MY “Person Of The Year”………

Malala

…..is Time magazine’s first runner-up. (And look at her lifetime achievement award.) Why pick Obama? Just lazy? A guaranteed way to sell the magazine at the nation’s 7-11s and supermarkets? The bliss white boys at newsweeklies feel being right next to power and documenting its every sneeze before retiring and teaching two days a week for six figures at an Ivy League school? Or an instance of whites attempting to educate other whites about the “new” America. Yawn……

Obama

FEBRUARY 5th UPDATE:

This/she/Allah is great.

Comicbook Mini-Review: “Django Unchained” No. 1

DjangoUnchained

Django Unchained, No. 1.
By Quentin Tarantino. With Art by R.M. Guera with Jason Latour.
Vertigo/DC Comics.
32 pp. $3.99.

On a good day of comicbook reading, it all just comes together–the tone, the rhythm, the art, the story.  Vertigo once again shows the care it takes with its projects with this first issue. Knowing that Tarantino gave permission to use his entire, unedited script fills this undertaking with intrigue. Not only is it a way to get more bang for my buck, adaptation-wise, but it allows me to see his full vision in a way we won’t on-screen.

And filled with bangs it is, as slavery becomes freedom and freedom becomes two-gun employment. The price of freedom is bullets, and bounty hunting with no sympathy for the hunted inspires a sense of pleasure.  Call Tarantino an exploitation filmmaker; he won’t give a crap. If he’s exploiting my need to see, and want, the bloody revenge that’s coming, then so be it. Guera’s and Jason Latour’s lines are a little thin for my tastes; I wanted more background and atmosphere than they provided. (Maybe John Paul Leon can do the next Vertigo Western?) But, like the script, they up the dramatic ante beautifully.

This comicbook has me positively salivating for the movie, and for the next three Vertigo installments.

A Walk Around The World…………..

…………for longform, narrative magazine journalism, “slow journalism!” GREAT idea! Hmm………

HARI SREENIVASAN: Paul Salopek is a two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter who has immersed himself in his reporting. From riding a mule across Mexico to canoeing down the Congo, he’s been a committed foreign correspondent.

But beginning next month, Salopek will embark on a 21,000-mile walk from Africa to Patagonia, tracing the ancient path of human migration. The journey, sponsored in part by “The National Geographic,” will take an estimated seven years to complete.

Paul Salopek, thanks for joining us.

PAUL SALOPEK, National Geographic fellow: Good to be here.

HARI SREENIVASAN: So, the first question most people ask is, why?

PAUL SALOPEK: Storytelling. That’s the bottom line of this walk. It’s not an athletic event. It’s not an endurance feat. It’s all about communicating in the 21st century, slowing people down.

HARI SREENIVASAN: And so why that slow journalism? Is it something — is it a reaction to what you have seen and the speed of Twitter and Facebook and everything else?

PAUL SALOPEK: I’m not against Twitter or Facebook. I think they’re wonderful ways of getting information around.

But I’m interested in long-form journalism, long-form storytelling. And I worry about finding a space for them in today’s world, stories with beginnings, middles and end. So if I slow down stories to three miles an hour, let’s see if people follow along.

HARI SREENIVASAN: And what kind of updates are we going to see from you? I know there’s one big National Geographic story per year, but in between, what kind of — how are you going to be updating us?

PAUL SALOPEK: We have a joint Web portal between all of my partners, outofedenwalk.com, where there will be episodic reports. There will be reports that come up as the human topography merits it.

If it’s a great story, the story will surface. But what I won’t be doing — at least I don’t contemplate doing it — is micro-blogging the Johnny. I think that would get boring very fast. I will save the good stuff, gather the string, and then spring it on people.

HARI SREENIVASAN: So, what are the topics that you are interested in covering?

PAUL SALOPEK: Stories that I have covered in the past, climate change, conflict, economic development, local innovations. I’m interested in finding local solutions to big problems, stories that don’t get told because we’re moving too fast to see them.

