The Neoliberal Prison: Brexit Hysteria and the Liberal Mind

I'm fascinated by the parallels between the Democratic Party and the Labour Party -- both parties were moved right by the Clintons and by Tony Blair. The article below is about the internal battles in the Labour Party, the British version of our Democratic Party. Labour was captured by the left - Jeremy Corbyn - let's call him a more left version of Bernie.

I'm continuing to post articles today relating to neo-liberalism and tie it to the world-wide ed deform movement as one of the major battlefields and how our union with its ties to the Democratic Party has been on the neo-liberal train since it began its ride in the early 70s with the overthrow of Allende in Chile, an act in which our own union played a minor role. (The American Federation of Teachers and the CIA by George Schmidt

www.scribd.com/doc/106238989)

This counterpunch piece by Jonathan Cook gets down to the essence. 

The Brexit vote is a huge challenge to the left to face facts. We want to believe we are free but the truth is that we have long been in a prison called neoliberalism. The Conservative and Labour parties are tied umbilically to this neoliberal order. The EU is one key institution in a transnational neoliberal club. Our economy is structured to enforce neoliberalism whoever ostensibly runs the country.
Much of the Labour shadow cabinet has just resigned and the rest of the parliamentary party are trying to defy the overwhelming democratic will of their membership and oust Corbyn. His crime is not that he supported Brexit (he didn’t dare, given the inevitable reaction of his MPs) but that he is not a true believer in the current neoliberal order, which very much includes the EU.....http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/06/28/the-neoliberal-prison-brexit-hysteria-and-the-liberal-mind/

Pro-EU have jumped on the left for being on the same side as Trump and other right wing forces. I have been putting up a series of articles that delves deeper into why some people who support Trump are doing it for reasons other than race and anti-immigration but rather a reaction to the outcomes of neo-liberalism. Now I think Trump is full of bullshit and is a neo-liberal himself - whereas Bernie is not. I will be putting up interesting pieces today from the NY Times which nails some good points though you won't see the term neo-liberal used too often in the Times - though I did see Laissez--Faire Capitalism.

Here are my recent pieces on this topic:

• Explaining the Democratic Party and the UFT: Liber...
• Whither MORE: Can We Talk About So Many Things? IC...
• The Tories Made Their Neo-Liberal Bed....
• Dexit -World-Wide Populist Revolt Against Elite fr...
• Norm's 2 columns in the Wave: On Ed Policy, It’s D...
• UPDATED: Does Brexit Shock and Awe Forecast POTUS ...

Read Counterpunch: http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/06/28/the-neoliberal-prison-brexit-hysteria-and-the-liberal-mind/

or below

Parent Opt-Out Group Slams Mulgrew Over Unity Caucus Leaflet

In addition to  providing your members with false information, you have demonized the  brave and outspoken NYC educators who have encouraged opt out. You have  inexplicably labeled these educators as “reckless and feckless”. This  begs the question, why would an experienced educator and union leader  dismiss and insult a historic act of civil disobedience? Surely, you are  aware that the opt out movement has yielded the only successful means  of resisting harmful “test and punish” policies that hurt not only your  members, but all educators and students around the state.... NYSAPE

I said right up front that the Unity Caucus attack on MORE and opt-out would come back to bite them. The UFT machine has often intimidated parent groups who wanted their support and didn't want to alienate them. When an influential statewide group like NYSAPE takes this unprecedented action it is big.
Some of my posts on this issue:

• Silent Unity Caucus Members, Deserving Scorn, Want...
• Unity-UFT Caucus Members MUST Be Called to Account...
• Unity Caucus Attack on Opt Out and MORE - It's Ran...
• Unity-UFT Attack on MORE and Opt-Out Ghost written...

June 28, 2016


Mr. Michael Mulgrew, President
United Federation of Teachers
52 Broadway
New York, New York 10004

Dear Mr. Mulgrew,

Over  the past few years, members of the opt out movement have become adept  at distinguishing our allies from those who work against us, often  behind the scenes. In light of your recent newsletter (see below) for  the UFT’s Unity Caucus, it has become apparent which of these two camps  you are truly affiliated with.

It is no secret, Mr. Mulgrew, that  as president of the NYC teacher’s union, the UFT (the largest local  teacher’s union in the state), you wield a tremendous amount of power  within NYSUT. With approximately 800 voting delegates and the resources  needed to send all of its delegates to statewide elections, the UFT  often holds the voting majority in NYSUT. Therefore, you have the power  to sway NYSUT’s powerful lobbying dollars and efforts towards policy and  law that will either benefit or harm our children. For that reason, the  opt out movement has shifted its attention to you.

In the  outrageous document referenced above, you claim that districts have  "lost" grant money due to opt out, when in fact that money was not  theirs to begin with. You cannot "lose" something you do not already  have and are not guaranteed to be awarded. While failing to test 95% of  all students may exclude a district from APPLYING for a small monetary  grant (25,000-75,000 dollars), no money is TAKEN from a district. To  date, no school in NYS has lost money as a result of opt out numbers. On  the other hand, high stakes testing has cost school districts MILLIONS  of dollars over the past four years while the State continues to shirk  its obligation to fully fund our schools. In addition, under the new  ESSA guidelines, this reward status and grant application process comes  to an end and will no longer be a factor.

In addition to  providing your members with false information, you have demonized the  brave and outspoken NYC educators who have encouraged opt out. You have  inexplicably labeled these educators as “reckless and feckless”. This  begs the question, why would an experienced educator and union leader  dismiss and insult a historic act of civil disobedience? Surely, you are  aware that the opt out movement has yielded the only successful means  of resisting harmful “test and punish” policies that hurt not only your  members, but all educators and students around the state.

It is  no secret that you have failed to support efforts to reject the  increased focus on test scores in the new teacher evaluation plan  (3012-d), or that you have publicly vowed to defend the common core  standards (standards that even the Governor’s skewed CC task force found  to be flawed) with violence, if necessary. In addition to your  disparaging comments aimed at those who support the opt out movement,  your actions as president of the UFT would appear to reveal whose side  you are really on.

When teachers, students, and unions were being  abused, demonized, and demoralized, a call to action rang out from  grassroots parent and educator organizations. Many teachers and local  unions heeded the call. Progressive caucuses within the UFT such as MORE  and the statewide caucus Stronger Together immediately stepped up and  worked alongside parents to fight for the best interests of our  children. Where were you?

Sadly, it seems apparent, Mr. Mulgrew,  that you have been standing and working against us at every turn. Deals  have been made, hands have been shaken, and forces have aligned to quell  the increasing discontent of this growing tide of parents and educators  fighting for the very survival of our schools and the well-being of our  children. Opposition to our cause within NYSED, NYCDOE, USDOE as well  as those who support illogical and damaging education policies have  found an unlikely partner in you.

