Give Labour a Voice

We currently have a right wing government in Saskatchewan that has launched an all out attack on labour. I have become increasingly disgusted and appalled at the right wing hate machine - the media and their display of biased reporting of events. When does the media in this province stick to the facts of a story? When do they allow a balanced approach? The voice of labour is rarely, if ever, heard. Any stories that are published are published in a negative light.

As we all know, positive stories are rare in today's media. We hear stories of how wonderful it is when corporations make large donations to community organizations (great free advertising and a tax write off to boot - no one ever said they were stupid), yet is there ever a story about the working class men and women who keep this country and these corporations running? All the unsung heroes? Without the efforts of those that labour to make these companies and their owners, and the CEOs wealthy, these companies wouldn't be in a position to donate. And yet any efforts made by organized labour to retain what these workers have fought (and some have died for) is criticized at every turn. I would like to see these big corporations be such wonderful, community minded "people" without their workers. The workers that they see no problem exploiting. And now having a government that backs them in the exploitation and the the media to ensure the government that they are doing the right thing by exploiting the workers that are making them rich!! It has all come together and works like a well oiled machine. You know, a general strike might not be a bad idea, after all.

If you really think this through, you might agree that treating employees well is a good thing. How many times have I heard the same old BS line, "Good employees don't need unions". You know what? You are absolutely right. Good employees DON'T need unions. Bad employers do. For surely, if you are a bad employer, your company will fail because you won't have anyone left to exploit. After all, there IS a labour shortage.

Back to the bias. When someone disagrees with someone, say, oh hosting a hate radio show, such as, let's use Gormley as an example, it is unlikely that he will take your call, or post your comments on his blog, because he runs the risk of exposing the facts.

And then of course, there's the sensationalizing of everything. We want peace and love not war, but where the heck is the news story in that?

Bigotry? No explanation needed - just listen to Rush Limbaugh, John Gormley or Bill O'Reilly.

So, in the media is, in effect, a hateful tool for censorship, that feeds Joe public with one sided views encouraging corporate greed, war, bigotry, raping the earth of it's resources, and "the old boy's club".


Enough of my rant.

I am a true blue rebel. When I die, don't waste any time mourning. Organize.

Shalom brothers and sisters.

In solidarity,


Politically Incorrect

Hate Radio: Bill Moyer Special

Al Franken: Where does Rush Limbaugh get his statistics?

Deconstructing Hate Sites

Bigotry and hatred thrive on ignorance, fear, false information and half-truths. But if readers are able to deconstruct any messages of hate that come their way, much of the messages’ power is reduced. This makes critical thinking skills an indispensable part of an anti-hate tool kit.

Common Characteristics

Journalist Keith Ferrell notes that, in their efforts to draw readers' support, most hate sites:

1. Capitalize on Paranoia

Conspiracy theories abound on hate sites, which often blame the groups they target for any number of social, economic or political problems. Such theories rely on their readers’ ignorance, plus invented "evidence," to back up their claims.

One of the most infamous conspiracy theories is contained in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The book was written by agents of the Russian czar at the end of the 19th century, and falsely “documents” the existence of a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world. Although such a theory has been thoroughly debunked, hate-mongers continue to invoke the Protocols.

2. Suggest Sanction from Above

Hate sites often make use of scriptural references, religious writings and holy tracts to give the impression that their claims are sanctified by moral righteousness and guided by a higher power.

For example, the site God Hates Fags portrays gays and lesbians in a hateful and demeaning way. Embedded in its homophobic rhetoric are scriptural references to support the position that God has "given up" on gay persons.

3. Exploit Fear of Armageddon

Hate groups take advantage of people’s fears of social and economic uncertainty by blaming the woes of modern society on the particular group they target. Canadian sites like National Skinhead Front, CFAR and the Canadian Heritage Alliance focus on the “dangers” of immigration and the need to return to a “traditional European way of life.”

