The GroundUpGarrey and the role of educationNMSU’s president has a particular vision of why we study

No. 2 - Aug/Sept 2013Las Cruces, New Mexico

(No) Price: Voluntary Contributiongroundupnmsu.org

- Chronicle of a political prisoner / Crónica de una presa política, pp. 3 -- The Dream 9 and their critics, pp. 5 -

- The world of work: the business of caregiving, pp. 7 -

The way to consumer satisfaction: Zuhl to get café and bakeryBy AlAn Dicker AnD The GrounDup STAff

For a ruthless criticism of everything existing - Por una crítica despiadada de todo lo existente

Manning, Snow-den, Assange (and all of us) against the state

- conTinueD on pAGe 6 -

in his argument. “The old traditional public school system is not working as well as it did, and it has a lot to do with changes in society… so I think the educational system has to change to accommodate [those changes]. We thought at one time we [edu-cators] drove society, but we discovered we lost that race.

“And take a look at what’s happening now,” Ca-rruthers adds: “these kids running around with their iPhones, and their iPads; and they’re twitte-ring ... And so we in the educational systems have to get used to the way they do business now. They do business clearly differently … I think sometimes we’re still teaching as if we were back in the old days

of the lead pencil and the typewriter, and we’re not. We need to change our systems to accommodate these young people.”

Up to this point Carruthers has spoken in very general terms; but here he gives us a specific example of something that needs to

*Note: A number of individuals inter-viewed for this story asked to remain anon-ymous. Names are used where permission was explicitly granted to our writers. A café for Zuhl

This June, an enclosed space behind the first-floor reference desk was cleared out of Zuhl Library. Head of Access Services Susan Beck moved her office into a new space in Branson Library, while libraries staff cleared scanners and other equipment from another room used for processing re-quests such as interlibrary loans. The spa-ce is planned to house a Jazzman’s Café & Bakery under the management of Sodexo, but for now it remains empty. Though offi-cials confirmed that initial plans envisioned the café’s opening as early as this semester, they said the project was still in a “design

The NSA domestic spying scandal that blew up over the summer is only one of a number of cases that put US intelligence practices and the government’s campaign against whistleblowers and leakers in the international spotlight.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange conti-nues to be confined to the Ecuadorian em-bassy in London, facing suspiciously-timed sexual assault charges in Sweden and fea-ring extradition to the United States for his role in publishing thousands of secret do-cuments. Bradley Manning was convicted on 20 counts, including violations of the nearly century-old Espionage Act, and sen-tenced to 35 years in prison by a military court for leaking documents to Wikileaks. Former CIA and NSA operative, Edward Snowden, exposed numerous secret survei-llance programs - including data tracking practices that give government agencies access to internet and telephone records of millions - for which he is currently on the run overseas.

The cases illustrate the government’s maintained hostility towards dissent and whistleblowing (including under a suppo-sedly “progressive” administration). The campaign against whistleblowers, critics, and socially-minded “lawbreakers” is not limited to these high-profile figures. For example, six individuals besides Snowden and Manning have been charged under the Espionage Act alone during the Obama administration (compared to three in the previous fifty years). The concerted federal campaign to protect “intellectual property” and against open-internet activism drove one of its targets to suicide in January.

Nonetheless, the campaign may be most vicious outside the nation’s borders. Just one example is the three-year imprison-ment of Yemeni journalist Abdulelah Hai-der Shayie. Shayie exposed the U.S. respon-sibility for a deadly 2009 drone strike in his

- conTinueD on pAGe 4 -

President Carruthers takes office

- conTinueD on pAGe 4 -

Garrey CarruthersNMSU

This May, Carruthers was elected in a 3-2 vote by the Board of Regents as university president, a post vacated for still-un-clarified reasons by Barbara Couture last fall. Carruthers’ con-tract began his tenure June 1, with a salary of $385,000 per year. The selection was made along an essentially party-line vote (the three regents that voted for him clearly lean Republican), and many saw the selection process as a predetermined outcome.

NMSU’s new president has spent his first days visiting NMSU installations around the state, courting donors, making nume-rous minor administrative changes, and approving a pay raise plan for about half of NMSU faculty to bring their salaries up

phase” and much has yet to be finalized.The café would include a small seating

area and room for up to 26 people at a gi-ven time, according to architect’s plans. An initial estimate for construction costs done in June stood at $125,893.60, though As-sistant Vice President for Auxiliary Servi-ces Tammy Anthony said equipment costs would likely rise above $150,000 as well. Funding from the project would likely be shared, and an internal library source re-ported that the library planned to use at least $100,000 to finance the café project, which would presumably be repaid at a la-ter time by profits generated from sales. As-sociate Dean of the Library Norice Lee did not confirm this information, though she did say through email that “shared costs have been discussed,” and that final costs and financing have yet to be determined.

Though a café had been discussed for

years as a possibility, numerous library staff members said they were “surprised” or “shocked” to learn at the end of last semes-ter that the space was already determined and finalization seemingly imminent.

Among library staff members inter-viewed, reactions to the café varied. One librarian interviewed expressed total oppo-sition to any café in the libraries. Other staff members criticized aspects of the plan. “We do want a café,” said one, “We just feel like it doesn’t work where it’s at.” Multiple in-terviewees questioned the use of space and funds for the project when lack of space and funding are already major areas of concern. Although Wendy Simpson, Library Specia-list, Senior, said she thinks the location is “perfect” and that the administration “really want[s] to make the library a nice place to be,” she expressed reservations about who would manage the establishment. “Anything - conTinueD on pAGe 6 -

but a corporation like Sodexo,” she said.Beck said she did not mind the reloca-

tion of her office and considered that there are now “enhanced services” in Branson because of it. She said she had a “neutral” opinion on the café, and that she was told months ago that her office may eventually be moved to make room for such a pro-ject. However, her relocation into what was Branson’s periodicals reading room has forced the academic journal collection to a request-only area behind the circulation counter, which upset some professors and library staff members who spoke to The GroundUp.

Nonetheless, Lee said concerns from fa-culty and staff “have not been brought to [the] attention” of Library administration. This may be because there is little room

Garrey Carruthers has worked as a professor of agricultural economics and dean of NMSU’s Colle-ge of Business, and he instituted a public education reform whose centerpiece was accountability mea-sures directing schools to make annual reports to the state during his term as governor, for which he was named one of the “Top Ten Governors for Edu-cation” by Fortune Magazine in 1990. He was vice chairman of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, served on the New Mexico Education and Accountability Task Force, and most notoriously was National Chairman of The Advan-cement of Sound Science Coalition, a group funded by Phillip Morris which aimed to discredit research that pointed to the negative health effects of tobac-co and the existence global warming, among others, as “unsound science.” Certainly, there is plenty to draw from to perform a deep analysis of Carruthers’ vision for NMSU and his ideas on the role of education in our society.

But during a visit to NMSU’s Grants Community College in July, Carruthers recorded a brief radio interview that we believe neatly summarizes an important part of his current thinking on the mat-ter, which illustrates, after a brief analysis, where the differences between us lie.

The following is a synopsis of the parts of the interview we find pertinent:

Carruthers starts out with admirable indignation, noting that the high dropout rates and low education levels in New Mexico are unacceptable, and goes on to note the importance of two-year schools, like Grants, in addressing that problem. “In New Mexico, the one thing we miss most of all in terms of recruiting business and keeping business is an internationally competitive workforce, and that workforce will be developed more by two-year colleges than it will be four-year colleges,” he says.

Carruther’s feels this workforce “upgrade” has not been accep-tably facilitated by the traditional schooling model, a central point

2 The GroundUp

This is the second issue of The GroundUp. We are an independent publication of criticism, analysis, culture and politics. While the paper is a brainchild of Aggie Solidarity, it is not that organization’s mouthpiece and the work and opi-nions included are those solely of the individual authors. Material is generated by the staff and also by contributors who submit material. The GroundUp aims to be:

1) Critical - In our view, there are enough me-dia outlets that repeat and celebrate the views of authority figures. There are enough that hide behind the idea of journalistic objectivi-ty to avoid uncomfortable issues and voicing dissent. There are enough that produce inane content to satisfy and perpetuate the consu-mer demand for garbage. We believe there is a necessity for unrelentingly critical voices both locally and in the world at large, and we aim to be one of those voices. In short, our aim is “a ruthless criticism of everything existing.”*2) Radical - In order to carry out a valid criti-cism, we recognize the necessity of going to the root (the radical) of the problems we choose to address. Radicalism, far from a cultish dogma-tism, requires theoretical and analytical tools that allow us to see through the fog, past straw man arguments and build a framework for un-derstanding the world as it truly works as well as what must be done to build a better one. The GroundUp is committed to fostering a radical consciousness in our community.3) Sound, accurate and open - We aim to be accurate in our use of facts, figures and state-

The GroundUp points of principle

An first-hand view of the repression of protest

“This is a business organization.”-Garrey Carruthers on NMSU athletics (from the Sun-News, August 25)

If you are not aware of the firestorm (it really amounted to an exchange of condescending letters and an online petition, but exaggeration is a journalistic tradition) that was set off over athletics funding last semester, here is what you need to get up to date:

The controversy erupted when then-president-in-waiting Garrey Carruthers stated in a forum that he would consider dropping the football team to a lower, non-bowl-eligible division (Carruthers also proceeded to use bogus informa-tion and belittle students in response to a question about athletics funding. He later backtracked about dropping down a division and also admitted to mis-representing the facts on the funding issue.). Apparently, the outcry from Ag-gie football fans was so great that Board of Regents head Mike Cheney felt it necessary to pen a letter pledging unwavering support for top-notch football at NMSU and also taking shots at anyone who dares to question university ad-ministration. “Anyone can criticize,” our top regent boldly asserted, “[But] It takes fortitude to be a supporter on our way to achieving the success we desi-re.” The letter was sent out in a university-wide email on the last day of classes and published in local media outlets. It received critical responses from faculty, community members and members of Aggie Solidarity, and also prompted a petition to stop the annual transfer of $4.1 million from the academic fund to athletics, which gained over 1,800 signatures.

