Monday, November 14, 2011

"We are the Many"
  A song for the OCCUPY movement and for 2011-12


The video is from Makana's web site at Vimeo. Makana represents the next step, a song for the Occupy movement in the tradition of Joe Hill, to Woody Guthrie, to Pete Seeger, and to Bob Dylan.

From a top news story today:
A popular Hawaiian recording artist turned a top-security dinner of Pacific Rim leaders hosted by President Barack Obama into a subtle protest with a song in support of the "Occupy" movement.

Makana, who goes by one name, was enlisted to play a luau, or Hawaiian feast, Saturday night for leaders assembled in Obama's birthplace Honolulu for an annual summit that is formulating plans for a Pacific free-trade pact.

But in the midst of the dinner on the resort strip Waikiki Beach, he pulled open his jacket to reveal a T-shirt that read "Occupy with Aloha," using the Hawaiian word whose various meanings include love and peace. He then sang a marathon version of his new song "We Are The Many."
Here are the lyrics:
We Are The Many

Ye come here, gather 'round the stage
The time has come for us to voice our rage
Against the ones who've trapped us in a cage
To steal from us the value of our wage

From underneath the vestiture of law
The lobbyists at Washington do gnaw
At liberty, the bureaucrats guffaw
And until they are purged, we won't withdraw

We'll occupy the streets
We'll occupy the courts
We'll occupy the offices of you
Till you do
The bidding of the many, not the few

Our nation was built upon the right
Of every person to improve their plight
But laws of this Republic they rewrite
And now a few own everything in sight

They own it free of liability
They own, but they are not like you and me
Their influence dictates legality
And until they are stopped we are not free

We'll occupy the streets
We'll occupy the courts
We'll occupy the offices of you
Till you do
The bidding of the many, not the few

You enforce your monopolies with guns
While sacrificing our daughters and sons
But certain things belong to everyone
Your thievery has left the people none

So take heed of our notice to redress
We have little to lose, we must confess
Your empty words do leave us unimpressed
A growing number join us in protest

We occupy the streets
We occupy the courts
We occupy the offices of you
Till you do
The bidding of the many, not the few

You can't divide us into sides
And from our gaze, you cannot hide
Denial serves to amplify
And our allegiance you can't buy

Our government is not for sale
The banks do not deserve a bail
We will not reward those who fail
We will not move till we prevail

We'll occupy the streets
We'll occupy the courts
We'll occupy the offices of you
Till you do
The bidding of the many, not the few

We'll occupy the streets
We'll occupy the courts
We'll occupy the offices of you
Till you do
The bidding of the many, not the few

We are the many
You are the few

You can download the mp3 version here.

AND through the web sites listed below, you can interact with the movement:






Originally Posted in the Redwood Guardian

Saturday, November 5, 2011

Why Third Way Democrats fail
   Solar Powered Soup Kitchens

The title to this post pretty much says it all about Governor Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown and President Barack "Avatar" Obama.

Both have been sufficiently removed from reality by political ambition that we would expect them to actually favor grant programs to provide solar power to soup kitchens while pondering signing off on cuts in funding for meat.

Reality is the story headlined Most of the unemployed no longer receive benefits explaining:

The jobs crisis has left so many people out of work for so long that most of America's unemployed are no longer receiving unemployment benefits.

Early last year, 75 percent were receiving checks. The figure is now 48 percent — a shift that points to a growing crisis of long-term unemployment. Nearly one-third of America's 14 million unemployed have had no job for a year or more.

...Their options include food stamps or other social programs. Nearly 46 million people received food stamps in August, a record total. That figure could grow as more people lose unemployment benefits.
Even if there are people "gaming" the system, these numbers clearly tell us a serious problem is developing.

By the time you add in those who have never drawn unemployment such as unemployed recent high school and college graduates (and drop outs), we are allowing a huge expansion of the number of our people who are poor by late 20th Century American standards.

Two things are certain.
First, green industry is not going to fix the problem of employment in California no matter how much people might want it to be the universal solution for everything.

Second, despite the machinations of Moonbeam's Administration, the California State Budget will be seriously out of balance by June.

The Great California Slump is not going to be fixed by creating solar powered soup kitchens. (Yes, there is such a thing - see Sun powers Tucson soup kitchen.)



Originally Posted in the Redwood Guardian

Thursday, October 20, 2011

One Day at a Time:
   The 21st Century American Family

To gain an understanding of the reality of our national economic condition, a good place to begin is the first in a series of articles by Advertising Age that will be "a year-long study of the American consumer with an examination of how those in the middle are getting squeezed -- and how marketers are beginning to respond."

Advertising Age is the main trade journal for the people who create and place advertising. They generally know what's going on in our consumer-based economy. From this first article:
...America's backbone is bending toward the breaking point. In the last decade, consumers overall cut spending 4.2% in 2010 dollars, and the brunt of that was felt by the middle class, which slashed spending between 10% and 13%. Meanwhile, the upper 20% of earners curbed spending only 6%. The blame can't be pinned on the recession, either. In real dollars, median family income is now what it was in 1997.

...This America looks like neither the Cosbys nor the Jeffersons; it does not resemble the Conners or the Bunkers. Perhaps it looks a little like "Modern Family" without the spending power. Today, half of all households have less than $10,000 in annual discretionary income, according to Experian Simmons.

While these changes haven't happened overnight, marketers are grappling with how to keep up. Walmart has stopped adding upscale merchandise and put back the bargain bins known as Action Alley. Layaway programs are in full swing at Kmart, Sears, Best Buy and Toys R Us. Hallmark even has greeting cards for the unemployed.
The article also discusses factual data from the 2010 Census that confirmed what many were noticing. Even in the early 1970's the median income family lived on one paycheck. But today the median income family has two paychecks.

The problem with that fact is the majority of the income growth over the past 35 years has taken place in two-income families while in the last two decades the number of married-couple families fell below half the American households.

Regardless of how you feel about the sociological changes, the fact is marketers are adjusting in order to survive. For the advertising business, these aren't political or social or religious issues, just economic realities.

The Advertising Age article mentions the ABC show "Modern Family," one of the most popular shows currently on television. It notes that America resembles the show but lacks "the spending power." Indeed, the one absence in "Modern Family" is that there is no one-adult household with or without children.  A curious omission.

