This is based on a study of 5,000 Americans [...]]]> I found this YouTube video the other day that I’d like to share with you, as it does a great job of explaining the amount of financial inequality we have in the U.S. right now. It’s probably worse than you realize.

This is based on a study of 5,000 Americans by a Harvard business professor and economist. He looked at their perceptions of income inequality in the U.S. and then asked them what adjustments they thought necessary to make the system fair and just. The study shows that most of us are very aware of the fact that too much money is flowing to the top of the financial food chain and that something needs to be done. However, as this video illustrates, it’s worse than we think–much worse.

Unfortunately, the erosion of the middle class began back in the days before Reagan was elected to the White House. This means, the middle class has been shrinking and getting a smaller and smaller piece of the pie for at least thirty years. In other words, over half of the people alive today have no memory of the time when the American middle class was healthy, vibrant and the was the source of American greatness.

It also means that over half of all Americans aren’t alarmed at what’s happening in this country, because they see this income inequality as merely being “business as usual.” Remember, things that happen before people are born are like ancient history to them–even events that happened immediately before their births.

To most American’s, a small and weak middle class is just the way it is. To them, there’s nothing alarming about our situation because, as far as they can tell, it’s always been this way. The hill we have to climb to turn this country upright becomes steeper every day, as more people who remember middle-class prosperity die and as more American babies are born into a world where it’s considered normal for half us to scrape-by on less than 5% of the wealth in this country.

It’s hard to see a way for us to ever turn the corner and get this country back.

This week Mr. Social proved that neither he nor his little Facebook site have an inkling of hippness away from the Starbuck’s universe, when they decided a historical photograph from counter cultural Toronto, taken in the late 60s or early 70s, was [...]]]> Zuck the suck has a lot to learn about being cool and hip.

This week Mr. Social proved that neither he nor his little Facebook site have an inkling of hippness away from the Starbuck’s universe, when they decided a historical photograph from counter cultural Toronto, taken in the late 60s or early 70s, was nothing but unacceptable nudity, or worse, porno.

Then again, I could be wrong. This could merely be a case of a computer algorithm with penis envy.

The photograph in question was originally used as a sort of anti-advertisement for Rochdale College, a chartered Canadian free school that closed in 1975. In it’s day, Rochdale occupied a brand spanking new building near downtown Toronto, bought and paid-for with government funds. Outside of Toronto, this building and the school it housed was one of hippiedom’s best kept secrets. If the 60s counter culture had a Vatican, it was Rochdale.

Now, we’re not going to get into the cool factor that was Rochdale–that’s another article entirely, if not a book. Let’s just say that it was hated by the local authorities because it was a lot like Alice’s Restaurant (where you could “get anything you want”) except on a much grander scale. But it was also legitimately a center of higher education–a free school that spawned some organizations that became mainstays of Canadian culture. Examples of this would include Theatre Passe Muraille, which began in Rochdale and continues to this day as a driving force in Canadian theater; Coach House Press, for a long time the country’s most prestigious artisan printing establishment; and Reg Hartt’s Cineforum.

Indeed, Rochdale was the brain child of Canadian writer and Toronto’s first Poet Laureate, Dennis Lee, who also co-founded House of Anansi Press. To be fair to Mr. Lee, who evidently was not much of an anarchist, Rochdale didn’t turn out quite like he envisioned and it’s doubtful he has fond memories of the place. However, some other writers were very comfortable there, most notably science fiction writer Judith Merril, who moved into the building almost immediately after moving to Canada from her native U.S. as a protest against the war in Vietnam.

Needless to say, running an eighteen story building was an expensive proposition–especially when you consider that the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Authority (CMHC) was always threatening to foreclose if the mortgage wasn’t paid (eventually they did). Enough rents were collected to cover some of the expenses–but not nearly enough to keep the place afloat–so other avenues of funding were explored.

One of the most famous ways Rochdale raised money was through the sale of degrees. Rochdale was an officially chartered educational institution. However, it was not accredited. In other words, Rochdale could legally operate as an educational institution, but an education there would not be recognized by the likes of big universities like the University of Toronto, which was located practically next door. It was a free school. What you learned at Rochdale was for your own edification, because credits from the place couldn’t even be transferred to McDonald’s Hamburger U.

But Rochdale could sell degrees, which they did to raise money. They were fine degrees, featuring high quality hand printing by the masters at Coach House Press. You could buy a Bachelor’s, a Master’s or a PhD. If you wanted to be subversive, or maybe a little more truthful, you could buy a non-degree–again a non-Bachelor’s, a non-Master’s or a non-PhD. In addition to money (they started at $25), some degrees required you to answer a question and others required you to ask a question. On the most expensive degrees, according to the brochure, “no question will be asked.”

