Friday, November 27, 2015


Here’s a little meme that perfectly expresses the problem – but not, I suspect,  the problem that the artist thinks he was expressing.  The arrogance, ignorance and Olympic-quality narcissim in this cartoon is staggering.
Here's why:
For 500 years, White people in North America have had it all their own way. 
For 500 years they’ve hammered Blacks, Indians, Asians, Hispanics --- well, hell, ALL NON-WHITES, as if White people were the cream of the crop of creation, and the rest were just negligible pieces of shit. They enslaved, Blacks.  They murdered Indians.  They put Japanese in concentration camps. And so on and so on, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.
500 years of oppression. 
500 years of telling these non-white folks that they were inferior, sub-human, second-class citizens.   
Mud People. 
Even the lowliest, poorest, most uneducated white trash, could be secure in the knowledge that he was still, at least, superior to even the most educated and accomplished Black man.  Until very recently, it was virtually impossible to convict a White man of murder  when the victim was Black – and equally impossible to acquit a Black man of murder when the victim was White.
When you're told every day that you’re inferior, stupid, worthless, lazy, and good-for-nothing, BECAUSE OF YOUR RACE,  to have PRIDE in your race is a revolutionary act. An act of rebellion against tyranny. To have pride in your slandered race is to spit in the face  of your oppressor, the first step in casting off the chains of oppression. People without pride are compliant, and subservient. People with pride don’t go down to oppression without a fight. For non-white folks to be “proud” of their race, isn’t “racism.” It’s self-defense. Non-white folks wouldn't have NEEDED that special pride, had they not been oppressed by White folks in the first place.
Now the flip side  of the story is different.
For White people – who have enslaved, murdered, raped and robbed with impunity (and often STILL do) BECAUSE they were White – to have “pride” in their race is really saying, “Yes, we ARE superior, we had a RIGHT to do all  the rotten shit we’ve done because we’re White, and we're not one bit sorry, so get over it."
If positions were reversed, if Blacks had enslaved Whites, then the reverse would be true: to be proud of being Black would be arrogant, and White folks would be the ones rebelling against oppression.
But that’s not the historical case, now, is it?

White people are SO accustomed to their privileged position that when non-whites want the equal rights due to them, White people actually feel that their own rights are being taken away!  They actually believe that they have  "right" to discriminate against non-whites, and NOT being allowed to discriminate against non-whites, is discrimination against Whites!  This reminds me of the "heroic defenders of the Alamo" who fought for "freedom." But what exactly was the freedom they were fighting for? The "freedom" to to own slaves.
So when when White people whine about being picked on, it’s EXACTLY like the playground bully who finally gets punched in the nose by a rebellious victim, and goes running to teacher bawling, “He hit me, and I wasn’t doin’ nothin!’”
Fuck him.
I suppose there are folks who will claim that “White Pride” is no different from “Black Pride,” or “Indian Pride.” 
These are the same folks who would claim that a RAPIST who uses force  or the threat of force to coerce a woman into sexual compliance, and a WOMAN who shoots the would-be rapist to protect herself, are both using “violence.” In this demented view of reality, RAPE and SELF-DEFENSE are morally equivalent acts.
They aren’t.  
One is assault. The other is self-defense
“White Pride” and non-white pride aren’t morally equivalent,  either. 
The only folks who say so are either lying, or just plain stupid..

Liberty & Justice,


Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Putting Down the Dog

A “malum in se” is something that is inherently evil, in and of itself. It’s wrong no matter who does it or why. Assault, rape, robbery, kidnapping and murder are all “malum in se.”  These  examples of malignant  aggression are wrongs because they do great harm, even irreparable harm to some innocent person(s).
A “malum prohibitum” is something that’s wrong because we SAY it’s wrong. Things like not wearing your seatbelt, smoking marijuana, jaywalking --- these are not inherently evil acts. They harm no one. They are wrong because we SAY they are wrong – sometimes we say so arbitrarily and capriciously. Sometimes we say so maliciously.
Where we run into serious trouble is when we confuse these two categories of “offenses.”  When you treat a “malum prohibitum” like a “malum in se,”   you’re reacting to conduct that harms NO ONE, as if it were conduct that were inherently harmful to someone,  treating jaywalking, or marijuana-smoking AS IF it were MURDER..
When you treat a “malum in se” like a “malum prohibitum,” you’re treating conduct that is inherently harmful to someone as if it did no harm at all to anyone; you’re treating MURDER as if it were jaywalking.
This is our current state of affairs.