The debate over athletics funding at NMSU is not new and often devolves into a limited discussion of the cost-effectiveness of the program or inane argu-ments over the importance of sports for campus life. Among the issues that de-serve discussion are the role of athletics in public education, how to mitigate the detrimental effects of big-time sports on campus, and the priorities of university administration as expressed by its vision and allocation of resources.

The administration, on this and other issues, has limited itself to playing de-fense in the press, instead of engaging in an open, horizontal dialogue with its critics. Over the summer, members of Aggie Solidarity invited the regents to help us organize such a dialogue through emails, hard letters and in the local media. Unfortunately, our attempts have been met with the evasive and condes-cending attitude that characterizes our administration. Nonetheless, we conti-nue to invite the regents, and particularly Chairman Mike Cheney, to a public and unrestricted debate over the athletics funding controversy and other issues.

***Since the regents have refused to consider such a dialogue with us, we, students

affiliated with Aggie Solidarity, take the initiative to publicly issue the following challenge: that any of the regents debate athletics and related administrative is-sues on Monday, September 23 at 7:00pm in the Corbett Center Auditorium. We guarantee a civil and open atmosphere. The public is encouraged to attend and join the dialogue. We believe that the university community, and not just upper administrators, should have a say in these matters, and this is the start.

Students challenge regents to debate athletics funding

Message to new studentsWelcome to New Mexico State University – where the vital work of student government begins with handing out lollipops to potential voters.Welcome to NMSU – where important decisions shall not be made without the guidance of a hired outside consultant.Welcome to NMSU – where games are worth a few million out of the academic budget every year.Welcome to NMSU – where Sodexo controls everything but Baltic Avenue and the get-out-of-jail-free card.Welcome to NMSU – where the regents think “If we aspire to be known as one of America's great universities, we are going to need to act like we are one of those universities today! That is what is called vision!” is good writing.Welcome to NMSU – where the prudent carry skunk repellent after dark.Welcome to NMSU – where we pay homage to veteran members of the country’s most corrupt political institutions – unfaithful husbands included, of course – over and over and over…Welcome to NMSU – where Your Library’s Collection Does Not Currently Contain This Title is now the most often read journal on campus.Welcome to NMSU – where banking experience magically opens every door.Welcome to NMSU – where the only things keeping this enterprise from even greater success are a rebranding campaign and an attitude adjustment. Welcome to NMSU – one of the best in the country! …according to this one list we heard about...

By Top STuDenT Ayn von hAySeS

Academics

“...when we support our board of regents; success will be ours!”-Regent Cheney

“It takes fortitude to be a supporter on our way to achieving the success we desire.”

-Mike Cheney

08-09/2013

ments, as we consider commitment to the truth a cornerstone of any sound argument. We hope to be held accountable by readers in this regard. The GroundUp, furthermore, is open to all re-asoned criticism or differing perspectives, and we will not avoid productive debate.4) Independent and against the dominant party politics - We are an independent publica-tion without loyalties or obligations to any out-side institution. We aim to not only maintain our independence but also to reject bourgeois party politics and the existing institutions of authority, whose manipulative mechanisms pe-netrate through all levels of our society and de-fend the interests of those with power. With the scrap of power that this paper and our position as students afford us, we see our responsibility as challenging authority and privilege, where-ver we find them. We will be a megaphone for no one other than los de abajo.5) In solidarity - We stand in solidarity with all those struggling for a just world and against oppression, tyranny, exploitation and degrada-tion and social exclusion, whatever form the-se may take. Our idea of solidarity implies the need to not only stand with those raising their voices and taking action within our own com-munities or our own national borders, but also with the working classes, the dispossessed, the oppressed, the freedom fighters and the part-ners in the struggle around the world. Solidari-ty knows no borders.*Karl Marx, “For a Ruthless Criticism of Everything Existing,” in Robert C. Tucker, The Marx-Engels Reader (1978).

The GroundUp is an alternative publication at New Mexico State University that seeks to provide a space for critical perspectives from the radical left on current issues both at and outside the university. Writing in The GroundUp reflects the opinions of individual authors, who may or may not be named. We publish material in English and Spanish as well as encourage submissions in both languages. The paper is self-funded and has no price. Any monetary contributions will go towards the costs of printing and distribution; they can be arranged by contacting us at groundupnmsu.org.

Con este periódico esperamos crear un espacio en la Universidad Estatal de Nuevo México para perspectivas críticas desde la izquierda radical sobre temas de actualidad tanto dentro como fuera de la universidad. Artículos en The GroundUp reflejan las opiniones de autores individuales, quienes pueden o no ser nombrados. Publicamos material tanto en español como en inglés y damos la bienvenida a contribuciones en ambos idiomas. The GroundUp se autofinancia y no tiene costo. Cualquier colaboración monetaria se utilizará para cubrir los costos de impresión y de distribución.

The GroundUpSubmissions, comments, donations, etc:

An open invitation to:

The Aggie SolidarityReading Society

Fall 2013Our reading group(s) will meet regularly du-

ring the fall semester, starting soon. Tentative topics this semester are contemporary Marxist/

left writers and political economy including comparative readings from distinct schools of thought. Open to anyone interested in serious

discussion of texts and topics.Inquiries/join: aggiesolidarity@gmail.com

By MeMBerS of AGGie SoliDAriTy

Más en / More at:groundupnmsu.org

•Film analysis: Brakhage’s The Act of Seeing with One’s Own Eyes• Full text of “Chronicle of a poli-tical prisoner”•Texto completo de “Crónica de una presa política”•Municipal government and the Las Cruces Country Club develo-pment •Links and past articles

Online: groundupnmsu.orgEmail: groundupnmsu@gmail.com

3The GroundUp

...Una vez ahí, comenzaron a tomarnos nuestros da-tos, una y otra vez, nombre, edad, ocupación. Nombre, edad, ocupación. Nombre, edad, ocupación. En el fondo del estacionamiento estaban aproximadamente otras seis personas y, tras nuestra llegada, arribaron más. Todos es-taban golpeados, algunos sangraban o no podían caminar con normalidad. Tras catearnos, nos tomaron fotografías y nos ordenaron subir a lo que sería la parte trasera de la recepción del MP.1 Era un espacio como de cinco por siete, con unas nueve sillas, insuficiente para soportar el sensible aumento de detenidos.

Buscando no separarnos mucho, permanecimos for-mados uno tras otro y nos recorríamos conforme llegaban más personas. Al final éramos cerca de treinta gentes entre heridos, personal con libretas tomando los endemonia-dos mismos datos y policías. Eran ya casi las 21:00 horas cuando nos ordenaron apagar los teléfonos y arribó un grupo de uniformados, el cual comenzó a repartirse en-tre los detenidos. A las chicas nos separaron unos pasos y nos asignaron policías mujeres, mientras que a los chicos les colocaron a un lado lo que conoceríamos durante toda la estancia como su “chambelán”. Después sabríamos que esos mismos policías que acabábamos de conocer serían quienes en su declaración nos acusarían de haberlos agre-dido física, verbal y, por la ambigüedad del delito de ata-ques a la paz pública y el de ultrajes a la autoridad, hasta psicológicamente.

Nos formaron de nuevo y nos quitaron cinturones, pier-cings, agujetas, listones de cabello, cordones de sudaderas, aretes y todo con lo que pudiéramos realizar un atentado homicida o una fuga delirante. Comenzaron a registrar nuestras pertenencias en hojas blancas y al terminar, nos formaron de nuevo para pasar al médico, que no era más que un caballero de bata blanca que no estaba autorizado a administrar ni una aspirina. Se limitaba a abrir un expe-diente, a pedirte, como todos ahí, el nombre, la edad y la ocupación y a llenar formularios en los que te preguntaba si estabas herido y de ser así, cómo te habías hecho daño. Lo que no decía era que lo que le contestaras podía ser con-siderado para la declaración, no decía que todo estaba yen-do no sólo a tu expediente médico, sino al del proceso pe-nal. Decir que iríamos a ver al médico nunca fue más literal.

Luego, papeleo. A todos nos dieron botellas con agua, un sándwich, una barra de amaranto, una fruta y nuestros chambelanes nos regalaron a mí y a mis compañeros un par de latas de refresco y una barra integral sabor a fresa. Los policías parecían aburridos, resignados, mi chambelán me contó que hacía un par de días había tenido que per-manecer en el MP toda la noche debido a lo ocurrido en Tepito2 y que ahora tendría que faltar de nuevo a su casa. Llamó a su madre delante de mí “no voy a llegar… sí, otra vez… Por lo de la marcha del Poli,3 sí… con cuidado”. Me miraba con lástima y me preguntaba dónde estudiaba. “Se ve que todos ustedes son niños bien, para qué se meten en estas cosas, ¿ya ves? te hubieras ido a tu casa, a nosotros sólo nos mandan como apoyo, no nos metemos a los gol-pes, ¡mira cómo traes la boca!”....

