking place in the Amazon and the Sahara, and around 20% of Brazil’s beef and soy exports to the EU are linked to illegal deforestation.
Explaining the reasons behind illegal deforestation, Raoni said there’s a big economic incentive to convert timberland to farmland because it is much more profitable, in addition to its use for agricultural purposes. “And since there has not been a proper and stronger law enforcement, especially in the last five years or so, the incentive for engaging in criminal activities has become higher and higher.”
The researcher criticized the EU’s threat to boycott Brazil’s products as ineffective. “First of all, because if you do boycotts because of around 20% of the exports that are contaminated, you end up punishing 100% of the farmers and even those who are not doing anything wrong. Secondly, if the EU stops buying from Brazil, the result is that Brazil is going to be selling more to China and the United States, [which in turn] is going to sell more to the EU. And so that just shuffles part of the trade. But that does not solve the problem.”
Raoni says the proposals put forward by various reports and policy papers call for Brazilian companies to provide private certifications showing their products are sustainably and legally produced. But it will not solve the problem, he says, because the companies exporting deforestation-contaminated products will either sell those products within Brazil or export to China. “So basically, you move the problem, but you don’t solve the problem. So I think what you could do now is to support Brazil and to demand transparency and institute transparent and universal solutions for tracking supply chains.”
Responding to the question of how best to tackle the problem of deforestation-contaminated products, the researcher said some international companies have been trying to get rid of deforestation from their supply chain for many years. But some of their big clients such as supermarkets and restaurants don’t want to get involved, and that becomes the key hurdle, Raoni explained. “I don’t think capitalism has a green heart. Quite the contrary. But what has happened is that since consumers are becoming increasingly concerned about this, that has become also one of the concerns of the markets.”
In June, under pressure from international multinational companies and governments, Brazil’s far-right president Jair Bolsonaro announced a 120-day ban on fires set to intentionally clear Amazon rainforest for agriculture. According to nonprofit Amazon Watch, the massive fires that raged across the Brazilian Amazon in 2019 were a direct result of the illegal deforestation and arson used to clear land for agribusiness.
During June this year, the number of fires in the Brazilian Amazon have increased 20 percent compared to last year, representing a 13-year high. Deforestation spiked for the 14th consecutive month in June, government data shows, leading to further pressure on Bolsonaro, who is widely seen as responsible for the worsening destruction of the rainforest on his watch.
What makes the effort to rein in illegal deforestation and mining ever more difficult is the nexus of the land-owning elite, local and national political constituencies, and others—including the police and military—who hold the levers of power in the country. “That makes things very difficult, especially in situations where some of the people which are supposed to be in office to defend the public good, they’re also there to pursue their own interest,” Raoni added.
It is the first time that research has provided hard data highlighting the extent of Brazilian exports that are linked to deforestation, illegal or not. The study has also exposed the doublespeak of the European Union countries who are some of the biggest consumers of the deforestation-contaminated products they criticize Brazil for producing.
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-07-31--The Secretive Source Of Cash Police Unions Use To Block Reform

This is a rush transcript and may contain errors .
It will be updated .
Taya Graham : Hello .
My name is Taya Graham and welcome to the Police Accountability Report .
As I always say at the beginning of the show , this program has a single purpose , holding the politically powerful institution of policing accountable .
But to do so , we don ’ t just focus on the bad behavior of individual cops .
Instead , we examine the underlying system that makes American law enforcement nearly immune to reform .
And today we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on one of the key players in the political power structure that shields police from oversight .
I ’ m talking about police unions .
The organizations that are supposed to bolster workers ’ rights , but in some cases have turned into a roadblock to change and reform that you are paying for .
Then we ’ re going to talk to a New Yorker who was arrested on her way to work and what her police officer father had to say about it and what her experience says about our addiction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American policing in general .
But before I get started , I want you watching to know that if you have evidence of police misconduct , please email it to us privately at [ email protected ] and we might be able to investigate .
And please like , share and comment on our videos .
You know I read your comments and appreciate them .
And of course you can message me directly at Tayas Baltimore on Facebook or Twitter .
Okay .
Now we ’ ve got that out of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve always tried to communicate on this show , we ’ re not just producing it just to broadcast videos of cops behaving badly .
That ’ s because when you see an officer breaking the law or violating someone ’ s rights , it ’ s usually the final act of a long chain of causality that makes bad behavior possible .
And it ’ s important to understand the system and how it works to provide context on police brutality and what can be done to change it .
And key @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ ve discussed on the show before , the political economy .
The link between the politics and money that reinforces and bolsters bad actions and bad policing .
It ’ s a relationship that provides a critical link in the chain of oppression in a country that uses law enforcement as a key enforcer of income inequality .
And a critical player in the afore-mentioned political economy are organizations that are receiving more scrutiny as calls for reform of law enforcement have grown louder , police unions .
As I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police , unions which represent officers are often the principal obstacle to reform .
Organizations that combine the access to public resources unique to policing with the political currency that comes with the power of the badge .
In fact , concern over the role of police unions in blocking reform in part led to a vote by the Martin Luther King County Labor Council in Seattle to expel the Officer ’ s Guild , an organization that represents roughly 1300 police officers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of course , as we always say on PAR , it ’ s better to show than tell .
And today we ’ re going to show how one facet of unique power police unions works and how you pay for it .
Let ’ s remember it was last year we literally witnessed how police unions watered down a bill that was supposed to provide greater transparency and accountability for families of victims of police brutality in our state capitol of Annapolis .
The idea was that when someone died in police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disciplinary record would be automatically made public .
But union officials were having none of it .
And our cameras were there when several of them literally dictated the parameters of the bill , essentially watering down the legislation to limit a law which would allow civilians to purchase transcripts .
That ’ s right , transcripts of internal review board hearings .
Let ’ s watch .
Speaker 2 : Number four says after final actions taken by the head of the labor enforcement agency , the funding shall be provided to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem with that ?
Speaker 3 : No problem with that .
Taya Graham : But wait , that ’ s not all .
Because often when we ’ re working in places like our state capitol in Annapolis , we come across police union officials who are lobbying to block bills who have an unusual working arrangement .
And to discuss this and talk more about it , I ’ m joined by my reporting partner , Stephen Janis .
Stephen , thank you so much for joining me today .
Stephen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much for having me .
Taya Graham : Stephen , you ’ re standing in front of a building that has generated some controversy recently , but it ’ s also symbol of the power we ’ re talking about .
What just happened there and what is it ?
Stephen Janis : This is ground zero police power and some of the problems that we talk about with police unions .
This is the union headquarters , which by the way , has a bar inside with a 24 hour beer tap @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the weekend was that protestors came and started tagging it , in other words , putting graffiti on it .
And I guess it upset the police and it became a major story .
All they were tagging was defund the police , et cetera .
But of course it caused so much controversy that the place has been locked down and people can ’ t get inside .
But nevertheless , this is what ’ s happened .
