From the Chicago Dispatcher, December 2007

It's a Wonderful Life
Organizing Chicago Taxi Drivers

“We need a union,” drivers would tell me as I would walk through the O'Hare lot passing out the Chicago Dispatcher five years ago. Drivers were saying that when I first started driving a cab 15 years ago. They're saying the same thing now.

But I've learned that when cabdrivers say they want a union, what they usually mean is that they want someone to help them with their problems. In other words, cabdrivers want empowerment. That's it. It's not about unionizing or organizing. What they generally want is some avenue to solve their problems so that they don't feel like they're being pushed around all the time without being able to push back.

But unfortunately most cab driver groups that emerge with the intent of solving driver problems fail or are otherwise ineffective. And they invariably fail for the same reasons.

The main reason is that cabdrivers can't legally organize in the traditional sense. A traditional union consists of employees and has legal protection once they unionize. They can compel their members to pay dues. Cabdrivers are not considered employees. They are considered independent contractors. They can't take a vote to unionize and then force every worker to join if they get a simple majority of the votes.

And since they are considered independent contractors and can't unionize, the tools of a union are not necessarily effective tools for taxi drivers. Take strikes for example. Since taxi drivers have no employer, the only people they really hurt when they try to strike are themselves and their customers.
Even if a strike is pulled off with a modicum of success, it can't be sustained before drivers just go back to work or hacks sitting on the sidelines start driving again because of the opportunity to make a quick buck. The city knows this and can always wait out a taxi driver strike. Strikes only serve symbolically; the only thing to really gain is enough public awareness so as to embarrass the city and prove to be enough of an annoyance that the city feels the need to address some issues to pacify and reassure the public's perception - not necessarily for the purpose of satisfying the drivers' needs.

The more the city needs cabs, the more cabdrivers will likely want to work to make money, which means the more cabdrivers will cheat, which means the less effective the strike. Economics dictate that taxi driver strikes will be short lived.

That's why strikes don't work. A strike is an effective tool when you have an employer because your employer is losing money and both the employees and the company know it. But they don't work as well when your employer is yourself. The strike this past July was successful in terms of getting participation among many drivers but it was a Pyrrhic victory, because not a lot has changed and drivers still don't have a fare increase. However it did get attention, whether the city and general press want to admit it or not, and it has raised awareness among drivers that something can and should be done to address their problems.

Another reason cab driver organizations tend to fail is that there is no intrinsic unity of cabdrivers. If a man is being abused because of the color of his skin, he has to deal with that problem in one way or another. He has no choice. If a cabdriver isn't satisfied with his situation, he can solve that problem by becoming a janitor or a lawyer or a newspaper publisher. That's why cabdriver rallies at City Hall almost never work. Rallies work when you are backed into a corner and have no alternative but to fight your way out - not when it's a lot easier to simply do something else or to keep your mouth shut and continue working since you can leave the industry whenever you want if you think things will get much worse. When drivers don't show up for these rallies, the reason is often attributed to fear of retribution by the city or driver apathy. But these aren't the reasons. These are merely symptoms of the real reason, which is that taxi drivers generally have no real loyalty to the profession and they have little incentive to develop any loyalty.

There are lots of other factors, but I'll leave it at those two for now.
So, given these two major constraints, how do you organize taxicab drivers?
What I'm going to say might upset some people who have been working very hard lately to organize taxi drivers. Let me assure you that the purpose of this is not to discourage anybody from working to improve the conditions of taxi drivers. The purpose is to help people focus in the right direction so that they don't spend the next 20 years of their lives futilely trying to create an organization of drivers in a way that simply won't work.

All too often, taxi driver groups and those who say they want to help them will misdirect their efforts. They will start in the usual and necessary way by creating an organizing committee and will even elect a president. But that president will have no real authority to act on anybody's behalf. And that president will have no money. They'll realize they need money to offset the sacrifice they're making by not driving their cabs. Otherwise they won't be able to take off very much time at all, especially when the realities of life set in, when the rent is due and the kids have to be fed. So they'll take up a collection from cabdrivers.

“Hey, cabdrivers should give, right? We're doing this for their benefit and they trust us, right?”

Wrong.

Drivers won't give money. Oh sure, a few will at first. But after a while, they'll stop giving and they'll start wondering what their money was spent on and they'll have nothing to show for their investment. Then they'll start wondering about the organizers themselves and the committee members, even if they were close friends before, and they'll wonder why they don't see them driving as much any more. They'll start to question if it is because the organizers are working for the betterment of cabdrivers or if it is because they are sitting at home, living on the money drivers donated. And when drivers who have contributed don't start seeing results, and the collectors start coming around again, these drivers don't give money as easily anymore and they start to look at the organizers with contempt. The leaders are seen as ineffective, at best. Some will think they are corrupt. The rumors start to fly. And no matter how much integrity the organizers have, they won't be able to eliminate the doubt and mistrust that has already festered.

But whether or not the organizers collect money from drivers, suppose that every cabdriver in the city of Chicago said they support that committee. What good will that do? The verbal support of cabdrivers is meaningless. Just because every cabdriver says they support you, you can't compel them to pay dues, as you would if you were an actual union. You can't compel them to strike. You can't compel them to write letters. They'll tell you they're going to attend your meetings but most won't. They'll tell you they'll strike, but most won't. They'll tell you they'll rally behind you, but most won't. You can't compel them to do anything at all.

