I am reading two wonderful books. One is by Liz Featherstone and the other is by Massimo Borghesi. They are both incredibly wonderful and informative. I would recommend them both.

The Book by Featherstone is called Divining Desire. It is subtitled Focus and the Culture of Consultation. It is a remarkable appraisal of and critique of the use of focus groups in a manner which supports Capitalism and undermines Democracy. It is deeply historical and also analytical.

The Book by Borghesi is entitled Catholic Discordance: Neoconservatism vs. the Field Hospital Church of Pope Francis. It deals with how the conservative Catholic movement has mis-read, misunderstood the way in which Pope Francis theology is actually a continuation of the larger Tradition. And not, as they would understand him, as somehow a ‘heretic’.

I very much reccomend both books. One of the great things about our technology is that I am certain there are ‘summaries’ or even lecturers given by these authors. Well worth finding out anything you can about their insights.

I am reading many books. Which is no big surprise….lol. I am reading one that has been on my reading list for a long time. It is entitled Masters of the Universe: Hayek, Friedman and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics by Stedman Jones. I have always contended that one of the best ways to understand all of the disparate elements of our social is to understand is to view it from within a historical materialist hermeneutical ‘lens’. I am aware that in vulgar language this puts me in the Marxist ‘camp’. This is a title I no longer try to run from nor frankly care to dispute. My experience with people that speak in these crude analytical terms are not really worth engaging. I know that this sounds profoundly dismissive but frankly these are some of the same people who believe that Mark Levin author of American Marxism is an actual ‘critique of Marxist theory! Ugh!

I have in some of my writings referred to the larger narrative (sometimes awkwardly called a Master Narrative) in which we find ourselves as Empire (or Empire Logic). In my thinking I feel like this is a larger more wholistic way of containing the various elements of reality. In my dissertation I spoke of the way to understand reality as being compose of various distinct, autonomous (but not arbitrary) Dimensions. However, I also always begin with the Economic element of human reality. Here I would say that I mean Economic in the way that is best expressed by Enrique Dussel. He speaks of his Philosophy as always being a Philosophy of Life. In that sense what constitutes reality is a desire for Life. This will always include all elements of Life, including those that we might at first perceive as death! It is not by accident that I am writing this on Holy Saturday the day in which Jesus is DEAD! Yet we know that this is not the end of the story. I am reminded of the magnificent meditation that is the song Thank U by Alanis Morissette which goes in part:

“How ’bout no longer being masochistic/ How ’bout remembering your divinity/How ’bout unabashedly bawling your eyes out/How ’bout not equating death with stopping” [Bold type and italics added]

But why I think it is so important to retrieve the Historical Materialist Dialectical tradition is precisely because of something that the Jones book points out. The rise of Neoliberal politics is/was profoundly powerful because it has ‘naturalized’ entire explanations of human existence. It has brought to bear the incredible forces of the owning class onto our consciousness. This is something that the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci spoke of in his writing. He, along with the Hungarian philosopher George Lukacs in his magisterial work History and Class Consciousness spoke about how the ruling class, who always ‘owned the means of production’ (a very Marxist way of understanding Class) could now create consciousness by owning the means of ‘mental production’. Others have spoken about this with much greater clarity (and frankly in a more ‘popular’ tone!). This includes Noam Chomsky, Matt Taibbi, Arundhati Roy, Michael Parenti, Robert McChesney, Michael Fisher, Marta Harneker etc..

