Across North America this July, flags unfurled and fireworks filled the sky. Canada celebrated Canada Day on July 1st, and shortly after in the U.S. we too fired up barbecues and poured beers to mark Independence Day.

The national holidays are typically reserved for light-hearted fun, time with friends and family, and celebration of the progress these two liberal democracies have made. Yet, this should also be a time for deep introspection on both sides of the border; of their colonial settler pasts, slave-trade legacies, and the current state of affairs.

It’s easy to succumb to headlines, and shallow stereotypes abound about Canada and the U.S. today: Those of the former as a beacon of liberal democracy in a troubled world, and of the latter as a declining superpower that has lost its way.

Contrasts are further accentuated by the respective leaders themselves. Justin Trudeau, Canada’s Prime Minister is a young, photogenic, refugee-welcoming, panda-hugging, multilateralist. Trump on the other hand, is a veritable a crooked villain with little regard for the rest of the world, Canada included.

In the U.S. groups and individuals behind the banner “Resist” have recognized the current administration for what it is: a threat to America’s founding principles as celebrated every 4th of July. They vigilantly monitor its every move, gather for marches, donate to progressive causes and are keeping informed (judging by the spike in newspaper subscriptions).

At the same time in Canada, a great majority of the public slaps itself on the back as they repeat: Gosh, we are better than that! Many progressive Americans too are quick to concur. Every election cycle there are quips of “I’m moving to Canada, if [insert undesirable candidate’s name] wins!”

One can’t blame them, for in Canada there is widespread public healthcare coverage, greater work-life balance than in the U.S., strong and growing economy, plenty of open-space, diverse populations and similar cultural understandings. There is idealism from coast to coast, a vibrant democratic debate, and even a dash of the “Europe-like” feeling in Québec.

These widely familiar trends and tropes, however, acquire a new perspective if one is to shine more light into the neighbor’s backyard.

There one finds the ongoing, and often painful, reckoning Canadians are undergoing with its past and the ongoing oppression of indigenous peoples. One too can also see the pernicious debates about the religious expression and islamophobia imported directly from France.Or witness deafness and unresponsiveness to examine systemic racist practices, as unarmed black men die on Canadian streets too.

There is also the most recent news of government committed to fighting climate change by acquiring an oil-pipeline. Across the provinces there is also pain among the working classes in former industrial towns, a reality well known to Americans in the Midwest, as economy changes and opioids are abundant.

The mention any of the above in Canada is often considered uncouth, particularly among its white liberal circles. It’s right up there with a loud fart in a crowded elevator. The well-to-do classes profit from the stability and self of self-righteousness.

However, Canadians, especially young Canadians, are speaking out. At times they are called rude for pushing back against the status-quo, other times they receive death threats for their activism. They are, however, undaunted and would profit from ideas and knowledge exchanges with their American counterparts.

The “resist” camp, while deeply American and context-specific, should also be a broader call to us all. Naturally. in Canada as America’s next door neighbor, and with shared histories and similar liberal democratic values. But also more widely. In places as far away as Ethiopia, where according to the latest Human Rights Watch report from July 4th, torture and abuse abound, to Poland, where the justice system is crumbling and democracy is under threat.

Today we have the digital tools to connect and share information. It is easy to get past the headline clichés of others lived experiences if one tries. Let’s make the best use of them, lend neighbors a helping hand in their social justice struggles and extend a lifeline to those doing similar work beyond America’s borders.

Ultimately, it makes all of us better off.

Bojan Francuz  is Public Leadership Fellow at the Jeanne Sauvé Foundation in Montréal and co-founder of CityInclusive, a social impact initiative focused on tech and inclusive community engagement in cities. Previously he worked as a community organizer advocating for immigration reform in Chicago, IL and as a policy advisor for various governments on security and disarmament issues at the United Nations headquarters in New York , NY. He tweets @francuzb

The post American and Canadian progressives: The case for solidarity appeared first on Occasional Planet.

If you read one think piece aimed at breaking down the Trump phenomenon, I highly recommend Jonna Ivin’s essay on coming to terms with Trump’s appeal with poor white voters. It very much informs the following essay. Ivin traces the use of racism and other manufactured diversions by elites throughout American history to divide the working class.