Nuestras mochilas les fueron entregadas a los conocidos y familiares que ya habían comenzado a arribar al MP. Era

ese el preámbulo para bajarnos a galeras. Por la recepción se escuchaban gritos y supe por algún murmullo que ya había salido la primera concentración demandando la li-bertad de todxs lxs detenidxs. “Ya mandamos gente a Bu-careli”, escuché reportar a uno de los funcionarios del MP.

...Once there, they began to take our data, again and again, name, age, occupation. Name, age, occupation. Name, age, occupation. At the back of the parking lot were about six other people and, after us, more arrived. All were beaten, some bleeding or unable to walk normally. After searching us, they took photos and ordered us up to what would be the back of the reception room of the MP.1 It was a five by seven space, with about nine chairs, insufficient for the growing number of detainees.

Trying to not separate ourselves from one another, we

remained in formation, one after the other, and made spa-ce as more arrived. At the end we were about thirty people counting the injured, the personnel with notebooks that wrote down the same damned data and police. It was now nearly 9:00 p.m. when we were ordered to shut off our pho-nes and a group of officers arrived, who began to divide up the arrested. The women were separated and assigned to female officers, while each man was assigned what we’d come to call “dates,” to stay by their side for the duration of their stay. We would later discover that the officers we had just met were the same ones who would accuse us in written declarations of having physically, verbally and even psychologically assaulted them, applying the vague defini-tions of “attacks on the public peace” and “disrespect of authority.”

We were lined up again and asked to remove our belts, piercings, shoelaces, hair ribbons, sweatshirt laces, ea-

rrings and anything else we could use to carry out a homi-cidal attack or delirious escape attempt. They began to register our belongings on blank sheets and then put us in line again to go to the doctor, who was no more than a man in a white coat, not authorized to admi-nister as much as an aspirin. He simply opened a file, asking, like everyone there, your name, age and occupation, and also to fill out a form asking whether you were injured and, if so, how you had injured yourself. What it didn’t say was that whatever you answered could be used for the declaration; it didn’t say that everything went not only into your medical file but also that of your penal process. Saying that we would go to see the doctor was never more literal.

Then, paperwork. We all were given bottles of water, a sandwich, an amaranto bar, a fruit, and our dates gave my compañeros and me a couple of cans of soda and a strawberry cereal bar. The cops seemed bo-red, resigned; my date told me that a couple of days ago she had to stay in the MP all night

due to what happened in Tepito2 and would now have to spend another night away from home. She called her mother in front of me, “I won’t make it... yes, again... Be-cause of the march of the Poli,3 yes... Take care.” She looked at me with pity and asked where I studied: “You’re clearly all good kids. Why get involved with these things, you know? If you would have just gone home, they only send us as backup, we don’t get involved throwing punches. Look at your mouth!”...

Our backpacks were turned over to the friends and rela-tives who had already begun to arrive at the MP. That was the preamble to our being taken down to the basement. Walking past reception we heard screams and I knew by some murmuring that the first concentration to demand freedom for those arrested had come out. “We’re sending people to Bucareli,”4 I heard one of the MP functionaries report.

One after another we descended down the stairs and I was able to make my personal hypothesis of why they ca-lled that place the “bunker.” A long corridor with dozens of cells appeared before us and I had a terrible premonition of where I’d spend the night. The floor had puddles of what may have been water and there were food and tetra pack

Crónica de una presa políticaChronicle of a political prisoner

June 10, 2013What shouldn’t be told

The author, a student of literature at the National Autono-mous University of Mexico and member of the youth wing of the Liga de Trabajadores por el Socialismo and the re-volutionary-feminist collective Pan y Rosas, was detained along with more than 20 other activists on June 10 in Mexi-co City. They were beaten and arrested by city police after a commemorative march for the anniversary of the Halco-nazo of 1971, an event in which dozens of student protes-tors were killed by a paramilitary group under government orders. This year’s march was marked by a clash between a group of protestors and police; however, all arrests were made far from the site of the conflict and nearly all were released days later for lack of evidence. Across the country, activists and young people continue to feel the weight of repressive force against them including increasingly hostile crowd control tactics used by police. Here we publish a se-lection from the chronicle that Nancy wrote about her ex-perience. The selection begins as Nancy and other activists arrive at a holding pen after being surrounded and arrested by police. To read the complete text, visit groundupnmsu.org.

10 de junio del 2013Que no le digan, que no le cuenten

Una vista de primera mano de la represión de la protestapor nAncy cornejo

An first-hand view of the repression of protestBy nAncy cornejo

La autora de este texto, una estudiante de Letras en la Uni-versidad Nacional Autónoma de México y militante del grupo juvenil de la Liga de Trabajores por el Socialismo y la agrupación revolucionario-feminista Pan y Rosas, fue detenida junto a más de 20 activistas el pasado 10 de junio en la Ciudad de México. Fueron golpeados y detenidos por la policía capitalina tras retirarse de una marcha para con-memorar el aniversario del Halconazo de 1971, una fecha en que decenas de estudiantes fueron asesinados por un grupo paramilitar bajo órdenes del gobierno. La marcha estuvo marcada por un enfrentamiento entre policías y un grupo de manifestantes; sin embargo, todas las detencio-nes se dieron lejos del lugar de la conflagración y casi to-dos los detenidos fueron liberados días después por falta de evidencias. A lo largo del país, los activistas y jóvenes continúan experimentando el uso de la fuerza represiva en su contra, incluyendo la creciente utilización de tácticas hostiles por parte de la policía. A continuación, publica-mos una selección de la crónica que Nancy escribió sobre su experiencia. La selección empieza cuando Nancy y otros compañeros arriban a una instalación de Ministerio Públi-co después de ser cercados y detenidos por los granaderos. Para leer el texto completa, visita groundupnmsu.org.

Left: Police as they attack and arrest members of the group with which Nancy left the June 10 march. Above: Students and activists march through Mexico City streets to demand the liberation of the political prisoners.

Izquierda: La policía en el momento de atacar y dete-ner a miembros del grupo con que se retiró Nancy de la marcha del 10 de junio. Arri-ba: Estudiantes y activistas marchan por las calles de México para exigir la libera-ción de los detenidos.

LTS-México

- SiGue en lA páGinA 7 -

- conTinueD on pAGe 5 -

1 El Ministerio Público (MP) es un órgano de la Federación mexicana con responsabilidades que incluyen la investigación, la acusación judicial y trabajo policíaco.2 Se refiere a una operación policíaca masiva en el barrio popular capitalino de Tepito, que se efectuó días antes de los eventos narrados.3 El Instituto Politécnico Nacional (el “Poli”) es una universidad pública en el Distrito Federal. La oficial parece equivocarse al creer que fueron estudiantes del Poli quienes dirigieron la marcha.4 La avenida Bucareli, en donde una manifestación se reunió para exigir la liberación de los detenidos.

2

1 The Ministerio Público (MP) is a federal agency with duties that include prosecutorial work, investigation and policing.2 Days before the events narrated here, a massive police operation took place in the hard-scrabble Mexico City barrio of Tepito.3 The “Poli,” short for Instituto Politécnico Nacional, is a university in Mexico City. The officer seems to mistake the march as being directed by Politécnico students.4 Bucareli is a major avenue near downtown Mexico City where a support rally congregated.

te fields of study have shifted over the past decades from education to business and professional studies, and most of the growing population of students in these fields or at two-year schools will never take more than a couple of ba-sic classes in the social sciences. But they may be shying away from history and similar fields for factors other than simple lack of interest (Do these areas really inspire less passion in young people than during the past century, an-yway?): they are being taught less in elementary, middle and high schools in favor of subjects measured by standar-dized testing, for example; and humanities are less prioriti-zed in a job-market and donor-obsessed education system than the fields of study related to industry or finance. This is problematic because the areas of study like history that promote critical thinking are vital in a society that aims to have some semblance of democracy. Conveniently for those whose ideology leans towards the promotion of big business, the fields of study students seem to want to go into just so happen to be those which businesses need wor-kers in!

People are turned off to traditional universities by their distant intellectualism, so the argument goes, and the an-swer is to marginalize everything intellectual and trans-form the role of the university from allowing individuals to reach their full potential, understand their society and help transform it, to one of simply giving individuals tools to fit into the needs of the business world. Instead of pro-posing cultural and structural changes in the universities, bringing students and academics in the ‘elite’ fields down from their ivory towers into constant and meaningful contact with wage workers or ‘disa-ffected’ young people (or even simply changing the way we teach subjects like history), the solution is apparently to put those subjects on a shelf for when hobbyists actively search them out. Since this is already a real phe-nomenon, we can already see some of the unintended consequences of the type of policy Carruthers advocates for: these include a de facto segrega-tion of the ‘elite’ subjects and the ‘ple-beian’ ones in higher education, with students at branch campus possibly never even having to encounter an anthropology or law major, for exam-ple; and a financial starving of certain subjects (e.g. history, English, philo-sophy) that now have to compete for funding with new branch campuses or expanded technical programs, along with their more profitable traditional campus rivals.