HARI SREENIVASAN: And so this is, as we mentioned, a seven-year trip. And when we take a look at that route, you’re leaving Africa, going through Central Asia, up around China, across the Bering Strait — I’m assuming you’re taking a boat there — and then down through the Americas.

PAUL SALOPEK: Yes.

HARI SREENIVASAN: One of those, as I’m noticing, the straight line goes right through Iran. How are you going to get through that?

PAUL SALOPEK: I think that, Iran, straddles an ancient migration path into Central Asia. And, ideally, it would be wonderful to set off on foot across Iran.

I’m going to see what relations are like in late 2015. Hopefully, they’re well enough, good enough, to allow me to go through Iran.

HARI SREENIVASAN: And if there’s a necessary detour, how long does that take to get around?

PAUL SALOPEK: It’s a big place to walk around.

Part of the beauty, I think, of this long project is that there are going to be obstacles that I don’t know answers to about how to get around them until I get there. And we will see.

Serendipity is a big part of this project.

HARI SREENIVASAN: And what are the types of steps you have been taking? You have been planning this for the last couple of years. So, what are we talking about, visas, immunizations? What else?

PAUL SALOPEK: There’s a lot of logistical planning that’s gone into getting mainly governments comfortable with somebody walking through their territories. It’s an unusual request, as you might imagine.

But a lot of it also is just finding the stories en route, pre-reporting them, and, frankly, leaving some of it open. Don’t overplan it, because when our ancestors dispersed out of Africa, they didn’t have a map. They didn’t have a plan. And so we’re kind of matching that spirit.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Now, you’re doing something interesting. I read that you are going to be doing these transects every hundred miles. Explain what those are.

We have got a couple videos of them, but what are we seeing?

PAUL SALOPEK: Basically, as well as the long-form literary writing that I hope to do episodically, every 100 miles along this 21,000-mile route, I will be stopping to take a set of narrative readings, whether it’s a 360-degree panorama of the Earth’s surface, a recording of the ambient sound of the Earth’s surface, a photograph of the sky, a photograph of the surface of the Earth, to create these shards in a larger mosaic that will give basically a picture, a slice of life on the surface of the Earth at the turn of the millennium.

HARI SREENIVASAN: And you’re carrying everything. There’s not a huge SAG wagon, so to speak, in ultra-marathon race terms. Everything you have got is going to be on your backpack and you’re just hiking.

PAUL SALOPEK: That’s correct.

The idea is to go light, to — and the trend in technological miniaturization is going in my direction. Things are getting smaller. The kind of communications gear I will be carrying now will be obsolete by the time I’m halfway through, and that’s part of the story, too.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Yes.

And I think that some folks are going to be concerned about your physical safety from other humans, but I’m also as concerned about your biological safety. What are you going to be taking with you? Antibiotics? Any other precautions? You’re eating and drinking whatever is available out there.

PAUL SALOPEK: That’s right.

The idea is to live close to the ground, to eat what local people are eating. All I can say is that I have sort of — I have had a background, 15 years of living around the world, where I have got a pretty good immune system. I have got a pretty good stomach. I will be taking a small med kit with the usual antibiotics, et cetera.

Preventive medicine is going to be the key here, because I cannot carry a pharmacy on my back.

HARI SREENIVASAN: And what about — what about safety the old-fashioned way? Who’s looking out for you? Who’s got your back in case you do run into a sticky situation?

PAUL SALOPEK: I have got a collection of friends and supporters back here, not just National Geographic but The Knight Foundation, the Nieman Foundation at Harvard, the Pulitzer Center, who will be helping me basically navigate these trouble spots, if there are new ones along the way that I’m not aware of.

HARI SREENIVASAN: So, we’re raising your awareness. There are other people around the world that are.

What is the danger here in potentially becoming a celebrity? I call it the Forrest Gump effect. There you are running along. You just start to pick up more people along the way. How are you going to deal with that?

PAUL SALOPEK: It’s a really important — it’s a conundrum, because my reporting method is observational, quietly watching the world unfold around me, getting into people’s lives.