I would argue that instead of looking back at the Huxtables (they weren't the Cosbys), the Jeffersons, the Conners, or the Bunkers, we should remember the CBS show "One Day at a Time" that ran from 1975 to 1984 and this family that in retrospect seems prescient:





Originally Posted in the Redwood Guardian

Thursday, January 21, 2010

The Latest Round in the California Water Issue

While generally not doing anything meaningful about the budget crisis, the Legislature and the Governor worked closely to put what may become a very unpopular water bond measure before the voters.

While we're all waiting for the opportunity to vote on the matter, a "discussion" continues which illustrates why the water "debate" is becoming another matter on the list of things California voters are disgusted about.

In what appears to be a reasonable approach in the debate over Delta water, the National Academy of Sciences appointed a panel to review rules adopted by federal wildlife agencies to protect endangered Delta fish species. This was requested by Senator Diane Feinstein.

At the simplest (or simpleton) level, the problem has been portrayed as a battle between hard working American farmers (who are an endangered species themselves) and liberal environmentalists who care more about smelt than people.

This review lays out clearly the kind of players involved on the agriculture side. Feinstein acted in response to a letter from Stewart Resnick, owner of Paramount Farms. To quote from the Paramount Farms web site: "Paramount Farms is the largest grower and processor of almonds and pistachios in the world." In fact, its processing facilities occupy more acres than what one might think of as "a farm." Again, from their web site:

Ah yes, as Ma and Pa Paramount, their eight kids, and their trusty farmhand Jethro struggle to keep the family farm....

In fact, this is a political arena battle between large corporate farmers and large corporate real estate developers on one side against the interests of California's remaining fisherman who are in truth the only small businessmen and women who have a survival stake in the battle (yes, the Delta wildlife have a survival stake also, but can't vote) joined by those who value the Delta ecosystem - the environmental community and federal wildlife agencies.

According to the Sacramento Bee, this review will cost American taxpayers $1.5 million and it will be the third such review, as the Bee notes: "Two separate independent science panels have affirmed the importance of fall flows for Delta smelt." Will the third review be enough?

Senator Diane Feinstein, the Senior Senator from California and a Democrat, is the epitome of the American survivalist politician dependent on large corporations and whose conservative politics look and smell like dead fish.



Originally Posted in the Redwood Guardian

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

  FERC Ponders Allowing Public Input,
  Environmental Review of Proposal for
  Electrical Generators in Whale Route

It was one year ago that my article entitled "Limited Time Only - Act now to own your piece of the ocean off the Mendocino Coast" (posted below) was published. This week the alliance of Northern California coast commercial and recreational fishing associations known as Fishermen Interested in Safe Hydrokinetics (FISH) has announced that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is extending its time to consider the FISH committee request for public participation and environmental analysis in developing federal licensing regulations for nascent wave energy generation projects.

In other words, FERC has to think about whether and how it would allow public participation and environmental analysis before issuing permits allowing PG&E and Chevron to place electrical generators and a grid in the Gray Whale Migration Route. More than 200 hydrokinetic projects have been proposed across the United States as a solution to environmental issues. Two wave energy projects are currently proposed for the coast off Mendocino County and one in Humboldt County, in one of the most flourishng marine areas on the West Coast. Seven are off the Oregon coast, including Lincoln County

Offshore from Mendocino County PG&E's proposal covers 68 square miles. Chevron's proposal is for a premilinary study. If implemented the proposals would require significant exclusion zones and would be located along the Gray Whale migration route. (See map above)

The City and County of San Francisco filed an initial statement in opposition to FERC even processing these applications because of lack of staff . In it's statement, the San Francisco argued:
    While specifically not referring to this application, San Francisco believes the risk of sparking a 'gold rush' by ill prepared applicants with ill-conceived projects is too high and the drain on Commission resources in reviewing such applications would be too great.
But the process has moved on.

As in all such complex regulatory processes, before the potentially effected public could wrap its collective head around the meaning of the proposals, FERC established rules regarding the process which essentially precluded public involvement in the process. As one writer noted:
    This pejorative May 21, 2008 FERC ruling rejects requests of FISH, Fort Bragg, Mendocino County and local stakeholders’ to rehear their right to participate in this wave energy development project. It is noted since onset of the Mendocino wave energy agenda, FERC and PG&E continue to swiftly move toward their goals while intentionally blocking all local, public participation. As wave energy development projects on the U.S. coasts progress, Americans are discovering that FERC’s convoluted wave energy licensing process is ill-defined, biased and discriminates against public participation.
As I noted in my article a year ago: "If you...want to get in on the action, you'd better hurry as FERC is likely to fast track these applications to approval before...when a new President takes office."

What the County of Mendocino, the City of Fort Bragg, the Recreational Fishing Alliance, and Lincoln County, Oregon discovered is that FERC really didn't plan to hear from them. So they've joined the FISH Committee’s request for a rehearing of FERC's policies. According to a report by Recreational Fishing Alliance West Coast Region Director:
    Potential negative impacts on marine life from wave buoys include electromagnetic pollution and interference with migratory finfish, whale entanglements and altering the bottom structure of the seabeds. Turbine devices submerged in rivers, bays and estuaries could entrain juvenile fish.
    "We take this issue very seriously and, if necessary, intend to vigorously pursue our legal options," said John Innes, board member of the North Coast Fishing Association. "We are not opposed to renewable energy, we only want to make sure we know what the impacts will be to fish and other marine life before we sign off on these projects. Considering that wave energy is in its infancy, it is extremely important to have proper controls and regulations in place to prevent non-recoverable detrimental effects on our ocean environment."
If you are concerned, its better late then never to get involved.



Originally Posted in the Redwood Guardian

Friday, July 27, 2007

Limited Time Only
  Act now to own your piece of the Pacific
  Ocean off the Mendocino Coast

Yes, folks, act now! Your friends at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) will give you piece of the Pacific Ocean. All you have to do is file an application to reserve your piece of the ocean. Chevron and PG&E have filed applications creating potential rights that constitute a claim over the ocean surface, similar to staking a mining claim. If they "mine" these "claims," the necessary structures would occupy the surface to the exclusion of others, including whales.

The California Energy Commission web site has some information on wave energy leading one to believe that this State Commission might be involved.  But Bob Aldrich of the California Energy Commission's Media and Public Communications Office stated: "We do not have any “experts” to speak of on wave energy at the Commission. I wrote the page, which was created based on information from a number of places." He also reflected a naive view: "You may also need Coastal Commission approval for such a wave energy device.

In fact, the filings are with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the people who allowed California to be ripped off by energy companies a few years ago. Thus the claims are likely to be outside the regulatory scope of State of California agencies such as the Coastal Commission. Legal challenges would inevitably end up in the Bush Supreme Court which has already established its sympathies against state regulation.