We do not argue that the teaching of practical skills undermines the value of higher education, or that one is more important than the other. On the con-trary, while we appreciate Carruthers’ premise – that education needs to do a better job of adapting to the interests and real needs of students – we believe his vision of the problem and its solu-tions is narrow. Our discourse must escape such restrictive contours. Ins-tead of picking technical and profes-sional studies over the humanities, the arts and the traditionally ‘elite’ fields, we need to find out how to greater in-tegrate these areas of study. We need an education model that doesn’t mar-ginalize either practical skills or social theory: we should not have to choose between mechanical skills and history.

3) Teaching methods need to change

Along with what we learn in schools, Carruthers points out that how we learn also needs to change: convenien-ce and ease are the main factors that must be prioritized. While we believe that this convenience (what we would call accessibility) is indeed important, it is necessary to re-cognize the difference between promoting greater access to education and diluting its content. Online classes can be great and need to be part of higher education, but at the same time, college studies are about more than going through textbooks and completing tests. It may not be en-tirely beneficial that students can receive a degree without stepping foot on the campus. We are living through a partialization of education that is putting more and more emphasis on the skills needed to perform a certain job and less on complete, well-rounded courses of study for all. Ins-tead of a prioritization of increasing the number of degree-holders at all costs to boost ‘competitiveness,’ we need to also prioritize developing intellectually full human beings, no matter their job category, and that will involve challen-ging them and introducing them to things they may not initially find as interesting as a car motor.

Carruthers clearly favors a business model of education which views what goes on in schools as a product that ne-eds to be sold; it seems likely that anyone who believes in education with any sort of broader social mission will need to fight tooth and nail to avoid being further marginalized under NMSU’s business-minded administration. Organi-zational steps should be taken to do so.

4 The GroundUp 08-09/2013

change: “I think technical career training … may be one of the most important things we can do to capture those kids who are thinking about dropping out. They’ll tell you, ‘I don’t see what the value of an education is. Why should I study history? It’s no big deal with me.’ But if you talk to them about cars: [they’ll say] ‘Ah, I like cars.. I’d like to know how to fix my car.’ You get them into auto mechanics, let’s say, and all of a sudden they’re in school...” From here, Carruthers says, some of these young students at two-year schools may graduate and go on to a four-year degree in mechanical engineering or a similar field. “So we have to appeal to them, to show them something that they might like to do, and then let them discover themselves.”

He returns to a critique of the traditional model, “But just to send them down the conveyor line, as we’ve done in the past, just isn’t working very well.” He then continues to explain how two-year associate’s degrees can easily be be turned into bachelor’s degrees through online courses of study, citing the Business and Hotel, Restaurant and Tourism Management schools in particular. “We’ll finish the last two years online at New Mexico State and they’ll have a [bachelor’s degree] from New Mexico State and ne-ver having set foot on the campus at New Mexico State.” ….. “Maybe they’d be more encouraged to say, ‘I can get a bachelor’s degree. I didn’t know it was that easy, and I didn’t know it was that inexpensive.’”

Carruthers’ discourse can be divided into three parts, and we will briefly address each:

1) the importance of two-year schools in building an “in-

ternationally competitive workforce”Carruthers is correct to highlight the importance of

community colleges such as Grants. The enormous growth of community colleges over the last 30 years has brought the opportunity to access higher education to many pla-ces and people who were previously largely ignored by the education system as a whole, and this access has allowed many a social mobility they may not have otherwise had. Nonetheless, we believe his idea of these school’s overall social role is problematic. His assertion that the education system has a responsibility to “upgrade” the workforce in order to make it “internationally competitive” shows who-se class interests he speaks for: the big business owners. They need a more highly-educated labor pool to be able to make higher profits here, so it’s our job to give it to them, and that’s why we should develop two-year schools.

Though the practical degrees for the job market offered at community colleges are certainly attractive for potential students, accessible costs and convenience of schedule - as well as the easy availability of credit to finance studies - likely bear more responsibility for the growth at these ins-titutions. Carruthers’ exaltation of the community college model, moreover, should be tempered by the numerous unresolved challenges posed by their growth, particularly the need to sufficiently fund them, often pulling from the same pools as traditional four-year colleges (which haven’t gotten any smaller).

2) Schools have to gear their offerings towards technical

and professional training in order to graduate more young people

Society has changed, and so should education. On this point, Carruthers and the writers are in complete agree-ment, though likely not on how it should change. But let us jump straight to Carruthers’ narrative about history and cars, which is probably the most telling part of the inter-view. Obviously, he does not simply refer to history, but rather any of the humanities, social sciences or ‘elite’ fields that do not seem to interest students anymore; and since they aren’t interested, we should find out what they like and offer that instead.

What is interesting is that Carruthers is not referring to something that needs to happen, but rather an already-existing phenomenon: the most popular undergradua-

- conTinueD froM pAGe 1 -

Carruthers: New president promotes an eduction-as-business model

to market standards.But the most striking moves by Carruthers so far, as should be expected,

have been his appointments. He quickly gained points with many faculty and the board members who voted against him for president by hiring the runner-up, Dan Howard, as Provost and Executive Vice President. Howard was the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Colorado-Denver and previously spent about two decades as a biology pro-fessor and administrator at NMSU. The Regents even allowed Carruthers to bypass a university rule mandating a nationwide search to fill the position. All agreed a nationwide search was unneeded, particularly after the presidential search committee was heavily criticized in the spring for hiring an outside consultant to search for candidates – at a cost of $90,000 – because many saw the presidential search as a simple formality without any genuine intention of selecting anyone other than Carruthers.

Eyebrows were raised by Carruthers’ appointment of ex-Doña Ana Com-munity College President Margie Huerta to a position as special assistant to the President, in charge of a project to bridge the transfer process between DACC and the main campus. Only last semester, Huerta notably oversaw the scandal which led to the DACC nursing program’s loss of accreditation, for which students filed a lawsuit against the college in May. Though set to retire in January and receiving a salary of $173,000 - paid in conjunction between DACC and NMSU - Huerta’s start date was repeatedly pushed back over the summer and she remained on “approved, paid leave status” as of press time, though president’s office spokesperson Justin Bannister gave no hints as to the justification. The nursing program at DACC, according to Bannister, is working towards reaccreditation, and former Vice President for Business and Finance Andy Burke has taken over as interim president of the college.

DACC also underwent an administrative reorganization over the sum-mer which gave former Small Business Development Center director Fred Owensby an effective promotion, putting him in charge of Adult Basic Edu-cation and Workforce Development, which oversees numerous departments. Owensby, interestingly, is Carruthers’ son-in-law, though Human Resources Manager Mack Adams said the new president played no role in the hiring and that the hiring process began before Carruthers was selected.

Carruthers also created a new position in the athletics department (Depu-ty Athletics Director) for David McCollum, who was previously owner of the Las Cruces Bulletin and publisher of the Sun-News before that. “We are going to manage the NMSU Athletics Department more like a business enterprise,” Carruthers said in an August 21 press release, explaining the hiring of busi-nessman McCollum, mentioning the need to “grow” the program through “through increased attendance, donor participation, sponsorships and mar-keting.”

- conTinueD froM pAGe 1 -

First days of a new presidency

Staff editorial (August 27, 2013). See more at groundupnmsu.org.

NO TO MILITARY INTERVENTION IN SYRIAA LA INTERVENCIÓN BÉLICA EN SIRIA

5The GroundUp

The Dream 9 and their critics

2

By AlAn Dicker

An August 3 New America Media article, “‘Dream 9’ Tactics Takes Debate Beyond Halls of Congress,” illustrated a long-standing divide within the immigrants’ rights mo-vement - what we will refer to here as the divide between the parliamentarians (whose main focus is working for re-form in legislatures and legal institutions) and the action-oriented. The particular issue in question was this: whether a group of undocumented protesters who willingly faced arrest to push for the DREAM Act and an immigration overhaul have advanced, or set back, the movement.

On July 22, the nine protesters - all of whom were raised in the U.S. but lacked citizenship papers - were arrested at the Nogales, Arizona-Sonora border crossing seeking to enter the U.S. and sent to an immigration detention cen-ter in nearby Eloy. What made this occurrence noteworthy (after all, more people than ever before are being arrested and deported by immigration authorities) was that the nine had publicized their crossing attempt beforehand and expected to be detained. While they left the U.S. for di-fferent reasons - to be with an elderly relative, to attend college, to maintain their families together, or just to take part in the protest - their organized act brought internatio-nal attention to the youth without legal right to live in the places they call home, as well as the deeper-seated issue of the arbitrary nature of national borders and legal citizens-hip distinctions.

As the New America Media article by Valeria Fernández made clear, however, many in the immigrants’ movement are at odds over the methods used to advance the cause: “What we ought to be talking tonight is about the politics in the House and the Republican Party,” former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association Da-vid Leopold was cited saying; “But instead our focus is on this action, so it pulls away attention from the big issue, which is fixing the system so 11 million can get out of the shadows.” In a similar article in the New York Times (Ju-lia Preston and Rebekah Zemansky, “Demonstration at Arizona Border Divides Supporters of Immigration Over-haul,” August 5), Leopold goes on: “To suggest that anyone should be able to walk out of the U.S. and turn around and knock on the door and come back in, I don’t know anybo-dy who thinks that we ought to have an open border.”

Illinois representative Luis Gutierrez, one of Congress’s most “progressive” members and sponsor of the DREAM Act, spoke along similar, and paradoxical, lines in a state-ment to The Daily Beast: “I do not agree with the actions taken by the DREAM 9 because current immigration law is not on their side” (Terry Greene Sterling, “The Dream 9 Ripple Effect,” August 4).

