James Palombo Photo

As our readership is continuing to develop, here is a piece from San Miguel Allende, Mexico, that was forwarded in the context of my last article on Cuba. It’s not exactly a politically based article, but it does represent some of the substance of the Cuban culture, and I trust you’ll find it interesting, as did I. The piece is followed by a bit of prose-poetry that I did, which seemed to capture a bit of the varying social and political landscape of the country. The article originally appeared in the newspaper Atencion San Miguel.

— Jim Palombo, Politics Editor

Out of Cuba, 2007

By Lou Christine

The consensus is that the one-time architectural marvel called Havana is a decaying city coming apart at the seams. Havana is hot and humid. The place is a bit pricey and there’s hardly anything to buy. The food’s insipid but the music’s spicy. And the women do live up to their erotic reputation! From my perspective, after spending five days in Havana, all the above rings true. Yet my slant here is strictly a thumbnail sketch of Havana, and can’t be compared to the whole of the nation and its people.

The economic effects from the 40-some-year, U.S. embargo and Soviet pull out have both isolated and reduced Cuba into an impoverished existence. Havana’s past splendor is apparent, as is its present anemic condition. One could bray, “What the hell happened here? Who’s in charge?” Putting those negative aspects aside it’s the Cuban people and their unique spirit that makes the place fascinating.

I skipped the government provided tourist hotels deciding to rent a second-floor apartment (casa particular) in a run-down barrio of old Havana. The neighborhood could be compared to tenement sections of the South Bronx. Despite the rough surroundings I found Cubans friendly, accommodating and hospitable. Hardly anyone seemed serious, if anything most acted sophomoric other than the downtrodden that have been crushed by the system or bad fortune.

My landlords were Jesus and his wife Dora. The apartment wasn’t spiffy yet clean with essentials. The affable couple had me feeling welcome and comfortable as I began to experience a slice of life in old Havana. For some reason they both called me Louie.

“Louie! Louie!” was shouted by a voice in my direction as I bopped down the block the following day. It was Jesus. In Latino fashion he hand signaled me to hold up. Catching up he latched onto my elbow only saying another Louie while leading me into the back patio of a dingy bar. The TV blared. Some Cuban pretty boy was up on the screen singing his heart out. Jesus ordered two cold cans of Crystal and got down to business.

Jesus said, “Louie,” two more times. We were up to five Louies and I still didn’t know what was on his mind. Evidently, the night before, I mentioned an affinity for baseball when Jesus clicked on the apartment’s TV with a game in progress. Sipping his beer and moving his hands in a certain way, Jesus began to paint a vivid picture. It was in 1951, Yankee Stadium, the top of the ninth and the great, Boston Red Sock, Ted Williams, was at bat. The Yanks were ahead by a run, with one out, and a runner on third. Jesus’ uncle had promised the then nine-year-old a trip NYC. to see a big-league game and his favorite player, Yankee, Joe DiMaggio.

Jesus paused his story to elaborate how he revered DiMaggio and how jolting Joe was “El Mejor!” After the brief DiMaggio eulogy Jesus continued telling me how he was seated in the left-center-field bleachers. Williams launched a screaming line drive seemingly out of centerfielder DiMaggio’s reach, yet the Yankee Clipper got a good jump on the ball and made a spectacular run-saving catch. Jesus became more animated describing how the Red Sox runner on third tagged up and began to race home to tie the game. Gracefully, according to Jesus, DiMaggio maintained his wherewithal, retrieved the ball from his mitt, and rifled a bullet toward Yogi Berra, the Yankee catcher, to make the tag out and to win the game! Jesus then just slowly nodded his head and looked away for the moment as he savored the past.

Those are the indelible, first-hand memories the Cuban has of his hero, Yankee Stadium and his beloved baseball. Then Jesus extended his chest somewhat telling me how he went on to become a hard throwing pitcher and a pro prospect, saying he threw a number of no hitters. In 1958 he signed a $5,000 minor league contract with the Brooklyn Dodgers but all changed with the revolution and his dream to become a big leaguer died.

From the looks of things, in present day Havana, many dreams died back in 1959. I am not qualified to judge if Uncle Fidel’s system is a travesty of justice, or a continuous-and-challenging socialist experiment with a severe case of spinning wheels disease. On the surface things don’t look all that prosperous. Yet discounting the obvious pitfalls, when ferreting a bit deeper, there’s something striking about the place.

Up to the point with Jesus I was having a love-hate relationship with the city. I almost wanted to leave after fifteen minutes. There were waiting lines at immigration and customs and longer lines for everything else. But regardless I could also sense there’s a special feeling, being in the mix with the multi-racial Cuban people that had me feeling so alive!

In Jesus’ case, most of our conversations covered the golden age of baseball. He doesn’t think much of today’s big leaguers. We searched our brains making a list Major-League 500 home-run hitters, those with 3000-hits and 300-game winners over their careers. Once back home I checked. Jesus and I nailed about 90% of the 60-some baseball playing icons. I seemed to be the called-for soundboard to talk the about the sport we both love.

I was living mostly a one-block existence. Fellow sanmiguelense, Jeffery Brown, was my neighbor. We shared shots of Vodka with some men, out of the trunk of a ‘54 Plymouth resting on its axles. There was Yasser, mid-twenties, strong and handsome. He inquired about gyms and weight-lifting equipment in the States. He hates his name. Seems he was born on the day Yasser Arafat visited Cuba and therefore stuck with the moniker. One of the men, Manuel, Jesus’ brother-in-law wanted to know about present day cars. He frowned some when I told him today’s autos are all about computers and that back yard tune-ups are out of the question. He and his cronies were then installing a clutch into a ‘49 Hudson. The men had us feeling at ease and the Vodka helped. We took more swigs and posed for buddy-buddy photos. I asked about the Soviet influence. Were they still around? Manuel said the Russians never really fit in, that they built decent roads but ugly buildings, along with bad running cars, motorcycles and tractors, then the Ruskies left them in a lurch. All and all the men agreed that the Russians presence meant little one way or another, other than the introduction of Vodka.

After a day and a half  “Louie! Louie!” peppered my ears from various directions each time I took to the street. I smiled. They smiled back. Take in part, it’s their block, and residents on such close-quartered blocks don’t miss a blink. Ironically I was residing on Calle San Miguel, the length of your average street here in San Miguel. The row homes were three-storied, with six-to-eight apartments in each. Most were occupied with Havanans, yet I observed tourists with luggage exiting taxis then disappearing behind doors.

To appreciate Cuba one has to seek out the silver linings from what seems like a hopeless situation. The system offers Cubans little incentive, so goes a desire to upkeep buildings and infrastructure. The streets are teeming with life 24/7. That memorable, far-out alien bar depicted in the film Star Wars seems pale compared to the outlandish street scenes in Havana. There’s big-time stoop life primarily because of the stifling heat and humidity; kids play baseball and grab ass using home-made baseballs fashioned from rolled up white tape and broom sticks and sticks of all kinds are swung bats. A parked, banged up ‘55 Chevy might be first base, and broken manhole cover second, a curbside third, while home plate might be a cutout portion of a cardboard box. Some kids just play catch or handball. With the ’50ish cars and street baseball alike, boyhood memories flashed in my mind’s eye. I could have been any one of those kids. I saw some sun-baked basketball courts, mostly deserted, marred with potholes and lopsided backboards, minus baskets. Kids played soccer with makeshift balls and even tin cans.