In other words, this was subversive hippiedom at it’s best.

One of most memorable ad campaigns for Rochdale degrees was in the form of a widely distributed photograph taken by Rochdale’s unofficial official photographer Alex MacDonald of actor and Rochdale resident Robert Nasmith. It’s a black and white, dirty-old-man flasher shot taken outside against a brick wall. Nasmith is holding open his overcoat in the stereotypical style of a flasher, wearing absolutely nothing at all underneath and leaving nothing to the imagination. Attached to the inside of this coat, however, are three Rochdale degrees.

Doesn’t this make you wish you had a degree from Rochdale College? Photo &copy Alex MacDonald–All Rights Reserved

As the Rochdale brochure used to say, “Support higher education–buy a degree.” Or words to that effect.

A few weeks ago, David Witton posted a copy of this famous photograph on a Rochdale Facebook group. This led to a lot of discussion about the old days, about our friend “Bobby” Nasmith, with some good natured comments on his physical attributes.

Then Zuckerberg’s nannies at Facebook found it and took it down, scolding Mr. Witton and giving him warning to not do that again. “I had to change my password,” Witton explained in an email, “the implication being maybe someone hacked into my account and did this foul deed, but otherwise I got off with a warning.”

According to Witton, Facebook explained their reasoning thusly:

“Facebook has a strict policy against the sharing of pornographic content and any explicitly sexual content where a minor is involved. We also impose limitations on the display of nudity. We aspire to respect people’s right to share content of personal importance, whether those are photos of a sculpture like Michelangelo’s David or family photos of a child breastfeeding.”

Now, I would’ve thought this picture would fall under the “Michelangelo’s David” clause of exceptions. Witton, evidently a fair man, theorizes: “They may have seen Bob’s pic as making fun of ‘flashing,’ which I’m sure they consider a sexual perversion.”

While it’s nice to know that Facebook wants to protect us from the boogeymen and women in this world–their enforcement seems to be quite selective. While they’re offended enough by this display of an example of 1960s subversive commerical art to remove it, they’re perfectly happy with the photos posted by a user with an account under the unlikely name Roop See (click and scroll down the wall a bit to see).

Maybe Zuckerberg is just one of those people who doesn’t know art but he knows what he likes. As for me, I do know art (or think I do) and this old hippie advertisement qualifies. Indeed, I think I’ll post it on my Facebook page. Care to join me?

Editor’s note: Make a statement in support of art, history and culture by sharing this on your Facebook page. Click on the Facebook share button below and a discrete thumbnail version of the Robert Nasmith photo along with a link back to this article, will appear on your wall. Then urge your friends to share.

Recently, when being interviewed by [...]]]> One of the hallmarks of the ’60s’ and early ’70s’ revolution was summed up by The Who’s finale on the 1971 Who’s Next album, “Won’t Get Fooled Again,” which ends with the all too prophetic words, “Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.”

Recently, when being interviewed by Max Keiser on the RT network’s Keiser Report TV show, Eric Hilton of the Washington, D.C. based band Thievery Corporation used the words to describe the current situation musicians face, now that the music biz jungle has moved from a shrink wrapped buy-it-in-a-store product to the more abstract and ephemeral digital download.

In this day and age when politically active bands have trouble getting airplay on radio–a medium that always played it safe but now does so with absolute gusto–it’s refreshing when a band feels free to speak-out with such intelligent candor.

In case you don’t know, Thievery Corporation has been around since 1995 and has released at least six albums, most if not all on their Eighteenth Street Lounge Music (ESL Music) record label. They’ve opened for Paul McCartney and have been regularly featured at Lollapalooza.

They’re also known for taking progressive stances on a host of issues. According to Wikipedia:

“Tracks such as ‘Amerimacka’ and ‘Revolution Solution’ from their album The Cosmic Game and ‘Richest Man in Babylon’ from the album of the same title [sic] reveal the group’s opposition to the positions and initiatives of former president George W. Bush’s administration.”

The group vocally supports World Food Programme and has spoken-out against the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The internet activist group Demand Progress has released a short 2 1/2 minute video on YouTube that explains the implications of the legal wranglings between student Supap Kirtsaeng and textbook publisher John Wiley & Sons in a case that’s already [...]]]> Editor’s note: This article was originally published on FOSS Force. Reprinted with permission.

