Remembering the Monkees

A few weeks ago I heard that Davy Jones had died and it made me sad. As a kid, I loved watching the Monkees television show and thought their music was great. In the 1970s and 1980s in the San Francisco Bay Area, channel 44 would play reruns of the old Monkees television show and I got hooked on watching the show. I thought they were the coolest group, until a distant cousin visited our home with his latest Prince cassette and thought I was uncool for liking the Monkees. I eventually grew to like Prince too, but I never stopped liking the music of the Monkees. They were just catchy songs. When I went to college, I met my friend Greg Beda, who was a big Monkees fan, and he let me borrow a 4 disc Monkees compilation and realized they actually had a very diverse set of music.

The Monkees were formed in the mid sixties for a television show about a rock group that imitated the madcap comedy of the Beatles of A Hard Day’s Night. When I was a kid, I heard that the Monkees did not play know how to play their own musical instruments and only faked playing for the show. I later found out that was only partly true. Both Mike Nesmith and Peter Tork were experienced musicians who wrote songs and knew how to play guitar before they got on the show. Mickey Dolenz knew how to play guitar, but he was assigned by the television producers to be the drummer for the group, and he had never played drums before. So during the early part of the show, he had to learn how to play drums, and he eventually became a decent drummer. A group of the top songwriters of the time, including Tommy Boyce, Bobby Hart, Neil Diamond, Gerry Goffin, Carole King, Harry Nilsson, Barry Mann, and Cynthia Weil, provided them with music for their show. Eventually the Monkees asserted themselves, and they played their own instruments for their songs starting with the album Headquarters. They also began contributing songs that they wrote to their albums, with Mike Nesmith contributing the songs “You Just May Be The One”, “Listen To The Band”, “Nightly Daily”, “Don’t Call On Me”, and “Mary Mary”, Peter Tork contributing “For Pete’s Sake” and Mickey Dolenz contributing “Randy Scouse Git”.

When I found out that Davy Jones had died, I looked through youtube and found several Monkees songs there from their television show. Instead of their usual hits, I thought I’d post some of their lesser known songs that I really like.

A youtube video of the Monkees performing the song “Love Is Only Sleeping”

A youtube video of the Monkees performing the song “Randy Scouse Git”

A youtube video of the Monkees performing the song “Cuddly Toy”

A youtube video of the Monkees performing the song “What Am I Doing Hanging Round”

A youtube video of the Monkees performing the song “Star Collector”

A youtube video of the Monkees performing the song “I’m Going Down”

A youtube video of the Monkees performing the song “Riu Chiu”

Jasper Writes A Blog

I made this cartoon after reading Ken Poland’s recent blog. I’ve really enjoyed writing blogs for Everyday Citizen and have enjoyed reading and learning from the other bloggers at Everyday Citizen. As the Everyday Citizen page writes“

Everything that is written here is imperfect and outstanding. Our combined aim is to engage, motivate, or stimulate interaction of ideas and thoughts across gender, generational, and ethnic lines. Our authors often seek to inspire advocacy or citizen action. The power of blogging is that bloggers not only reach out to one another, but this venue can also serve as its own form of activism, a tool to spur action on issues that matter most to the writers and to you.

While very diverse in the their values and views, these authors, story tellers, and citizen journalists share some things in common with one another. They all care deeply about some social, economic, environmental or human conditions in our nation and our world. They hope for positive change and progress. And, they are likely to write about these things that they care so much about.

If you enjoy this cartoon, take a look at these links for more of my political cartoons at Everyday Citizen. You could also join my Jasper the Cat facebook page.

Conversations During The Holidays
Jasper and the Cop
The Parents Visit the Occupation
Cartoons About Occupy Wall Street
Jasper and the Moderate Republican
Obama and the Republicans
Jasper And the Homeless Veteran
Jasper Celebrates the 4th of July
Jasper Meets Howard Zinn
Jasper and the Nature Poem
The Reunion
Government and the Market Economy
Jasper Joins Two Protests
Bob the Nerd Vampire
Jasper Debates War
Jasper Finds His Way Home
Jasper Escapes the Detention Center
Jasper At A Detention Center
Jasper Meets a Poet
Jasper’s Day
Jasper Tackles Health Care
Jasper Protests the War
Jasper and the Economy
Jasper Sings a Protest Song
The Road To Health Care Reform Cartoon
A Cartoon about the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
A Cartoon about My Experience in an Evangelical Church
A Cartoon about Political Debate
A Cartoon On Gay Marriage

Voting

With the 2012 Presidential elections coming up, it’s time to look back on the past 4 years and decide who we want to vote for. I know many progressives who had high hopes for change after the 2008 elections and have been disappointed with the Obama administration’s lack of progress in the economy, in climate change legislation, in immigration reform, in regulating the excesses of Wall Street. Many wonder if it is worth it to vote again after being disappointed at the slow pace of change and at the lack of a more progressive choice than the moderate course taken by the Obama administration. I do think voting is important and I think, as citizens, we should all vote in each elections for the important issues that come forth. But we should also realize that voting alone will not bring change. After the 2008 elections, several activists activists suggested to progressives not to trust in the ballot box alone to affect the political changes that we hope to get enacted. After the elections, even if the candidates that we want are elected, these activists urge progressives to stay active and lobby for the causes that are important to them, and to build up a social movement to rally public opinion and pressure the President and Congress to pass legislation for those issues.

The grueling health care reform debate especially seemed to suck a lot of the enthusiasm and energy out of many progressives, as they watched the Democrats dropped the public option and make several painful compromises despite a large majority in both the House and the Senate. During those debates, a strong movement of conservative activists that later became the Tea Party movement had a great influence on legislators and the Tea Party movement had a great influence in moving the Republican Party to the right during the 2010 elections. Though I disagree with a lot of what the Tea Party stands for, I have to give grudging respect for the passionate civic activism of their members. I read many progressive activists urging their fellow progressives to show some of the same activism in lobbying for what they want in the health care reform bill. Pamela Jean wrote a great blog for Everyday Citizen entitled Voting Isn’t Enough, Let’s Exercise Our Power of Citizenship in which she wrote:

Have we been on automatic pilot since November 2008? How many in our ranks thought that our jobs were more or less done following the presidential election? Who among us slowed down our activism because, in part, we believed that electing Democrats to the White House or Congress was sufficient enough to create sweeping social change and install justice throughout our land?

We can look back at history and see that all significant social changes began as people-powered tidal waves. The people maintained ownership and control of their own movements. The movements germinated, bubbled up and remained political forces powered by the people – and were never given away or handed off to Washington to mismanage.

Obama’s election can only be a very small part of one puzzle. Though some mistook him for it, Obama and his campaign were never movements. He was just a candidate. A man. A politician. Now, he’s just the temporary president. That’s all.

We need movements that have nothing to do with candidates and their political ambitions.

Another Everyday Citizen blogger, Gerald Britt, wrote a blog titled The Prose of Citizenship that reinforces Pamela Jean’s idea:

What are the election revelers from November ’08 supposed to do during the ‘prose-period’ between elections?

Educate yourself on the health care issue; sift through the political rhetoric and talking points and find the facts. Find the position you believe in and make your voice heard, by email, phone calls, texts, tweets, blogs and faxes and whatever else is out there.

It’s not enough to be a voter – that’s great; now is really the time to exercise citizenship!

I heard a story about FDR, to whom Obama is often compared. Eleanor Roosevelt and Walter White, a former President of the NAACP, went to see the President. They wanted him to put the weight of the office behind an anti-lynching law. Roosevelt didn’t want to do it, not because he believed in lynching, but because he needed the southern vote to maintain support for the war. Eleanor Roosevelt and White continued to press him, making cogent argument after cogent argument.

Finally, Roosevelt stopped them. He waved his hand and said,

“You’re right. Everything you say is absolutely right. Now go out and organize and make me do it!”
The prose of governance…

Those of us who really want health insurance reform (and anything else for that matter), need to understand that we are now up against what it really means to have the person for whom we’ve voted in office.

Matt Tiabbi wrote a scathing article in the September 3, 2009 edition of Rolling Stone magazine during the health care reform debate where he made out a similar point as Pamela Jean and Gerald Britt.

Then again, some of the blame has to go to all of us. It’s more than a little conspicuous that the same electorate that poured its heart out last year for the Hallmark-card story line of the Obama campaign has not been seen much in this health care debate. The handful of legislators – the Weiners, Kuciniches, Wydens, and Sanderses – who are fighting for something real should be doing so with armies at their back. Instead, all the noise is being made on the other side. Not so stupid after all – they, at least, understand that politics is a fight that does not end with the wearing of a T-shirt in November.

In 1993, during the debates on Hillary Clinton’s health care reform proposals, Paul Wellstone wrote in The Conscience of a Liberal: Reclaiming the Compassionate Agenda about the necessity of social movements to overcome entrenched interests:

Moreover, progressives or liberals who advocated “medicine for all” legislation were dysfunctional. We talked to ourselves. I spoke at many pro-single payer gatherings around the country. I loved the people, especially the doctors (usually family practice doctors and pediatricians) and nurses who cared so much about their patients. But we never moved beyond a small family of fighters that, though right, never became much of a political force. Too many single-payer advocates assumed that proposing the correct solution to the problem would automatically set the legislative machinery into gear. They forgot the missing ingredient: power. We never organized a grassroots constituency powerful enough to successfully fight for the change.

The only way we could have beaten the health care industry would have been with dramatic and effective citizen politics.

I like President Obama, but I have to admit to being disappointed at times during the past 4 years. In 2008, though, many longtime activists warned that Obama’s supporters would be in for a letdown, and that those supporters should stay mobilized to lobby for the changes that they wanted. In the December 2008 edition of The Progressive, Jim Hightower pointed out after the Obama election:

Like fresh poured concrete, the shape of Obama’s Presidency is going to set up quickly, and we can’t be lulled into thinking that casting a ballot is all that democracy requires of us. People who really want change can’t just crank back in their La-Z-Boys, trusting Obama to do the heavy lifting for us. Wall Street, the war machine, corporate chieftains, Republican Congress critters, rightwing yackety-yackers, weak-kneed Democrats, and other powerful forces of business-as-usual policies will be all over him. They are the insiders, and intend to shape him in their mold. We have to be the counterforce- an aggressive and vociferous Loyal Opposition pushing insistently and persistently from the outside. Obama was the candidate of change, but he’ll be the President of change only if we buck him up and back him up.

Howard Zinn wrote in the March 2009 edition of the Progressive magazine:

I’m talking about a sense of proportion that gets lost in the election madness. Would I support one candidate against another? Yes, for two minutes- the amount of time it takes to pull the lever down in the voting booth.

But before and after those two minutes, our time, our energy, should be spent in educating, agitating, organizing our fellow citizens in the workplace, in the neighborhoods, in the schools. Our objective should be to build, painstakingly, patiently but energetically, a movement that, when it reaches a certain critical mass, would shake whoever is in the White House, in Congress, into changing national policy on maters of war and social justice.