For students of history, this thesis is not particularly startling: It’s well-known that Bacon’s Rebellion (a late 17^th-century uprising of interracial rabble against the tidewater elite of Virginia and, sadly, the local Native Americans) prompted the adoption of black codes to segregate workers; the postbellum Southern elite famously used, and use, racism to maintain their own status over white workers and as well as black ones. The success of Ivin’s essay is that it places the divide-and-conquer strategy in the contemporary context, and, more importantly, humanizes Trump supporters.

Donald Trump memes are amusing. From images comparing Trump to a Buddhist monk to his hypothetical take on the situation in Westeros, they are all over the internet. But they don’t help us, and frequently reflect the kind of thinking Ivin writes about: The way in which the Left as well as wealthy interests look down upon poor white people. Ivin writes:

Why do poor whites vote along the same party lines as their wealthy neighbors across the road? Isn’t that against their best interests?

Ask a Republican, and they’ll probably say conservatives are united by shared positions on moral issues: family values, religious freedom, the right to life, the sanctity of marriage, and, of course, guns.

Ask a Democrat the same question, and they might mention white privilege, but they’re more likely to describe conservatives as racist, sexist, homophobic gun nuts who believe Christianity should be the national religion.

The issue here is the Left’s perception of poor whites. We should be nuanced about this, especially in regard to race: Of course racism would not be possible without poor white people. But the Left has failed them in its own way. Our social justice rhetoric frequently tackles everything but class, singing the virtues of intersectionality but still mocking impoverished whites. Small wonder that when they hear us calling Trump racist or sexist (which he objectively is), the response is inevitably something along the lines of “that’s liberal PC BS, which is ruining this country.”

How do we get around this?

I propose instead of calling out Trump directly on racism, sexism, and general disdain for those he thinks are weak, we could use the following three arguments:

1. The people Trump blames are not responsible for America’s problems.

 It shouldn’t be too difficult to explain that radical Islam is dangerous but its adherents constitute a tiny fraction of the billion Muslims in the world.  If someone doesn’t understand this, they may be a lost cause. As far as Mexican immigrants, some hard facts dispel most of the rhetoric. According to CNN, the prevailing myths about the lazy, welfare-absorbing Mexicans isn’t particularly accurate. Add this to the fact that Barack Obama deported more immigrants than any President in US History, and a new picture emerges: First, Mexican immigration isn’t a nation-destroying threat, really, though it may pose a collective problem for us to solve. Second, why would a border wall help, if Obama has already upped deportations? Finally, liberal academia, feminism, etc: Do these institutions and ideologies really have much of a sway over the United States political establishment? If they do, have the Trump fan explain exactly how “political correctness” is ruining America. I really haven’t heard a coherent argument for that position. The trick here, I think, is to ask for specifics and be specific.

 2. Trump can’t help you.

Donald Trump’s appeal is frequently cited as fundamental honesty. That is to say, “he tells it as it is”.  This is pretty objectively not true, according to Politifact, which is nonpartisan and highly respected. In addition to his disastrously scant knowledge of foreign policy, we see a candidate that says some extremely vague things (“Make America Great Again”, “bomb the s— out of ISIS”, etc.) that sound great for those fed up with the political establishment. If he were an outsider to politics, albeit one with nuanced and well-reasoned ideas, Trump might be a more legitimate phenomenon.  He is not. What we can do, again, is to ask for specifics: How is Mexico “sending its worst”? This implies the government of Mexico is purposefully undermining us for no reason. What constitutes “bombing the s— out of ISIS”? What would our objectives be in this hypothetical Syrian war? Why is Trump a fan of Marine Le Pen and Vladimir Putin?

3. Only with the help of the people from Item 1 can America progress.

Ivin’s article quotes MLK in during the Poor People’s Campaign in 1968:

You [poor whites] ought to be marching with us. You’re just as poor as Negroes.” And I said, “You are put in the position of supporting your oppressor, because, through prejudice and blindness, you fail to see that the same forces that oppress Negroes in American society oppress poor white people. And all you are living on is the satisfaction of your skin being white, and the drum major instinct of thinking that you are somebody big because you are white. And you’re so poor you can’t send your children to school. You ought to be out here marching with every one of us every time we have a march.

