Now
Available from
CounterPunch for Only $11.50 (S/H Included)
Today's
Stories
March 8, 2004
Amy Goodman
An
Interview with Aristide
Eric Ruder
An Interview
with Robert Fatton on the Coup in Haiti
Robert Jensen
The Presidential Library Terrorist
Connection
Mike Whitney
Expel the US from the Security Council
Jason Leopold
How Cheney Helped Cover Up Pakistan's
Nuclear Proliferation
Mazin Qumsiyeh
Why is Apartheid Touted as a Solution?
Kevin Alexander Gray
The Legacy of Strom Thurmond
Derek Seidman
Radical Continuity: an Interview with Paul Buhle
Steve Perry
Kerry Fiddles While He Could be Burning Bush
Website of the Day
Patriot
Act Game
March 6 / 7, 2004
Alexander Cockburn
Understanding the World with
Paul Sweezy
Robert Pollin
Remembering Paul Sweezy
Jeffrey St. Clair
The Politics of Timber Theft
Tom Reeves
Bush's Mass Deportations: 63,000 and Counting
Charles Lewis
Who Mugged Howard Dean in Iowa:
Kerry, Torricelli and a Mysterious Frontgroup
Tom Jackson
My Breakfast with Sen. Judd Gregg
Kurt Nimmo
Is Venezuela Next?
Alan Cisco
A Report from Caracas
Jack Random
Haitian Democracy be Damned
Colin Piquette
Oh, Canada: the Coup Coalition
Lee Sustar
Labor's State of Emergency
William D. Hartung
Iraq and the Costs of War
David Sally
Rebuilding
Amérique
Mark Scaramella
When God Mooned Moses: Test Your Bible Knowledge
Mickey Z.
What We Can Learn from Ashcroft's Gallbladder
Ron Jacobs
Politics and Baseball
Dave Zirin
The Longest Jump: the Blackballing of Phil Shinnick
Poets' Basement
John Holt and Larry Kearney
Website of the Weekend
National Day of Action for Rachel Corrie
March 5, 2004
Chris Floyd
Uncle
Sugar: How the WMD Scam Put Money in Bush Family Pockets
Ron Jacobs
Chaos
Reigns: Haiti and Iraq
Lisa Viscidi
Guatemalan
Refugees: a Difficult Return
Yves Engler
Canada and the Coup in Haiti
Mike Legro
Those Bush Ads: Some Dead Bodies Are Worth More Than Others
Javier Armas
A Night of Inspiration: Oakland Benefit for Grocery Workers Strike
Bennett Hoffman
"Who Cares About Haiti, Anyway?"
Bill Christison
Faltering Neo-Cons Still Dangerous
Website of the Day
Haiti Support Group
March 4, 2004
Diane Christian
Sex
and Ideals
Sen. Robert Byrd
Stop the Stonewalling, Mr. President: Fairy Tales, Bush and the
9/11 Commission
Norman Solomon
Assuming the Right to Intervene: The US Press and Haiti
Jack Brown
A Fragrant Saga of Mexico's Greens
Hal Cranmer
The
John Kerry Experience
David Lindorff
Greenspan's Pension
Sam Smith
The Election is Over, We Lost
Christopher Brauchli
Goin'
to the Chapel: The Gay and the Dead
Brian D. Barry
The "Perfect" World of E-Voting: A Computer Scientist
Reports from the Polling Booth
Richard Oxman
Arsonists for Haiti?
Peter Phillips
Haitian
Fantasies: Mainstream Media Fails Itself, Again
Tariq Ali
Notes on Anti-Semitism, Zionism and
Palestine
Website of the Day
What If Boeing Ads Told the Truth?
March 3, 2004
Heather Williams / Karl
Laraque
Marines
Retake Haiti
Jack McCarthy
Guy's
Our Guy: "I am the Chief. My Hero is Pinochet."
Robert Sandels
The
Purloined Label: The Struggle Over the Havana Club Trademark
Juliana Fredman / James Davis
Israeli Organized Crime
JG
The Yuppie Silence on Haiti
Emilio Sardi
The
Colombia/US Free Trade Deal: It's About More Than Trade
Alan Farago
Swimming in Sewage
Mike Whitney
"Blood
Will Have Blood": 143 Murdered in Liberated Iraq
CounterPunch Wire
Nader's Legislative Record in the 1960s
Steve Perry
Kerry
Advisory: Remember Lena Guerrero
Nelson George/ Marcus Miller
Miles Davis & Hip Hop: a Conversation
Website of the Day
$10,000 Is Yours for the Taking: The USS Liberty Challenge
March 2, 2004
William Blum
If Kerry's
the Answer, What's the Question?