Let’s remember that even when there is a ‘better’ candidate (yes, better Roosevelt than Hoover, better anyone than George Bush), that difference will not mean anything unless the power of the people asserts itself in ways that the occupant of the White House will find it dangerous to ignore…

Historically, government, whether in the hands of Republicans or Democrats, conservatives or liberals, has failed it responsibilities, until forced to by direct action: sit-ins and Freedom Rides for the rights of black people, strikes and boycotts for the rights of workers, mutinies and desertions of soldiers in order to stop a war.

Voting is easy and marginally useful, but it is a poor substitute for democracy, which require direct action by concerned citizens.

Though the electoral process often yields slow and incremental change, I still think the vote is still an important tool for enacting social change. Woman’s suffragists, civil rights workers, and other types of activists risked their lives to fight for the rights of African Americans, women and other marginalized group to be able to vote and have a voice in the government. One has to realize though that voting is just one part of a much larger larger process. Radical poet Amiri Baraka said in a 1982 interview in the book Conversations with Amiri Baraka something about the 1980 Presidential elections between Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan and John Anderson that still applies to the 2012 Presidential elections. He said in the interview:

To me, the use of electoral politics is only a tactic. I mean I think it does have to be utilized, because I think if you don’t utilize it, you will find yourself in a position where you’re backed up against the ovens, you know; and then the only thing you can do is fight for your life. I mean quite literally. Like people are talking about now they want to repeal the Voting Rights Act. They came on with an editorial on Channel 11, WPIX, “Repeal the Voting Rights Act.” Now, if you sit still and say, “Well, we can’t fight against that, because, finally, voting is not going to change monopoly capitalism”… and it’s not. I don’t think, in the end, anything other than… short of armed revolution will change this system of monopoly capitalism and end racism and women’s oppressions. But for you to sit quietly and let them wipe out the Voting Rights Act is just bizarre. For you not to fight for every kind of democratic right, inch by inch- you know what i mean, like they say, fight for every inch- is mad. It’s like, I was very critical of a lot of people on the Left in the recent election, because their line was, “Carter and Reagan are exactly the same.” Well, look, they represent the same class, but there are different sectors of that class, and they are not identical, you see, as you now found out. Here’s a man now talking about getting rid of Social Security… you can’t say that’s the same as Jimmy Carter. So I think that those kind of sweeping, Leftist, ultra-revolutionary statements serve to do nothing but fog up the reality that you have to fight for every inch. Yes, you have to utilize voting. Absolutely you have to utilize it. People died in the South to get the right to vote, and then you’re going to tell people, “Don’t vote. It doesn’t mean anything.” That’s bizarre. The question is, what does it mean? It has a limited and specific meaning, but it has to be utilized.

These past 4 years have been a learning experience for me. I learned about the importance of voting so that I can have a voice in our government. But I also learned about its limitations in enacting social change. One of the great discoveries over the past few years has been the history books of Gordon Wood, an eminent historian of the Revolutionary Period. Gordon Wood wrote in his book The Idea of America: Reflections on the Birth of the United State something that echoes the insights of the activists that I have quoted earlier in this blog:

Despite an electorate that at times seems apathetic, interest in suffrage and in the equality of consent has never been greater than it has over the past generation. Such a concern naturally puts a terrific burden on our political system, but it is a burden we should gladly bear (and many other nations would love to have it), for it bespeaks an underlying popular confidence in the processes of politics that surface events and news headlines tend to obscure.

In fact our concern with suffrage and with the formal rights of consent has assumed such a transcendent significance that it has sometimes concealed the substance of democratic politics and has tended to exaggerate the real power of the legal right to vote. Suffrage has become such a symbol of citizenship that its possession seems necessarily to involve all kinds of rights. Thus acquiring the vote has often seemed to be an instrument of reform or a means of solving complicated social problems. The women’s rights movement of the nineteenth century- premised on the belief, as one women put it in 1848, that “there is no reality in any power that cannot be coined into votes’- came to focus almost exclusively on the gaining of suffrage. And when the Nineteenth Amendment granting women the franchise was finally ratified in 1920 and did not lead to the promised revolution, the sense of failure set the feminist movement back at least half a century…

This special fascination with politics and this reliance on political integration through voting as a means of solving social problems are legacies of our Revolution, and they are as alive now as they were then. The Revolution not only brought ordinary people into politics; it also created such confidence in suffrage as the sole criterion of representation that we have too often forgotten just what makes the right to vote workable in America. In our dealings with newly developing nations, we are too apt to believe that the mere institution of the ballot in a new country will automatically create a viable democracy, and we are often confused and disillusioned when this rarely happens.

The point is that we have the relationship backward. It is not suffrage that gives life to our democracy; it is our democratic society that gives life to suffrage. American society is permeated by the belief in (and, despite extraordinary differences in income, in the reality of) equality that makes our reliance on the ballot operable.

…it was the egalitarian process of politics that led to the mobilization of voters and the political integration of the nation.

A youtube video of Angela Davis and her thoughts on Obama and the community of voters he inspired

A youtube video of Howard Zinn talking about voting for Obama, but afterwards to work for direct action

A youtube video of Naomi Klein talking about Obama

Quarterbacks

This year is the first year that I have been interested in football in a long time. My favorite team, the Raiders, showed promise as the season began and Jason Campbell was still healthy. The Forty Niners were rejuvenated under a new head coach and a revitalized Alex Smith at quarterback. And in Denver, a young quarterback named Tim Tebow was pulling out the craziest victories in spite of his erratic passing and college style offense.

I started looking on Mondays on youtube for the latest highlights of Tebow’s football exploits. His in-your-face displays of his Christianity sometimes got annoying, but I figured that he is just a kid, and will eventually learn to be more humble in his expressions of faith. I just enjoyed watching the improbable comeback victories that he always seemed to pull off.

I used to be a big football fan in the 1970s and 1980s. I am a lifelong Oakland Raiders fan and the 1970s and 1980s were a golden era of Raiders history, with Ken Stabler, Dave Casper, Jim Plunkett, and Marcus Allen. My interest in football began to wane in the early 1990s, when Bo Jackson suffered a career-ending hip injury. I didn’t like the way Al Davis was treating running back Marcus Allen, and I gradually lost interest in football until this year. I’m grateful, as football is a great game with a lot of history. When I was a kid, I had a lot of favorite quarterbacks, and Tim Tebow and Alex Smith helped me to regain a love of watching the game.

My favorite player was Ken “the Snake” Stabler, the quarterback of the Raiders in the 1970s. In many ways, he’s sort of the anti-Tebow. He loved to drink and party and be with the ladies. On the football field, he had a weird side-arm throwing motion that was very accurate at getting to his receivers. Stabler was a master of the two minute drill. I saw many games where Stabler masterminded a late drive that would snatch victory from the hands of defeat. Sometimes he would find the strangest ways to win. I watched the famous game where the Raiders played the Chargers, and Stabler fumbled the football, and the ball got kicked around until Dave Casper fell on the ball in the endzone to win the game. Stabler had bad knees that cut short his career, but I always have felt that he was one of the greatest quarterbacks to have played the game.

Another favorite player from that time was Fran Tarkenton. I saw him towards the end of his career, when he didn’t scramble as much. But I saw old clips from Saturday morning sports shows of Tarkenton in his younger days scrambling all around the field and driving defensive linemen crazy. In many ways, Tarkenton reminds me of Tebow, in that both quarterbacks are at their best when they’re improvising on the run. I remember the Vikings of the 1970s, with Chuck Foreman, Ahmad Rashad and the Purple People Eaters defense. They never won a Super Bowl, but they were a great team.

I recently discovered youtube videos of old football games. So I’ve been spending some time watching old players that I always was curious to see. One of the players I always wanted to watch play during his prime was Joe Namath. As a kid, I watched him in his last year in the Rams, when Namath was way past his prime. My dad told me that when Joe Namath was young, he was one of the greatest quarterbacks around. He had a strong arm and quick feet and he had a great football mind. Don Shula once commented that Namath was one of the three best football minds that he ever competed against. Namath’s downfall was his bad knees. Because of his bad knees, Joe Namath couldn’t move away from tacklers like more mobile quarterbacks could, so he took a lot of vicious hits that eventually took a toll and eroded his talent. So Namath didn’t have as many good years as some of the other great quarterbacks. But as my dad said, when Namath was good, he was one of the best.

I never got to see Johnny Unitas play. And I missed out on Peyton Manning’s prime years during the 1990s and 2000s. So I missed out on watching some great quarterbacks. The two best quarterbacks that I saw play were Roger Staubach and Joe Montana. Both of them were great leaders who were cool under pressure. Like Stabler, Staubach and Montana led many rallies in the fourth quarter to lead their team to victory. Both led their teams to multiple Super Bowls. Of the two, I think Montana was the greater quarterback. I’m not sure if Joe is better than Johnny Unitas or Peyton Manning, but Montana was the greatest quarterback of the 1980s and early 1990s.

I don’t know how Tim Tebow will do in the future. During the off-season, I read that John Elway will work with Tebow on Tebow’s throwing mechanics. A lot of football commentators say that Tebow has lousy throwing mechanics. But I remember quarterbacks in the 1970s like Joe Kapp and Billy Kilmer who had a hard time throwing a spiral, yet still led their teams to victory. If Tim Tebow is to succeed in the long term, my guess is that the Broncos would probably have to stick to an offensive system that is built around Tebow’s skills, rather than force Tebow to have to fit into a more conventional offense. But who knows… maybe Tebow will develope into a more accurate passer. This entire season, he’s surprised everyone. He could do so again next year.

An Interview With Eric Wilks

Eric Wilks has been one of my best friends since we met in 7th grade. One of the most politically astute individuals that I know, Eric worked for several years in GLAAD, anr organization that works to advance LGBT rights in the local community and acts as a watchdog against homophobia in the news, entertainment and social media. I always enjoy our many discussion of politics over the years, and even when we disagree, he’s pointed out weaknesses in my own arguments and has offered different perspectives on the political issues. A longtime political activist, Eric has participated in several protests and has used his facebook page as a forum for political discussion.

You’ve always been interested in politics, at least since I first met you. How would you describe your politics when you were younger? And how has it evolved over the years?

My political views were initially shaped by those of my father. I don’t recall politics being part of dinner conversation, but my father encouraged my sister and I to read the newspaper when we were young. I generally didn’t do much more than read the headlines and the first few paragraphs of news stories that interested me, but that was enough to spur my curiosity in current events and politics. My father didn’t align with either the Democratic or Republican party. He held moderate-to-liberal views on many social issues but also was a strong believer of a citizen’s right to bear arms. He was uncomfortable with government intruding in our lives, including registering his weapons. That said, he owned only a couple of firearms intended for protection. He mostly owned shotguns and rifles for duck and deer hunting. So, he identified his politics as those closest to Libertarian. He appreciated the fiscal conservatism of the Republican Party of the mid- to late-70s, but less so its stand on social issues.

As a child and young adult, my political views were more black-and-white. Though I could understand how neither the Republicans nor Democrats satisfied every voter, I felt a vote for a third party was essentially a “throw away” vote, given the way our political system functions.

