Dear Friends:

Today was a tragic day. I didn't know anyone involved in the shooting in Connecticut nor have I (thankfully) ever had to experience what they did, but my heart goes out to them none the less on this senseless and sadly preventable day.

I have been reading your facebook posts all day and amidst the anger of this incident is outrage, that yet again we have another string of victims who could have been saved through fairly reasonable means and pleas to allow this to be the incident that wakes us up. That finally show our political opposites that a small degree of regulation, sensibly written and applied, is not going to send us spiraling into Hell. I find myself asking the same questions. Unfortunately I also find myself coming to inevitable answers.

No.

No this will not be the thing that shines fresh light on the subject.

No this will not be the water shed moment that the right abandons it's hard headed obstinacy.

No this will not be the tragedy that finally gets us all to the table looking for a real solution to gun violence.

We will be accused of politicizing the tragedy, as if such events aren't always politicized as with the drive to war following 9/11 or the NRA convention in the Denver suburbs after Columbine.

The right will toss tired and debunked straw man arguments that have nothing to do with the current tragedy (I am a gun owner and avid participant in shooting sports and have many times been told
I want to ban guns)

The right will make outrageous claims that if the kids had been carrying guns this could have been avoided. In fact already I have read someone advocating that if the teachers had been allowed to carry guns this wouldn't have happened. Which assumes that the teachers WOULD have carried guns and that a shoot out would not have occurred and even after that still ends up with some people dead.

This is because the right are not entering this debate as honest actors. They may think they are, but what they really are coming in as is fundamentalists. They have no interest in common sense. They have no interest in reexamining their own beliefs, even just to double check their validity. They have a near religious belief that if everyone can have guns then everyone will and crime will stop. This belief is not held up by numbers. The highest rates of gun crimes are in states that have loose gun laws. They have a blind adherence to the second half of the second amendment. The first half refers to a militia and makes it clear that the right to bear arms is meant for national defense against the government and not personal protection. They will not even agree the while the mentally ill should be allowed to have guns it would be better for us all if the criminally insane Didn't have them. We are not going to win on gun control at this time.

There is hope. The right has already started sandbagging against any and all attempts at even the meekest legislation. But there is another avenue to help prevent tragedies such as this. In all of the mass shootings of the past several years the perpetrator has been mentally ill. When considered it's kind of a crazy thing to do after all. So while they build bunkers on the supply side. They will leave their demand side flank uncovered. Naomi Klein wrote about the Shock Doctrine which uses tragedy to pull us into fear and war. It can be used for good.  

The discussion of gun control is a discussion of means.  It is ultimately tangential to the problem.  What we need, is s discussion of cause.  Those who are so busy prepping against the imagined assault on their guns have no answer for how to avoid the cause of these tragedies.  They claim more guns may reduce body counts but their demagoguing cannot not even conceive of prevention.  So it falls to us. 

Now is the time to call for comprehensive mental care for the mentally ill.

Now is the time get your representatives to demand that we treat those who are mentally ill as people and not just cast them to the wolves.

Now is the time to try and treat the problem at it's source. They make a good point, that banning guns will not solve the problem. So let's focus on solving the problem before it starts.

It might seem tasteless to bring this up now. But if we don't act fast we will be leaving the next school, theater, shopping mall waiting for the next tragedy.

A Letter to OC on behalf of the FOP

Dear Occupy Chicago,

Two weeks ago you and your activist brothers and sister were asked to test your mettle against an imposing force. In defense of the rights of people around the world to live free from the secret machinations and oppression of the elite ruling class you put yourselves on the line against the tools of that class, the Chicago Police Department. Against their own brethren in the 99% the CPD unleashed weapons of intimidation and when those failed violence. They stood against their own people and lashed out against those weaker then themselves.

And now they need our help

Mayor Emmanuel is shorting the CPD who worked NATO on their overtime and trying to defer what limited payments he actually intends to make. In the two weeks since the summit the Fraternal Order of Police in Chicago has filed four grievances against the Mayors office, all pending. The grievances refer, in no particular order, to the following violations of the union contract: Not compensating officers with overtime who worked more than five consecutive days in a calendar week, forcing officers to take overtime pay as compensation rather than substituting time off, canceling furlough days within two weeks leading up to the summit, and ensuring correct compensation for officers whose shifts were adjusted two hours or more in either direction for the summit. Many of these officers on top of that were put in a position to work twelve or more hours on the days of the summit. Given the heat and riot gear it could easily have been predicted that they would strike out with undo severity at the slightest provocation.