Professor and vocal immigration reform backer Stephan Nuño is also quoted in the Times, uncomfortably saying, “You’re making it much harder for Congress to give you a pathway to citizenship when you gamble.” Reading Nuño’s previous writing, many of his criticisms of the DREAMers - young activists who specifically push for the DREAM Act - are valid: He fears they divert attention to the unjust situation affecting them in particular, instead of focusing

on the brutality of the immigration system as a whole. He also posits that the Obama administration may push the DREAM Act as a “pressure valve” in place of pushing a comprehensive immigration reform (see “Dream On: Im-migration Reform should not focus on Dreamers,” NBC Latino, November 13, 2012).

He also believes the DREAMers’ “travel[ing] around the country challenging authority” and “flaunt[ing] the law” create a negative public image of the undocumented: “This image is damaging to the prize,” he writes.

So, immigration activists, the parliamentarians have a message for you: Stay in your place. Keep your head down, keep doing the work that bona fide Americans want you to do, and hope that the political class gives you a “pathway to citizenship,” or a guest worker program, or whatever. Most importantly, just shut the fuck up, and let the lawmakers, NGOs, journalists, and attorneys do their jobs.

***Few like to admit it, but there is a battle being fought

within the immigrants’ and workers’ movement over both strategy and tactics. The problem is that both Nuño and Leopold, and the parliamentarians in general, see a yes vote on some potential immigration bill as “the prize,” and that the way to attain it is to push an image of immigrants as passive, lowly, and unthreatening. Never mind that the reform they are currently trying to pass would exclude a great part of the undocumented population; nevermind that it would keep much of immigrant labor in an under-class through onerous citizenship “pathway” requirements and/or a temporary guest worker program; never mind that it would leave intact the unworkable immigration structure that helped to create the “problem” of illegal im-migration in the first place; never mind that it would even strengthen the “security” and incarceration regimes that repress and terrorize people across borders...

The “comprehensive” law that these weak-kneed refor-mers would presumably claim as a victory only promises to get more and more unsavory as it goes through nego-tiations in congress, subject to the pressure of business interests that need immigrant labor and conservative po-liticians that would rather see immigrants given one-way tickets out of the country. To even begin to move the deba-te in the other direction, towards addressing the economic forces that drive mass migration, workplace exploitation and the inherent flaws of the immigration legal system, the aims and methods of the movement will need to push the politicians and business interests back into a corner. While it’s true that even the most minimal reforms would bring concrete benefits to many of our society’s most vulnerable - which makes many settle for begging for table scraps - we’ll get them and more if we aim our sights higher and push harder, attacking the problems at their roots.

The immigrants’ movement needs to begin to look for long-term “prizes” above and beyond reform laws - more than citizenship and “humane” standards. The inhumani-ty, blindness, and degradation in the current system have their roots in the very existence of national divisions, na-tionalist ideologies, and the economic forces that drive mi-

grations, among other factors - and instead of working to weaken these, activists are often fortifying them by “wrap-ping themselves in the flag.” The movement needs to turn its attention to overcoming today’s problems at their roots, and it will only be a strong, transformative political agent by taking up systematic, long-term goals and bringing up uncomfortable questions.

We should be critical of the DREAMers’ program - after all, its long-term strategy is as parliamentarian as that for immigration reform (Please señor congresista, be so kind as to give us papers!), and even more narrow. But we’re hardly to the point of discussing a more transformative strategy. As the last few years have shown, the old-hat begging tac-tics of the well-behaved reformers have proven to be both demeaning to immigrants themselves and little-effective: the DREAMers and other young people willing to make sacrifices by confronting state power are starting to show us an alternative.

What we want to point out here is that the increasin-gly daring and confrontational methods of the “action-oriented” - though still largely moderate - sector of the immigrants’ movement, including those of the Dream 9, show an increasingly clear understanding of the need for more radical organizing and confrontational political ac-tions, as well as the limitations of working within the two-party political system. Even if their tactics detracted from efforts to pass a reform bill (which there’s little evidence for, in any case), the action-oriented activists are taking a step towards something bigger: directing the movement towards long-term, radical goals and independent, trans-formative politics.

Tactics and ‘prizes’ in a social movement

A poster pressing for the release of the Dream 9, from before their liberation on August 7. After being held in detention, the nine were given temporary visas while their cases are processed.

DreamActivist

wrappers everywhere. I was afraid – why deny it? – when I saw about seventy men lying at the back of the corridor, watching us attentively. “You’re a woman, the tortu-re is different,” a compañero had told me in the patrulla, and at that moment I knew what he meant.

Knowing your rights is useless if no one respects them. That’s how the legal pact and

Political prisoner: Student activist recounts detention after June 10 prostest march in Mexico City

- conTinueD froM pAGe 3 -

the application of bourgeois justice works. They took the front and pro-file mug shots of us, with a label stating our charges. It wasn’t the same for ever-yone. Some for theft, others for disturban-

ces, others for damage to the property of others, all of us there were tacitly obliged to take the blame. When they covered my fin-gers in ink I knew that, without ever being formally notified of my detention, I was being processed. A police investigator, a tough-looking, straight-haired woman, led the women towards the end of the corridor. The men on the ground kept their eyes fi-xed to our trajectory; they were all young, in their twenties. The officer opened a cell

and stepped aside. For me, this was one of the hardest blows I received in those days: entering that cage by my own volition.

The lock clicked and she put a padlock on our door. At dawn, when the feeling of being watched shook me from my lethargy, I discovered a couple of subjects standing, looking at us through the bars, and I appre-ciated that lock and those walls. That is the terrible game of fear. I understood that it’s not enough to know that you’re innocent, because you rot. If you live thinking of the unfairness of the situation, you get frustra-ted, you surrender. For me it was necessary to fill myself with rage. Things are as they are and won’t change even if we bring in human rights defenders or if we all study law. What happened to me happens to hun-dreds of people in Mexico and the world. The problem is not the law, or reforms, or the concessions of the Legislative Assem-bly during election times. The problem is systemic, economic, political, social and it will only be resolved by the strong allian-ce of the millions of dispossessed when

they stand up to authoritarianism and take charge of their own future.

We knew nothing of the men until Tues-day morning, when the cry of “We want to eat, we want to eat!” let us know not only that they were still in the bunker, but that they conserved their spirit and hunger, two good pieces of news. The nearly seventy men that crammed the hallways were re-leased in their entirety. They just let them all go. I learned later that they had been arrested during an eviction, but for unk-nown reasons were completely unproces-sed. Capitalism in the government, unable to provide housing for the population, pus-hes vulnerable groups to become criminals, meting out punishment and pitting one against the other. That’s the perverseness of its dynamic; that’s why it doesn’t serve us and never will.

Translation by A. Dicker

Read the entire text atgroundupnmsu.org.

6 The GroundUp 08-09/2013

Leaks: While state murders, terrorizes; dissenters criminalized

DON’T LET YOURCONSCIENCE GET IN THE WAY OF YOUR DUTIES TO

THE NATION-STATE.

home country. The journalist’s subsequent imprisonment on terrorism charges was reportedly influenced by the Obama administration. After his July release, a National Security Council spokesperson told journalist Jeremy Sca-hill it was “concerned and disappointed.” Also, in Britain, government agents raided the offices of a major newspaper to destroy information connected with the Snowden leaks, and held the partner of investigative intelligence journalist Glenn Greenwald in a 9-hour airport detention.

Many prominent commentators have pointed out the tragic irony behind the use of law and government power against those who conscientiously expose unethical or un-lawful behavior, even while numerous military and gover-nment officials - including presidents - selectively leak se-cret information for other political reasons without being targeted by a similar campaign of punishment. Moreover, the predominant focus of the government and media on the criminality of the leakers stands in contrast to the ra-rity and levity of consequences for the perpetrators of the type of illegal or barbaric acts exposed by the leakers.

For many commentators, this campaign against whistle-blowers is a shocking development - the Bush and Obama administrations, in their view, have progressively ushered in an unprecedented era of government trampling of ci-vil liberties. These commentators, however, need a history lesson that goes beyond the Patriot Act and Bush-era wi-retapping under Michael Hayden. There is no reason for surprise at the government’s actions. Government spying - domestically and internationally, aided by business inter-ests - is nothing new. The U.S. government, at the behest of capital, has spied on and targeted both groups and in-dividuals under highly questionable criteria for decades, including civil rights and anti-war activists, revolutionary groups, and public intellectuals. Massive corporations of-ten provide the means and serve as an integral force dri-ving surveillance and repression of dissent.

To cite another historical example, the Espionage Act, currently in vogue as a weapon against information leakers, was largely intended to silence war opponents

and break the radical labor unions of the early twentieth century. What is new and disconcerting, though entirely expectable, is the growing scope of data mining and sur-veillance capabilities. Tapping into phone conversations, monitoring people’s every move, and keeping tabs on their contacts has never been so effortless. Far from a charac-teristic of a particular presidential administration or the U.S. alone, the pattern is mirrored across the globe. The power of the contemporary capitalist state dwarfs that of 20th century totalitarian regimes. This should be reason enough to spur us towards organized opposition - not only to such-and-such president or party but to the world so-cioeconomic system that they represent and protect.