The first presidential contest that I paid attention to was in 1980, when we first met in junior high. We were coming off of a painful recession. Gasoline had been rationed. Iran held Americans for hostage. President Jimmy Carter rightly or wrongly was perceived as impotent. Then came Gov. Ronald Reagan who projected confidence and charm. I didn’t really care about his politics, when it came right down to it. I, like many Americans, responded to the optimism and strength he represented. I became a Republican at 13. It’s ironic that though Reagan was an idol at the time, I never had the opportunity to vote for him. I turned 18 two weeks after his reelection victory in 1984.

Though I considered myself a Republican, my views were pretty moderate. I would have considered myself fiscally conservative but socially liberal. I didn’t always vote along
party lines, but probably did so more often than not.

It took going off to college, UCLA, at 23 and looking more deeply into the impact of social and fiscal policy as practiced by the Republicans. Though I’d come from an ethnically diverse community, I didn’t appreciate the impact of income disparities and racial discrimination in our society. At the same time I also came to terms with being gay. Coming out made me even more sensitive to oppression by one’s government. I had trouble reconciling Republican ideas of what our country was versus what real-world experience showed me.

Though my political views migrated more to the left, I initially still considered myself a moderate Republican though it became harder and harder given the sway the Religious Right had on the party.

During our many discussions on politics over the years, you’ve often focused on political issues, but I don’t remember you mentioning any individual that you look up to as a hero. What individuals or books have influenced your political thinking? Who are your heroes?

I guess my interest in politics has always been rooted in the current day. I can’t say I really have political heroes from the past. Of course history can provide perspective, but I have the most fun watching how players on both sides of the aisle navigate the here and now.

It seems so much has changed even in the thirty plus years since you and I first started talking politics. The Republicans have moved even further to the Right. They call themselves the Party of Reagan, but by today’s standards he’s more moderate and more willing to compromise. I doubt that a candidate who ran on Reagan’s record of accomplishments today would get very far with the party’s conservative base. And look at how the Democratic Party has moved more to the Right in many ways. It’s these political machinations that I take the most interest in.

I’m not sure I’ve ever been the kind of guy to have political heroes. I suppose if I had to pick one it would be Bill Clinton. He is such brilliant man and savvy political tactician. When it came to charm and connecting to people, in many ways I think he surpassed Reagan’s talents. Needless to say, Clinton also had his weaknesses.

Of course, I respect politicians like Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson who managed to get truly important and landmark legislation despite opposition from Congress. And, I have to say Ronald Reagan to an extent. With his communication skills, and the talents of his speechwriters, his administration was masterful at getting the public behind their policies. And I respect that Reagan knew how to play political hardball and yet could have a good relationship with the Democratic Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill. The Washington of today can learn from how those two conducted themselves.

Eric, you came out of the closet during the midst of the AIDS crisis in the gay community. How did that affect you? Did you have any friends that were affected? What would you say is the difference of that generation of the LGBT community as opposed to the generation of today?

Wow. Well, as you can imagine, HIV/AIDS had a profound impact. I realized I was gay when I was about 13 as AIDS first started making headlines. Again, we’re talking about 1980/81, around the same time we first met in school. There wasn’t even a name for it initially, and scientists had yet to discover its cause. All we knew was that gay men here in the U.S. were among its heaviest casualties. It was a scary time to come out. There was nowhere to turn for information other than the library. There was no Internet, no gays on TV to speak of, and hardly any mention of lesbian, gay, or bisexual issues in the newspapers or media in general, and even when there was it was rarely positive. So, I suppressed that part of myself for years and focused on other things. It was a lonely, depressing time. It took years for me to learn I wasn’t the only gay person. It wasn’t until I was 23 and had been at UCLA for a couple of years before the isolation and frustration got so overwhelming that I was forced to deal with who I was. I had to overcome some preconceived ideas of what being gay was and that being a sexually active gay man was a death sentence.

But, those ten years of extreme loneliness probably saved my life from HIV/AIDS. I have friends who came out just a few years earlier than I did and lost scores of friends. In comparison, I could count on one hand the friends or acquaintances I’ve lost. A couple of my friends tested positive after I came out, but given the progress made are living with the disease. I can’t really speak of the differences between the communities then and now first-hand since I didn’t meet other gay men and women until the late ‘80s and early 90s. Both are products of their time. The gay community affected by HIV and AIDS in the 70s and early 80s had, largely, been living as a result of the Free Love era of the Sixties. No restraints. It was difficult in the face of the plague that descended upon them when there were no answers about transmission as to how to react. They didn’t want people dictating to them how to live their lives. The reaction – or lack thereof – by the federal government, the Reagan Administration, didn’t help. Fewer people were affected by an outbreak of Legionnaire’s Disease at around the same time and the government responded swiftly and thoroughly. Because of how HIV/AIDS was primarily transmitted here in the U.S., the government made decisions based on morality. And yet look how many people died because of government reaction? One can argue whether that was truly a moral choice.

For several years, you worked at GLAAD, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, an organization that works to keep the media accountable on LGBT issues. What was your work like at GLAAD? With shows like GLEE and MODERN FAMILY and movies like MILK, what do you think of Hollywood’s depictions of the LGBT community over the past couple of years? In what areas do they still need to improve?

I first started as a volunteer with GLAAD. Since I was studying film and television at UCLA, GLAAD was a natural fit for my personal activism and professional interests. I became a member of the committee that put forth the nominees for their Annual Media Awards film, television, and documentary categories. Back then there wasn’t much to choose from. Usually there’d be what we jokingly called “the very special episode of Blossom”, where in one episode a one-time character would come out or an issue would be discussed. It took years before shows had recurring lgbt characters. Of course, the show that really changed things was THE ELLEN SHOW. The show had started first as a show like FRIENDS with no single lead character. Eventually the show became about Ellen and the friends were relegated to supporting roles. The writers had no choice but to try to put her in romantic situations with members of the opposite sex, but it didn’t work. I still think it’s amazing that the network agreed to let her come out. That’s not to say it was an easy decision for them. They were understandably squeamish. And they didn’t always give their full support to the show, which could be why it only lasted a couple of more years, as I recall. But it changed the landscape. Shows like the original MELROSE PLACE and DAWSON’S CREEK helped immensely too. And of course, MTV’s THE REAL WORLD, which has included a gay or lesbian roommate in virtually every season since it debuted in 1992. Exposure to lgbt issues has helped normalize lgbt people. These shows have shown straight people we’re just like them. And they’ve shown gay people that they aren’t the only ones.

I took a paid position with GLAAD in late 1999, about a year and a half after Ellen Degeneres came out on THE ELLEN SHOW. It opened the door to shows like WILL & GRACE, obviously, and QUEER AS FOLK on Showtime

But it’s still a bumpy road. There could be more lgbt characters on television. I’d love to see more examples like the show SOUTHLAND. You have a macho, hard ass, morally ambiguous sergeant introduced in the pilot as the lead character’s training officer. He’s not a character you want to like. Yet, at the end of the episode, you see him in a gay bar and he’s not that confident character you saw earlier. He’s struggling with embracing his sexuality. There’s clearly room for more of these kinds of characters on T.V. And with the occasional exception of a movie like MILK, lgbt characters are more rare in movies made by the major studios. Certainly not as leads.

As a participant in many protests, what have been the biggest benefits been for you in participating? What are your thoughts on the recent Occupy Wall Street protests? What have the Occupy protests been like in your area?

I wouldn’t say I’ve participated in “many” protests, but I’ve been in more than a few. Having come from a pretty middle, or lower-middle class background, protesting was foreign territory. Just like coming out in general, challenging authority felt a bit like I was part of a secret society. Doing something a “good boy” might not necessarily do. But, the first march I participated in was when I was still a registered Republican. Then California Governor Pete Wilson, who claimed to be a moderate, had vetoed AB101, a bill that would have protected lgbt people from being fired by private employers due to their sexual orientation. This wasn’t same-sex marriage. It was an issue that should have been cut and dried. But Wilson caved to the social conservatives in the party.

At the time Los Angeles, especially its lgbt population, wasn’t known for its political activity. But marches went on for days, closing major streets like Wilshire and Santa Monica Blvd. It was empowering. It was that veto by Wilson and similar actions by then President George H. W. Bush that made me realize I could no longer identify as a Republican.

When it comes to the Occupy Movement, I understand the frustration it’s born from. The Have Nots are being squeezed and squeezed. The frustration has to vent somehow. That said, I’m not sure the Occupy Movement has made the impact it could have. There were so many diverse interests involved and no coherence to messaging or organization. I think back to ACT-UP (AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power) and Queer Nation, groups of people who got together in the ‘80s and 90s to protest inaction on HIV/AIDS and lgbt rights, respectively. They were very in your face, guerrilla theater. ACT-UP protested the headquarters of pharmaceutical companies to force them to bring down the cost of their medications, or staged “die-ins” in intersections in mid-town Manhattan to keep HIV/AIDS on the nightly news and on the front page of newspapers. Queer Nation staged “kiss-ins” at shopping centers or bars that made the news for kicking out gay people. There were plenty of people who responded angrily to their methods or the inconvenience they caused. But these groups were the Malcolm X to the Martin Luther King approach of more mainstream lgbt organizations. Both serve their purposes. I think to an extent the Occupy Movement didn’t go far enough. It shouldn’t have been content to occupy one space. I think the message was undermined by staying in one place. It allowed the other side to paint them as squatters. I believe they could have been more successful had they had occupied various locations. Conducted “sit-ins”. If it were me, I would have modeled an approach like those of Flash Mobs. Choose your location, have members position themselves throughout the space, then stage an action that’s at least somewhat choreographed communicating a clear message.

Though we’re both liberal, you and I have frequently disagreed about different issues and about political tactics. Yet even when we disagree, I appreciate the fact that you take the time to listen and to ponder my arguments. Out of our conversations I’ve learned the weaknesses of my own arguments and gained new perspectives on many issues. In recent years though, the national political discourse hasn’t been very good. With the gridlock in Congress and the venom coming out of the Republican primaries, what do you think of the political discourse of the past decade or so?

We’ve heard the term gridlock as long as we’ve discussed politics, but I don’t think anything compares to where we are now in modern history. There’s always been a lot of one-upmanship in Washington. But, this political strategy by the Republicans becoming the “Party of No,” to reject compromise, to seek to undermine and wait out the current administration is repugnant. People are hurting and the Republican Party turns a deaf ear. It’s no wonder the approval rate of Congress is at historic lows. But I’m not sure what the answer is. We rarely blame our own senators and representatives, we just want to kick out everyone else.

Though I’m clearly a Democrat now, I bemoan the loss of Moderate Republicans. The Republican Party has become so extreme that there’s no room for Moderates and dealmakers. And yet the party loves to call itself the “Big Tent” party. Well, it’s always been good at euphemisms. It’s too early to tell, but I think Republicans need to face the same sort of backlash they received after the failure of Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America”. He and the Republicans took power and power corrupted. They misread their mandate, didn’t deliver what they promised and voters tossed them out. I think that’s what it’s going to take again.