Taya Graham : But Stephen , you also did some research and learned a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how they are bolstered by taxpayer money .
What did you learn ?
Stephen Janis : Well , it ’ s amazing .
On top of the fact that police unions are obstructionists , the chief obstructor being the president of the police union is paid for by the city taxpayers .
In other words , when a police FOP president is elected , he is then detailed to here where he works pretty much full time , but he ’ s getting paid by the police department funded by the taxpayer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And while you ’ re sitting there in Annapolis or in any state capitol watching the chief of the police union obstruct laws for reform , just bear in mind , he ’ s getting paid for by the taxpayers who are trying to achieve that reform .
So the people that are paying for his obstruction are you and me .
It ’ s an incredible system .
And it shows , exposes how powerful the political economy of policing is .
Taya Graham : Now is this phenomenon something that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happening in other police unions across the country ?
Stephen Janis : I mean , if you look at the records in other cities like in Minneapolis and Chicago and Los Angeles and New York , all the heads of police unions are paid by the police department as well .
We don ’ t follow them around every minute of every hour and know exactly what they ’ re doing every second .
But we know these people are constantly engaging in obstructionism .
We know they ’ re the ones that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does something horrible .
They ’ re the first people to say , hey , wait , it ’ s not so bad .
Especially in Minneapolis where the police union there spoke out in favor of three of the four officers charged with the death of George Floyd .
But they all are getting paid by the police department .
They ’ re all getting paid by taxpayers to obstruct legislation , to obstruct reform and asking for more money for policing and are completely in the way of any defund the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is quite concerning , but shows again , the political economy that informs and empowers policing .
Taya Graham : It ’ s interesting to note that police unions are generally awash in taxpayer cash .
A largess that has an unseen effect on the adjudication of police brutality cases and the overarching goal of holding police accountable .
Well , how do we know this ?
Well , look at the recent not guilty pleas of four police officers charged in the death of George Floyd .
The officer ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ All of Floyd ’ s death was caught in this video .
And all the officers took part in restraining Floyd ’ s body in a dangerous downward position that the Hennepin County medical examiner determined was positional asphyxiation and thus a homicide .
But as we ’ ve seen in cases like this across the country , the police fight on .
And not just because juries are often sympathetic to police officers , but for a lesser known reason .
And that ’ s because police unions are usually footing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it .
Across the country , officers rarely plead guilty .
Charges that would prompt regular citizens to cop a plea often lead to lengthy trials and a pricey defense .
Take the six officers charged with the death of Freddie Gray in police custody here in Baltimore .
Despite the fact they did not seatbelt Gray in the van , as required by law and Gray subsequently broke his neck in the back of the van , which the medical examiner determined was a homicide , all six officers pled not guilty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for by the unions .
And all six were eventually acquitted .
So as you can see , a police union is quite a different animal than your regular workers shop .
It has access to vast sums of money and the political power that comes with it in part because many cities where they operate , law enforcement is simply the biggest business in town .
And one town that has the largest police industry in the country is the home of my next guest , New York City .
The New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officers and its annual budget of $ 5 billion exceeds the entire discretionary spending of cities across the country .
The video you ’ re seeing now gives us some insight into how this massive law enforcement agency operates .
It also shows how an innocent bystander was swept up into a massive dragnet on the Brooklyn Bridge , an arrest that raises serious questions about how much police are instigating violence during protests , not preventing it .
To discuss what happened on the bridge that day and the broader implications about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m joined by the woman who filmed the mayhem and was arrested herself .
Her name is Tina Spisak and she ’ s an aspiring lawyer who was simply commuting to work on the day the arrest occurred .
Tina , thank you for joining us .
Taya Graham : So tell me , what were you doing before you were apprehended ?
Weren ’ t you just trying to get to work ?
Tina Spisak : So actually I had been on my way to work .
I ’ ve been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the week .
And once I saw the commotion and arrests being made on the bridge , I stopped to record what was going on .
First , closer to the Brooklyn side .
And then once things seemed to come to a close , kind of at that end , I moved with the protesters to the other side and again , began recording another arrest of one person .
And after that point even had I wanted to move on and go to work , I could not because officers had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Taya Graham : So what did they say to you ?
Why did they say they were detaining you ?
Tina Spisak : I was detained .
I remained on the bridge for a little while .
Officers indicated to myself , the other protesters caught on the other side of their line and other commuters that we would be able to pass , we just needed to kind of wait it out .
And all of us indicated that would not be a problem .
We were happy to wait .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officers began making arrests of folks who were complying with their order to stay on the other side of the line .
And they grabbed one bunch of people and kind of secured them .
And then around five minutes later , they started grabbing two people who were extremely close to me and I continued recording the events .
At this point , I was recording live on Instagram .
And when I asked why one woman was being arrested , two officers began to arrest me .
So I was put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times why I was being arrested .
Officers eventually answered that it was because I had refused to comply with an order to disperse .
And as some of the video I shared with you guys indicates , such an order was never given .
I waited on the bridge for maybe like an hour or so .
I wasn ’ t really aware of the time , in the heat with numerous other protestors who were arrested during that time .
It was extremely hot that day .
And this one woman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me , among other protestors , continually requested water .
Officers told them we would get it when we got to the precinct .
But people who were walking by pulled out their water bottles and were like , hey , we ’ ll pour water into their mouths .
And officers were like , no , we ’ re not going to allow you to do that .
Taya Graham : So you , a commuter , were considered part of a violent group and you were charged with disorderly conduct .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ your record or affect your career ?
Tina Spisak : So it ’ s actually kind of funny because as I mentioned , and as helped me in this situation , my dad was a cop .
I work at an attorney ’ s office , a criminal appeals defense office , and I ’ m starting law school in the fall at NYU .
So I mean , the only thing that really worried me was what reporting obligations I would have to my law school and how an arrest might impact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Because I know in some states it can be a major issue .
I ’ ve reached out to a couple of lawyers in my office who I work with and I know some of them have said , oh , it ’ ll probably just be dismissed when you go for your court date , which isn ’ t until October .
So I don ’ t know what ’ s going to happen in the interim period .
Others are saying the DA is not prosecuting , but I don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to be of the situation just given the amount of negative press that has surrounded the events that took place on the bridge on Wednesday .
So I was definitely extremely a little freaked out when it first happened .
But I certainly think that myself , as well as the other 37 folks on the bridge , there was absolutely no reason for us to be arrested .
I think police were just upset that one of their own was injured by one person and that we were espousing a message @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And they used that as a pretext to lock us up for as long as possible , because they can .
Taya Graham : It seems that you support the peaceful protesters .
Has this experience in any way changed the way you think about police and law enforcement in America ?
Or has this confirmed anything for you ?
Tina Spisak : I mean , I ’ ve been interning or working in the criminal defense system for awhile .
So I ’ ve kind of been aware that stuff like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretty prevalent .
And heard from clients about extreme abuses of police power .
But for me to see it as close as I saw it , happening to myself and the other folks I was arrested with , and just the utter disregard for our humanity and personhood and the lack of concern for informing us what was going on in the process .