PG&E is seeking to have two 40-megawatt wave farms up and running off the state's north coasts within a few years, according to documents it has filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC.

The Mendocino County wave farm will be located off Fort Bragg in open ocean a half mile to 4.5 miles offshore. A 68-square-mile area will be assessed. PG&E essentially will turn the zone into a wave-energy testing ground, spending up to $3 million to try out various technologies from up to four manufacturers. "A number of different device concepts are being pursued by independent device manufacturers, and there is no industry consensus at this time on the optimal energy conversion technology," PG&E execs wrote in an application for a preliminary permit for the project. "The initial ... devices to be used will be selected from device manufacturers who have sufficiently mature technologies available for deployment."

On July 2, Chevron California Renewable Energy, Inc. filed a preliminary permit application with the FERC. The Town of Mendocino would be dead center in the claim area, although wave energy plants are not normally visible from shore. It would avoid the Van Damme State Marine Area. The large study area is framed in order to locate a smaller project area. That larger area is a rectangle that runs from three miles offshore to less than a mile from shore, from Point Cabrillo to a spot halfway between the mouth of Little River and Albion.

Like PG&E, Chevron plans to evaluate alternative designs and locations of wave energy conversion devices.

"These devices would be combined in arrays for demonstration scale or commercial scale power production," Chevron said in a July 5 letter to local government agencies.

Wave energy technology is moving from the idea stage to the practical at breakneck speed.

Chevron's proposal is nearly identical to PG&E's, including a competition among manufacturers and technologies, which could make the Mendocino Coast the world's leading spot for wave energy research, at least as the world stands now. Wave energy plants proposed all over the world generally come with a single technology.

PG&E is in preliminary discussions with Ocean Power Technologies of New Jersey, the U.K's Ocean Power Delivery and Ireland's Finavera Renewables. While wave energy technologies vary, they essentially involve a device that floats on the ocean's surface and that harnesses the power produced by the surf to drive a turbine that generates greenhouse gas-free electricity. PG&E will deploy multiple wave-energy devices in an array moored to the ocean's floor and connected to the shore by a transmission cable.

Chevron, however, has picked a company and a technology to start with The Pelamis which resembles a chain of bobbing giant redwood trees or wriggling giant sea serpents. Waves jostle the links between Pelamis sections, pushing hydraulic rams to provide the energy.

Chevron estimates the power range from a tiny 2 megawatts to 60 megawatts, about twice as much as needed to power the entire coast. The PG&E plan hopes for 40 megawatts.

Chevron is making substantial investments in alternative energy. Although the Chevron company has California in its name, all the mailing addresses are in Houston, Texas.

Chevron would connect the power via undersea cable to an unnamed PG&E substation. Chevron promises public meetings and "extensive public process."

On August 14, 2006, Roger Bedard, Ocean Energy Leader, Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), gave a presentation to the Fort Bragg City Council about the benefits of wave energy which, according to minutes of the meeting, included the following points:
• Wave energy is clean with no pollution or emission of greenhouse gases.
• It is a sustainable and renewable source with high power density and creates working class jobs.
• This new technology, with proper maintenance, will be one of the most benign energy-producing technologies around.
• He described three of the dozens of different types wave energy devices made today.
• Fort Bragg is considered a possible site for wave energy because it has the infrastructure: an outflow pipe from the former mill site with an easement; a PG&E substation nearby on Walnut
Street; and a harbor with machine shops and docks that could possibly provide device deployment.
• Other fishing communities have formed a port liaison project where engineers and scientists get together with fishermen and crabbers and come up with a solution for the greater good.
• National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reimburses fishermen for their time spent on the project.
• Hal LaFlash, Director Renewable Energy Policy & Planning, PG&E, stated that PG&E is working toward 20% renewable energy by 2010.
The minutes of that meeting show some signs of discussion:
The following was noted in response to question from the public:
• The effect of tsunamis is very small as the devices are located about three miles offshore.
• The Coast Guard, which must approve installation of the plant, has rules about beacons,
transponders and lights. Wave machines are also indicated on their charts.
• Wave energy devices are modular and installed in small increments. If there are no unforeseen effects, another modular can be installed.
• Typically waves that reach the shore are reduced by 10%.
• Ocean Beach was not a viable site because it would have been very costly to upgrade power from the west side of San Francisco to the east.
• Three California communities – Morro Bay, Eureka, and Fort Bragg will be considered as potential sites September 20, by PG&E, the California Energy Commission, and the Public Energy Commission.
• It costs $100 million to $150 million to build a plant which employs about 30 people full time. Independent developers invest in wave energy plants.
• Government subsidizes the first plants to get the market going. Production tax credits are offered.
• There is no history on how long units last because the technology is so new; however, they are designed to last 20 years.
• The mooring is similar to mooring a ship with anchors, clump weights, and cables.
• LaFlash added that PG&E has an open solicitation for renewable energy.
• The on-shore facility might be at PG&E’s Walnut Street site depending on voltage.

The following was noted by Council during discussion of this item:
• Councilmember Melo suggested that research be done on the Fort Bragg Local Coastal Plan, in particular Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area restrictions. The easement for the wastewater treatment plant goes out 600’. He believes that outfall was blasted into the bedrock, not buried in sediments. He stated that he supports finding out more about this.
• Councilmember Hammerstrom said that he appreciates the depths of answers from Bedard and the fact that he also admits when he does not know the answer. He asked if the site could be relocated from time to time to distribute its effects. Bedard replied that it could be done, but there would be cost impacts. It would have to be a really good reason to move it.
The President and CEO EPRI is Steven R. Specker, a PhD in nuclear engineering, whose primary work background was with General Electric's nuclear power division. The company's Strategic Vision is described on its web site as follows:
The Electricity Technology Roadmap initiative began in 1997. Although spearheaded by EPRI, over 200 organizations contributed to the framing of this vision and the development of an initial report in 1999. It was organized around five Destinations that are critical milestones on the path toward achieving a sustainable global energy economy by 2050. The five Destinations are:
(1) Strengthening the Power Delivery Infrastructure
(2) Enabling the Digital Society
(3) Boosting Economic Productivity and Prosperity
(4) Resolving the Energy/Environment Conflict
(5) Managing the Global Sustainability Challenge
One of its related reports is entitled Limiting Challenges Report #12: Ecological Asset Management which in its Preface contains the following paragraphs:
Eco-asset management harnesses market forces to preserve, enhance, restore, and create the natural capital life itself depends upon. In this report, eco-asset management is described within the context of the societal objectives defined by the Electricity Technology Roadmap, a collaborative exploration of the future of the global electricity enterprise. Eco-asset management is characterized as a market-based approach with promise for maximizing the productivity of natural resources to promote economic vitality, protect environmental and public health, improve the human condition, and accelerate global progress toward a sustainable future.