To put this in Trump-terms, the only way to Make America Great Again is by standing together with those Trump puts down. Only an interracial and multicultural front can make serious progress on economic issues; another way of putting this is that racism and economic exploitation are inherently linked.

Ivin’s article ends with a rallying call for Bernie Sanders, whose presidential bid I support. Asking everyone to get aboard that train comes off as agitprop, however, and while Ivin’s arguments are generally accurate, the Sanders section partially undermines her article. Nevertheless, her thesis remains poignant: Poor white people support Trump for reasons other than simple prejudice. To reach out to them and change their minds about Trump, while exceedingly difficult, may provide us with valuable allies for future struggles. Remember, be specific and ask for specifics!

The post How progressives can constructively engage Trump supporters appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Can you identify this person?

Occasional Planet’s “Who Am I” series features people who have made important contributions to liberal thought, progressive politics, human rights, enlightened education, environmental awareness, and “small-d” democratic principles–both in the US and internationally.

The abbreviated bios in our “Progressive Hall of Fame” only hint at the scope of our hall of famers’ struggles and accomplishments. We hope that curiosity will impel you find out more about these inspiring people, whose professional efforts and personal sacrifices deserve to be remembered—and emulated.

To see a gallery of the progressive role models previously featured on Occasional Planet, click here. Our current featured progressive role model is:

GEENA DAVIS (1956 – )
Actress, film producer, writer,women’s rights activist

Claims to progressive fame

Partnered with the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism to commission the most extensive research project on gender in film and television ever undertaken.

Founded the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media (2007), a research-based organization working with media and the entertainment industry to promote gender balance, reduce stereotyping, increase the percentage of female characters in media, and create diverse female characters in entertainment for children under the age of eleven.

Works with the Women’s Sports Foundation  to improve the lives of young girls and women through lifelong participation in sports.

The post Who am I? Guess the progressive. appeared first on Occasional Planet.

I was in eleventh grade when the shots were fired, the announcement was made, and the LBJ years began. Up until JFK, my father had been a Republican, but after the “I Like Ike” years, both my father and I graduated to the Democratic Party. JFK had influenced me already; I decided to go to American University in DC because the President had given a brave and optimistic speech there about ending the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

How could you not admire JFK, he was thoughtful, funny, caring, athletic and eloquent? Does that remind you of anyone? Of course it does, President Barack Obama. We should be so fortunate as to have the two of them as presidents in the same half-century. But the violence that struck down JFK, and the prejudicial venom directed to President Obama is what is so disturbing. Equally a downer is much of the list of presidents we’ve had in between.

The accomplishments of JFK were remarkable, and they were accelerating at the time of his death. While it’s true that much of the Great Society legislation of Lyndon Johnson was made easier because of the sympathy towards Kennedy following his slaying, the specifics of the Great Society were items that were on JFK’s checklist. Also on JFK’s “to-do” list was to thoroughly re-examine the commitment that the United States had to South Vietnam. But his accomplishments were brutally ended by the strange loner who had as few reasons to feel good about himself as JFK had reasons to regard himself with pride.

As things are now, Barack Obama, a man with as many assets or more as John Kennedy, has fallen into a rut in which he is mercilessly battered by the right, a right that is far fiercer than what JFK faced. For the most part, the media is stone cold to what Barack Obama could do if he was given a few breaks. But perhaps most distressing for the President is how his base seems to abandon him when he needs them most. The hope that JFK gave us is only equaled by that which Barack Obama has given us. It’s quite possible that if we don’t help him when skies are grey, we will have to wait another half-century to get a similar opportunity.

As inelegant as LBJ was, he was skillful in getting legislation passed. If he had chosen to withdraw from Vietnam, he might have put in place a long-lasting progressive era. But that didn’t happen.

Jimmy Carter was our next hope and he was to be loved for his professed sense of ethics, his attention to detail, and his connection with “ordinary people.” But like Obama, he was fiercely opposed by the right; undermined by the media; and somewhat forgotten by the left. Was it his fault that the hostages were taken in Iran? Probably not. Was it his fault that a helicopter crashed in a rescue mission? No. He became a one-term president.