So the president of the taxi drivers organization will not be listened to by the city in any greater capacity than any other taxicab driver or general citizen off the street. Actually, probably even less because the city might not want to lend any credibility to the organization by meeting with the president or its committee. Now is the place where somebody who doesn't understand Chicago politics to say, “Hey man, they work for us. They have to do what we tell them to do. Power to the people. Solidarity, my brothers and sisters!” This is Chicago. Wake up.

So the problem is that when cabdrivers try to organize in a traditional way, without the legal avenue in which to do it, they are bringing a knife to a gunfight and end up stabbing each other in the back. They will find themselves spending more time trying to organize and fighting over control and meaningless victories than on actually empowering themselves or fellow drivers. Groups split up, unity is broken and everything fizzles away.

Then a new generation of cabdrivers will emerge who will be naïve enough to believe that something can be done by “organizing” and will make exactly the same mistakes. Even if they have some knowledge of history, they'll believe that they can do it better or they will mistakenly believe that they have the support of the drivers or that some minor change they make in their organizing rules and policies will make all the difference in the world. It won't. History will repeat itself. And the cycle will never be broken so long as taxi drivers operate under a “workers rights” mentality, when everybody else with any kind of authority sees them as business owners.

Am I saying that cabdrivers can't organize? No. That's not what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that taxi drivers have basically one of two choices: They can either work to change their classification from independent contractors to employees, or they can accept that they are independent contractors and use those tools which are already available to them. They can accept that they are business people who have their own means of addressing problems that are very different from - and in some ways more effective than - the tools employees use.

Changing the classification from independent contractor to employee would be difficult and would be met with a lot of resistance from owners, insurance companies and drivers themselves. A lot of drivers like the benefits of being independent contractors because they don't want a boss and they want to work when they want. Go ahead, try this: Ask a driver what she or he thinks about working for someone now and being given a set schedule about when to drive, eat lunch and take breaks. See how many of them like this idea. So for now I'll assume that the legal status of taxi drivers will remain as independent contractors and will discuss empowering taxi drivers accordingly.
But there's a problem that needs to be addressed right now.

A spectre is haunting Chicago. There are people out there who believe that they are still fighting a war that began in Russia in 1917. They think you're a victim and they're treating you like one. They think you should be taken care of and that they are the ones to take care of you. They are playing by rules from a playbook that was destroyed along with the Berlin Wall in 1989. They spew Socialist rhetoric that few people take seriously anymore but that may sound comforting to a some uninformed and frustrated taxi drivers.
Let's get right into it. They say things like, “No lease-cap increase!” But why? Why do they say this? Why is this near the top of their list?

Are you in favor of a lease cap increase? If you are a lease driver reading this, you might immediately say no. You might think that, especially if you always plan to be a lease driver and have an employee's mentality. But remember, you are not an employee. You are a business owner. You don't have to be a lease driver for the rest of your life.

You are like a larvae in a cocoon when you are a lease driver. The cocoon is the owner of the cab. You don't have to stay in the cocoon forever. You can break out of the cocoon and become a butterfly, when you buy a medallion. And if you survive and flourish, you can even create your own cocoon one day to help other larvae become butterflies.

But some people want you to stay in that cocoon. Who? There's two types of people who want you in that cocoon forever. One is the cab owners. It's not for any bad reason. It's just that you are their customers and they don't want you to leave them, just as you don't want your passengers to find other means of transportation. If you become an owner yourself, you cease to be their customer and you become their competitor.

The other group consists of misguided Socialists who don't understand this business and think that they know how to take care of you better than you do. They don't see you as having any potential. You are inept. You are poor. You have no station in life. You need to be coddled and taken care of because you can't do anything yourself. They want you in that cocoon. And they tell you not to worry because they're going to make sure that cocoon always keeps you nice and snug by fighting to keep lease rates down. Now just drift off to sleep and don't pay attention. We'll take care of you. Shhh.

Let's get back to the lease cap issue. Are you in favor of an increase? If I were a lease driver, which I am, I would not be. But if I ever buy my own cab, I would be sympathetic to lease drivers, but it wouldn't make much of a difference for me personally because I would no longer be paying a lease. Instead I would be paying a medallion and car loan. I would start to understand the hardships owners face. Once I start leasing my cab out when I want to take a little time off, I may start to feel the constraint of the lease cap because now my income is limited and I have bills to pay. Then I buy another cab, and another one and I lease these cabs out to drivers and that is my only source of income. Now I start thinking that a lease cap increase isn't such a bad idea. Then the city imposes more rules that are going to cost me money as an owner, but they're saying to me that I can't raise my prices to pay for these requirements. So I refinance my medallions to cover the costs of new vehicles and their required equipment. The prices of medallions have been driven up, yet I'm no better able to service those loans than I was before. I know how I can get more money. I'll just take out a bigger loan on my medallion since I have equity in it now.

Are you starting to feel the choke?

What the heck happened? I'm just a cabdriver who tried to build myself up, but I'm being held down by city policies and financiers who control medallion prices. So now what do I do? I guess I have to sell out to the big boys before my medallions are foreclosed. Hey, that's business. Right? I seem to think that I've heard that before.

So at the end of the day, because of people supporting the artificial suppressing of the lease cap, the little guys are forced out of the market and the biggest guys are getting bigger. What ends up happening when all the dust settles is that you have huge fleets and lots more lease drivers. That’s good for your “Friends” at the American Friends Service Committee, who say they want to help you organize with their Taxi Workers Organizing Project. There will be more pathetic workers who need to be protected. Maybe they can call their connections on the East Coast and get more funding now. “Hey boss. Bad news. The problem’s getting worse. This project is going to take longer than we thought. Oh, and send more money.”