Conn Hallinan
Haiti:
the Dangerous Muddle
JoAnn Wypijewski
The Bravo
H-Bomb Test: One WMD They Couldn't Hide
Mike Whitney
Regime Change in Haiti: the Bush Dominos Keep Falling
Ra Ravishankar
Afghanistan, the Liberation That Isn't: an Interview with Mariam
from RAWA
Dan Bacher
Merle Haggard & the Politics of Salmon: "Clearcutting
is Rape"
Greg Moses
Oscar White
Brandy Baker
Mel Gibson's Minstrelsy Show
Little Tucker Carlson
What I Did on My Vacation
Robert Fisk
All This
Talk of Civil War, Now This
Merle Haggard
Kern River
Website of the Day
Rebel Edit
March 1, 2004
Alexander Cockburn
Morris
Thanks War Criminal in Front of Billions
Richard Oxman
Oscar's
Obit: Thanking Bob McNamara
Elaine Cassel
Writing and Reading as "Terrorism"
Mickey Z
Thomas Friedman's Education
Mike Whitney
George Will and Anti-Semitism: a Cul-de-Sac of Prejudice
Heather Williams
Haiti
as Target Practice: How the US Press Missed the Story
Cathy Crosson
Chanson d'amour haïtienne
Website of the Day
God Hates Shrimp
February 28 / 29, 2004
Stephen Green
Serving
Two Flags: Neo-Cons, Israel and the Bush Team
Gary Leupp
Another Senseless Bush Battle: Defining and Protecting Marriage
William A. Cook
Israel:
America's Albatross
Ron Jacobs
Kucinich: Good Fight; Wrong Battlefield
Ben Tripp
A Nosegay of Posies: Queer Weddings at Last!
Leilla Matsui
Dances with Crucifixes
Mike Whitney
Dismantle
the Military Goliath
Yoel Marcus
Down and Out in the Hague
Uri Avnery
The Dancing Bear
Linda S. Heard
Britons and Americans Condemned to a Hobson's Choice
Al Krebs
Unmasking a Secret American Empire: Land, Water & Cotton
Stan Cox
Life (Pat. Pend.): Genetic Commandeering
JG
The Haiti Boomerang: "After The Looting & Pillaging,
Your Hunger Will Remain"
Rick Giombetti
Censorship at the Seattle P-I on Forced Psychiatry
Keith Hoeller
The Bankruptcy of Mental Health Insurance Parity
Dave Zirin
Colorado Football: Buffalo Swill
NADERAMA
Alan Maass
Nader and the Politics of Lesser
Evils
Michael Donnelly
Regime
Rotation: Anybody But Bush...Again?
Niranjan Ramakrishnan
Exeunt Serenaders; Enter Nader
Doug Giebel
So Nader's Running? Get Over It
Bruce Jackson
An Open Letter to Naderites
CounterPunch Wire
Stalinists for Kerry! and Other Roars from the Crowd
Poets' Basement
Davies, Scarr, Kearney & Albert
February 27, 2004
Thomas C. Mountain
A
White Jesus During Black History Month?
Laura Carlsen
Americans
Abroad: Bush is Persona Non Grata
John B. Anderson
Nader's Campaign Brings Back Memories: Creating an Open Electoral
Process
Jason Leopold
Spying
on Kofi Annan
John Chuckman
Nader,
Risk and Hope
Standard Schaefer
An
Interview with Michael Hudson on Putin's Russia
Ray McGovern
Punished
for Honest Intelligence
Saul Landau
The
Haiti Redux
Website of the Day
Bush: Why I'm Running for Re-election
February 26, 2004
Brandy Baker
Is Nader
on to Something?
