If you use the word “illegal”, do you also say the N word?

Language changes, but the hate does not.

Illustration Julian Lucas

Language, erasure, and the violence we’ve agreed not to be bothered by.

It doesn’t even begin with a knock.

It’s more like the so-called smash and grab, only this time, it’s not teenagers,
Its federal agents in black vests,
doing their own harm to the community.
A pull-up-and-grab, not for sneakers, but for members of the community.
All of this sanctioned by Trump; State violence with a MAGA stamp of approval.

The only time kidnapping awakens patriotism is when the bodies being taken don’t look like theirs.

Why don’t the same people  screaming about shoplifters at CVS also scream out about people being kidnapped in broad daylight. Surely a crying child, as she sees her mother taken away, would elicit screams of injustice.

Let’s talk about masks.

When Palestinian protesters cover their faces, they are labeled terrorists.
When students wear keffiyehs, they’re accused of inciting violence.
When brown kids march, they’re “terrorists and thugs”.

But when ICE pulls up masked,  armed, no badge, no official vehicle, no warning, no accountability, that’s cheered on, that's ok?

People are  vanishing  in real time. No one is exactly sure about where they are taken.

We’ve been here before. 

1954: When a Slur Became Federal Policy

Operation Wetback

Operation Wetback was the real - and very derogatory and racist - name (used in official memos and press releases) of the campaign to remove Mexicans from the country by President Eisenhower. It was executed by armed agents and celebrated in newspapers and by some Americans. Sound familiar?  In the 1920s, when the economy was booming and white Americans wouldn’t pick beets, lay track, or clean hotel kitchens, the U.S. actively recruited Mexican laborers to fill the gap. Railroads, farms, and factories sent agents across the border to bring workers in, cheap, fast, and exploitable.

When the stock market crashed and unemployment surged, those same workers became scapegoats. No hearings. No charges. Just buses, trains, and public silence. In 1942, there was a  U.S. Mexican Farm Labor Program, which was also known as Operation Bracero. This  program brought Mexicans into the United States with the promise of decent wages and good treatment. During Operation Wetback as many as 1.3 million Mexicans, some of them U.S. citizens, were rounded up at gunpoint, dragged from fruit stands and factory floors. They were shipped off in overcrowded trains, ships, buses, often to places in Mexico that were unfamiliar to them. Sound familiar? 

There’s a plaque in downtown Los Angeles now. It admits what was done. But it doesn’t tell the whole story, that the people expelled were first invited, then blamed. Welcomed as labor and then removed as a threat.

And It Didn’t Start There

Hundreds of Mexicans at a Los Angeles train station awaiting deportation

Before Operation Wetback, there was the so called Mexican Repatriation of the 1930s.

These people have been scapegoated for unemployment, blamed for taking jobs from “real” Americans’. Sound familiar? 

It was racialized economic panic then and its racialized economic panic now.

The Invention of “Illegal”

In the decades since, we’ve gotten more careful with our words. The slurs are less acceptable. The harm and hate is still palpable.

The politicians have switched to something that sounds neutral: Illegal. People who intentionally use it must know how cruel it is. They must know the harm it causes?

You hear it when you watch the news, check in on Facebook or Nextdoor, or talk to a conservative media consumer. The word illegal is offensive and crass and it strips away at identity and says “you don’t belong here” to people who do, in fact, belong.

“Illegal” is not a status. It’s a whole sentence.

So I’ll ask again, do the same people who say “illegal” also use the N word?

Is the word “Illegal” like the N word? The origin and tone are different, but the use feels the same.

Both words serve the same social/political function: to dehumanize, disappear, insult and to say you don’t belong. 

Calling someone “Illegal” makes it easier to justify the harm and  ignore the trauma being inflicted.

This country doesn’t just deport people. It deports memory.

Are conservative commentators aware of the similarity? How about the  Latinos for Trump conservatives who scream the loudest. It is easy to forget where your roots first took hold and to dismiss the fearful people who look just like you. 

Ken Light. 6/2/1985 San Ysidro, California.

The question is avoided because facing it means facing the fact that the legal system is just a polished machine for disappearance.

The Myth the Right Way

Immigration done “right way” is expensive and fraught with confusion. People say this, like that path actually exists for everyone. But for many, it’s unaffordable, takes decades, and still ends in rejection. If your child’s life is at risk, you don’t wait for paperwork, you run. The “right way” is often just a privilege people mistake for a moral high ground. But don’t be surprised when the “right way” shifts again and you’re suddenly on the wrong side of the line.

Citizenship has always been a moving goalpost. Ask any Black American. Ask any Indigenous person. Ask any second generation kid watching their uncle being snatch-and-grab into detention while white coworkers joke about tacos and plan the next taco Tuesday.

What Does Language Allow?

“Illegal” doesn’t just erase the person.

It erases the context.

It erases the war, the drought, the cartel, the IMF, the colonial border drawn across someone’s ancestral land.

It erases the U.S. policies that created the very migration it now punishes. A simple google search can tell you what US policies lead to migrants leaving their homelands in search of a better future.

“Illegal” asks no questions about cause.

It just gives permission to punish the effect.

This country never apologized for the deportations of the 1930s. It never apologized for Operation Wetback. This country likes to pretend it forgot.

The state of California did issue a quiet apology in 2012, installing a plaque at LA Plaza de Cultura y Artes to acknowledge the forced removal of Mexican Americans during the Great Depression. It recognized that 400,000 Californians, many U.S. citizens, were deported, part of a repatriation of up to 2 million people. 

But did anyone notice?
No national headlines. No prime time apology. No reparations. No shared reckoning.

And the raids happening now? Don’t hold your breath waiting for acknowledgement or atonement.

