Martin Luther King, Jr. On Nonviolence

---

From MLK

In his speech on receiving the 1964 Nobel Peace Prize, Martin Luther King Jr recognized that the prize was made as a response to violence: “I am mindful that only yesterday in Birmingham, Alabama, our children, crying out for brotherhood, were answered with fire hoses, snarling dogs and even death. I am mindful that only yesterday in Philadelphia, Mississippi, young people seeing to secure the right to vote were brutalized and murdered. And only yesterday more than 40 houses of worship in the State of Mississippi alone were bombed or burned because they offered a sanctuary to those who would not accept segregation.”

“After contemplation, I conclude that this award which I receive on behalf of that movement is profound recognition that nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political and moral question of our time — the need for man to overcome oppression and violence without resorting to violence and oppression.”

In his speech, King refers to

Howard Zinn on Democracy and Civil Disobedience

---

~~

From HOWARD ZINN

Seven guidelines for civil disobedience

• Civil disobedience is the deliberate, discriminate, violation of law for a vital social purpose. It becomes not only justifiable but necessary when a fundamental human right is at stake, and when legal channels are inadequate for securing that right. It may take the form of violating an obnoxious law, protesting an unjust condition, or symbolically enacting a desirable law or condition. It may or may not eventually be held legal, because of constitutional law or international law, but its aim is always to close the gap between law and justice, as an infinite process in the development of democracy.
• There is no social value to a general obedience to the law, any more than there is value to a general disobedience to the law. Obedience to bad laws as a way of inculcating some abstract subservience

Progressive Points: Sen. Bernie Sanders proposes 5.4% surtax on millionaires

---

From METEOR BLADES
Daily Kos

[Let's get behind this with emails, letters and phone calls. ~DS]

As he promised earlier this week, Sen. Bernie Sanders put some teeth into the “shared sacrifice” argument Thursday by introducing the Emergency Deficit Reduction Act. It would impose a 5.4 percent surcharge on Americans whose annual incomes exceed a milliion dollars. That, he says, would raise in the neighborhood of $50 billion. The bill would also get rid of tax breaks for oil and gas companies to the tune of $3.5 billion. This comes close to the $61 billion that House Republicans (and some Democrats) have decided to chop from programs in education, environmental regulation, heating subsidies for the poor, Planned Parenthood, nutrition, the Peace Corps and others. Says Sanders:

The American people get it. They understand you can’t move toward deficit reduction just by cutting programs that working families, the middle class, low-income people desperately need in order to survive in the midst of this terrible recession. They understand that serious, responsible deficit reduction requires shared sacrifice.

Progressive Points: An Open Letter To My Conservative Family And Friends

---

From DOUG REED
Solidarity Wisconsin
Thanks to Joe Wildman

Dear Friends and Family Who Lean Politically To The Right,

First and foremost, I love you. The bonds of family and friendship are stronger than the wedge that any politician can drive between us. In these divisive times, I think it’s important that we keep telling each other that.

The Declaration Of Independence begins with these words: “When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another… a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

You may have noticed that my Facebook page has gone all-Wisconsin-politics-all-the-time. If you haven’t already hidden me from your news feed, I feel that a decent respect for the opinions of my friends and family requires that I should declare the causes why I am throwing myself into the fight against this bill.

My politics are proudly liberal, but I strive to keep them from being knee-jerk Democratic party talking points. I have thrown my impassioned opposition

Progressive Points: Tax Breaks vs. Budget Cuts

---

From DONNA COOPER
American Progress

House leaders are unfortunately restricting their proposed budget cuts for the remainder of fiscal year 2011 to nonsecurity discretionary spending in an attempt to tame a $1.3 trillion deficit. This approach is especially shortsighted since the Federal Treasury loses twice as much revenue due to tax breaks than Congress appropriates on all nonsecurity discretionary spending.

The chart below compares the 10 safety-net programs slated for deep cuts with the cost of the tax breaks that should also be considered for reduction or elimination to bring the budget into balance. The column on the left is a list of safety-net programs that have already been targets of the House leadership’s budget ax. The column on the right is the cost to specified tax breaks.

Most Americans would be surprised to learn that tax breaks are not on the table during any budget negotiations. In fact, Congress has the Congressional Budget Office prepare an official spending estimate for the cost of all programs or their expansions. Meanwhile, Congress enacts and continues tax breaks without any requirement that the cost of tax breaks be calculated and shared with members before a vote.

That’s why, over the last 16 years, the cost to the Treasury of the mortgage interest tax deduction, for example, doubled from $48 billion in 1995 to nearly $100 billion this year and no one made a peep about getting control of this loss in revenue. The stunning growth in this tax break is unchecked and unquestioned.

Progressive Points: The Astonishing Stupidity of Not Raising Taxes on the Rich When Budgets Are Tight

---

From LARRY BEINHART
Alternet

[There is nothing more telling about our former Republic than when the facts argue conclusively for a direction that favors the people, and the polls show agreement by a majority of the people, yet our representatives make decisions against us. This, of course, argues for non-violent revolution as the only course left. However, the Right may now have gone way too far and aroused the dumbed-down populace  to a fateful populism that overthrows them at the ballot box. One can still hope... ~DS]

History shows that when spending is cut — in the name of balancing the budget — recessions immediately follow.

The current economy is routinely and universally referred to as the worst recession since the Great Depression.

It makes sense, therefore, to look back at government tax and spending policies during the Depression and what the results were.

1932 — Hoover raises the top tax rate from to 25 to 63 percent.