Bill Clinton gave us a big boost. He tried to reform health care he didn’t have the magic touch. His one major foreign intervention was so successful that the U.S. did not lose a single person in the Balkans conflict. Clinton knew how to maintain a semi-progressive agenda and still bring us a balanced budget. But his dalliance with Monica limited the esteem with which the public held him. A progressive period was abruptly stopped when a conservative and cynical Supreme Court selected George W. Bush to be president rather than Al Gore.

For someone who has had high hopes that the government can help promote more income equality, expand human rights, acknowledge its mistakes, intervene in foreign affairs with great caution, it’s been a very rough fifty years, from beginning to end. As part of the Kennedy legacy, we need to garner as much support as we can for Barack Obama and pave the way for a continuing line of Democratic presidents, each one daring to get a little more progressive than the last.

The post From Kennedy to Obama – what might have been appeared first on Occasional Planet.

When Barack Obama ran for president in 2008, I was quite disappointed that he had virtually no substantive written material about his campaign to provide to voters.  The policy positions that he made available on his campaign web site were extremely general and minimally informative.  It was a campaign that in many ways was based primarily on slogans, and it worked quite well that way.  At the very least it worked well enough for him to win the election, and that’s a big part of what he wanted to accomplish.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel talks about the two types of followers that a politician has: (a) political hacks who are primarily concerned about winning elections, and (b) policy wonks who want to see implemented the policies that they support.  During a campaign, the wonks and near-wonks are looking for whatever information they can get in order to provide some clarity and certainty as to what candidate stands for.

In 2008 I found very little information from the Obama campaign that helped me determine what his views were on certain issues and what his style of governance would be.  However, I had enough confidence in him to try to engage in some “educated speculation,” or at least “hopeful wishing” as to who he really was.  I chose to put my contribution to his campaign into a special account that I established.  It was not legally connected with the “Obama for America” campaign organization.  It was essentially a one-person PAC.

I created a flyer that spelled out the key wishes that I had; had over 6,000 of them printed; and had them mailed to households in swing districts in St. Louis County, MO. You can see a somewhat unclear copy of the flyer by clicking here for Side A and here for Side B (unfortunately I did not keep track of the digital copy from which the prints were made).

Five years later, we can look back on my “wonky wishes” and examine how well Barack Obama satisfied this particular progressive.  Here is a list of the stated wishes in the flyer and an assessment of how well the President has fulfilled them:

1. “I hope that he is still an idealist with a primary concern for those less fortunate.
   1. I would give him a ‘B-.’  He could have done more with less obstinacy from the Republicans.  He also has been cozier to the bankers than I would like, but he could have his reasons that will eventually work to the benefit of the less poor.
2. “I hope that Barack Obama bases his decision-making on logic and compassion.”
   1. I would give him an “A” on this.
3. “I hope that Barack Obama favors the strictest possible gun control laws.”
   1. I give him a “B” on gun control.  It sure took him a while; it would have been great if he could have started this campaign in Tucson after Gabby Giffords was shot.  But the timing was probably better with Newtown and once he embraced the issue, he became a relentless fighter.
4. “I hope that despite what he has said, Barack Obama opposes the death penalty.”
   1. “D-.”  It’s been very disappointing to not hear the president say a word about abolishing the death penalty.  It’s particularly difficult to hear his almost glee when he talks about killing terrorists.  However, his position is probably politically wise.  I’m holding out hope that when he writes his memoirs he will express significant reservations about the death penalty.
5. “I hope that Barack Obama is genuinely committed to providing an effective economic and social safety net for disadvantaged or disenfranchised citizens – in fact for all of us.”
   1. “B. “ With Barack Obama, it’s no longer just the suffering middle class; it’s also the poor amongst us.  He has not turned his back on those with whom he worked when he was a community organizer.  However, we do have to wonder about what he is willing to sacrifice in Social Security and Medicare.  I’ m hoping that’s just a talking point with him.
6. I hope that Barack Obama could mock himself; the office that he occupies; and the absurd nature of the political game – much as Robert Redford did in the movie The Candidate.
   1. “A.”  Just watch one of his White House Correspondents’ dinners.
7. “Have a ‘B.S.’ detector similar to Jon Stewart’s on the Daily Show.
   1. “A-.” It took him a while to learn that “Boehner-talk” and “McConnell-talk” were B.S., but once he learned it in late 2010, he has not forgotten it.