Because even in my head , I had this picture of , okay , you get arrested , they ’ re going to tell you , okay , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it ’ s going to be like an hour or so , this is what ’ s going to happen to you .
So I think I even still had a rosy view of policing and the way that an arrest happens and this has really opened my eyes to that ’ s not at all how our system operates .
Though it really should .
Taya Graham : I think it ’ s clear from Tina ’ s story that , as we ’ ve said before on the show , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the toolbox of neoliberal oppression that needs to be looked at more seriously .
And combined with our previous discussion of the power police unions , another troubling aspect of the ability of law enforcement to occupy and influence , both the space to protest and the political process .
Remember , police arrest 10.5 million people per year according to the Vera Institute .
It is no longer a last resort to corral the most violent criminals .
Instead it has become a weapon of social suppression for inequality warriors to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Make no mistake , any free society with any modicum of respect for civic agency would not tolerate arrests with such impunity .
And any society which truly understands the trauma and terror that arrest inflicted upon the people who experience it , would understand why it should and must be used sparingly at best , but not here and not for us .
Instead , as we ’ ve said before , this country is addicted to arrest .
And unlike truly totalitarian governments , which wield it in a dictatorial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ created a much more insidious conditioning for its widespread deployment .
Instead of brute force , we ’ ve come to accept mass arrest due to a coordinated symbolic attack on our own sense of agency .
I ’ m talking not just about previously highlighted unions who are paid to lobby against reforms by the taxpayers .
I ’ m also referring to the endless barrage of cop shows depicting the police as guardians of the tenuous line between the poor and disenfranchised and civil society .
The hollow us against them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a virtue .
But of course , as the coronavirus has proven , just the opposite is true .
All the militarized police , the endlessly expansive prison industrial complex , the courts , the cops , the judges and the plain clothes drug units haven ’ t done a damn thing to make us safer or healthier .
All the SWAT teams and drug sniffing dogs and license plate recognition technology haven ’ t brought us peace , prosperity or health as we fight a virus that other countries have subsumed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Our addiction to arrest has instead atomized us .
It has consigned us to the fate of containment and complicity , cages and conspiracy .
It vanquishes our democratic spirit and otherwise condemns our sense of restorative justice and communal cooperation to the purview of handcuffs and zip ties .
We are not a free state , so to speak , but a carceral commune welded together by the exigencies of fascism and fear .
Case in point is the video you ’ re seeing right now .
It ’ s of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at a detainee during an arrest .
The officer was signaling , according to activists , to the gathering crowd that he would shoot the man now under arrest if the group of citizens deigned to show displeasure or refuse to back away .
But that ’ s not the end of the story because the officer wielding the gun was part of a controversial police killing that still resonates today .
The victim ’ s name was Tyrone West and he was pulled over in 2013 after making a u-turn in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the officer in the video , beat West for 45 minutes and he died shortly thereafter .
The medical examiner ruled his death an accident due to dehydration .
But his sister , Tawanda Jones , said his death was a homicide caused by positional asphyxiation when an officer sat on West ’ s back , a point she made during a gathering on the seventh anniversary of his death , which we attended .
In a sense , Tyrone West ’ s death , and the cops action on the video provides @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the choke hold American policing has on the civic life of this country .
The proverbial gun pointed at our collective heads if we dissent or disagree .
The sword of Damocles poised in the air that keeps us at bay as income inequality and injustice swallow us whole .
It ’ s a fitting symbol of the lack of accountability we discussed at the beginning of the show .
An officer , who despite the facts surrounding West ’ s death , was not even subject to internal discipline .
Instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and thus circumvented the system of accountability that we agree is all so sorely needed .
But I ’ m going to give the last word on the subject to Tawanda herself , a woman that has protested over her brother ’ s death every Wednesday for the past seven years .
An activist whose fight for justice for her brother has captured not just the imagination of our city , but has sparked a movement towards reform that has had a lasting impact here in Baltimore and beyond .
Let ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Nonstop , no progress , none whatsoever .
It is utterly ridiculous .
Taya Graham : I would like to thank my guest Tina Spisak for her time and her courage in coming forward today .
Thank you , Tina .
Tina Spisak : Thank you so so much for having me .
I really appreciate having a forum to share this story with folks and I really appreciate that you guys are giving a voice to other people ’ s experience on the bridge .
Taya Graham : I would also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for his investigative work writing and editing on this piece .
Thank you , Stephen .
Stephen Janis : Taya , thank you so much for having me .
Taya Graham : And of course I would be remiss if I did not thank friend of the show Nollie D. Thanks , Nollie D. And I want you watching to know that if you have evidence of police misconduct or brutality , please share it with us and we might be able to investigate .
Please reach out to us .
You can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protected ] and share your evidence of police misconduct .
You can also message us at Police Accountability Report on Facebook or Instagram or at Eyes on Police on Twitter .
And of course you can message me directly at Tayas Baltimore on Facebook or Twitter .
And please like and comment , you know I read your comments , appreciate them .
And I try to answer your questions whenever I can .
My name is Taya Graham , and I ’ m your host of the Police Accountability Report .
Please @ @ @ @ @

PAR investigates how police unions use taxpayer dollars to defend brutal police officers and block legislative change. We speak with a New York commuter who was arrested as a “violent” protester for stopping her bicycle to film the police.
Story Transcript
This is a rush transcript and may contain errors. It will be updated.
Taya Graham: Hello. My name is Taya Graham and welcome to the Police Accountability Report. As I always say at the beginning of the show, this program has a single purpose, holding the politically powerful institution of policing accountable. But to do so, we don’t just focus on the bad behavior of individual cops. Instead, we examine the underlying system that makes American law enforcement nearly immune to reform. And today we’re going to do so by focusing on one of the key players in the political power structure that shields police from oversight. I’m talking about police unions. The organizations that are supposed to bolster workers’ rights, but in some cases have turned into a roadblock to change and reform that you are paying for. Then we’re going to talk to a New Yorker who was arrested on her way to work and what her police officer father had to say about it and what her experience says about our addiction to arrest and what that says about American policing in general.
But before I get started, I want you watching to know that if you have evidence of police misconduct, please email it to us privately at par@therealnews.com and we might be able to investigate. And please like, share and comment on our videos. You know I read your comments and appreciate them. And of course you can message me directly at Tayas Baltimore on Facebook or Twitter.
Okay. Now we’ve got that out of the way. Now, as we’ve always tried to communicate on this show, we’re not just producing it just to broadcast videos of cops behaving badly. That’s because when you see an officer breaking the law or violating someone’s rights, it’s usually the final act of a long chain of causality that makes bad behavior possible. And it’s important to understand the system and how it works to provide context on police brutality and what can be done to change it.