You were once a Reagan Republican. In the Republican Party there is a group called the Log Cabin Republicans, who are fighting for LGBT rights within the Republican Party. What are your thoughts on the Log Cabin Republicans? With Republicans being key votes in many of the recent legislative victories for gay marriage, do you think more Republicans are coming around on the issue of LGBT rights?

Well, there are two lgbt Republican groups these days. Log Cabin Republicans came first. I think many viewed it as a group that was largely apologetic for whatever the party did. I’m not sure many Republicans, let alone liberal gays, took them seriously. That was until the last Bush Administration when the then new executive director decided to be more vocal and without support of the organization to Bush’s reelection efforts. But, as a result, this spurred some members to split from the organization called GOProud, which again, seemed to be perceived as more apologetic for the Republican establishment. Though, in the last couple of years, both have been helpful in challenging “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”.

On one hand, I’m glad they exist and are willing to take on the party from inside. On the other hand, I’m not sure how effective they can be given what drives the party and its base these days. Until moderates once again become a dominant force in the party, I think Log Cabin and GOProud will have a very limited impact in changing things from inside.

As a Southern Californian, you must hear a lot about the illegal immigration issue. What are your thoughts on the immigration issue? Are you a supporter of the Dream Act?

This is another issue where I just shake my head. Just a few years ago President George W. Bush was close to finding middle ground. And now his party is far to the right of his solution.

Border security is important. But, this country cannot function without its immigrant workforce. If it wouldn’t be so devastating, I wish we could give Republicans what they want and deport all undocumented workers. Let’s see what our economy looks like then. I’m certain their solution would be devastating to the economy. There wouldn’t be enough people willing to fill those jobs in the fields, or working as domestic help, etcetera. You’d think given how they’re viewed as the more “business friendly” party that they’d be on the right side of this issue. We have to find a fair resolution to this issue. I see no other way than some form of amnesty.

Many gays and lesbians show a justified wariness about the Christian church. In recent years though, many Christians have begun speaking out for LGBT rights within their church, especially in denominations that have been known to be anti-gay. Affirmations is a Mormon LGBT rights group. Dignity USA and New Ways Ministry are longtime LGBT advocates within the Catholic Church. Right now Soulforce, an Evangelical gay rights group, is preparing their annual Equality Rides campaign to confront homophobia in Christian colleges and universities. What do you think of these groups? How do many of the LGBT community view these Christian groups?

Well, I can’t claim that there’s some monolithic view by the lgbt community of these Christian groups. I believe, in general, people are glad these lgbt groups exist. Just as the lgbt community isn’t a monolithic group, neither are people of faith. And there is plenty of overlap. Of course, there are large numbers of straight people here in the U.S. who pick and choose the religious doctrine that works for them. You need only look as far as divorce, birth control, and abortion to see that plenty of people of faith disagree with the Church on these issues. And just as lgbt rights are finding growing support in the U.S. in general, those numbers are starting to rise among people of faith, too. Polls show religious people are far more accepting of protections of lgbt people in housing and employment. Obviously, support for same-sex marriage is lagging, but support is growing even there.

But most of the organizations you reference, like Dignity and Affirmations, exist to help their lgbt membership reconcile their homosexuality with what their church has taught them and to show that they can be gay and still practice their religious beliefs. Whether you are religious or not, you should be able to practice your faith even if you are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.

You were an Obama supporter in 2008. What do you think of the Obama administration these past four years? How do you think the 2012 elections are going to shape up?

I didn’t support Obama for president until the California Primary forced me to choose between Obama and Hilary Clinton. Obama had impressed me, but I had the same questions about his experience and electability as others had. I also questioned whether Clinton could overcome the negatives that had followed her as First Lady.

Yes, Obama talked a good game, but I knew the optimism that surrounded his election would make way to the reality of politics in Washington. For one, I knew he wouldn’t be able to pull troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan immediately. I knew the economy wouldn’t turn around quickly. And I wasn’t surprised that lobbyists undercut attempts to hold Wall Street and the banking industry accountable for getting us into the situation we’re in. There have been times I’ve been profoundly disappointed in the president. But also times I’ve been extremely proud that he’s prevailed through persistence. Sure, we love to see some passion and empathy from our leaders, and I’m not sure that comes through enough with Obama. But, he is deliberate and strategic. Given the unwillingness by Republicans to meet him half-way on many issues, it’s amazing he’s gotten accomplished what he has, not the least of which is Health Care Reform and the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, among others.

Ultimately, I think his reelection will hinge on the economy and the rate of unemployment. Those have been and will continue to be the issues Americans care about most right now. We were in a deep hole when Obama was elected and we still have so far to go. Indicators are generally moving in the right direction. But housing, student loans, and the European economic crisis all pose real dangers to our fragile recovery. A lot can happen between now and November.

But, the Republicans have yet to offer how their policies will benefit Americans, certainly not when it comes to Romney. Though, I understand he has a major policy speech he’s preparing to make in the next couple of weeks. But, it seems like Republicans, and Conservatives especially, are finding it difficult to get behind him. He might describe his time as governor of Massachusetts as being “severely conservative”, but I think it’ll be difficult for him to back that up. I think he’s done little to distinguish himself in the race so far, and appears like another lackluster John McCain. I heard a comparison the other day that he is “a John Kerry without the medals”. Still, I view him as the only viable candidate the Republicans can run against Obama. Gingrich and Santorum will alienate a lot of Americans, especially independents. One has to wonder what would happen if Bloomberg got in the race, as either a Republican or Independent. That would be VERY interesting.

Here are more interviews that I did for Everyday Citizen

An Interview With Cartoonist Greg Beda
An Interview With Poet Melissa Tuckey
An Interview With Cartoonist Andy Singer
An Interview With Author Robert Balmanno
An Interview With Cartoonist J.P. Jasper
An Interview With Cartoonist David Cohen

An Interview With Cartoonist Greg Beda

I’ve known Greg Beda and his cartoons since we took college classes together many years ago at San Jose State. For years now I’ve been a fan of Greg’s series Zeke and Goulash and his comic book Postmodern AnXst. His comics often explore with insight the ups and downs of relationships. His latest work has incorporated a spiritual dimension, influenced by many spiritual teachers, most prominently Ken Wilber, an American author who has written about mysticism, philosophy, ecology, and developmental psychology. I admire Greg’s cartoons because he maintains a strong personal point of view that is unique in the comics world.

Over the years, Greg has built a steady readership from the many comic book conventions he has attended to exhibit his comics. Last year marked the 25th anniversary of Zeke and Goulash; to see examples please visit the Zeke and Goulash Facebook page

Thanks Greg for this interview. So tell us a little on how you started cartooning.

I loved cartoons as a child and made a decision to become a cartoonist at age five. My first influences were “The Flintstones,” “Underdog,” and the various animated cartoons on television. I started out drawing my favorite TV characters, as many children do. I created magnets and gave them to my Mom. I also created homemade trading cards of my favorite Hanna-Barbera characters and had them laminated at my bank.

You are a big fan of the great Archie comics and teen comics of the 1940s and 1950s, and the cartoonists of that period, like Al Jaffee, Al Feldstein, and Bob Montana, have had a great influence on your art. How has your artwork evolved and grown from your early influences?

I fell in love with the artwork in Archie Comics when I was 10 or 11. I discovered there were many artists drawing Archie Comics and learned to distinguish each of the artists’ styles even if the artwork was unsigned. My favorite Archie artists included Dan DeCarlo, Harry Lucey, Bob Bolling, Sam Schwartz, and Bob Montana. As a teenager I started collecting Archie original art. I also collected many other teenage humor comic book titles, from the 1940s onward; this became a favorite genre, I suppose. As I became older, at around 13 or 14, I discovered reprints of E.C. comic books from the 1950s (i.e. Tales From The Crypt, Weird Science, Shock SuspenStories, Mad, etc.) and became enamored by the artwork of Wally Wood, Reed Crandall, Jack Kamen, and the other E.C. artists. When I was 17, I discovered the work of underground cartoonist R. Crumb, and likewise the music of Bob Dylan, The Doors, Simon & Garfunkel, The Velvet Underground, etc. I became very interested in 1960s pop culture and the popular arts.

My style has gone through many changes over the years, but we could narrow it down to three major developmental shifts. These can be a bit hard to pin down precisely—stages tend to overlap—but I’ll give you a general idea. Phase-1 lasted from around age 5 until around age 21; Phase-2 lasted from around age 21 until around age 41; Phase-3 started a few years ago and is still unfolding. These phases mirror my own interior development and generally point toward my world view or intention as an artist. Phase-1 is more modernist and entertainment bound; Phase-2 is postmodern and tends to deconstruct and evaluate myself and the world around me. Phase-3 is integral and is more spiritual. Phase-3 also embraces what came before it and so I hope my cartoons are still entertaining and analytical. I suppose integrity and sincerity are my main goals as a cartoonist; I do not care too much for excessive putdowns or irony. Satire and social commentary certainty are valid approaches to humor, but right now it appears that many cartoonists and humorists rely too much on satire and irony and not enough on sincerity and deeper human emotions, interactions, and values.

I know you’re a Robert Crumb fan. Are you a fan of his early underground work of the 1960s and 1970s? How has Crumb’s later autobiographical work influenced your comic?

Between the ages of 5 to 17 I went from being a fan of Hanna-Barbera, to Archie, to E.C., to Crumb. As a late teen on the verge of young adulthood, Crumb was certainly unlike anything I had ever seen before. At first I just admired Crumb’s creativity, his outrageousness, and his courage to create anything he wanted, without censorship. His work was postmodern—it criticized social norms but he was also self-deprecating and touched upon a whole range of emotions, including rage, depression, and sexual urges and hang-ups. Crumb was my first glimpse into the ‘untamed id,’ as well as the late sixties underground counter culture.

I love and appreciate Crumb’s later autobiographical work, too, and it was through my interest in Crumb that I discovered the work of Harvey Pekar. Pekar’s subject matter was everyday life and I thought that was fascinating. Another influence on me, however fleeting, was a comic book called Duplex Planet, in which David Greenberger shared interviews and stories about senior citizens he knew. I later created Rosewood, a comic book series that took place in a group home for developmentally disabled women. The first Rosewood story appeared in Postmodern AnXst #1, a comic book anthology of my comics that I began self-publishing in 1995. I tend to not do autobiographical comics overtly, but I do aim for honest self expression.

The work that I remember from our college days was more focused on relationships. But I noticed that your later work has begun to add more spiritual dimensions. When I last visited your studio, you introduced me to some of the ideas of Ken Wilber. Could you explain something of Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory and how it has influenced your life? How has this influenced your work on Zeke and Goulash?

For most of my life I have been curious about understanding myself and the world around me. As a young child I had migraine headaches, although my parents and I didn’t know what they were called at the time. These hellish so-called “sun headaches” were the first non-ordinary experiences I remember having, my first deep glimpse into deep human suffering. I also became fascinated with dreams and so I remember waking up in the middle of the night or early morning and remembering vivid, luminous dreams, dreams that had an emotional charge or depth that would remain somewhat after I woke up. But I did not see the importance of dreams as a child or teenager, perhaps because we live in a culture that tends to devalue the so-called “inner world”.

