MEDIA ROOTS — Abby Martin raises the important question, in the finest spirit of Nina Simone, of an artist’s duty toward humanity. Here, she showcases some of her political artwork and explains art’s importance in reflecting the zeitgeist of today’s society. 

MR

***

Abby Martin on an Artist’s Duty

***

MEDIA ROOTS — “Both parties have conspired to bring us disaster,” says Professor William K. Black, a leading white collar criminologist, who also teaches economics and law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. “This has strangled the recovery and may even put the economy back into recession.”  Professor Black gives a crucial recap of Obama’s (and both Democrats’ and Republicans’) recent history of assaults against the working-class, also known as austerity.

This “act of austerity is insane, self-destructive, [and] might well cause another recession,” says Prof. Black. “Neither party is getting behind a clean bill. It would be, literally, one sentence: The sequestration provisions are repealed.”

With the fast-paced 24-hour soundbite news cycle dominating attention spans, it’s beneficial to take a step back and scope the bigger picture.  Professor Black masterfully articulates the truth behind the two-party budget cuts at home coupled with war spending abroad.

Messina

*** 

Prof. Bill Black: Both parties have conspired to bring us a disaster; Obama’s sequestration plan gives cuts without blame

***

REAL NEWS NETWORK — “Welcome back to the Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay in Baltimore. And welcome to this week’s edition of The Bill Black Financial and Fraud Report. [Professor] Black now joins us from Kansas City, Missouri. Bill’s an Associate Professor of Economics & Law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. He’s a white-collar criminologist, a former financial regulator. He is the author of the book, The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One. Thanks for joining us, Bill.”

Professor Bill Black:  “Thank you.”

Paul Jay (c. 0:33):  “So, the sequestration cuts and drama, what do you make of it?”

Professor Bill Black:  “So, both parties have conspired to bring us disaster. In this case, sequester is the fourth shoe to drop in austerity. And, collectively, this has strangled the recovery and may even put the U.S. economy back into recession.

“So, the first major act was in mid-2011 when they reached this budget deal, that created the sequestration. And the budget deal, in itself, caused over a billion dollars in spending cuts at the worst possible time.”

Paul Jay (c. 1:15):  “So, just to remind everybody, the sequestration formula deal was a proposal by President Obama.”

Professor Black:  “Well indeed, it was created by President Obama, now, under, of course, Republican pressure, where they’re threatening to not raise the debt ceiling. But it was an Obama idea. And the principal framer of it was Jacob Lew, the President’s selection to be Geithner’s replacement as disastrous Treasury Secretary.

“And then the President blocked a Republican effort to get rid of sequestration. And then the President went so far as to threaten a veto any bill, that got rid of sequestration when the Republicans tried to get rid of it again.

“Now, you shouldn’t think too well of the Republicans in all of this. What they were worried about, pretty much solely, was defence spending. And making sure there’d never be a drop in defence spending.

“In any event, what you see is neither party, even at this time of crisis, where all the supposedly serious people finally agree that this act of austerity is insane, self-destructive, might well cause a recession. Neither party is getting behind a clean bill. It would be, literally, one sentence: The sequestration provisions are repealed. Right? And we could be free of, at least, that aspect of the insanity. We’d still have the debt ceiling insanity. But the sequestration, we would no longer be shooting ourselves, not in the foot, but substantially farther up our anatomy.

“So, as I said, the sequestration is large, but it’s not the sequestration all by itself. It’s the fact that it is this fourth act austerity. I began to mention the mid-2011 pact knocked off a billion dollars in spending at the worst possible time.

“Then we raised taxes on the wealthy, which you may well support, but it is an act, that pushes you towards austerity.

“And then the far larger and vastly more destructive resuming the entire payroll tax on Social Security, which economists think—all by itself—knocked a half percentage point off of growth. And growth is really small, so that’s a massively important thing, that is gonna cost hundreds of thousands of people their jobs.

“And, now, the fourth shoe to drop of austerity, of course, is going to be the sequestration.

“And, meanwhile, this is happening while we see Europe forced back into a completely gratuitous recession. The entire Eurozone, on average, is back in recession. And the European Commissions have just come out with dreadful projections, saying things are going to get worse.

“Spain just announced today that a single bank that they were bailing out—which is really seven failed thrift-type entities—is going to cost them roughly $25 Billion dollars just this year. And Spain’s a large economy, but nowhere close to the United States.

“So, this is bigger, by far, than the most expensive US banking failure in history, all occurring in Spain, all being driven by the bubble and fraud and then this self-inflicted wound of austerity.