For companies in the energy, agriculture, mining, timber, real estate, land management, and other resource-based sectors, eco-asset management oilers significant opportunities for increasing revenues, reducing compliance costs, eliminating liabilities, and managing risks. Improving environmental quality, protecting public health, and demonstrating corporate citizenship represent additional—and substantial—benefits. For government agencies and other stakeholders, market-based approaches promise solutions for achieving environmental goals more efficiently and at lower cost, as well as for addressing complex challenges such as climate change, water shortages, and biodiversity loss.
The Institution of Engineering and Technology, a British research organization, noted the following about wave energy in a "fact file" publication entitled Environmental Effects of Electricity Generation: Renewable Sources:
Wave Energy

There are, basically, two types of wave energy device. The first utilises the essentially up and down movement of the sea’s surface and is usually located well away from a shore-line where the average power of some 50kW per metre of wave front. The other type utilises the action of the waves on the sea-shore. Clearly, which of these devices is used has a considerable effect on the type of environmental impact of wave technology.

Off-shore devices have received the most attention in the UK and will therefore be considered first. As wave energy devices extract energy from motion, the water surface behind the device is essentially calm. There is, therefore, a reduction in the sea’s action on the seashore, and hence an effect on its ecology. How effective this change is depends on how far offshore the device is moored and how long it is. The devices themselves could be a navigation hazard, particularly if they broke their anchors. Seals and predatory sea birds may also be attracted to the devices. Although the actual method of energy extraction, the conversion of this energy into electricity, and its subsequent transmission to population centres have not been agreed, it is already clear that the cabling ashore and the siting of transmission facilities, in what would generally be areas of high scenic value, would cause the greatest environmental concern about potential wave energy exploitation. The impact of transmission facilities is, in fact, common to many types of renewable energy sources.
What hasn't been discussed is that the Mendocino County proposals would place electrical generation and transmission facilities electromagnetic fields in or near the Pacific Coast whale migration routes. It would likely take a decade after full installation to know the real effects.

Are we really ready to do this? If you are and want to get in on the action, you'd better hurry as FERC is likely to fast track these applications to approval before 2009 when a new President takes office.


Originally Posted in the Redwood Guardian

Monday, January 1, 2007

Welcome to the Pacific Progressive Message

Our Core Message

The core Progressive Pacific Message is that individual freedom is bound to one's personal responsibility to assure equitable communities. The ongoing mission is:
As knowledge and technology evolve in the 21st Century, the day-to-day customs and practices of individuals, their organizations, and their governments should be adjusted to assure the creation and maintenance of equitable communities which permit every person the opportunity to pursue personal productive goals while sharing with all other humans equality in personal dignity and human rights while enjoying freedom with responsibility.
"Progressive" in the 21st Century does not mean any "liberal" or "socialist" or "leftist" or "rightist" or "populist" ideology. It means addressing, through individual action and public policy, significant inequities resulting from prejudice, industrialization, urbanization, and corruption much as it did beginning in the late 19th Century and early 20th Centuries. Solutions to the problems were, and are, to be addressed in a balanced, pragmatic approach not dependent upon ideology.

Perhaps no mid-20th Century Progressive worked harder to achieve the ideal of securing human rights than "The First Lady of the World" Eleanor Roosevelt.

After the end of WWII she led the international process that resulted in the adoption of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in December 1948. At the time of her death on November 7, 1962, she was the first Chair of the Presidential Commission on the Status of Women.

It is time for Progressives to pick up her sword-of-persuasion to defend Progressive policies in the Progressive Pacific States of Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, and California.

Also, it is time for Progressives to pick up her sword-of-persuasion to restore Progressive polices within all the states of these United States.

The 70-Year Systematic Destruction of American Progressivism

Beginning in the U.S. in 1947, a political movement that in 2016 most Americans had never heard of - the Neoliberal movement - sustained by billionaires such as the Koch Brothers, began the task of displacing the Progressive message established by Republican President Teddy Roosevelt. Neoliberals have successfully ended “trust-busting,” the breaking up of large corporations that had controlled prices and prevented competition.

They succeeded in displacing the Progressive message advocated by Democratic Presidents Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, and Jimmy Carter by eliminating or reducing the impact of fair trade and pro-worker laws and by minimizing the economic safety-net programs.

As the result, they restored late-19th Century income inequality in the United States. After their  beginnings in 1947 it took American Neoliberals 70 years to solidify the map below, though as we explain elsewhere it was a surprisingly short 33 years after 1947 when we elected an avowed admirer of Neoliberalism to the Presidency in 1980.


Progressives now must be willing to commit to a similar effort. That won't be easy. As you might note, the map above does not use the terms "Republican" and "Democrat" but rather "Neoliberal" and "Third Way." The reason for this is simple. While American Neoliberals such as the Koch brothers have been able to gain an ideological dominance in the Republican party, they have also established an ideological beachhead in the Democratic Party.

In 1992 Democrat Bill Clinton was elected President ushering in the era of Third Way Democrats and ushering out of the Democratic Party power structure true Progressives. As explained in Wikipedia:
    In politics, the Third Way is a position akin to centrism that tries to reconcile right-wing and left-wing politics by advocating a varying synthesis of right-wing economics and left-wing social policies. The Third Way was created as a serious re-evaluation of political policies within various centre-left progressive movements in response to international doubt regarding the economic viability of the state; economic interventionist policies that had previously been popularized by Keynesianism and contrasted with the corresponding rise of popularity for economic liberalism and the New Right.
    ..."Third Way" presidents "undermine the opposition by borrowing policies from it in an effort to seize the middle and with it to achieve political dominance."
    ...The Third Way think tank and the Democratic Leadership Council are adherents of Third Way politics.
This was partly the result of the realization by some Democratic intellectuals that their party was losing ground because the core message of Progressivism is that "individual freedom is bound to one's personal responsibility to assure equitable communities." And if Bill Clinton is anything, he is an intellectual deliberately shrouded by using his childhood poverty.

Which brings us to the ironic problem of the successful attack on "intellectuals" being expanded by American Neoliberals who, focused on their narrow goal of unleashing unfettered capitalism, set out to create a distrust of science and particularly to discredit the climate science advocated by Al Gore.