I started studying psychology at age 17, and a few years later I discovered the works of C.G. Jung, Alan Watts, D.T. Suzuki, and Joseph Campbell. I knew of Ken Wilber’s books when I was in my early twenties, but it wasn’t until I read his book “A Brief History of Everything” that I became very influenced by him. My Master’s thesis, for example, finally completed in 1996, reveals an early interest in developmental psychology and the evolution of world views. I postulated a theory about Comic Art inspired by Ken’s work: Comic art as entertainment (modernist world view); comic art as social commentary (postmodern world view), and Comic Art as medicine (post-postmodern or integral world view). Do you see how this mirrors the development I talked about earlier as a cartoonist?

I love Ken’s theory because it is comprehensive map of reality that resonates with me. Ken is a synthesizer: he takes a lot of diverse fields and ideas and finds ways to integrate them into a cohesive whole. He talks about how human beings tend to develop through a developmental sequence: pre-conventional, conventional, and post-conventional, for example. The culture we live in tends to be based upon convention or agreed upon ideas. Right now, the world—or, rather the world view each individual holds—appears to be going through a radical transition. Remember that famous quote by Albert Einstein– “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them”? However what often happens is that rather than transcend convention (‘the norm’) we tend to rebel, or argue our viewpoint by attacking opposing viewpoints, and became anti-conventional. In other words, it’s often easier to criticize the world than to be an agent of creative change in the world. To go beyond convention is not easy because we are so conditioned as children with the values of our parents and our specific culture.

Another idea I like from the Integral perspective is the distinction between “I”, “We”, and “It”. “I” refers to the subjective I of the beholder, or the interior perspective of the individual. “We” refers to the inter-subjective I-Thou relationship between people. “It” refers to the objective, visible world of matter or form. Another way to look at these: I refers to aesthetics, We refers to morals, and It refers to science. And so, for example, the war between science and religion doesn’t really make a lot of sense using this map because scientists and theologians are looking at different aspects of reality. But often our common notion of reality is reduced to the realm of the material “It” and thus a secular world view arises—not that there is anything wrong with this per se, but material reality is only partial and not complete. Perhaps I have spent a lot of my adult life exploring the subjective “I” and the inter-subjective “We” because that is what was primarily left out of my upbringing and education during the first 20 years or so of my life.

Ken often talks about holding many different perspectives. Maturity might be defined as the ability to hold multiple perspectives, and immaturity as the inability to hold other perspectives. Integral Theory can be quite complex and I have simplified a few key ideas. In order to deepen or expand one’s world view takes time, commitment, and effort,,, while, at the same time, it often requires relinquishing illusions or old beliefs. Ken and most spiritual teachers recommend engaging in various injunctions or practices—meditation, prayer, and spiritual inquiry are common examples—to deepen and expand one’s perspective. These practices help cultivate love and compassion. Other favorite spiritual teachers include Adyashanti, Caroline Myss, Cheri Huber, Byron Katie, and Robert Holden. For an integral Christian perspective, I like Father Thomas Keating, Richard Rohr, and Cynthia Bourgeault.

Spirituality has influenced my more recent work—it is difficult for me to separate my current, emerging world view and my creative endeavors. I do not want to preach or to make all my comics overtly spiritual, but I do want my comics to reflect the person I am today. I think all artists express their values in their work, whether subtle or pointed. And so by expressing my values—i.e. the futility of ego, self-contradictions, the need for love and connection, etc.—I am simply expressing myself as an artist. My jokes have tended to be psychological or philosophical anyway, even the ones I did as a late teen. Goulash tends to be emotional and analytical, whereas Zeke is more spiritual and insightful; the dynamic between the two often creates playful dialogue.

You’ve been doing comic conventions for a long while now and have met a lot of fans and fellow cartoonists. How has that experience been for you? Are there any cartoonists that you have been most thrilled to meet?

I went to my first comic book convention in 1980, and went to small conventions in the 1980s. I first went to the San Diego Comic Con in 1989. At conventions, it is easy to meet a lot of cartoonists; cartoonists tend to be more assessable compared to actors and rock stars! As a young cartoonist, I received a lot of advice and encouragement. I certainly enjoyed meeting many of my favorites. For example, over the years I have met many important syndicated cartoonists, such as Hank Ketcham and Bil Keane, and many comic book legends, such as Will Eisner and Al Jaffee. But meeting someone and getting to know them is different. I first met Dan DeCarlo, the prolific Archie comic book artist, in 1999 and started calling him on the phone during the next two and half years. Getting to know DeCarlo was a dream come true, and something I cherish deeply. I also met other Archie cartoonists, such as Samm Schwartz and Bob Bolling, and many of the newer ones, too. Perhaps what I like most is having cartoonists create a drawing of my characters Zeke and Goulash in their own style; I have been collecting these for use in a future paperback collection.

In some ways, I am more enamored with meeting musicians and actors than cartoonists. I am enjoy collecting autographs and sometimes having my photo taken with someone I admire. I have met many old time radio and TV actors and that is a real treat: Janet Waldo, Frankie Thomas, Art Linkletter, Bob Hastings, and recently Dick Van Patton and Tony Dow. I’ve enjoyed meeting favorite musicians, too, such as Richard Thompson, Davy Jones (of The Monkees), Loudon Wainwright, and Nellie McKay.

Tell me something of how you produce your cartoon. What technique to you use? What do you do to color your cartoons?

I tend to write jokes, which is basically dialogue, on whatever scraps of paper I can find! I pencil my comics on ordinary paper (nothing special!), but embellish the art on duraline (high quality tracing paper) with a black prismacolor pencil. I letter with Sharpies, although I would prefer to create my own lettering font sometime in the future. I do not know if this is the best way, but at the present time this is what I do. I scan in my b/w artwork, which has no shading or blacks, then ‘tweak’ it or fix it (redrawing small details digitally, correcting lettering mistakes, etc.) and then color it using Photoshop (sometimes augmented by Painter).

In your 25th anniversary Zeke and Goulash comic, you have a comic strip with Mingyur Rinpoche. How was that meeting? How did he like your cartoon? Tell us a little about Mingyur Rinpoche.

I had never met Mingyur Rinpoche and thought it would be fun to create a strip with Goulash meeting him. I was a bit unsure of how he would respond, but he loved the strip! He is a Tibetan Buddhist, a very playful, funny, and spiritual guy. He read the strip out loud and laughed throughout. His books Joy Of Living and Joyful Wisdom integrate Buddhism and neuroscience and are very easy to understand—putting the ideas into practice is another matter! I admire his teachings very much and go to a local Buddhist group twice a month based upon his teachings.

One of the things I most admire about your work is that is it one of the most unique comics out there. Your work always has a strong personal point of view. How were you able to maintain that strong voice in your work?

I don’t have to make a living as a cartoonist hence I can be as personal as I want… or as transpersonal I want! When I was younger I strived to be a commercial cartoonist. You might remember that my first professional scripts were published in New Kids On the Block comic books in 1990-91! But as time passed I chose integrity over commercialism. I don’t want to be micro-managed or art directed. Nowadays, my work is moving in a more spiritual direction, but I do not have any agenda. I trust the creative process, although I am not creative 24-7. My creativity will always reflect the current condition of my psyche—for better or worse!

In what new directions do you want to take Zeke and Goulash in the future? Are there any new projects that you want to tell the readers of Everyday Citizen?

I’d like to do some more Zeke & Goulash comic book stories, and more new strips, as well. I’d like to remaster(!) the first Z & G full length story I did in 1997, and then compile a Z & G 100+ page book collection of stories and strips. Eventually, I’d like to do a Z & G graphic novel—one long story—which would be overtly psychological/spiritual and funny at the same time.

Right now, I’m writing a script for a graphic novel that will feature the character Mike from Rosewood. I have never created a graphic novel from scratch, so this is a new experience for me. I want it to be simple and straightforward, but the story does feature way too many characters and a moderately convoluted plot.

I’m also compiling my best work, including early work, into a 35 year retrospective that will show my development from age seven to the present. This book is called Images & Reflections and is an autobiography of my inner world—although the outer world is naturally discussed as well! It will include one panel cartoons, comic strips, comic book pages, editorial cartoons, photos, etc. and will include psychological/spiritual commentary.

Thank you for this interview, Angelo. I appreciate your interest in my cartoons.

Here are more interviews that I did for Everyday Citizen

An Interview With Poet Melissa Tuckey
An Interview With Cartoonist Andy Singer
An Interview With Author Robert Balmanno
An Interview With Cartoonist J.P. Jasper
An Interview With Cartoonist David Cohen

An Interview With Poet Melissa Tuckey

I learned a lot about the poet activist from reading the blogs of Melissa Tuckey, a blogger at Everyday Citizen. Melissa is a poet who strongly believes in the power of poetry to act as agents of change, to engage readers in many of the important issues of society. This philosophy led Tuckey to serve as the events coordinator for DC Poets Against the War and to serve as a founding co-director of the Split This Rock Poetry Festival, while she was living in Washington, DC. She has written a chapbook, “Rope As Witness” for Pudding House Press. Her poems have appeared in the Southeast Review, Poet Lore, Beltway Poetry Quarterly, Beloit Poetry Journal, and Terrain: A Journal of Built and Natural Environments, and others. Melissa currently lives in Ithaca, New York.

How did you become interested in poetry? Was it something that you first loved when you were in school?

I first encountered poetry at about age 14. I had a teacher who was a poet and he introduced us to Whitman and Dickinson. I fell in love with Emily Dickinson. Her sense of isolation matched mine, and the mystery of her writing was intimate. I slept with her book. My teacher Robert West, was very supportive, he read every poem I wrote and would meet with me during office hours to discuss books.

As a poet/activist, you are walking in a long and proud tradition. What poets have played a strong influence in your duel roles as a poet/activist? Are there any particular poetry books that have had a profound influence on you?

As far as politically engaged poets who have influenced my work, a few include Wendell Berry, Mahmoud Darwish, Lucille Clifton, Carolyn Forche, June Jordan, WS Merwin, Grace Paley, Adrienne Rich, Muriel Rukeyser, and many others. The styles of these poets differ, but each has given me a kind of permission in my writing. June Jordan was the first poet I heard read who made me realize poetry could be both passionate and political, that it could be urgent and necessary; it could move you to tears or make you jump up and want to do something. Grace Paley brought so much joy to her writing as well as politics. I love her short stories and read them again and again. And I admire the fierceness of Adrienne Rich’s work, her refusal to look away, her commitment to language. Adrienne Rich’s prose been influential, starting with “What is Found There,” which is a book about the intersection of poetry and politics.

Your poetry appears in magazines like Southeast Review, Poet Lore, and the Belway Poetry Quarterly. What is your process for writing your poems? Do you have a favorite spot to write or draw inspiration from?

My writing process is not very romantic. I sit at a computer and write. I keep a small notebook with me to jot down phrases and ideas, and I’ve started keeping folders to hold converging ideas, notes from readings, and poems. Over time, I’ve learned that poetry doesn’t come when I call it, or when I sit down with an “idea” to write about. It comes from a feeling, or a sound, or word, or maybe a question or an image, a starting place that opens up in some way to surprise me as I am writing. There are themes I am interested in, and my goal is to find ways to approach, a sideways glance, an open window, a list of words.