The creators of the social order sometimes referred to as Neoliberalism were deeply aware that they had to win ‘the battle of ideas’. This has recently been ‘packaged’ as winning the ‘hearts and minds’ of those countries we (The Empire) occupy. This includes, incredibly enough, not even seeing our presence there as an ‘occupying force’! While many progressives have done an admiral job of citing and applying the work of these great thinkers. Particularly the wonderful work of Gramsci, what seems to be lacking from the actual application (and understanding) of contemporary folks who use these two thinkers is their adherence to their Marxist origins and ongoing commitment to the Marxist vision and some of its foundational (not dogmatic) tenants. This includes understanding the all-encompassing logic of Capital accumulation which they believed to be a bedrock of all social reality grounded in Capital logic. This would not change because they spoke of something as ephemeral as Consciousness. Precisely because they believed this, they would demand that all talk of ‘consciousness’ be understood within the framework of historical materialism in general. It would also be inseparable from understanding that the final ‘telos’ of Capitalist derived ‘consciousness’ is the continued accumulation of (and maintenance of) Capital. What this means is that the way to undermine ‘false consciousness’ for both Gramsci and Lukacs was not merely to ‘change’ the ‘consciousness’ of the people but to actually change the material (historical/social) conditions under which they existed. Because they (Gramsci, Lukacs) were from what is broadly called the historical dialectical materialist school they would never submit to a crude cause and effect logic in dealing with any problem. Because they were dialecticians of the first order we should not get into a crude ‘which came first the chicken or the egg’ debate.

In many ways, I see that many progressives, liberal, leftist etc. have inadvertently bought into the distorted vision offered by Neoliberalism. This includes saying such things as “perception is reality” (It’s actually not!) or a ‘symbolic gesture’ is identical with actual historical movement. Simply put, having a few more ‘diverse looking’ billionaires will not change the nature of how exploitation is an absolute prerequisite for certain levels of wealth to be attained. The exploitation is the sin, not who is doing the exploitation, or what they look like, or even how they ‘identify’. The unpacking of this will require a completely different entry but simply put this is one of the reasons that I am against using the term ‘Class’ in the same way that I use Race, Gender or Orientation. This for me is key, you see that diversity in Racial identification may (or may not) include the destruction of a certain Racial identity, this is true for Gender etc. But what seems to be the case is that the existence of a certain community (identified as a Class) to exist by Exploitation (specifically identified as those who now garnish unwillingly the ‘fruit’ of another person’s Labor) can only be resolved by the destruction of this exploitive relationship. That exploiter community would cease to exist…qua community (as a Class). What is also true for me is that the incredible level of marginalization that must be part of any system to continue to ‘exploit’ leads me to always fight in Solidarity with those communities that are marginalized. But for me this is predicated precisely on their commitment to also end exploitation. It is not predicated on their being members of a marginalized community. In a White Supremacists system that is part of our current condition I will always be ‘marginalized’. That being said, I have no ‘monopoly’ on anything which might be good for the ending of exploitation of others (including Madre Earth!) so my agenda, strategy, ideas, motives, perspective has to constantly be questioned, interrogated by myself and others. I have to be part of an ongoing community of people moving towards a larger vision that cannot ever be fully encompassed (or realized, seen etc.) by any one marginalized perspective.

This means, ultimately, that there will be some degree of surrendering absolute assurance that ‘my way’ is the ‘right way’ (it will certainly never be the ‘only way’). But the solution to this conundrum is not to surrender the understanding that there is a ‘there, there‘ or an actual Way. We must always be willing to surrender to larger visions, insights always knowing that while our struggles are provisional, they are not ‘arbitrary’. We continue to move…. with deep Love, Wonder, and (to paraphrase Abraham Joshua Heschel) Radical Amazement.

Having just come back from El Paso it seems like a natural thing to write about my journey. It was in many ways a remarkable trip. It is something that I am sure I will be processing for a long time to come. These are just some Dispatches from the Road! : )

The first thing I felt was that as Al would say there is a way in which the journey allowed me to connect with some part of who I am. It was both an epiphany and an affirmation. I tend to not believe in any kind of solid ‘essentialist’ version of ‘culture’ (Ex: All Latino people are warm and hold strong family values etc.). But what I did see where some consistent ‘patterns’ of conduct, attitudes, dispositions etc. Here are some that I noticed are part of my personality and now I see one place where these qualities were cultivated, experienced, expressed (therefore impacted me!)