And for them to admit me in their lives, I have to be quiet. I have to listen. If this becomes too much of a spectacle, I can’t work. And so I’m still figuring this out. In today’s wired world, how anonymous can I be? I am on TV, after all.

HARI SREENIVASAN: All right.

(LAUGHTER)

HARI SREENIVASAN: That’s right.

We are going to continue this conversation online with more of your questions.

Paul Salopek, thanks so much for joining us.

PAUL SALOPEK: It’s a pleasure to be here.

Book Mini-Reviews: A Challenged Life Redeemed And A Graphic Novel’s Serious Twists

Jones

Veronica & The Case Of Mumia Abu-Jamal, As Told To Her Sister Valerie Jones.
Foreword and Commentary by Mumia Abu-Jamal. Legal Afterword by Rachel Wolkenstein.
 Xlibris.
161 pp. $19.99 (paperback).

In many ways, writing a book is a great act of self-determination. You can take your name and put new definitions around it, attempting to make yours stick for eternity. So instead of “Veronica Jones, prostitute” or “Veronica Jones, scared,” this book attempts new search terms for one of the witnesses of the murder of a white Philadelphia police officer in December 1981, 31 years ago this very month. For Jones, it was a long, grimy, exploitative road from being acknowledged just six years prior as a 14-year-old community fundraising success in The Camden Courier-Post.  “I felt like one of those poor little animals that get snared in a hunter’s trap,”  said Jones when the Philadelphia police came to find her.

The question: Who killed Officer Daniel Faulkner (the man Jones claims here to have had a sexual relationship with, the memoir’s big reveal) while she was working her trade near 13th and Locust, the city’s red-light district? She told her truth during their interview, but she accused the police of subsequently pressuring her to lie on the stand in the murder trial—to finger the man, a former Black Panther-turned-MOVE-supporter that the police grabbed at the scene. The cops had something to pin on her for at least a 10-year bid—away from her children, away from everything. So, on the stand, she did what she was taught to do by men: she performed as they demanded. But only to a point. She recanted her original story, but refused to name the dreadlocked cabbie as the shooter. “The defense was not pleased at all,” she remembered. In the book’s foreword, the man then on trial for his life—now a lifer for the crime, after decades on death row—recalled in tribute: “She did not say what the government wanted her to say. In spite of ungodly pressures.” With the guilty verdict read, she was “free” to escape, but only after a bar scene as powerful as any from the hottest street-lit.

There’s no real freedom for those who feel guilt, however, because a lie’s ghost never really fades. So Jones stood again. She spent much of the last 20 years telling the original version of what happened that night to anyone who would listen. The tears on the cover match the ones inside, the sacrifices of 1981 and the mid-1990s ever present. But the straight, street-talk realness also matches inside-out. The author died in 2009, a sister, a mother, a grandmother, an important documentary interviewee. (Audio version is here.) This book—the latest story in the saga, told in gripping first-person style and detail—frees Veronica Jones with as much effort as Jones tried to free Mumia Abu-Jamal.

****************************************************

RIGHT-STATE

Right State. A Graphic Novel.
 Mat Johnson and Andrea Mutti.
Vertigo/DC Comics.
 144 pgs. $24.99 (hardcover).

In his third graphic novel, Mat Johnson is proving to be the master of the simple comicbook drama that gets more complicated as it zips along. His graphic work draws you in, allowing you to think you’re just reading another story about racism, with some class issues tossed in for added value. But he’s just setting up a good, fast-paced yarn, with twists that only occur if they’re believable. In “Right State,” he molds the residue of the 2008 presidential campaign into some good fodder for this alternative future, in which the nation’s second Black president is targeted for assassination by a white militia group. The hero is a white right-wing TV host (visually think, perhaps, FOX News Channel’s Brett Baier) who is asked by the government to access this group (read: spy). Myths and fears live side by side. (Do militia members really think that peanut allergies exist because George Washington Carver bred peanuts into biological weapons against Europeans?) Andrea Mutti’s art, particularly in black-and-white, has a direct-line, not-trying-too-hard quality that makes me think of the late, great Joe Kubert.  (Is the antagonist a post-modern Bizzaro Sgt. Rock? Hmmm….) “Right State” is a thriller that goes so fast, you have to purposely slow down the reading to make sure it’s all being absorbed. This not-so-funnybook is just the thing for that “Homeland” fanatic in your family.

