Some Comparison, Please

The tainted food supply coming from China has been mounting into bigger and bigger news. It is a serious problem that looks like it has spread well beyond the pet food supply. When the news reports on this issue, though, they use a lot of borderline bigoted statements that aren't backed up by good comparative data.

NPR was reporting numbers of food-related deaths each year in China. How does the U.S. compare? E. coli has been in the media as of late, but that's only the tip of the iceberg. And even when these numbers are provided, are they reported deaths or estimated deaths based on some organization's calculations?

The radio also made much of the unreliability of food suppliers in China. They spoke of cultural and business problems, implying that the Chinese just haven't come around to a "proper" attitude yet. But lets get some numbers. What agencies are there in China? What are their guidelines and enforcement powers? And, most importantly, how does food safety regulation compare to the U.S.? This one is particularly important, because over the last decade or more the FDA has moved to a "self-monitoring" model where companies are expected to inspect themselves. The FDA inspectors then come in and just look at the data the company has already assembled. The FDA does not have the power to recall certain food items, but must "shame" the company into doing it voluntarily.

There is little reason to doubt that food safety is not up to acceptable standards in China, but it would be important to point out how inadequate they are here, as well. The complaint about the fraud and incentive for corruption in China's food industry needs to be compared and contrasted against the same situation here. Serious economic analysis is missing, and not expected soon.

Fundamental Assumption

Yet another article about public transportation this weekend helped point out a fundamental flaw in the way of this much needed resource. High-speed rail system may be derailed contains the following line:

Critics see the high-speed train as a potential boondoggle that would be a drain on the state treasury and a loser that would never pay for itself.

This is practically the same think that Snoble, the MTA's chief, said just last week; that these services are not able to pay for themselves, and thus a fee increase is necessary.

The a priori assumption of the newspapers and politicians in this country is that a public service must pay for itself. Every last single thing must be held to the profit model, else it be purged and beaten into shape until a profit can be made. Here, when mass transit and the environment should be at the forefront of the discussion in this country, humanity must be made to suffer to maintain profits.

The fundamental contradiction and hypocrisy here, of course, is that if politicians held everything to this ideal, then there'd be no reason for people to pay taxes. These ideals are only held up when they serve the goal of cutting or not providing public services. A human-centric system would take a (temporary) hit to build essential infrastructure.

Yes, Virginia, America is Racist

"My first thought when I heard initial reports was 'Oh my God, I hope it's not a black person." These are the words of a prominent black author and activist, discussing his first reaction to the shootings in Virginia early this week. The article, When ethnicity brings an unwelcome focus, discusses why Koreans and Korean-Americans have come out in vigils and with statements atoning for the actions of Seung-hui Cho.

The article continues on to offer quotes from several other minorities, including a Latino and a Muslim. (They also quote a racist from a local right-wing, AM radio station ... this is the L.A. Times.) Here is another apt quote from a psychologist, "When you've got a white guy going crazy, [his ethnicity] doesn't stand out because most mass killings are done by whites."

Of course, the one word the L.A. Times is unable to say is "racist". Fact is, America is racist – why else would ethnic minorities have these kinds of initial gut reactions? These are the reflexes of people who have grown up in a society that discriminates against them systematically. Instead, the newspaper adopts a line that the "typecasting of minorities" is somehow a part of human nature and unavoidable.

Destroying Our Myths

Within the past week or so I had seen advertisements around for a new series about Robin Hood. My initial thought was positive, since Robin Hood is one of those figures with a lot to teach us, especially in a time when the rich are getting richer at the expense of the poor. But, as revealed in Robin Hood takes different paths in Sherwood Forest, that absolute opposite is happening.

There are two separate rapings of the Robin Hood story coming soon. One for TV depicts Robin Hood as a pacifist who only robs from the sheriff of Nottingham ... and not from the myriad other parasites who put the sheriff into office to prop up their exploitation of the poor. The writer for this series actually said, "I don't think it's interesting or sympathetic anymore to have your supposedly heroic characters robbing people just because they're rich." Well, if you are talking to Hollywood executives, you are probably correct.

The seconds script, slated as a film staring Russell Crowe in the part of the sheriff, attempts to depict the sheriff is a "working-class cop". Historically, sheriffs were overseers for the serf system, working for the local lords to make sure that serfs kept at their work and didn't steal from the lord.

This certainly isn't the first time this folk hero has been maligned or distorted, but it is interesting that we see two such stories hitting the media plate at the same time. This degenerate society of ours, with the huge chasm between rich and poor growing constantly, has nothing to offer those at the bottom but a "rotten apple" theory of corruption or a request to sympathize with their torturers. Robin Hood is a story that poor folk have been telling for centuries because it speaks to them. The message of robbing back from the rich (what they robbed from us) is apparently a little to apt these days, so the story must be corrupted.

Sick Society Turns to Black Market

Cancer drug on black market comes as no surprise. Several months ago, reports came out about a drug being wildly successful at destroying cancer tumors. The drug is dichloroacetate, or DCA; but, there's a minor problem – or at least, a minor problem for a capitalist health care system – the patent has long since expired on this drug. This means that no current drug company can make super-profits off of it, as they are accustomed to.

Drug trials need to be done on this drug. I believe that Canadian researchers who discovered this are looking to do trials with public funding, but the process shouldn't be as long and drawn out as it necessarily will be under our current system. Many terminally ill cancer patients, aware of the study and their dire situation, have started acquiring the drug from the black market. A humane society would handle this better. With people taking this on their own, without supervision, it will be difficult for scientists to figure out what other possible effects the drug may have. We can only hope that the drug makes like better for those forced to turned to the black market.