The plethora of street scenes are both poignant and heart breaking; men get haircuts in the street, transmissions from vintage American cars, now jalopies, are yanked out with brute strength and then jury-rigged as to get them back on the road. The shelves of the few available tiendas are bare, except for nine or ten items; people look disheveled and beat, except for the exquisite smiles they dole out toward neighbor and stranger alike; the pulsating beat of Latin music pours out of barred windows and open doorways. One day I went out to the avenue and bought eight pork sandwiches. Problem number one: The sandwich maker didn’t have a bag. I think I’m resourceful and tried to buy a bag but didn’t possess the right currency, but a kind lady gave me one. Then I was in search for mayonnaise or mustard. I would have been better off seeking out the Holy Grail. None was to be found, but low and behold in the basement of a foreign investment market I found mayonnaise. Voila! But didn’t you know the computerized cash register system crashed and there would be no more sales that day, mmmmm, dried pork sandwiches.

Tourists are forced to buy a currency called CUC. It’s a government sponsored rip off regardless if cashing dollars, Mexican pesos or Euros. Ten to fifteen percent comes off the posted exchange. You’re getting a Cuban CUC for about a dollar-thirty. Prices in tourist joints are more expensive than here and food wise it’s mostly lousy, ill prepared with inferior ingredients. I ordered Chow Mein in a Chinese restaurant, only thing there were no noodles.

As earlier noted, countless old Fords, Chevy’s, Hudson’s and Studebakers rumble along Cuban boulevards as rusted hulks held together by who knows what? The state of public transportation is atrocious. People are crammed tight into deteriorating buses with no room for their guardian angel. With the heat, sweat and mass of humanity one can only gasp and say, “but for the grace of God.” Taxis are too expensive for most except for community cabs that are packed to full capacity, dropping some off and taking on others. Many hitch hike, standing in droves, off sidewalks, waving down anyone who might pick them up. As the pecking order goes the young and better looking chance to hitch a ride rather than the elderly or decrepit.

The men are forward and the women receptive. I eyeballed mostly women whose dress is alluring and enticing, dolled up in some tawdry chic that beckons with the hotties featuring enticing curves and plunging necklines, primarily, because in reality, that is all they have to show for themselves. In most other places chicks wiggling their behinds in such a way while planted in exaggerated high-heels and wearing short-shorts would be perceived more like cheap strumpets. Inside Havana that look is hardly out of the ordinary. The men’s dress on the most part was shabby and wrinkled. I suppose in the men’s case their well-defined bodies do the talking.

Love or lust is constantly in the air. Even the most unsightly tourist, fat, bald or snaggle-toothed can be seen as a desirable Romeo, that’s of course if he has fresh money in his pocket. That easy availability of women mostly arises out of hunger and need. Cuban women do show case a certain one-of-a-kind sensuality that seems inbred. Such overt actions later on might place a few extra staples on the family table. Horny men attracted to such vivacious women might just shrug their shoulders and sum, “When in Rome…” or those with conscious may ask themselves if they are taking advantage of an undeniable female commodity or participating in some sort of lurid exploitation? I don’t have the answers.

Under the surface breathes an oppressive state. Jesus warned me there are street-corner snitches and police everywhere. A woman just sharing a taxi or walking down the street with a foreigner can be whisked away by the police for doing either. Often consequences have females spending a couple of months in the slammer and a mark on her record to boot. Girls constantly talk and worry about the police.

The government is well aware of the prostitution yet for the hooker in Havana it’s a Catch-22 situation. They have to be tricky to procure tricks. Cuban women of any profession are discouraged from frequenting with tourists other than in the daytime in public places. Only female employees are allowed in hotels. Yet just outside on sidewalks of some tourist, oriented, boom-boom establishments, sanctioned by the government, the girls gather in bouquets and are permitted to enter if accompanied by a tourist. Then it seems the government turns a blind eye that makes the whole man-woman thing seem ambiguous at most. Many, in actuality, are not professional streetwalkers but country girls merely in search of a meal, some drinks, a nice time and pocket money. Yet the pocket money they receive for their charms often equals a month’s pay. For men, reciprocated affection offered by women is almost automatic; “You were nice to me so now I’ll be nice to you.”

Cuba does hold claim to the world’s lowest AIDS rate. Reason being: Random HIV tests. At first people infected with HIV were whisked off to a sanitarium, for life. In 1998, the government permitted patients who have been properly indoctrinated and treated to return home but under a state of house arrest.

Many young gals from the countryside apply and anxiously wait for coveted visas permitting them to stay in Havana up to two or three months. They apply for the get-away visas under the guise of schooling or to visit relatives. Yet on the most part, probably because of the wireless coconut, they know Havana has brighter lights and a slew of generous men from around the world who seek female company — their possible escape. Cubans do not have access to the Internet’s super highway. They can e-mail and telephone but are kept much in the dark about what is taking place in the outside world. They see only what the regime wants them to see, period!

I queried some about their impression of foreign men and men in general. My sampling had some of the gals telling me they don’t like Italian men, especially those from the south. Women, even streetwalkers, have their dignity and the girls said Italian tourists were rude and presumptuous in a place where being presumptuous is a gimme. The French, Greeks and Spanish, in their view, act stodgy and above them. German and Scandinavian are said to be polite yet distant. When I asked about Mexicans or other Latinos the girls pointed to their elbows and patted them with their other hand, a sign that indicates cheapskates. “And they lie,” said Magalia, saying how they promise marriage faster than the rest. She likes American men, primarily because they are generous but they are loud and brag too much. As for Cuban men, Magalia made a face and extended her open hand and counted off her fingers one by one emphatically, “Uno, dos, tres, quatro novias, siempre… ellos el pejor!”

During multiple conversations with Havanans the men were more restrained about Cuba’s situation and I refrained from pushing the subject. Men of age wanted to speak about glory of the past. Taxi drivers openly spoke about long hours but the money was great. Only one cabbie tried to sell me that Cuba is a wonderful place where everybody is equal and it’s only getting better. There are devilish billboards showing Bush and Hitler as equals. Posted images of Che are everywhere yet there aren’t many images of Castro. Women looked to the future and were more expressive about the state of things. “Get me out of here!” shouted out from within them.

“Everybody’s afraid of the police,” one women told me in a low voice inside a tourist restaurant as two cruised outside. “They make us go to rallies.”  For bigger rallies thousands are bussed in from the countryside with a 48-hour pass to stay and party in the capital city but only after attending a mandatory rally. “We cheer real loud, because if we make the government happy maybe they will cut short the rally and we can go party.”

I find it ironic that the Marx’s and Engle’s utopia of socialism has failed worldwide and today that sort of none functioning lifestyle hardly survives other than in a few bastions of repression like Cuba. I find it just as amazing that a taxi driver or tour guide can make ten times the money compared to the government stipend trickled down to a trained doctor, engineer or scientist. The general population is rationed some rice, beans and few other staples on a monthly basis that lasts no longer than a week. That’s the reality of life in today’s Cuba.

Then, in spite of the failed dream, there is the elite who enjoy the status of privilege due to government appointed professions and housing. Cuba claims to have a 100% literacy rate and free medical for all. Cubans expressed to me that the bureaucratic hoops they have to jump through for health care isn’t worth the hassle unless there is an absolute emergency.     Havana’s embassy row is as stately as it gets, where upscale embassies bask along side botanical finery while facing a wide, sparkling thoroughfare.

Hotel Nacional is a first class hotel. Its staff is bilingual and sharp. Black, sleek, Mercedes’ taxis wait outside for tourists or big wigs in the government. Yet the gal tending the bar yakked on the phone and finished her smoke before waiting on us. There are a few square blocks, surrounding the capitol, impressively restored and pristine. Hotel Raquel glistens with marble floors and columns’ indicating a regentrification is in vogue yet out of the reach for the average Cuban. The Museum of the Revolution and Art Museum are well cared for as are a few other buildings and cathedrals in the vicinity. That’s about it.