Jacques Kinau
AEI
to Colombia: "Can't Give You Anything But Guns, Baby"
Norman Solomon
Bugging Kofi Annan: UN Spying
and the Evasions of US Journalism
Greg Weiher
A Purloined Letter: the Zarqawi Gambit
Walt Brasch
Janet Jackson, Bush & No. 542: There are No Halftime Shows
in War
Shadi Hamid
The Music World Explodes in Anger
Norman Madarasz
As Canadian as Corruption
Chris Floyd
Bullets and Ballots
Virginia Tilly
The
Deeper Meaning of the Wall
Amy Goodman / Jeremy
Scahill
Haiti's
Lawyer Says US is Arming Haiti's Anti-Aristide Paramilitaries
Website of the Day
Clear Channel Sucks
February 25, 2004
Dr. Susan Block
Saddam's
Sex Therapist and the Rape of Free Speech
Bruce Anderson
Treacherous Bastards: The Greens and the Dems and Nader
Ron Jacobs
Our Power is on the Streets and
in Our Hearts
Mike Whitney
Bush
and Gay America: the Politics of Duplicity
Sam Husseini
Jesus in 100 Words
John L. Hess
Kick Off or Flub?
Sam Hamod
Bush's Newest Red Herring
Cockburn / St. Clair
Winning
with Nader
Website of the Day
VotePact
February 24, 2004
Ralph Nader
Why
I'm Running for President
Greg Moses
Rally
the Mob! Bush, Gay Marriage and the Constitution
Douglas O'Hara
The
Merchants of Fear: Smearing Nader
Phillip Cryan
Frozen in Time: The WSJ's Paranoid
Lens on Latin America
David Lindorff
John Kerry's China Connection
Jason Leopold
Cheney's Shame: Halliburton Faces New Charges
Gary Younge
Haiti: Throttled by History
Kromm, Masri & Purohit
Why No Democracy in Iraq?
Steve Perry
Tangled Up in Red and Blue: Beware the Electoral College
February 23, 2004
Neve Gordon
Israel's Apartheid Wall on Trial
at The Hague
Kurt Nimmo
Richard Perle, Executioner: "Heads Should Roll"
Jonathan Franklin
US Soldier Seeks Refugee Status in Canada
Al Krebs
The Liberal "Intelligentsia" v. Nader
Josh Frank
Nader's Nadir? Not a Chance
Bruce Jackson
Nader, Another View: "He's as Evil as Bush"
Gary Leupp
A Misguided
Attack, The Passion, Rabbi Lerner and the Gospels
Hot Stories
Alexander Cockburn
Behold,
the Head of a Neo-Con!
Subcomandante Marcos
The
Death Train of the WTO
Norman Finkelstein
Hitchens
as Model Apostate
Steve Niva
Israel's
Assassination Policy: the Trigger for Suicide Bombings?
Dardagan,
Slobodo and Williams
CounterPunch Exclusive:
20,000 Wounded Iraqi Civilians
Steve
J.B.
Prison Bitch
Sheldon
Rampton and John Stauber
True Lies: the Use of Propaganda
in the Iraq War
Wendell
Berry
Small Destructions Add Up
CounterPunch
Wire
WMD: Who Said What When
Cindy
Corrie
A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter
I Can't Hear From
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream
Francis Boyle
Impeach
Bush: A Draft Resolution
Click Here
for More Stories.
|
March
9, 2004
Word Up
Let's
Have a Conversation
By BEN TRIPP
A building is really just a hole. It can be a
very fancy hole with 200 executive suites, high speed Internet,
two restaurants and a fitness center, but it's still just a hole.
In this same way, politics is really just an argument. Forget
all this hogwash about pubic policy, governance, and the social
contract. Politics is a futile shouting match carried out in
the most public way possible between two gangs of wealthy drunks.
Do normal people want to argue? No. So they avoid politics- and
they're right. Politics is poverty. Politics is domination. Politics
leads to war. Politics is a cesspool full of rabid badgers duking
it out in an atmosphere comprised of equal parts helium, oxygen,
and crack smoke. The average person's enthusiasm for politics
is right up there with rectal cancer, although both are preferable
to public speaking. Yet politics rules every aspect of our lives.
It's the mechanism by which the reality we live in is defined.
If we do not participate in the political
process, we must accept that the biggest, meanest badger will
be running the show. He'll be pissed off, tore up, and looking
for payback. Do I really have to name any names? As hideous as
it sounds, we all have to get involved. By 'involved', I don't
mean showing up at the high school gym once every four years
so you can get the little sticker that says "I voted"-
not that many people even go that far. After all, you can buy
your own 'United We Stand' sticker for a couple of bucks, slap
it on your car, and then you don't have to vote- you're united
with whoever everybody else chooses. Although it can hardly be
said you're taking any kind of stand. Maybe it means standing
around. "United We Stand Around" doesn't have the same
ring, does it? But that's what we're doing, and meanwhile the
fox is in the whorehouse. So if you do vote, great. That's a
start. But voting is not enough, especially now that the odds
of getting your vote counted are similar to house odds at roulette
(37 to 1 straight bet, 8 to 1 corner bet but you have to vote
4 times, which is difficult in some Northern states). So what
else can you do besides casting your ballot on the waters?
