Argentine Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, elected as the Catholic Church's new Pope, Francis, has greeted crowds in St Peter's Square in Rome.

Appearing on a balcony over the square, he asked the faithful to pray for him. Cheers erupted as he gave a blessing.

The 76-year-old from Buenos Aires is the first Latin American and the first Jesuit to be pontiff.

An hour earlier, white smoke from the Sistine Chapel chimney announced the new Pope's election.

He will be installed officially in an inauguration Mass on Tuesday 19 March, the Vatican said.

Pope Francis replaces Benedict XVI, who resigned last month at the age of 85, saying he was not strong enough to lead the Church.

He has telephoned Benedict and is planning to meet him, a Vatican spokesman said.

Latino

"Habemus Papam Franciscum," was the first tweet by the papal account @pontifex since Benedict stood down last month.

The election was met with thunderous applause at the cathedral in Buenos Aires, Pope Francis' home city.

Throughout Latin America - home to 40% of the world's 1.2 billion Catholics - people reacted with delight and surprise.

"It's a huge gift for all of Latin America. We waited 20 centuries. It was worth the wait," said Jose Antonio Cruz, a Franciscan friar in the Puerto Rican capital San Juan, quoted by the Associated Press.

"Everyone from Canada down to Patagonia is going to feel blessed. This is an event."

US President Barack Obama sent "warm wishes" on behalf of the American people to the newly elected pontiff, hailing the Argentine as "the first pope from the Americas."

Argentina's President Christina Fernandez de Kirchner wished him a "fruitful pastoral mission".

_

BBC

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has passed away at the age of 58 following a two-year fight against cancer and a severe respiratory infection. His untimely demise raises serious questions about the future of the oil-rich Latin American power.

The president of Venezuela died on Tuesday afternoon, Vice President Nicolas Maduro has announced. "It's a moment of deep pain," he said, accompanied by senior ministers.

Foreign Minister Elias Jaua has announced in televised comments that Maduro will assume the interim presidency. Elections are to be held in 30 days, he added.

The country’s military chiefs appeared live on state television to pledge their loyalty to Maduro, whom Chavez had named as his preferred successor.

The national army has been deployed to ensure the Venezuelan people’s sovereignty and security, Venezuelan Minister of Defense Diego Molero said.

Venezuela will observe seven days of mourning after the leader's passing. Thousands of Chavez supporters have taken to the streets across the country to mourn their late president.

The news comes weeks after Chavez returned from Cuba, where he underwent the fourth cancer operation. His 'delicate condition' had recently worsened due to complications from a respiratory infection, with official reports stating he was breathing through a tracheal tube and unable to speak.

Venezuelan opposition leader Henrique Capriles, whom Chavez defeated in last year’s elections, has called for national unity in the wake of the president’s death.

"My solidarity is with the entire family and followers of President Hugo Chavez, we call for Venezuelan unity at this moment," Capriles wrote on Twitter.

"We are not celebrating death"

In the US, crowds of Venezuelan immigrants took to the streets cheering while waving their country’s flag. Dozens of members of the anti-Chavez community took to the streets in Doral, Florida, wearing national colors and chanting “He is gone!”

"We are not celebrating death," Ana San Jorge, a 37-year-old Venezuelan immigrant explained, "We are celebrating the opening of a new door, of hope and change."

There are currently some 190,000 Venezuelan immigrants in the United States.

World class socialist leader

One of the world’s best-known socialist leaders and a staunch critic of the United States, Chavez had been battling the disease for nearly two years, undergoing four surgeries and several sessions of chemotherapy in Havana.

Despite his ailing health, Chavez was reelected in November 2012 to a fourth term. However, he was not able to attend his January 10 inauguration ceremony, which cast doubt on the succession of power in the country. Prior to his death, the Venezuelan opposition called for a new election should Chavez be unfit to take office.

Until his last days Chavez was in touch with the public. His last tweet, published on February 18, read, "I am still clinging to Christ and trust in my doctors and nurses. Ever onward to victory! We will live and overcome!”

_

RT

French socialist Francois Hollande has won a clear victory in the country's presidential election.

Mr Hollande - who polled just under 52% of votes in Sunday's run-off - spoke of his pride at becoming president.

Admitting defeat, centre-right incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy wished "good luck" to Mr Hollande.

Analysts say the vote has wide implications for the whole eurozone. Mr Hollande has vowed to rework a deal on government debt in member countries.