The internet activist group Demand Progress has released a short 2 1/2 minute video on YouTube that explains the implications of the legal wranglings between student Supap Kirtsaeng and textbook publisher John Wiley & Sons in a case that’s already gone before the U.S. Supreme Court and is now awaiting a ruling.

At issue is the reselling of new textbooks purchased cheaply abroad in the United States. Kirtsaeng, a Thai graduate student in the U.S., sold textbooks published by John Wiley & Sons on eBay that had been purchased by relatives in Thailand. The publisher is claiming copyright infringement, and so far has won all rulings in the Federal courts.

The Demand Progress video, which we have posted below this article, points out that a ruling in favor of the textbook publisher could have implications beyond the mere selling of textbooks purchased abroad, especially in a world where hardly anything is manufactured wholly within the U.S. anymore. In other words, it could soon be illegal to sell used books or CDs that you no longer like.

For a quick overview of this case, The Chronicle of Higher Education has posted a short interview written in the form of a FAQ.

Hollywood and politicians have made strange bedfellows from back in the days of Charlie Chaplin whose independence sealed a lifetime beyond the cherished reels and busy work of the war lords consigning him to distant shores until the final redemptive days. You [...]]]> Guest Column

Hollywood and politicians have made strange bedfellows from back in the days of Charlie Chaplin whose independence sealed a lifetime beyond the cherished reels and busy work of the war lords consigning him to distant shores until the final redemptive days. You are either with us or against never upon us.

Lord Louis B. Mayer gave the Republican Party a say in the 1920s in building a solid propaganda machine. Edward G. Robinson fought Nazi’s–Ronald Reagan and George Murphy darlings of the high flying right served as presidents of the Screen Actors Guild. Depending on which side of the aisle you inhabited, politics of the day influenced the type of movies being made. We went from gun toting Vietnamese slayer John Wayne in The Green Berets to Jane Fonda’s Oscar win in the anti-war Coming Home.

Last night’s appearance of Michelle Obama although predictable did come as a surprise. When I first caught a glimpse I knew political interference was in play but willing to abide the show.

Obama is probably the most elegant well-spoken first lady of our times. She exudes perfect health, ambition, opulence, beauty–the impossible woman. She is style central; in fact last night in her Naeem Khan Gatsby era art deco dress she put the entire flock of starlets to shame. I ask? Should this be the case?

Jack Nicholson is the real deal but up against Lady Obama he looked like the guy who missed the last bus. In fact, he looked like he couldn’t afford a token.

I think where I’m going with this–I found it a truly uncomfortable moment and not for anything Seth MacFarlane might have said. It’s that spooky mix of Hollywood and Washington politics that leaves me dry. Separation of Hollywood and State?

I’m an old lefty so for me to fess up to this takes a bit of reflection. I never liked the stink of Chuck Norris hanging around or gun-crazed Charlton Heston, so in all fairness, beautiful–gorgeous perfect First Lady–rethink these spectacles. Please don’t make this a habit. Your words were too completed and cultured–remember America eats at Denny’s and parents work a dozen menial jobs a day and can’t afford ten sequins on that dress. We know Ben Affleck was gobsmacked by your cameo–but remember, that’s the guy who couldn’t get the Argo story straight even when Canadian truth slapped him silly at every turn. And do remember Fox News will replay and dissect and stoke their crazed club of lunatics into a Obama hate-filled frenzy–that in itself should give one pause to consider.

Bill King is a pianist, composer and publisher who lives in Toronto. This piece first appeared on his blog, Bill King Words and Music, and is published with permission.

The following 30-second climate change ad has already aired in three major media markets across the United States, to great acclaim as the [...]]]> We found this ad posted on Other98. It’s an interesting pull-no-punches ad, evidently crowdfunded and scheduled to be aired nationwide this past Tuesday night until it was pulled–according to Other98:

The following 30-second climate change ad has already aired in three major media markets across the United States, to great acclaim as the first nationally crowdfunded climate change PSA. It was scheduled to play during Fox’s State of the Union coverage this past Tuesday. Then Exxon sent a single email, and it was unilaterally taken off the air. Here’s the ad you weren’t allowed to see:

The ad probably wouldn’t have been pulled except for the “We’re Exxon and we hate your children” part. After all, the Fox folks are nothing if not full fledged capitalists–and to the Fox capitalists, money talks even louder than crazy right wing ideology. Something tells us the folks at Exxon threatened some legal action, maybe mentioning the word “slander.” It was probably a whole lot cheaper to turn down the bucks for the ad than it would be to duke this out in court. Even a win would cost a bundle.