I am not suggesting that the CPD acted justifiably or rightly last May. I am not suggesting that what their tactics of intimidation and violence were in anyway proportional or appropriate for the peaceful protest that we and our brothers and sisters brought to them. I am suggesting that they are members of the 99%. They are currently facing the oppression of the snake tongued denizens of the wealthy oligarchs of this city and they need our help.

They probably don't want our help. Most reports from those who know members of the CPD, are that they are not friendly to our movement in the least. They see us as a nuisance and a threat. But nonetheless, if we are to stand by the message from last fall that we are all the 99% then it is our responsibility to stand and fight for the CPD to get their due overtime compensation.

This movement cannot stand if we fall victim to pride. As a overwhelmingly peaceful movement we must look to the methods of our predecessors that worked. It is not enough to simply be non-violent, that is as ineffective as the “black bloc” critics within our ranks accuse. We must be a force for truth. We must lay down our pride, and focus solely on that which accomplishes our goal. During WWII Gandhi suspended all actions against Great Britain. He did not wish to fight his enemy while they were down. His goal was for the two nations, India and the UK to exit as friends. This must be our goal as well. Should we win this struggle for a truly just society, should we win this fight to end oligarchy; we will create a world that the members of the CPD must live in too. IT behooves us to recognize out common plight. It is in our best interest to swallow our pride. It is ultimately our responsibility, as those to fight oppression, to fight for those who are falling victim to the lies of the 1%. We can only stand to gain.

So I am calling for action against the CPD. I am calling for a march in support of the Fraternal Order of Police. I am calling the 99% to action. We are better than their false divisions and it's time we showed that.

In Solidarity

Zachary Johnson-Dunlop

A Letter regarding the importance of voting (For Fucks sake just do it)

Dear Pissed off Adults of America

For the love of God people, would you VOTE. I know the arguments. I do. And they are valid. We have a two party system that not only is dysfunctional but is barely distinguishable. The two sides are like two people who have way to much in common. They bicker about near trivial differences as if the world rides on them, and meanwhile they sell us all down the river to whomever can buy the best legislation. It's like two frat boys debating whether or not to go at the passed out girl missionary or doggie style. Meanwhile our country is the passed out girl wondering why that drink was so strong (it was rufies). We are afforded as individuals a relatively paltry selection of avenues to pursue when we have grievances against the government. You don't protest an election by not participating, especially as an individual. If you don't vote because you don't believe in the merits of the candidates, NO ONE WILL CARE. You have chosen to take what little voice you have and silence it. What's more you are showing your ignorance.

Elections are not just for Presidents, or Senators, or Representatives. When you go to vote there are a plethora of races being decided. That's why the ballot is like three pages long. Every two to four years on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, all sorts of races get decided. Most of the time these are races that will have much more direct effect on your life than some national election with a billion dollars pumped into it. Your county board often has a lot of control over roads and land usage. Your city council makes decisions over your property taxes and zoning laws. Your state reps handle your highways and infrastructure. Your school board decides what techniques and curriculum educate your kids. These races are all much closer to home than some macro policy about how we decide to sanction Syria. These races also deal with a smaller electorate so each vote means more.

Beyond the direct results of your locals elections, it is important to remember that the people who hold these offices are burgeoning politicians. Many of the most powerful men in our country right now, began either as political activists or in local elections. Barack Obama began as a state Senator. Mitt Romney started at the state level as a Governor. These lower votes help decide who will decide in years to come. Through this you ultimately can have an effect on the national scale. Financial regulations spent twenty years being dismantled before the financial collapse, so the people who were coming up in politics entered an arena where that was the norm. This is so much the case that now, in light of glaring evidence and the admission from Alan Greenspan that self regulation is a fallacy, you still have people claiming it as gospel.

