Zcom_simple

Hello,

Blogs are a familiar feature on the internet - where users post content in an accumulating manner, with comments, and search options, etc. They facilitate expression and exploration, and via attached comments, also debate and synthesis.


Reading and
Navigating Blogs

Our blogs are quite powerful. Each writer can post, as is typically the case. Sustainers who have the option can also post, however. All Blogs appear in the blog system, and sometimes also in content boxes the top page of ZNet - and always via the left menu of the top page - and can be found via searches, etc.

Commenting on blogs follows the blogs, attached at the bottom, and blog comments, like all others, are also visible in many places that show comments including in the forum system. In addition, the entire blog system gathers content for everyone - but one can look at the accumulating content in many ways.

  • For example one can look at one writer's efforts - so one is seeing what is effectively a blog system for that one writer, or Sustainer.
  • One can also look at the content by topic, seeing blogs that are tagged as being about a certain topic - or place, as well. Thus, when doing that, it is a blog system about a topic, or a place, with many contributors.
  • One can look at only writer blogs, or only sustainer blogs, as well.
  • One can look at blogs for particular Groups, too.

All this is easily done using the left menu. Searches allow even more variables and refinements.


Creating Blog Posts

If you are a Sustainer with permission, and are logged in, you will see a link in the left menu for you to post a blog - and you can use that to post one, and then tag it various ways (such as with a topic or place, or a group tag), and once you do, it is in the system with you as the author.

You can also use the console button to the left to post a blog - anytime and from anywhere in the site, as long as you are logged in.

Meanwhile, enjoy the blogs - and, by the way, if you are a Free Member or a Sustainer with a ZSpace page, of course you can put one or more content boxes on it, pulling blog links of any sort you may want to filter for, for example, by you or by your friends or by others - and by topic, about places, for groups, etc.

Blogs

Web

Chris Spannos's Blog

Web Address: http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/chrisspannos
Bio: Chris Spannos has had over a decade of experience in self-managed media collectives and also as an activist, organizer, and anti-capitalist. From 1998-2006 he participated in the Redeye collective,... (More)

