Progressive Views: Allison Kilkenny Part 2

Due to overwelmingly positive feedback from readers of the first interview, I have decided to publish this second interview with blogger, radio host, and humorist Allison Kilkenny. The first part of this interview is poster here : http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/51925-progressive-views-allison-kilkenn...

Connelly: An essay of yours appears in a new book published by The Nation alongside such heavyweights as Ralph Nader, Howard Zinn, and Naomi Klein. How does it feel to be lumped in with such leftist mainstays?

Kilkenny: It’s pretty neat. I actually had no idea I was in the book until my boyfriend’s brother called me from a bookstore and was like, “Um, did you know you’re in a book?” And I’m such a neurotic mess that I assumed someone had written a smear piece about me, or some angry diatribe about how I’m a leftist radical Marxist (someone did call me that once. Redundant much?) Anyway, it’s very nice I’m in the book. It’s a huge compliment.

Connelly: What do you make of President Obama's apparent lack of enthusiasm concerning torture investigations? What motivates this apathy?

Kilkenny: A lot of Democrats were complicit in the terrible things the Bush administration did, so I’m sure there’s enormous pressure on the Obama administration to cover their asses i.e. not raise hell about potential crimes with the whole Iraq mess, torture, wiretapping, etc. The terrible thing is that the Obama administration appears to be politicizing the Department of Justice in the exact same fashion as the former Bush administration. Obama has no right to say if there should or should not be an investigation. It’s up to the Attorney General, Eric Holder, to see if crimes were committed. If Obama sticks his nose in this whole business, he’s doing exactly what the Bush administration did with the DOJ, which is politicize it and corrupt its sovereignty. He needs to stay out of it and let the law be the law.

Connelly: You recently wrote that, "We are a nation of laws only if the people in charge get to benefit from the rulings." Is this simply the nature of government, that those with power will always try to cover their backside? Certainly this is neither a uniquely American development nor a recent one. What steps can we as citizens take to become more just?

Kilkenny: This isn’t the case with direct democracy. There are still small towns (mostly in the northeastern states) where the people get to directly affect their government (one vote for each person, and other such radical notions.) If the people have direct involvement in their government, it’s easier to keep politicians in check. It’s when big business has enormous influence in government that things get out of control. Suddenly, politicians become more concerned with getting reelected than representing their constituents in a fair manner, so they rely on corporate money to win expensive elections. If Americans want a fairer, more progressive political system, they need to start supporting progressive, third party candidates, direct democracy initiatives, and the public funding of elections. Corporate donations poison democracy.

Connelly: As with many of the issues you have written about, you have not spared anyone regarding torture. The current administration, the former administration, "center left" Democrats, the beltway media, everyone takes their lumps. One thing you wrote recently really struck a chord with me, "Apparently, upholding the law is now a fringe issue." Again, this is certainly not a new development (Gerald Ford was lauded as a hero for pardoning Nixon, for instance) however, when do you believe the idea of accountability being considered "fringe" began? Who is mostly responsible for this trend?

Kilkenny: I think cronyism has been around since the beginning of humanity. Humans are weak, so of course our morality is subjective, which is why we rely upon the law to level the playing field and make life fair. Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon because they were of the same political and social class, and from Ford’s perspective, it was the right thing to do. According to the law, he was wrong, but the ruling class only applies the law when it’s convenient. I propose we apply the law all the time – to everyone – without exception. This includes the torture issue. Whether we’re talking about a CIA agent who supervised the waterboarding, or Donald Rumsfeld, torture is torture, and all parties should be held accountable for their actions.

Connelly: You have tied the torture debate into a larger dialogue concerning treatment of domestic prisoners, going so far as to compare the death penalty to Nazi practices. Why do you suppose that the American prison system is in the state it is in? Where does the ideology that mistreatment of criminals is okay because they are the "right people" to be mistreated come from?