If they actually fix the problem, they lose their jobs.

Back to my scenario. Drivers have gotten a few meter increases, the financiers are getting more money from the increased loan I have to repay, but my income as an owner is still fixed. So now my incentive to grab a piece of the American dream as an owner has been hurt.

So, taxi organizers who claim to be Friends of drivers are complicit partners in keeping lease drivers as lease drivers, whether that was their intention or not. And their policies, if adopted, assure the consolidation and growth of the largest fleet operators. Congratulations.

Oh, and you'll see even more of the smaller and medium sized guys gobbled up soon because lease payments aren't keeping up with what they owe the finance companies or they simply don't make enough money to put up with the nonsense. They'll take their capital elsewhere.

Meanwhile, Commissioner Reyes and Alderman Allen have decided to sit on their hands and watch all of this go down. They’re going to let the market work. Well the market’s not working. The city doesn’t let the market work when it comes to rates of fare. The city doesn’t let the market work when it comes to lease rates. The city doesn’t let the market work when it comes to how many medallions are on the street. But the city wants to let the market work when it comes to medallion prices?

How do the biggest guys stay afloat? Don't they make their money from lease payments as well? Yes. But unlike the smaller and medium sized players, some of the biggest fleets own or work very closely with finance companies. They themselves are basically the lenders who can then rely on interest payments, which have no cap, to get around the lack of funds they receive from lease payments. They might not even mind the suppressed lease cap for now as long as the little guys continue to crumble. But once the market is cornered, they will push the city for a lease cap increase. And when that time comes, then the city will miraculously decide to give them one.

Who’s to blame for this? You can’t really blame the financiers if they’re playing within the rules. That would be like blaming a driver for not working in the neighborhoods when there’s a big convention at McCormick Place.
The blame for this rests on the city and on the lobbyists who are working against the interests of drivers and owners when they’re supposed to be on our side.

But let's turn back specifically to organizing. Organizing taxi drivers on a social level will fail. That's right. It will. It will fail for the reasons already mentioned. Cabdrivers are in it for the money, just as cab owners are. Most taxi drivers don't define themselves as taxi drivers. If you see a taxi driver in a store and you ask him what he is, he will probably tell you four or five things before he says he's a taxi driver. He might say, “I'm Muslim.” He might say, “I'm African.” He might say, “I'm short.” Taxi drivers generally don't define who they are by what they do. They define who they are by, well, who they are.

So how can taxi drivers be organized? If they can't be organized legally as employees and they won't organize themselves socially because they have no intrinsic unity, how can they be organized?

The best way to organize cabdrivers is economically. People who truly want to empower drivers should help them become owners of taxicabs and even affiliations. That's how drivers develop business skills. That's how they break out of the cocoon.

There's a saying, “Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime.”

For drivers to be empowered, they need to be taught to fish for themselves. They need to be helped and encouraged to be owners of their own medallions. They need to have the opportunity to buy equity in their affiliations.
These ideas aren't new. They aren't imaginary. They are already out there and working. John Henry Assabill is the president of the Gold Coast Cab Association, which is an economic organization. This association was set up so that the drivers would own the association and share in the profits and losses of its operations.

If the Friends actually cared about drivers and think the lease cap should never be raised, why don't they buy medallions, buy the vehicles and equipment and lease the cabs out to drivers for less than market? If they think that owners are making such huge profits in spite of their own loans and other expenses, why don’t the Friends buy medallions and charge a lot less on the lease that the current market is making? Surely if they believe that owning a cab is so profitable, they could buy medallions, lease them for less and still make big profits and then buy more medallions. Why not just buy medallions for drivers? I'm sure they could get the financing to do it. I can even think of a couple of salaries they could free up to help do this. But they won't do it. Cab owners are evil and you need to be protected from them - not become one yourself.

The moment you, as a lease driver, start showing any signs of success by buying a cab, you become a threat to them. How dare you leave the cocoon!

In the words of Ronald Reagan, “The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.”

But let's forget about them and get back to organizing cabdrivers. What cabdrivers need if they want to organize is a union. No, not an employee union. A credit union, financed by cabdrivers. Cabdrivers shouldn't just borrow money to buy medallions; they should also lend money to other drivers who want to buy medallions too. And they should be compensated for this if they have no religious or other objection to earning interest on loans. Drivers do have the ability to be the owners, lessors, lesses, borrowers and lenders of this industry. This would actually build loyalty to the profession because drivers would be investing in the industry - investing in themselves, really. The charter of this credit union could set aside money to be used for political purposes. Plans could be drawn up to help drivers attain benefits through the credit union.

We can discuss this further on CabMarket.com in the Discussion Forum and I’ll dicuss other ways taxi drivers can organize and otherwise empower themselves.

In the classic Christmas movie “It's a Wonderful Life,” George Bailey operates a building and loan for the residents of Bedford Falls. He helps the people of the town stay out of old man Potter's slums by helping them invest in each other to buy their own homes. George didn't sell out to Potter and he didn't think the best way to solve the people's problems was by keeping Potter's rent low.

Merry Christmas.

George Lutfallah, C.L. #79310

"What I am saying is that taxi drivers have basically one of two choices: They can either work to change their classification from independent contractors to employees, or they can accept that they are independent contractors and use those tools which are already available to them."

Why either or? Why not both?

You can do both. They just have to viewed independently because the tactics that work using one strategy won't necessarily work with the other.

You could lobby the NLRB to be considered employees and then use the effective tools a union has.