Many of my readers are activists, and
they know what else. They're the ones raising their hands right
now, going "ooh, ooh". An activist is somebody who
works to promote a lost cause, such as world peace or free dental
care for mice. "Get involved, man!" They cry. This
isn't particularly helpful, but thanks for sharing. I'm an activist
too, and look what a difference I've made. Through my tireless
efforts, the people I hate most have secured absolute power,
destroyed the common weal, and pour my tax money directly into
their pockets. It's enough to make a fellow not participate,
isn't it? This creates a perfect system: people are so turned
off by the status quo (Latin for 'this sucks') that they won't
even think about it. Which means the status quo is never going
to change. But what if there were enough activists, for instance
driving around on election night with school busses and shotguns,
forcing people to vote? Then we'll have a revolution, right?
No. All that really means is we've switched badgers.
What we must do is transform our very
notion of what America is. Otherwise, we're just badgers, tearing
ragged, greasy strips of flesh off each other while the world
around us decays. But transform it into what? One idea I had
is we could transform America into a large side order of blintzes;
then at least everybody could eat. But this doesn't strike to
the core of the thing, nor even the pith or marrow. America must
transform itself into a union of citizens that nurtures its land
and people, inspires other nations, and stands united not merely
by birthplace but by the common birthright of humanity.
To do this, we Americans must first transform
our political argument into a personal conversation. Seems fairly
obvious, once somebody mentions it. Unfortunately the entire
notion is hooey, because to transform the nation we must first
transform the way we operate as human beings, or more broadly
(to include Republicans), bipedal terrestrial primates. We must
let go of the ideas of wrong and right, yes and no, have and
have not.
These polarities will never go away,
but we give them so much of our energy there's no room to create
solutions. The right hand wins, then nails the left hand to a
table in order to secure its victory. Who wins? Certainly not
the guy on the other end of the arms. He can't check his watch.
Am I saying we should agree on everything? No, I am not. To return
to the hand analogy, this would look very much like thumb twiddling.
In any case it will never happen. If you think a nation of 300
million souls can ever agree on anything, try this experiment:
get twenty complete strangers to order the same thing at your
local Chinese restaurant. This exercise also works with Greek
restaurants, or ten strangers if it's Bavarian food. The result
will be havoc. Not only that but they'll automatically add a
15% gratuity to the check. Humans cannot agree on anything. That's
why politics even exists: politics is the art of getting large
numbers of people to disagree about the same things. It's a business.
Whoever generates the most disagreement, wins. Yes? After all,
if we agreed on things, if we developed mutually satisfactory
outcomes, we couldn't be miserable. And that's what this is all
about.
Humans like to be miserable. When we're
in the womb, we're essentially perfect. I mean we look like skinned
koalas, but we don't have any troubles. Then we get born- big
mistake- and the next thing you know we're short, or fat, or
female, or gay, or black, or Jewish, or bald, or unmusical, or
prone to flatulence, or wrong, different, alone and despised;
some of us are all of these things, or none of these things,
which is even worse. Of course we like to be miserable: at least
that way we're happy. What politicians do is create beneficial
outcomes through the manipulation and management of mass misery.
Beneficial to whom? To themselves, of course. With the exception
of one politician in the Oval Office (I won't name any names),
they're not stupid. And even that one guy has a certain animal
cunning, almost badger-like. Life may be miserable, but you'd
have to be some kind of simp not to notice, by about the age
of three, that rich, powerful people enjoy their misery a great
deal more than everybody else. After all, would you rather be
miserable while scrubbing underwear in the sweltering belly of
an industrial laundry, or succumbing to the blandishments of
a frisky intern in the custom cabin of a Bell 430 executive helicopter?
Quick, choose one. I'll see you at the helipad.
Do you see where this is going? I hope
so, or I'm going to have to rewrite the whole thing. Politics
is the business of mass disagreement; politicians practice mass
misery management. If the masses agreed, the political class
would be out of business in a flash, or possibly half a flash.