While your actions speak  volumes, we urge you to prove us wrong and demonstrate that you are in  fact, an ally of the opt out movement. Take a stand against a corrupt  and harmful test-based accountability system, advocate for research and  evidence-based education policies, and respect teachers, parents, and  students who advocate the use of test refusal as a means of impacting  policy and regulatory change.

We think it only fair to inform you  that should the educators of New York City and New York State seek new  leadership in their elected union officials, the parents of New York  will stand in solidarity with those who seek to safeguard public  education from harmful policies, regulations, and corrupt leadership.

Sincerely,


New York State Allies for Public Education

​

Explaining the Democratic Party and the UFT: Liberals and Neo-liberalism

https://youtu.be/GD5wa7duofo


There's something underlying the so-called populist reaction to impact of globalization, free markets, open borders, the loss of - or the movement of - jobs from industrialized nations to 3rd world. So we need to explore the concepts of liberalism and how it morphs into today's version, neo-liberalism.

The Clinton/Bernie battle can be boiled down into pro and anti neo-liberalism. 

I'm posting this as a way to dig down on some of the issues that tie our union to the Democratic Party even though it has morphed into the left flank of the Republican Party - so-called Rockefeller Republicans -- but even beyond. Obama and the Clintons and most Democrats today are examples as they have abandoned FDR''s New Deal piece by piece. Bernie on the other hand is a classic New Deal Democrat. Our own union while giving lip-service to New Deal ideals has gone along.

It is no accident that Richard Kahlenberg's "Albert Shanker, Tough Liberal" bio was backed by the union AND Deformer in chief Eli Broad. In our review of the book, Vera Pavone and I rebranded Shanker for what he was - Albert Shanker: Ruthless Neo-Con | New Politics

The bio was aiming to square the union's going along with ed deform as a positive classical liberal idea based on the 1960s concept of liberalism when in reality they were justifying neo-liberalism - the book emphasized Shanker's ties to both Reagan and the Clintons where the basics of ed deform were laid.
One of the tenets of NL: Reagan's "Government not the solution, but the problem." That private can do anything better than government.

Ed deform is the perfect example of neo-liberalism. Get rid of the public schools. Ed deform actually oozes out of every pore. Some elements of neo-liberlism - see if you recognize any in ed deform:

The main points of neo-liberalism include:

Whither MORE: Can We Talk About So Many Things? ICE Meeting Will Do Just That

There has been so much to comment on that I have been paralyzed in just making a decision.

I do want to celebrate the last day of school for all of you after what I am sure is a tough year. This day was always the happiest day - and in some ways the saddest day (when I was teaching my own class for 18 years) of the year. We would party and then I would wake up the next morning in the most relaxed state of the year - until I realized there was now only 67 days left before we had to go back.

ICE often meets on June 30 to tie up the year and discuss issues that don't get discussed in depth at the crowded MORE meetings.

There is an interesting discussion going on around the way forward for MORE. Some people think MORE should focus in social justice issues. Others think the primary role of a caucus is to focus on issues of concern to the rank and file while not neglecting social justice issues. I believe there are very few people in MORE who think MORE should not worry about SJ issues at all, but there are some. Related to these issues is who is the target audience?

Depends on the extent you think you can really contend for power. Do you want to win over the right wing anti-Unity people by diluting your politics?

Some people in MORE are concerned about dilution. I am not. What concerns me is the use of naked rhetoric about some issues without explanation. I try to put myself in the position of a rank and file person in the schools.

I believe, as the discussion below demonstrates, that as long as MORE takes care of day to day school issues it can also take strong SJ positions. Some anti-Unity people will never vote for MORE as being too left wing. To them I say - go form your own caucus and do the work. MORE has proven itself as a viable alternative to Unity. If you are an ATR and don't think MORE is doing enough MORE is perfectly open to anyone coming in and making that an important issue. You can't do it from an anon comment on blogs.

There are certainly points of intersection where some of these issues clash -- I would say school discipline is a potential dividing point. If MORE takes a strong position on discipline for the kids it must also address the very real issues facing teachers and other school staff. It is easy to call for more resources and a viable (not bullshit) restorative justice program. But when you have an awful principal and a school out of control MORE must address that issue.

Sometimes I see some people in MORE salivate over issues like supporting the teachers in Mexico but get a dull glaze in their eyes when it comes to supporting the teachers in NYC. I get it. Going to a rally for Mexican teachers or raising money is easy. Figuring out how to fight an abusive principal is hard if not impossible. But enough people in MORE are trying - see my upcoming videos of the PEP meeting last week were we stood up and supported people.

Some of my recent posts about Brexit have raised the issue of Trump voters and MORE with some snarky Unity comments about Roseanne's support for MORE and Trump. Actually Roseanne and other Trump people do not actually support Trump - they just despise the Democrats, Randi and Hillary and the ed deformers. But still a vote for Trump in essence endorses and gets counted as a vote for white supremacy and therein lies my attempt to convince these people to vote 3rd party. I do believe that Trump will take away people's rights and get away with it.

So in that context I present the upcoming ICE meeting on Thursday with the email I sent out to ICE and MORE members.

ICE meeting Thurs June 30 3:30 - whenever the rice pudding is served

Reminder for those interested - RSVP as space is limited.

Another open-ended ICE meeting to talk about whatever is on your mind.

For those new to MORE, ICE, founded in late 2003 and with TJC another founding group, won the high school exec bd seats in the 2004 election,  was one of the founding groups and still meets a few times a year to discuss issues in depth and maintain a blog run by James Eterno.

Send agenda items - indicating we may go till midnight.

1. Further analysis of the vote in the election. Where did those 11000 votes come from?

Make your best guess. How many due to SJ politics of MORE, how many due to knowing someone in MORE they trust, How many due to MORE support for teacher rights? Consider the 1400 votes for Solidarity in the equation.

2. ATRs - updates and proposals for solutions. Getting ATRS involved in their own battle.

3. Fair Student Funding discussion - won't be discussed until 4:30 since some people can't make it until then. Understanding Fair School Funding - the complexities of calling for an end.

4. Prep for MORE July 6 summer event -- supporting chapters, training etc.

5. MORE and New Action and other caucuses.
New Action has proposed MORE and they sit down and talk. In that context ----
History of UFT Caucus discussion - Election coalitions and the big tent caucus
   History shows that over time mere election coalitions don't work out and eventually lead to merger -- ie TAC and New Directions took 20 years to come together in 1995 into NAC and ICE and TJC took 10 years to morph into MORE.
What do we learn from those experiences? How can a big tent caucus operate with a wide disparity of views?

A MORE retiree committee - what would it do? -- can it work with New Action retirees?

6. MORE as a caucus -- has it shown it can compete for power in the UFT? Does MORE have to compromise fundamental principals to do so? Can people who support Trump also support MORE?