And key to understanding that system is a concept we’ve discussed on the show before, the political economy. The link between the politics and money that reinforces and bolsters bad actions and bad policing. It’s a relationship that provides a critical link in the chain of oppression in a country that uses law enforcement as a key enforcer of income inequality. And a critical player in the afore-mentioned political economy are organizations that are receiving more scrutiny as calls for reform of law enforcement have grown louder, police unions. As I’m sure you’ve heard since the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police, unions which represent officers are often the principal obstacle to reform. Organizations that combine the access to public resources unique to policing with the political currency that comes with the power of the badge. In fact, concern over the role of police unions in blocking reform in part led to a vote by the Martin Luther King County Labor Council in Seattle to expel the Officer’s Guild, an organization that represents roughly 1300 police officers from the AFL-CIO affiliated council.
But of course, as we always say on PAR, it’s better to show than tell. And today we’re going to show how one facet of unique power police unions works and how you pay for it. Let’s remember it was last year we literally witnessed how police unions watered down a bill that was supposed to provide greater transparency and accountability for families of victims of police brutality in our state capitol of Annapolis. The idea was that when someone died in police custody, the officer’s internal disciplinary record would be automatically made public. But union officials were having none of it. And our cameras were there when several of them literally dictated the parameters of the bill, essentially watering down the legislation to limit a law which would allow civilians to purchase transcripts. That’s right, transcripts of internal review board hearings. Let’s watch.
Speaker 2: Number four says after final actions taken by the head of the labor enforcement agency, the funding shall be provided to the public. Do you have any problem with that?
Speaker 3: No problem with that.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Taya Graham: But wait, that’s not all. Because often when we’re working in places like our state capitol in Annapolis, we come across police union officials who are lobbying to block bills who have an unusual working arrangement. And to discuss this and talk more about it, I’m joined by my reporting partner, Stephen Janis. Stephen, thank you so much for joining me today.
Stephen Janis: Taya, thank you so much for having me.
Taya Graham: Stephen, you’re standing in front of a building that has generated some controversy recently, but it’s also symbol of the power we’re talking about. What just happened there and what is it?
Stephen Janis: This is ground zero police power and some of the problems that we talk about with police unions. This is the union headquarters, which by the way, has a bar inside with a 24 hour beer tap. But anyway, what happened over the weekend was that protestors came and started tagging it, in other words, putting graffiti on it. And I guess it upset the police and it became a major story. All they were tagging was defund the police, et cetera. But of course it caused so much controversy that the place has been locked down and people can’t get inside. But nevertheless, this is what’s happened.
Taya Graham: But Stephen, you also did some research and learned a little known fact about police unions and how they are bolstered by taxpayer money. What did you learn?
Stephen Janis: Well, it’s amazing. On top of the fact that police unions are obstructionists, the chief obstructor being the president of the police union is paid for by the city taxpayers. In other words, when a police FOP president is elected, he is then detailed to here where he works pretty much full time, but he’s getting paid by the police department funded by the taxpayer. This has been a tradition in Baltimore. And while you’re sitting there in Annapolis or in any state capitol watching the chief of the police union obstruct laws for reform, just bear in mind, he’s getting paid for by the taxpayers who are trying to achieve that reform. So the people that are paying for his obstruction are you and me. It’s an incredible system. And it shows, exposes how powerful the political economy of policing is.
Taya Graham: Now is this phenomenon something that only happens in Baltimore or is it happening in other police unions across the country?
Stephen Janis: I mean, if you look at the records in other cities like in Minneapolis and Chicago and Los Angeles and New York, all the heads of police unions are paid by the police department as well. We don’t follow them around every minute of every hour and know exactly what they’re doing every second. But we know these people are constantly engaging in obstructionism. We know they’re the ones that come out in support when an officer does something horrible. They’re the first people to say, hey, wait, it’s not so bad. Especially in Minneapolis where the police union there spoke out in favor of three of the four officers charged with the death of George Floyd. But they all are getting paid by the police department. They’re all getting paid by taxpayers to obstruct legislation, to obstruct reform and asking for more money for policing and are completely in the way of any defund the police movement. So it is something that is quite concerning, but shows again, the political economy that informs and empowers policing.
Taya Graham: It’s interesting to note that police unions are generally awash in taxpayer cash. A largess that has an unseen effect on the adjudication of police brutality cases and the overarching goal of holding police accountable. Well, how do we know this? Well, look at the recent not guilty pleas of four police officers charged in the death of George Floyd. The officer’s face a daunting path to acquittal. All of Floyd’s death was caught in this video. And all the officers took part in restraining Floyd’s body in a dangerous downward position that the Hennepin County medical examiner determined was positional asphyxiation and thus a homicide. But as we’ve seen in cases like this across the country, the police fight on. And not just because juries are often sympathetic to police officers, but for a lesser known reason. And that’s because police unions are usually footing the bill for legal costs. Think about it.
Across the country, officers rarely plead guilty. Charges that would prompt regular citizens to cop a plea often lead to lengthy trials and a pricey defense. Take the six officers charged with the death of Freddie Gray in police custody here in Baltimore. Despite the fact they did not seatbelt Gray in the van, as required by law and Gray subsequently broke his neck in the back of the van, which the medical examiner determined was a homicide, all six officers pled not guilty and all were represented by lawyers paid for by the unions. And all six were eventually acquitted. So as you can see, a police union is quite a different animal than your regular workers shop. It has access to vast sums of money and the political power that comes with it in part because many cities where they operate, law enforcement is simply the biggest business in town. And one town that has the largest police industry in the country is the home of my next guest, New York City.
The New York police department has over 55,000 sworn officers and its annual budget of $5 billion exceeds the entire discretionary spending of cities across the country. The video you’re seeing now gives us some insight into how this massive law enforcement agency operates. It also shows how an innocent bystander was swept up into a massive dragnet on the Brooklyn Bridge, an arrest that raises serious questions about how much police are instigating violence during protests, not preventing it. To discuss what happened on the bridge that day and the broader implications about police tactics during the uprising, I’m joined by the woman who filmed the mayhem and was arrested herself. Her name is Tina Spisak and she’s an aspiring lawyer who was simply commuting to work on the day the arrest occurred. Tina, thank you for joining us.
Tina Spisak: Nice to meet you Taya.
Taya Graham: So tell me, what were you doing before you were apprehended? Weren’t you just trying to get to work?
Tina Spisak: So actually I had been on my way to work. I’ve been biking in a couple of days during the week. And once I saw the commotion and arrests being made on the bridge, I stopped to record what was going on. First, closer to the Brooklyn side. And then once things seemed to come to a close, kind of at that end, I moved with the protesters to the other side and again, began recording another arrest of one person. And after that point even had I wanted to move on and go to work, I could not because officers had blocked the exit to the bridge.
Taya Graham: So what did they say to you? Why did they say they were detaining you?