Anyway, the folks at Other98 have a letter for you to sign, if you’d like to tell Exxon, “You can’t silence us.” We suggest that you sign.

You think I’m joking, right? Wish that I were, but I’m not. The folks who think we have no right to choose whether our food’s been genetically modified, are now trying to sneak a move behind our [...]]]> People in the government are now telling us we’ll be perfectly safe taking our meals using radioactive silverware.

You think I’m joking, right? Wish that I were, but I’m not. The folks who think we have no right to choose whether our food’s been genetically modified, are now trying to sneak a move behind our back that will end up unleashing tons of radioactive metal into the scrap market. Over the years the government has accumulated thousands of tons of the stuff that was used in various types of nuclear tests and even in warfare. Now the Department of Energy (DOE) would like to lift legal restrictions on the recycling of nuclear contaminated scrap, so the stuff can be melted down into consumer goods.

Will a radioactive spoon heat our soup for us? Or will a glowing radioactive zipper mean fewer awkward moments getting undressed in the dark after things get hot an heavy?

This isn’t the first time the DOE has tried this trick. According to an article published in 1998 in The Progressive, the DOE and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) “temporarily” lifted the ban on recycling radioactive waste in the 1990s and dumped an estimated 7,500 tons on the public in 1996. At that time, the government agencies were attempting to have the ban permanately lifted, and were suggesting that the radioactive scrap could be safely used to make everything from the already mentioned silverware to pots, pans and eyeglasses.

Evidently that operation was shut down around 2000 when the ban was reinstated. However, recently the DOE has been working again to get rid of any roadblocks that would get in the way of disposal of the metals on the open scrap market, according to Natural News:

“‘A Department of Energy proposal to allow up to 14,000 metric tons of its radioactive scrap metal to be recycled into consumer products was called into question today by Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) due to concerns over public health,’ wrote Rep. Markey in a recent news brief about the issue. ‘In a letter sent to DOE head Steven Chu, Rep. Markey expressed “grave concerns” over the potential of these metals becoming jewelry, cutlery, or other consumer products that could exceed healthy doses of radiation without any knowledge by the consumer.’”

It was Rep. Markey who was responsible back in 2000 for having the original ban reinstated. He seems to be a good guy who deserves our support.

If all of this isn’t scary enough, it appears that the problem of radioactive scrap metal making it into our homes is already a problem, as Bloomberg reported in an article last March:

“The discovery of radioactive tissue boxes at Bed, Bath & Beyond Inc. (BBBY) stores in January raised alarms among nuclear security officials and company executives over the growing global threat of contaminated scrap metal.

“While the U.S. home-furnishing retailer recalled the boutique boxes from 200 stores nationwide without any reports of injury, the incident highlighted one of the topics drawing world leaders to a nuclear security meeting in Seoul on March 26-27. The bi-annual summit, convened by President Barack Obama for the first time in 2010, seeks to stem the flow of atomic material that has been lost, stolen or discarded as trash.”

As it turns out, this was no isolated incident. Indeed, it appears that people who work in the scrap metal business have to constantly be on the lookout for radioactive scrap getting into the mix, some of it weapons grade material:

“‘The major risk we face in our industry is radiation,’ said Paul de Bruin, radiation-safety chief for Jewometaal Stainless Processing BV, one of the world’s biggest stainless- steel scrap yards. ‘You can talk about security all you want, but I’ve found weapons-grade uranium in scrap. Where was the security?’ …

“Rotterdam-based Jewometaal, which found 145 nuclear items in scrap last year and 200 in 2010, reports incidents to Dutch authorities and the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency. De Bruin keeps pictures of the nuclear-fission chamber containing bomb-grade uranium and other scrap with plutonium that he’s uncovered using radiation monitors at his shipping yard.”

Right now, Steven Chu, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy, plans to dump 14,000 tons of radioactive scrap metal on the market to be used for manufacturing consumer products. This is only a fraction of the amount of radioactive scrap they currently have on hand and there are plans to release more of this material in the future.

They’re fast tracking the operation in an attempt to not give time for any opposition to get organized. According to Maureen Headington who is spearheading a petition drive at SignOn.org, the deadline for stopping them was today. However, at the time of this writing, signatures to stop the DOE are still being collected at http://signon.org/sign/will-the-zipper-on-your?source=mo&id=62348-17973181-yhra_kx .

You are urged to sign this petition, if it is still available. I would also suggest that you contact your congressperson or senator. Voice your opposition to this. Let it be known that a Geiger counter should not have to be part of smart shopping.