What exactly is a caucus in the UFT? Must you run in an election to be a caucus? Is ICE a caucus or a sub-group within MORE? Can a caucus be a lobby group in the UFT only? What is the future of the relationship between New Action and MORE? How is ICE different from New Action? Is there room in a left-leaning caucus for center right including Trump voters?

Is there is a non-left anti-Unity sentiment in the UFT and how does a left-caucus relate to it? Unity caucus comments on this issue - for 50 years they have branded the opposition as left wing fundamentalists - does Unity see the fact that non-leftists can support MORE as a threat?

Roseanne McCosh who signed up 30 MORE members in her school may vote for Trump out of her outrage at Hillary, Randi and the Democratic party - so are other teachers who are not right wing I meet. I think they are wrong and should vote 3rd party.

Unity people have jumped onto the comment section to chide  MORE for allowing people who are not left fundamentalists - as the Unity hack put it. I guess they want MORE to have loyalty oaths like they do.
(You can follow the debate in the comments: http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2016/06/does-brexit-shock-and-awe-forecast.html#comment-form

Roseanne response:

Let's take a look at what MORE is against. MORE is against teacher evaluations being tied to test scores. Against high class size. Against the persecution of teachers in the opt out movement. Against the 2nd tier status of ATR union members. Against a bullshit contract and delay in retro. Against abusive administrators who torment members. And---OMG! Against racism...how dare they? If knowing I support MORE gives you a chuckle then I guess you'll split your sides knowing I also send them a monthly donation. People like me support MORE because MORE supports working teachers---a foreign concept to you Unity shills.

 

Roseanne McCosh

The Tories Made Their Neo-Liberal Bed....

So the austerity Tory (Brit Republicans) neo-liberals from Thatcher to Cameron have driven a stake into the economy and now must live with it while Labor (Brit Democrats) Tony Blair and even the current so-called left leader sailed along and are now undergoing divisions. The strongest party in Britain seems to be the Scotish nationalists who will soon hold their own ScEXIT and stay with Europe with Ireland to follow. Great Britain is getting slimmer. Oh Boris, have fun while you are prime minister for your very few minutes in the sun.

After this vote the UK is diminished, our politics poisoned

Gary Younge
Meanwhile a section of London-based commentariat anthropologised the British working class as though they were a lesser evolved breed from distant parts, all too often portraying them as bigots who did not know what was good for them. Having assumed themselves cosmopolitan, the more self-aware pundits began to realise just how parochial they were: having experienced much of the world, they discovered they didn’t know their own country as well as they might.

But if the remain campaign was incompetent and patronising, leave was both inflammatory and irresponsible.

It is a banal axiom to insist that “it’s not racist to talk about immigration”. It’s not racist to talk about black people, Jews or Muslims either. The issue is not whether you talk about them but how you talk about them and whether they ever get a chance to talk for themselves. When you dehumanise migrants, using vile imagery and language, scapegoating them for a nation’s ills and targeting them as job-stealing interlopers, you stoke prejudice and foment hatred.
The chutzpah with which the Tory right – the very people who had pioneered austerity, damaging jobs, services and communities – blamed migrants for the lack of resources was breathtaking. The mendacity with which a section of the press fanned those flames was nauseating. The pusillanimity of the remain campaign’s failure to counter these claims was indefensible.

Not everyone, or even most, of the people who voted leave were driven by racism. But the leave campaign imbued racists with a confidence they have not enjoyed for many decades and poured arsenic into the water supply of our national conversation.

More
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/24/eu-vote-uk-diminished-politics-poisoned-racism

Dexit -World-Wide Populist Revolt Against Elite from Left and Right Spells Bad News for Both Parties in Long Run

Dexit is the theme of this post. Which I stole from Sean Crowley who says he stole it from a comment on Arthur's blog. There's a good facebook debate going on regarding the Democratic Party. Stay and fight or go? Arthur linked to an interesting piece (see below) with this comment:

At this point the only reason I remain a Democrat is to vote in the primaries. Obama fooled me once, broke my heart, and left me awfully skeptical. Who's gonna stand up for working Americans? We have a governor who ran on a platform of going after unions and a presidential candidate who talks school closings, opposes a living wage, and says we're never gonna get single payer. Who've we got left to support?

On the larger scale it may mean we are revisiting the 1920s-40s of a century ago. Are the dictators coming? Hitler was once a funny little man with an even funnier mustache who was ridiculed. 

Here are a few notes I took yesterday as the Brexit story unfolded:

Does history repeat itself? Will it?

Are we entering a version of global politics of a century ago? Will the 2020s be like the 1920s? Will the 2030s be like the 1930s?

Isolationism
coming apart of 70 year post ww2 euro unity?
resurgent nationalism
economic dislocation helps the right - dictators all over the place

Separate Trump the man from some of the ideology. Imagine a slicker Trump? Marine la Pen disavowed her Trump-like father to slicken up the message. Hungry, Poland, etc. on the right.

Have Al Quada and ISIS won by destabilizing the west? Putin too?

Elites in all countries flourished while manufacturing and other jobs disappeared - elites - Dems and Rep - said or did nothing - didn't care.

There is a lot of anti-Democratic Party and anti-Hillary stuff floating around today. I mean Cuomo is the NY State chair for the convention? Vomit now.

Dear Democratic Party, I’m Leaving You and I’m Taking the Kids

I want to believe we can save the Democratic Party…
But if we can’t, we will walk away..
And build something new and inspiring.....

https://theindependentthinker2016.wordpress.com/2016/06/23/dear-democratic-party-im-leaving-you-and-im-taking-the-kids/

I have too much to say in one post. There are a few things floating around that should be of concern to Hillary and her Randi acolyte, especially after the Brexit vote. I know the things we hear about the differences from here - Britain is 85% white and we are 66% white - and that is a big difference. If the Republicans had a slicker less onerous candidate than Trump it would be a landslide for them and might come close to wiping out the Democratic Party - my only hope that something new could rise in its place - shades of the 1850s.

There are lots of comments on  my post:  Does Brexit Shock and Awe Forecast POTUS Election - and UFT Internals too

One comment said:

Trump is a "slicker" Ross Perot. Remember how right Perot was ? "That giant sucking sound" you hear are all of the jobs that will leave the U.S. with acts like NAFTA. Well, he was completely correct ! Now that giant sucking sound is the entire country now, across the board.

Good point - except for the followup comments that Obama is a racist - like saying Obama is a socialist. Even if you believe that don't share it because it negates the good points made. Obama leaned over backwards to minimize race - and why do you consider him black when he is half white? He may look black but he was brought up white - and the very fact that he had to deal with issues which related to how he looked on the outside is the very essence of why people of color have different experiences. Do you doubt that if Obama looked like his mother his life would have been different? Then you'd recognize the essence of institutional racism. And imagine how so many white people who think of blacks as lower than them are seething every time they see the WHITE HOUSE in the hands of the Obamas.