All Spannos Blogs

Life After Capitalism Conference

By Chris Spannos at Aug 17, 2004


Change Text Size a- | A+
Well, four more days to go before the Life After Capitalism conference being held in New York City, beginning this Friday and continuing throughout Saturday and Sunday. Myself and fellow Vancouver Parecon Collective member Matt Grinder will be attending the conference as participants and as media. The conference is attempting to transcend the Republican/Democrat party dichotomy as well as the electoral system by developing vision, strategy and tactics for a better world. As the site says, "Life After Capitalism 2004 aims at contributing to this process by providing a space for activists - in the run up to the intense mobilization period - to reflect on the importance of long term vision, strategy, and face to face relationship building. We also seek to bring together and give voice to the (non-sectarian) anti capitalist left in the United States."  I will provide blog updates from the conference trying to convey what I see, the issues being discussed, actions proposed, and actions taken. In related news, a friend has passed along this New York Times article (below) which reports that the FBI is investigating demonstrators across the country who may be attending the Republican National Convention. Joe Parris, FBI spokesman in Washington, says, "We vetted down a list and went out and knocked on doors and had a laundry list of questions to ask about possible criminal behavior," he added. "No one was dragged from their homes and put under bright lights. The interviewees were free to talk to us or close the door in our faces." As for the harassment and intimidation, Mark Silverstein, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado says, "This kind of pressure has a real chilling effect on perfectly legitimate political activity"..."People are going to be afraid to go to a demonstration or even sign a petition if they justifiably believe that will result in your having an F.B.I. file opened on you." New York Times F.B.I. Goes Knocking for Political Troublemakers By ERIC LICHTBLAU WASHINGTON, Aug. 15 - The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been questioning political demonstrators across the country, and in rare cases even subpoenaing them, in an aggressive effort to forestall what officials say could be violent and disruptive protests at the Republican National Convention in New York. F.B.I. officials are urging agents to canvass their communities for information about planned disruptions aimed at the convention and other coming political events, and they say they have developed a list of people who they think may have information about possible violence. They say the inquiries, which began last month before the Democratic convention in Boston, are focused solely on possible crimes, not on dissent, at major political events. But some people contacted by the F.B.I. say they are mystified by the bureau's interest and felt harassed by questions about their political plans. "The message I took from it," said Sarah Bardwell, 21, an intern at a Denver antiwar group who was visited by six investigators a few weeks ago, "was that they were trying to intimidate us into not going to any protests and to let us know that, 'hey, we're watching you.' '' The unusual initiative comes after the Justice Department, in a previously undisclosed legal opinion, gave its blessing to controversial tactics used last year by the F.B.I in urging local police departments to report suspicious activity at political and antiwar demonstrations to counterterrorism squads. The F.B.I. bulletins that relayed the request for help detailed tactics used by demonstrators - everything from violent resistance to Internet fund-raising and recruitment. In an internal complaint, an F.B.I. employee charged that the bulletins improperly blurred the line between lawfully protected speech and illegal activity. But the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, in a five-page internal analysis obtained by The New York Times, disagreed. The office, which also made headlines in June in an opinion - since disavowed - that authorized the use of torture against terrorism suspects in some circumstances, said any First Amendment impact posed by the F.B.I.'s monitoring of the political protests was negligible and constitutional. The opinion said: "Given the limited nature of such public monitoring, any possible 'chilling' effect caused by the bulletins would be quite minimal and substantially outweighed by the public interest in maintaining safety and order during large-scale demonstrations." Those same concerns are now central to the vigorous efforts by the F.B.I. to identify possible disruptions by anarchists, violent demonstrators and others at the Republican National Convention, which begins Aug. 30 and is expected to draw hundreds of thousands of protesters. In the last few weeks, beginning before the Democratic convention, F.B.I. counterterrorism agents and other federal and local officers have sought to interview dozens of people in at least six states, including past protesters and their friends and family members, about possible violence at the two conventions. In addition, three young men in Missouri said they were trailed by federal agents for several days and subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand jury last month, forcing them to cancel their trip to Boston to take part in a protest there that same day. Interrogations have generally covered the same three questions, according to some of those questioned and their lawyers: were demonstrators planning violence or other disruptions, did they know anyone who was, and did they realize it was a crime to withhold such information. A handful of protesters at the Boston convention were arrested but there were no major disruptions. Concerns have risen for the Republican convention, however, because of antiwar demonstrations directed at President Bush and because of New York City's global prominence. With the F.B.I. given more authority after the Sept. 11 attacks to monitor public events, the tensions over the convention protests, coupled with the Justice Department's own legal analysis of such monitoring, reflect the fine line between protecting national security in an age of terrorism and discouraging political expression. F.B.I. officials, mindful of the bureau's abuses in the 1960's and 1970's monitoring political dissidents like the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., say they are confident their agents have not crossed that line in the lead-up to the conventions. "The F.B.I. isn't in the business of chilling anyone's First Amendment rights," said Joe Parris, a bureau spokesman in Washington. "But criminal behavior isn't covered by the First Amendment. What we're concerned about are injuries to convention participants, injuries to citizens, injuries to police and first responders." F.B.I. officials would not say how many people had been interviewed in recent weeks, how they were identified or what spurred the bureau's interest. They said the initiative was part of a broader, nationwide effort to follow any leads pointing to possible violence or illegal disruptions in connection with the political conventions, presidential debates or the November election, which come at a time of heightened concern about a possible terrorist attack. F.B.I. officials in Washington have urged field offices around the country in recent weeks to redouble their efforts to interview sources and gather information that might help to detect criminal plots. The only lead to emerge publicly resulted in a warning to authorities before the Boston convention that anarchists or other domestic groups might bomb news vans there. It is not clear whether there was an actual plot. The individuals visited in recent weeks "are people that we identified that could reasonably be expected to have knowledge of such plans and plots if they existed," Mr. Parris said. "We vetted down a list and went out and knocked on doors and had a laundry list of questions to ask about possible criminal behavior," he added. "No one was dragged from their homes and put under bright lights. The interviewees were free to talk to us or close the door in our faces." But civil rights advocates argued that the visits amounted to harassment. They said they saw the interrogations as part of a pattern of increasingly aggressive tactics by federal investigators in combating domestic terrorism. In an episode in February in Iowa, federal prosecutors subpoenaed Drake University for records on the sponsor of a campus antiwar forum. The demand was dropped after a community outcry. Protest leaders and civil rights advocates who have monitored the recent interrogations said they believed at least 40 or 50 people, and perhaps many more, had been contacted by federal agents about demonstration plans and possible violence surrounding the conventions and other political events. "This kind of pressure has a real chilling effect on perfectly legitimate political activity," said Mark Silverstein, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, where two groups of political activists in Denver and a third in Fort Collins were visited by the F.B.I. "People are going to be afraid to go to a demonstration or even sign a petition if they justifiably believe that will result in your having an F.B.I. file opened on you." The issue is a particularly sensitive one in Denver, where the police agreed last year to restrictions on local intelligence-gathering operations after it was disclosed that the police had kept files on some 3,000 people and 200 groups involved in protests. But the inquiries have stirred opposition elsewhere as well. In New York, federal agents recently questioned a man whose neighbor reported he had made threatening comments against the president. He and a lawyer, Jeffrey Fogel, agreed to talk to the Secret Service, denying the accusation and blaming it on a feud with the neighbor. But when agents started to question the man about his political affiliations and whether he planned to attend convention protests, "that's when I said no, no, no, we're not going to answer those kinds of questions," said Mr. Fogel, who is legal director for the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York. In the case of the three young men subpoenaed in Missouri, Denise Lieberman, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union in St. Louis, which is representing them, said they scrapped plans to attend both the Boston and the New York conventions after they were questioned about possible violence. The men are all in their early 20's, Ms. Lieberman said, but she would not identify them. All three have taken part in past protests over American foreign policy and in planning meetings for convention demonstrations. She said two of them were arrested before on misdemeanor charges for what she described as minor civil disobedience at protests. Prosecutors have now informed the men that they are targets of a domestic terrorism investigation, Ms. Lieberman said, but have not disclosed the basis for their suspicions. "They won't tell me," she said. Federal officials in St. Louis and Washington declined to comment on the case. Ms. Lieberman insisted that the men "didn't have any plans to participate in the violence, but what's so disturbing about all this is the pre-emptive nature - stopping them from participating in a protest before anything even happened." The three men "were really shaken and frightened by all this," she said, "and they got the message loud and clear that if you make plans to go to a protest, you could be subject to arrest or a visit from the F.B.I." Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
Person