The late George Wallace, Alabama Governor and 1968 Presidential candidate pictured at the left,  gained notoriety for tapping into an anti-intellectual bias that many politicians have used (though the quote shown is somewhat inaccurate as he said: "Pointy-head college professors who can't even park a bicycle straight ....").

That anti-intellectual bias, particularly when coupled with racial prejudice and/or class distrust,  makes it is difficult to explain to far too many Americans the complex history that created the 21st Century United States. It is that history which resulted in a significant cultural divide between the Pacific States and the 33 Neoliberal controlled states shown on the map above.

The crisis is that the American "anti-intellectual class" bias based on perceived snobbery has been used by politicians representing corporate interests to create an "anti-science" bias. Unfortunately, the problem lies in the definition of "science."

As explained by Wikipedia (emphasis added):
Contemporary science is typically subdivided into the natural sciences which study the material world, the social sciences which study people and societies, and the formal sciences like mathematics. Disciplines which use science like engineering and medicine may also be considered to be applied sciences.
With this understanding, we can then see the potential problem of the "intellectual." Per Wikipedia (emphasis added):
An intellectual is a person who engages in critical thinking, research, and reflection about society and proposes solutions for its normative problems.
As further explained by Wikipedia:
Normative generally means relating to an evaluative standard. Normativity is the phenomenon in human societies of designating some actions or outcomes as good or desirable or permissible and others as bad or undesirable or impermissible.
In other words, an "intellectual" is a person who ponders under the guise of engaging in the social sciences, matters related to politics, economics, religion, and philosophy, and then offers opinions supported by logic based upon observation of groups of people using preconceived values, opinions frequently offensive to many regarding human beliefs, human behavior, government, and law.

This has allowed goal-oriented Neoliberals to deliberately create a political atmosphere that confuses "intellectuals" with "scientists" in natural science fields. Those scientists use "scientific method" as described by the Oxford Dictionaries Online as (emphasis added):
...A method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.
Unlike the social sciences, before a hypothesis in natural science can become published as fact, experimental and theoretical results must be reproduced by many others within the scientific community - an arduous process referred to as "peer review".

Social "science" has not retained that approach. Statistical studies are the core of the social sciences when the "social scientist" attempts to prove a hypothesis. But instead of the arduous process of peer review prior to publication, the conclusions of literally thousands of social science statistical studies appear in the popular press as support for some assumed arguable truth. This has allowed intellectuals to insult the beliefs of thousands of voters. Thus, it becomes clear to many Americans that all scientists are in the businesses of offending people, a truth then used to undermine natural science when it serves a political purpose.

The Task Facing Progressives

In truth, both Neoliberalism and Progressivism are the result of the pondering of intellectuals, using data from the social sciences - sociology, economics, political science - to support normative views. The weakness of Progressivism is that historically Progressives have been more transparent in their activities, more thinly spread while advocating for numerous disparate goals, and more focused than Neoliberals on national politics rather than on state and local government.

Neoliberals retain a late 18th Century view of these United States - that the states are empowered to govern and they allocated only very limited powers to the new national government. In fact, this is a correct take on the Constitution as it was viewed not by "the Founding Fathers" but by the vast majority of state politicians who voted to ratify it, and by their constituents.

In these blog posts (and the Progressive Pacific Message web pages) we offer some insight into the Neoliberals who, despite the fact that they are well-educated (many economic philosophers), have abandoned all conscience piggy-backing on the appeal of that anti-intellectual bias, plus racial bigotry, religious dogmatism, and class prejudice, in order to create that map above, solely to achieve their narrow goal of unleashing unfettered capitalism.

In our website a narrative on American Neoliberal activity is offered in order to help Progressives organize for winning elections over the next 30 years. But Progressives need to create their own future narrative for the 21st Century.

Whether to interface with the existing political parties or bypass them will be one of the first decisions.

You are encouraged to go to our website. The information contained in those web pages and this blog are not a "short read." It is, however, far from a comprehensive history/geography textbook. It simply offers some insight into the 21st Century amplification of a deep American cultural split - useful if you want to do something about what has happened to the Progressive movement of the late-19th-to-mid-20th Centuries.

Table of Contents
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT
THE PROGRESSIVE PACIFIC MESSAGE
  1. Welcome to the Pacific Progressive Message
    1. Our Core Message
    2. The 70-Year Systematic Destruction of American Progressivism
    3. The Task Facing Progressives
    4. Statement of Obligations and Rights of People and their States
  2. History Matters: The 2016 Bi-Partisan Attack on the Pacific States People, Beliefs, Economy, Defense
    1. Why is it a "Pacific" Message???
  3. History Matters: The Significance of the Spanish Pacific in North American Historical Geography
    1. New Spain (1521-1849): The Real History of American States
    2. How the Spanish Created the 21st Century Pacific States Worldview
  4. History Matters: Conquering the Transcontinental Divide by Amplifying the Racial and Cultural Divide
  5. History Matters: Defending the Endangered Basic Human Rights of the People of the Pacific States
    1. It's not Roger Williams' American Dream
    2. About that Star Spangled Banner National Anthem
  6. Economics Matter, Stupid! Combating the Bi-Partisan Assault on the Enduring Economics of the Pacific States
  7. Wealthy Neoliberals Matter: How an Economic Ideology Took Control of U.S. State and National Legislative Agendas
    1. History Matters: Neoliberalism comes to America
    2. History Matters: The Loss of the Progressive Message in America
    3. History Matters: After Reagan, Neoliberals continue to win
    4. Organization and Drudgery Matter: The Neoliberal Advocacy Network
  8. The Future Matters: Restoring the Lost Progressive Message by Advocating for a Warm, Big-Hearted World
    1. Overcoming the Neoliberal strategy
    2. An Alliance does not equal assimilation or multiculturalism
    3. History Matters: To win it's State Party Politics, not Celebrity
    4. A Goal: Learn to use 21st Century technology to win

History Matters:
  The 2016 Bi-Partisan Attack on the Pacific
  States People, Beliefs, Economy, Defense

Why is it a "Pacific" Message???