Tina Spisak: I was detained. I remained on the bridge for a little while. Officers indicated to myself, the other protesters caught on the other side of their line and other commuters that we would be able to pass, we just needed to kind of wait it out. And all of us indicated that would not be a problem. We were happy to wait. We were in no rush. And then officers began making arrests of folks who were complying with their order to stay on the other side of the line. And they grabbed one bunch of people and kind of secured them. And then around five minutes later, they started grabbing two people who were extremely close to me and I continued recording the events. At this point, I was recording live on Instagram. And when I asked why one woman was being arrested, two officers began to arrest me.
So I was put in zip ties. I asked numerous times why I was being arrested. Officers eventually answered that it was because I had refused to comply with an order to disperse. And as some of the video I shared with you guys indicates, such an order was never given. I waited on the bridge for maybe like an hour or so. I wasn’t really aware of the time, in the heat with numerous other protestors who were arrested during that time. It was extremely hot that day. And this one woman in particular, who was next to me, among other protestors, continually requested water. Officers told them we would get it when we got to the precinct. But people who were walking by pulled out their water bottles and were like, hey, we’ll pour water into their mouths. And officers were like, no, we’re not going to allow you to do that.
Taya Graham: So you, a commuter, were considered part of a violent group and you were charged with disorderly conduct. Are you concerned this will be on your record or affect your career?
Tina Spisak: So it’s actually kind of funny because as I mentioned, and as helped me in this situation, my dad was a cop. I work at an attorney’s office, a criminal appeals defense office, and I’m starting law school in the fall at NYU. So I mean, the only thing that really worried me was what reporting obligations I would have to my law school and how an arrest might impact my legal career at some point. Because I know in some states it can be a major issue. I’ve reached out to a couple of lawyers in my office who I work with and I know some of them have said, oh, it’ll probably just be dismissed when you go for your court date, which isn’t until October. So I don’t know what’s going to happen in the interim period.
Others are saying the DA is not prosecuting, but I don’t know how true that’s going to be of the situation just given the amount of negative press that has surrounded the events that took place on the bridge on Wednesday. So I was definitely extremely a little freaked out when it first happened. But I certainly think that myself, as well as the other 37 folks on the bridge, there was absolutely no reason for us to be arrested. I think police were just upset that one of their own was injured by one person and that we were espousing a message that they didn’t agree with. And they used that as a pretext to lock us up for as long as possible, because they can.
Taya Graham: It seems that you support the peaceful protesters. Has this experience in any way changed the way you think about police and law enforcement in America? Or has this confirmed anything for you?
Tina Spisak: I mean, I’ve been interning or working in the criminal defense system for awhile. So I’ve kind of been aware that stuff like this happens and that wrongful arrests are pretty prevalent. And heard from clients about extreme abuses of police power. But for me to see it as close as I saw it, happening to myself and the other folks I was arrested with, and just the utter disregard for our humanity and personhood and the lack of concern for informing us what was going on in the process. Because even in my head, I had this picture of, okay, you get arrested, they’re going to tell you, okay, we’re like booking you now, it’s going to be like an hour or so, this is what’s going to happen to you. So I think I even still had a rosy view of policing and the way that an arrest happens and this has really opened my eyes to that’s not at all how our system operates. Though it really should.
Taya Graham: I think it’s clear from Tina’s story that, as we’ve said before on the show, the arrest has become a commonplace tool in the toolbox of neoliberal oppression that needs to be looked at more seriously. And combined with our previous discussion of the power police unions, another troubling aspect of the ability of law enforcement to occupy and influence, both the space to protest and the political process. Remember, police arrest 10.5 million people per year according to the Vera Institute. It is no longer a last resort to corral the most violent criminals. Instead it has become a weapon of social suppression for inequality warriors to extend the psychological conditioning of social control. Make no mistake, any free society with any modicum of respect for civic agency would not tolerate arrests with such impunity. And any society which truly understands the trauma and terror that arrest inflicted upon the people who experience it, would understand why it should and must be used sparingly at best, but not here and not for us.
Instead, as we’ve said before, this country is addicted to arrest. And unlike truly totalitarian governments, which wield it in a dictatorial fashion, our vestige of democracy has created a much more insidious conditioning for its widespread deployment. Instead of brute force, we’ve come to accept mass arrest due to a coordinated symbolic attack on our own sense of agency. I’m talking not just about previously highlighted unions who are paid to lobby against reforms by the taxpayers. I’m also referring to the endless barrage of cop shows depicting the police as guardians of the tenuous line between the poor and disenfranchised and civil society. The hollow us against them narrative that makes uncontained power to arrest a virtue. But of course, as the coronavirus has proven, just the opposite is true. All the militarized police, the endlessly expansive prison industrial complex, the courts, the cops, the judges and the plain clothes drug units haven’t done a damn thing to make us safer or healthier.
All the SWAT teams and drug sniffing dogs and license plate recognition technology haven’t brought us peace, prosperity or health as we fight a virus that other countries have subsumed, while we continue to suffer with it. Our addiction to arrest has instead atomized us. It has consigned us to the fate of containment and complicity, cages and conspiracy. It vanquishes our democratic spirit and otherwise condemns our sense of restorative justice and communal cooperation to the purview of handcuffs and zip ties. We are not a free state, so to speak, but a carceral commune welded together by the exigencies of fascism and fear. Case in point is the video you’re seeing right now.
It’s of a Baltimore police officer pointing a gun at a detainee during an arrest. The officer was signaling, according to activists, to the gathering crowd that he would shoot the man now under arrest if the group of citizens deigned to show displeasure or refuse to back away. But that’s not the end of the story because the officer wielding the gun was part of a controversial police killing that still resonates today.
The victim’s name was Tyrone West and he was pulled over in 2013 after making a u-turn in a North Baltimore neighborhood. Police, including the officer in the video, beat West for 45 minutes and he died shortly thereafter. The medical examiner ruled his death an accident due to dehydration. But his sister, Tawanda Jones, said his death was a homicide caused by positional asphyxiation when an officer sat on West’s back, a point she made during a gathering on the seventh anniversary of his death, which we attended.
In a sense, Tyrone West’s death, and the cops action on the video provides us with a complete and fulsome symbol of the choke hold American policing has on the civic life of this country. The proverbial gun pointed at our collective heads if we dissent or disagree. The sword of Damocles poised in the air that keeps us at bay as income inequality and injustice swallow us whole. It’s a fitting symbol of the lack of accountability we discussed at the beginning of the show. An officer, who despite the facts surrounding West’s death, was not even subject to internal discipline. Instead, the union fought on his behalf and thus circumvented the system of accountability that we agree is all so sorely needed. But I’m going to give the last word on the subject to Tawanda herself, a woman that has protested over her brother’s death every Wednesday for the past seven years. An activist whose fight for justice for her brother has captured not just the imagination of our city, but has sparked a movement towards reform that has had a lasting impact here in Baltimore and beyond. Let’s listen.
Tawanda Jones: 365 weeks. Nonstop, no progress, none whatsoever. It is utterly ridiculous.
Taya Graham: I would like to thank my guest Tina Spisak for her time and her courage in coming forward today. Thank you, Tina.