Shortly after polls closed at 20:00 (18:00 GMT), French media published projections based on partial results giving Mr Hollande a lead of almost four points. Turnout was about 80%.

Jubilant Hollande supporters gathered on Place de la Bastille in Paris - a traditional rallying point of the Left - to celebrate.

People drank champagne and chanted: "Sarko, it's over!"

Mr Hollande - the first Socialist to win the French presidency since Francois Mitterrand in the 1980s - gave his victory speech in his stronghold of Tulle in central France.

He said was "proud to have been capable of giving people hope again".

He said he would push ahead with his pledge to refocus EU fiscal efforts from austerity to "growth".

"Europe is watching us, austerity can no longer be the only option," he said.

After his speech in Tulle, Mr Hollande headed to Brive airport on his way to Paris to address supporters at Place de la Bastille. His voice hoarse, he spoke of his pride at taking over the mantle of the presidency 31 years almost to the day since Socialist predecessor Francois Mitterrand was elected.

"I am the president of the youth of France," he told the assembled crowd of tens of thousands of supporters, emphasising his "pride at being president of all the republic's citizens". "You are a movement that is rising up throughout Europe," he said.

Mr Hollande has called for a renegotiation of a hard-won European treaty on budget discipline championed by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Mr Sarkozy.

Mr Hollande's campaign director, Pierre Moscovici, told AFP news agency that Mrs Merkel had congratulated the president-elect by phone, and that the two had agreed to work together on "a strong Franco-German relationship in the interest of Europe".

Mrs Merkel later said she had invited Mr Hollande to come to Berlin soon, AFP reported.

UK Prime Minister David Cameron has also called Mr Hollande to congratulate him.

BBC

Photo: © Matthieu Riegler, CC-BY

Comunicas Radio will be hosted by Juan Perfetti founder of the organization

Comunicas Organization strengthen its communication's channels with Comunicas Radio, a program in the renowned venezuelan radio station: Radio Uno 1340 AM.

The program, will be airs live every Wednesday from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., will be focused to promote and develop popular communication, community participation and freedom of expression. The transmission is also available online through the website of Radio Uno.

Comunicas Radio will be hosted by Juan Perfetti, and its character will be essentially participatory.

To propagate the popular media in the communities of Caracas City (Venezuela), Comunicas have several communication tools like Twitter @comunicas, SMS and phone numbers for each transmission.

The premiere will be on Wednesday, April 18, 2012.

Comunicas Global.- Wednesday 18 January marked the largest online protest in the history of the internet. Websites from large to small "went dark" in protest of proposed legislation before the US House and Senate that could profoundly change the internet. The two bills, Sopa in the House and Pipa in the Senate, ostensibly aim to stop the piracy of copyrighted material over the internet on websites based outside the US. Critics – among them, the founders of Google, Wikipedia, the Internet Archive, Tumblr and Twitter – counter that the laws will stifle innovation and investment, hallmarks of the free, open internet. The Obama administration has offered muted criticism of the legislation, but, as many of his supporters have painfully learned, what President Barack Obama questions one day, he signs into law the next.

First, the basics. Sopa stands for the Stop Online Piracy Act, while Pipa is the Protect IP Act. The two bills are very similar. Sopa would allow copyright holders to complain to the US attorney general about a foreign website they allege is "committing or facilitating the commission of criminal violations" of copyright law. This relates mostly to pirated movies and music. Sopa would allow the movie industry, through the courts and the US attorney general, to send a slew of demands that internet service providers (ISPs) and search engine companies shut down access to those alleged violators, and even to prevent linking to those sites, thus making them "unfindable". It would also bar internet advertising providers from making payments to websites accused of copyright violations.

Sopa could, then, shut down a community-based site like YouTube if just one of its millions of users was accused of violating one US copyright. As David Drummond, Google's chief legal officer and an opponent of the legislation, blogged:

"Last year alone, we acted on copyright takedown notices for more than 5 million webpages. Pipa and Sopa will censor the web, will risk our industry's track record of innovation and job creation, and will not stop piracy."

Corynne McSherry, intellectual property director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told me:

"These bills propose new powers for the government and for private actors to create, effectively, blacklists of sites … then force service providers to block access to those sites. That's why we call these the censorship bills."