By Ted_heistman, Truthseeker at Aug 19, 2004 12:05 PM

"The conference is attempting to transcend the Republican/Democrat party dichotomy as well as the electoral system by developing vision, strategy and tactics for a better world." Basically one of the first lines in the article refutes the whole basis of your rant, No to Kerry. Good article Chris. I wish I could go.

Reply this comment


Person

Re: Life After Capitalism Conference

By To, No at Aug 18, 2004 08:58 AM

I am not trying to "convince [you] of anything". It is you who will have to live with what you have done in the year 2004. I can only promise that this part of your bio, and of others' bio too, will not be forgotten, so that you can “take pride” of bio that you are making these days and months, too. (Since there will be the names of those who “held their nose” on every bomb that Kerry throws) "Kurz ist der Wahn, lang ist die Reue"

Reply this comment


Person

Re: Life After Capitalism Conference

By To, No at Aug 18, 2004 08:34 AM

Thanks for your patience Chris, but since you accuse me of fraud and misrepresentation of you, I beg you one last thing: 1. Can you tell us explicitly what is your position on what stand should ZNet take in regard to the November election. What is your own position? 2. Do you consider this question important? Or do you think that it is “a waist of time”, which should “just stop”, as quickly as possible, and should better not be mentioned on ZNet ever again, like the things that were not supposed to be mentioned on DNC? Frankly, Chris, I don't think it is a crime to ask you as a blogger about your stand on November election, I think you own it to readers. Noblesse Oblige, you remember?

Reply this comment


Person

Re: Life After Capitalism Conference

By To, No at Aug 18, 2004 05:43 AM

And you ignore the most crucial lesson of all -- that if any change is to take place the break with the Democratic Party is more essential than Bush, Cheney, Frankenstein and other witches that you frighten kids of. The Bush can afford to be Bush not because of intrinsic strength of Republicans, but because of the role the Democratic Party plays. Here is one quotation from wsws.org “The central weakness of previous mass social movements in the United States—the populist revolt of the 1890s, the militant union struggles of the IWW before World War I, the massive labor upsurge of the 1930s, the civil rights and antiwar movements of the 1960s—is that they never succeeded in freeing working people from the political domination of the Democratic Party. Consequently, the working class was limited to fighting for the mitigation of this or that social evil. It could not place on the political agenda the systematic reorganization of American society to serve the needs of the people, as opposed to the corporate establishment.” So I questioned your “vision” if you even couldn't absorb this basic lesson from the past. Plain and clear. Comradely, No to Kerry