1. A strong sense of humility. I felt like the people in El Paso as a whole were much more deferential to myself and other people in general. I know some of this was me being an ‘outsider’ but nonetheless it was very clear that these people have a remarkable sense of being humble (not unimportant!) in their general disposition. I feel like in California everyone is sort of trying to be ‘discovered’. We are after all near Hollywood. You hear all the time that “Everything is bigger in Texas”. That may be true for certain communities but certainly the dialectical balance to it would be a quiet sense of ‘appropriate size’ in terms of your relationship to the world around you.
2. There was something about the simplicity of the aesthetics involved in the desert landscape. It allows for a truly lived sense of how ‘less is more’ in all areas of life. And not in the way that in California the ‘less is more’ is frequently followed by a ‘look, see how I am doing less with more’ attitude that undercuts the entire premise of the aesthetic which is being attempted.
3. Finally, there was in a sense a very clear and omnipresent quality to death as a companion to life. I think when I was younger (when I lived there) this was experienced as an ongoing sense of dread or fragility. But in retrospective, and with some 55 years of living in between, I can now see the way in which it adds a degree of sacredness to all reality. It is not by accident that I am writing this rumination on Holy Saturday….the day when Jesus is DEAD! Making the celebration of Easter Sunday all the more joyous and authentic. I here was reminded of how so much is made in the California of the plastic surgery industry. This speaks to a deep denial of (and fear) of the natural and inevitable ‘decay’ of all matter, especially of ourselves.

I am aware that all of these are generalizations. I am certain that there are people that are humble, simple and profoundly aware of the sacredness of life in California. I am speaking more of a general milieu found within the larger communities. I am also certain that I will continue to mine and develop new insights from this journey. I also hope to go there again, as we say in Spanish (something I am sure I learned in El Paso)….’si Dios quiere’.

So much has been said about this trial. I thought it would be nice to visit this issue in particular but speak to how White Supremacist ideology colors the entire discussion in a way that goes frequently unnoticed. One of the most insidious qualities of any type of ‘privilege’ is that it not only imposes a view of the world, forcing us to see things an also, and maybe more importantly, disallows us from seeing certain things. It actually frames certain realities and gives us only a partial view and claims this ‘perspective’ to be the totality. In the Scriptural traditions this inversion of partial vision being substituted for the whole vision would be seen as a type of Idolatry. We can, in one sense speak of White Supremacist ideology as a type of idolatry.

As the trial came to its conclusion, I have heard many people say that Rittenhouse was vindicated not only as it pertains to his behavior (he was found innocent of various felony charges and a possession of dangerous weapon charge) but also and in one sense, even more important, as it pertains to his character/value/political position etc. That this was all seen by the ‘evidence’ presented in the trial. This may be true but to speak of a trial of this nature as existing in a ‘neutral space’ or some ‘hallowed ground’ where no social force(s) can come into play is the most absurd, and oddly enough White Supremacist (Racist) perspective of all.

I will begin with some anecdotal information. I am deeply aware that there is a danger in starting with this but I think it is very important to understand the larger context in which these events occurred. Kyle Rittenhouse went to a protest/rally/march etc. in Kenosha, Wisconsin. This protest was that was to demonstrate the killing of Jacob Blake by police officers. Blake was shot ‘multiple times at close range’. The killing of Blake occurred approximately 3 months after the death of George Floyd. This particular protest was part of a much larger movement and manifestations of social unrest that has been occurring in the United States in recent times. What is important to understand is to enter this ‘arena’ in general and this protest in particular while visibly carrying a high-powered firearm and then to profess a kind of naive ‘innocence’ about how things can get so ‘out of hand’ is profoundly ignorant/stupid at best and consciously falsifying one’s position at worse. It is also important to note that Rittenhouse went there essentially uninvited, none of the sponsors of the protest/rally asked him to show up. Now part of why this is so important is because of the following. After the verdict I asked, albeit informally, 12-14 African-American young men close to Rittenhouse age if they would, under any circumstancesm, go to a highly volatile situation with a high-powered rifle, uninvited, where one of the ‘features’ of the protest was its ever changing and unpredictable dynamic. I also asked them if they had killed two people (no disputing that the bullets came from their rifle) and had injured another person would they expect to credibly speak of ‘self-defense’ as a reasonable defense. I am going to say this very clearly…and yes, loudly! NOT ONE PERSON SAID THAT THEY WOULD DO THIS OR EXPECT ANYONE TO GIVE A SHIT ABOUT SELF-DEFENSE!!! NOT ONE PERSON! I want to highlight something that I thought was powerful, and insightful in its own way. I asked an Asian-American young man. He said he might, (but most probably not!) consider going (maybe without a gun?!) but he WITHOUT HESITATION SAID THAT IF HE WERE AFRICAN-AMERICAN THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL HE WOULD GO! Because he knew damn well what would happen. I don’t know if I can speak with his certainty (maybe I can?) but even he knew how the issue would be “Framed” given the structure of color/race etc. in the United States of America.