“And we can’t even get the President, who, you know, on day one will say, the sequestration disaster [is] insane.

“And on day two refuses to put forward a clean bill to stop it.

“And, on day three, says, hey, that Jake Lew, the guy, that created this disastrous scenario, that is going to, potentially, hurl us back into a recession. He should be our Treasury Secretary and create our financial policies.”

Paul Jay:  “So, when you read the business press, some of the stories are about how blasé Wall Street is and corporate America is. And they’re not very concerned with $85 Billion dollars of cuts. And the stock market’s doing fine. It does not seem to be affected by it. Why is that, if the threat of recession is looming?”

Professor Black (c. 5:53):  “Well, recession isn’t necessarily bad for the stock market. We’ve had a record recovery in stock market prices with extremely weak recovery from the Great Recession because it’s been strangled.

“So, they love the current system, in which wages have not simply plateaud, household wealth for the middle class is down to where it was 18 years ago. There’s over a 15% of loss of wealth of the middle class and working-class and a massive increase in corporate profitability where we get all these productivity gains, which is what allows you to pay workers higher wages without any inflationary risk. And virtually all of those productivity gains during the Great Recession have gone to the richest—not 1%—but the richest one-thousandth of 1%.”

Paul Jay (c. 6:54):  “Thanks very much for joining us, Bill. And thank you for joining us on the Real News Network.”

***

Transcript by Felipe Messina for Media Roots, New Economic Perspectives, and Real News Network.

fm: Updated 23 MAR 2013 20:39 CST

***

MEDIA ROOTS — The top 1% hold 40% of the nation’s wealth. But the bottom 80% hold only 7% of the nation’s wealth. This infographics video provides an arresting presentation of widening wealth inequality in the USA. It also compares and contrasts our perceptions with actual reality.

A notable segment is a graph showing perfect equality, which is summarily disregarded by our society because it’s labelled socialism. The logic goes that people need protive motive, which means we choose to have socially-stratified classes, where we always have a lower class, an underclass. However, we only hear about the mythologised middle class in our national discourse. This means we idealise having an elite, ruling-class as well, to which we’re supposed to aspire entry.  However, when over-allocated crony capitalists prey on the working-class (which includes the celebrated middle class), we wonder what went wrong. 

Messina

***

***

MEDIA ROOTS — Abby Martin breaks through the veil of establishment myths surrounding the late President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, by highlighting the criticisms and achievements of his 14-year presidency and outlining why he was such a threat to the status quo.  (Transcript included below.)

MR

***

***

Tune in from 6-6:30 or 9-9:30 EST M-F on your local cable station

OR watch live @http://www.RT.com/usa

OR SUBSCRIBE to the official YouTube channel @http://www.youtube.com/BreakingTheSet

LIKE Breaking The Set @http://fb.me/BreakingTheSet

FOLLOW Abby Martin @http://twitter.com/AbbyMartin

***

UPDATED  10 MAR 2013  13:53 CST

Abby Martin:  “Alright, guys.  By now, I’m sure you’ve heard the news of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez passing away.  He lost his two-year battle with cancer on Tuesday, March 5^th, at the young age of 58.  Although he gave a voice to Venezuelan people in a way unlike any other Venezuelan leader, during his 14-year leadership, Chávez was a controversial and polarising figure on the world stage, who was, both, hailed and smeared.

“Now, if you’re looking at the rhetoric from the US establishment, you’re only getting the side of the story, that paints Chavez as a ruthless dictator, a tyrannical socialist, and a madman dead-set on destroying America.  See for yourself.”

FOX NEWS (woman with blonde hair):  “Well, it’s being called the Tour of Tyrants, Iran’s Mahmud Ahmadinejad and Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez making a joint appearance yesterday.  You’re seeing a video that, joking about Iran’s nuclear programme and US anger.”

CBS NEWS (male voice):  “A problem?  It’s coming at the hands of a man the US describes as nothing short of a dictator, Hugo Chávez.” 

Abby Martin:  “Strong words from media organisations, who had already made up their minds about what type of leader Chávez was. 

“So, how is the same establishment press running with the news of his death?  Let’s find out.”

NBC NEWS (woman with blonde hair):  “We move on now to the death of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez who lost his two year battle with cancer on Tuesday.  He was a polarising and outspoken figure.”

FOX NEWS (male voice):  “He referred to the US as the evil empire and famously branded US President George W. Bush as the devil during an address at the United Nations.  And he warned his countrymen frequently of an impending US invasion of Venezuela.”