Maybe I should have done more clubbing or drank where Hemingway once did, or maybe I should have delved more into the artsy social scene and ate at trendy tourist traps or rode around in a horse drawn carriage. Maybe next time. I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the music. One has to be dead to not appreciate the hot Latin tunes along with the enticing lyrics and tight rumba rhythms. That part of Cuba’s soul can never be replaced or squashed by a warped system. It’s their national treasure. When Cubans play or sing music they appear as free as birds. But when I peer into the tired and worn down faces of Jesus, Dora and the all the others who have been denied the advancements of modern society, regardless of Capitalism’s own pitfalls, I can’t help but think about Cuba’s once glorious past, minus Batista, and what would have occurred if Cuba wasn’t so abused and neglected.

Perhaps my mind-set parallel’s Jesus’ the same way he pooh-poohed today’s spoiled and pampered Major League baseball players who he doesn’t think that much of. Just as Jesus wonders about what happened to his beloved baseball, I wonder about what happened to the first city of the new world which might have us both asking, “Where have you gone Joe DiMaggio?”

* * *

Cubaism

Flat, spread into being
Two dimensional, cut-up, cut across
Located, dislocated
Ordered disorder
Contrasting, contradictory
Turning inward, turning away
Existential, god
Poorness without poverty’s soul
Hopeful despair
Tearing a smile
Redemption, dereliction
Ridiculous, sublime
Darkly lit canvas
Art-life, life-art
Still life
For all to see

Quizas

(Perhaps)

By James Palombo, Politics Editor

It was less than a two-week visit. One could argue that this was hardly enough time. And I was mainly in one city, more to argue in that there was so much more to see. Yet, I’ve been around the world, Europe, the Middle and Far East, Central and South America, but nothing has affected me quite like this. A truly profound experience you might say.

Photos by Jim Palombo

It’s not a large island, but it’s a country with a storied past. Its beauty and riches are well documented by explorers and visitors throughout its captivating history. Its dangers have been equally chronicled via the days of pirates, mobsters and revolutionaries. It’s a place of contrasts and contradictions, with its people having all of this compressed into their souls.

I was awed by the mysterious influences of time and place on the people. I noticed this almost as soon as I arrived, especially with simultaneous and contradictory feelings being elicited; inspiration-deflation, caring-non-caring, right-wrong, beauty-beast, ahead-behind, all of these overwhelming my senses. It was like being in the space between the right thing to do and the right thing to think, between preach and practice, or social man and economic man – a gap where a God and even sin might find value. Again, it was a quick yet powerful sensation. In fact, I notice the feelings again in recall, with the notion of “tearing a smile” coming to mind. Perhaps in some unexpected, existential way, I stumbled upon a piece of myself or mankind in coming to this place.

But I couldn’t get lost in all of this, not on this particular visit.  I had my sights set on a particular purpose. I was hoping to find out if what I thought about the place in terms of its ideological underpinnings would lend itself to further exploration. In other words, I knew of the politically difficult situation there, and I also heard of the socially romantic character. I was hoping to find that perhaps the twain might meet.

And it did; there was a convergence of what I hoped to see and feel with what actually transpired. I quickly felt that my purpose had some real ground, it was not just fanciful thinking. In fact, I was reminded to some extent of my own country, one also filled with contrasts and contradictions, buoyed by revolutionary spirit, a place where the entirety of its experiment seems to have somehow been lost in translation.  My purpose involved wanting to know more about the similarities of our countries, and if the similarities could overcome our differences, could in fact be fuel for a better understanding. I am more certain now that perhaps they can.

Let me say more about this, about the elements surrounding my purpose. On initial examination, it was fair to reason that we were two countries laboring in the midst of our revolutionary beginnings, especially in the context of the post WWII world. In terms of the spirits of those revolutions, one has been couched within the frame of democracy, the other in communism. And by principle, neither of these frames ever seemed so at odds with the other. Both revolutions have also been enormously affected by the nature of capitalism, almost in the sense of being two sides to the capitalist coin. With one revolution, historical variables seem to have been on its side – there has been substantial political, economic and military growth, progress. This is while the other has struggled to maintain its identity, some argue as an effect of the other revolution’s success. In any event, as we speak, both sets of revolutionary principles seem distorted by the nature of market influences — it’s now hard to recognize the true intent of either revolutionary experiment.  So we actually appear to share a great deal. My purpose was to sense the actuality of this, and again, I’m hopeful that this “similarity” can actually bring us together, each of us learning from the other relative to what has transpired in the modern world. Perhaps it’s finally the time when this can happen.

With this in mind, I would like to present a review of “the model” that I was considering prior to my trip. I actually took the idea around to community related agencies in the city I was visiting to ascertain what interest might be generated.  Despite the often offered caveat about discussing politically focused endeavors in the country, I met with success. The “initial project” idea developed as discussions unfolded and it seems a perfect fit in terms of developing future projects.

In the reading of both, I expect you’ll get a better sense of what is being considered, and what I’m hoping to develop as I now speak with those in our own country. It could be – perhaps – that something of value may be in the offing.

The Model

During my initial trip, I intend to build on contacts in the academic/art/civic/governmental communities, garnering an interest in the idea of developing a dialogue, and then returning in the near future, hopefully with a project in hand. In this context, I would like to develop an interest in what can be termed an ideological-educational model from which any number of projects can grow. In short, my professional and personal experiences (documented in my last book, “Criminal to Critic-Reflections Amid The American Experiment,” Rowman and Littlefield Publishers) tell me that we share some mutually important concerns pointed at our political, economic and social structures. This “mutuality” can be framed in the imagery of a large circular intersection, with a center from which several directions can be taken. In this center lay, among others things, the concerns of capitalism, socialism, communism, and democracy. No doubt, these concerns – and all their implications — have prompted a great deal of separation/conflict between the two countries over the past half century. Yet both countries must now legitimately and openly address these concerns in terms of proceeding in directions that can speak to better futures. Therefore, it is at this “crossroads” where projects might be best developed. This is underscored by the belief that in sharing information while we are both there, we will not only help address and repair our separation/differences, but, in taking the best informed directions, we can also move toward bettering our respective countries.

With these ideas at the model’s center, what is developed via dialogue and the sharing of literature, or art, or research, etc., can be expressive of/serve these educational ends. Although small in nature this type model, in the course of its development, will legitimately and clearly speak to the long-term interests of both our countries.

An Initial Project

I have completed my stay, and in terms of discussing the above “model”, it was clear that the ideas represent ones of interest. In this sense the following is proposed relative to actually initiating a “grass-roots” oriented bridge between our countries.

Bike race in Havana

Forming a “work group” developed from the organizations I have contacted (importantly, organizations which have a link to both the government and the University) and from similar organizations that can be involved from my country, we can together develop a “symposium on dialogue.” At this juncture, here is a general idea on what this would be. With students from both countries involved from the beginning/developmental stages, we could bring together individuals from academia, politics, community work, arts, media, entertainment, etc. to discuss the ideological issues that have been at the forefront of our mutual concerns. From this, attention can be garnered on the issues and the intent of continuing corresponding dialogue, perhaps a documentary or music developed, and certainly some shared research projects between students/universities could begin. This should not be seen in the context of necessarily resolving all our differences, but more as an open dialogue to facilitate better future relationships. In short, and as those I talked with seem to agree, it’s about time this happens.

There are certainly both procedural and substantive issues that will need to be tended to, and funding will be an issue as well. But given the issues (and their immediacy), and that we have universities and organizations poised to help, and that this will not require a burdensome sum of money to organize (especially given the potential rewards), I would strongly urge that the discussions and contacts already initiated be utilized to their fullest extent. In this sense, I am hoping to further integrate those who can help move the ideas/interest/energy forward. Again, what is being proposed is based on the value of education — the sharing of ideas and thoughts with the next generations in mind. As both an educator and a participant with issues that relate to bettering international understanding, I’m confident that this is a viable and timely way to proceed.