The word "Pacific" is included in The Progressive Pacific Message because the beaches of the four Pacific States - Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, and California - are on the Pacific Ocean. This is a different orientation culturally resulting in:
  • a history based upon not being anywhere near the Atlantic Ocean,
  • an economy built upon Pacific trade routes,
  • a majority population that includes persons who identify themselves as Hispanics, Asian,  Indigenous, Black, and/or Mixed Race, and
  • for the second time in a century, inadequate defense preparation and activities because of an Atlantic-focused myopia.
In 2016 leaders and voters of both major political parties openly embraced a 21st Century...
  • attack on the human rights of the 51 million people of the Pacific States,
  • denial of the Progressive beliefs of the Pacific States majority,
  • assault on the economy of the Pacific States, and
  • failure to provide defense planning to protect the Pacific States.
Population by Race/Ethnicity



Additionally, the traditional Progressive Message that...
individual freedom is bound to the personal responsibility of all citizens to assure equitable communities
...still remains a dominant value in the Pacific States. Thus it is those in the Pacific States who are most likely to advocate for that Message.

Before exploring...
  1. how American Progressivism was lost and
  2. how to advocate for its restoration,
...in order to provide some shared context we will note what makes the Pacific States different and Progressive. History, geography, and economics matter far more than ideals.
  1. Consider that the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 passed in the House of Representatives by a vote of 59-57 because...
    1. the power of the Atlantic seaboard states would be threatened by the new citizens in the West, whose political and economic priorities were bound to conflict with with those of East Coast merchants and bankers, and
    2. the Atlantic seaboard voters (white male landowners) opposed the granting citizenship to the Catholic French and Spanish speaking residents, as well as free Black residents, of New Orleans as the treaty required.
    The Pacific State residents who in the 21st Century take a hard look at U.S. history and politics recognize that those attitudes took root westward as "pioneers" displaced the indigenous people until reaching the Intercontinental Divide. The 2016 Presidential Election turned on deportation proposals based on prejudices against religion, language, and skin color.
  2. Consider that California has a larger Hispanic population than 44 other states each have people (yes, total people, everyone in each of those states) and a larger Asian population than 25 other states have people; non-Hispanic white people and black people* (the 13 Colonies Races) together make up only 39% of California's population.
  3. Consider that in Hawaii non-Hispanic white people and black people* together (the 13 Colonies Races) make up only 20% of the population and that Asian residents make up 36% of the population.
  4. Consider the pie charts without the white and black segments, the 13 Colonies Races.*
  5. Consider that imports and exports at the 28 ports along the West Coast totaled over $630 billion in 2014, including smaller ones like Kalama , Washington (total 2014 trade $3.0 billion, top export Soybeans, top import Rolled iron and steel); and consider that the voters in states like Michigan which has a population that is 88% 13 Colonies Races have abandoned trade patterns and proposals that benefit such ports.
  6. Consider the terrorist threat that so worries those East of the Intercontinental Divide. The fact is the country with the largest Muslim population in the world is a Pacific Rim country. The country which provides the most crew members on merchant ships delivering goods - both necessities and fripperies - to the United is  home to the worlds 30th largest Muslim population (larger than Somalia) is a Pacific Rim Country that has been engaged in a war with the Islamic State East Asia (ISEA) for two decades in which U.S. troops participated from 2002 to 2015; most 13-Colonies-Race Americans are ignorant of these facts.
  7. Regarding a significant military threat, in addition to China and Russia which are both Pacific Rim countries, North Korea has had the ability to attack the Pacific States with missiles since the beginning of the 21st Century, first with submarines and by 2013 with ICBM's.
We will explore all these facts and more in the following posts. Admittedly it is a lot of information to take in, but without knowing this information one cannot understand the nature of the 21st Century U.S. political divide.

The Pacific States came with views west from San Francisco towards China, North from Seattle towards what was originally Russian Alaska, and South from San Diego towards Mexico. You can walk the Pacific Coast of the continent from the Southern tip of Chile to Alaska. You can sail from a harbor directly across an ocean to Japan,  North Korea, or China because it is the Pacific Ocean.  Yes, it is 2,827 driving miles from San Diego east to New York City. But, it's also only 2,819 driving miles from San Diego, California, to San Salvador, El Salvador. Here we are in the 21st Century and here are some troubling aspects of the worldview from the Pacific States:
  • The history of the Pacific States is ignored by Americans living east of the Transcontinental Divide who have a North Atlantic cultural orientation and who misrepresent their region's history.
  • The history derived from the 18th Century U.S. policies of slavery, religious bigotry, and genocide is misrepresented, literally resulting in discrimination and recriminations against Pacific State people who protest established U.S. politicians and institutions continuing those misrepresentations.
  • An extreme cultural separation from those east of the Transcontinental Divide exists resulting in continuing discrimination against Pacific State residents the majority of whom are descendants of indigenous peoples of the Americas and the Pacific and Asian immigrants.
  • The economies of the Pacific States are under attack from Americans who live east of the Transcontinental Divide.
  • The defense of the Pacific States, through both strategies in international relations and the military, ranges from secondary-in-importance to incompetent to non-existent.
The lack of a blunt, honest, full, and open discussion about the issues that particularly impact on the Pacific States and their people continues. A key goal of the Progressive Pacific Message is to force that discussion.

__________________________
*In a future post, we will explore the fact is that the 1790 Census counted white males and white females separately, plus all other free persons in a single category, and slaves in a single category. The United States Constitution Article 1 Section 8 also did not recognize indigenous people as being part of the new country. Before the Civil War most Black Americans were slaves but were included along with White in 1790 as a "13 Colonies Race." For purposes of allocating among the States seats in the House of Representatives, a slave was recognized by the United States Constitution Article 1 Section 8 as three-fifths of a person which endorsed the concept of black persons as less than persons, officially permitting white folks a point of reference - a black person is 60% of a real human. Today three U.S. States have majority populations that do not include their "13 Colonies Races" residents. Two are Pacific States and the other state is New Mexico.

Table of Contents
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT
THE PROGRESSIVE PACIFIC MESSAGE
  1. Welcome to the Pacific Progressive Message
    1. Our Core Message
    2. The 70-Year Systematic Destruction of American Progressivism
    3. The Task Facing Progressives
    4. Statement of Obligations and Rights of People and their States
  2. History Matters: The 2016 Bi-Partisan Attack on the Pacific States People, Beliefs, Economy, Defense
    1. Why is it a "Pacific" Message???
  3. History Matters: The Significance of the Spanish Pacific in North American Historical Geography
    1. New Spain (1521-1849): The Real History of American States
    2. How the Spanish Created the 21st Century Pacific States Worldview
  4. History Matters: Conquering the Transcontinental Divide by Amplifying the Racial and Cultural Divide
  5. History Matters: Defending the Endangered Basic Human Rights of the People of the Pacific States
    1. It's not Roger Williams' American Dream
    2. About that Star Spangled Banner National Anthem
  6. Economics Matter, Stupid! Combating the Bi-Partisan Assault on the Enduring Economics of the Pacific States
  7. Wealthy Neoliberals Matter: How an Economic Ideology Took Control of U.S. State and National Legislative Agendas
    1. History Matters: Neoliberalism comes to America
    2. History Matters: The Loss of the Progressive Message in America
    3. History Matters: After Reagan, Neoliberals continue to win
    4. Organization and Drudgery Matter: The Neoliberal Advocacy Network
  8. The Future Matters: Restoring the Lost Progressive Message by Advocating for a Warm, Big-Hearted World
    1. Overcoming the Neoliberal strategy
    2. An Alliance does not equal assimilation or multiculturalism
    3. History Matters: To win it's State Party Politics, not Celebrity
    4. A Goal: Learn to use 21st Century technology to win