My Thinking About “The Life of Pi”

I did a movie marathon on Thursday. (And to the surprise of a friend of mine who joined me for Movie No. 1, I actually paid all four tickets. :)) The movies were: “Skyfall”; “Twilight: Breaking Dawn, Part II,” “Life of Pi” and “Lincoln.” I really enjoyed it! Verdicts: “Skyfall”: Best Bond ever! “Twilight”: LOVED the “Braveheart” ending! “Lincoln”: Umm…… 🙂

“Pi”: An interesting meditation on faith. (But I think “The Alchemist” knocks it out the water, frankly. :)) But I was thinking about faith and symbolism today while on youtube, and I found the below. I remember how Part 7, which I wore out on VHS, was the only—well, the main—thing that kept me going those lonely years of my freelance dreams in the late 1990s to mid-00s. (Just watching it right now, I hear every other line in my head before it is uttered.) Even though I knew the Haley story was mostly—well, practically all—myth, I didn’t care. It was the idea—the “truth” of the myth—that kept me going. Hmmm…….

“A Rockefeller Republican In Blackface”

Gosh! But are they right? I think so!

(Many leftists have this kind of optimism right now, but we know it won’t last very long. And, as the above and below show, we still need to publicly deliver a strong critique [especially -48 to -41, but -48 to the end].)

I especially liked this part:

AMY GOODMAN: I talked about Smiley & West, your weekly radio show, which was just canceled here on WBEZ in Chicago, though it’s being picked up by other networks. Tavis, can you talk about this and the controversy around this? It’s been written up in the public radio and television—

TAVIS SMILEY: Sure.

AMY GOODMAN: —newspaper, Current, and other places.

TAVIS SMILEY: I’m now in my 20th year in the broadcast business, and most of that time has been spent in public media spaces—NPR, PBS, PRI—and that’s by choice. I could be in a commercial space if I chose to be, and I’ve done that before, but I—

AMY GOODMAN: You came from BET.

TAVIS SMILEY: I came from BET, came from CNN. I came from ABC. I’ve done the commercial thing. But I love the public radio and public TV space, because it allows us to get a different kind of truth, and I don’t have to respond to all the pressures from corporate media when you’re playing that particular game. And I have respect for my friends who do it; it’s just not for me at this point in my life. So I’ve done this for a long time.

This has been an uphill battle all along for me. It’s tragic to consider that, at my age, I’m the first person of color in the history NPR to have his own daily show. And that started in 2002. 2004, I become the first person of color in the history of PBS to have his own show every night on PBS. That’s how late to the game public TV and public radio have been in terms of giving people of color a space to operate inside of, so that when a station like WBEZ in Chicago—a great station—but when a station like WBEZ in Chicago starts making excuses for why they drop Smiley & West, when we believe and know this was all about the politics—this is the president’s home town, and they didn’t want us on the air in the last six weeks of the campaign talking about holding the president accountable and pushing him on why he’s not talking about poverty and why he’s not talking about the drones. So a decision was made here in his home town, without our knowledge, without our consultation, to just simply pull the plug on the Smiley & West show, again, without any forewarning. When that happened, you know, the citizenry here in Chicago who supports BEZ and listens to our program went crazy. And—

AMY GOODMAN: What was it replaced by?

TAVIS SMILEY: It was replaced with a repeat of Car Talk, which is not—which, as you know, is no longer even in production. Car Talk was a very popular show for years, but it’s not even in production anymore. So they pulled us off and started running repeats of Car Talk. So, that got a lot of conversation going in the city.