___________________________

So I imagine you have the picture. One might scratch his head thinking that this seems so obvious a course of action, that this type bridge must already have been built. But this is not the case. And you can well imagine the worn-out, archaic reasons for this may be the same ones used to deflate the spirit from this initiative – the same spirit interestingly tied to both our country’s beginnings. Of course, we shall see.

There is certainly more I could say about my visit – especially about the people, their problems, the daily goings on and the country itself. Perhaps I can get to all of this another time, perhaps after my next visit.  For now, I will only add this last piece of information. On my return flight, I was seated next to a woman from South Korea. She was fluent in English which allowed us the opportunity to chat about our experiences on the island. (This “spread” of our language certainly speaks to our post WWII expansion. It also speaks a bit to both our luck and our arrogance in terms of having other people speak in our native tongue.) She was a school teacher and she along with husband and two children (seated across from us) had been on holiday discovering and photographing the island. When it was my turn to explain my visit, I did so in the context of what you’ve read above. She seemed to take in the ideas I was expressing with a great deal of interest, and complimented me on what she perceived as some form of bravery. Shortly thereafter, and much to my surprise, she asked if she could have the piece of paper I was jotting some notes on. I gave it to her and she returned it with a sentence written on it. I found her consideration in wanting to write something surprising, and I remain inspired by the words she wrote. In closing, I thought I would pass them along to you.

“I hope you are healthy and happy and that you and your friends help light the world’s darkness.”

A rather profound way to end a profound trip – it seems the ideas must continue to be discussed. And perhaps some light will indeed follow … quizas.

_____________________________________

A Life in Cuba

As with circumstances in the U.S., there are many legal and extra-legal claims referencing injustices in Cuba. At the same time, and again similar to the U.S.’s revolutionary history, the Cuban experiment represents a great struggle to achieve objectives truly believed in and admired by many in the world. Herbert Zulu’s ink-penned poetry and design seem swirled somewhere in the mix of these conditions, perhaps making the black and white of his work appropriate. Zulu continues his life in Havana, struggling to make something out of his art and life. He wrote the following poems in English.

The Voyeur

The voyeur cracking his teeth

and all that you know what I mean

I am about to swear

he thinks of a frying pan the light is

to toast the woman’s titts for dinner

and that’s not neither fair nor right.

The Drummer

First one step, then another, then

the drummer runs away from the picture

of himself in the middle of a destructive night.

catching this image as it came from my memory,

Now, an image of downton in an old city?

The drummer is unreal and so the place where my imagination sees

these things. Ink and words even at midnight

make a seeming of a man, the imbecile, composing

a Southern breeze when rhythm cannot free it from desires.

First one step, then another , then

I reduce the player to my self, slow and naked,

and, acquiring each other’s thought, we are one.

My Niece Jennifer

Little by little my niece Jennifer hugs herself.

She does it hard and closes any entrance when being mad

at the shod feet passing by her side with its deafness

and too many words utters on behalf of silence.

Then she plays anger and she plays an ancient blues

that once we sang it never let us live.

All I need to do to feed her with a taseful ripe fruit pie or

can we talk it through right now or can I

help you hug yourself as a consolation?

She then tells me she gets made at what she sees.

No one has leter know how much we treasure her

how lovable and huggable she is

even when she hugs herself with down-headed anger

And I just look her in her eyes

so that she sees these words on mine

visualizing them neatly way out of her uncle’s tongue.

By James Palombo

More food for thought…

In this month’s edition I want to reference several articles that appeared in the news over the past few weeks. Although each one stands on its own relative to the issues raised — some interesting things are going on these days — they are indeed interconnected, and also tied to concerns noted in my previous columns. The following piece then presents this interwoven review, hopefully demonstrating the practical significance of what was previously presented for your reading. I trust this will be of value in advancing thought on our ever changing American experiment, but as always, I’ll let you be the judge.

The first article, “The new mortgage revolution: walk away” by Alyssa Katz. (www.housingwatch.com/2010/01/25) succinctly captures the essence of the “strategic default” phenomenon. In general, this strategy suggests to those who owe more on their mortgage than their property is worth to simply pack-up and move on. As Ms. Katz points out throughout the piece, there are a variety of elements that have been offered in support of the idea:  the actions of the big real-estate developers seem to reflect it, i.e., they do it all the time; real-estate agents feel this might re-invigorate a sluggish market with “short” re-sales; a number of interest  groups  propose that large scale defaults will be a revolution of sorts, justified in addressing a system that allowed the banks to screw the lender in the first place; that default, in such hard economic times, will not really effect what  future borrowing may be like; and defaulting on the mortgage will actually free up money which can be spent on/put into the market for other items.

Ms. Katz’s also quotes Connecticut Realtor Minna Reid who said “I know many will consider strategic default wrong or immoral, but as for me, I stopped passing judgment long ago.” And this seems to mirror the sentiments of many who are involved with the process.

Being perfectly honest, I can appreciate how one could arrive at such a feeling — almost all the logic tied to it makes economic and self-interest sense. And in terms of any moral or ethical questions, or the idea that two wrongs really don’t make a right, well, in short, and especially given today’s moral climate, one could easily say, “give me a break.”

Yet, it just doesn’t seem right to leave it at that. In other words, there should be more to consider. For example, one might want to know to what extent the cynical, morally callous attitude displayed in terms of the “strategic default” strategy is reflective of the overall nature of the instincts developed in our society? And how did these “instincts” become so prevalent?  I mean have we always just been this way?  Or is this type behavior part of a larger phenomenon, one that is affecting the changing cultural instincts of our entire country? Is it in fact tied to the same instincts that fueled the financial crisis itself?

Clearly, if there is more to all of this than human nature, and there surely must be, then we must inquire as to what has been motivating such behavior — behavior that makes America appear at odds with its own democratically principled identity? I think you would agree that although the answer includes elements of our nature, it has to also include elements connected to the environment in which we live. And to this point relates one that I have stressed to some length in previous columns — that in order to understand things like “strategic default”, or the financial crisis, or all the other economic aspects that tip the scale of our perceived morality, we must consider the effects of living in our advanced system of capitalism. Without this, it is hard to understand that beyond pure human greed, there are things at work which may be pushing us to act in ways that seem inconsistent with the principles we want to lay claim to, principles that seem to be slipping away from us as we speak.

It is no secret that we’ve reached a form of economic rationalization, where it becomes more likely that when the dollar versus morality decisions come due, the scales of choice will tip more and more in favor of the dollar. How far this will go, well, who knows? As the articles previously presented imply, however, this appears to be a situation we seem to be looking away from rather than into. And certainly this doesn’t bode well for rectifying the serious problems at hand.

In speaking of the “dollar tipping the scales” theme, the next article references similar considerations relative to our “scale of justice.”  In his piece, “No-dollars-barred campaigns” the Washington Post’s David Broder highlights the Supreme Court holding in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. In short the decision provides corporations the opportunity to spend unlimited resources on election campaigns. For the most part (legal decisions are never easy to relay to  “lay public”), Broder expressed the inherent worry related to this decision — that it could well result in an even more money/profit tilted process than we currently see in action. In this sense, he offers the dissenting opinion of Justice John Paul Stevens who along with three of his colleagues objected to the decision, saying that it confronts “the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self-government since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate engineering since the days of Theodore Roosevelt. It is a strange time to repudiate that common sense.”

I certainly have no objection to Mr. Broder’s approach, or to the dissenting opinion offered by the Court — that unfettered capitalism does not work well at any level, particularly in relation to the political principles tied to the nature of democracy, and it does certainly seem like a “strange time” to take this course of action. (Could there ever be such a time?)