History Matters:
  The Significance of the Spanish Pacific in
  North American Historical Geography

New Spain (1521-1849): The Real History of American States


 The images above are the continent of "L' Amerique" mapped by by Jean (aka Robert) Janvier, a Paris-based cartographer active in the 18th century. By the late 18th century Janvier was awarded the title of "Geographe Avec Privilege du Roi" and this designation appears on these maps. Janvier worked with many of the most prominent French, English and Italian map publishers of his day.

The map at the top was completed and sold in the 1760's before the Revolutionary War, the one at the bottom in 1790, during the first year of the United States government.

From the maps one can see that to the west of the continent of "L' Amerique" is the "Mer du Sud ou Mer Pacificque." While Janvier didn't see a need to provide the name for the "Mer du Nord" (Atlantic Ocean) on the map, he found it necessary to provide the name of the Pacific Ocean.

That was because in the 18th Century the Pacific Ocean was an unknown curiosity and irrelevant to most Europeans other than the Spanish. (From this point on, Spain and Spanish will be emphasized to help the reader understand that Britain and English were unimportant to the Pacific Coast of North America.)

Effectively, the Pacific Ocean did not exist for Europeans prior to the 16th Century. And in the 16th, 17th, and 18th Centuries (1500's through the 1700's), it was not important to Americans as well as to most Europeans other than the Spanish.

Though the peoples of Asia and Oceania have traveled the Pacific Ocean since prehistoric times, the eastern Pacific was first sighted by Europeans in the early 16th century when Spanish explorer Vasco Núñez de Balboa crossed the Isthmus of Panama in 1513 and discovered the great "southern sea" which he named Mar del Sur (in Spanish), a designation indicated on the maps above.

However, it was Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan who in 1521, during the his circumnavigation of the world on behalf of Spain, upon encountering favorable winds named it Mar Pacífico, which in both Portuguese and Spanish means "peaceful sea." The word "pacific" derives from the Latin pācificus meaning "peace-making." During that 1521 voyage, Magellan "discovered" the Philippines and claimed them for Spain.

Also in 1521 the Spanish conquered the Aztec Empire and, following some additional conquests, in 1535 Spain created the Viceroyalty of New Spain. In fact, in 1789 when the U.S. Constitution became effective, contrary to the 1790 map above created by a French citizen, the map of New Spain looked like this...

 ...because in November 1762 in the secret Treaty of Fontainebleau, France handed over Louisiana and the Isle of Orleans to Spain. Over the years, this treaty was contested. But the point of presenting this map is that in 1789 those in the United States had no claim nor apparent interest in the land along the Pacific Ocean. In fact, the United States had no coastline on the Gulf of Spain - what we now know as the Gulf of Mexico.

On October 1, 1800, First Consul of the Republic of France Napoleon Bonaparte, reacquired Louisiana from Spain by the secret Treaty of San Ildefonso. To the distress of the United States, Napoleon held title to the Mississippi River and the port of New Orleans.

In 1803 with some sense of urgency, President Thomas Jefferson and Secretary of State James Madison secured the Louisiana Purchase in the face of considerable opposition. As explained in part in Wikipedia:
    Both Federalists and Jeffersonians were concerned over thepurchase's constitutionality. Many members of the House of Representatives opposed the purchase. Majority Leader John Randolph led the opposition. The House called for a vote to deny the request for the purchase, but it failed by two votes, 59–57....
    The Federalists also feared that the power of the Atlantic seaboard states would be threatened by the new citizens in the West, whose political and economic priorities were bound to conflict with those of the merchants and bankers of New England....
    Another concern was whether it was proper to grant citizenship to the French, Spanish, and free black people living in New Orleans, as the treaty would dictate. Critics in Congress worried whether these "foreigners", unacquainted with democracy, could or should become citizens.
Slaveholder President Thomas Jefferson placed a special importance on declaring U.S. total sovereignty over this land occupied for centuries by the many different indigenous Native American communities. Immediately after the Louisiana Purchase he commissioned fellow slaveholders Meriwether Lewis and William Clark to carry out the Lewis and Clark Expedition; the three year Corps of Discovery Expedition (as it was known then) crossed the Transcontinental Divide of the Rocky Mountains, camping near the Pacific Ocean in the winter of 1805-1806.

It should be noted that William Clark went on in official positions to implement President Andrew Jackson's Indian removal (aka genocide) policy, even issuing an extermination order that read:
    The faithless and treacherous character of those at the head of our Indian enemies appear now to be so well known and understood, as to permit the expression of the hope, that their wanton cruelties will eventually result in their own destruction; and aa they have afforded sufficient evidence not only of their entire disregard of Treaties, but also of their deep-rooted hostility in shedding the blood of our women and children, a War of Extermination should be waged against them. The honor and respectability of the Government requires this: - the peace and quiet of the frontier, the lives and safety of its inhabitants demand it.
At that time there were still conflicting claims on the area designated as "Oregon Country." However, despite having fought the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 against England, the area of what are now the states of Oregon and Washington were included in the Oregon Territory, initially defined by the Treaty of 1818 that set up a "joint occupation" between the United States and the British over the region. In 1848 the Oregon Territory became an organized incorporated territory of the United States. The Washington Territory was split off in 1853.

After a protracted struggle (1810–21) for independence, New Spain - including the current U.S. states of California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and parts of Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado and Wyoming - became the sovereign nation of Mexico, with the signing of the Treaty of Córdoba.  (At this point, terms related to "Mexico" will also be emphasized to help place that country's context in U.S. history.)


California was part of Mexico for 27 years until the Mexican-American War beginning on May 13, 1846, ending with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848. California was admitted to the Union as a state in 1850. But it should be noted that prior to the War, Pío de Jesús Pico IV, the last governor of Alta California, as with a significant number of influential Californios, was in favor of British annexation.