Simply put the very fact that Kyle Rittnhouse felt he ‘could’ go to a place like this with a fully loaded high-powered rifle is incredible. Now I know that every ‘white’ person I know (that is not a racist!!!) has dozens and dozens of ‘friends’ that are African-American … 🙂 . But I don’t have that luxury so I actually had to ask what might be the experience of African-American’s in this type of situation. By searching out some information to get a different ‘frame’ of reference.

I also now wish to deal with two other questions that seem to be put forth to show how Rittnehouse is not a ‘racist’ (whatever the hell that means?!) The first is that he had some interest in the community and even had some ‘ties’ to the community. The second issue is that the people he killed were white.

Let us begin with the first issue. It is very admirable and even commendable to know that one is deeply connected to various communities no matter where one lives. But an element of exploitation, oppression and privilege is that it allows for ‘loyalties’ to be defined, redrawn, ignored, our highlighted depending on one’s ‘agenda’. I regularly used to drive by a very, very wealthy neighborhood where I would see many signs on the lawns (particularly near the road) which read “Drive as though your child lived here”. I was particularly frustrated because I had just heard that the vast majority of the people living in this neighborhood (and surrounding area) had recently ‘rejected’ a new tax that would allow for more funding for schools all over the state (not even to mention the federal level). It occurred to me that while these people want me to ‘drive as though my child lives here’ but certainly they don’t want to be taxed as though other children who live in other locations also matter?

The second issue is the ‘color’ of the victims. People have made a big ‘issue’ of the fact that the victims of his violence were white. I do understand that there was a huge confusion about the victims including the reporting that the victims were African American. I know that some very powerful, brilliant, intelligent people made a huge issueof this mistake. This includes two people who I have incredible respect for; Jimmy Dore and Glen Greenwald. I certainly feel that this is very important point, and the error is egregious but still the fact that these people and many others have made an issue of this goes to show you how bizarre and truncated the discussion about Race in the United States has become. Anyone that is fighting against White Supremacist ideology/Structural Racism etc. will become a target of those who benefit (or think they are benefitting) from these social realities. This does not preclude people of various ethnic backgrounds, colors, orientations etc. of becoming targets. The color of the victims does not in anyway make this a racist act or not. What I found most surprising was that the people mentioned above never thought to speak in these categories after Heather Heyer. She was a white women and yet, it was obvious she was a victim of a racist motive attack.

In the end, these events are tragic at so many levels. I hope that as we process this experience in particular and these types of experiences in general we can use them as Grist for the Mill (a la Ram Dass) and specifically use it to help Build the Kingdom.

Here is what I am struggling with? Today is the funeral of John Lewis. He is an iconic civil rights activist. Like all people he is clearly a man that is a mixture of grand impulses towards the creation of a better world and other times succumbed to the exigencies of the times. But without a doubt he was a man whose overall legacy is one of struggle (non-violent). Always seeking the greater good and guided by a vision that is deeply rooted in a love ethic. On this day Herman Cain a former presidential candidate passed away. The interesting thing about his passing away was that he died from Covid-19. He was an outspoken critic of those who would wear a mask. He parroted the anti-science rhetoric of the right wing in the United States. It is believed he contracted the disease while attending a Trump rally. Because of his ignorance, and stupidity AND the power of his platform. He may have also helped caused the death of many, many people. Not to mention that, as mentioned above he possibly contracted this disease while attending a rally for a man that has deep affinity with explicitly anti-black, white supremacist perspective. But somehow I have a feeling that both these African-American men will be remembered in a similar fashion. Why?