But in order to fully grasp the nature of this decision, wouldn’t it seem necessary that the reader/the public have adequate knowledge of the political and economic principles tied to this decision? In this sense, wouldn’t having information as to the Conservative/Republican nature of this decision, as well as how such a Conservative/Republican dominated court came to be, be important? And shouldn’t the public also have adequate knowledge of how things might be different in regards to a Liberal/Democrat decision, and what a “stacked” Liberal/Democrat Court might result in? Moreover, shouldn’t the public also have an adequate understanding of how both these political parties, as well as the governmental processes themselves (including the judicial, executive, and legislative branches) are affected by the nature of the capitalist/profit driven system in which we live? In other words, regardless of what political party is in power, can we ever attach to the principles related to democracy and self-government as long as the capitalist system goes on without real notice and/or understanding and/or altering?

Once again, and like with idea of “strategic default” these type questions as well as their answers would seem to be required ingredients in making any informed rationalization as to what has been happening relative to such significant considerations.  And I think that as you listen, read and watch what is going on, you would have to agree, no? (As a little side note, how would it be to see corporate logos worn by those in government? One can imagine the result, although it would seem that corporations wouldn’t really want to overtly place their tags/identity on the foolishness that would ensue — things may well be better just as they are.)

The last article of note “Google negotiating ways to keep its presence in China” was syndicated by the Associate Press. In essence, the article references the struggle involved as Google’s interest in the enormous potential of the Chinese market, i.e., profit, meets with interpretations of the Chinese government in terms of the “free-flow” of information, i.e., principle. In other words (and like with issues pertinent to human rights interpretations and profit), what should a corporation do? After all, any political censorship should not be tolerated in relationship to the principle of free-speech – isn’t that what we Americans stand for? Yet, the market is just so immense, and, well, isn’t that what we stand for?

There is no doubt that Google will reach some form of compromise, which will most likely be formed in the context of it being mutually beneficial to both countries. However, the situation itself is indicative of not only the ongoing struggle of principle versus the dollar, and the cultural instincts developed within the context of  a corporate/market milieu, but also with the issues that were raised in the November column regarding my experience at the G-20 in Pittsburgh PA, particularly the reference to what was described as the on-going struggle between western and eastern capitalism.

In other words, one can see that what is developing with the “Google and China story” speaks to this contest of western versus eastern interpretations of economic, political and social policy. Moreover, it demonstrates the power of China to strongly influence and even dictate policy in terms of its burgeoning producer and consumer market, as well as its nexus to other developing countries. This is so irrespective of technology innovations or anything else that western corporations bring to the table.

With all this being said, the fact remains that to understand today’s international strategies and policy decisions, an understanding of the process of capitalism is a must. And in recognition that the world is clearly at our doorstep, we must ask if we are doing enough to actually make this happen.

* * *

I think it’s clear that most of what is happening in and around the American experiment demands particular attention to how we manage our political, economic and social selves. And it only makes practical sense to include our ties to the nature of capitalism. To this end, I would encourage you to ask your favorite columnist about his/her thoughts on the matter.  I imagine you would like to know what they might say, and I would certainly be interested in their response as well.

Jim Palombo, Editor

Food for thought from our readers

In the previous articles I’ve written for Ragazine, I’ve focused primarily on the concept of capitalism.  Via reports on the G-20, I documented its significance in terms of understanding what is happening with the rest of the world, and in particular with China. It has become quite clear that as the rest of the world struggles with the tenets of capitalism, we should at least have a grasp of what that struggle entails.  In another article, I reviewed further why I think we should come to a better understanding of how capitalism works, in particular its effect on our own political and social processes. In this sense, a discussion was presented noting the dangers tied to our citizenry’s lack of having an “informed consent,” and a course of action that might alleviate this problematic situation.  

The approach frequently evokes negative feedback. Almost to the letter, this feedback suggests I must be some type of socialist or communist to be presenting material prompting discussion on America as a capitalist country. It seems a good number of people find this type of dialogue, which is not the more typical one attached to democracy, offensive.

Actually, I find this criticism more supportive of my “we need to better understand capitalist America” position than not. This is so in that the bulk of our public quickly admits to the economically driven elements tied to their daily lives, (consider work/jobs (or lack thereof), tv, media, family situations, politics, etc.), but find a discussion tied to analyzing this fact alien. In other words, they feel/sense/see what is going on, but they not been encouraged to discuss why it’s so – a curious and dangerous situation, indeed. Moreover, asking that we come to understand the nature of capitalism – again a major piece of our own complex puzzle – really has nothing to do with being a communist or socialist. It references nothing more than a person interested in having a better educated and more informed America society.

This being said, what follows are two pieces I received in support of what I’ve been writing. The first is from a gentleman named Peter Wilcox, whose current home is in Scottsdale, Arizona. He is a world-traveled businessman who has come to feel that America may be losing its soul. The second is from a retired engineer, Fredric Fitzgerald, who maintains the hope that through well designed and serious dialogue, we can revitalize our American experiment.

I trust you will find both pieces of interest. In addition, I hope their reading will encourage you to submit your own thoughts that speak to a better understanding of the serious problems we face.

Re-Visiting the “Gilded Age” –  Peter Wilcox

Having traveled the world extensively, I’ve had the opportunity to discuss our country’s rising inequality and distribution of income with many foreigners. And they often express dismay over how apathetic Americans are toward this obvious growth in disparity regarding the incomes and lifestyles of the rich and poor.

Over the past fifty years, there have been a variety of statistical analyses that point to the very small percentage of people who control the overall wealth of our nation. This is not just relative to income, but to the total assets accrued year in and year out. This of course does not bode well for a society’s welfare, especially when that society purports to be one focused on equality.

Foreigners see this and respond that surely a country with such a skewed income distribution cannot be better than a country where there is more parity. So why don’t Americans feel more alarm?

A big part of the reason is that Americans don’t know what is going on. They are misinformed, rely more on opinion, are too self absorbed, or simply have become immune to caring about what they think they can’t control. At the same time, our culture seems to cling to core beliefs and attitudes about a future that will always be better, in spite of what we see and feel happening to the contrary.

It appears that instead of moving forward, instead of taking stock of who we are and what we do, we again seem to be in an era of robber barons and corrupt political, banking and social processes. And the inequalities we see, well, these may well have become as American as apple pie along the way. It’s a shame, no doubt. But in the end, we will really have only ourselves to blame.

Improving Our System — Fredric Fitzgerald

Our system of democracy and capitalism has allowed some problems to develop. Fortunately, it has levers for making corrections, so let’s hope they get used. Here are some considerations I’ve gathered from a variety of readings and resources. (Not necessarily in order of significance.)