Surveillance and repression of political activity, as it always has, goes far beyond the few high-profile cases co-vered by the mass media. The Department of Homeland Security has been exposed for spying on and disrupting Occupy and anti-Keystone XL pipeline protests, including in the border region. Even a seemingly innocuous protest in Washington D.C. by United Students Against Sweats-hops activists regarding working conditions in Bangladesh was recently infiltrated by the police. The conclusion to draw? Any kind of protest is a potential threat to national security.

Why the need for repression in a supposedly free, ca-pitalist society? The government and the legal system are largely designed to uphold the class power of those at the top of the pyramid. Their primary interest is to avoid the destabilization of the economic and political systems, the-reby protecting the collective interests of those in power. In a society of classes, the resources at the disposal of those in power, including the law, will always be directed towards minimizing the threat of destabilization; and quite simply, the political and capitalist classes in the US find themselves slipping towards that precipice after the economic crisis, popular tiring of its imperialist wars, and questioning of government-corporate alliances. At such a time, those with power turn to increasingly invasive and brutal mechanisms to maintain their control over the population.

The persecution of Manning, Assange and Snowden must end - but they are only lionized figureheads: We are all aligned in a conflict with the state. The battle being played out is not simply one between the “necessities” of national security and the civil liberties of citizens. What is also being contested is whether high technology and the internet are tools for the free spread of information and the empowerment of the masses or, on the contrary, tools for the consolidation of power by the government and the great corporations. This is a contested terrain in the fight for social and economic power, with the inter-ests of the great majorities threatened. We must organi-ze against the surveillance state, the militarization of the world in the name of ‘security,’ and the criminalization of dissent.

- conTinueD froM pAGe 1 -

for dialogue and input between adminis-trators and regular staff regarding projects or funding in general, according to nearly all of the staff members we interviewed. “The library staff are used to not being consulted,” said research librarian Molly Malloy. “Generally, it’s just the dean telling us what’s going to happen,” said another staff member. Simpson expressed a simi-lar sentiment. “That’s just how things are done around here,” she said, but added that she believes this is reflective of university operations as a whole instead of something unique to the library: “We’re [the university is] definitely a top-down organization.”

The Jazzman’s Café project comes during a time of deep budget cuts for the NMSU Library. Since 1997, the library has cut over $1.5 million from its buying power for new serials, books, databases, microforms and standing orders, which has meant the loss of 1889 journal titles, according to a docu-ment on the library website. Moreover, an internal document shows that $92,162.91 are planned to be cut from the materials budget during Fiscal Year 2014.

It is “disturbing” to see the library “star-ved” and have research needs go unmet, said Beck. “We’re at the bare bones. I don’t know how we can continue to call ourselves a research library and not fund it.”

Where exactly the money for the café project would come from remains an open question. In an email to The GroundUp, however, Auxiliary Dean Lee emphasized that any funds used for that project “would NOT (sic) come from the library materials budget,” which is used to procure books, periodicals, and other such materials.

The Auxiliary Services office, the Library dean’s office, and Sodexo representatives are actively involved with the planning of the café for Zuhl. Ex-ASNMSU President

- conTinueD froM pAGe 1 -

Zuhl: Café project raises concerns about administrative priorities, practices Breeana Sylvas also participated in project development last spring and pushed for a bill in the ASNMSU Senate (Bill #191) which would have provided $5,000 for the project “to show student commitment.” The bill claimed the money would be “paid back in full … and may include interest” as the café generated revenue. The bill was de-feated in the student Senate.

Individuals involved in the planning of the Jazzman’s location all mentioned sur-veys showing support and/or demand for a café in Zuhl. One external review prepared for the library in 2011 emphasized the need to create welcoming public spaces, particu-larly containing food services, and affirmed that it was informed by patron surveys. The 2011 “Dining Services Master Plan,” prepa-red by an outside consultant for Auxiliary Services, also refers to consumer surveys and mentions a library café as a potentia-lly viable project. Survey results can often tell us what we want to hear, however, or do not tell us a full story. A library user survey from the 2009-2010 school year, for exam-ple, shows that food and coffee services were rarely mentioned by patrons as urgent ‘ne-eds’ in Zuhl and Branson, particularly com-pared to the need for study spaces, electrical outlets, or an expanded journal collection.

The café would add another brand-name franchise to the growing network of eate-ries around campus operated by Sodexo. Sodexo won an eight-year contract from Auxiliary Services in 2011 that gave the 21st largest multinational corporation in the world near-monopoly power over food services. While a café in the library would certainly be a boon to Sodexo, contribute to library goals of ‘modernizing’ its space, and satisfy many library users, it also may have unforeseen impacts.

For example, the café raises concerns about drawing business from other lo-cal coffee shops, including or the TCBY/

Coffee Haus in the nearby Frenger Food Court (which is not operated by Sodexo) or Milagro on University Avenue. The privi-leged in-house location of Jazzman’s, along with the additional pressure exerted by the recent on-campus openings of two Eins-tein Bros. Bagels locations and the Barnes & Noble Café featuring Starbucks coffee, could potentially oversaturate the market. “I now consider the university my business competitor,” Milagro owner Bernie Digman told The GroundUp for a story last fall, affir-ming that his business had been negatively affected by the recent additions to campus.Jazzman’s and the business development model at NMSU - notes for a critique

The writers’ intention is not to take the side of small business over big name-brands. Nor is it to single out the Auxiliary Services or the Library administration offi-ce for criticism. We believe that the story behind the Zuhl café project - the way in which the it is being consolidated and how it reflects larger trends at NMSU such as the top-down administrative structure and intensive business development on campus - raises a number of important issues that need to be considered alongside the jubila-tion that will be portrayed in official com-munications and the mainstream media.

By itself, the Zuhl café is simply one more consumer space on campus. But the ‘un-derside’ of the project illustrates a number of unflattering aspects about library admi-nistration and how private business and the university interact. We believe the striking lack of communication between library staff and the Dean’s office about the library project signal a non-democratic, hierarchi-cal method of administration, which has negative effects on library operations and the and goes against the spirit of the public university. This is reflective of a broader culture and structure of non-transparency and top-down decision-making throug-

hout the university and in our public insti-tutions in general: the trends at the library simply mirror those in other departments and at all levels. These ills are exacerbated when involved with outside, private inter-ests and particularly for-profit ventures.

Further, the library café demonstrates how projects such as these are oftentimes advanced over significant concerns about academic funding and needs, or broader social implications. Funding sources are usually different for construction/image projects and academics; indeed, special funding from the state for construction at universities is often easier to obtain and less restricted than that destined to re-search or materials, and this partially ac-counts for the building boom on campuses across the U.S. even while overall spending on colleges decreases and tuition rises). If the administration wanted to change this, however, they could work to do so. At the end, it appears certain that there is a prio-ritization of construction, image-boosting and business relationships while significant difficulties go unresolved and deepen at NMSU - and this gives us ample reason to question the administration’s overall vision and development model.

University administration is all-too-happy to submit a public, nominally aca-demic institution to a market logic that prioritizes growth and the strengthening of the current global socioeconomic-poli-tical system, instead of working to address its pitfalls and challenge those in power. Moreover, the effective refusal to consi-der the possible negative effects of campus development or promote alternative mo-dels - in food services, these could include nonprofits, student-run establishments or mom-and-pop startups - shows a restricti-ve, short-sighted administrative vision and could have a number of negative conse-quences in all areas of university life.

7The GroundUp

Throughout the years I have had many jobs, but none as difficult or satisfying as that of a home health care aide, more commonly known as a caregiver. Recently I was able to go back to my town of Truth or Consequences, where I visited a 61-year-old gentleman by the name of Paul Thompson. For three years I had been both a ca-regiver and friend in the midst of his many battles with epileptic seizures. Fortunately, his seizures were very few, and we had our share of happy times.

Reminiscing with Paul made me remember back to my beginnings as a caregiver, when I gained unforgettable knowledge of my client and job. Even then, in the ear-liest of days of my occupation, I began to realize that not only was it a labor of love, but that I could expect little else from the position; the average pay of a caregiver in New Mexico is eight dollars per hour. After taxes I was barely able to pay for necessities, and I was also uninsu-red. In fact, there are no basic caregivers I know of, at least within the Ambercare workforce, that has any kind of health insurance or disability protection.

This is not just a corporation flaw. All throughout the country caregivers are working uninsured and without the monetary incentives of other professions. The lack of benefits has become such a staple in the care giving world that recent articles, such as one written by AARP Vice Pre-sident Nicole Duritz, have started to outline the benefits to both caregivers and elderly clients that will occur with the implementation of nationwide healthcare in 2014.

“It’s important to nurture your own needs and take care of your own health so that you have the strength, presence of mind and stamina to help those who are de-pending on you,” Duritz writes.

This is a truism that care giving firms and insurance companies are beginning to wake up to; caregivers who

hurt themselves while on the job are a huge liability and cost a fortune in turnover training. A healthy, happy care-giver, according to an article by Humana, a leading health care company, “gives you additional strength and vigor in your ongoing role as a caregiver.”

The inability to focus on their own health needs has been difficult for caregivers, as their problems are con-sidered secondary not only to their clients, but also in the framework of a larger economic crisis. This, in turn, makes it difficult for those caregivers who truly enjoy their jobs to continue and still make ends meet.

Lisa Flack, a 42-year-old woman who has been a care-giver for more than three years, has decided that the job has to be its own reward. “I think it’s really a calling,” she said. “There is no way that someone could do this for a living. You have to want to help people, sometimes at the peril of your own financial security.”