I get it if you don't want to vote for the President. In the end, both sides will cater to the same corporate masters that fuel their campaigns (it's like a weapons dealer selling to both sides). I personally think a protest vote is a more effective measure. All ballots have the option of a write in, and writing down the name of the guy who you want to be President at least means someone has to bother to process the vote. But if you'd rather not say anything, I get where you are coming from. There are, however, plenty of other things being decided on voting day. If you don't have the will to take the time to show up because of that, then you don't have the time to bitch about how this country is failing you

-Sincerely

-Zach Johnson-Dunlop

A Letter to the Black Block of the Occupy Movement

Dear Black Block

The spring is upon us. We of the Occupy Movement are facing a momentous season. We are already rededicating ourselves to the cause of smashing the standing hierarchy and seeking to usher in a new paradigm of true democracy. As we move into the warmer weather our movement gains momentum and support from all walks of life in this country. Even among the 1% we can find pockets of support and approval. Some say that our movement cannot stand to take part in violence. They say this for both practical and principled reasons. I do not know if this is true. What I do know to be true, is our movement cannot withstand thoughtless actions.

As a revolution we are in our infancy. The ideals of equality and the reclamation of our freedoms ring true amongst so many people, yet many of those people still stay home; unable or unwilling to brave the risks that direct action presents. We need the active support of such people. We need to inspire them to action. The question is how.

Mohandas K. Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. provided a road map on how to spur people to take to the streets. Their methods were non-violent, and they were brilliant. I would ask you to consider them as we move into the spring and to consider why such methods were effective.

First of all, it is a mistake to think that non-violent resistance was used by these men strictly out of some moral compulsion. This would be a discredit to these leaders and their ilk. Gandhi, MLK, Rosa Parks, Caesar Chavez, Neru and all of their brethren understood something about their opponents. They understood that they were physically stronger, and that they were not inherently tyrannical. Tyrants will fight for power above and beyond anything, including survival. Tyrants are not rational actors. This was not true of the oppressors that our subjects faced. The goal of non-violence is not to gain the sympathies of those who directly oppose you. The goal is to gain the sympathies of those whom they depend on for support. Protestors who allow themselves to be the sacrifice on the alter of freedom, find ever increasing support. While Protestors who fight against those the public perceive as civil servants who are also of the 99% find ever vanishing support.

Think of the fury raised over the UC Davis videos, or of the Brooklyn Bridge arrests, or of Ofc. Bologna pepper spraying peaceful young women. The outcry there was louder by a degree of magnitude over anything said about the fires set outside of occupied buildings, or the outcry over the virtual warzone created at the suggestion that a bottle had been thrown by the Occupiers in Oakland. This is because when we raise our fists against an enemy we can't possibly beat and who many hold as being of our number, we are inherently being self-defeating. When we stand strong, and walk knowingly into the line of fire without arms, we become the sacrifice that the nation can rally behind.

I want you to know that I am not a pacifist, I am a pragmatist. If the time ever arises when violence becomes apropo, I will stand with you. In as fragile a position as we are, this is not that time. We must be the wrench in the machinery, not the bomb dropped on the factory.

That being said, when such a time comes we must be thrifty with our resources, and always keep our goal and our foe in mind. The Police are tools of an oppressive regime. As intelligent activists, surely you can see the benefit of using the tools of the enemy against them. We do this whenever we use the bathroom in a McDonald's or organize using an Ipad. The Police are people and of the 99% as are any of us. Many of them are inches away from tossing down their shields in disgust at what they are ordered to do. These people will not be won by throwing bottles.

You might say to yourselves “fine” or “We don't need them” but I would call your attention to the uprisings in Serbia, Egypt, and to a lesser extent Libya. In Serbia, Milosevic was caught when his secret police refused to support his oppression anymore. In Egypt, the Army's refusal to turn on the people gave them the legitimacy and support thy needed. Even in Libya, the tide of the battle turned when soldiers began defecting.

I admire your enthusiasm. I share your rage. But if we fail to act intelligently at every turn, our fledgling revolution could end before it gets off the ground. We have what may amount to the last great opportunity to save our democracy. We cannot let our passion for the cause lead us into rash decisions or we will end up in disaster.

-Zach J-D

Letter to those who would lead us into yet another stupid fucking war.