1. Stop promotion of the idea that “growth is good” and adapt to climate change: Current exponential growths of human population, pollution, and the usage of natural resources are not sustainable. The earth cannot support an unlimited number of people, it has a finite capacity to absorb pollution, and its non-renewable resources will run out. We also need to recognize and work at the significance of the altering climate change in the world.
2. Concentrate on Water and Food Issues:  Allow for the increased price of fresh water only to pay for the trillions of dollars need for infrastructure and conservation purposes; establish world-wide food growing and distribution strategies. We must focus on these areas, as shortages, which already exist in some areas, cannot be allowed to continue to develop.
3. Implement policies that the poor see as just and implement universal health care: Work at the continually growing gap between the rich and the poor. Progressive taxation will provide funds to support the disadvantaged, as this is part of a fair and equal society. These funds must be limited to work/education incentives and community investments. Progressive taxing will also discourage the accumulation of huge family fortunes unearned by succeeding generations. And health care coverage must be extended to all, especially given our interests in a free, fair and equal America.
4. Require corporations to contribute 50% of their local profits to the local poor: Equal partnerships must be formed both here and abroad, and corrupt/imperialistic type bribes of leaders must stop
5. Acknowledge our addiction to oil and its impact on our relations with the Middle East: Currently, we cannot get along without oil and we need to be honest about our policies and adjust them accordingly.
6.  Drop our role as “world cop,” shrink our “military-industrial complex” and shift our emphasis away from a war on Islamic terrorism:  There are too many areas we should not/cannot be militarily involved with, so we need to better embrace our diplomacy, and not necessarily through only trade. We must not be reluctant to talk to adversaries without preconditions. We should cut back on the development and stockpiling of all weapons, which only stimulates reaction to the notion of our imperialism. And educating our people to differences and difficulties with others is the most prosperous way to avoid conflict.
7. Educate the public to understand the nature of capitalism: Capitalism has a flaw in that it promotes human greed, materialism and competitive conflict. We need to develop an educational process, perhaps a series of courses, that will fully inform us all on what a capitalistic system is, and what restraints we can apply to help it work more for our benefit.
8. Restrain the anti-democracy efforts of big business and financial organizations that benefit only the profits of the shareholders; shift our emphasis from bailing out Wall Street to providing work/jobs; limit executive salaries to a peak of 25 times the average worker: We cannot tolerate the expanse of business at the expense of our public welfare. In this sense we must seriously consider all possibilities of curbing the corporate appetite while making our system more equitably balanced. One area that needs to be immediately addressed is the limitation of campaign and lobbying funds which have served to skew our pursuit of common interest government.
9. Stop the degradation of the social connections necessary for democracy to flourish: It must become a mandate to alter the course of our seemingly undereducated and complacent society, a very dangerous situation. This can be addressed by encouraging things like; a. better civic education, b. meaningful community service, c. networks that bridge racial, social, religious and geographic differences, d. integrating pedestrian friendly living and working areas, e. citizen discussions and debates, f. art and cultural activities.
10.  Challenge the reigning ideological system and, using all our technological and social abilities, seek to create constructive alternatives of thought and action with both our public and within our institutions: There are many issues confronting us which will require examining alternative methods of government as well as economic, political and social planning. We cannot eliminate consideration of these methods simply based on ideological differences, nor on profit motive, nor on merely public opinion, nor on the need to obtain a vote. This may take a “new will,” but we have demonstrated in the past that this is not something we cannot generate.   

As you have read, both articles contain some definite “food for thought.” Mr. Wilcox has captured an image that most Americans sense – we seem to be at odds with our own ideals. Mr. Fitzgerald has pointed out some specific areas of concern – there is plenty of work to do and serious times ahead.  In putting these two pieces together, it makes sense that we must be willing to make some significant changes to alter what we see happening around us. Said another way – we cannot continue to do “business as usual.” Unfortunately, even following the great hope tied to President Obama’s election, we don’t seem to be doing what we need to do. And I’ll add that harkening back to an earlier day – as his opposition often does –  in the sense that life was simple and ideals were clear and close at hand, is not the answer. Aside from the fact that these “simple and clear” days never really existed, especially for those living them, we cannot exist in the past while trying to deal with the present and the future. Although history is important, things have changed, our cultural instincts from generation to generation have changed, technology has changed, world power has changed – it’s not a world to be lost in the past.

So, the hope is that we get to consider all these things (and more) as time move on – that we continue to challenge ourselves in the way that we must. It’s a mandate we cannot ignore. In this context, I hope you won’t hesitate to send in your comments or an article for consideration – offering your own “food for thought,” if you will. In the meantime, and until next edition’s piece, be safe, keep thinking and stay involved.

On Considering Capitalism… 

In my last report “The G-20 in Retrospect,” I discussed to some degree the development of what can be considered “eastern capitalism”, with China as its champion, as compared to “western capitalism” with the United States at its helm. In ensuing discussions with people who read the article, questions surfaced as to what capitalism actually is, and how one system could be so markedly different from another. Obviously these were fair questions, and neither is easy to answer in brief discourse. As I stated to the questioners, clear and concise responses may well require, at a minimum, a semester’s worth of discussion.

In the nature of the questions however, there is contained a very significant point which does not take as long a time to relay. It is a point in fact that I’ve been referencing for most of my professional career – some thirty years – in both academic and social service work. In short, our public is woefully ill-equipped in terms of understanding the nature of capitalism.  Additionally, we are woefully ill-equipped in terms of understanding our political and economic history relative to the notion of capitalism, especially as it was commingled with the advent of democracy.  And, we are also sadly in arrears in terms of understanding the basic tenets of both liberal and conservative political platforms and their respective ties to both democracy and capitalism. (Just think of your own education in terms of garnering an understanding of political and economic America.)

In consideration of my position, I am offering two pieces. The first, “Informed Consent,” is a   commentary on the nature of the “not understanding capitalism” problem. The second, I’ve termed “In continuance…” and it references points from the conclusion of my most recent book, Criminal to Critic-Reflections Amid The American Experiment. (Rowman and Littlefield Publishers).  Together, I hope these will serve to highlight a very serious situation, as well as what might be done to address it. With this in mind, please read on, and as always feel free to offer your own thoughts accordingly.

Informed Consent                                                                                                                                                 

(This piece was written in light of the “new hope” tied to the objectives of the Obama administration, and before the current economic crisis.)                                         

In this morning’s paper I again read a piece referencing Barak Obama as a socialist. As I often do, I shook my head in dismay. This is not because I necessarily agree that he is or isn’t. Rather, it is because I know that most Americans have little understanding of what this actually means. This realization comes after  twenty plus years in the post-secondary arena, addressing countless students at both undergraduate and graduate levels, and after hundreds of discussions with both public officials and private citizens. Said another way, it has become very clear that when it comes to understanding the principles tied to the concepts of socialism, communism, democracy and especially capitalism (after all, this is our American system) we are in a civic information/education depression. In fact, amid our economic and war concerns, this depression may indeed be our most drastic problem.

If one begins to consider this “non-understanding” situation it is not hard to imagine rather disturbing results. Simply put, in confronting both our national and international concerns, we cannot have a legitimate grasp of our current concerns nor our future options – we are to a great extent “in the dark.”

In terms of our national concerns like unemployment, the housing crisis, income disparities, crime, taxation and government regulation, if our citizenry is unable to measure these problems against a legitimate frame of analysis, then little could be expected in terms of addressing them.  Relative to our international concerns, imagine trying to comprehend and/or compare what those in Europe, the Middle East or China are doing if we don’t understand the political and economic structures under which they live. And how can it be possible for us to examine and justify our foreign and military strategies without this understanding? (Consider that this gap in understanding can also lead to all types of political chicanery – where politicians simply pander to public emotions, create half-truths and lies, and do or say anything to attract a vote. Certainly, the sense of this happening would simply make trusting our political processes and our government and the import of the vote all that more difficult.)

There may be a solution, a way “into the light” if you will. Given that the educational system has most of our population captured for a good number of years, it could be in that arena where we can develop a more comprehensive framework from which people can better understand and discuss political and economic America. We’ve done this with technological skills; why not with citizenship skills?  All we need is some help to make this happen.

Thomas Jefferson, in addressing the mandates of government, once said: “… Educate and inform the whole mass of people. Enable them to see that it is in their interest to preserve peace and order, and they will preserve them. They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.”  It’s a tall order indeed — asking those in government to act on behalf of the people, not for the party, nor for the profit. But given our current state of affairs, it’s something we cannot avoid undertaking.  So let’s try and hold our leadership to the possibility.

In continuance…                                                 

As an example of how this might work, consider this. In elementary schools, children could be introduced to concepts developed by educators that better equip youngsters to think about issues of freedom and equality. This would be done (and is being done in some select areas) in the context of helping young people understand who they are and how they might relate to other people. As these youngsters passed on to their higher grades, they could then be engaged in discussions related to liberal and conservative politics and the concerns of democracy and capitalism.