The bills, she says, are the creation of the entertainment, or "content", industries: "Sopa, in particular, was negotiated without any consultation with the technology sector. They were specifically excluded." The exclusion of the tech sector has alarmed not only Silicon Valley executives, but also conservatives like Utah Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz, a Tea Party favorite. He said in a December House judiciary committee hearing, "We're basically going to reconfigure the Internet and how it's going to work, without bringing in the nerds."

Pipa sponsor Senator Patrick Leahy (Democrat, Vermont) said in a press release, "Much of what has been claimed about [Pipa] is flatly wrong and seems intended more to stoke fear and concern than to shed light or foster workable solutions." Sadly, Leahy's ire sounds remarkably similar to that of his former Senate colleague Christopher Dodd, who, after retiring, took the job of chairman and CEO of the powerful lobbying group Motion Picture Association of America (at a reported salary of $1.2m annually), one of the chief backers of Sopa/Pipa. Said Dodd of the broadbased, grassroots internet protest, "It's a dangerous and troubling development when the platforms that serve as gateways to information intentionally skew the facts to incite their users in order to further their corporate interests."

EFF's McSherry said, "No one asked the internet – well, the internet is speaking now. People are really rising up and saying: 'Don't interfere with basic Internet infrastructure. We won't stand for it.'"

As the internet blackout protest progressed 18 January, and despite Dodd's lobbying, legislators began retreating from support for the bills. The internet roared, and the politicians listened, reminiscent of the popular uprising against media consolidation in 2003 proposed by then Federal Communications Commission chairman Michael Powell, the son of General Colin Powell. Information is the currency of democracy, and people will not sit still as moneyed interests try to deny them access.

When internet users visited the sixth-most popular website on the planet during the protest blackout, the English-language section of Wikipedia, they found this message:

"Imagine a World Without Free Knowledge.

"For over a decade, we have spent millions of hours building the largest encyclopedia in human history. Right now, the US Congress is considering legislation that could fatally damage the free and open internet."

In a world with fresh, internet-fueled revolutions, it seems that US politicians are getting the message.

• Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.

© 2012 Amy Goodman; distributed by King Features Syndicate

Via The Guardian

Comunicas United States.- Attorney and activist Eva Golinger has written an excellent piece on US-Venezuela relations that’s posted on her website Postcards from the Revolution. Golinger details the astonishing turnaround that Chavez has effected since he took office 12 years ago. Not only has Chavez routed the predatory oligarchs who once dominated Venezuelan politics, but his revolutionary social programs have also raised the standard of living for the poor and middle classes while strengthening the institutions that have transformed Venezuela into one of the hemishpere’s most vibrant democracies. Venezuela has seen a 50 percent reduction in poverty since Chavez took office in February, 1999. Venezuelans are now guaranteed free, universal healthcare, a K-through-college education, and civil liberties that are protected under the constitution. US citizens have every reason to be envious of the social safety net Chavez has created for his people via his Bolivarian Revolution.

Naturally, Chavez’s progressive policies have raised a few eyebrows in Washington where his successes are seen as a threat to the established order. Corporate mandarins regard Chavez as a troublemaker and they’re doing whatever they can to get rid of him ASAP. This is why one never reads anything positive about Chavez or his accomplishments in the US media, because the corporate bosses hate him, as they do anyone who diverts money from the 1 percent at the top of the economic foodchain to the 99 percent at the bottom.

US-Venezuela relations have continued to deteriorate under Barack Obama, who has turned out to be as big a disappointment to Chavez as he has to his supporters in the US. The Obama administration continues to fund the stealth network of US-backed NGOs that have been working around-the-clock to depose the democratically-elected leader for more than a decade. Golinger has written extensively on U.S. government agencies and their persistent meddling in Venezuela’s politics. Here’s an excerpt from Golinger’s post:

“Ever since the US-supported coup attempt against President Hugo Chavez in Venezuela failed in April 2002, Washington has been pursuing a variety of strategies to remove the overwhelmingly popular South American head of state from power. Multimillion-dollar funding to anti-Chavez groups in Venezuela through US government agencies, such as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the US Agency for International Development (USAID), has increased exponentially over the past ten years, as has direct political support through advisors, strategists and consultants- all aiming to help an unpopular and outdated opposition rise to power.