If the masses weren't miserable, there would be nothing for the
politicians to do. And worse, the politicians would no longer
be less miserable than other people, which is humanity's number
one metric for whether we have good lives or bad lives. Do you
get it? In the name of sweet Mother Mary and her auntie May,
can't you see? That's what's going on! You put the extreme Left
in charge, it turns into Stalinism. You put the extreme Right
in charge, it turns into Fascism. What's the difference? Who
cares!
The people on one side will always do
their very best to make sure the people on the other side have
the suckiest possible lives. Then and only then have they won.
The only difference- and if this is all you get I can die happy,
or at least miserable, which is good enough- the only difference
between the Left and the Right is that the Left wants to spread
the misery around evenly, and the Right wants to concentrate
it on somebody else. What happens to the vast majority of people,
the ones I'm really speaking to here, who fall into the middle?
What about them, all those folks who can't stand politics and
don't want to get involved, who find the whole thing disgusting,
who either tape their nostrils shut, close their eyes, and vote
at random, or don't bother to vote at all? Guess where all that
misery the politicians are managing goes. Ah yes. Right in the
middle.
To summarize: you're one of four things.
You can be apolitical, in which case you're merely crouched shivering
in the reeking mud flats of misery, waiting for the tide to come
in and drown you; at least this requires no effort. You can be
a dutiful citizen, meaning you vote and can remember who the
governor of your state is, but nothing you do makes any difference.
Finally you can be an activist, meaning you're deeply committed
to futile resistance against power, or you can be in power, in
which case you spend all your time trying to keep the resistance
futile. This doesn't leave us in what you might call a great
place. Luckily, there is an answer. There's something else you
can do, and it's so simple the sheer possibility of the thing
will make you break out in hives. Ready? Here it is.
Two parts. First, have a conversation
with somebody. This isn't as difficult as it sounds. Merely find
a comfortable position to sit and then make noises with your
mouth. If you wish, you can also enjoy a refreshing beverage.
There's one caveat to this part: it's can't just be any conversation
at all. It must be a conversation about politics, during which
you create an agreement between yourself and the other person
in the conversation. (I should note that you're supposed to converse
with a human being. Trees, carpet scraps, and beef entrees don't
listen, I've tried.) Done that? Great. Now here's the second
part. Anybody can agree to anything, and nothing happens. I agree
to everything, and I do nothing. You need some kind of call to
action, you know, like in the hero's journey? Like when Luke
Skywalker decides to go to Alderaan? That was cool. What you
need to do is to motivate the person you came to an agreement
with to take an action. What action? Thanks for asking. They
don't have to go to Alderaan. All they have to do is exactly
what you did: have that same conversation with somebody.
See, when one person invents a political
possibility someone else can get behind, which is what this kind
of a conversation is all about, and the purpose of the thing
is simply to generate the conversation again with another, new
person (new in the sense of uninitiated; they can be fairly old),
it's easy. And miserable people want things to be easy, unless
they're activists, in which case they want things to be difficult,
so they know their struggle is valid. What's the point? After
all, it's just talk. But what else is there? Politics is just
talk. Even war is just talk, although that kind of talk is called
orders, and some of the talk is more like the screaming of napalmed
civilians. Sort of inarticulate talk. But you get where I'm going,
right? I mean duh, right? What I'm saying is all we have is talk.
Even what we do is talk, and I include Panzer charges and decapitating
complete strangers in this definition.
Somebody had to talk to somebody in order to create the possibility
of a tank. Then somebody else had to talk someone into enlisting
in the military, tell them how to drive the tank, give them orders
(go drive back and forth over that village) and afterwards tell
the war crimes tribunal it was all the tank driver's fault. It
was all talk. There are only two things human beings will respond
to besides talk: more misery and less misery, in the form of
quantifiable stimulus. To demonstrate this, simply set one person
on fire, and in another person, precipitate an orgasm. The first
person will be more miserable and the second person will be less
miserable, no talk required. Please note that doing both with
the same person will not yield the desired results. If you don't
know any people, you can try the same experiment with a reasonably
affable badger. So that's the power of talk: other than direct
stimulus, the only way to get anybody to respond to anything
is talk. And what is response? Action. So what if that action
is simply more talk? What else is there? Now forget about setting
people on fire for a minute, and let's return to the point for
a brief, twinkling moment.
Think of it as a contest you can enter
as many times as you want. You have a conversation with somebody
about your political standpoint. During this conversation, you
invest your standpoint in the other person in the conversation.