To make a long story short, this is not about Smiley & West being canceled. This is about the democratization of public media. It’s about the lack of diversity in public media. Something is wrong when a black man from Chicago has a better chance of being president of the United States than he does of hosting a talk show in prime time on public radio in Chicago. So all these excuses continue to be made. I’ve been fighting this battle for years. And when I talk about diversity, I don’t mean just ethnic diversity. I mean ideological diversity. For all the criticisms that public media takes for being part of the liberal media bias, we ain’t so liberal, when you listen to the ideology, when you see the lack of ethnic diversity.

And so, the good news is, without going, you know, on so long, because I don’t believe in spending too much time on what’s prologue, the reality is that within 24 hours a number of stations in Chicago called and said, “We would love to carry Smiley & West.” And so, part of our being in Chicago alongside you last night was to talk about democratizing public media and to celebrate with our listenership the fact that there are two stations in Chicago now—WCPT, Chicago Progressive Talk, and WVON, the Talk of Chicago—two stations now that are carrying the program. So we lose one station and pick up two. So, if every time I get canceled by somebody, if I can pick up two in the place of one, keep canceling me. I can live with that.

CORNEL WEST: Keep canceling. Keep canceling. You know, but Brother Tavis makes the point with great insight that when public broadcasting was first initiated under Johnson, it was for children and people of color. But it has become a white liberal elitist bastion, as if white liberal elitists own it. And so, the voices of red, our indigenous brothers and sisters, Latino, black, Asian, don’t play a fundamental role. That needs to be radically called into question. And our white liberal elitists, they need to understand that this is part of the critique that they have to come to terms with.

AMY GOODMAN: So, where do you go from here? Tavis, you still have your PBS show. Your show continues here in Chicago and all over the country. Inequality globally and here in this country is growing.

TAVIS SMILEY: Yeah, there’s no doubt about it. One of the things that—to answer your question expressly, where do we go from here, we continue using these platforms every week and every night to try to speak truth, again, to power and to the powerless. And I’m about to start my 10th year on PBS, so that show is going extremely strong. I’m 13 years now on the public radio. So I’m very blessed to be where I am with these platforms.

And with regard to poverty, specifically, where we go next is January the 17th in Washington. We are having another national symposium, just three days before the president gets inaugurated, talking about poverty. The confirmations are coming in. We’re bringing together this time the leaders in the poverty—the anti-poverty movement. We’re talking Marian Wright Edelman, confirmed. We’re talking Jeffrey Sachs, confirmed. We’re talking Cornel West, confirmed. We’re talking Jonathan Kozol, confirmed. We’re bringing together leaders in this movement, and we’re going to talk about the president calling a White House conference to eradicate poverty.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to do part two of our conversation with Smiley and West in just one moment, and we’ll post a web-ex.

(Go here to see Part II, transcribed below.)

We continue our conversation with broadcaster Tavis Smiley and professor, activist Dr. Cornel West about their push for President Obama to address poverty in his second term. Smiley argues the ultimate question now, is: “Are we ready to push?” He and West have organized a symposium to take place on Jan. 17, prior to Obama’s inauguration, to demand Obama call a White House conference on the eradication of poverty.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman. And our guests are Tavis Smiley and Cornel West. Professor Cornel West now teaches Union Theological Seminary in New York. He taught, before that, at Princeton University and, before that, at Harvard University. Tavis Smiley broadcasts on PBS and NPR. He has several shows, The Tavis Smiley Show, and he does a show together with Dr. Cornel West called Smiley & West, as well as his own NPR show, The Tavis Smiley Show. I’m Amy Goodman.

And we’re talking about poverty. Now, this should not be revolutionary to talk about poverty. It shouldn’t be radical at all to deal with a critical issue in this country. But if you look at the last months of this political campaign, of the presidential campaign, poverty was almost mentioned—well, almost not at all. Yet, a new report is warning global inequality has reached a 20-year high. According to the group Save the Children, poverty, that had previously been concentrated in the world’s lowest-income countries, is now on the rise in middle-income countries, which account for 70 percent of the world’s poor. Let’s talk about that, Dr. West.