You can also use the tools you have as an independent contractor.

My point was that if you're classified as an independent contractor, many tools of a union don't work and drivers who attempt to use these tools oftentimes find themselves spinning their wheels and they might not even know why.

For example, the CPTDA has been around for years. I remember covering one of their rallies led by Steve Weidersberg when I first started the Chicago Dispatcher. It was at the Rainbow Restaurant. The press was called. The turnout of drivers was dismal. It was a big dud.

Then I went to another rally led by Steve Weidersberg on Valentine's Day to City Hall. He was bringing former Commissioner Shoenberger an empty box of chocolates that was shaped like a heart. He wanted to show that Commissioner Shoenberger had no heart. It was funny. But nothing came of it except more animosity between the city and cabbies. The press was called. The turnout of drivers was dismal. It was a big dud.

In all my years in this industry, I can't think of a single thing the CPTDA accomplished. I'm sorry to say that but I honestly can't. To this day they will talk about a strike they pulled off about ten years ago. They still live off of that like I live off the 1985 Chicago Bears. But what did that strike accomplish? Anybody?

With the full backing of the CPTDA and its membership of drivers, Steve did nothing more than get his face on camera. He probably did more to hurt drivers than to help them. I hate to say it but it was embarrassing. Does this sound at all familiar?

But Steve Weidersberg left the CPTDA and I stopped hearing from him as much. Why? Steve actually began getting things done rather than trying to be the president of a cabdriver organization. He worked to pass a law that made assaulting cabdrivers a felony. That was huge. Steve did more working independently than he ever did as "The President of the Chicago Professional Taxicab Drivers Association."

I like Steve Weidersberg now. A lot.

The CPTDA was left behind and to this day their leadership does practically nothing more than talk about organizing. After all these years they're still *talking* about organizing. Some of these people brag that they've been doing if for twenty years. Well if they really knew how to organize drivers, don't you think that I would need more than one hand to count their membership?

Oh wait. That's right. I almost forgot that it's my fault drivers aren't organized because I wrote an editorial three months ago that was critical of an outside organization brought in to help them, which by the way, was using the same tactics that Steve Weidersberg had tried and failed at time and time again.

Could I be silent and watch history repeat itself? Would I have been doing justice to cabdrivers by smiling and saying that everything is just great?

There's a saying that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

As far as unionizing goes, it has been done. Some drivers in California voted to join the Teamsters after lobbying the NLRB and got a ruling that they are employees.

I've spoken with the Teamsters recently. In fact, about a week ago I got an email from them saying, "We are definetely interested in assisting the drivers in any way we can."

For those of you who have been around a while, you may remember that the Teamsters already came in and tried to organize drivers. They say they have some new ideas that may work.

If anyone is interested in talking with the Teamsters, I'm sure I can set up a meeting with them. You can send me an email if that is your interest.

If you like the idea of setting up a credit union to help drivers become owners, you can send me an email about that as well.

George Lutfallah
Chicago Dispatcher

Subject: Sticky: Re: Fool me once Shame on you, Fool me twice Shame on me, FOllow the Teamsters, Shame On All
Name: Name Withheld
Date Posted: Dec 16, 07 - 12:45 PM
Message: Same on Mr. George Lutbellow. The truckers will get him.

Only a fool would believe that the CPTDA has anything to do with the TEAMSTERS.

George's attempted association between the CPTDA with the Teamsters is pure falsehood.

Wiedersberg was behind that ill-fated marriage, which has nothing to do with the current organization.

He led the drivers into a trap.

You may remember that the Teamsters and Wiedersberg slunk back into the woodwork after busting up the unionization drive.

What is that called, when one makes statements that are "directly contradictory to the facts?"

Oh, yes, it is another LUTF- LIE.

Caught again MR. LUTF-LIAR.

Apparently you take pride in your lies and you r ability to hurting taxicab drivers.

And that is why Wolf called you a TRAITOR.

That is also why others have called you a Nazi and a Fascisti a Brownhsirt and a storm trooper – because you act like all of them:

Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt

By Umberto Eco

(Writing in New York Review of Books, 22 June 1995, pp.12-15. Excerpted in Utne Reader, November-December 1995, pp. 57-59.)

(The following version follows the text and formatting of the Utne Reader article, and in addition, makes the first sentence of each numbered point a statement in bold type. Italics are in the original.)

(For the full article, consult the New York Review of Books, purchase the full article online; or purchase Eco's new collection of essays: Five Moral Pieces.)

In spite of some fuzziness regarding the difference between various historical forms of fascism, I think it is possible to outline a list of features that are typical of what I would like to call Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism. These features cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other, and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it.

* * *

1. The first feature of Ur-Fascism is the cult of tradition.

Traditionalism is of course much older than fascism. Not only was it typical of counterrevolutionary Catholic thought after the French revolution, but it was born in the late Hellenistic era, as a reaction to classical Greek rationalism. In the Mediterranean basin, people of different religions (most of the faiths indulgently accepted by the Roman pantheon) started dreaming of a revelation received at the dawn of human history. This revelation, according to the traditionalist mystique, had remained for a long time concealed under the veil of forgotten languages -- in Egyptian hieroglyphs, in the Celtic runes, in the scrolls of the little-known religions of Asia.

This new culture had to be syncretistic. Syncretism is not only, as the dictionary says, "the combination of different forms of belief or practice;" such a combination must tolerate contradictions. Each of the original messages contains a sliver of wisdom, and although they seem to say different or incompatible things, they all are nevertheless alluding, allegorically, to the same primeval truth.