(Remember, it's a person you're talking to, not a shopping bag
or some speaker wire.) If you're really having a conversation,
not an argument, you will inspire that person. The two of you
will find agreement. You don't have to be right, you just have
to create agreement. Being right is nailing the other person
to the table. Being right is not one of the conditions. You just
have to come to agreement. Your original proposition may evolve
as a result, in which case both of you still agree, so it still
worked: both of you got inspired. And none of that 'agree to
disagree' crap. That's thumb twiddling, right? What we're looking
for here is a firm, dry handshake. Step two: that other person
has the same conversation with somebody else. If your political
standpoint has evolved as a result of the initial conversation,
you must now have another conversation with a new person (new
to the conversation, remember? Talking to a new person in temporal
terms is just silly because they don't know any words, because
they're babies.) Wow, it's like some kind of game, or a ponzi
scheme.
You may recall I said I'd get to the
point eventually. Here it is.
What happens if everybody has a political
conversation with somebody else in which both persons come to
an agreement? It never ends, does it. Vast, rippling waves of
agreement wash around the world, back and forth, evolving, transforming.
People on one side of the world might
be working with a different iteration of the agreement than people
on the other side, but because the mode of transmission is personal,
not imposed from a distance via communication technologies, you
don't have different agreements colliding with each other: instead
you have conversations happening. Can you crazy cats dig it?
Now, this agreement I'm talking about is just words. But what
else have we got? You can't share pain or pleasure, subjectively
speaking. There are websites dedicated to sharing both at the
same time, but that's a goat of a different feather. You can
cause them, but you can't share them. You can only share the
idea of them with words. If Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had gotten
hold of an atomic bomb (and there are people who think he was
pretty close) he could have wiped out the city of Washington,
DC., right? But instead, all he had was some words. And with
those words, he had a conversation with America. So did Tiny
Tim, but his words were somewhat less compelling, which ought
to be some kind of a lesson to you. Dr. King, who was only eighteen
inches tall, transformed the very fundaments of this nation with
a conversation. Several conversations. You know what I mean.
So this conversation of yours is more powerful than an atomic
bomb, you get that? Kablooie. You can change everything. But
you don't have to speak on a stage on the Washington Mall to
a crowd of thousands. All you have to do is speak with one person,
which you were probably going to do anyway, if only to buy eggs
at the store. What are you waiting for? You want to become a
force in politics, you want to get off the sidelines and start
the eternal great march toward being less miserable, one and
all, you don't have to become president. Just have a conversation,
which is more than the president can do, by the way. Some day,
that conversation will have circled the entire world and it will
come back to you and someone else will have it with you, and
transform your thinking, and what do you know? You've gotten
involved in politics, and you haven't even had to argue.
That's my conversation with you, by the
way. If I've succeeded, pass the word.
Ben Tripp
is a screenwriter and cartoonist. Ben also has a
lot of outrageously priced crap for sale here. If his
writing starts to grate on your nerves, buy some and maybe he'll
flee to Mexico. If all else fails, he can be reached at: credel@earthlink.net
Weekend
Edition Features for March 6 / 7, 2004
Alexander Cockburn
Understanding the World with
Paul Sweezy
Robert Pollin
Remembering Paul Sweezy
Jeffrey St. Clair
The Politics of Timber Theft
Tom Reeves
Bush's Mass Deportations: 63,000 and Counting
Charles Lewis
Who Mugged Howard Dean in Iowa:
Kerry, Torricelli and a Mysterious Frontgroup
Tom Jackson
My Breakfast with Sen. Judd Gregg
Kurt Nimmo
Is Venezuela Next?
Alan Cisco
A Report from Caracas
Jack Random
Haitian Democracy be Damned
Colin Piquette
Oh, Canada: the Coup Coalition
Lee Sustar
Labor's State of Emergency
William D. Hartung
Iraq and the Costs of War
David Sally
Rebuilding
Amérique
Mark Scaramella
When God Mooned Moses: Test Your Bible Knowledge
Mickey Z.
What We Can Learn from Ashcroft's Gallbladder
Ron Jacobs
Politics and Baseball
Dave Zirin
The Longest Jump: the Blackballing of Phil Shinnick
Poets' Basement
John Holt and Larry Kearney
Website of the Weekend
National Day of Action for Rachel Corrie
Keep CounterPunch Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
|