A comment from Roseanne McCosh on why she is voting for Trump:

If Trump wins, it will be the anti politics-as-usual wave that carries him to the White House. I rode the wave with Bernie and will now ride the wave with Trump. I truly see it as the only way to wake up the Democratic Party. I understand that people may disagree with those who think like I do but what I can't understand is how you can't understand why people like me are voting for Trump. Claims that we aren't "thinking people" or mocking his hair and his speech impediment don't matter to Trump supporters. Some buy his rhetoric. Others, like myself, are willing to accept whatever comes our way with him because we are tired of being told by dems that they are on the side of working and middle class people while their actions contradict their words. Obama was bad for teachers. Clinton will be bad for teachers. Cuomo is bad for teachers. Dems have not been good for unionized workers at all. So there really is no difference between them and the republicans other than the republicans tell us up front that they hate us. As I said....I get it if you disagree. If you think Clinton will be a better president than Trump, you have your reasons and that's your right. But to claim you don't understand why Trump has more than neandertals and racists supporting him means you just don't want to understand. Plenty of teachers and other unionized workers I know are voting for Trump--and they are not racist idiots. They, like me, are tired of the democrats and their bullshit. And as a result, we are willing to back the other guy because we genuinely believe that a vote for Clinton is telling the democrats it's okay to screw us anytime you want because we will give you our vote regardless of what you do. I'm not willing to do that anymore. And I'm also no longer willing to give my vote to a third party that has zero chance of winning. The mere fact that Clinton was endorsed by Randi, who sells us out time and time again, is reason enough for me to vote for Trump. If every teacher committed to voting for the guy/gal Randi doesn't want us to vote for, her political clout would be gone. Agree or disagree but please stop saying you don't understand why. Roseanne McCosh reply to EdNotes: Does Brexit Shock and Awe Forecast POTUS ...":

Roseanne is not voting for Trump because she loves him but because she hates the Dems more. I and many others agree with her - floating around now is: the lesser of 2 evils is still evil. [Make sure to read the loyalty oath signing Unity slug comment on how MORE can accept a Trump supporter].

I think she is wrong to vote for Trump - she may not be a racist but she is joining racist KKK people with her vote --- white supremacists will vote in droves for Trump -- if I went into a voting booth and voted for him I would feel their slime. If your conscience won't let you vote for Hillary there has to be a conscience about a Trump vote.

But some of Roseanne's rationale for the "benefits" of a Trump win are not nuts. Hillary wins and we are now talking lesser of 2 evils in 2020 - and she could easily lose in 2020. Roseanne puts forth the Trump-apocalypse  theory -- he can destroy the Republican Party while the left undoes the Dems.

I disagree with Roseanne on the 3rd party vote -- The Democratic Party will not change - they will keep putting up phony fronts. Only a growing 3rd party can really stop them - it happened very fast in Italy over the past few years. I don't know if Green is the answer but if the Bernie people get active there is a chance. Jill Stein is polling 7% right now - the difference between Hillary and Trump. So a vote for Green builds the cache and influence of a 3rd party - only that threat will force change om the Dems. And really, if Trump turns into the North Korean guy you may not want your vote for him on your conscience.

Here is food for thought:


https://theindependentthinker2016.wordpress.com/2016/06/23/dear-democratic-party-im-leaving-you-and-im-taking-the-kids/

Norm's 2 columns in the Wave: On Ed Policy, It’s Democrats vs. Democrats Plus RTC on Follies

School Scope: On Ed Policy, It’s Democrats vs. Democrats

By Norm Scott

I’ve been writing in this space on education policy for about a dozen years. About the massive nationwide assault by both political parties on educators, their unions,  the concept of the local community school as a neighborhood hub, the use of high stakes testing as an instrument and charter schools as the spearhead of disruption. Let me restate this point in bold letters – BOTH POLITICAL PARTIES – in case you are now aware, known as the Republicans and the Democrats. While there are some differences – the Dems moderate their positions just enough to keep a carrot in front of the teacher unions so they keep running after each other. But make no mistake about it – both parties deserve the label of “ed deformers.”

As a left leaning Bernie Sanders supporting social democrat, I’ve been particularly harsh on the Dems who should be the natural allies of teachers and their unions and on the surface they seem to be. On the surface. But just witness the new NY State law extending mayoral control by one year but handing another giveback to the charter school lobby.

Jeff Bryant has an interesting article in Common Dreams, How Long Can Big Money Keep Democrats In The Charter School Camp?

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/06/18/how-long-can-big-money-keep-democrats-charter-school-camp

Bryant points to the recent California primary. “While the Democratic Party’s presidential candidates, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, ran on populist platforms denouncing “the corrosive role of money in politics” and “condemning the plutocratic consequences of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision,” many Democratic Party candidates down ticket funded their campaigns with big money from two corporate interests. One interest flooding the election with campaign donations is hardly new to the scene. For decades, the petroleum industry has stuffed the coffers of candidates in both parties to ensure legislation continues to favor oil consumption, stall alternative energy sources, and ensure lax environmental regulations. The other source of corporate cash in Democratic politics is much newer: charter schools. ….Many Democratic Party candidates relied on money from the petroleum industry and “education reform” advocates backing charter schools to win their contests over more progressive candidates.”

Obama is a Republican on ed policy

While be see a barrage of criticism from Republicans over anything Obama should happen to do  no matter how insignificant, one thing you will not hear is criticism of anything he has done on education. Hillary will continue most of these policies. Trump? Don’t even think about it. Educators who call themselves Republicans are basically voting to end their life work. Just desserts for these people, especially those on pensions would can watch their hero executing an overt attack on their pensions as being “too expensive” and urging us to take 25 cents on the dollar to “make America great again.”

When it comes to ed policy the charter industry doesn’t even have to worry about the Republicans.

Back to Bryant: “According to a report from the Center for Media and Democracy, an organization calling itself Democrats for Education Reform has been effective in a number of states at getting Democratic candidates to team up with traditionally Republican-leaning financial interests to defeat any attempts to question rapid expansions of unregulated charter schools. According to the CMD study, DEFR is a PAC “co-founded by hedge fund managers” to funnel “dark money” into “expenditures, like mass mailings or ads supporting particular politicians, that were ‘independent’ and not to be coordinated with the candidates’ campaigns.” The organization and its parent entity also have ties to FOX’s Rupert Murdoch and Charles and David Koch.”

With Bernie pretty much done for pro-public education supporters are left with little choice in the election. (Not that Bernie has said very much about education.) We know that the Clintons have been ed deformers since their Arkansas days. Observers of the UFT and AFT, our local and national unions also note that our own unions have been allied with the Clintons on education policy since the alliance built with the Clintons in the 80s by the late Albert Shanker. While if I were the deciding vote I would still vote for Hillary over Trump, as a NY State voter I think I can afford to vote “other” and still not help Trump get elected. I don’t stop at ed policy. We need massive reform at all levels of policy.