Tina Spisak: Thank you so so much for having me. I really appreciate having a forum to share this story with folks and I really appreciate that you guys are giving a voice to other people’s experience on the bridge.
Taya Graham: I would also like to thank intrepid reporter Stephen Janis for his investigative work writing and editing on this piece. Thank you, Stephen.
Stephen Janis: Taya, thank you so much for having me.
Taya Graham: And of course I would be remiss if I did not thank friend of the show Nollie D. Thanks, Nollie D. And I want you watching to know that if you have evidence of police misconduct or brutality, please share it with us and we might be able to investigate. Please reach out to us. You can email us tips privately at par@therealnews.com and share your evidence of police misconduct. You can also message us at Police Accountability Report on Facebook or Instagram or at Eyes on Police on Twitter. And of course you can message me directly at Tayas Baltimore on Facebook or Twitter. And please like and comment, you know I read your comments, appreciate them. And I try to answer your questions whenever I can. My name is Taya Graham, and I’m your host of the Police Accountability Report. Please be safe out there.
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-08-04--Cornel West and Tricia Rose Talk AOC, Racial Justice, and More

All donations in the US and Canada are tax deductible .
To make a secure donation by credit or debit @ @ @ @ @ location , or select PayPal .

The two say they want to address the urgency of the civil rights movement happening right now.
Story Transcript
This is a rush transcript and may contain errors. It will be updated.
Kim Brown: Welcome to The Real News. I’m Kim Brown. As we stand here at the midpoint of 2020 of what has already been a tumultuous year, it’s so important that we take moments to memorialize, observe, reflect, and analyze all of the things that have our society, and by extension, our world in a state of flux right now. And that is exactly what The Tight Rope hopes to achieve. It’s the brand new podcast hosted by professors and doctors Tricia Rose and Cornel West, and their inaugural episode features an in-depth and revealing conversation with Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Let’s take a look.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: Our identity is about trying to do best by everyday people and knowing right from wrong. You cannot allow your identity to be subsumed with this superficial political identity of red or blue or this tribe, this, that, and the other.
Kim Brown: They join us here today to talk about this new venture, what caused them to create this new media platform and what they aim to achieve and who they hope to talk to over the course of its life. We are so honored and so glad to be joined with Tricia Rose and Cornel West today, professors and doctors. Thank you all so much for being here.
Cornel West: Same to you.
Tricia Rose: It’s a pleasure to be here. Thanks for having me.
Cornel West: Thank you, indeed. Indeed.
Kim Brown: Well, I had the opportunity to check out the premiere episode of The Tight Rope, where the two of you sit down with New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for a very revealing and in-depth interview. But before we get into what that conversation was like, I wanted to ask you guys, first and foremostly, why now? Why is now a good opportunity for academics and media personalities such as yourself to create a podcast in this time? Professor Rose, we’ll start with you.
Tricia Rose: Yeah, sure. Well it’s always a good time to have an in-depth conversation with Cornel West. So there’s never a bad time for that. But I also think right now there are a number of issues that are extremely pivotal. There’s an urgency to the social justice movement and the crisis that’s created by anti-black racism and capitalism and all of the other crises that we’re facing, environmental issues and so on. There are a lot of pundits, but there are not many, many people who sit and think and read on these issues at length. We want to create space for guests who can really shed really deep light, but we also want to create space for a broader conversation on African American history and culture generally, which we both share experience as teachers and writers for many years. We think the conversation needs expanding. We think it needs enrichening and deepening and we’re happy to be in conversation and be able to do it. I think those are some of the main reasons that we felt both why now and why what we’re doing, right? Why this and why now?
Kim Brown: Cornel-
Cornel West: Absolutely. Absolutely.
Kim Brown: Many would say that this is overdue for you and Tricia to have your own space to discuss these issues. Clearly we see you featured on television programs and in other people’s platforms, but at this time I think many people are going to be quite ecstatic to see and come in to tune in to hear directly from the two of you.
Cornel West: Well, that’s very kind of you say. I mean, for me, it becomes first, just a matter of being able to revel in Sister Tricia Professor Rose’s brilliance and her genius. And by genius I mean this geniality, this largeness of mind and heart and soul, and bringing it all together, locating it in the best of both the black tradition in particular and the highly progressive tradition of humanity as a whole. To be able to allow those traditions to come through us so they can affect the younger generation, they can affect others in such a way that they get fortified in the name of an intellectual integrity, in the name of a moral compassion, in the name of a political solidarity across national boundaries, across class, across gender to hit white supremacy, predatory capitalism, US Imperial status, head on as well as hidden homophobia and transphobia. So we’re basically having a good time and trying to be a force for good at the same time.
Kim Brown: So let me ask you guys, who is this podcast for? Whose ears are you trying to capture and eyes are you trying to capture with The Tight Rope?
Tricia Rose: Well, I think, I mean, our main purpose is to reach as many people who want to engage on the issues that are interesting and important to us. That crosses a political spectrum. It crosses a racial class, gender, orientation, dimensions. It’s meant really not for any one group of people. Now, the people who I would say we’re not trying to be in direct conversation with are people who want to feed off of a one position versus another position and we’re going to fight, bring these two so-called oppositional positions, which is a binary fiction usually anyway, and create a lot of unnecessary, uninteresting, unnecessary and unproductive hostile exchange. We’re just not really interested in that. We’re interested in intelligent disagreement, of reflective, thoughtful agreement, disagreement, conflict, as long as it’s meant for real serious conversation. But I would say that kind of context is something we’re not particularly interested in. So everything else, I say, is fair game. I don’t know, Cornell, if you agree, but-
Cornel West: That is true. Absolutely. No, but see Sister Tricia and I, we’re so deeply rooted in the black musical tradition that says lift every voice. It doesn’t say lift every echo. We’re not just extensions of an echo chamber. We think for ourselves. We laugh for ourselves. We love for ourselves. We struggle for others through ourselves. We are grounded in those who came before, the best of what came before, but we’re trying to unleash this Socratic energy, critical energy, and then the moral energy, the prophetic energy. In that sense, if we’re able to really ascend as high as we’d like, we would hope the people’d have a little semblance of Tammi Terrell and Marvin and the others. The real thing.
The Ashford & Simpson stamp on the culture. That’s what the Rose West stamp is trying to be. Can we keep that stamp? So when you finish listening to us, it’s like, “I didn’t agree with everything, but ooh, that was so real and I felt it in my heart, mind and soul. So let me go on and run a little bit and be better and think better and act more courageously.” Ooh. At that point we would have done what we supposed to do.
Tricia Rose: Yes. Yes, indeed. I couldn’t agree more. That’s right.
Kim Brown: Well, Dr. West, if you straighten your hair, you might look like Nick Ashford if you give it a shot.
Cornel West: Well, not with-
Kim Brown: Tricia could be Valerie Simpson. It would be perfect.
Cornel West: Brother Nick is so much more handsome I could ever be, but I’m working on it. I’m working on it. I definitely don’t have his genius. I don’t have his genius, I can tell you that.