You were the events coordinator of D.C. Poets Against the War, a group of poets who used their poetry to protest the Iraq War. What was that experience like? What was it like meeting other poet activists and hearing their poetry?

It was necessary. I felt so depressed by the wars, and when Sarah Browning asked me to help coordinate, I was glad to have some way to speak out. The first time I attended a DC Poets Against the War event, I drove home weeping and realized that no one around me had been talking honestly about war, not the newspapers, not friends who opposed the war, not those who supported it. Poets were bringing a profound empathy through their poetry, and challenging the dead language of war.

One of the highlights of our work was to march with signs carrying lines of poetry at protests. At one point we had maybe 70 poets marching together. People were happy to see us, though it was disappointing we could not get a national poet on the stage at the march. There were too many people representing too many organizations to allow room for a poet, even a nationally renowned poet. Too much talking, not enough poetry!

In a January 4, 2009 blog for Everyday Citizen, you mention the power of words to shape how we see a particular issue, in this case the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. You’ve also contributed to the poetry anthology “Poets For Palestine”. What has led you to be interested in this particular issue?

I’ve been interested in this issue for years. I’d say my main enthusiasm for the issue comes from having met Palestinians and heard their stories, and little by little having learned the history. I feel strongly for the people who have lost their homes, who are losing their homes, who are imprisoned, or living under occupation. It reminds me of the plight of indigenous people in the United States and elsewhere, and I feel it’s a great loss to destroy such a beautiful culture and people. My love for Palestine is also influenced by it’s great poets and intellectuals, and I am moved by the incredible cruelty against these people– the ripping out of hundreds of years old olive trees to break the bonds of people to their ancestral land, the bulldozing of homes, the closing of schools. And in Gaza, control of their borders is a crime against humanity.

What has it been like teaching in Ithaca College and the University of Maryland? Has the exposure to young students been an invigorating experience for you?

I’ve taught at a number of universities and I really enjoy it. I view the classroom as a dynamic experience, where students play an active role in shaping the conversation and we all learn something. Many young people are bored and not engaged intellectually, and I enjoy the challenge of tapping into their curiosity. I also love being part of a conversation about literature or writing or language.

The Split This Rock Poetry Festival sounds like a wonderful gathering for poets and activists to get together to socialize and learn from each other. You served as assistant festival director and a founding co-director. Would you tell me how you got involved in this festival? How did this festival come into being?

I became involved with Split This Rock when Sarah Browning asked me to take over organizing responsibilities for DC Poets Against the War, so she could work on creating a national festival. A small group of poets began to meet to talk through the logistics two years ahead of the first festival. We came up with a list of our favorite politically engaged poets and sent letters to invite them, never expecting that every one would agree to participate. We had no money to pay them. We had no venue. We had no idea who would attend and all 27 of our poet-heroes agreed to participate (!!), and then we began to hear from people around the country who also wanted to participate. It was a stampede. Eventually, everything came together, we raised the money, we recruited volunteers, participants traveled from across the country and the first festival happened. There was a synergy to it, all the right energies coming together. In the process we decided to create not just a festival, but an organization, something that could carry the momentum forward.

It was a huge success because it answered a need in the poetry community, to speak out, to engage, to build community, not just in opposition to the war, but in celebration of the great tradition of politically engaged poetry. Split This Rock also answers a need in the activist community, for vision, imagination, empathic engagement. In addition, it’s one of the most culturally and poetically diverse poetry festivals in the country, and this is a strong part of our mission.

In the Split This Rock Poetry Festival website, it mentions that you are a co-translator with Chun Ye and Fiona Sze-Lorrain of Chinese poet Yang Zi’s collected works. I’m not familiar with Yang Zi. Would you tell us a little about Yang Zi and his poetry?

Yang Zi is a contemporary Chinese poet. His poems confront rampant consumerism, materialism, destruction of the environment and culture in China. His poems are lyric and moving, a singular “I” speaking back in an era of rapid deterioration. For example, he writes, “what a city. / eight million people dream the same dream: money, money, money!” I find his book to be a dire warning.

This year, the Split This Rock Poetry Festival will celebrate the life and work of poet June Jordan. Would you tell us about June Jordan? How would interested people participate in this year’s festival?

June Jordan was a poet, writer, teacher, activist who continues to inspire both activists and poets. This is the tenth anniversary of her death, and she is deeply missed by the poetry community. The festival is from March 22-25, and lasts four days. There are panel discussions and writing workshops during the day, and readings in the evening, featuring such poets as Homero Aridjis, Alice Walker, Marilyn Nelson, Naomi Shihab Nye, Sam Hammill, Sonia Sanchez, and more. There will also be a “money is not speech” protest in front of the Supreme Court. It’s going to be an inspiring event. All are welcome.
Full registration is already sold out, but limited day passes are available, get yours today at

A YOUTUBE VIDEO OF JUNE JORDAN

YOUTUBE VIDEOS FROM PAST SPLIT THIS ROCK POETRY FESTIVALS

Here are more interviews that I did for Everyday Citizen

An Interview With Cartoonist Andy Singer

An Interview With Author Robert Balmanno

An Interview With Cartoonist J.P. Jasper

Heroes

I’ve always been inspired by heroes. From family members, to close friends, to major figures in books that I’ve read, these heroes have helped shaped my values, my politics, and the way I want to live my life. As I’ve grown older, my parents have become real heroes to me. As a young man, I admired several sports stars, especially Larry Bird and Magic Johnson, for their work ethic and their ability to make their teammates play to their highest level. With this in mind, I thought I’d write a list of my heroes who are either politicians or political activists, people who inspire me and who have shaped my political views.

I’ve met many people who do not believe in heroes. They see flaws in any hero and believe that it’s dangerous to have so much faith in a flawed human being to fight for good causes. It’s never bothered me to know that my heroes have flaws. What makes a hero special to me is that they have the courage to transcend their human weaknesses to do great things that benefit humanity.

So here is my list of my favorite political and activist heroes. Some are radicals. Some are reformers. They have all inspired me. Perhaps a few of them will inspire you. Please feel free to mention your own list of political and activist heroes.

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN
Benjamin Franklin has always been my favorite Founding Father. A genial and good humored man, Franklin seemed like the kind of person that one could enjoy a fun conversation with. A few years ago I read Joseph Ellis’ book Founding Brothers about Franklin’s failed attempt to get Congress to pass legislation to abolish slavery. It reminded me of something that is often overlooked about Benjamin Franklin, his civic activism. Franklin organized the first fire company in America helped formed the first insurance company, which introduced fire insurance, crop insurance, and insurance for widows and orphans. In 1751, Franklin and Dr. Thomas Bond established the Pennsylvania Hospital, the first hospital in what was to become the United States of America. In the 1780s Ben Franklin was president of the Pennsylvania Abolition Society and worked to set up schools to educate free African Americans and give them employable skills and to try to pass for legislation to abolish slavery and end the slave trade. While many people become more conservative as they get older, Benjamin Franklin grew more radical as he aged. It’s one of the things I most admire about him.
Recommended books: Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation by Joseph Ellis, Revolutionary Characters: What Made The Founders Different by Gordon Wood, Not Your Usual Founding Father: Selected Readings from Benjamin Franklin edited by Edmund S. Morgan, Benjamin Franklin: An American Life by Walter Isaacson, The Americanization of Benjamin Franklin by Gordon Wood.

JOHN QUINCY ADAMS
I didn’t know much about John Quincy Adams until I read two wonderful books, Arguing about Slavery by William Lee Miller and Mr. Adams’s Last Crusade by Joseph Wheelan. I most admire Adams’ time as a representative in the House of Representatives, during which he would become the Congress’s most influential and outspoken critic of slavery, as well as a critic of the government’s policies for the removal of eastern Native American tribes, a defender of the right of women to petition for political rights, and a critic of the 1848 war to obtain land from Mexico. His path as a champion for human rights began by accident, when he found himself in a legislative fight to end the gag rule in the Congress. The gag rule was imposed by Southern congressmen to silence any debate on the issue of slavery. This debate changed Adams, as he showed a willingness to learn and change as he was exposed to the arguments of abolitionists, to the stories of suffering of Native Americans, to the crusading spirit of women petitioners. A highlight of his later life was his defense of the mutineer slaves of the Cuban ship Amistad in the Supreme Court in 1840.
Recommended books: Arguing about Slavery by William Lee Miller, Mr. Adams’s Last Crusade by Joseph Wheelan.

CHARLES DICKENS
Until a year ago, I really didn’t know very much about Charles Dickens or his books. Then my wife and I enjoyed watching a 1930s version of A Tale of Two Cities and it got me interested in learning more about Dickens. I began to learn that many people that I admire, like Howard Zinn, Dorothy Day, and George Orwell, were deeply influenced by Dickens’ books and the empathy they have for the poor. Charles Dickens was a great social critic of his time and he had many of the same criticisms of the capitalist system as Karl Marx. Unlike Marx though, Dickens criticized the capitalist system from a moralist point of view rather than a revolutionary point of view. This insight has had a profound impact on me. I agree with many of the criticisms that the Left has of the current economic system that we have. I’ve always been wary, though, of the revolutionary rhetoric that I read in some of radical parts of the Left. Charles Dickens’s books have taught me that a moral critique can be just as radical as a revolutionary critique, because both critiques point out that the flaws of the economic and political system lie somewhere at the root of the system. I like how Dickens was interested in saving the oppressor as well as the oppressed in many of his books. Dickens attacked the values of the economic system that influenced people to be selfish, greedy and lacking in any empathy for the poor and underprivileged. It gave me a new way to look at radicalism. I hope to emulate the example of Charles Dickens’ social criticism in my political cartoons.
Recommended books: The Annotated Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens, A Tale Of Two Cities and Great Expectations: Two Novels (Oprah’s Book Club) by Charles Dickens, Hard Times by Charles Dickens, Little Dorrit by Charles Dickens.