I want to continue to make a point that neither of the parties in our 2-party system is satisfactory to me and what is needed is a 3^rd force as we are seeing in Italy where the 7-year old Five Star Movement just elected female mayors of Rome and Turin. I can only hope the Bernie movement goes beyond Bernie. This past weekend a couple of hundred Bernie people met in Chicago to plan future actions which include beginning to get involved in local politics to either change the Democratic Party from the grass roots are start a 3^rd way real reform movement like 5 Star.

Next: Why can’t a so-called progressive Dem who is bringing Rockaway a subsidized ferry at metrocard rates find love in Rockaway?

See Norm fume at ednotesonline.org.

Here is my RTC column
-->

Memo from the RTC: Final Follies Kudos as La Cage Aux Folles is Coming

By Norm Scott

Well, the Follies set is down and La Cage… (opening August 4) is on the way up as the rehearsal schedule begins getting intense. There are so many sets for Tony Homsey and crew to build, there may be scarcely a tree left standing on Rockaway.

I had to miss the final two performances of Follies at the Rockaway Theatre Company this past weekend (and the cast party) because we had tickets to see the legendary Brian Wilson sans the rest of the Beach Boys (except for Al Jardine) at Tanglewood in Massachusetts. I’m still feeling those good vibrations so I want to say a few final words about the show, the cast and the behind scenes people involved in this complex production of Stephen Sondheim’s Follies. Many people just don’t like Sondheim music or shows and so there was some resistance even within the RTC family. So the show got mixed reviews. Even one of the lead actors made some comments early in rehearsals about how he was not a fan. Yet by the end of the run he was totally enveloped. I found myself running song after song in my head all day – once in a while I even broke out into song, only to see my cat (and my wife) cover their ears.

The Sunday June 11 matinee had to survive a crisis as the fire on Flatbush Ave closed down the Gil Hodges bridge and delayed 3 performers by an hour and a half. The audience was offered their money back if they couldn’t stay for the delayed performance, which began at 3:30. Most remained and were treated to pie, coffee and ad hoc performances by various members of the cast who came out and sang for them. When the show ended around 6PM there was a palpable love fest between audience and cast.

Director Peggy Page Press threw herself into the project with enormous energy and commitment (12 facebook or more cheerleading and encouraging messages a day) and the cast and production crew came through with flying colors. Peggy’s usual partner, Michael Wotypka, co-directed. There are the usual dedicated suspects who delivered a bang-up job. Music director and sound designer Richard Louis-Pierre and Choreographer Nicole DePierro-Nellen played primary roles and will also be doing the upcoming La Cage…. Costumier Kerry O’Conner, despite being very pregnant, was in charge of what was one of the most complex costuming jobs the RTC has seen. Andrew Woodridge, as always, took care of the increasingly professional lighting.

One of the major jobs on any show is the sound technician who must make 20 remote mics work so the actors can be heard. This job fell to 15-year old Alex Stabiner who Peggy praised as one of the heroes of the production for taking on this complex task with humor and dedication. Also behind the scenes were RTC Young People regulars Mia Melchiorri and Reilly Mangano who were racing around all over the place taking on tasks that needed to get done. I find one of the most impressive things about Peggy is her faith in kids as performers and back-stage people. Our current 20-something crew came up through these ranks over the past dozen years and this 3^rd generation is so hooked on the RTC we know things will be in good hands for a long time to come.

In addition to doing the Wave’s School Scope column, Norm blogs about education and politics at ednotesonline.org.

UPDATED: Does Brexit Shock and Awe Forecast POTUS Election - and UFT Internals too

Will we be shocked to wake up in November to a President Trump?

Trump is in Scotland on the very day of the major shock over Britain's exit. I can see the same kind of surprise in November since many of the same issues in Britain and all over Europe are operating here. One of the themes is that the wealthy/elite/liberals/neoliberals were opposed to Brexit while the working class was for it.

In the primaries, Bernie and Trump seemed to capture some of those same political winds albeit from different directions. Hillary and the Bushes in many ways were more aligned than may seem obvious.

I think this will be going on all over Europe as the right rises. And it will go on here too to some extent -- but the left may be rising too -- so maybe we will end up in another civil war.

Now let me leap to some internal debates that have been taking place and will be taking place in MORE -- a sense of people at elite schools don't feel the same kind of pressure that most of the rest of the UFT members face. I feel a similar yin-yang going on but then again I may be looking too deep.

Anyway - Michael Fiorillo sent this along which touches on some of these issues with this comment:

Worth reading, if only because it takes a far more honest view of class conflict than mainstream, Clintonian "liberalism" does

Why Clinton Lost So Many Democrats

Almost half of her party—and more than two-thirds of its youth—want a different kind of liberalism.