CORNEL WEST: Well, it’s sad. In America, we are 34 out of 35 of the top industrial countries when it comes to child poverty, ahead only of Romania.

AMY GOODMAN: Thirty-four of 35.

CORNEL WEST: Thirty-four of 35. Twenty-two percent of our precious children of all colors live in poverty in the richest nation in the history of the world. That’s obscene and profane. No serious talk about it. Now, in the black community, it’s nearly 40 percent; in red, 40 percent; brown, nearly 40 percent of the children.

AMY GOODMAN: How have we come to this point?

CORNEL WEST: Shameful silence on behalf of leaders who do not want to tell the truth about the suffering of poor people.

TAVIS SMILEY: On top of that, corporate greed.

CORNEL WEST: Yes, yes.

TAVIS SMILEY: On top of that, political indifference.

CORNEL WEST: That’s right.

TAVIS SMILEY: On top of that, a silencing and a sidelining of progressive voices over the last four years.

CORNEL WEST: That’s right.

TAVIS SMILEY: So there are myriad reasons how we arrived at this place. The ultimate question now is, to whatever extent—to whatever extent there is hope in a second term for President Obama, the ultimate question is—that we raised in our gathering last night here in Chicago—are we ready to push? And that’s why Dr. West and I love that Curtis Mayfield song, “Keep on Pushing.” That’s the only option that we have at this point. You know, we have to ask ourselves, what kind of nation do we want to be? And what kind of demos are we going to be to make the nation that we want to live in? So I’m hoping that those of us on the left, who have been so quiet, are going to start to push this president.

I noted, as we all did very—the day after the election, and to their great credit, the Latino leadership called a national press conference, a national conference call, and they went on record the day after, letting the president and the whole world know what they had done to elect Barack Obama to a second term. And they laid out immediately what their expectations were, what their demands were. So there’s a long line wrapped around the White House now to push him. But the Latino leaders, they get it. They didn’t waste any time saying, “We got you re-elected, and here’s what we expect.”

AMY GOODMAN: So talk more about what it is you’re going to do, this convening you’re going to be doing in Washington, right at the time of inauguration.

TAVIS SMILEY: Absolutely.

AMY GOODMAN: Inauguration is on Dr. Martin Luther King’s birthday.

TAVIS SMILEY: Twenty-first of January. And so, just three or four days prior to that, on the 17th, we’re gathering at George Washington University for a live symposium on C-SPAN and on PBS and on public radio. But we’re talking specifically about how we get this president—demanding, in fact, that he call a White House conference on the eradication of poverty. To his credit, the first thing he did when he got elected four years ago was to sign Lilly Ledbetter. We’re demanding now that he call immediately a White House conference on the eradication of poverty, bring together all the experts, from the left and the right, and let’s craft a national plan to cut poverty in half in 10 years, to move toward eradicating it in 25 years. This is not a skill problem; it’s a will problem. Do we have the will to do this? And he ought to take a page out of Lyndon Johnson’s playbook. You know, if he wants to hit—if he wants to aim for the fences, you know, if he want to be a great American president, if he wants to leave behind a legacy—and we read in the New York Times, from all his private talks with these historians, that that’s what he wants to do: he wants to leave a legacy, he wants to be a great transformational president—we say take on the issue of poverty, so that all of America benefits. So, January the 17th, we’re going to have this national conversation, pushing him and demanding—and all these leaders have bought into this. I mentioned Jeffrey Sachs and Marian Wright Edelman and Cornel West and Jonathan Kozol and others, who are coming together. And we’re going to have, obviously, an opportunity for folk to go online, as they watch this symposium live, to sign the letter to the president that he get serious about calling a White House conference to eradicate poverty.

AMY GOODMAN: How do you end poverty in America?