Of what value is it to live your life by one set of values if in the end every person that ever lived is remembered in basically the same manner? I recently read a biography of Henry Kissinger by Greg Grandin. In it he speaks in great detail about the United States carpet bombing of Cambodia (along with other countries in which the United States practiced its imperialist agenda). He also speaks of how Kissinger spoke openly of contempt for certain communities.

I want to be clear, here I am speaking about your Legacy. I am not talking about an ‘off handed’ comment said in a casual setting, or even an opinion or perspective once held which the person later explicitly condemned or refuted. We are all allowed the possibility of change (not always for the better?). I am speaking about what is sometimes referred to in Catholic ethics as fundamental orientation. It is important to me as I live my life to know that my life has some coherence. That I will be remembered in a certain way. That all the quotidian content of my existence will ultimately lead to me being remembered in a way that accurately reflects how my articulated values were ultimately lived out, albeit, always in an imperfect manner. Ones legacy should ultimately reflect the very ‘shape’ of our heart. For as Scripture says “Where your Treasure is, there your heart will be also” I think it is profoundly dangerous to have everyone who dies ‘appear’ to have the same ‘shaped’ heart. It as though all people when they were alive ‘valued’ the same things? Had the same Treasures? We know this is not the truth. Our social reality is precisely defined by the collision of various values, and Treasures. In fact some of life’s conflicts can be understood as what constitutes Treasure. The question of Legacy is not merely what did we treasure in the time we spent here on earth but also, and maybe more importantly what ‘Treasure’ did we leave those that come after us?

Today, in American imperialism, the commodity has reached its most grandiose historical manifestation (C.L.R. James)

I have been struggling to understand the incredible amount of pain, grief, sadness and anger (among other emotions) that seems to consume my days and even more so my nights. I want to honor the feelings that are so pronounced and raw. I also wish to speak to something that has helped me see things in a new light. I have been reading the work of Roberto Sirvent and Danny Haiphong. Specifically their book American Exceptionalism and American Innocence. Virtually every chapter/essay is a revelation for me in terms of understanding our current reality. I will now reflect on something that has come to light, in part, from their reading of history.

I was never aware of the geographical, and temporal contemporaneousness of the slave trade and the rise of Wall Street as a location. Wall Street was one of the original locations in which the actual Slave Trade Market was practiced. It was so important to me because of my desire to ‘link’, (connect), and create coherence between the many modes of oppression. This is important, in part, because how you understand the links will impact your strategy for resistance. One of the fundamental links to understand our historical crisis is made worse precisely because we have not understood a key element of the relation between Capital and White Supremacist thought. The best way to frame the place of White Supremacist thought in the United States concept is to understand the all encompassing ‘commodification’ of reality by the Capitalist system. What I mean to say, is that the United States of America views all people of color (and in a sense all “Others”) as property. This is the default designation given these communities. I don’t just mean this in a metaphorical or symbolic manner. I mean that literally. The system views all human persons deemed (by the system) as Non-White, and Non-Male as OBJECTS like a toaster, or television. The obvious example is the Dred Scott decision. But there are many other examples. To speak of how racism dehumanizes the person of color without understanding the ‘thingification” of the human person is to not fully grasp the depth of what is being done in this praxis. What racial discourses (precisely in its new Neoliberal iterations) fails to see is precisely how the “White” Gaze sees not the person of color as human person but, in fact precisely, sees them as an extension of the world of Objects. So that the fight against White Supremacist thinking /praxis is intimately linked to our survival as a species. This is especially true because of how Capitalism in creating deformed desires does not see creation as a ‘family member’ (To All My Relations) but merely as ‘an object’ to be exploited. The climate catastrophe is merely one effect of this profound misreading of reality. This pernicious and evil ideology (and all the praxis, institutions etc. that abet the creation, maintenance and perpetuation of this movement) are directed against all those designated as other. This includes all creation and all people of color. This will eventually include all people deemed not important for the accumulation of wealth. This should be a clarion call to all of our White Sister’s and Brother’s. It has been recently reaffirmed how the struggles of people of Color (or in some cases the Global South) are the proverbial ‘canary in the coalmine’. What happens to these communities will eventually happen to the vast majority of people on the planet.