By Jack Ross • June 21, 2016

• 
• 

The decisive factor in Hillary Clinton’s victory over Bernie Sanders was her rock-solid support from upscale liberals voting primarily on culture-war issues. White Democrats, in other words, largely voted along class lines.
This was most starkly illustrated when the New York Times published a map of how every precinct in the five boroughs voted in April, with Hillary completely sweeping Brownstone Brooklyn and all of Manhattan save a few lonely precincts on the Lower East Side. It was first seen as early as March 1 in Massachusetts, when Cambridge and its bedroom satellite Lexington put Clinton over the top by a fraction of a percent. And it ensured her consolidating victories throughout the Northeast and finally in California.
The urgent wake-up call that these facts should present to the Democratic leadership is this: While Hillary won the upscale white liberals and minorities who “look like the Democratic Party”—indeed, she lost among registered Democrats only in Vermont and New Hampshire—she still won only 54 percent of the primary vote, and she lost young voters by nearly three-to-one.
The turbulence of this election is best understood as the end of the era that began with the election of 1968, defined by the numerous domestic consequences of the Vietnam War. Published the following year, The Emerging Republican Majority by Kevin Phillips remains the indispensable chronicle of the historical forces that led up to that election, as well as the most breathtakingly accurate forecast of its long-term aftermath. Phillips bluntly described the diminished Democratic Party that would face the Nixon/Reagan supermajority as “the party of the Establishmentarian Northeast and Negro South.” The generation of progressives shaped by this tumult reached its apotheosis in Hillary Clinton’s present campaign.
The presidential contender who set the tone of American liberalism for the epoch that began in 1968 was not a high-minded representative of Cold War liberalism’s better half such as Eugene McCarthy or George McGovern, but Bobby Kennedy, whose campaign represented an odd alliance of the Democratic establishment with such New Left ideologues as Tom Hayden. The politics of Vietnam have obscured the early history of the New Left, which was deeply invested in the idealism of the Great Society—an idealism that Kennedy most effectively channeled.
In his widely praised book The Agony of the American Left, Christopher Lasch diagnosed the fatally limited imagination of this species of leftism. In discussing the lionization of such early-20th-century anarchists as “Big Bill” Haywood and the IWW, Lasch explained that “Haywood’s militancy, his advocacy of violence and sabotage … and his view of radicalism as a movement based on marginal people, all correspond to the anti-intellectual proclivities of the contemporary student left.” Oddly enough, this proved a comfortable fit for Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society, which was directed at such marginal populations as Appalachian coal miners and the black urban poor, as opposed to the more nationally unifying, and thus naturally more popular, programs of the New Deal.
Whatever one’s opinion of Bernie Sanders’s proposals for single-payer health care, tuition-free public college, and a massive reinvestment in infrastructure, they have reemphasized why the New Deal was popular and the Great Society was not. This is a fundamental break from the pattern of missionary progressivism by what in the 1970s was called “the new class” of affluent professionals, typified by the Great Society and over the following decades increasingly conflated with culture-war priorities.
This is the source of the biggest misunderstanding of the Sanders phenomenon by the generation of liberals formed by 1968 and its aftermath. Even older Sanders supporters, hailing from that milieu themselves, have typically assumed that the campaign is merely the latest in a predictable cycle of generational struggle between youthful “egalitarians” and wizened “politicians” (to borrow from the title of the suspiciously timed new book by Sean Wilentz, who is perfectly representative of this conceit as both an ardent Clintonite and nostalgic son of postwar Greenwich Village).
But Phillips provides a clearer insight into what presently roils American liberalism. Perhaps nothing is more striking to the retrospective reader of The Emerging Republican Majority than how completely marginal, if not irrelevant, was the drama of the New Left to the causes of the realignment that led to the Nixon/Reagan supermajority. Phillips recognized what was lost on the political and media elite of the 1960s and ’70s—that the emergence of this supermajority, not the campaigns of Gene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy, was the real story of 1968.
Much of the political story of the past few years should be understood as the unfolding consequences of a highly analogous situation among the millennial generation. The privileged student radicals of 1968 became the vanguard of the new class, which, despite its electoral marginality, defined American liberalism for the next five decades. Their children, inheriting their values, advanced their cause both in the prestige media and as the loudest, most aggressive voices on elite campuses. Today, that prosperous elite is ever-more isolated from the social and economic devastation that has gripped most of the country.
The overwhelming preference of millennials for Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton—and the not-insignificant showing of millennial support for Donald Trump—has thus been a revolt by that generation’s masses against their appointed representatives in prestige media, who were largely responsible for creating the illusions about the mood of the country that have set the tone and underlying assumptions for the Clinton campaign.
This self-satisfied culture-war extremism might have been tolerated by most millennials had it not become the hallmark of open class contempt. But it is no accident that leading corporate liberal publications, from The Atlantic to Slate to New York, traffic in the most unrestrained identity politics, belligerence, and transgender extremism while their mostly young writers have also been the most supportive of Clinton and critical of Sanders.
It may be extremely sobering that Hillary Clinton’s only challenger for the Democratic nomination was both a lifelong independent and a representative of the aging Jewish cohort that is perhaps the last surviving segment of voters with a serious attachment to the class-solidarity appeal of the New Deal Democrats. But it is at least as revealing that only such a man as Bernie Sanders could have rallied the economically hard-pressed youth of America behind a future they could believe in, just as it is now clear that only a human wrecking ball such as Donald Trump could have finally dislodged and buried the rotting corpse of the historic conservative movement.
Many longstanding assumptions about the future of American politics are likely to be exploded over the next several months. Polls have been showing Clinton and Trump running about evenly among millennials, and Nate Cohn of the New York Times has laid out data undermining the assumption of a declining white electorate. Meanwhile, a millennial supermajority that rejects its politically correct mouthpieces, not unlike the boomer supermajority that rejected the New Left, is coming into view.
To be sure, that majority is firmly committed to social and economic policies that are far closer to those of Bernie Sanders than to those of Ronald Reagan. But it is precisely because the liberal culture-war catechism is so totally losing resonance with them—not to mention the slaying of the Reagan policy paradigm by Trump—that the liberal pundit class is invoking that catechism with increasing hysteria. This election will do much to determine how the millennial majority ultimately takes shape.
If Trump wins, the combination of his likely one-term disaster and the shock of a Clinton loss will likely open the way for a lasting generational transformation of the Democratic Party. Unless Trump loses in a landslide, which looks increasingly unlikely, there is no going back to the old order for the Republicans, in which case they could still thwart the emerging Democratic majority of the past decade. Yet the success of the Sanders campaign has made clear that if, as some have suggested, the coming realignment is between the Bloomberg party and the Trump party, the former cannot long survive.
The legacy of the Bernie Sanders campaign will have been to reveal that for the Democrats, no less than the Republicans, the twin legacies of the 1960s—in both the party establishment and its ideological base—are at long last at death’s door.
Jack Ross is the author of The Socialist Party of America: A Complete History and the forthcoming The Strange Death of American Exceptionalism, on the history of the present political moment inspired by the scholarship of Kevin Phillips.

Here is another point of view from Daily Kos. I don't quite agree since there is a lot more devastation in this ecomony than it admits too and the effects of globalization are a reason in part.

By Laurence Lewis   

You’re going to be reading a lot of stories about the Brexit vote being a warning that Donald Trump can win. Those stories will be wrong.
Brexit apparently has won, and the primary reason is the economic turmoil wrought by the greed and at times open cruelty of British austerity, as imposed by David Cameron and George Osborne. Labour didn’t run against austerity in the last British election, and was punished for it. The British people were punished with more austerity. A brutal economy always feeds extremism, and that is how Britain got Brexit. The irony was that Cameron and Osborne had to fight desperately against the consequences of their own policies. And if you think I’m ignoring Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, that’s because he was almost invisible during the Remain campaign, and his support was tepid if not feigned. Britain has austerity and no credible national leaders. Hence Brexit.
While much of Europe was electing right wing governments that imposed austerity, the United States was electing Barack Obama. The Obama stimulus was a starkly different approach from European austerity. A larger stimulus would have done more to fuel a robust recovery, but the stimulus that was enacted stopped the economic free fall, and got the United States back on the right track. More needs to be done, and will be done, but the difference with Europe and particularly Britain is obvious. The extremism fueling the Trump campaign is neither as broad or deep as the extremism fueling Brexit. Because President Obama and Congressional Democrats ensured that the United States did not end up with the sort of brutal economic program the Republicans would have imposed, and that Cameron and Osborne in Britain did impose.
Simply put, the extremism fueling Brexit does not have the same resonance in the United States. Because our economy is not suffering the way Britain’s economy is suffering. And the economic agenda of Hillary Clinton is very deliberately designed to build on the success of the Obama economic agenda. The United States has alternatives that Britain did not have. And the United States will not follow Britain’s path into extremism because it hasn’t been on a parallel economic path.