CORNEL WEST: Well, you have to have an awakening, and you have to have people who are willing to put their bodies on the line. I think what is happening now, moving into the second term, the black prophetic tradition has waken up. What’s the brother from Howard? Brother Keith, open letter —

TAVIS SMILEY: Mm-hmm, to the Washington Post.

CORNEL WEST: —to Obama in the Washington Post. Strong. Fredrick Harris, Columbia, Price of the Ticket, strong. Boyce Watkins, already strong. Julianne Malveaux, bell hooks, Black Agenda Report with Glen Ford and Bruce Dixon and Nellie Bailey. There is an awakening that’s—and when the black prophetic tradition wakes up, you got something, because then you got Jamal and Leticia on the block beginning to say, “I need to talk politically, not be addicted to this cultural, superficial spectacle.” And that’s what we’re about.

AMY GOODMAN: And yet, you have the whole discussion now about the bipartisan consensus. Republican House Speaker John Boehner told newly re-elected President Obama he wants to see Obama succeed.

HOUSE SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER: Mr. President, this is your moment. We’re ready to be led—not as Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans. We want you to lead—not as a liberal or conservative, but as president of the United States of America. We want you to succeed. Let’s challenge ourselves to find the common ground that has eluded us. Let’s rise above the dysfunction and do the right thing together for our country.

AMY GOODMAN: So there you have House Speaker John Boehner.

TAVIS SMILEY: Yeah, I—I appreciate the sentiment. But their words, at the moment, we will see what kind of truth there is, what kind of authenticity there is behind those words, when the president, now back in Washington, sits down Republicans to deal with that word that I hate—sequestration—when we start dealing with these cuts that are on the table. We’ve said many times that budgets are moral documents. Budgets are moral documents. When they get into the weeds about these numbers and about the budget priorities, we will see how strong that sentiment comes through.

CORNEL WEST: Absolutely. Yeah, my spontaneous response is, if I believe those words, I’m the flying nun of Eskimo origin. But everything’s possible.

TAVIS SMILEY: There’s always hope.

CORNEL WEST: Everything’s possible.

AMY GOODMAN: But you see how the—

TAVIS SMILEY: Yeah.

CORNEL WEST: I’m a Christian. Everything’s possible.

AMY GOODMAN: The crackdown happens from the beginning. The discussion is all about how far right do you go. And groups who are concerned about issues like poverty, issues of social justice, are being told, “You’re going to be lucky—you just have to be quiet right now, because we are talking about these massive cuts.”

CORNEL WEST: Yeah, don’t do it.

AMY GOODMAN: “Do not undercut the president.”

TAVIS SMILEY: Well, they—that’s the same thing we heard the first term. And we see where we are now. And we—part of the reason why the race was as close as it was, getting down to the wire, is because too often in the first term, the president compromised, capitulated, caved, and oftentimes negotiate against himself with Republicans. And so, I hope that we’ve learned a lesson—that he’s learned a lesson, the White House has learned a lesson, from the first administration, that sometimes you’ve got to draw a line in the sand. And as my grandfather said, there’s some fights that ain’t worth fighting even if you win, but there are other fights you have to fight even if you lose. So I would love this notion of bipartisanship to come to the fore in Washington, but if that doesn’t happen, the president has to stand on a—on some immutable principles and try to advance the conversation.

AMY GOODMAN: Maybe it’s the bipartisan consensus that’s the problem in Washington, not the gridlock, right? I mean, the bipartisan consensus—

CORNEL WEST: That’s right.

AMY GOODMAN: —you see reflected in the presidential debates. There’s no debate over drones.

CORNEL WEST: That’s right.

AMY GOODMAN: There’s no discussion of poverty, absolutely no mention of climate change. And yet, does this represent the majority of people in this country? Hardly, I think this election shows.