An Important Source

Sometimes the short articles say the most, as with Pentagon can keep funding Scout event in today's paper. A federal appellate court has ruled that it isn't a violation of the separation of church and state for the military to help fund the annual Boy Scout Jamboree, held at a military base in Virginia.

Funding has been going on for 35 years now, and it is clearly a violation of church-state separation. But the important thing is the main issue for the military: the Boy Scouts are a "useful recruiting and training tool." The BSA has long been a bastion of blind patriotism and religion. You aren't technically allowed to be a member unless you are religious; atheists need not apply.

It would be nice to see a real separation of church and state, but that's only possible in a democracy. Cases like this, while sad in that they show how far we are from a more humane society, also bare wide open the real nature of this system in a straightforward way. It also shows how intimately connected religion and the state are.

Why Attorneys Matter

The media and Congress is making much of the firing and resignations of several U.S. attorneys. Much of the blame is being put on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, despite the complete glossing over of his bigger crime in the promotion of torture to public U.S. policy. Certainly, the Democratic Party has something to gain electorally by pressing this issue. It seems that the reason these firings are a bigger issue, however, is because it undermines the American illusion in a fundamental way.

It is one thing for the nation to carry out unspeakable acts. It is an entirely different thing to make plain that the checks and balances of the system are in fact illusion. The legal system is a fundamental part of the illusion that the people have some sort of check on the government. High school civics classes across the nation go to great lengths to instill this notion.

To paraphrase George Carlin, it is called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.

The Game is Up

Capitalism has been bankrupt for a long time, but its inability to deal with global warming is a wonderful example of just how bankrupt it is. Game over on global warming? highlights this well.

What is the first proposal that the article makes, even if only in "jest"? That all American abandon their cars for bicycles. The EPA administrator says, "As a citizen, each of us has an opportunity to make a difference." But then their own statistics later on reveal this common attitude, i.e. that individuals should have to suffer and sacrifice for the greater corporate good. Motor traffic and transport account for 7.3% of global emissions. Power plants, however, account for 39%. Seems a little obvious that we should start with the big dogs, but then energy companies are a major component of the ruling class, so we cannot expect them to sacrifice themselves (and by sacrifice, we mean take less profits).

They hint at one way the U.S. is trying to solve the problem today — "If the rest of the world returned to the Stone Age." Maybe U.S. foreign policy is more forward-looking that we realized. By returning Iraq and Afghanistan to the stone age, we are helping to stem global warming. Who's next? Any volunteers?

But we've seen where the U.S. and the rest of the imperialist powers stand and how far they are willing to go. The war in Iraq is about oil and the control of that oil-producing region. Another chunk of our foreign policy is about preventing Iran and North Korea from developing nuclear energy, thus keeping them dependent upon fossil fuels — another article in today's paper reports that a deal might be in the making with North Korea to supply them with oil in lieu of the two light-water reactors they were promised over a decade ago. And blame continues to be heaped upon China; how dare they try to expand their economy so recklessly? The second suggestion, of course, was that the "Chinese could close all their factories."

Real change requires large-scale action. People cannot "give up" their cars simply because of this problem. Real alternatives have to be produced, and we see here in L.A. how, despite the glaring need, even the "transportation" mayor is dragging his feet on putting in real mass transit and doing it now. Every proposal a capitalist politician puts forth is an attack against working people, an enforced sacrifice so that corporate profits might be protected for a little while longer. This system offers no solutions for humanity, only for itself.

Protecting the Cattle Industry

Three separate bills have been introduced to address the E. coli issues that arose last year with spinach and lettuce here in California (Bills would target unsafe farming of leafy greens). The bills basically call for more restrictions, inspections, and accountability for those "farmers" producing leafy greens.

The problem with this is that E. coli is a bacteria that lives in the intestinal track of mammals. Last I heard, leafy greens were plants that grow out of the ground, now out of a mammalian hind end. Since the focus of the laws is the greens growers, it seems an obvious maneuver to avoid blaming the people who should be responsible for keeping E. coli out of the water and fertilizer supply. Another example of good old fashioned American blaming the victim.

Even if the cause of these particular outbreaks is not directly attributable to nearby cattle farms, it doesn't negate the fact that more people in the U.S. die or get sick from E. coli because of infected beef than from anything else, but somehow those stories aren't big news.

In Case You Were Worried

The Democrats are the party of delusion, and they gather their votes through the illusion that they are different from their sister party. Events continue to show what the real difference is. Despite an overwhelming mandate in the 2006 election to get the U.S. out of Iraq, all Congress is willing to do at this point is non-binding resolutions while continuing to sign the checks.

In case there was any doubt as to what would happen to the Gemini relationship of business and politicians with a new Congress, this article sheds some light on the matter: Lobbyists find new Congress is open for business. A lobbyist from Bracewell & Giuliani says it about as well as can be expected in a public statement: "One of the lessons is that good lobbying is always bipartisan."

The article has its own twist. It presents the situation as one where other groups besides business are getting a voice. The counterpoint is that you cannot win an election like the last one and expect to do nothing ... there must still be token gestures. By no accounts will the Oil industry be hurt by the elimination of subsidies – all honest economists will tell you this and a basic understanding of economics should confirm it &ndash and the bills passed only cut a small portion of those subsidies. But the public effect is to fuel the illusion that the Democrats have done something about excessive Oil profits. The same goes for Medicare changes (which don't do what would be a baby step in fixing the problem) and the minimum wage increase (long overdue and loaded with subsidies).