Ambercare, at the time of my employment, did not allow me to work over my allotted hours for each client, even though there were days when I did so out of com-passion. Sometimes it was even a matter of necessity; cer-tainly I could not be so insensitive as to leave Paul in the midst of a seizure, and they would have terminated my employment on learning I had done so. This meant that a twenty hour week with a client could easily extend to thirty hours, or more, without pay for any of those extra hours. This was blamed on the oversight of the insurance companies who keep strict parameters on home health care aides.

There really was no end to the inconsistencies when comparing care giving to other professions. I was not paid for my gas when I had to run local errands for clients, no matter how many miles that included. The in-surance company also claimed that if not performing cer-tain physical tasks while on the job—cooking, cleaning, etc.—then I should not get paid for the time. For exam-

ple, companionship, which is a large part of a caregiver’s job, is not taken seriously or even counted as a profes-sional duty. Every year the insurance company, in charge of paying for my service, found ways to cut my hours by citing how much better Paul’s health had become over the previous months, meanwhile forgetting that my compa-nionship was considered the most important part of my job, at least to Paul.

“I used to have a caregiver for 32 hours a week,” Paul said in an interview while being asked about his waning home care. “Now I only have a person here for nine hours.” Without an immediate family to visit him, Paul soon became depressed and despondent. This is exactly what happens to many clients who are victims of the insu-rance company’s unwilling attitude towards care giving. It is impossible for a corporate structure to understand the alienation and loneliness of elderly and disabled clients.

“Sometimes I feel like a bird in a cage,” Paul said. “It’s very depressing to think that these companies are just waiting for you to die so they don’t have to pay anymore.”

Despite the darkened past of the care giving profession, there seems to be better days ahead. With the uniformity in health care coming in 2014, caregivers may have more options to choose insurance that will allow them to stay in their profession. Also, with a looming increase in mi-nimum wage, many caregivers will—for the first time—be able to take care of their clients with the comfort of financial security.

After all, the basic belief system underlying the care giving profession really has nothing to do with money. It is about the basic human understanding of helping so-meone in need and gaining satisfaction from doing so. It is imperative we keep it that way.

Under the wage: caregiving in a for-profit systemSeries: The world of work

By Monique AnDerSon

Have a work story that should be heard? Send us yours at groundupnmsu@gmail.com.

2

Uno tras otro descendimos por unas es-caleras y pude hacer mi hipótesis personal de porqué le llaman bunker a aquel lugar. Un largo pasillo con decenas de celdas se presentaba ante nosotros y tuve la terrible premonición de dónde pasaría esa noche. El suelo tenía charcos de lo que parecía ser agua y había envolturas de comida y te-tra pack por doquier. Tuve miedo, para qué negarlo, cuando vi a cerca de seten-ta hombres acostados en el fondo del pasillo, mirándonos expectantes. “Eres mujer, la tortura es distinta”, me había dicho mi compañero en la patrulla y supe en ese momento a qué se refería.

Conocer tus derechos no sirve de nada si no hay quien los respete. Así funciona el pacto de la legalidad y de la aplicación de la justicia burguesa. Nos tomaron la famosa foto de frente y de perfil, con una hoja rotulada ya con los cargos. No era el mismo para todos. Unos por robo, otros por disturbios, otros por daño en propiedad ajena, todos los presen-tes fuimos obligados tácitamente a asumir la culpa. Cuando me llenaron de tinta los dedos supe que así, sin siquiera haber sido notificada formalmente de mi detención, estaba siendo fichada. Una policía de in-vestigación, de aspecto duro y cabello lacio, nos condujo a las mujeres casi al final del pasillo. Los hombres del suelo siguieron con la mirada nuestro recorrido, todos eran jóvenes, de entre veinte y treinta años. Abrió una celda y se hizo a un lado. Este fue para mí uno de los más duros golpes que recibí aquellos días: entrar por mi propio pie a la jaula.

Corrió el seguro y puso un candado a nuestra puerta. Por la madrugada, cuando la sensación de ser observada me sacó de mi letargo y descubrí a un par de sujetos de pie, mirándonos a través de los cristales, agradecí ese candado y esos muros. Ese es el terrible juego del miedo. Descubrí que no basta con saberse inocente, porque te

Presa política: La detención de activistas en el DFpudres. Si te la vives pensando en lo injus-to de la situación, te frustras, te entregas. Para mí fue necesario llenarme de rabia. Las cosas son como son y no cambiarán si todos nos metemos a defensores de dere-chos humanos o si todos estudiamos leyes. Me pasó a mí como le pasa a cientos en México y en el mundo. El problema no es la ley, no es la reforma, no es la concesión

de la Asamblea Legislativa en tiempos de elecciones. El problema es sistémico, eco-nómico, político, social y se resuelve con la fuerte alianza de los millones de desposeí-dos que le plante cara al autoritarismo y se haga cargo de su propio futuro.

De los hombres no supimos nada sino hasta el martes por la mañana, cuando al grito de “queremos comer, queremos co-mer” nos anunciaban, además de que esta-ban aún en el bunker, que conservaban su espíritu y el hambre, dos buenas noticias. Los cerca de setenta hombres que atiborra-ban los pasillos, fueron liberados en su to-talidad. A todos los soltaron. Supe después que habían sido detenidos por un desalojo, pero que por desconocidas razones no en-frentaron proceso alguno. El capitalismo en el Gobierno, incapaz de proveer de vi-vienda a la población, orilla a grupos vul-nerables a convertirse en delincuentes, los castiga y los confronta unos contra otros. Así la perversidad de su dinámica, por eso no nos sirve ni nos servirá nunca.

- SiGue De lA páGinA 3 -

Encuentra el texto completo engroundupnmsu.org.

On Trayvon, Marissa, Kimani and unequal power relations

George Zimmerman’s acquittal in the death of Trayvon Martin, Marissa Alexander’s twenty year prison sentence in the same state for shooting a gun that ki-lled no one, and the police killing of Kima-ni Gray this spring illustrate what should be self-evident: Racial, gender, and class inequities in the U.S are far from resolved, and legal civil rights protections - however ‘progressive’ - do not completely fulfill their promises.

All three cases sparked outrage and pro-tests across the country, but what we need to remember is that there are Trayvons, Kimanis and Marissas all around us. Inti-midation, police brutality, and inequality in the legal system are a reality for many Americans, and our focus needs to not be on simply liberating the innocent, picking out the ‘bad seeds,’ and turning to civil rights protections - but rather attacking the systemic roots of injustice found in unequal power relations, historical social structures, and the inequities of the current socioeconomic system.

Race and gender are certainly not the only causes behind of the injustices per-petrated by the legal/political system. We insist that imprisonment policy, unjust law enforcement practices, and criminal activi-ty are tied to class in nearly every instan-ce, and should be viewed as class issues. They cannot be addressed by civil rights legislation, prayers, denunciations, or race-specific organizing alone. We cannot begin to solve the underlying problems without uniting as an independent political force of working people across color, gender, sexual orientation and other identity lines.

The three cases highlighted above are not unique. There are countless murders and abuses that go unpunished, whether by police, civilians, public officials, soldiers, or bosses protected by their power over others and/or aspects of the law or social norms.

High profile cases like those of Martin, Ma-rissa and Gray - and others such as those of Israel Hernandez and Robert Saylor - make us realize that racism, impunity, classism, mental illness, and sexism are all-too-com-mon determining factors in the ‘rule of law.’ There are sectors of the population that live in fear of those meant to protect them, where the law is little more than a means of oppression. Though some certainly feel the weight of these inequities more than others, they cross racial, gender, and cultu-ral lines in every direction.

Our goal should not be to strengthen ci-vil rights laws or ‘protect’ vulnerable popu-lations. Instead, we need to work, at every level, to dismantle the unequal power rela-tions that make some vulnerable in the first place.

***Our attention must turn to the products

of power inequities all around us, not just the sensational cases on TV. This past Au-gust 19 in Las Cruces, 23-year-old Alan Golden was confronted by police early in the morning while apparently sleeping on the street in a residential area. According to police reports, he was holding a knife, and threatened to kill himself with it. After refusing orders to put it down, he was shot with bean bag guns and attacked by a poli-ce dog. After stabbing the dog, Golden was tasered and subdued. A day later, he was arrested upon release from the hospital for assaulting the police canine. The local me-dia treated the story as an oddity, focusing mostly on the injuries to the dog and not the questionable behavior of police. As far as we know, it has not sparked any protest.

One can only imagine whether the po-lice would have fired bean bags (which, despite their nice-sounding name, pack the force of a punch) and used a dog if the de-ranged man with a knife had been sitting in his Mercedes-Benz...

8 The GroundUp

Drone research and New Mexico StateDrones are used as agents of death, surveillance, and terror. NMSU is ‘doing its part’ to help the military and contractors develop them.Making a more dangerous world for us all

By freDDy DeMuTh

Drone warfare has become a major component of Ame-rican military operations around the world, and drones are being introduced into domestic security operations at an increasing rate. The use of drones began in the 1990s, and was rapidly expanded both in numbers and in the kinds of things drones are used for in the wake of the September 11 attacks in 2001. Drones have become the weapons system of choice for surveillance and assassination operations, allowing military and intelligence forces to carry out their activities with little or no risk to human agents.