CORNEL WEST: Not at all. Not at all. You got the far right, and then you’ve got the center-right—the Republican Party, Democratic Party. And without no one who’s really progressive on the left telling the truth about the suffering. But, you know, the truth is, is that, you know, if 40 percent of white babies were going to bed every night either starving or not having enough to eat, it would be a different discussion. And each baby has the same value, but we’ve got 40 percent of the babies of color who are going to bed without, and we’re told to be silent and somehow capitulate to a debate about deficit, when we know we need massive investment for jobs with a living wage, massive investment for public housing, massive investment for public education, and we’re getting privatization on each front? There’s no way we’re going to be silent. You would have to crush us to the earth and introduce us to the worms before we’re going to be silent.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to ask you about a protest that happened this week. Hundreds of people gathered at the University of Mississippi on Wednesday to denounce racism on campus, one day after a heated protest against President Obama’s re-election. After the results were announced on Tuesday night, a crowd of several hundred gathered in anger, with some people reportedly shouting racial slurs. At least two people were arrested. What type of backlash do you expect against President Obama’s re-election?

CORNEL WEST: I think it’s going to be intense, as it was before. But the important thing is not to focus on that. That’s lunatic fringe. You focus on the suffering and what can be done about the suffering. As long as we focus solely on the xenophobic, right-wing fringe, there’s always going to be one. We’ve got 1,100 white supremacist militia groups in America, coming at us all the time. We can’t be obsessed with that. We’ve got to be obsessed with trying to do something that’s positive and changes the world, you see.

TAVIS SMILEY: In 10 seconds, racism is still the most intractable issue in this country. And I know you saw this report a couple of weeks ago, just before Election Day, that finds that racial attitudes in this country have not changed at all. In four years, the needle has not moved on race relations. So, so much for the post-racial America that Mr. Obama’s election was going to usher in. It’s still the most intractable issue in the country.

AMY GOODMAN: I flew into Chicago, and I was sitting next to a man, African-American manager in a large company, manufacturing company. He said he was afraid to go to work the next day. He said these are all his friends that he works with. He loves his company. He does happen to be the only black person in the company. And he said he’s very loved in the company. But he was afraid to go to work on Wednesday, after Election Day, because he knew that everyone in the company voted for Romney, and that when they saw him, they would see President Obama’s face, and he just didn’t want to bother them. He didn’t want to disturb them. And he was a little bit afraid, though he loved them.

TAVIS SMILEY: It’s a serious burden around, Doc. I—wow.

CORNEL WEST: But he’s much better off than those kids that got to deal with the bullets coming at them all the time and going to funerals 12 and 13 times before they’re 17. And that is what we’re dealing with in terms of the massive number of poor folk in these chocolate cities. So I pray for the brother, and I know he’s got some challenges, but he’s not a priority.

AMY GOODMAN: Very quickly, your book, The Rich and the Rest of Us: A Poverty Manifesto, which has come out in paperback, why did you write it? Talk about your poverty tour, and talk about your conclusions from the book.

CORNEL WEST: Brother Tavis’s idea, Brother Tavis’s vision. I was glad to go along with him.

TAVIS SMILEY: OK, brother, talk about it, please.

CORNEL WEST: And we had a magnificent time. Started with indigenous peoples on the reservation. We went to white poor, brown poor, black poor, yellow poor, trying to allow all the voices to be heard. Color of Change, De-incarcerate, Janitors for Justice—all the different organizational groups that are bubbling from below, of all colors, especially younger generation.

AMY GOODMAN: We haven’t even talked about prisons, and they certainly rarely talk about prisons, except the other way: locking people up.

TAVIS SMILEY: That’s why we call it A Poverty Manifesto. In the back of the book, the last part of the book, 10 specific things that can be done, that must be done, to eradicate poverty in this country. And one of those 10 is taking on this prison-industrial complex. And we hope that the president and that those in the White House who are serious about creating his legacy, whatever that means, will consider doing something about poverty in this country. It is threatening our democracy. It is now a matter of national security. When people have no hope for the future, they have no power in the present. Something must be done to save this democracy by doing something about this growing gap between the have-gots and the have-nots, about this gap between the rich and the rest of us. And we’re going to keep pushing the president, lovingly, respectfully, but keep talking about this issue.