Dear Mr. Romney, Mr. Santorum and Mr. Gingrich:

My name is Zach Johnson-Dunlop. I am a citizen of the country that you would seek to lead and as such I have a message that I think you need to hear. Please stop this hawkish nonsense regarding Iran. Our country can ill afford another war, either financially or psychologically. We are tired of watching our young men and women sent off to fight. We are tire of watching them come home, wounded mentally and physically. We are tired of hearing endless reports of new casualties in countries that don't want us there. As you speak of the inevitability of war with Iran as though the conclusion is long foregone, I feel I must warn you about the dangerous position that you place our country and it's citizens in. If you care nothing for such warnings as this, those issued by Mossad, the CIA and the Jont Chiefs of Staff, then I find myself with serious questions regarding your motives for both such a conflict and your respective drives for this nations highest office.

I want to bring you back to the words of one of this nations greatest single enemies, Osama Bin Laden. He issued a statement regarding his tactics in attacking the U.S. which spelled out how he presumed to beat the world's one remaining super power with such limited means. That evil man explained that he intended to drive the U.S. into a thoughtless war that would show it as a monster to the rest of the world and bankrupt it. As of now, Bin Laden is winning. He was a man who had no fear of death and cannot be beaten by simply killing him. Even from the grave the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the threats against Iran are helping bring his plan to fruition at a break neck pace. I must ask the question: Do you want Osama Bin Laden to win?

Our nation is deeply indebted due to the policies of Mr. Obama's predecessor. President Bush cut income by dropping the tax rates to historic lows. Added loopholes to make the effective corporate tax rate virtually nil for the top companies and then engaging our nation in the most expensive endeavor that a country can attempt: War. It is not the social safety net, nor health care that is bankrupting us. It is war. We spend billions of dollars every day fighting for countries that would be happy to see us leave and to support puppet governments that would turn against us in a heart beat. We can ill afford the expense against yet another country that by all reliable accounts, is of no immediate threat to either us, nor or ally Israel. The nation has lost it's patience for pointless wars and if by some miracle one of you is elected you will be a one term president if you bog us down into yet another meaningless quagmire meant to remind the world that we have guns and make your defense contractors even richer.

Worldwide the opinion of the U.S. has been slowly declining since the invasion of Iraq. I am well aware that you three don't care what America means to the rest of the world. It is worth mentioning however that as our popularity in the world drops it allows those countries that are quickly developing as economic competitors an opening to swoop in and take business and production that could have gone to creating jobs in the United States. We are effectively cutting our own throats in the global free market. While I am sure that each of you individually don't care and would find a means by which to profit off of Americas loss, as an American who makes less than seven to eight figures a year, I find myself concerned for the health of our economy in a global market. We are viewed as the bullies by much of the world and rightly so. We are discussing an attack on a sovereign nation that poses neither a clear, nor a present danger to our country. The only threat that may exist is to our ally Israel and even their intelligence agencies think that such an attack is unlikely; even if Iran gets a nuke.

This leads me to my last point. Mr. Gingrich fancies himself a historian. Perhaps his vast array of meaningless historical name dropping includes a man name Franz Ferdinand. This was a man who was assassinated in 1913 and who through the confluence of battling allegiances, kicked off WWI. One attack led the Austrians to attack the Serbs, which led Russia to run to their defense, which led Germany to side with Austria, which sparked old tensions over the Alsace Lorraine with France. If one ill timed bullet can lead to a world war, what do you think an unprovoked attack on a country that has powerful allies in the eastern hemisphere could do. Iran has strong ties to Russia and China and is we came to the aid of Israel, they would almost certainly run to the aid of Iran. Your place in history will be cemented as the man who brought war back to a global scale.

Gentleman, I am writing this today to warn you of the dangers you face. You are seeking to command the most expansive and thus expensive military in history. It is comprised of the best in the world fighting for a country with the potential to be a beacon to all. If you continue this reckless path you risk casting that light into darkness. We can ill afford in soldiers or sovereigns the price of war with Iran. Please don't rob this country of it's potential when we are poised to become greater than ever before.

Sincerely,

Zach Johnson-Dunlop

Letter to Mayor Rahm Emmanuel: We will be watching you.

This letter was sent to Rahm Emmanuel friday, after hearing consecutive reports about increased security for the G8 and the potential installation of Speed Cameras though out the city.