Overall I am quite satisfied with the job that President Barack Obama has done.  Most of what I wanted that he has not accomplished is because of the recalcitrance of the Republicans and the ugly influence of money in politics.  But he’s doing about as well as can be expected.  I’ll give him a B+.  This is not the average of the grades above, but I have to give him extra credit because he has had to deal with the political realities and I need to modify some of my wishes because of those same realities.

I have already taken the liberty to express my advance wishes for what President Obama writes in his memoirs to truly clarify his progressive ideas.  You can read them here.

The post Your wish for Barack Obama may become his thought appeared first on Occasional Planet.

So many progressive role models, so much for them [and us] to do–and so many ways to do it. When things get tough for liberal ideas–as they are now–we need to keep reminding ourselves of the society-changing impact that activism, commitment to liberal principles,  and perseverance in the face of long odds can have.  Here on Occasional Planet, we’ve been publishing mini-profiles of people who have made a difference–whether it’s through their writings, their organizational skills, their heroic efforts on behalf of people in need, and the examples they set for the rest of us. You can find a new one every week, up there in the right-hand corner of the page. What continues to amaze us is the diversity of people who persist in doing this work, and the vast variety of ways they’ve found–or created–to help make the world move forward.

Now, just to make it a little more fun to learn about these inspirational people, we’ve created an on-line, video quiz: We show you a photo, you guess who it is, and then we reveal the details, including our subject’s claims to progressive fame.  You may not recognize some of them at first glance, but stick around, because all of them are definitely worth knowing about–and emulating.

Ready to try it? Here goes:

[Music credit: Tom Cascino, http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Broke_For_Free/]

The post Guess the progressive: A video quiz appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Right-wing Republicans may be strutting around calling the 2010 mid-term elections a “rejection” of progressive ideas, but that doesn’t mean that it’s so. Contrary to popular belief among right-wing conservatives, there is more than one valid point of view on the political scene in 2010. Progressives are still out here, advocating for policies and programs that work for the common good, help people whose opportunities have been constricted by circumstances beyond their control, and promote equality, human rights and small-d democracy. And, in fact, Americans count on fundamental, progressive policies and programs in their everyday lives. That’s why it’s so important to keep the progressive fire burning, to keep advocating for progressive programs and to be unrelenting in reminding America about the constructive role that progressivism continues to play.

And that’s why Occasional Planet is starting a new feature, called “Stand-up Progressives.” As events dictate, we’ll highlight people in and out of government, who are fearlessly making the progressive case that is so critical to the well-being of our country. And that’s why a news item we saw on November 10, 2010 prompted us to call out Dennis Kucinich as our first “Stand-up Progressive.”

Congressman Kucinich [D-OH] is unhappy about the just-revealed plan to keep troops in Afghanistan until 2014, thus undermining a previous Obama-administration pledge to begin withdrawing troops in 2011. Most importantly, Kucinich is doing something about it.

“When the new 112th Congress convenes in January, I will immediately enter a privileged resolution that will force Congress to vote on setting a withdrawal date,” Kucinich said. “The withdrawal of our troops must be driven by Congress, not the corrupt president of Afghanistan.”

On his website, Kucinich says:

In July 2010, Kucinich introduced bipartisan legislation that would have ended the war in Afghanistan by the end of this year. The new legislation would call for the end of the war by the end of 2011. This legislation will firmly establish ownership of the war and its timeline by the new 112th Congress.

“It is imperative that the 112th Congress move immediately to end this costly and unnecessary war,” said Kucinich. “Our economy needs help and as the new leadership looks for ways to reduce spending, I will continue to introduce legislation and amendments to force votes, ensuring that this issue remains at the forefront of issues facing the next Congress.

Kucinich’s plan demonstrates his courage as a progressive willing to go beyond complaining and take action. His resolution has little chance of passing, but he’s not backing down. His action is a role model–in the Howard Zinn tradition–for fighting the uphill battle in the interest of the common good.

The post Stand-up progressives: Kucinich vs. war appeared first on Occasional Planet.