Kim Brown: It seems to hang on. I was just listening to that the other day.
Cornel West: It seems to hang on. Ooh, I was just listening to that, too.
Kim Brown: That’s right. That’s the jam. Come on now.
Cornel West: That’s the jam. That’s right.
Kim Brown: Well listen, the first episode interviewed Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and I had the opportunity to preview this episode and I was truly blown away. I mean, I confess I did not know much about her beyond her political rise to Congress and a little bit about her background, where she worked as a waitress and as a bartender. But this conversation you guys had with her was so incredibly revealing, talking about her family dynamic, the way that she was raised, the extent that her parents sacrificed in order for her to have access to a quality education, and then the road her own academic career took, which brought her to this point where she is now in Congress. It was very illuminating. Tricia, when you spoke with her, what was the thing that really jumped out about her that you previously did not know?
Tricia Rose: Well, there was so much. I mean, I’ll try to limit it to a couple of key highlights, but I think the overall experience I had was just how much coverage there’s been of her and how little coverage there’s been of her at the same time, right? That we see the same thing over and over and over again. We hear the same kind of narrative and we see the same kind of pitting certain members of Congress against others and the narrowing of the framework of her humanity to fit a box of understanding around what the political framework should be. So the first thing was just the experience of looking at someone that I thought I had a sense of what motivated them or what they were about and realized I had no idea. So that was the general picture. But I think most specifically I was really taken by a combination of her commitment to her family that was much more nuanced than normally… When people normally easily say, “I love my parents. I want them to respect and love me.”
But that she had a very close relationship with her father that was very powerful and politically much more complex and sophisticated. Her description of him as a jokester who tells off-color jokes, a regular working man who sneaks off and reads philosophy, right?
Cornel West: That’s right.
Tricia Rose: That kind of description was very moving to me. I mean, I could go on and on, but those were two of the things that I was just blown away by.
Kim Brown: And Cornell, you related to the Representative by referencing the way that she was raised, her religious background, a combination of Pentecostal and Catholic through the lens of being Puerto Rican, especially being raised in the Bronx, but also spending quite a bit of time in Puerto Rico. How does those sense of cultural understandings come through that? It’s almost like Negritude, right? The way that black people relate to each other, even if we don’t know each other personally, but that goes by extension to our Latin and indigenous brothers and sisters as well.
Cornel West: But I mean, one thing that Sister Tricia and I attempt to do, and it’s already a blow against white supremacy, when you just assume the rich, deep, complex humanity of black people or brown people or indigenous people or Asian people, and that’s how we proceed. So we started with Sergio. We started with Blanca. That’s dad. That’s mom. What has gone into the shaping of her? And then we went back to the Puerto Rican backdrop of Pedro Flores and Rafael Hernandez and Albizu Campos and Julia de Burgos and all of these towering figures that shape her Puerto Rican tradition in New York. And then we discover, lo and behold, Howard Thurman comes in part to the rescue when precious Sergio dies at 45 years old when she was an undergrad at Boston University. How would Thurman, mentor of Martin Luther King Jr, close friend of a giant named Benjamin Mays, inseparable from the music of Mahalia Jackson, who gives the eulogy at Martin Luther King Jr’s funeral, it’s Howard Thurman, that Thurman that she talked about, who has a center at Boston University, that came to her rescue.
And then she’s off to Africa. Again, as Tricia said, all of those hundreds of interviews they’ve had of our dear sister, putting her in one little narrow niche, one little truncated label, one little parochial category, rather than allowing her rich humanity to overflow. How true it is for black and brown and indigenous peoples every day of our lives in America. Thank God that she was able to come to a site and just let it all hang out and overflow, and it was a beautiful thing.
Tricia Rose: That’s right. Yeah.
Kim Brown: Listen, having watched this episode, I don’t think you guys are going to have a problem attracting an audience among like-minded people who affiliate themselves with left and leftist politics and radical thought. My question is, you both as academics, how can you reach the people in the streets who also have these ideas, though they may not have so much the formal education behind workers rights, but people, even sans college education, know that they’re being oppressed? And they do understand the systems that do oppress them, though they may not use academic language. For people who might tune in and be like, “Oh, Professor West and Professor Rose. This might be a little over my head,” how can The Tight Rope relate to the everyday person, in your opinions?
Tricia Rose: Well, I mean, there are a few things I’d say there. One is that we are not bringing a consistent diet of academic speech, number one. Number two, I think people are incredibly smart and they are often underestimated, and I really think that people will let us know if we’re off the mark and not comprehensible. I hope they hold us accountable, right? If we don’t make sense to our own family members, right, then we shouldn’t really be trying to talk to the public too much. I think we’d both be comfortable with being held accountable. But I also think we’re not bringing ideas from the ivory tower to tell everyday people what to do. We’re trying to be in a conversation with people bringing what we can bring to the table. It’s like if you want to start a good fire, you need dry wood, right? You need a safe environment. You need good fire, right? You need a number of things.
We just bring in an ingredient to the table to make sure that we create and participate in the things that are already going on. So I guess, I think the fact that we’re both professors and so on and so forth, we’re hoping brings an asset without bringing what could be a liability, right? I mean, I think that’s the rub. And also we have other guests you’ll see coming up that are amazing, and very few are academics. We’re not in the business of interviewing our own profession.
Cornel West: That’s true.
Tricia Rose: We’re in the business of talking to people from all walks of life, whether they’re athletes or poets or artists or activists, politicians, so on and so forth. While we’re having a deeper conversation, it’s not an inaccessible conversation, right? I mean, I don’t know, Cornell, if you wanted to say more about that.
Cornel West: I appreciate that question because it’s very important that people understand that we believe in respecting people and when we respect people, we communicate with them. Now Sister Tricia, she is a masterful teacher in the classroom or in the public square. She’s an eloquent speaker in the classroom as a lecturer or in the public square. And she and I are fundamentally devoted to the notion that if you speak to people’s hearts and touch their souls, then nothing you say is going to be above their heads or beyond their minds. And we learn that from our musicians. We learn that from our artists. And we learn that because we are humbled by what we’re trying to say and we are respectful of those to whom we are speaking. We’re trying to touch hearts. We’re trying to touch souls. We’re trying to unsettle minds. And so in that sense, I don’t think they’ll have anything to worry about in terms of the language that flows from our hearts and minds and lips to them on The Tight Rope.
Kim Brown: People absolutely recognize the truth when they hear it. So what can we expect? You came out the gate with an amazing conversation with AOC. What are some of the other conversations we can expect in the future with The Tight Rope?
Tricia Rose: Well, I mean, I’ll just mention a couple of things. We have a lot of great things coming up. I mean, it’s been amazing. One in particular, we did a terrific interview with basketball legend Isaiah Thomas. I don’t even want to tell you anything about it because I want people to see it when it comes out from the beginning, but suffice it to say that his life and his childhood and what he shared with us is so much more important than even his own legendary athletic talents and abilities and awards, right, and his championships. What that show and what others will, I’m sure Cornell will mention a few others, but what that show and the other shows are revealing is that there really is very little space, particularly for people of color, but not only people of color, people who want to share the lived experiences of everyday people of color and their histories and contexts, whether they’re celebrities or not, right?