As a consequence, there can be no advancement of learning. Truth already has been spelled out once and for all, and we can only keep interpreting its obscure message.

If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores, are labeled New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine, who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint Augustine and Stonehenge -- that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.

2. Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism.

Both Fascists and Nazis worshipped technology, while traditionalist thinkers usually reject it as a negation of traditional spiritual values. However, even though Nazism was proud of its industrial achievements, its praise of modernism was only the surface of an ideology based upon blood and earth (Blut und Boden). The rejection of the modern world was disguised as a rebuttal of the capitalistic way of life. The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.

3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action's sake.

Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. Therefore culture is suspect insofar as it is identified with critical attitudes. Distrust of the intellectual world has always been a symptom of Ur-Fascism, from Hermann Goering's fondness for a phrase from a Hanns Johst play ("When I hear the word 'culture' I reach for my gun") to the frequent use of such expressions as "degenerate intellectuals," "eggheads," "effete snobs," and "universities are nests of reds." The official Fascist intellectuals were mainly engaged in attacking modern culture and the liberal intelligentsia for having betrayed traditional values.

4. The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism.

In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason.

5. Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity.

Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.

6. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration.

That is why one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups. In our time, when the old "proletarians" are becoming petty bourgeois (and the lumpen are largely excluded from the political scene), the fascism of tomorrow will find its audience in this new majority.

7. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country.

This is the origin of nationalism. Besides, the only ones who can provide an identity to the nation are its enemies. Thus at the root of the Ur-Fascist psychology there is the obsession with a plot, possibly an international one. The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia. But the plot must also come from the inside: Jews are usually the best target because they have the advantage of being at the same time inside and outside. In the United States, a prominent instance of the plot obsession is to be found in Pat Robertson's The New World Order, but, as we have recently seen, there are many others.

8. The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies.

When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers of Ur-Fascism must also be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.

9. For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.

Thus pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. It is bad because life is permanent warfare. This, however, brings about an Armageddon complex. Since enemies have to be defeated, there must be a final battle, after which the movement will have control of the world. But such "final solutions" implies a further era of peace, a Golden Age, which contradicts the principle of permanent war. No fascist leader has ever succeeded in solving this predicament.

10. Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology, insofar as it is fundamentally aristocratic, and aristocratic and militaristic elitism cruelly implies contempt for the weak.

Ur-Fascism can only advocate a popular elitism. Every citizen belongs to the best people in the world, the members or the party are the best among the citizens, every citizen can (or ought to) become a member of the party. But there cannot be patricians without plebeians. In fact, the Leader, knowing that his power was not delegated to him democratically but was conquered by force, also knows that his force is based upon the weakness of the masses; they are so weak as to need and deserve a ruler.

11. In such a perspective everybody is educated to become a hero.

In every mythology the hero is an exceptional being, but in Ur-Fascist ideology heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death. It is not by chance that a motto of the Spanish Falangists was Viva la Muerte ("Long Live Death!"). In non-fascist societies, the lay public is told that death is unpleasant but must be faced with dignity; believers are told that it is the painful way to reach a supernatural happiness. By contrast, the Ur-Fascist hero craves heroic death, advertised as the best reward for a heroic life. The Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death.

12. Since both permanent war and heroism are difficult games to play, the Ur-Fascist transfers his will to power to sexual matters.

This is the origin of machismo (which implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality). Since even sex is a difficult game to play, the Ur-Fascist hero tends to play with weapons -- doing so becomes an ersatz phallic exercise.

13. Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say.

In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view -- one follows the decisions of the majority. For Ur-Fascism, however, individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common Will. Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus the People is only a theatrical fiction. There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.

Because of its qualitative populism, Ur-Fascism must be against "rotten" parliamentary governments. Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.

14. Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak.

Newspeak was invented by Orwell, in Nineteen Eighty-Four, as the official language of what he called Ingsoc, English Socialism. But elements of Ur-Fascism are common to different forms of dictatorship. All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning. But we must be ready to identify other kinds of Newspeak, even if they take the apparently innocent form of a popular talk show.

* * *

Ur-Fascism is still around us, sometimes in plainclothes. It would be so much easier for us if there appeared on the world scene somebody saying, "I want to reopen Auschwitz, I want the Blackshirts to parade again in the Italian squares." Life is not that simple. Ur-Fascism can come back under the most innocent of disguises. Our duty is to uncover it and to point our finger at any of its new instances — every day, in every part of the world. Franklin Roosevelt's words of November 4, 1938, are worth recalling: "If American democracy ceases to move forward as a living force, seeking day and night by peaceful means to better the lot of our citizens, fascism will grow in strength in our land." Freedom and liberation are an unending task.

Umberto Eco (c) 1995

Where did I say that the CPTDA had anything to do with the Teamsters?

You need to read what I wrote again. You're trying to change the subject and skirting the issues I raised.

Speaking of blackshirts, you're using the very tactics of which you're accusing others. You keep saying others, including me are lying, without even saying what the lie is.

Your tactic is to try to attach the words, "liar" and "fascist" to people with the hopes that they'll stick and that people will believe it without even questioning what the lie is. Shame on you.

And isn't it ironic that you are calling other people liars without using your own name?

Why don't you address any of the points I made in either posting in this thread? I'd love some intellectual discussion about organizing points.

I find it hard to believe that you nor anybody else in this forum has anything to say about organizing Chicago cabdrivers.

Does anybody have any ideas to contribute?