Common Strategies

1. Racialism

White power and white supremacy sites typically deny that they are racist organizations. Instead, they focus on the need to protect white people from assimilation and/or direct threats from non-white groups. They call this perspective "racialist" as opposed to racist.

The 14/88 Society is a good example of this dynamic. The site’s name combines two hate slogans popular in the white supremacy movement:

• 14 refers to the 14-word slogan: “We must secure the existence of our race and a future for white children”
  
• 88 represents HH (H being the eighth number in the alphabet), which stands for Heil Hitler

Overtly racist sites, like 14/88, are the easiest to identify because they conform to the mainstream image of the neo-Nazi skinhead hate group. However, Canadian researcher Matthew Lauder warns that many hate sites attempt to conceal a racist agenda behind a more moderate message.

For example, Melissa Guille of the Canadian Heritage Alliance (CHA) denies the CHA is a hate site, arguing instead that the site is concerned about “keeping Canada for Canadians” and “removing the anti-white sentiment in society.”

Racist messages are also used by non-white hate groups, such as Aztlan, a site dedicated to the establishment of a greater Hispanic empire in North America, and Libre Opinion, a Spanish-language ISP providing free hosting services to racist sites.

2. Pseudo-Science and Intellectualism

Many hate-mongers use pseudo-scientific intellectualized language and incorporate the work of university-based academics to make their views seem more credible.

Canadian professor Phillip Rushton’s work on the different intellectual and physical abilities of different “races” is a case in point. In addition, the late Dr. William Pierce operated a publishing company that released a steady stream of neo-Nazi literature. Pierce’s fictionalized account of racialist revolution in The Turner Diaries is said to have inspired the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995.

3. Historical Revisionsim

Holocaust denial is a frequently used strategy. Haters who “revise” history argue that the Holocaust either did not occur, or was less significant than the historical record indicates. The Zundelsite, for example, houses a collection of revisionist writings, including Zundel’s pamphlet Did Six Million Really Die?

4. Patriotism

A number of hate sites clothe their messages in patriotic language. For example, the High Desert Militia of Southern California includes quotes from Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin on their home page, beside the “Patriot’s Prayer” (see right).

5. Misinformation

A number of hate groups seek to embed their messages in sites that purport to exist for non-hateful purposes.

At first glance, the site martinlutherking.org appears to contain historical information about King and the civil rights movement; however, it in fact promotes racism and anti-Semitism. Similarly, the Canadian Association for Free Expression purports to advocate for civil liberties, but its founder, Paul Fromm, admits that the site was created to promote “conservative discussion especially of race and immigration.”

6. Nationalism

Sites such as the U.S.-based League of the South and the Canadian Heritage Alliance use the language of national pride and heritage to advocate for a return to white, “anglo-Celtic civilization.”

7. Hate Symbols

The hate movement continues to use well-known symbols such as the Nazi swastika and the KKK's burning cross to "brand" its message. However, it is increasingly common for hate groups to co-opt mainstream symbols such as the Celtic cross and pagan runes, re-signifying them as emblems of white supremacy.

The Anti-Defamation League argues that hate symbols are more than mere signs: “These symbols are meant to inspire a sense of fear and insecurity. [They] give haters a sense of power and belonging, and a quick way of identifying with others who share their ideology.”

Challenging Hate Radio: A guide for Activists

Challenging Hate Radio: A Guide for Activists

1. Force yourself to listen to it. We know it's tough, but someone's got to do it.

2. Document it. Sometimes only a talkshow host's loyal following hears the most outrageous thing that he says. You need to be able to document exactly what was said (and when it was said). Record the show, and be sure to label and date your tapes.

3. Keep track of the worst statements. Transcribe the most offensive comments [if possible]. Transcripts are easier and cheaper to distribute than audio tapes. Having a one-page list of quotes educates people and motivates them to action quickly. A "worst of" tape can also be very valuable.