Technicians in air-conditioned rooms in Florida or other domestic sites guide the actions of drones on screens like video games, raining down high intensity fire power on targets on the other side of the world.

In 2001 the US military had 167 drones. By 2009 that number was 5,500, and today the drone fleet is more than 7,000. These numbers are only going to grow larger. Dro-nes are used to kill human targets in countries with which the United States is not at war, sometimes against the wis-hes of governments which are supposedly American allies. Drones are most extensively used for lethal missions in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Iraq, and have been used in Libya and other countries for surveillance and mission coordination as well. In theory, drones are used to target identified individuals who are an imminent threat to America or Americans. But the precision of this targe-ting is minimal, both in terms of who the targets are, and whether there are other individuals in the target area who may also be killed or injured when the drone strikes. The exact number of people killed by drones is hard for civi-lians to know, but from available information we do know that around 5,000 people have been killed this way over the period in which drones have been in use, and most of those have been during the last five years under Obama. A lar-ge proportion of those killed have been ‘collateral damage,’ such as the 16 year old son of Anwar al-Awlaki, who was killed in a drone strike in Yemen two weeks after his father was assassinated by a drone. Indeed, many drone killings are directed at young men who simply fit a certain

“signature” or profile, who are considered by military or intelligence decision makers as likely to be, or become, a threat in some vague and ill-defined way. Anyone who is found in proximity to such young men is also considered expendable, acceptable collateral damage.

The net effect of these thousands of killings has not been to make us safer, to reduce tensions and hostilities, or to eliminate the dangers which Americans face. The lar-ge scale killing of bystanders and the seemingly random targeting of people serve to broaden and deepen the rage which people in other countries, especially those where drones are most widely deployed, feel toward the U.S. go-vernment. Drone killings create more terrorists than they eliminate, making us all less safe, more threatened, and perpetuating the supposed need for a massive military and intelligence establishment. Drones breed more drones, more war, and more profits for military contractors, and contributions to politicians of both parties.

Sadly, New Mexico State University plays an impor-tant part in the drone complex. The innocuous sounding Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight Center which NMSU operates is helping to expand the range of drone opera-tions, especially to American domestic airspace. Drones are already in use along the border, as part of government programs which drive thousands of aspiring immigrants into ever more remote parts of the desert in their efforts to seek better lives in America, finding instead death in the harsh backcountry of the borderlands. Drones are also to be used in urban surveillance, putting eyes in the skies to partner with the NSA’s listening programs to create a comprehensive surveillance system. NMSU

partners with private corporations in drone development, including a collaboration between the NMSU Physical Science Laboratory and AeroVironment. These efforts are directed in part, according to an NMSU Arrowhead Cen-ter press release, to supply data to the Department of Jus-tice about conducting night operations, especially for law enforcement in urban areas.

NMSU will also be hosting an upcoming conference on drone development. Since 1999, NMSU has operated the Technical Analysis and Applications Center to help fe-deral agencies, including the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, with their work in using drones. This year’s conference, to be held away from public view on campus at the Santa Ana Pueblo, will feature both open and classified sessions, presumably so that sensitive issues about drone use will not be subject to public review.

Drones are a big problem, and getting bigger. Their wi-despread use as instruments of killing inflicts terror and suffering on people in far-flung parts of the world, and their growing role as the visual dimension of the compre-hensive American surveillance state threatens the privacy and security of everyone, both Americans and citizens of

the rest of the world. They make ordinary people less safe, and serve instead to pro-mote and protect only the interests of the rich and powerful.

El desarrollo de drones y NMSU

Creando un mundo más peligroso para todos

La guerra de aviones no tripulados (drones) se ha convertido en el principal componente de las operaciones militares norteamericanos en todo el mundo, y éstos se introducen a las operaciones domésticas de seguridad en una proporción cada vez mayor. El uso de drones comenzó en el año de 1990 y rápidamente se amplió tanto numéricamente como en el tipo de tareas en las que se emplearon después de los ataques del 11 de septiembre de 2001. Los drones ya constituyen el sistema de armas predilecto tanto para las operaciones de vigilancia como de asesinato, permitiendo así que las fuerzas militares y de inteligencia lleven a cabo sus actividades con poco o ningún riesgo para sus agentes humanos. Técnicos en habitaciones equipadas con aire acondicionado en Florida o en otros sitios domésticos guían las acciones de los drones en pantallas como si fueran videojuegos, llevando la muerte por armas de alta potencia a blancos ubicados en el otro lado del mundo.

En el 2001 las fuerzas armadas de EE.UU. tenían 167 drones. Para el 2009 el número ascendió a 5.500, y hoy la fleta drone suma más de 7.000. Estas cantidades sólo aumentarán. Los drones son utilizados para abatir blancos humanos en países con los cuales Estados Unidos no está en guerra, a veces contra la voluntad de gobiernos supuestamente aliados con Norteamérica. Los drones se utilizan más extensamente para misiones mortíferas en Afganistán, Pakistán, Yemen, Somalia, e Irak, y también se han empleado en Libia y en otros países para la vigilancia y la coordinación de misiones. En teoría, los drones se utilizan en persecución de individuos identificados como amenazas inminentes para los Estados Unidos o los estadounidenses. Sin embargo, la precisión de estas persecuciones es mínima, tanto en términos de quiénes son los blancos como en si hay otros individuos en la zona colindante que puedan sufrir la muerte o lesiones en un ataque drone. La cantidad exacta de personas asesinadas

por los drones es difícil de calcular para los civiles, pero la información disponible alude a unas 5.000 personas asesinadas de esta manera durante el período en que se han empleado los drones, y la mayor parte de estos casos se dieron durante los últimos cinco años bajo Obama. Una gran cantidad de las muertes se definen como “daños colaterales, tal como el hijo de Anwar al-Awlaki, quien fue ultimado en un ataque drone en Yemen dos semanas después del asesinato de su padre, muerto bajo las mismas circunstancias. De hecho, muchos asesinatos por drone tienen como blancos a jóvenes masculinos simplemente por cuadrar con cierto perfil o “firma”, quienes son considerados personas con probabilidad de ser, o llegar a ser, alguna difusa clase de amenaza por parte de altos mandos militares o de espionaje. Cualquier persona cercana a tales jóvenes también representa un daño colateral prescindible y aceptable.

El efecto neto de estos miles de asesinatos es que no nos han protegido, no han contribuido a reducir tensiones ni hostilidades, y tampoco han eliminado los peligros que enfrentan los norteamericanos. Tanto el asesinato a gran escala como la selección, al parecer aleatoria, de blancos, sirven para ampliar y profundizar la ira que la gente en otros países guarda contra el gobierno norteamericano, sobre todo en donde los drones son más utilizados. Estos asesinatos crean más terroristas de los que eliminan, generando menos seguridad y más riesgo para todos, además de perpetuar la supuesta necesidad de un masivo establecimiento militar y de inteligencia. Los drones generan más drones, más guerra, y mayores ganancias para los contratistas militares, tanto como contribuciones para los políticos de ambos partidos.

Por desgracia, la Universidad Estatal de Nuevo México (NMSU) desempeña un papel importante en el complejo drone. El aparentemente innocuo Unmanned Aircraft Systems Flight Center (Centro para Sistemas de Aviones No Tripuladas), operado por NMSU, contribuye a ampliar el alcance de las operaciones de drones, especialmente

dentro del espacio aéreo norteamericano. Los drones ya se emplean a lo largo de la frontera como elemento de los programas gubernamentales para empujar a miles de aspirantes a inmigrantes quienes se esfuerzan por encontrar vidas mejores en Norteamérica hacia regiones cada vez más remotas del desierto, haciendo que, al contrario, encuentren la muerte en la inhóspita tierra fronteriza. Los drones también son pensados para su empleo en la vigilancia urbana, creando nuevos ojos en el cielo en conjunto con los programas de escuchas de la Administración de Seguridad Nacional, para crear un sistema integral de vigilancia. NMSU se relaciona con corporaciones privadas para el desarrollo de los drones, incluyendo una colaboración entre el NMSU Physical Science Laboratory (Laboratorio de Ciencias Físicas) y AeroVironment. Según un comunicado de prensa de NMSU Arrowhead Center, estos esfuerzos se dirigen en parte a encanalizar datos al Departamento de Justicia sobre el manejo de operaciones nocturnas, especialmente en cuanto al trabajo policíaco en zonas urbanas.

Además, NMSU organizará un coloquio sobre el desarrollo de drones. NMSU opera el Centro de Análisis y Aplicaciones Técnicas desde 1999 para auxiliar a las agencias federales, incluyendo el Departamento de Defensa y el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional en su uso de drones. El coloquio de este año será en Santa Ana Pueblo, lejos de la mirada del público en el campus; ofrecerá tanto sesiones abiertas como cerradas, aparentemente para que los temas delicados sobre el uso de los drones no sea foco de la revisión pública.

Los drones representan un gran problema, el cual va en aumento. Su uso como instrumento letal causa terror y sufrimiento en lejanos lugares del mundo, y su papel cada vez más importante como dimensión visual del integral estado de vigilancia norteamericano amenaza la privacidad y la integridad de todos, tanto norteamericanos como en el resto del mundo. Éstos disminuyen la seguridad de la gente común, y sirven para promover y proteger los intereses de los ricos y poderosos únicamente.

por freDDy DeMuTh

Los aviones no tripulados traen la muerte, la vigilancia y el terror. NMSU quiere poner de su parte.

08-09/2013