FREDERICK DOUGLASS
Frederick Douglass was one of the great champions of human rights in American history. A great abolitionist and a champion of African American rights, Douglass was also a strong supporter of women’s suffrage, a defender of immigrants’ rights, and a critic of the anti-Chinese laws that proliferated in the later 1800s. I admire his courage and his strong will, as he was born under the worst of circumstances as a slave. I know I wouldn’t have had the strength of will to overcome the beatings that Douglass went through. His intelligence, his perserverance, and his strong oratorical skills helped inspire the abolitionists and persuade the general public of the righteousness of the abolitionist cause. Douglass’s meetings with Abraham Lincoln helped Lincoln evolve into a greater respect for the equality of African Americans. To the very end, Douglass criticized the Jim Crow laws that were emerging as the Reconstruction era ended. Douglass spoke out for the rights of all marginalized and oppressed groups, regardless of the consequences.
Book recommendations: Frederick Douglass: In His Own Words edited by Milton Melzer, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass: An American Slave by Frederick Douglass, Douglass and Lincoln: How a Revolutionary Black Leader & a Reluctant Liberator Struggled to End Slavery & Save the Union by Paul Kendrick and Stephen Kendrick, The Radical and the Republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the Triumph of Antislavery Politics by James Oakes

ABRAHAM LINCOLN
There is not much left to say about Abraham Lincoln that hasn’t already been said by writers much better than me. The more I learn about Lincoln, the more I like him. The thing that I most like about Lincoln is his generosity of spirit and his capacity to grow as he gained new experieces and is exposed to different types of people. A primary example of his capacity to grow is in Lincoln’s evolving views on race. Though Lincoln had always been a strong opponent of slavery, his views on race before his presidency were similar to most of his white Americans. During the Civil War, however, those views changed. As Lincoln began to meet African Americans, especially in his meetings with Frederick Douglass, he began to shed his prejudices against the equality of African Americans. Lincoln was also deeply moved by the bravery of African American Union troops in battle during the war. By the end of the war, Lincoln was strongly advocating laws to insure the protection of the rights of the newly freed slaves. I personally think Lincoln is our greatest President,
Recommended books: The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery by Eric Foner, Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin, President Lincoln: The Duty of a Statesman by William Lee MillerDouglass and Lincoln: How a Revolutionary Black Leader & a Reluctant Liberator Struggled to End Slavery & Save the Union by Paul Kendrick and Stephen Kendrick, The Radical and the Republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the Triumph of Antislavery Politics by James Oakes

JANE ADDAMS
I admire Jane Addams for many of the same reasons as I admire Benjamin Franklin. They both have deeply instilled in them a strong sense of civic activism. Both of them are wealthy individuals who are deeply empathetic to the plight of the poor and the marginalized. I just admire the variety of causes that Jane Addams tackled and the various groups that she had a hand in organizing to deal with the problems of society. I am empathetic to this approach, as I tend to look to groups that have worked on issues for several years to get their insights on particular issues. Addams was one of the leaders of the Hull House movement in Chicago, where social workers lived in settlement houses in poor immigrant neighborhoods to bring education opportunities, child care, and artistic endeavors to help empower the poor. She helped found the NAACP in 1909 due to her opposition to racial prejudice. Jane Addams was also a strong women’s suffragist and a strong pacifist, joining the Women’s Peace Party in 1915. Addams became president of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom in the 1920s.
Recommended books: Citizen: Jane Addams and the Struggle for Democracy, Jane Addams: Spirit In Action

CARLOS BULOSAN
Carlos Bulosan’s book America Is In The Heart really helped me to appreciate my Filipino heritage. I grew up in military bases most of my life, so I had little exposure to Filipino culture and never learned to speak Tagalog. During high school, I encountered many Filipinos who looked down on me because I didn’t know how to speak Tagalog and it made me very insecure about my Filipino heritage. Two things gave me more confidence in my Filipino heritage. The first thing was my first girlfriend, who was a Filipina. She was very kind to me and she accepted me for who I was. The second thing was taking an Asian American history course in college and learning about Carlos Bulosan for the first time. Carlos Bulosan was a poet and a union activist who entered the United States in 1930 and worked in the next 2 decades in various low-paying jobs: servicing hotels, harvesting in the fields, and working in Alaskan canneries. Carlos went to the public library and taught himself to read and write, eventually becoming a prolific writer determined to describe his struggles as a Filipino coming to America and the struggles of other people. I admire his leftist politics and his determination to bridge the gap between America’s high ideals and the discrimination that Filipinos and other immigrants faced while living in America.
Recommended books: America Is In The Heart by Carlos Bulosan, The American Radical by Mary Jo Buhle

DOROTHY DAY
Dorothy Day has been one of the biggest influences in my life. There have been times in my life that I’ve gotten into conflicts with other Christians who’ve accused me of not being a true Christian, and those conflicts have sometimes gotten me thinking of just leaving the Christian religion. My admiration of Dorothy Day is one of the things that kept me going as a Christian (the other thing is this fellow named Jesus). Dorothy Day is one of the most offbeat and interesting Christians that I know. As a young woman, she was an editor for the radical leftist magazine The Masses and she had as friends Anarchists, Socialists and Communists. She was jailed for participating in a protest for women’s suffrage. She had an abortion and eventually had a child out of wedlock. When her daughter was born, it inspired her to go to a Catholic Church and she eventually converted to Roman Catholicism when she found the same love of the poor in Catholic Social Teaching that she found in the radical politics of her friends. Day remained a radical activist, founding the Catholic Worker movement with Peter Maurin, a movement that had Catholic Worker houses to feed and shelter the poor and to protest war, discrimination of minorities and the excesses of the capitalist system. Dorothy Day’s Christian radicalism led her to deal with the poor directly in her Catholic Worker home, developing personal relationships with the homeless, the mentally ill, the marginalized. Religious activists like Dorothy Day are always reminding us that the least of us have value too, and I admire their courage in speaking out for people who cannot speak for themselves.
Recommended books: By Little and By Little: The Selected Writings of Dorothy Day, Voices From The Catholic Worker edited by Rosalie Riegle Troester, The Long Loneliness by Dorothy Day

FRANKLIN AND ELEANOR ROOSEVELT
I always think of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt as a unit. It’s sad that their marriage wasn’t more fulfilling to them both, but as a political team they were a powerful force for good. Franklin Roosevelt was the consummate politician, able to use his charm and political savy to ease the fears of a nation going through the Great Depression and to pass legislation that would help the unemployed, the aged, the laborer, and the uneducated. Eleanor was the determined civic activist, highlighting civil rights issues, women’s right issues, economic issues, and worker issues through her travels across the nation and through her daily newspaper articles. Together, they gave the average American the feeling that the First Couple cared for them.
FDR’s New Deal helped out its most vulnerable citizens from the worst effects of the calamitious economic collapse by such programs as the Works Progress Administration, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the United States Housing Authority. It empowered workers by putting the rights of collective bargaining into law through the Wagner Act. The elderly were given some measure of security through the Social Security Act.
Eleanor Roosevelt worked to include women in the New Deal programs. She spoke out against Southern segregation laws, organized a concert for African American singer Marian Anderson, and lobbied for anti-lynching laws in Congress. She made personal appearances to labor meetings to show her sympathy to workers. Eleanor held 348 press conferences during the Roosevelt administration, limiting attendence to female reporters and addressing issues like unemployment, poverty, education, rural life, and the role of women in society.
Recommended books: No Ordinary Time: Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt: The Home Front in World War II by Doris Kearns Goodwin, Traitor to His Class: The Privileged Life and Radical Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt by H.W. Brands, My Day: The Best of Eleanor Roosevelt’s Acclaimed Newspaper Columns, 1936-1962, Courage in a Dangerous World: The Political Writings of Eleanor Roosevelt

PAULI MURRAY
When I first attended the Episcopal Church I wanted to find an Episcopalian who has the same radical Christian vibe that Dorothy Day has. I found a few contenders. Sara Miles is the author of the book Take This Bread: A Radical Conversion and is a lesbian leftist journalist who covered poor communities in Latin America and the Philippines, and started a food pantry for the poor people who inhabit the neighborhood of her church in San Francisco. Jonathan Daniels was an Episcopal seminarian who was killed while participating in the Freedom Summer civil rights campaign to register African Americans in Alabama. The Episcopalian whom I am most attracted to is Pauli Murray, Pauli Murray was a historian, attorney, poet, activist, teacher and Episcopal priest, and she spoke out her entire life for economic and racial justice. 
A member of the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR), Murray worked to end segregation on public transportation and she went to jail in March 1940 for refusing to sit at the back of a bus in Virginia. She helped found the Congress of Racial Equality in 1942, and she received a law degree in the University of California Boalt School of Law. In 1977 Murray became the first African American woman to become a Episcopal priest. The more I learned about Pauli Murray’s accomplishments, the greater my respect became. I also grew more baffled as to why such a woman of accomplishment isn’t better known.
Recommended books: Pauli Murray: The Autobiography of a Black Activist, Feminist, Lawyer, Priest, and Poet

BAYARD RUSTIN
Bayard Rustin is one of the great forgotten heroes of the civil rights movement. I had not heard of him until a couple of years ago, when I wrote a blog about Grace Paley and Grace’s daughter commented that Bayard Rustin was the greatest influence in bringing Grace Paley over to nonviolence. Political cartoonist Jules Feiffer noted in his book Backing Into Forward: A Memoir that a lecture by Bayard Rustin taught Feiffer about the importance of the African American struggle for civil rights.
Rustin was a Quaker, a socialist and a gay man. His radical politics and his homosexuality were constant sources of problems Rustin, as mainstream civil rights leaders would try to minimize Rustin’s involvement on civil rights campaigns due to fear of a backlash of more conservative supporters who had problems with both socialism and homosexuality. Rustin briefly was a member of the American Communist Party in the late 1930s. He quit in 1941 because of its autocratic nature, but he learned a lot about organizing from the group. Bayard Rustin learned about nonviolent tactics from the Fellowship of Reconciliation, a Christian pacifist organization, and he used those lessons with the group he helped found, the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE). In 1947, Rustin organized the Journey of Reconciliation, a percursor of the Freedom Rides, where 8 whites and 8 African Americans rode together on a bus in the South to protest segregation in interstate travel. Rustin taught the Reverand Martin Luther King Jr. about the tactics of nonviolence during the Montgomery Bus Boycotts and helped him organize the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), though the SCLC would eventually force Rustin to leave the group because of his homosexuality. Rustin’s most famous feat was to organize the March on Washington in 19, where Martin Luther King Jr. had his “I Have A Dream” speech. I am deeply influenced by an essay that Rustin wrote titled From Protest To Politics, which described how the civil rights movement must shift from protesting on the streets to creating coalitions with unions and liberal religious groups to fight the economic disparities were deeply embedded in the structure of the economic system.
Recommended books: Time on Two Crosses: The Collected Writings of Bayard Rustin, Lost Prophet: The Life and Times of Bayard Rustin by John Demilio, Lost Prophet: The Life and Times of Bayard Rustin by John D’ Emilio

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.
I have always respected Martin Luther King Jr. because of his “I Have A Dream” speech. The PBS documentary series “Eyes On The Prize” showed me a King who was in the middle of a larger Civil Rights movement that was challenging society’s legal and economic oppression of the African American community. It showed me the activist Martin Luther King Jr., the courageous religious subversive who was willing to say the unpopular thing about economic injustice, about the Vietnam War. Martin Luther King Jr. is such an icon now that we forget just how radical and subversive he was in the later part of the 1960s. Like many religious activists that I admire, King combined a strong moral standard with compassion for human weakness. With this compassion, King was able to empathize with those who are most opposed to him, to seek the redemption of the oppressor as well as the oppressed. I think if a strong moral standard is not combined with compassion for human weakness, that strong moral standard can go to extremes and a person could wind up like Torquemada or Robespierre. King’s compassion helped him to avoid that fate, and his humility is one of the most appealing things to me.
Recommended books: I Have a Dream – 40th Anniversary Edition: Writings and Speeches That Changed the World, April 4, 1968: Martin Luther King, JR.’s Death and How It Changed America by Michael Dyson, Parting the Waters: America in the King Years 1954-63 by Taylor Branch, Pillar of Fire: America in the King Years, 1963-65 by Branch Taylor, At Canaan’s Edge: America in the King Years, 1965-68 by Taylor Branch

THE KENNEDY BROTHERS
I’ve always been a fan of the Kennedys. I remember the documentaries and television specials that came out during the aniversary of Kennedy’s assasination, and I was deeply inspired by John F. Kennedy’s charisma, wit, and his clarion call for for all Americans to ask not what our country can do for us, but to ask what we could do for our country. And then his brother Bobby became a hero of mine, first from watching a chapter in the documentary “Eyes On The Prize” and then from checking out the book “RFK: The Collected Speeches”. And gradually I came around to Teddy Kennedy, after looking back at his career and seeing all of the great legislation that he passed that really helped ordinary Americans. At first I admired John F. Kennedy the most. As the years have passed, I’ve grown more partial to Bobby and Ted, as they both seemed more passionate about fighting social injustice, and more committed to speaking out for the voiceless in our society.