US government agencies, including the State Department, Central Intelligence Agency, National Directorate of Intelligence and the Pentagon, have pumped up their hostile language towards the Venezuelan government in recent years. The major oil-producing nation has been placed on the countless, and baseless “lists” produced annually by Washington, including “failure to cooperate with counter-narcotics efforts”, “failure to aid in the war on terror”, “trafficking in persons”, and others, that are based on political decisions instead of concrete, substantial evidence to support their accusations. These classifications have enabled Washington to justify not only the millions of US taxpayer dollars channeled to anti-Chavez groups fronting as NGOs, but also to increase military presence in the region and convince public opinion that Hugo Chavez is an enemy.” (“War on Venezuela: Washington’s False Accusations Against The Chavez Government”, Eva Golinger, Postcards from the Revolution)

So, things have not improved under Obama at all, in fact, they’ve gotten worse. The US congress–whose public approval rating has plunged to single digits–is also beating the war drums against Chavez trying to garner support for direct intervention.

While Obama has refrained from name-calling or explicit accusations; his underlings in and out of the bureaucracy never hesitate to connect Chavez to Iran or to suggest links between Chavez and terrorism. Obama’s role in the smear campaign is as clear as his role in eviscerating the Bill of Rights with his recently-passed NDAA.

Here’s more from Golinger: “Other “commentators” and “analysts” are busy writing blogs and columns warning of the growing terrorist threat south of the US border. These dangerous, unfounded accusations could easily be used to justify an attack against Venezuela, as weapons of mass destruction was used against Iraq and “protecting the population” was used against Libya. ….Time again, Venezuela has shown there are no “terrorist training camps” on its soil. Nor is it secretly building a bomb to attack the US. Venezuela is a nation of peace. It does not invade, attack or threaten other countries.”

So, what does a peaceful country like Venezuela need to do to avert a confrontation with the United States?

Venezuela needs to become more like neighboring Colombia that Obama and others regularly hold up as a model of “democracy” in the region. Colombia –where human rights abuses and targeted assassinations are routine and where the US spends billions on a drug eradication program (Plan Colombia) that routinely sprays toxic (re: poison) chemicals on crops, livestock, water supplies and children.

Here’s a little background from Aljazeera: “In 2008, Colombian soldiers were revealed to have murdered possibly thousands of civilians and then dressed the corpses in FARC attire in order to receive bonus pay and extra holiday time. Juan Manuel Santos (who is now Colombia’s president) was serving as defence minister …when the “false positives” scandal broke…. Despite this and other details – such as that, since Uribe’s assumption of office, more trade unionists have been assassinated in Colombia than in the rest of the world combined …(Even so)…..the country has been applauded by the US State Department and the Inter-American Development Bank as a regional role model in confronting security threats ensures the fortification of a system in which profits depend on the perpetuation of insecurity.”(“Private security and ‘the Israelites of Latin America’”, Belen Fernandez, Aljazeera)

So, this is how one becomes America’s friend; just follow orders, kill and imprison your own people, (preferably trade unionists) and allow the corporate looting to go unchecked. No wonder the repressive Saudi dictatorship consistantly ranks so high on Washington’s Friend’s List.

So, what’s in store for Chavez, who’s done nothing except raise living standards, strengthen the rule of law, and make the world a better place for ordinary working people?

The Obama administration presently has its hands full with its wars in Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa. But as soon as Obama is finished “liberating” Tehran, it’ll be on to Venezuela. You can bet on it. After all, Venezuela sits on the biggest ocean of oil in the world, “over 500 billion barrels”. That means it’s only a matter of time before WMD and Al Qaida training camps are discovered in Caracas.

By Mike Whitney / Via Counter Punch

Comunicas America.- The world financial crisis and safe guarding  Latin America's growing economies were the main topics of discussion Friday when the region's leaders met in Caracas for the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) summit.

Several presidents stressed at the start of a two-day summit Friday that they hope to ride out turbulent times by boosting their local industries and increasing trade within the region.

Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff led such calls, saying that if the nations are to keep thriving they will need to look more to their neighbors.

"The economic, financial crisis should be at the center of our concerns," Rousseff said. "We should respond to this crisis with a new paradigm."

Rousseff said Latin America should "realize that to guarantee its current cycle of development despite the international economic turbulence, it means that every politician must be aware that each one needs the others."

As a region, Latin America and the Caribbean have so far weathered the economic woes better than the U.S. or Europe, achieving economic growth of more than 5 percent last year.

Brazil is now one of the world's fastest growing economies, and its government said this week that it's willing to contribute funds to the International Monetary Fund to help minimize the effects of the European debt crisis.

Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos said the region has immense potential "in this world that's going through great uncertainty, where there's a hurricane that's hitting the so-called industrialized economies hard." He said Colombia's current trade with Brazil, for instance, is minimal and could grow significantly.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez read aloud a letter from Chinese President Hu Jintao congratulating the leaders on forming a new 33-nation regional bloc, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. Hu pledged to deepen cooperation with the new group, which he said will "contribute in a significant way to strengthening the unity and the coordination among the region's countries to face global challenges together."

The U.S. remains the top trading partner of many countries in the region, with exceptions including Brazil and Chile, where China has become the biggest trading partner. China has also made diplomatic inroads, including by granting about $38 billion in loans to Venezuela in exchange for increasing shipments of oil.

Argentine President Cristina Fernández noted that experts believe the region could be vulnerable to fallout from the economic crisis. She said trade within the region should be a priority.

Some countries, such as Brazil, expressed interest in reducing imports from outside Latin America.

"Together we can be stronger, together we can grow, and that should be beneficial for everyone," Rousseff said.

Chávez and some of his closest allies, meanwhile, called for the new regional bloc to be a tool for both integration and for countering U.S. influence.

"Only unity will make us free," Chávez told the more than two dozen heads of state.

Cuban President Raúl Castro said that if it's successful, the creation of the new bloc known by its Spanish initials CELAC will be "the biggest event in 200 years."

The group includes every country in Latin America and the Caribbean. Unlike the Washington-based Organization of American States, it will have Cuba as a full member and exclude the U.S. and Canada.

Read more: http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2011/12/03/latin-american-leader-talk-world-economy-at-celac-meeting/#ixzz1fXjEubqb

Verone, who was unemployed, had a growth on his chest and ruptured disks in his back, but he had been unable to obtain health insurance. He wasn’t holding up the bank for the money. Rather, he sought free medical attention in prison.

The robber was wrong to think that he would benefit from good healthcare once incarcerated. Depriving prisoners of adequate treatment has long been a tacit part of criminal punishment in the U.S., the subject of lawsuits and human rights reports. But he is right that, even in a time of austerity, prisons remain a centre of government growth and funding.

Should Verone be sentenced, he will join some 2.3 million other Americans behind bars, a total that dwarfs the number imprisoned in any other country. This includes China, which has four times the population of the United States. According to the International Center for Prison Studies, the U.S. locks up residents at a rate of 743 out of every 100,000 – a far higher rate than that of the UK (152), Canada (117) or Japan (58).

The neoliberal ‘free market’ paradigm prescribes that the state shed its responsibilities in such realms as education, housing, public health and care for the elderly. However, in the name of upholding the ‘rule of law’, the neoliberal state retains – and even expands – its more coercive instruments: the armed forces and the penitentiary.

The U.S. prison population has more than quadrupled since the 1970s, owing largely to a failed ‘war on drugs’ and to mandatory sentencing requirements that eliminate judges’ ability to set reasonable punishments. Studies indicate that white and African American men use and sell drugs at similar rates. Yet, in 2003, black men were over 10 times more likely to be incarcerated for drug offenses.

It has always been true that money spent on prisons could have been put towards more humane and productive purposes. But now that state budgets are being slashed and spending on incarceration has reached nearly $70 billion, the trade-offs are being felt directly.

During his last year in office, even action-hero-turned-Republican-California-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger complained of a historical reversal: three decades prior, 10.1 per cent of expenditures from the state’s general fund went to higher education, and 3.4 per cent to prisons. By 2010, prisons consumed 11 per cent of the budget, but universities only 7.5 per cent.

Prisons have covered for government failure to provide mental health treatment, with over half of U.S. prisoners suffering from serious psychological problems. As the Christian Science Monitor recently noted, the Los Angeles County Jail has been dubbed ‘the largest public mental hospital in America’.

If Verone’s bank robbery is an apt parable for life in Prison Nation, another story from Wisconsin is equally rich: earlier this year, when anti-union Governor Scott Walker eliminated collective bargaining for state employees, he allowed for expanded use of convict labor. As a result, in Racine County, unpaid prisoners have performed landscaping and maintenance work previously done by unionized state employees.

Conservative advocacy groups such as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) are pushing for similar moves nationwide, arguing both for elimination of restrictions on prisoner labor and for public-sector layoffs.