Reply this comment


Person

Re: Life After Capitalism Conference

By To, No at Aug 18, 2004 05:41 AM

The Bush is not important at all, he is Bush because of the forces he represents and their objective needs. Those are the same forces that Kerry represents, and those forces are now looking for better CEO who can continue the same agenda, because Bush does it inefficiently. You are playing most reactionary and anti working class role by trying to frighten workers of the “witch Bush”, to frighten them into collaboration. There will always be Bushes or Lepens, and according to you workers should always run to elect a bourgeois candidate, while you drink lemonade and discuss with Bouvard and Pécuchet. I admit my tone is sharp, partly because I am writing in foreign language, but I don't think there is anything confusing here. Its crystal clear, the problem is that you and others want to avoid this topic because you know you are propagating “wisdom” of collaboration with Nazis, on pretext that somehow it will make a great difference to choose between Hitler and Eichman.

Reply this comment


Person

Re: Life After Capitalism Conference

By To, No at Aug 18, 2004 05:38 AM

2. The whole project of Parecon rests on the high esteem of workers abilities, but here you want to convince us that the same those workers have no other way to fight Bush but by the most ANTI-PARECON means -- by voting for bourgeois candidate. So you think that workers must rely on bourgeois establishment to defeat fascism. That's the worst betrayal packed into a nice middle-class Bouvard and Pécuchet philosophy. Look at another blatant example of hypocrisy. You wrote: “I don't think your opinion about a boycott for Kerry and the Democrats will get off the ground so probably not worth the energy...” So you who advocate Parecon and at the same time state that something what you don't think “will get off the ground” is “probably not worth the energy...” Contradictions coming from disguised support for the establishment.

Reply this comment


Person

Re: Life After Capitalism Conference

By To, No at Aug 18, 2004 05:36 AM

Thanks for the reply! You are conferencing at the time when, for example, people are being slaughtered every day in Iraq, so wouldn't it be natural that you first of all demand immediate withdrawal of troops INSTEAD OF VOTING FOR A MAN WHO GUARANTEES THAT TROOPS WILL STAY? So the whole this LIFE AFTER DEATH Conference is to divert attention from what is the task of the day. It is like an opium at the time when for the first time there is a real chance that ruling system be shattered. I exposed here the contradictions of your perspective: 1. On the one hand you contemplate the most idealistic society, but on the other hand, at present, you take the most opportunistic and collaborative line of always being the first to come to rescue the system when its legitimacy is in question.

Reply this comment


Person

Re: Life After Capitalism Conference

By To, No at Aug 17, 2004 17:25 PM

Few more lines, to practise participatory democracy, if its not too much: ********************************** Life After Death Conference Every participant will be served a tiramisu Special guest coming from Paris Protocol arranged like on Democratic National Conference -- no “sectarian” banners please! Only “responsible” opposition allowed **********************************

Reply this comment


Person

Re: Life After Capitalism Conference

By To, No at Aug 17, 2004 15:16 PM

In other words, to develope a vision for tomorrow one must first have a compass for TODAY!

Reply this comment


Person

Re: Life After Capitalism Conference

By To, No at Aug 17, 2004 15:07 PM

Dear Chris, If you can stand some criticism, here it is: Every left conference being held these days has, in my opinion, two choices: 1. To vehemently call for boycott of Kerry and Democrats, for support for certain third party candidates (like SEP) and independent mobilization, or 2. To invite Maria Antoinette to preside the conference, because you will be selling to hungry people tiramisu. How are you going to change the society by talking about cakes when people have no bread, by conveniently avoiding real and urgent questions of the day and by lending a help to the ruling system when it faces collapse? For the cause of CHANGING society anybody is better than Kerry and anyone else from Democratic Party, Democratic Party is the key to subvert any change. What is the point in developing a vision of paradise and then telling people that the road to paradise leads through holding nose and voting for Party of genocide and their candidate Kerry Mengele Mobutu Seseko? I doubt the ability of any of you to offer any serious vision at all if you, at the same time, avoid and mislead people on the key issues in this life, not in the next, on this world, not the one after the death!

Reply this comment

Loading_border