Police officers nationwide  commit “malum in se” against persons who have committed a “malum prohibitum,” and in too many cases that “malum prohibitum” isn’t even an illegal act, but merely something the officer doesn’t like.  It’s only “wrong” because the officer SAYS it’s wrong. This is the very definition of “arbitrary and capricious.” Perhaps it’s “wrong” only because he or she is in a bad mood, or abuses steroids. Maybe it’s “wrong”  because he just doesn’t like you  -- you’re black, or brown or red or yellow, or you are weak, disabled, elderly, poor, homeless, mentally ill, or a child. Perhaps the “wrong”you fail to show sufficient deference to satisfy the officer’s inflated ego.
In response to the “malum prohibitum” --- whether real or imagined --- the officer then inflicts one or more “malum in se” on his the “transgressor.”  If you jaywalk, smoke marijuana, or fail to wear your seatbelt, the officer may assault you, rob you, rape you, kidnap you, and/or murder you.
And when  the officer commits these “malum in se,” the prosecutors and judges treat the officer AS IF the “malum in se” were merely “malum prohibitum.”  They treat MURDER as if it were merely jaywalking.  Indeed, the courts commonly give police officers less punishment  -- if ANY --for a “malum in se” than a non-police office receives for a petty “malum prohibitum.”
This is not justice. It is the antithesis of justice.
It’s a situation that is intolerable, and it must be changed immediately.
By whatever means necessary.

                                     For every action there is an equal and opposite re-action.

There was a time, not too long ago, when a Black man dare not look a White man in the eye, or look at a White woman at all., for fear of being lynched.  A Black man had to be mindfully deferent, had to address EVERY White man politely and in hushed tones, and carefully remembering to call him “sir.” No matter what the provocation, no matter what the outrage might be, protest, argue, raise your voice or appear in any other way “uppity,” and you might find yourself, beaten, hanged or burned alive.
Whites were a special class of citizens who had extra rights compared to Blacks.
This is fundamentally the exact situation we all now find ourselves in with regard to police officers, but most especially if we are perceived of by that officer as being physically, socially, economically or politically weak, vulnerable, defenseless: if we are non-white, if were are elderly, or a child, if we are small, female, physically disabled, or mentally ill.  Because police officers are bullies, and bullies are, in their secret hearts, abject cowards, police officers target most those whom they perceive as helpless.   (Only the worst  coward  --- or the biggest liar ---could be armed to the teeth, with a club, pepper spray, taser and pistol, and still claim to be  put “in fear for my life,” by an unarmed person  who is running away  from them.)
Police officers are now a de facto “special class” of citizens with extra rights compared to the rest of us.
The 14th Amendment of the Constitution states, in relevant part: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
The “equal protection” clause requires states to provide ALL people under its jurisdiction with EQUAL protection of the laws.  A state may not provide SOME people with more than equal protection than others, or with LESS  than equal protection.
There are  numerous cases of police officers enjoying impunity for conduct which would send the average person to prison. This in effect established police officers as a special class of people, with EXTRA protection of the law, in direct contradiction to the 14th Amendment.
Think not?
Try this simple test:
Shoot someone in the back as they run away from you, then claim “self-defense” in court. See what happens.
For the average person, “self-defense” is an affirmative defense, which means that the burden of proof is on the person claiming self-defense.  You may use a degree of force NECESSARY to protect yourself, and no more.  If someone throws a punch at you, you may punch them in return. But if they go down and are no longer an IMMINENT threat to you, you may not then throw a second punch. The fight is effectively over. That second punch makes YOU the new aggressor.
Generally, you may use lethal force in self defense when you REASONABLY believe that you (or another person you may lawfully protect) is in imminent danger of grave bodily injury or death. One operant term here is “reasonably.” If you are, for whatever reason, deathly afraid of people who wear striped ties, that does not permit you to go around shooting anyone who is wearing a striped tie. Being a coward does NOT grant you a license to murder.   If you claim you shot someone because he had a gun and that gun turns out to be a cell phone, it will be YOUR burden to convince us that you REASONABLY mistook that cell phone for a gun. You can shoot some just because they have SOMETHING in their hand. You have to REASONABLY believe it’s a gun AND that they intend you (or someone else) harm with it.
For police officers, however, the burden of proof is reversed. When they commit homicide, they are presumed to have acted in self-defense, just because they say so. It’s up to the victim – or the victims family- to prove otherwise.  Police are held to a different standard than non-police.
Having DIFFERENT laws for different classes of citizens, or different standards of proof  for different classes of citizens is a blatant, prima facie violation of the 14th Amendment.

"Deacons for Defense," the movie.