Of course, it’s not guards and soldiers they would cut. Much of the world already experiences the U.S. government primarily through its military. If the ideologues prevail, and other public institutions are eliminated, those of us within the country will also face a hardened state. All that will remain is the prison.

"Life in prison nation"

By Mark Engler / Via Progreso

Comunicas Libya.- After months of bloody conflict, embattled Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi was reportedly killed in his hometown of Sirte.

Although more information is still pouring from Libya, rebel leaders and many of the Libyan people are rejoicing over the news of his death.

Gaddafi ruled the country for over 40 years, after a military coup in 1969. Gaddafi, who viewed himself as a “brother leader,” was a Pan-Africanist and worked to unite African countries and fashion it into a sort of “United States of Africa.” His goal was to develop “a single African military force, a single currency and a single passport for Africans to move freely around the continent,” while including other countries, like Jamaica and Haiti, whose population was majority Black. Although his “United States of Africa” idea didn’t work out, many of the principles influenced the formation of the African Union, of which he served as chairman from 2009 to 2010.

While he was embraced by many at home, Western leaders shunned him. After denying involvement for years, Gaddafi took responsibility for the 1988 Pan Am bombing over Lockerbie, Scotland which killed 270 people.

After coming to power, Gaddafi was reportedly suspicious of a possible coup and was very active in crushing dissidence. However, after other countries in the region–namely Egypt and Tunisia–saw their leaders fall, many Libyans took to the streets to oust Gaddafi. As a result of 6-months of protests and bloody conflicts, rebel forces were able to overthrow the government, and many are claiming responsibility for Gaddafi’s death.

Via Clutch

Comunicas United States.- On September 27th Lauren Ellis published an essay in Mother Jones Magazine entitled “Is OccupyWallStreet Working?”

The essay argues that Occupy Wall Street (OWS) is not working because the movement has no clear message and is not demographically representative of those who are affected most by the current economic problems.  While Ellis does raise important points about movement-messaging and political representation, she in no way tries to understand the internal logic and outward expression of OWS.

Ellis’ conclusions center around four main points: that OWS’s “kitchen sink approach” is a form of ineffective messaging; that the media’s focus on the police brutality distracts from OWS’s main message (or lack thereof); that the hacktavist collective Anonymous inhibits the OWS movement; and that the OWS participants are the “usual suspects” of “dreamers.”  In what follows, I provide counter-arguments to each of Ellis’ points as an attempt to flesh-out some of the philosophies, practices, and communicative strategies of Occupy Wall Street.  I want to note that I am not seeking to attack Lauren Ellis in any way.  Instead, I am trying to demonstrate why her arguments—representative of many like-minded skeptics—are insufficiently substantiated.

1.  Kitchen Sink vs. Multi-Issued Messaging.  It is common practice to critique festival and carnivalesque protests (and radical social movement overall) as lacking coherent, effective messages.  I agree that protesters and social movements (of all kinds) bare the responsibility of effective messaging.  But we must realize that OWS does involve a rhetorical logic.  OWS is not lacking a coherent message; instead, its message is multi-issued, politically complex, and systemic: economic inequality, layoffs, house foreclosures, bank bailouts, million dollar bonuses, overpriced health insurance, cuts to social welfare, credit card debt, the student loan industry, tax breaks for the rich, underfunded schools, climate change, genetically modified food, the burgeoning prison-industrial complex, war, as well as racism, sexism, and homophobia are interconnected issues.  None of these occur in a vacuum; instead, each contributes to and affects the others.  One of the root causes of “this current system” is corporate dominance.  Most (if not everyone) can agree that corporations control this country.

Political, educational, prison, mass media, and military systems are dominated by the corporate will-to-profit.  Even the production of culture is a corporate manufacturing of brands, logos, jingles, and cradle-to-the grave advertising.  How many people identify themselves by the brands that they wear, consume, and purchase?  How much material support is given to independent artists, musicians, and film makers?  How many words within the collective lexicon—like Google, Xerox, and Coke—are actually corporate titles?  Corporate dominance is not the only root cause of these interrelated issues, but it is a good place to start.  Protesters are thus occupying Wall Street because it is the epicenter of corporate dominance and condenses all of these issues into one symbolic force.