Thus, by the beginning of the Civil War the map of what is now the "continental" United States looked like this:

And so the United States attacked the sovereign nation of Mexico allowing the American military, and subsequently its citizens, to occupy lands all the way to the Pacific Ocean. This was done though in 1803
  • nearly half the people in "the Atlantic seaboard states would be threatened" by the new westerners as confirmed by a 49% "no" vote in the House of Representatives,
  • they didn't want to grant citizenship to "French, Spanish, and free black people living in New Orleans" as they were foreigners, and
  • a "War of Extermination" against the indigenous population would be necessary because of the "faithless and treacherous character of those at the head of our Indian enemies."
Then, of course, Americans fought a civil war as 13 of the 30 states wanted to not be part of the United States. And that included the entire Gulf of Mexico U.S. coastline and ⅔rds of the U.S Atlantic coastline.

After that Alaska was purchased from Russia in 1867.

That leaves the last Pacific State - Hawaii. A Kingdom run by indigenous Pacific Islanders until 1887, the U.S. military leased Pearl Harbor for a military base. Then some wealthy white families from the United States displaced the ruling monarchy and formed a Republic after setting up barriers to voting that disenfranchised the majority indigenous and Asian populations.

Hawaii became a U.S. territory in 1898 during the Spanish-American War.

In passing, it should be noted the after the Spanish-American War, in 1898 Spain ceded the Philippines to the United States. Keep this in mind, because as explained later, in 1565 hundreds of Manila galleons began sailing from the Philippines in Asia to New Spain, establishing a trade pattern that has continued for 450 years.

If by now it hasn't entered your consciousness, you should notice the number of times words involving Spain and Mexico appear above highlighted. That is to emphasize the importance of the Spanish in the history of the western side of the area we call the Continental United States.

But you probably were fully aware of that since the United States launched two foreign wars in the 19th Century - the Mexican-American War and the Spanish-American War. Your history books taught you that Jefferson's successors wanted to gain access, and ultimately control of, the Pacific Ocean by occupying Alta California after starting the Mexican-American War and Hawaii and the Philippines after starting the Spanish-American War.

How the Spanish Created the 21st Century Pacific States Worldview

"PACIFIC" as in "Pacific States" reflects a worldview - about the weather, ecology,  history, economy, and people - that derive from living in the Pacific States of Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, and California. Additionally, it is an economic worldview created by the Spanish guided by nature.

 The Pacific States have coastlines along the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre, the largest ecosystem on Earth, located between the equator and 50° N latitude, and comprising about 8 million square miles.

Most Americans don't know what the Kuroshio Current is, much less why it is important. That is because it is critical to understanding the economic history of the Pacific States, so that history not taught in U.S. public schools.

In 1620 about 100 Puritan Separatist Pilgrim religious bigots settled the Plymouth Colony arriving on the Mayflower at what is now Cape Cod Bay, Massachusetts.

That was 100 years after Ferdinand Magellan discovered the Philippine Islands. And the Mayflower was 55 years after Miguel López de Legazpi established the first Spanish settlement in the Philippine Islands in 1565 seeking to develop trade between the East Indies and the growing Catholic Spanish colonies in the Americas across the Pacific Ocean.

In 1565 the Manila-Acapulco galleon trade finally began when Spanish navigators Alonso de Arellano and Andrés de Urdaneta discovered the eastward return route. Reasoning that the trade winds and currents of the Pacific might move in a gyre as was the case in the Atlantic, they sailed north to the 38th parallel off the east coast of Japan, before catching the Kuroshio Current and winds that would take them back across the Pacific. Reaching the west coast of North America, Urdaneta's ship the San Pedro reached the coast near Cape Mendocino, California, then followed the coast south to San Blas and later to Acapulco, arriving on October 8, 1565.

For 250 years - starting 49 years before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock and 205 years before the American Revolution - hundreds of Manila galleons traveled between the Asia and New Spain. That trade pattern has continued since, an additional 200 years, creating...

 "Mayflower" and "Pilgrims" have been terms drilled into U.S. school curriculums. Miguel López de Legazpi and the Philippine Islands not so much.

From that alone, one might infer that the "Pacific States" designation would reflect a substantive historical, cultural, economic, and physical separation from the area of the United States located east of the what we call the Transcontinental Divide. And indeed, the next post will focus on the Transcontinental Divide in the continuing effort to assure a full and open discussion about:
  • the attacks on the people of the Pacific States by the people east of the Transcontinental Divide,
  • the assault on the economy of the Pacific States by the people east of the Transcontinental Divide, and
  • the failure of the United States to provide an adequate military defense for the Pacific States because of the North Atlantic focus of the people east of the Transcontinental Divide.

Table of Contents
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT
THE PROGRESSIVE PACIFIC MESSAGE
  1. Welcome to the Pacific Progressive Message
    1. Our Core Message
    2. The 70-Year Systematic Destruction of American Progressivism
    3. The Task Facing Progressives
    4. Statement of Obligations and Rights of People and their States
  2. History Matters: The 2016 Bi-Partisan Attack on the Pacific States People, Beliefs, Economy, Defense
    1. Why is it a "Pacific" Message???
  3. History Matters: The Significance of the Spanish Pacific in North American Historical Geography
    1. New Spain (1521-1849): The Real History of American States
    2. How the Spanish Created the 21st Century Pacific States Worldview
  4. History Matters: Conquering the Transcontinental Divide by Amplifying the Racial and Cultural Divide
  5. History Matters: Defending the Endangered Basic Human Rights of the People of the Pacific States
    1. It's not Roger Williams' American Dream
    2. About that Star Spangled Banner National Anthem
  6. Economics Matter, Stupid! Combating the Bi-Partisan Assault on the Enduring Economics of the Pacific States
  7. Wealthy Neoliberals Matter: How an Economic Ideology Took Control of U.S. State and National Legislative Agendas
    1. History Matters: Neoliberalism comes to America
    2. History Matters: The Loss of the Progressive Message in America
    3. History Matters: After Reagan, Neoliberals continue to win
    4. Organization and Drudgery Matter: The Neoliberal Advocacy Network
  8. The Future Matters: Restoring the Lost Progressive Message by Advocating for a Warm, Big-Hearted World
    1. Overcoming the Neoliberal strategy
    2. An Alliance does not equal assimilation or multiculturalism
    3. History Matters: To win it's State Party Politics, not Celebrity
    4. A Goal: Learn to use 21st Century technology to win