That meaningful, humanized kind of sharing and learning and exchanging, that’s a place we want to be. That’s a place we would tune into, and that’s the place we’re hoping to set a tone for providing for everybody. So, Isaiah Thomas was one amazing episode. But I don’t know, Cornell, if you want to share any other tidbits. I don’t want to give it all away. I was going to give one.
Cornel West: No, we don’t want to give it all away, but there is a genius named Rapsody who engaged in such a high quality dialogue and reflection with us that is worth noting. I think that people will love what she has to say as well as be challenged by it. As well as be challenged by it.
Tricia Rose: Yeah. So yeah, we have artists, athletes, intellectuals, politicians.
Cornel West: Intellectuals. Politicians.
Tricia Rose: It’s meant to be, exactly, a range of people.
Kim Brown: Good. I wanted to get the both of yours, a quick take before we wrap up. In terms of where we are right now, we’re dealing with a global pandemic that is ravaging black and brown America. We’re also dealing with tremendous political uncertainty as we have an election upcoming where the incumbent president is posturing as though he may not leave the White House even if he loses and is also trying to discourage voter participation by undermining mail-in voting, which is probably going to be the predominant way in which people participate in the election because of the pandemic.
We are in the middle of this and it’s so hard to see what the end will look like. How would you guys categorize or how would you even describe this moment in history where we are right now? Because it definitely feels unique. Obviously we are not the first generations to endure struggle and not the first generations to fight back, but this feels so distinct from places that we have been in past. How would you sum it up? I’m so sorry to even cheapen it in that way. How can you sum up 2020? It’s so crazy. But I did-
Tricia Rose: You’ve got 30 seconds!
Kim Brown: Right? Give me 30 seconds, Professor Rose. How would you categorize it?
Tricia Rose: I have one thing and then I’m going to let Cornell take us out on that because this is directly in his fantastic wheelhouse. The very quick thing I would say is that the production of chaos produces so much distraction and fear that it encourages us to take our eye off of what’s consistently going on, right? And so the hallmark of what I see is a series of shock waves that are constantly being produced and manufactured that are designed to distract us from the takeover of American institutions by a neofascist and by destroying and dismantling the possibility of a multiracial democracy, right? So to me, it’s using that shock and chaos. That the continuity. So the goal here is to recognize that shock, but to try to keep as centered while to stay on that tight rope, right? To stay as centered as you can in the face of it. But Cornell, you go ahead. I’m sure you have something far more helpful.
Cornel West: No, no. You have said it so powerfully as you always do. But I think for us on that tight rope, it’s a matter of trying to fortify yourself so that you focus on a moral integrity that leads you toward a solidarity with all of those who are struggling, because we happen to find yourself in a US empire that’s wrestling with spiritual decline and moral decay with a predatory capitalist project in which it’s money, money, money with the greed at the top dictating, shaping the destiny of the nation. And yet these everyday people, in the language of Sly Stone, coming together concerned about justice, concerned about love, concerned about freedom. And we got to keep that focus on integrity and solidarity with the love of everyday people, the solidarity with oppressed people here and around the world, and then swing and see how far we can go.
Kim Brown: Badang. We’re going to leave it right there. I’d like to than you both.
Tricia Rose: Yeah. Now you know my life.
Kim Brown: Right?
Tricia Rose: Just leave it right there.
Kim Brown: Dr. West be throwing the mic down. Bam. It’s over.
Cornel West: We salute you, Sister Kim. We salute you, Sister Kim. You’re a force for good.
Tricia Rose: Thank you. These were great questions-
Cornel West: You’re a force for good. Absolutely.
Tricia Rose: … and they’re right on the heart of where we are.
Cornel West: Right on what we’re trying to do. Absolutely.
Kim Brown: I’m so glad and I’m so excited for your project. On behalf of you two, two shiny new podcasters out here joining this media landscape. It’s called The Tight Rope. It is a podcast hosted by Trisha Rose and Cornel West. You can find it everywhere where your podcasts are located, so definitely check it out. The first episode with AOC, phenomenal. You will definitely learn a lot from it. Professors and doctors, thank you guys so much for being here. I can’t thank you enough. I’m so excited about your project.
Tricia Rose: Thank you, Kim.
Cornel West: [crosstalk 00:23:55].
Tricia Rose: It was great to be with you.
Cornel West: Thank you. Thank you so much. God bless you.
Kim Brown: And thank you all for watching The Real News Network.
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


Pandemic Politricks

Stir Crazy! Episode 74: Today we are joined by political commentator Marcus Ferrell, founding member of the Baltimore Based Chinatown Collective Leandro Lagera, and climate and housing organizer Rachel Eve Stein. Hosted by Kim Brown.
If you have comments or suggestions email us at stircrazy@therealnews.com
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-08-04--As Prison COVID-19 Cases Rise, A Mental Health Crisis Intensifies

Family visits , job programs , and recreational activities have all been put on hold because of the virus .

Executive Producer
Eddie Conway is an Executive Producer of The Real News Network. He is the host of the TRNN show Rattling the Bars. He is Chairman of the Board of Ida B's Restaurant, and the author of two books: Marshall Law: The Life & Times of a Baltimore Black Panther and The Greatest Threat: The Black Panther Party and COINTELPRO. A former member of the Black Panther Party, Eddie Conway is an internationally known political prisoner for over 43 years, a long time prisoners' rights organizer in Maryland, the co-founder of the Friend of a Friend mentoring program, and the President of Tubman House Inc. of Baltimore. He is a national and international speaker and has several degrees.


therealnews--2020-08-05--Sen. Sherrod Brown Talks With Ohio Mother Facing Water Shutoff

Host, The Marc Steiner Show
Marc Steiner is the host of "The Marc Steiner Show" on TRNN. He is a Peabody Award-winning journalist who has spent his life working on social justice issues. He walked his first picket line at age 13, and at age 16 became the youngest person in Maryland arrested at a civil rights protest during the Freedom Rides through Cambridge. As part of the Poor People’s Campaign in 1968, Marc helped organize poor white communities with the Young Patriots, the white Appalachian counterpart to the Black Panthers. Early in his career he counseled at-risk youth in therapeutic settings and founded a theater program in the Maryland State prison system. He also taught theater for 10 years at the Baltimore School for the Arts. From 1993-2018 Marc's signature “Marc Steiner Show” aired on Baltimore’s public radio airwaves, both WYPR—which Marc co-founded—and Morgan State University’s WEAA.
marc@therealnews.com
@marcsteiner


therealnews--2020-08-05--Oregon Sen. Merkley Stands With Community Leaders Calling For A Moratorium On Utility Cut Offs