George Lutfallah
Chicago Dispatcher

George you're right! These drivers are very stupid and they don't even know how to read. I don't even know how they've passed a written exam for a chauffeurs license. Ptropbably the staff at consumer services haven't yet got caught taking bribes under the table. I would like to see consumer services get caught, just so I could see Norma Reyes sit in jail with former Secretary of State and Former Illinois Governor George Ryan.

ut should camera in this guy

01/17/2000
Chicago Sun-Times

Murder spurs march
Cabdrivers are planning a march today in the wake of the murder of driver Hisham Siam, who was found stabbed to death in his cab in the 1800 block of West Nelson on the North Side. Police said Sunday they had no new leads in the slaying. Steve Wiedersberg of the Chicago Professional Taxi Drivers Association said the cabbies are protesting what he says is a lack of support from the Teamsters union to help cabbies unionize for better protection and benefits. The drivers plan to march from the Harold Washington Library to the Pacific Gardens Mission homeless shelter, 646 S. State.

Perhaps Lutfallah is not aware of the facts or he is deliberately re-posting incorrect information for reasons only he can explain.

Lutfallah's FICTION: "... the CPTDA has been around for years."

TRUE FACT: The CPTDA or Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association was incorporated in November 2006 by two former members of the of Weidersberg's CPTCDA or Chicago Professional TAXI CAB DRIVERS Association and several independent activists in the taxi industry, Weiss, Qureshi and Budsynski.

The CPTCDA corporate status went "DISSOLVED in February of 2005 after several years of inactivity and failure to re-register the corporation by it's inactive members' apparent lack of interest and irreconcilable differences beytween Weidersberg and his Board Members.


Lutfallah FICTION: "Steve did more working independently than he ever did as "The President of the Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association."

TRUE FACT: Steve may have done more work, but he was never - repeat never - the President of the Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association. He may have been the President of the Chicago Professional TAXI CAB DRIVERS Association, but he was never the President of the Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association. The President of the Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association is Wolfgang J. Weiss,one of the independent activists who came on board during the organization of the CPTDA as a consultant along with George Kasp and several others.


Lutfallah's FICTION: "The CPTDA ... to this day their leadership does practically nothing more than talk about organizing."

TRUE FACT: TO this day the Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association is not and has not been in the organizing business since its incorporation in 2006. Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association Board Members are free to work with and support organizing efforts of legitimate groups and credible individuals, which they do to fulfill one of their stated purposes in the CPTDA Articles of Incorporation.

Is Lutfallah intentionally misleading the public about the CPTDA or is he misleading the public out of ignorance of the facts?

T. Rashman

A suggestion for Wolf Weiss to make things understandable for all:

Wolf, you should change the name of CP-whatever to "WOLF WEISS' WONDERGROUP".

That way, everyone will know exactly who and WHAT??? we are referring to.

After you get some recognition, maybe Raja and Diane can start a "different" group called, "WISE WOLVES' WUNDERGROUP".

In any case, we all wonder what it is you all exactly do and who is doing WHAT???

Exactly, that is.

-Mike Foulks

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Perhaps Lutfallah is not aware of the facts or he is deliberately re-posting incorrect information for reasons only he can explain.

Lutfallah's FICTION: "... the CPTDA has been around for years."

TRUE FACT: The CPTDA or Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association was incorporated in November 2006 by two former members of the of Weidersberg's CPTCDA or Chicago Professional TAXI CAB DRIVERS Association and several independent activists in the taxi industry, Weiss, Qureshi and Budsynski.

The CPTCDA corporate status went "DISSOLVED in February of 2005 after several years of inactivity and failure to re-register the corporation by it's inactive members' apparent lack of interest and irreconcilable differences beytween Weidersberg and his Board Members.


Lutfallah FICTION: "Steve did more working independently than he ever did as "The President of the Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association."

TRUE FACT: Steve may have done more work, but he was never - repeat never - the President of the Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association. He may have been the President of the Chicago Professional TAXI CAB DRIVERS Association, but he was never the President of the Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association. The President of the Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association is Wolfgang J. Weiss,one of the independent activists who came on board during the organization of the CPTDA as a consultant along with George Kasp and several others.


Lutfallah's FICTION: "The CPTDA ... to this day their leadership does practically nothing more than talk about organizing."

TRUE FACT: TO this day the Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association is not and has not been in the organizing business since its incorporation in 2006. Chicago Professional TAXICAB DRIVERS' Association Board Members are free to work with and support organizing efforts of legitimate groups and credible individuals, which they do to fulfill one of their stated purposes in the CPTDA Articles of Incorporation.

Is Lutfallah intentionally misleading the public about the CPTDA or is he misleading the public out of ignorance of the facts?

T. Rashman

Perhaps it is best to let Lutfallah speak for himself. Stick to wondering what others are doing.

Lutfallah is quite capable of doing so without help of his pet howler monkey.

The subject of this thread is about Lutfallah's repeated posting of incorrect and misleading information regarding the CPTDA.

The misunderstanding, if any, was created by Lutfallah's repeated post of the same wrong information, not by anyone else.

The serious issue of whether Lutfallah is deliberately misleading the public about the CPTDA or if he lacks the facts is a valid question.

Either way due to his insistence on posting false information, Lutfallah can no longer claim the status of journalist. Nor can he claim he did not know the facts.

He has proven himself to be just another propagandist, a word slinger, perhaps in the hopes to further his own commercial purposes.

Doing so at the expense of others is beneath contempt.

How Peter Enger and Steve Kim are smarter than Wolf Weiss:

When they abandoned Melissa Callahan and the AUPD, they didn't name their new organization the "AUTD".