Dear Mayor Emmanuel:
As Chicago is cast into the international spotlight this coming spring you have announced a wide variety of various punitive and surveillance initiatives to ensure so called "security" at the approaching G8 and NATO summits to be held in our fair city.  Beyond that you have chosen to expand the use of unmanned surveillance to enforce various and sundry laws.  I am not addressing the fact that penalizing the owner of a car for the actions of the driver goes against written law in our state.  Nor am I writing to address the fact that your petty desire for some imagined control borders on creepy.  I am writing with a reminder and a warning.
Thus far you have used a comparatively light hand in the suppression of dissent in your city.  Not one person has been arrested for speaking their mind provided that they shut up when told.  By failing to give legitimate grievances their due, you have shown who your masters are.  However, you have handled matters in far better ways than your predecessors, the mayors Daily.   That being said you must know that you are in the wrong.  Free speech has no "zone", and you are no King.  You would claim that a suppression of speech is for the betterment of Chicago when everyone knows, Mr. Mayor, that it is for the betterment of yourself.  We are not fooled and we will not be dissuaded.  You may turn your officers on us, but would do well to remember that they ARE us.  A Uniform and a badge does not make take away the fact that our concerns are theirs and our problems are their problems.  This is my reminder to you Mr. Mayor.
My warning is simple.  As you turn your cameras on us, so to will we turn ours on you.  You may post cameras at every intersection and surveillance on every street, but we still are watching.  We are recording, and by the time anyone you might send to disrupt or disengage us knows they are being watched, the world will know what we have seen.  We will be watching.  We will be recording.  We will be documenting and sharing and reporting what it is you do.  You cannot escape our watchful eyes. Our cell phones and flip cams, our Nikons and Canons, from iPhone to ustream we will be watching you  and by extension so will the world.  Because as you have taught us Mr. Mayor, such actions are necessary for our safety.

Letter to Mike O'Neal "You Were Unwise"

I wrote this letter to Kansas' Speaker of the House, Mike O'Neal.  Speaker O'Neal wrote a letter to his GOP colleagues recently in which he said that he had finally found a prayer in the Bible to pray for our President.  He then quoted the first two line of the following prayer. 

Let his days be few; and let another take his office
May his children be fatherless and his wife a widow.
May his children be wandering beggars; may they be driven from their ruined homes.
May a creditor seize all he has; may strangers plunder the fruits of his labor.
May no one extend kindness to him or take pity on his fatherless children.

In response to this, I wrote Mr. O'Neal the following email.

Dear Speaker O'Neil
I am sure in light of your recent email regarding the death of our president you have taken a lot of heat.  I'm sure that you have been called a racist.  I'm sure that you have been called insane.  I will not refer to you as either of these.  As far as I am concerned you are a traitor.  You cited a psalm that in it's entirety begs for innocent children to be beggars in the street and to go without comfort.  I ask you, what if someone said the same of your children.  You asked that Mrs. Obama be left a widow.  What if someone said the same of your wife.
    I have followed the actions of your state since 2010 and find the legislation against women passed by your legislature repugnant.  I still would not celebrate if you died.  Perhaps you forgot the national tragedy that is the assassination of the president, because you have just called for our nation to be dragged through it again.  Perhaps you have forgotten the national tragedy that came only a year ago when a Representative was shot.  The Giffords shooting was not over political causes and still it gave all parties in the country pause to consider their conduct. You have just called for a man to be killed because you disagree with him on a political level.  You have called for the death of the President of the United States who was elected by the people of this country and who can in his due be fired by said people if they so choose.  Yet you obviously have no love for this country because you have asked that the institutions and processes that make it great, that make it fair, that make it free be tossed aside by some enterprising nut job. 
   Your excuse that the prayer asked only for his days in office to be few holds no water, because you callously went on to the next line of the psalm asking that his children be fatherless and his wife be widowed.  If someone answers your prayer Mr. O'Neal, on your urging, then you are a traitor and have acted against this country.  Perhaps I should thank my lucky stars that in such an event we have the recently signed NDAA to deal with you accordingly. 
    The people of your state would be wise to call for your ouster now, but may be patient enough wait for an election to fire you from your job.  I will repeat one line of your prayer for you "let another take his office"  the rest I will be civilized enough to ignore.