2.a  Police Brutality Stealing the Spotlight vs. Political Theater.  It is also common to critique mass arrests—and the direct actions that usually spur those arrests—as another form of ineffective messaging.  But people must realize that direct action and civil disobedience are forms of messaging, albeit, forms of embodied messaging—the action is the message, with the assumption that observers will have the wherewithal to understand this form of messaging.  Just as audience members “read between the lines” to understand the actions that occur on a theatrical stage, observers must also read between the lines to understand the actions that occur on a politically occupied street corner.  This is not a lot to expect given the fact that we are all actors and audience members, everyday and all day.  Each of us is a walking embodiment-and-expression of our roles, beliefs, values, perspectives, and philosophies.  We are all constantly performing for one another, continually expressing and reading-and-reacting to one another’s embodiment.  This intersubjective and reflexive process often occurs subconsciously.  But direct actions and mass arrests call us to attention: politics is an embodied phenomenon.  Occupy Wall Street is therefore a message about reappropriating our political agency:  The business of greed, hyper-competition, private gain, casino capitalism, and political corruption must stop immediately, and people are willing to put their bodies on the line to make this happen.  And if that message is too long and complicated, here’s an easier one:  Our current system of profit before people is inhumane and unjust.

2.b  Police Brutality Stealing the Spotlight vs. Journalistic Integrity.  Arguing that direct action and mass arrests distract from the main message implies that the protesters are to blame for how the media portrays the situation.  Again, every protester has some responsibility for rhetorical effectiveness.  But in this case, we should be blaming the mass media rather than the protesters.  There are a million ways to cover a story and a million details to focus on.  But much of the mainstream coverage focuses on the cop vs. protester scenario.  Why?  Because the public has become accustomed to want such time-tested, politically vapid narratives.  As the saying goes, if it bleeds, its leads.  This is a problem of journalistic integrity, not of ineffective messaging by the protesters.  I find it hard to believe that reporters and journalists are incapable of properly deciphering the basic message of Occupy Wall Street.  At the very least, one could interpret the occupation as “Wall Street equals Bad.”  I would assume that an honest, hardworking reporter would want to understand why this message is being communicated with such passion, dedication, and urgency.  If that were to occur, then perhaps mainstream media outlets would actually air open and honest debates about the merits and pitfalls of the Occupy Wall Street message.

3. Anonymous vs. Anti-authoritarianism.  Occupy Wall Street is structured around anti-authoritarian and non-hierarchical principles of decentered organizing practices.  Unlike older models of, say, the civil rights movement, OWS does not offer up a single spokesperson standing on a well-defined stage articulating one clear message.  Instead, there are many people on many stages offering up numerous-yet-interconnected demands, goals, and/or outlooks.  The point is to resist a top-down approach and to invite, instead, a diversified, bottom-up, directly democratic approach.  No model of organizing is ideal, and neither is this one.  But this helps explain why particular groups—such as the Anonymous hacktavist collective—will appear to simultaneously champion and distance themselves from OWS.  It’s like a kaleidoscope: different groups and causes will appear and disappear depending upon when and how you look at it.  Such a structure allows people to enter, exit, and contribute on their own accord.  In many ways, then, the anti-authoritarianism of Occupy Wall Street is about radical immediacy: the immediate evocation of one’s desired reality.  That immediate evocation is partial and incomplete, but that is true for all human-created realities.  We are finite and fallible creatures always working from partial histories and moving toward unpredictable futures.  Occupy Wall Street is no different.

4.  The Usual Suspects vs. The Radical Imagination. It is too easy to reduce Occupy Wall Street to a rendition of the radical 1960s.  Such a reduction commonly occurs anytime a radical movement emerges, as if political radicalism began and ended with the hippie counter-cultural movement.  Radical social movements—along with anti-authoritarian and anti-corporate sentiments—play an intimate role throughout American (and world) history.  I agree that OWS began with a small group of people that may not have accurately represented the overall demographics of “middle-America.”  But OWS is consistently gaining sympathizers and momentum.  According to occupytogether.org, approximately 130 cities across the United States are now organizing events and actions.  Similar events are being organized in Canada, Mexico, Europe, Asia, and Australia.  Given these numbers, I find it hard to believe that OWS is just another wannabe revolution put on by the usual suspects of hopeless idealists and out of touch day dreamers.  Instead, OWS advances a tradition of radical immediacy that is invigorating the collective imagination.  That imagination envisions a world that exists beyond corporate dominance.  The many steps to get there are still unknown.  But a first step is being offered up by Occupy Wall Street.

By Jason del Gandio | Via Counter Punch