Black men, by arming themselves and standing together, revealed KKK members for the cowards that they were. More than once the KKK came to burn a cross or bomb a church only to wet their sheets and run for cover when met by armed an determined Deacons for Defense. Cowards can be vicious in gangs, but when the tables are turned, their aggressive faux  “courage” evaporates faster than alcohol on a hot stove. 
There’s a lesson there, I think.  It's a lesson that some of us learned in having to deal with schoolyard bullies. There's only ONE effective way to do that, and you know what it is as well as I do.  It isn't running to tell Teacher. It isn't complaining to the bully's parents. It isn't having the school board pass rules against bullying.  And it certainly isn't reasoning with the bully, or begging and pleading for him to stop taking your lunch money.
You have to stand up to the bully.  
You have to punch the bully squarely in the nose and knock him on his ass. Individually or as a group, you have to make it more painful for the bully to pick on you than to not pick on you. Once the bully takes a good, hard fall, that's usually the end of his reign of terror. 
And not before.

We will never stop police violence by going to court. At BEST we can sue – if we can afford the legal expenses (while the police officer is provided a lawyer at no expense to the officer) – and hope to win a judgment someday.  But that judgment will not be paid by the offending police officer, but by the police department, or the city or town – which means by all the taxpayers living there.  The offending police officer will get a paid vacation and probably not even be fired.
But some debts cannot be paid with money. No amount of money can “compensate” you for the loss of a loved one.  It’s a de-humanizing insult to even entertain the notion.
Some debts can only be paid in blood.

 The police are now the KKK and all the rest of us regular folks are the “uppity negras.”
Unless we want to live in permanent terror, keeping our eyes averted, being cringingly obsequious in word, tone and manner, we might do well to think a lot less Marting Luther King, and a lot more Nat Turner.
Someone recently said to me that that there is no difference between a (violent) police officer and a rabid dog.
I disagree.
Rabies is not the dog’s choice.
I’d feel sad about putting down the dog.

 Liberty & Justice.


Sunday, July 12, 2015

Fukiyu Haiku

I dig poetry.
One of my favorites is haiku.
Haiku is a form of Japanese poetry. Three lines.  Usually 17 syllables., but that’s not carved in stone. The essential characteristic of haiku is that it juxtaposes two images or ideas in such a way as it cuts,  like a katana through a pile of dried cow patties, right to a zen revelation of truth in the way those two elements are related,
Not a lot of people know it, but my ex-hometown, Chicago, has its own native poetry.
Much like a haiku, it juxtaposes two ideas, or concepts or images, and then offers a terse punch-line, sometimes a single word,  to condense volumes of exposition and description  down to an “essence,” that hits you a truth about the relationship of those two ideas, concepts or images, like a short uppercut to the solar plexus.  It the verse of the underdog, the losers in love, the down-trodden. 
The rich snits?  
They’ve got sonnets and iambic pentameter.
No offense, Will.

Chi-town “haiku” is named for the last line of a famous example:
Lies and greed and bloody deeds
You say love it or leave it.
Fuck you.

Here are a few more examples of Fukiyu poetry.
Election time
Who’s the lesser evil?
Motherfuckery for sale.

Unarmed man shot in the back
Cops claim fear for their lives.

Autopsy, witnesses and videotape.
Cop still skates.
What the fuck?

My squeeze and him.
She says they’re friends.
Dump her.

Some of his best friends are black.
And he never owned slaves.
Sheet’s in the wash.

Black man in the White House.
Nothing changes.
House negro.

The government said so.
They wouldn’t do that.
Seen any Indians around here lately?

Got some Fukiyu you’d like to share?
Lay it on me.


Saturday, July 11, 2015

Coincidence Theory

                                     Member of the Warren Commission investigating the JFK murder.

It's Monday. 8:15 P.M.

According to the testimony of more than a dozen eye-witnesses and a security camera, the following events occurred.

1. 8:02PM: Bob, fresh from the pool and wearing just his speedos, enters an empty 4' by 4' closet. The closet has one door. No trap-door, secret panels, suspended ceiling or other possible access.

2. 8:03 P.M.: Joe enters that same closet and closes the door behind him.

3. 8:04 P.M.: There is a loud, though muffled, noise like a "pop" that appears to come from inside the closet. A moment later, Joe exits the closet, leaving the door wide open. Crumpled up on the closet floor is Bob, dead as a doornail. There is a .38 calibre entry wound at the center of the base of his skull that did to his medulla oblongata what the Allies did to Dresden. Lying beside him on the floor is a .38 Smith and Wesson revolver.

OK, Sherlock. Who shot Bob?

                       If you can't trust a cop who wears black fishnet stockings, who can you trust?