The idea would be that as they developed a dialogue pointed in this direction – understanding social, political and economic America – individuals completing secondary school would have a more solid sense of what we can do in the country  and who might be legitimate candidates come voting time.

We could then continue this focused dialogue as individuals proceeded on to post-secondary processes. It seems it would not be difficult to implement mandated courses, perhaps a one credit course at the beginning of every year of college, where students integrated social, political and economic issues with the idea of fueling (or re-fueling) an ongoing and continually developing dialogue related to American citizenship.

We could also develop a similar process for the general community, holding adult classes and/or seminars for the same purposes, perhaps several times in the year, allowing for paid time to be taken from work to attend. (Some corporate responsibility perhaps?)

In toto, these processes would help develop dialogue between parents and children, students and non-students, over national concerns, helping everyone to learn together.

Finally, we could draw on those in the political and economic arenas who, even with their other interests, recognize the importance of an informed public. These individuals would have little trouble acknowledging the tremendous social energy it has taken to survive this far, and they should be willing to help with the efforts needed to carry this energy into the future. And in helping to create a new dialogue, these individuals will even have the chance to demonstrate a new form of leadership, a form hard to attach to in the country today.

In closing, consider that we have sent people to the moon and beyond, something only several generations ago seemed as far from possible as reaching the stars themselves. We have seen other tremendous advancements in technology which continue to take us beyond our imaginations. In this light, its seems hard to believe that we cannot figure out ways to come to a better understanding of America, that we cannot create a dialogue about who we are and where we are going. Rather than being seen as too difficult or impossible, this should be, in the interests of our national and international selves, our most important mandate.

 **************************

Just to note – Given what is said above, and in keeping with the notion of being actively involved with ideas, I have been attempting to organize a “symposium on capitalism.” In brief, this would be a non-partisan, two or three day conference with individuals invited from academia, social service, government, business, media, entertainment and the general public. The focus would be to: call attention to the concept of capitalism; create some viable plans to better educate the public – including developing research projects across disciplines and universities to study related issues; have a few commentaries or songs written and/or perhaps a film done relative to what this all may mean. In this context, I have reached out to many famous and not-so-famous people for assistance. And although nothing as yet has materialized, the networking continues. Certainly, if you find the idea of merit, feel free to join in with the effort.

G-20 in Retrospect

 In the last edition of ragazine.cc, I provided some comment in anticipation of traveling to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for the G-20 summit. Having participated in the proceedings, in both summit and demonstration venues, here’s my follow-up. As always, feel free to comment or add your insights accordingly.

 The scale of the G-20 mandate

Clearly, building a sustainable global recovery amid the financial crisis that has both stunned the world and stunted its processes, seems a daunting and enormous undertaking. In fact, whether or not this could actually happen, particularly with any sense of urgency, and especially given the historical, political, social and religious differences among the countries represented at the G-20, seems open to question. After all, given the differences, particularly as they are intricately tied to the essence of economically motivated interests, well, it’s not hard to imagine the chore at hand.

In any event, the mandate of the G-20 has been directed at precisely this effort. Importantly, the major theme that has been integrated into the process is that business can no longer continue in its current form. Said another way, “business as usual” cannot coexist with the change needed in how the economic/financial/market systems are being run. What exactly “changing the system” means, and to what extent it’s possible in terms of regulation, de-regulation, and/or system “policing,” seems to remain in the balance of the G-20 considerations.

As a follow-up to the earlier Summit in London, what happened in Pittsburgh centered primarily around these issues: restructuring global financial institutions;  preserving, restoring and protecting trade investments; securing food and agricultural growth;  protecting the climate and the environment; and reinforcing the prosperity and health of the citizens of both developed and developing countries. Of course, this meant that the details, data and designs relative to each issue were expected to be sorted through, with some consensus among the countries – again, amid all the ‘differences’ referenced above – expected. It also meant that these negotiations would be happening under the growing threat of terrorism and war, two concerns underscored by the discovery of an Iranian nuclear plant the second day of the Summit.           

Although much could be said pertinent to the vast amount of economic variables tied to the G-20 proceedings, and/or on what each country must do to bring about global financial change, and/or on the intricacies of organizations like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, The World Trade Organization, The Financial Stability Board or the International Finance Corporation, I will leave this to others, those with perhaps more expertise. Instead, what I would like to reference is more in tune with what stood out to me as I moved about the Summit, talking with people and listening to the briefings and interviews that were happening throughout the two days of the meeting.  I would suggest that you can certainly follow-up on the wide variety of elements tied to the Summit should you so desire, particularly given the amount of material that is being produced from it.  Along these lines, the closing speech of the Summit printed ‘on-line’ is a start. It certainly provides more on the expanse of variables set upon the international community’s table.

Observations amid the G-20

I

On the logistical and organizational aspects of the Summit:  Aside from the enormity of the mandate of the G-20, these were the first things that struck me.  I’m not sure that any of it could have been done another way, but it seemed the cost and resources attached to bringing in the delegates, making the huge David Lawrence center operational for media, G-20 participants and the security personnel (there was a large number of security people inside the facility, intermingled with the 2000 media individuals and G-20 participants), and securing the city with some 4,000 police and military personnel had to be enormous. Placed up against the global financial crisis itself, it wasn’t hard to understand the criticism that the Summit seemed symbolic of how resources, certainly needed elsewhere, can be wasted. The staging of the entire event also did little to support the aforementioned theme that the G-20 would not be about “business as usual.”

II

On security:  The armed police and military personnel, both in full battle gear, stationed at various checkpoints throughout the city roads and bridges or often passing in the streets in small bands of ten or twenty, the police boats in the river waters, the barricades, the wire and fencing, and the closing down of many of the streets, made the city look like a military zone. It reminded me of a smaller version of Zagreb where I had been during the early ‘90s, amid the Bosnian conflict. Many of the residents from Pittsburgh whom I chatted with felt this whole process was too much, and it served more to close off their city to visitors than anything else –  not a good thing for Pittsburgh overall. Again, I’m not sure of the alternative, nor were those I spoke with, particularly given the potential for serious problems. Nonetheless, it was a bit eerie in the street. 

                                                                       III

On the demonstrators/protesters/opposition:  Obviously, as had been made clear at every “G” event across the world, the opposition represents an important part of the proceedings. The argument that what is raised by the opposition is as important in the G-20 proceedings as anything else certainly has some credence. In this sense, I suggested the idea that it would behoove those who organize the Summit to invite delegates from the demonstration/protest/opposition side to the proceedings. This would serve to get that side involved in a participatory process, help diffuse their sense of alienation, and allow for G-20 participants to interact with them. I’m not sure of the idea’s future, but it did draw a few encouraging nods. In any event, as someone concerned with all aspects of the G-20 (and the problems in the world), I did my best to stay informed on the agenda of the G-20 opposition.

     I attended several meetings sponsored by the Thomas Merton Center, which helped framed the objections and assisted with the organizing of the various demonstrations and the march on the most significant day of the Summit. I participated in the march, albeit only for a short part of the walk. There were not a large number of people in the march, about on scale with Pittsburgh, and it was well-organized, peaceful and meaningful. It is interesting to note that although most of the people had been at the issues for years and/or decades, they had varying views on the G-20 itself. The views seemed to hinge on interpretations of capitalism:  whether capitalism needed to be completely done away with, or altered to a form where its application would be more socially acceptable.

     For many then, their opposition was pointed at the problems they felt were part of the main G-20 players’ own doing. In other words, the problems connected to war, poverty, unemployment, poor health care, and the environment remain tied to the same capitalist processes that the G-20 players actually support. For these protesters then, the G-20 was a sham, representing nothing more than “business as usual.” It could not speak to the issues in ways that would really satisfy the problems, as the G-20 members were more a part of the problem, rather than the solution.           