4. Inform others who will take action. If you have a group of people interested, setting up an email list, or a quick response phone or fax tree, is a good idea.

5. Call in to the show. Call the on-air line during the show and try to challenge the racism, sexism or homophobia calmly and directly. It often doesn't take much to demonstrate the absurdity of bigoted arguments. If several people call in, it can change the entire show.

6. Write letters to station managers or owners. If the host doesn't respond to criticism, those who run the station need to know how offensive the program is. If you are part of a group or coalition, you might want to request a meeting as well.

7. Notify other outlets. Newspapers, non-commercial radio stations or other media might be interested in stories about talk radio. Send a press release including a few of the worst quotes and the dates they aired. Be prepared to offer a tape for documentation.

8. Build a coalition. Contact organizations that have a particular interest in challenging hate speech—like civil rights, religious, feminist and gay rights groups—and have organizational resources devoted to the issue.

9. Organize a demonstration. If you have an active coalition, a demonstration can draw attention to the problem and put pressure on the station at the same time. Large signs or placards and a one-page flyer with some of the worst on-air statements by the host and your coalition's demands will educate passersby.

10. Keep the pressure on. Even if the station doesn't balance the hate-jock, or allow an on-air discussion of hate speech, just publicizing bigoted statements changes the terms of debate. Hate flourishes when other views are not heard. By challenging it as often as possible, you diminish the ignorance that is necessary to racism, sexism and homophobia.

---

For more information, read FAIR's Bob Grant Success (Extra!Update, 6/96).

---

---

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

---

Right wing media encourages average citizens to hate

Published on Wednesday, February 22, 2006 by the Capital Times (Madison, Wisconsin)

Flatulent Right Wing Fills Radio with Hate

by Bill Berry

The man who does my parents' taxes in Green Bay seemed nice enough. He shook our hands and greeted us with small talk as we sat down to go over papers. But the acrid sounds coming from a stereo tuner near his ancient desk filled the office like dirty smoke. It was right-wing radio, an angry white man on his afternoon shift. I was amazed that this accountant was taking my parents' money and making us listen to this to boot, but I reminded myself I was there to help them. On this day, the topic was poor Dick Cheney and how the liberal media wouldn't leave him alone after his little hunting mishap. Soon the accountant was trying to wrench my 80-year-old mother into this angry world. He asked her if she thought such a trifling matter was grounds for Cheney's resignation. She snapped back, saying that she didn't think the hunting incident merited Cheney's resignation but that there were plenty of other reasons for it. She added that the two men with her felt just as she did. The accountant curled his lip in Cheney-esque fashion and went back to work. My skinny little mother won that battle, but the drone of the angry white men goes on day after day, and they still cling to the myth of the liberal media as some sort of overpowering beast. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who spoke at last year's Fighting Bob Fest in Baraboo, has been keeping a close watch on this. In a speech in San Francisco late last year, he noted that the notion of a liberal media is a right-wing ruse. "There is a right-wing media, and if you look where most Americans are now getting their news, that's where they're getting it. According to Pew (Research Center), 30 percent of Americans now say that their primary news source is talk radio, which is 90 percent dominated by the right." Unshackled by any meaningful oversight from the Federal Communications Commission or any sense of fairness, the right has elbowed its way into the mainstream, backed by big bucks. As Kennedy noted, "Twenty-two percent of Americans say their primary news source is Fox News, MSNBC or CNBC, all dominated by the right, and another 10 percent, Sinclair network, which is the most right wing of all." Sinclair also happens to be primarily Midwestern, a broadcast company whose owner makes news employees swear they won't criticize the war in Iraq or the Bush administration. Right-wing radio may be the most pernicious of all in the way that it sneaks its way into the workplace day after day. If one person listens, then all in earshot must, too. You hear it everywhere, in the places where people work hard for a living. There's good reason for these people to worry, but not about poor Dick Cheney. We are about one Supreme Court decision away from an end to collective bargaining for working men and women. Anyone concerned? Nearly 50 million Americans lack health care insurance, and many times that face shrinking benefits and growing premiums. Now there's something to worry about. Higher education? It's slipping out of reach for many. But on it drones, this electronic flatulence. Call it the great distraction. It makes little distinction between Muslim extremists and loyal but liberal Americans. When Al Gore recently criticized the Bush administration for trampling on civil rights, right-wing radio accused him of treason. One can only hope that they didn't sentence him to a hunting trip with Dick Cheney. The message on a daily basis seems to be that it's OK to hate, to shout other people down, to go about one's life in an angry mood. Perhaps more frightening is this: If this brand of thinking is now mainstream, what is next? What supplants the right at the far end of the spectrum? What will feed the monster in coming years? Bill Berry of Stevens Point writes a semimonthly column for The Capital Times. E-mail: billnick@charter.net Copyright © 2006 Capital Newspapers