The only person in the closet with Bob at the time of his death was Joe.
But no one actually saw Joe shoot Bob because the closet door was closed.
"Bob committed suicide," claims Joe. "It was tragic. The fact that he chose the very moment when I was alone with him to do the deed is just coincidence."

Nobody saw a gun in Bob's possession.
Not much room in Speedos to hide one.
"Well, just because no one saw it," says Joe, "that doesn't prove he didn't have it. Maybe he had it under his arm or something."

The cops test Joe's hands for gunpowder residue. The results are positive.
They test Bob, too. The tests on Bob are negative.

"I was at the pistol range this morning," explains Joe. "And I hadn't washed my hands. Bob happened to pick a day when I was at the range to shoot himself. It's just a coincidence. Besides, those tests aren't 100% foolproof. Something must have gone wrongs with Bob's. The police lab must have messed up the test."

The cops ID the revolver. It's Joe's.
"My gun was stolen sometime after I went to the range. I'd put it in my desk drawer and when it was time to go home it was gone. I guess it was Bob that stole it."

The Medical Examiner does an autopsy and determines the trajectory the bullet took through Bob's skull. It was a somewhat upward angle. The ME also found no contact burns on the wound and concluded that the muzzle of the weapon had been 18-24 inches away at the moment the weapon was discharged. The ME concluded that it would be anatomically impossible for Bob to have shot himself in the back of the head, with the gun at this angle and at this distance.
"But Bob was really into yoga," comments Joe. "He could do all kinds of weird things with his arms and legs. The fact that the nature of the wound suggests that Joe was murdered is just a coincidence."

The cops check around and find that Bob's wife, Honeybunch — using afalse name, wearing a cheap wig and paying in cash — had taken a room at the One-Hour Motel on at least 9 different occasions — occasions when motel staff had also seen Joe in and around the premises. But no one could testify to actually seeing them together.
"Sometimes I just need to get away for a little while," says Wifey. "I get a room, use the sauna, relax. A little peace and quiet. I use the wig and a false name because people would think it an odd thing to do, or jump to all kinds of conclusions."

"I go there to swim in the pool," explains Joe. I could coincidentally have been there some time or another when Bob's wife was there. In fact, I swim a lot, so it was almost inevitable. The lifeguard maybe didn't notice me because there are other people there, too. Some good-looking young women, if you catch my drift. Oh, and sometimes I just used the steam room, which is usually empty at that time."

                                                             Rule number one: Follow the money.

Bob was a very wealthy man. His wife had signed a pre-nuptial agreement that gave her little more than chump change. But it turns out that Honeybunch had recently taken out a life insurance policy on her husband from Acme Insurance, with herself as sole beneficiary. A cool 10 million bucks. The policy has what appears to be Bob's signature -- but it seems "irregular" as if the hand that penned it
were "uncertain."

It also turns out that both she and Joe had gotten new passports and had booked first class seats — one way — on a flight to a Caribbean haven that has no extradition treaty with the United States.
"Really?" exclaims Joe. "What a coincidence! I had no idea that Bob's wife liked the Caribbean. I've been planning this vacation for a long time. I didn't book a return flight because I was thinking of sailing back."

Jay Gumshoe, an investigator for Acme Insurance, was given the case. Acme didn't want to pay out that 10 million. Jay looks it over, goes to see the cops, grabs coffee with the two police detectives who'd caught the case.

                                            How I thought I looked when I was an investigator.

"Here's what I think," Jay tells them. "Joe was having an affair with Bob's wife. We have witnesses putting them at the motel at the same time on many occasions, with her disguising her identity. The lifeguard can't put Joe at the pool. She wanted to leave Bob, but would have gotten zilch after a divorce because of the pre-nup. So she took out that 10 million dollar life insurance policy behind Bob's back — nothing in the files to indicate he knew about it. And the signature's fishy. Joe takes his gun into the closet, shoots Bob and tries to sell it as a suicide. Powder residue on Joe's hands, but not on Bob's plus the angle is all wrong, no contact burns or stippling around the wound. And it's Joe's gun, he claims was stolen by Bob. Joe and Honeybunch got new passports and one-way tickets to an island paradise where US law can't touch them. How about you pick these two up on suspicion of murder?"
"Ok, we'll look into it," says one of the police dicks.
"Thanks. I'll wait to hear from you," replies Jay, gives them his card, and then leaves.

                                        How I probably actually looked when I was an investigator.

After Jay's gone, one of the cops starts shaking his head incredulously.
"Jesus H. Christ," he mutters.
"Yeah," says his partner, crumpling up Jay's card, and tossing it away. "Another freaking conspiracy nut!"


                              Hey, maybe he was just talking about the communists. Yeah, that's it. Communists...