There are many other oppressions that are part of the larger system(s) of injustice that keep people in power. What was truly important for me to see was how, even as people of various ‘marginalized communities’ continue to be treated as commodities. The system has become adept at placing people of these very marginalized communities in places of authority (perceived power) while not having to change the actual relations of power, and unjust structures. This move by the system to continue its barbaric practices has been termed by the brilliant author and professor Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor as a strategy of placing ‘Black Faces in High Places” (see her brilliant article by this title online in the Jacobin website!!). This strategy is so insidious it bears some closer examination.

I remember that from 1997-2002 Apple Computer Inc. began an advertising campaign entitled Think Different. It consisted of images of historical figures with the simple but powerful phrase “Think Different”. It claimed to be an homage to those who where able to ‘think outside the box’. According to the campaign it was a tribute to those iconic figures who were visionary in their perspective. The problem is that this ad campaign completely extracted the individuals from their social, historical, political, economic context. So this campaign ad allowed an image of Dr. King, or Muhammed Ali to be used in service of Capital accumulation. It showed Nelson Mandela (who, at the time was a member of the African National Congress) as someone whose life and values were in alignment with the values of Apple corporation and its founder Steve Jobs. They used Caesar Chavez (a Union Organizer/Leader!!) in their ad campaign. This was at the time when Apple was aggressively anti-union. Think of the absolute and utter disdain the corporation had for the humanity of these individuals! There entire life of struggle and all that they stood for was completely subsumed for the service of Profit.

One of the ways this understanding of the networking of oppression has been labeled is to speak of a racialized Capitalism. This is a wonderful term because it allows us to see that an element of White Supremacist ideology is intimately tied to the accumulation of wealth for the owning class. This might also help us understand the deep need to explain to our White Sister’s and Brother’s how they are exploited in a similar (NOT IDENTICAL!) manner. To the degree that Capital views all human labor (and all corporeal existence) as some(THING) to make profit from, it can continue to despoil our humanity and all of creation.

Part of addressing these issues is to see their interlocking character. It is truly impossible to be authentically Anti-Racist without being Anti-Capitalist. If you claim to be Anti-Capitalist and not be explicitly Anti-Racist (Anti-White Supremacist) then you do not have a grasp of either oppressive system. This would be true for other forms of oppression. (Example: Anti-Patriarchy etc.)

I wanted to end on a note that brought me some hope, I have heard this quote attributed to the brilliant Trinidadian Marxist C.L.R. James who I cited at the begining of this entry. James said that “All peoples are entangled in the net of the world market”. While this could be seen as a source of despair, I prefer to view it as a source of hope. For wherever you are, there, in some form is the enemy. But this also means we can join the struggle anywhere we find ourselves.”

Thanks for joining me!

Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton

I am just beginning this journey. I had been told by many people who had heard me speak where they could get more of my reflections, rants, insights, thoughts, feelings etc. I always find it remarkable that people ask this of me. However, after much thought I decided to start a ‘blog’. I am not incredibly comfortable with my writing ability but hope that this can communicate some of the things I am learning (or have learned) up to this point. I am also still learning all of the proper protocol, habits, rules etc. of this online/blogging world. It is truly a case of learning as we go! I hope that you find something in here that will help you and also help the larger communities that we are all a part of during these interesting times. Finally, because of my wide, and varied interests, I will be speaking on various topics, and subjects. I hope to eventually create more ‘organized’ categories so that people can navigate within this site better towards whatever content they may wish to view. An example will be that there may be a category for my political/economic/cultural reflections (think of Jimmy Dore show). There may be a category of more explicit religious/spiritual/ psychological reflections (think Henri Nouwen,, Richard Rohr, James Hollis, Anne Lamott etc.), finally there may just be a potpourri category that has mundane writings. This might include comments on movie, music, sports, comedic content, or anything that catches my attention. I still find great wonder in the fact that people find some succor in what I have to offer. Please know that it has been my experience that I always come away more enriched by my interactions with the people who claim that I have helped them. I feel very blessed and honored to be on this journey traveling ‘home’ with you all!