CBS NEWS (male voice):  “Adding to the tension was Chávez’s long list of dubious friends, like a who’s who of American enemies, from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran, Muammar Gaddafi in Libya, and Iraq’s Saddam Hussein.”

CNN NEWS (male voice):  “The price of his socialist agenda?  Hugo Chávez, himself.  Term limits were abolished.  Even his critics admit he could have gone on winning elections indefinitely.  His biggest failure may be his unilateral success, a legacy of one.  Before his death, critics said Chávez was leading Venezuela in the control of narco-traffickers.”

NBC NEWS (woman with blonde hair) (c. 2:18):  “And this morning US officials are wondering how his passing will impact relations with the oil giant.”

 Abby Martin:  “Yes, of course, the big question:  What’s gonna happen to the oil?  Can you make it anymore obvious?  Look, I’m not gonna sit here and glorify Venezuela or Hugo Chávez, or socialism, for that matter.  In fact, there are many legitimate criticisms to be had.  Take, for example, the heightened rates of violence and censorship and prosecution of political dissidents.

“But you’ll hear the less appealing aspects of Chávez ad nauseum from the corporate press.  So, my job is to tell you what they won’t.  And I’m gonna lift the veil on the most egregious myths said about the Venezuelan president.

(c. 2:59):  “So, let’s get back to the subject of oil.  After all, Venezuela has the largest reserves of crude oil in the western hemisphere.  And the bold move by Chávez to nationalise the nation’s petroleum resources has been one of the biggest points of contention. 

“The seizures of foreign- and corporate-controlled lands in the country, along with the redistribution of wealth amongst the populace are notions, that do not sit well with many.  Unlike other developing nations, that allow multinational corporations to sell off the country’s natural resources, Chávez began to initiate incremental steps, giving the state full control over its oil reserves.

“With these funds, the government was able to instate various programmes of social development, narrowing the country’s wealth disparity and developing Venezuela into a principal player in the international community.

“Despite what you’ve heard about Hugo Chávez, it is undeniable that, under his leadership, the poorest in the country were empowered.

“In 2009, the Center for Economic and Policy Research published a report on Venezuela’s economic expansion.  It highlighted that, under Chávez, the country’s GDP nearly doubled in only five years; extreme poverty was down by 72%; child mortality down by a third.  There was unprecedented access to universal health care.  And college enrolment was on the rise.

(c. 4:20):  “Still, the myth we hear is one of a socialist comandante who manipulated the poor with handouts to gain their loyalty and support.  But, in reality, he helped the poor enormously.  It’s just a fact, that doesn’t bode well with the people supporting corporate domination over the region.

“Another media talking point is that Chávez was a ruthless dictator, who redrafted the Constitution to dissolve term limits to insure his perpetual, tyrannical reign.  Dictator?  Not so much.  Chávez won the seat of President four separate times, often by an overwhelming majority.  The last election, alone, drew over 80% voter turnout.  It was a process that, former US President, Jimmy Carter characterised as being, quote, ‘the best in the world.’

The referendum in question, to dissolve term limits was voted on and passed by over 50% of the people in the country.  So, when it comes to democratic participation, Venezuela puts the US to shame.  You won’t find that kind of enthusiastic voter turnout anywhere in this country.

“Chávez also has been painted as a conspiracy theorist and a loon for his questions of the Bush Administration’s role in 9/11 and for accusing the US of assassination and coup attempts to unseat him.

“But is it really so ludicrous to imagine that scenario, given the CIA’s sordid history of assassinations and coups across Latin America and against leaders, that didn’t quite fall in line with American interests?  In fact, there’s mounting evidence linking the Bush Administration to a 2002 coup, that briefly did oust Chávez.  And officials at the Organisation of American States have said that the US was not only aware of the coup, but that they, in fact, sanctioned the coup.

“By dismissing Chávez as a dictator like the media machine tends to do, we’re ignoring all of these valid points.  That same media machine ignores the impending tyranny in this country, the soft fascism leading to the indefinite detention of US citizens in 12 years of endless war.

“When you look at who Chávez was, lumped in with the likes of Fidel Castro, Muammar Gaddafi, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Saddam Hussein, they share a commonality.  They all opposed the US corporate imperialist take over of the planet. 

“Going forward, keep this in mind:  When a leader is vilified and demonised, it usually signifies they’re a threat to the status quo.  So, regardless of what you’ve heard or what your personal thoughts are about Hugo Chávez, he simply cannot be dismissed as a tyrant because his voice of opposition, and others like him, serves a necessary divide to prevent global corporate enslavement and tyranny.”

***

Transcript by Felipe Messina for Media Roots and Breaking the Set.

***