Friday June 24: Students, Parents to Walk Out of Historic East Harlem School Demanding Removal of Principal

Community to Demand accountability from District 4 Superintendent

It was a pleasure hanging out with the parents and teachers of Central Park East 1 last night at dinner after the PEP meeting. The Farina assault on this school and the UFT turning its back says it all about what is going on. I will be putting up the videos of their comments, including charges of racism. The District 4 Supt looks to be another criminal supervisor put in power by Farina.

For Immediate Release:

Contact:
Kenya Dilday:

Kaliris Salas Ramirez:

Jennifer Roesch:  

 

More information at www.savecpe1.org

Students, Parents to Walk Out of Historic East Harlem School Demanding Removal of Principal

Community to Demand accountability from District 4 Superintendent

EAST HARLEM—Students will walk out of Central Park East 1 Friday morning to join a protest march calling for an end to the year-long attack on the school’s storied, progressive culture, its long-term teachers, children and families.

The children, from pre-k through fifth grade, will join their families and supporters in a march to the office of District 4 Superintendent Alexandra Estrella. The walk out and march is being organized to directly address Estrella for her role in decimating a school that pioneered progressive education in the city.

In the summer of 2015, Estrella appointed Monika Garg as the principal of CPE1. Garg quickly lost the trust of the majority of CPE1 families by antagonizing long-time teachers; submitting young children to interrogations without informing their parents; advocating for a new version of “separate but equal” by stating that CPE1’s progressive education doesn’t work for students of color or poor children; and bypassing the school’s democratic structures and even the Chancellor’s regulations to push an agenda of changing the historic school.

Garg has been supported by Estrella even as 70% of the parents at CPE1 have called for the principal’s removal. As CPE1 parents take action to demand Garg be removed from CPE1, Estrella has mounted her own campaign against CPE1 families, spreading lies about parent leaders and purposely misinforming the District 4 Community Education Council about the “SAVE CPE1” movement.

Previous public actions by the CPE1 community demanding Garg’s removal include multiple appearances at the Panel on Educational Policy and a 300-person rally at DOE Headquarters last month.

Who: Students and parents from CPE 1

What: Protest to demand removal of school’s principal.

Excellent visuals include young children with protest signs,crowd chanting and marching, delegation delivering petition to Superintendent Estrella.

When: Friday, June 24, 2016; Start time 8:30AM

Where: Starts at 106th Street between Madison and Park,march moves to 120th Street between Lexington and 3rd Avenue.

The website, savecpe1.org, offers an extensive timeline detailing the pattern of administrative mistreatment over time. It also provides testimonials from families about what a Central Park East 1 education has meant for them and their children. It explains Central Park East 1’s unique curriculum and pedagogy as well as its success - as measured by the Department of Education’s own metrics.

###

A Pre-PEP Primer: Who Ya Gonna Call?

Jia Lee:

Jia with fans

I bore witness, at yet another Panel for Educational Policy where the Chancellor and other members, appointed by the mayor, pretended to hear the voices of community members, as they lined up to speak, with incredible courage and conviction. I had to leave midway only to hear later that chaos ensued when the PEP ignored or gave lip service to its constituents. The PEP is not a democratic space. Nothing has changed. I see you Aixa Rodriguez Kathy Cole Alexandra Alves Jen Roesch Lydia Ann Norm Scott Jane Maisel Julie Neusner ‪#‎SaveCPE1‬ ‪#‎justiceforMary‬ ‪#‎PS233‬ 

I returned late last night from the monthly Panel for Education (PEP) meeting which lasted past 9 with my head pounding from Farina's constantly reminding everyone how she never breaks a promise. What a pathetic crew most of the PEPs are -- but not all - kudos to Brooklyn PEP Eric Adams appointee Fred Baptiste.

There is too much to digest though I did enjoy digesting the post-PEP meal at a Vietnamese restaurant with the great crew of parents and teachers from Central Park East 1 - hanging with them makes going to the PEP worth it --- they told Farina they will be back to every PEP until principal Monika Garg, who trained under the racist principal of Pan American HS who is under federal charges, is gone.

But let me not get too far ahead of myself --- the video is processing and best to let you see for yourself when it is done.

In the meantime let me tell you about my day yesterday BEFORE I went to the PEP.

It was a big construction day at the Rockaway Theatre Company as we began major construction for the set of La Cage Aux Folles. In the midst of all that I received 3 phone calls from teachers - phone calls that pumped me up to go to the PEP even though I had to leave Rockaway on a beautiful day.

A MORE member called to talk about what she might do after getting discontinued by a vicious and vindictive principal - and I suggested she come down to the PEP and tell them about it to their faces. She did and she waited all night to talk and she was great. I will put up her video and tell her story in a separate post. She is leaving anyway after getting a scholarship to law school in California - I hope she comes back here in 3 years and makes the DOE lives miserable - we sure could use a young movement lawyer. She is an avid social justice advocate.

Another MORE member called - a chapter leader who beat a Unity slug in the election who happened to be the principal favorite - so our gal has faced onslaughts from both directions. It has not been a fun first year as chapter leader. She came down to the PEP yesterday too but the meeting lasted so long she couldn't stay to talk.

Finally, I received a call from a high school chapter leader who is under assault by a new principal, as is the rest of his staff. He is a MORE supporter who I met when I was stuffing mail boxes -- he even helped me. The UFT district and borough reps are less than useless -- I won't get into details. I also suggested he come to the PEP and he met me there and sat through the entire meeting - his first PEP - and couldn't believe what he was seeing. He also made a great statement.

Jia Lee and I met some teachers from a another school with a vindictive principal. They were also MORE fans and voted for us. There is an epidemic of vindictive power-hungry principals.

Addressing this issue must be a major focus for MORE though I don't know exactly what more MORE could do - other than putting pressure on the UFT- which as usual was absent from the PEP.

Here area few PEP pics.

Army in Mexico Attacks Teachers Protesting Ed Deform - 8 Dead

If the day ever comes that things get so bad for educators in this country and we no longer have a sell-out Unity Caucus leadership licking at the boots of the deformers (wish I were a cartoonist), the Bush/Obama/Clinton/Cuomo/Trump et al admins would send the national guard after teachers too.

Dear Norman,
During the past few days, extreme violence has been used against teachers in Oaxaca, Mexico who were protesting governmental education "reforms." This has resulted in the deaths of at least eight people. The Network for Public Education joins with those condemning this violence and calls for a dialogue to resolve the underlying issues. We support the statement issued by the Civil Society of Oaxaca demanding that the government do the following:

• End the wrongful and disproportionate use of force and repression against the teachers who make use of their legitimate right to free expression and free protest.

• Establish a round table for dialogue with the teachers of Oaxaca.