My favorite Kennedy is Bobby. Bobby always seemed to me this shy ackward man who felt ill-at-ease on the national stage, but forced himself to speak out to champion the ideas of his martyred brother. Bobby was the one who reached out to the African American community, he was the one who supported Cesar Chavez and the farm workers strike, he was the one who changed his mind about Vietnam and became a critic of the war. What I most admire about Bobby is his ability to inspire others to get involved in our democracy, to get people to believe that they can make a difference, that they are a part of this American society too.

It’s taken me a while to like Ted Kennedy. When I was young I felt more sorry for him than anything else. With Chappaquidik, with his marital problems and his alcohol problems, Ted seemed to me to be struggling with deep emotional problems stemming from the trauma of so many violent deaths in his family. As the years have passed, though, I grew to admire Ted as I saw the many legislative achievements that he had to helped the poor, the elderly and the marginalized. While John and Bobby had the ability to inspire us, Ted gave the Kennedy legacy its substance. Ted Kennedy authored over 2,500 bills, of which 500 became law. During the 1960s, Kennedy supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1968 Fair Housing Act, and the 1965 Immigration Act. Kennedy’s amendment to the Economic Opportunity Act of 1966 led to many community-based health clinics throughout the nation. Kennedy sponsored the 1975 Education for All Handicapped People Act, and the 1980 Civil Rights for Institutionalized Persons Act to protect the constitutional rights of the elderly, the mentally ill, the disabled, and the incarcerated. In 1990, Kennedy cosponsored with Orrin Hatch the Ryan White CARE Act to fund cities most hit by the AIDs epidemic. In 1990 Kennedy wrote the Americans with Disabilities Act. In 1993 Kennedy co-authored the Family and Medical Leave Act, requiring businesses to provide unpaid leave for emergencies or births. In 1996 he cosponsored with Kansas Republican Senator Nancy Kassebaum the Kennedy-Kassebaum Act, which allowed employees to keep health insurance for a time after losing job. He worked for passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to restore a fair rule for filing pay discrimination cases. He worked for the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, which gave public safety workers the right to form a union and bargain for wages, hours, and working conditions. Kennedy supported the Mathew Shephard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 which added violence against people due to sexual orientation to the federal hate crimes list.
Recommended books: RFK: The Collected Speeches, Let the Word Go Forth: The Speeches, Statements, and Writings of John F. Kennedy 1947 to 1963, The Last Campaign: Robert F. Kennedy and 82 Days That Inspired America by Thurston Clarke, Last Lion: The Fall and Rise of Ted Kennedy by Peter Canellos

MURIEL RUKEYSER
I first encountered the name of Muriel Rukeyser from Grace Paley’s book “Just As I Thought”. I became interested in learning more about Rukeyser and was fascinated by what I discovered of the life of this very interesting woman. Muriel Rukeyser was a a poet, a journalist, a pilot and a political activist. She was determined to blaze her own path, and she took a lot of flack for her independence. She was a poet who was regularly criticized by literary critics for consistently commenting on political matters in her poetry. She was a leftist, but was regulary criticized by other radical leftists for not towing the party line. Her radical leftwing politics led her to be harassed during the McCarthy era during the 1950s, which caused her difficulty in finding work. She bore a child out of wedlock in the 1940s and chose to be a single parent, causing her to be shunned in many social circles. I most admire Rukeyser’s strength of will to live the life that she wanted to live and her willingness to pay the price for her artistic integrity when it would’ve been easier to conform.
I also deeply admire the many political causes that Muriel Rukeyser was involved in during her life. At the age of 19, Rukeyser reported on the second trial of the Scottsboro Boys in Decauter, Alabama in 1933, in which 9 black defendants were accused of rape, and were unable to have a fair trial due to racial prejudice. In 1936 Muriel reported on the antifascist Olympics in Barcelona, Spain, and reported on the Spanish Civil War, writing various articles supporting the Spanish Republicans. Rukeyser wrote poems of the industrial disaster in West Virginia, where African American and migrant workers died of silicosis poisoning due to inadequate precautions taken by Union Carbide and Carbon Corporation. In 1972, she traveled with Denise Levertov to South Vietnam to protest the Vietnam War. Muriel traveled to South Korea in her capacity as president of the PEN American Center to hold a vigil outside the prison cell of the South Korean poet Kim Chi Ha.
Recommended books: The Collected Poems of Muriel Rukeyser, How Shall We Tell Each Other of the Poet?: The Life and Writing of Muriel Rukeyser edited by Anne F. Herzog and Janet E. Kaufman

GRACE PALEY
I became interested in Grace Paley because of the unusual cover of her on her book “The Collected Stories”. In the back cover, Donald Barthelme described Paley as a wonderful writer and troublemaker and that our country was lucky to have her. That hooked me. I started reading all that I could of Grace Paley, her short stories, her poems, her essays. I admire her role as a writer/activist. In her books, there is this wonderful sense of humor and this great love of family and friends that makes her seem so human to me. I’ve met a few radicals who seem so angry and righteous, and Grace Paley seems to be a radical of a very different cloth. She seems like the kind of person I’d enjoy the company of.
A description of her political activity. In the early 1960s, Paley helped organize the Greenwich Village Peace Center. In 1969, Paley went to Hanoi to free prisoners of war. In 1973, Paley traveled to Moscow as a delegate of the World Peace Congress. During the Carter administration, Paley was arrested along with other peace activists for unfurling a peace banner on the White House grounds.
Recommended books: The Collected Stories by Grace Paley, New and Collected Poems by Grace Paley, Just As I Thought by Grace Paley

HOWARD ZINN
Howard Zinn has been a shining light for me for the past couple of years. His “People’s History” is a wonderful book of the struggles of African Americans, women, Native Americans, immigrants, workers and those Americans that you normally do not hear about in regular history books that focused only on great political leaders. I learned for the first time about the Wobblies, the Populists, and many grassroots movements by people fighting for a more just community. My favorite book of Zinn is his autobiography “You Can’t Be Neutral On A Moving Train”. In this book he chronicles his time as a teacher in the African American school Spellman College in the 1950s and how that led him to be involved in civil rights. He described his work in the anti-war movement in the 1960s. And he described his consequent activism against the Iraq War and against the power of corporations in our national life. What I like most about Zinn is his reverance for history, and for his faith in the power of people to join collectively and create social change. All protests, even the smallest public demonstrations of a handful of people holding picket signs, are meaningful to Zinn. While I met a lot of leftists who are disillusioned and pessimistic, I like Zinn’s optimism that with patience and persistence, the average people have to power through protest and civil disobedience to make great and positive changes in this country.
Recommended books: You Can’t Be Neutral On A Moving Train by Howard Zinn, The Zinn Reader: Writings on Disobedience and Democracy by Howard Zinn, Voices of a People’s History of the United States edited by Howard Zinn, Original Zinn: Conversations on History and Politics by Howard Zinn, A People’s History of the United States: 1492-Present

RALPH FASANELLA
I discovered Ralph Fasanella from an article in Smithsonian magazine in the early 1990s. He has become a role model for me of what an artist activist should be. My two favorite artists, Thomas Hart Benton and Diego Rivera, were also leftwing artists, but Fasanella was more intimately tied to the working class of his time. At various times he was a garment worker, a truck driver, an ice delivery man, a member of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade during the Spanish Civil War, and a union organizer. During the 1950s, he was blacklisted and harassed by the government for his progressive politics. He took part in a strike by Portuguese fishermen in 1986 and a strike by the Newspaper Guild in 1990.
These life experiences gave Fasanella a deep sympathy for the working man and he used his art to chronicle the history of the workers’ struggles for economic justice in America. From the 1950s to the early 1970s, Ralph worked by day at a gas station that he owned and at night he would work at his paintings. These are wonderful paintings of labor marches, protests, workers assemblies and union meetings. After he was discovered and became famous, Fasanella made paintings critical of the Reagan era of big business and decried the decline of union power. All the while, Fasanella remained a good family man who went to his favorite restaurants and enjoyed conversations with the workers who regularly dined there. He stayed in touch with his roots, something I deeply respect.
Recommended books: Ralph Fasanellas America by Paul S. D’ambrosio

Jasper Writes A Blog

I made this cartoon after reading Ken Poland’s recent blog. I’ve really enjoyed writing blogs for Everyday Citizen and have enjoyed reading and learning from the other bloggers at Everyday Citizen. I hope more people contribute and write blogs for Everyday Citizen. As the Everyday Citizen page writes:

Everything that is written here is imperfect and outstanding. Our combined aim is to engage, motivate, or stimulate interaction of ideas and thoughts across gender, generational, and ethnic lines. Our authors often seek to inspire advocacy or citizen action. The power of blogging is that bloggers not only reach out to one another, but this venue can also serve as its own form of activism, a tool to spur action on issues that matter most to the writers and to you.

While very diverse in the their values and views, these authors, story tellers, and citizen journalists share some things in common with one another. They all care deeply about some social, economic, environmental or human conditions in our nation and our world. They hope for positive change and progress. And, they are likely to write about these things that they care so much about.

If you enjoy this cartoon, take a look at these links for more of my political cartoons at Everyday Citizen. You could also join my Jasper the Cat facebook page.

Conversations During The Holidays
Jasper and the Cop
The Parents Visit the Occupation
Cartoons About Occupy Wall Street
Jasper and the Moderate Republican
Obama and the Republicans
Jasper And the Homeless Veteran
Jasper Celebrates the 4th of July
Jasper Meets Howard Zinn
Jasper and the Nature Poem
The Reunion
Government and the Market Economy
Jasper Joins Two Protests
Bob the Nerd Vampire
Jasper Debates War
Jasper Finds His Way Home
Jasper Escapes the Detention Center
Jasper At A Detention Center
Jasper Meets a Poet
Jasper’s Day
Jasper Tackles Health Care
Jasper Protests the War
Jasper and the Economy
Jasper Sings a Protest Song
The Road To Health Care Reform Cartoon
A Cartoon about the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
A Cartoon about My Experience in an Evangelical Church
A Cartoon about Political Debate
A Cartoon On Gay Marriage