Kevin Zeese


Kevin Zeese, Executive Director of VotersForPeace and Co-Chair of Come Home America, discusses whistleblower Bradley Manning’s treatment at Fort Leavenworth prison; why the UN torture investigator is still being denied a private interview with Manning; how Manning’s chance for a fair military trial has been greatly impaired by Obama’s pronouncement of his guilt; the common ground shared by protesters – from the Left and Right – against government corruption; and why relying on the UN to enforce the rule of law isn’t ideal, but is almost required while all means of legal redress are denied.

MP3 here. (20:01)

Kevin Zeese is the Executive Director and co-founder of VotersForPeace. He also served as the Executive Director of Democracy Rising, is an attorney, and a long term peace advocate. He took a leave from VotersForPeace for most of 2006 while he was running for the U.S. Senate in Maryland. Zeese was a founding member of the Montgomery County Coalition Against the War in Maryland and has worked with various non-profit organizations on peace, justice, and democracy issues since 1978.

14 thoughts on “Kevin Zeese”

  1. Have to disagree with Zeese about the bill of rights vs. U.N. declaration of human rights. Leftists (and many rightists) don't seem to understand the difference between negative rights and positive 'rights,' which are not "rights" at all. Also, the solution to corporatism is a freed-market, not more violent redistributionist/regulatory statism.

  2. I saw a poll when asked who should be the 2011 nobel peace prize winner Bradley Manning came out on top with 40% of the vote. But off course the nobel committee cannot give Manning the prise because that would embarrass there 2009 laureate and that in turn would be an embarrassment for them selfs.

    1. W., I like your message, but you really need to work on your grammar and spelling. These deficiencies detract from what you're trying to convey.

  3. Rick, glad you brought this up about corporatism. Left and Right agree that corporatism (which is probably more accurately called corporate capitalism, because Mussolini meant something different by "corporatism") is the problem. But disagree on the solution – have the state take over the existing huge enterprises, or break the corporations up so smaller companies can freely compete. But either way, you have to take on the corporate state. IMO, corporations are part of the state. They couldn't exist without the state. So let's agree on breaking them up or scaling them back or at least limiting their power.

    1. David, your "solution" is a non-starter. Corporations seeking preferential treatment have to get their benefits from the other participant in the arrangement: the state. If the state can't grant special privileges, pass out subsidies, pass favorable legislation at the expense of competitors and consumers, and fund bailouts at our expense, all of this nonsense would cease forthwith.

      The simple fact of the matter is that every corporation, no matter how large, is at the mercy of consumers without government intervention. Let's concentrate on the entity that provides these privileges rather than the recipients.

      Get the government out of the way. The MIC would implode. The insolvent banks would go under. The bankrupt corporations would wither. The adjustment would be painful, but it is infinitely better than printing money to paper over this monstrous fiscal and monetary system we're enduring. The alternative is an economic implosion and widespread unrest.

  4. Steve, I basically agree, but either way, we are talking about a revolution – the corporations and the state are a unified force against the people. Unlike you, I can't really see where one starts and the other ends. We're just arguing about strategy, a discussion that urgently needs to happen.
    The best thing about Occupy Wall Street is that people aren't coming in saying "we have all the answers." They're learning from each other. We should all be there.

  5. Keven says they are staying out of party politics? Where does that leave the effort to elect Ron Paul? Very shortsighted.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.