Somebody explain this to Wolf or find him a helper monkey which can.

Whatever you say, Wolf. The confusion doesn't stem from the fact that both names couldn't be more nearly identical?

I met frauds in jail, Wolf. You behave just like them.

-Mike Foulks

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Perhaps it is best to let Lutfallah speak for himself. Stick to wondering what others are doing.

Lutfallah is quite capable of doing so without help of his pet howler monkey.

The subject of this thread is about Lutfallah's repeated posting of incorrect and misleading information regarding the CPTDA.

The misunderstanding, if any, was created by Lutfallah's repeated post of the same wrong information, not by anyone else.

The serious issue of whether Lutfallah is deliberately misleading the public about the CPTDA or if he lacks the facts is a valid question.

Either way due to his insistence on posting false information, Lutfallah can no longer claim the status of journalist. Nor can he claim he did not know the facts.

He has proven himself to be just another propagandist, a word slinger, perhaps in the hopes to further his own commercial purposes.

Doing so at the expense of others is beneath contempt.

Subject: Fool me once Shame on you, Fool me twice Shame on me, Follow the Teamsters, Shame On All
Name: S. Watts
Date Posted: Dec 15, 07 - 9:08 AM
stringme1@comcast.net
Message:

Introduction:

The following editorial letter first appeared on the Taxi-L website and appeared in Toronto’s Taxi News, [June 2007, Vol. 22, No. 06] with the permission of the author.

Original Editorial Title:

----------------------------------------------------
Chicago cabbies suspicious of City's eagerness to 'help'

The Chicago City Council's offer to help taxicab drivers -- per Alderman Pat O'Conner's resolution calling for fare hike hearings without the usual drivers' petition -- is a milestone and historic first!

Wow, the cabbies are finally getting a break from City Hall. Sun Times reporter Fran Spielman reports that "cabbies were surprised and delighted to learn that aldermen were responding ....”

She didn't report that those of us cabbies who know and remember are and rightfully should be suspicious.
We're surprised and delighted and- suspicious. Better take a good, long, hard and cold second look. Be suspicious. Be very suspicious.

It is highly likely that this seemingly kind offer from City Hall is no more than an attempt to preempt a possible industry-wide outcry and concerted action -- petitions, demonstrations, marches, maybe even targeted strike actions in critical transportation points like O'Hare, Midway, museums, tourist hot spots, hotel cab stands and dispatch service.
It may be no more than a ploy by City Hall to buy time so that the recent changes to rules and regulations that DCS has been working on in secret can be rammed into place. Hmmmm!

City Hall's offer to review a fare increase without the taxicab drivers' petition is a first, but it is not the first time anyone offered help to ease the plight of taxicab drivers -- not just about fare rates, but also the seemingly predatory, deliberate mismanagement and misdirection of the taxicab industry by the City -- for the simple purpose of increasing the flow of taxicab drivers' and owners' cash into the city coffers.

Some of you may recall in the mid-nineties when things got really hot, the Teamsters Union -- the truckers -- showed up and offered to help. We felt the love, we felt the power.

We had rallies, demonstrations, speeches, organizing drives, the whole works. We were going to be saved from the mob-like clutches and iron-fisted control of the City.

We were finally gonna be a union! Fair fares, fair rules, fair regulations, and a level playing field in matters of City law, a kinder and gentler administration of the taxicab industry. A new age was about to dawn. The Teamsters offered to represent us and actually held a few “negation sessions” with the City via Caroline Schoenberger, Commissioner Reyes’ predecessor.

Then they went back to Teamster Hall and the Taxicab/Teamster marriage disolkved just as quickly as it seemed to have materialized. Poof, gone!
All the promises turned to dust. The taxicab organizing intitiative was 100% pre-empted – dead on arrival.

What really happened? Someone (from within City Hall itself, it is said) explained to the seemingly all-powerful Teamsters that if they continued to support the taxicab movement, not a single teamster-driven truck would be allowed to load or unload at McCormick Place or possibly anywhere else in Chicago.

And at that time, truck and container traffic at almost all Chicago entry points was growing in leaps and bounds. Business was booming fro the Teamsters.
The Teamsters, tough and powerful as they may be, ran off like screaming little school girls. I mean no disrespect to school girls! The Teamsters sold us out, thanks to the not-so-kind-and-gentle extortion by City Hall.

And oh yes, at that time the Teamsters were the undisputed number one contributors to the Illinois Democratic Party’s election coffers. Something smells here. Can you guess what it is? Be suspicious. Be very suspicious.

Taxicab drivers were left alone again, left to their own devices. The old rule continued, “Shut up, pay your lease, you have no rights.”

We ended up getting a fare increase, but we paid dearly for that increase – some of the toughest and most stringent rules came with the higher meter rates –to fulfill the City’s Prime Directive – get the money, get the money by hook or get the money by crook.

The notion that the taxicab industry could be organized to determine its own fate – to t ake up responsibility for our own profit or loss; to makesound business decisions based on real-world economic and business conditions, to improve service to our riders, to raise the standards of our work environment by our own effort, to gain that long sought-after “equality” and “equity” that workers in many other industries strive for – was not even given a decent burial.

Hopefully, the taxicab industry in not going into summer reruns this time around.

Respectfully submitted by
Wolfgang J. Weiss
Member, Board of Directors
Chicago Professional Taxicab Drivers Association
----------------------------------------------------

Post Script: How quickly we forget. How quickly those who are willing to pull the same wool over our eyes over and over again take advantage to mislead us down another dead end.