A case for constitutional amendments - John Gormley

The title describes it all in a nutshell, but to offer a bit in the way of explanation, he's a hate-filled menace. I have never been able to figure out why right wing extremists always resort to name calling. Take a look at his blog and you will see that it is filled with people who love to call people names and these are the people who are calling other people "childish". Go figure.

Why is that almost all people who publish a blog allow people to blog freely, but Gormley has to "review your comments for moderation"? Is that because if he doesn't agree with you, he won't publish your comments, or because he is afraid that some people might actually post the truth, or because people might post how they actually feel about him, or because he posts most of the comments himself?

Rawlco radio executives must really have issues to have this guy on. I mean, he's a one man hate machine. It is likely high time that the decent people in the province rallied to take some kind of action against Rawlco just for keeping this guy on the payroll.

He allows people to post, or posts himself, that delegates at the SFL convention should have their names made public and circulated to their employers as they are an embarrassment. I raise the point that this is illegal under the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act, and that the Constitution allows all citizens freedom of opinion, expression and association.

Does he believe in censorship? I don't, or at least didn't until I started to listen to his crap. When does freedom of speech become hatred? Can you take poetic license because you are on NTR, does that allow you that freedom? Why is it okay for some people to totally disrespect others but not for others? Gormley hates the NDP and labour. When labour fights back, he calls them names and says they are disrespectful?

Gormley - do you like Saskatchewan? If you do, why don't you do us all a big favour and move to Alberta?

Hey, Sask Party are you listening?

Sure, Norris.

We are just fine with your bullshit speech. We are just going to sit and listen to you like nice little boys and girls, nod our heads and smile.

What the f*** is everyone in this province thinking? Have we lost our collective minds?

We have to RESPECT this S.O.B?
Our government is trying to strip the average working stiff of everything they work for, making it more difficult for working people to be protected from employers who may exploit them. They want to destroy everything that the labour movement has worked for, including everything that some activists have DIED for.

Sure, MR. LABOUR MINISTER, "SIR". Yes, Sir. You are doing a wonderful job. Of course you are. We all love you. Of course we should just respect you and we are childish for acting in such an awful way. We'll just sit and listen to you and kiss your ass because you are the labour minister.

If I was a Sunday school teacher and I was molesting the kids, that would be okay then and you respect me , because I was the Sunday school teacher and by the sheer power of my position I would have earned that respect?? Get a grip people. When you're screwing people, you don't deserve respect!!

I thought Mr. Hubich treated you with far more respect than you deserved. The fact that the SFL invited you in the first place, because traditionally that is what they do, was a class act. You, sir, are not a class act, nor are any of your buddies in the Sask Party.

It is about time labour started to fight back in this province. What they did to at the SFL Convention, you "poor thing" was mild.

RISE UP, RESIST, REBEL. Stop the injustice. Don't just sit idly by anymore. Enough is enough.

The Sask Party has WAY too much power.

Yours truly,

Politically Incorrect - and I don't care - because sometimes you just have to tell it like it is!