     For others, however, the G-20 itself was a valuable concept. Bringing decision makers from all over the world together over the economic crisis was of significant import. However, for these protesters, the countries participating needed to focus more on the social problems existent in the world, over and above stimulating economies for economic growth. In other words, their protest seemed directed at altering the current mode of capitalism with more with more significant emphasis on social concerns than the G-20 seemed to be giving.

     For others, there was also a concern that the social problems were not be adequately prioritized, but this was tied to the fact that the G-20 was leaving out the less developed countries in their proceedings. For them, both developed and undeveloped countries needed to be involved in the proceedings, and the lack of this happening represented the lack of concern for the depth of the social problems at hand. In this sense, pushing for the inclusion of the undeveloped countries would in turn bring about more concern for the social ills plaguing many of the world’s economies. (I spoke with two of these “include more countries and more issues protestors” who were inside the G-20. They were from London and seemed to take on a more professional approach both with their attire and demeanor than the protestors in the street. One of them said that their network of protesting in Europe was more sophisticated than what had been organized in Pittsburgh, and they thought their points at this venue could be better tended to by handing out flyers within the G-20 and talking with people. I’m not sure to what extent they were effective, or whether I personally liked them, but their presence did lend support to the idea of officially including the “opposition” in the G-20 proceedings.)

      In sum, much of what I saw and heard reminded me of the issues and actions tied to the civil rights movement in the ‘60s, and the callings of people like Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. From the concerns of violence and non-violence, to the logistical planning, to the difficulty of getting permits to organize the demonstrations, to the energy over the issues themselves, it was  inspiring to see the tradition of protest remaining active and worthwhile. As conditions in the world demonstrate, the struggle between our economic and social mandates continues, and there is more than enough room for improvement. Clearly there needs to be as many voices heard as possible in untangling what our collective future holds.   

IV

On the content of discussion, briefings and conversations:  “Capital, capital, capital” was how one French diplomat put it as I listened to his interview with Reuters news.  And that seemed to sum up much of what the G-20 was about. Debates on whether to continue with stimulation, how much would be enough, who should control the flow, who should get what and under what conditions, and when to exit from that type strategy, dominated the discussions. Like that same Frenchman said, “the devil is in the details.” And of course, this pointed to the intricate work involved at the G-20 proceedings.

     The Frenchman’s statement was applicable to another theme I found not quite missing, but not highlighted as much as its significance would merit. In short, the devil of the proceedings existed not really, or not only, in the details, but also at a more macro level concern – the ideological struggle that seemed to hang over the entire G-20 process. It is a struggle that could be referenced as a contest between established western capitalism, a system dominated by U.S. interests, and eastern capitalism, one being developed with China at its center. Importantly, the existence of such a struggle makes compromise and/or agreement within the G-20 proceedings appear on shaky ground. (I could only surmise that this is why, at least for public consumption, so little consideration was given to this point.)

     In essence, it is fair to ask to what extent China, with the most rapidly growing power in the world, will immerse itself in the “fixing” of the western, predominantly American version of capitalism, over promoting its own model. As western capitalism is at the center of the economic problems in the world, and with the U.S., its core player, mired in Middle East conflict, it is not difficult to understand the nature of this query. Add to this that China has its eye focused on developing countries, particularly those in Africa, which represent vast numbers of producers and consumers in addition to their own Chinese population. (Consider the Russian and Indian populations in this mix as well.) Again, would they prefer to rely on a model that is in serious jeopardy or promote one consistent with their own interests? (Another intriguing question could be to which wagon, the West or East, might the European Union, which also has its agenda, ultimately tie its horses?)

     My conversations, particularly with several of the Chinese delegates, and ‘listenings,’ including the briefings of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy, did little to dispel the notion that China will do whatever is best for China. Moreover, in the speech of Chinese President H.E. Hu Jintao, it was clear that this is China’s mandate. In addition, Jintao stressed that China considers itself more a developing country than a developed one, particularly since it has been only since the 1970’s that China has shaken off ties to the Russian model it adhered to for several decades.

     It is important to note that this “developing more than developed” line of reasoning opens China’s strategies to those countries generally outside of the G-20. In fact, China has lobbied the G-20 for more countries to be included in the process. In this sense, it is not hard to imagine that China will continue to make investment efforts in the west, but more as a hedge to buttress its own developments in other parts of the world.  (As an example of both their ‘hedging’, as well as their range of power, take into consideration their large investment in America’s Treasury bills.)

    In sum, it is not difficult to argue that China, along with other countries that will benefit accordingly, is tying its hopes for the prosperity of the world to a new model of capitalism, with more of a socialist/communist/populist/Confucian oriented base than has ever been seen. It is a model actually foreign to U.S. political and economic interests, and, moreover, it may be beyond our cultural abilities to understand its properties. In the end of course, this situation serves to pit one system against the other, underscoring the concern of actual long-term, G-20 accord.

     The Chinese delegates I spoke with stressed that China has no real interest in “universalizing” its model, it is more interested in taking care of the needs of China. In that light, I posed the idea that as China moves in the direction of assisting the less developed countries of the world, it will, by logic of the producers and consumers involved, spread its version of capitalism (not necessarily by force or war mind you), while at the same time taking care of itself. This was in fact similar to the course followed by post World War II America, to some degree of success.

     My Chinese discussion-mates found this proposition most interesting. They did respond that I might be applying too much western logic in my image, that it implied a capitalistic, expansionist manipulation not really consistent with Chinese character and sentiment.  As a rejoinder, I noted that current business dealings with the Chinese might indicate otherwise, many see the Chinese business person as ruthless in character. Moreover, I stressed that, given my American heritage, my notions are centered on cultural instincts developed in the most advanced capitalist system in the world, and that they should not be easily dismissed by others moving more toward capitalism. After all, Americans had the call of democracy in their hearts at the country’s inception. Yet, given the situation in today’s world, this is often hard to recall. With these points in mind, they found my ‘expansionist’ proposition more worthy of consideration.

     It was important to emphasize that none of my questioning or proposing was directed at the value of what China may do. In other words, what might be developed by China should not be considered in a negative light. The logic of their policies and their concern for developing a more socially sophisticated model than what the west has produced might be a positive – the world may be a better place for what ensues. Even in light of the human rights and environmental concerns in China this might eventually be the case. (The Chinese, particularly in the context of their being a “developing country,” like to remind Americans of their own struggle with these issues throughout the 20^th century.)  But one could imagine that for many in the U.S., this would not be the feeling. They may see any move toward another way of doing business as an assault on America’s political and economic domain, a threat to our existing power. And this again frames a major concern relative to the success of the overall G-20 proceedings. (As an addendum to this concern, consider the international currency-modification discussions engaged in by countries like China, Russia and Brazil, as well as the advance of an Islamic financial model as an alternative to what is currently in use. The context of these considerations, with the devaluing of the predominantly American dollar exchange in sight, also points to issues centered on the balance of power in the world. This too has a significant bearing on the nature of G-20 outcomes.)

* * *

AT END: For the most part, this is what I took away from the G-20. It was interesting and informative on every level, and as you can tell, the West versus East notion seemed most intriguing to me. I would offer that all of us, across all countries and populations, need to know more about each other. No one can argue that a better grasp of how the world works is essential for our collective future. Let’s hope we never lose sight of this, and that we continue to grow accordingly.

Jim Palombo can be contacted at ragazine.politics@gmail.com

Preparations for the G-20 Pittsburgh Summit began right after the London Summit ended in April. Here is the full transcript of the Leader’s Statement as it was presented September 24-25, 2009.  ragazine.cc politics editor Jim Palombo attended the summit and will be filing a report shortly. Come back to see for his impressions of what got done, what didn’t, and whether or not the delegates’ actions met expectations.