It does not matter if it is out of naivety, stupidity or malevolent design, the result is the same -- another dead end.

Are we going into winter re-runs now?

Bravenet has not banned me. Nor has Lutfallah. This posting may be deleted by him because he pays so dearly for the right to be able to decide who posts on his website.

Lutfallah has deleted many of my postings in the past. But he won't delete any more. It's time to stop with the postings that take time away from activism.

Lutfallah's felon ally has suggested that details of the civil litigation against the City need to be disclosed on the "Dispatcher Forum" and that I have some sort of duty to lay out both progress and our strategy for the City attorneys to read along with the taxi industy. I think not. The reason foulks can to to the public record to satisfy his curiousity is that it is not in the interest of my clients OR the cabdrivers in Chicago to educate the enemy.

ONLY A DUMMY WOULD JUMP INTO THAT TRAP. But foulks is an agent of Richie Rich, and we all know it. He's on the short list to be the next DCS Commissioner even though he's a convicted felon. Da Mare doesn't mind his felony background. Why should he? It wasn't a violent felony. It was only a death threat.

So I'm planning on ignoring foulks' further provocations and his rantings. Let the junkyard dog howl at the moon. Unless there's something really useful to comment on - and it's certainly not going to come from ANYTHING foulks has to say - I think it best to take a pass on saying it.

No doubt most will find this a welcome choice anyway.


Donald Nathan

Wake up, Mr. Nathan. You are subconsciously responding to me with your self-delusions.

I'm glad to hear that neither Bravenet nor Mr. Lutfallah has banned you. Who is this "Jack Spear" who claimed to get an e-mail saying that both you and Mr. Weiss were banned?

Who but an enemy of George Lutfallah would distribute such a lie in an e-mail, or obviously lie here about such an e-mail?

There are many reasons why Mr. Lutfallah has deleted many of your previous postings. All of the ones I know about were with good reason.

I agree with you, Mr. Nathan, that it is indeed time to stop with the non-productive lies, half-truths, insults, and irrelevancies.

You go first.

You already blew it when you refer to me as "Lutfallah's felon ally". I am not an "ally" of Mr. Lutfallah's.

This is a powerful self-delusion which serves no good purpose to those suffering from it. If I can't convince you how untruthful this notion is, perhaps I can suggest that it is a great exagerration to call me, "Lutfallah' felon ally".

It is as disrespectful to Mr. Lutfallah as it is to me.

I simply asked for a more detailed update on the lawsuit you filed against the City of Chicago in Mr. Weiss' interest. I don't see how discussing the public record so far could have any detrimental effect upon the case, but I tend, reluctantly, to defer to your "expertise" at the moment.

However, your credibility about your "reasoning" takes a nose-dive when you proceed to refer to me as an "agent of Richie Rich". If you really believe that the City pays such close attention to this website, I don't see how deriding our Mayor in such a juvenile manner benefits anyone.

You go on to claim that I am a possible candidate to be DCS Comissioner. I am not qualified to be the DCS Commissioner nor would I accept any employment with the City of Chicago. I am a full-time cabdriver and I plan to be so for many years, perhaps until I retire.

I never admitted to making a "death threat" against anyone at anytime. This is part of the public record. I pled guilty only to telephone harassment, and I have made a timely claim regarding this unlawful conviction. The complete adjudication of this case will likely remain out of the public record once a final disposition is reached.

I anticipate being vindicated. It is a continuing criminal investigation involving several members of my extended family and officers of the court. Quite frankly, it is simply none of your business, at least, not at this time.

This is why much of the information about this unfortunate legal situation of mine isn't accessible to you and most other people. None of this affects my chauffeur's license or my political activities.

I think you have been a failure at many things, Mr. Nathan. I think you will fail to "ignore (my) provocations".

Especially because I have had many useful things to say. I will continue to have many useful things to say. I will continue to do many things worth commenting on, whether you are agreeable or not.

None of this is meant to "provoke" you, Mr. Nathan. You think you are far more important to me than the reality: I don't care about what you say or do much at all.

However, I agree again, most of us would prefer that you stick to the issues and stay out of our personal conflicts.

Here's an underhanded softball pitch for you, Mr. Nathan:

What are your legal thoughts about the credit card requirements?

-Mike Foulks

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

Bravenet has not banned me. Nor has Lutfallah. This posting may be deleted by him because he pays so dearly for the right to be able to decide who posts on his website.

Lutfallah has deleted many of my postings in the past. But he won't delete any more. It's time to stop with the postings that take time away from activism.

Lutfallah's felon ally has suggested that details of the civil litigation against the City need to be disclosed on the "Dispatcher Forum" and that I have some sort of duty to lay out both progress and our strategy for the City attorneys to read along with the taxi industy. I think not. The reason foulks can to to the public record to satisfy his curiousity is that it is not in the interest of my clients OR the cabdrivers in Chicago to educate the enemy.

ONLY A DUMMY WOULD JUMP INTO THAT TRAP. But foulks is an agent of Richie Rich, and we all know it. He's on the short list to be the next DCS Commissioner even though he's a convicted felon. Da Mare doesn't mind his felony background. Why should he? It wasn't a violent felony. It was only a death threat.

So I'm planning on ignoring foulks' further provocations and his rantings. Let the junkyard dog howl at the moon. Unless there's something really useful to comment on - and it's certainly not going to come from ANYTHING foulks has to say - I think it best to take a pass on saying it.

No doubt most will find this a welcome choice anyway.


Donald Nathan