• Provide medical attention for all persons injured as a result of the violent acts of the State.

• Stop the criminalization of the teachers by cancelling arrest warrants against members of the teachers' union of Oaxaca. Immediately release all teachers who have been arrested in an arbitrary and illegal way.

• Punish all persons responsible for arbitrary detentions, torture and other violations of Human Rights against members of the teachers' union of Oaxaca.

Please personalize the statement above and send it to:

US Ambassador to Mexico, Roberta S. Jacobson
Paseo de la Reforma 305
Colonia Cuauhtemoc

06500 Mexico, D.F.

Or call or fax Ms. Jacobsen at:
Phone: ( 01-55 ) 5080-2000
Fax: ( 01-55 ) 5080-2005

In addition to the above, contact the Mexican Consulate at:

1250 23rd St. NW - Washington DC, 20037
Tel: (202) 736-1000 * Fax: (202) 234-4498
E-mail:consulwas@sre.gob.mx

Thanks for all that you do. Share this link:

http://networkforpubliceducation.org/2016/06/6569/
Carol Burris
Executive Director
The Network for Public Education

Jeff Bryant: How Long Can Big Money Keep Democrats In The Charter School Camp?

How did the charter school industry get mixed up with big oil to gets its way in Democratic Party contests?... Jeff Bryant

Will the Bernie revolt in the Democratic party extend to those Dems being backed by charter money?

Clearly there are enough voters in the Democratic Party base who feel this way to convince some of their party’s candidates and current officials to challenge the wide leeway the charter school industry wants. So maybe more Democratic candidates who’ve tapped charter school money will have some explaining to do... Jeff Bryant

Jeff examines the California primary voting patterns for clues. It is our job to begin to hold Dems supported by charter money accountable.

How Long Can Big Money Keep Democrats In The Charter School Camp?

Published on

Saturday, June 18, 2016

by

Education Opportunity Network

by

Jeff Bryant

How Long Can Big Money Keep Democrats In The Charter School Camp?

Silent Unity Caucus Members, Deserving Scorn, Want Perks But No Accountability

Careful not to show how you really feel.. Attacking the entire Unity caucus is really a show of how unhinged More is becoming at the seams.... Unity Caucus slug commenting on Ed Notes post: Unity-UFT Caucus Members MUST Be Called to Account - In their own schools

I and other bloggers have been posting about that Unity Caucus leaflet attacking MORE for supporting opt out.

• Unity Caucus Attack on Opt Out and MORE - It's Ran...
• Unity-UFT Attack on MORE and Opt-Out Ghost written...

You see, Unity Caucus people want immunity from having to face consequences for their support for their leadership's disastrous decision making on issues such as mayoral control or opt out or common core or supporting a crippling evaluation committee or being silent on abusive principals or ---- fill in the blanks.

Another Unity slug excused their post DA meeting with this:

The meeting after DA was for new convention delegates. While they are UNITY caucus members, the meeting is a UFT meeting, not a caucus meeting.

Causing Michael Fiorillo to comment: Oh, I get it: L'etat c'est moi...

Michael is right - the members of Unity Caucus think they are the UFT. Right. Maybe the caucus meeting to tell them all how to vote will take place another time.

As to my call for Unity Caucus enablers of bad policy to be attacked as being a sign that MORE is becoming unhinged --- well I don't view myself as representing MORE policy. In fact if more people in MORE listened to me, there would not be tame little district rep meetings or Delegate Assemblies or even upcoming executive board meetings. I would declare war on Unity. But I and some other ICEers in MORE, who have a lot of experience with the Unity machine are in a minority.

As an elder statesman in MORE, I have realized the the newer MOREs must go through years of frustration at dealing with Unity leaders who often play word games to misdirect the members from their real policies. Right now many MORE people think they can work with Unity to create change in the union. They are dreaming. I think they should go for the jugular and treat Unity people politically the way Vichy-like collaborators should be treated.

Hey, I like many Unity people too but we have to separate the work some of them do for the union - which can be good work -- and their political support for the bad policies of the caucus. Make each and every Unity caucus member defend mayoral control - and if they tell you they don't agree with the leadership tell them they are full of bullshit until they have the guts to stand up publicly and say so,

I'll leave the final comment to the gutsy Roseanne McCosh, one of the few Unity Caucus member who would not take the bullshit anymore

Anonymous: You're confusing unhinged with unbound. Unbound to Mulgrew/Randi and every other sell out piece of shit in a union leadership position who is promoting Cuomo's agenda. I guess since Cuomo's cronies are busy readying for prison or an indictment someone has to pick up the slack and do the governor's dirty work for him. Andrew Cuomo thanks you and Mulgrew and Randi for your service and commitment to the destruction of public schools and teachers. Roseanne McCosh

Unity-UFT Caucus Members MUST Be Called to Account - In their own schools

MORE urged students to opt out of the state exams as a means of protecting the professional autonomy of educators and fighting against a corporate education system. ... Unity-UFT Caucus leaflet, June 2016

Arthur has a follow-up post today on the Unity Caucus attack against MORE for, as Leonie Haimson put it:

How dare MORE fight for professional autonomy and against a corporate driven agenda! Who do you think you are?
NYC Educator: UFT Unity and Corporate Values

See my previous posts on this issue:

• Unity Caucus Attack on Opt Out and MORE - It's Ran...
• Unity-UFT Attack on MORE and Opt-Out Ghost written...

I've heard people say that they like people they know in Unity -- yet these are the very people who empower the Unity Caucus leadership to take stands antithetical to the interests of UFT members.

By now the entire opt out community is condemning the leaflet but the focus has been Mulgrew when in fact it should be the Randi-Mulgrew enablers who make up Unity Caucus.

Unity Caucus is not just an entity divorced from the 800 people who are going to the AFT convention to vote the way they are told to. Right after the DA the other day, Unity held a meeting - I saw some luscious food platters some people had -- to tell them how to vote.

I like some Unity people too. But isn't it time to hold each and every one of them accountable for the positions of the caucus they choose to join? I told a union official recently that not all of them are slugs -- I view only the nasty ones that way. They seem to feel insulted when I refer to them as slugs. Well, maybe someone can come up with a better word for what I estimate to be around 1500 Unity Caucus members, many retirees, many still based in schools, who sign on to a caucus that says it is wrong for MORE to fight against corporate deform and professional autonomy.
I wrote the other day:

If you know people in Unity Caucus show them the leaflet and ask them to pledge allegiance to what it says - and if they won't, ask them to make a public statement denouncing it -- and watch them cower in fear - all 800 of them - or more. That makes them a slug in  my book.

If you are a MORE or an independent chapter leader and attend the monthly district rep chapter leader meetings, which are often packed with Unity acolytes, isn't it time to stand up and say,

I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore.

And for my friends in Unity - isn't it time for you to get some legs on your slug body and stand up and join us.