Kilkenny: The Nazis experimented with their own form of lethal injections, so the fact that we call state executions “humane” is laughable. There’s no humane way to kill a human being, who doesn’t want to die. Unfortunately, prisons (much like war) are profitable, and the “right type” of people are the ones going to jail: the poor, people of color, immigrants, the mentally ill, etc. These people aren’t influential in the right circles, so they can disappear without too much fuss being made. There’s something that is now being called the “prison-industrial” complex, and it refers to private prisons. Building huge prisons, and keeping them staffed, is enormously expensive, so a select class of people is actually making a lot of money from jailing human beings. This is the same kind of privatization we see with our overstretched military and the emergence of the private mercenary company, Blackwater.
If wealthy people write the laws, and wealthy people vote to uphold the laws, then who do you think will benefit from the laws? The hypocrisy of the so-called justice system is most obvious in the War on Drugs. A white suburban teenager will get a slap on the wrist for possessing cocaine, while an inner-city, black teenager will get the book thrown at him for possessing some crack. That’s the same drugs (in different forms,) so why the huge sentencing discrepancy? It’s a power issue. It’s a class issue. The white kid is on the “right” side of the law, and the black kid is on the “wrong” side.

Connelly: I spoke with William Carrigan, a historian who has devoted a great deal of his career to writing about lynching, about what factors lead to lynching, and he said that often times the issue wasn't race at all, but class and economics. How are these same factors affecting our prison system today?

Kilkenny: Poor people go to jail, and poor people in America are overwhelming black and Hispanic. A while ago, I interviewed Matt Gonzalez, who is a California-based politician and lawyer, and was Ralph Nader’s running mate in 2008. Matt talked about how some of the public defenders assigned to poor people, who can’t afford other legal representation, are horrendous. In one example, a Texas public defender, fell asleep during the trial! These are the lawyers defending poor people, and no one really raises any objection to this because it’s only hurting poor people, and poor people have no power. Martin Luther King, Jr. knew class was one of the biggest issues in America, and before he was assassinated, he wanted to form a poor people’s party so they could have some leverage in Washington. I think that’s a wonderful idea, and if the unions combined forces with other poor people, they’d be unstoppable.
As for how these factors affect our prison system: our prisons are overcrowded and understaffed. Overcrowding leads to violence and disease. More than one in 100 adults are in prison, and prisoners face the threat of rape and are more likely to contract HIV, hepatitis, and tuberculosis. It’s totally inhumane and the model can’t sustain itself.
The drug war appears to be lost; many Americans feel that our money can be better spent elsewhere. Why do you suppose politicians are the only ones who cannot see this fact?
They see it, and they know it’s a waste of time. There are some stubborn, old mules, who have been around since the War on Drug’s birth that probably remain invested in it because of a pride thing, but most politicians know they’re never going to win a war against drugs. They’re not stupid. Of course, the idea of fighting a war on drugs is a useful tool. Whenever we invade a Central American country, and totally subvert the democratic will of the indigenous people, it looks vaguely suspicious, and Americans start to ask, “Wait a second, what’s this about?” But when the CIA can say, “Oh, War on Drugs business,” everyone calls down right away. Because drugs are naughty, and only bad men sell drugs.
Also, as I mentioned before, incarcerating people is profitable, so all of these prison profiteers (including Dick Cheney with Vanguard Group,) actually like seeing more people go to jail. As more citizens get thrown in jail, Cheney’s bank account expands.

Connelly: I read an interesting article on Mother Jones Magazine's website about an increase in elderly prisoners in the United States' correction facilities (the article is available here http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/04/aging-behind-bars) I read this article shortly after the first interview and thought, "what would Allison Kilkenny say about this?"

Kilkenny: It’s totally devastating. It’s laughable that American politicians talk about this country being a beacon of justice and freedom when we are literally throwing away our own citizens. I don’t know how anyone can read things like (from the MJ article): “In California, the population of prisoners over 55 doubled in the ten years from 1997 to 2006,” and “[The Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola,] has its own hospice, mortuary, and graveyard,” and not realize something is seriously wrong. America is moving toward a crib-to-coffin state prison system. (Note to Obamaniacs: I’m pretty sure that’s the opposite of “hope.”)

Connelly: Our interviews have a rather pessimistic tone, I'd like to end on a positive note: what gives you hope for the future?

Kilkenny: I think Americans are savvier news consumers than they were a decade ago. A certain dose of disillusionment can sometimes be a good thing. Citizens are currently seeing the truth about their country with the Wall Street bailouts. They see that there is a ruling class that takes care of its own, and that ruling class is very cozy with the mainstream media. Citizens know they’re only seeing a very select opinion when they watch Meet the Press on NBC, and so they’re looking elsewhere for their news.
But the outrage is still at its most superficial. People are pissed, and pundits like Glenn Beck are capitalizing on that anger in the cheapest possible way. However, I think citizens are close to realizing they’ve been sold a big, heaping lie called the American dream. With a little more outrage, and organization, something productive may come out of this mess.