Maybe one day there will be a monument. A footnote in a textbook. A documentary narrated by someone who mispronounces our names.

But by then, how many lives will have vanished?

So I’ll ask one last time, and this time, I want you to actually sit with it:

Is “illegal” like the N word?

Are we just too polite, too white, too complicit, too satisfied, to say what we really mean?

Final note. The term “Illegal” isn’t even accurate. It’s not a crime to exist without papers. It’s a word people use to ignore the reasons someone came, war, poverty, policy.

You can call the system broken, but don’t call the person illegal. That’s not law, that’s a choice.

Julian Lucas is the editor of The Pomonan. He writes about power, memory, and the parts of America that would rather forget.

Centennial of a Prophet: Malcolm X and America’s Enduring Denial

Malcolm X turns 100 today. That sentence alone should crack the sky. Not because we’ve come so far, but because we haven’t, at all.

A century later, the very system he warned us about still thrives. The police still kill with impunity. The media still gaslights. Our cities and schools still dilute. Gaza bleeds in real time. Prisons burst with the impoverished. And Malcolm? He’s still considered too much. Too Muslim. Too radical. Too honest. Too Black.

Meanwhile, America keeps stroking its chin and quoting Martin Luther King Jr. as if that’s the cure for everything, although America assassinated King too. But only certain parts of King make the cut, such as the dreamy lines about the content of our character, but never the hard hitting sermons condemning capitalism, militarism, and white moderation. King gets murals and recognizes in school curriculum. Malcolm doesn’t make the murals, or the curriculum.

So let’s celebrate Malcolm X’s centennial by saying the things that still scare people.

Let’s celebrate him by telling the truth. Malcolm X didn’t die because he was wrong. He died because he was dangerous to the structure of lies. He didn’t believe in asking the system to love us. He believed in power rooted in unity, not permission. So when white America defaults to Dr. King, it’s not about reverence, it’s about control. King is safer. He fits into a narrative of redemption. Malcolm forces confrontation. He didn’t beg for inclusion. He demanded power. And conservative Black communities, especially those clinging to respectability, too often go along with this, embracing King as the “correct” way to protest: quiet, suited, and church-approved.

But seriously, if Malcolm X makes you uncomfortable, it’s not because of his methods. It’s because he names the game.

And the game hasn’t changed.

Since the post Reconstruction era, Black Americans have owned roughly 1% to 3% of the nation’s wealth, despite over a century of so called progress. Meanwhile, white Americans consistently hold over 85% to 90% of the country’s total wealth. The gap isn’t closing. It’s calcified. This isn’t a flaw in the system, it is the system. One that was never designed for equity, only maintenance of dominance.

On a local level for example, if we take a walk through Martin Luther King Jr. Park in the city of Pomona. There’s a mural, bright, sprawling, reverent. It features Dr. King, Rosa Parks, John Lewis… and even Gandhi, who once referred to Africans as “savages.” But Malcolm? Not a glimpse. Not a shadow.

This isn’t just an oversight. It’s a curriculum. But it doesn’t have to stay that way. Curriculums can be rewritten. Walls can be repainted. And public memory, when reclaimed, becomes public power.

And where are some of the many Black organizations? The ones with grant money, or participate in gala dinners, and have “equity” in their mission statements? Why aren’t they celebrating Malcolm? Why isn’t there a single event, vigil, panel, or youth program in his name this week? The same groups that show up for MLK breakfasts and Juneteenth gatherings for photo ops go suspiciously quiet when it comes to Brother Malcolm. Maybe it’s because he didn’t smile for the donors. He didn’t dance around discomfort. He didn’t preach patience. And for many Black institutions desperate to seem “neutral” to gatekeepers, that makes him a liability, not a legacy.

But the truth is, Malcolm doesn’t need to be feared. He needs to be understood. He spoke out of love, tough love, yes, but love all the same. A love that demanded more for us than survival. A love that still waits for us to catch up. And maybe that’s the opportunity, not to shame those who’ve stayed silent, but to invite them to speak louder. To remember more fully. To honor him not just in words, but in action. There’s still time.

On a local level, Pomona suffers from selective remembrance. Mention Malcolm’s absence and you’ll be met with deflections. It’s easy to imagine city officials raising eyebrows, hesitating to greenlight a figure who still makes America uncomfortable.

That’s how erasure happens, not through censorship, but through cautious approvals, quiet committees, and unwritten rules about who’s “appropriate” for public celebration. But rules can be broken. Stories can be restored. And the absence of Malcolm today can become a presence tomorrow, if we’re bold enough to name what was left out.

The absence isn’t accidental. It’s strategic. And it says more about the institutions than it ever could about the artists.

But this isn’t about paint. It’s about principle.

Malcolm X challenged power. He called out liberal complicity. He said things that made white allies uncomfortable. And Pomona, like the rest of America, edits that kind of truth out of murals—and textbooks.

This mural isn’t neutral. It’s curated. But curation is a choice. And the next generation doesn’t have to inherit a version of history stripped of its sharpest truths. We can still choose to honor the full legacy, not the comfortable one, but the courageous one.

And when Malcolm X is left off the wall, we’re telling an entire generation:

Be grateful. Be quiet. Be like him, not him.

We’re living in an era of mass forgetting. The kind that turns revolutionaries into mascots and protests into brunch talking points.

Malcolm X, if he’s remembered at all, is reduced to a quote without context. A fire without heat.

But he saw it all coming:

The co-opted movements.

The liberal betrayal.

The Black faces in high places selling out the very people they claimed to uplift.

And he said so loudly.

Malcolm X turns 100 this year.

He’s not just a relic.

He’s a mirror.

And it’s long past time we stopped looking away.

And yet, there’s still time to get it right.

History isn’t fixed, it’s something we revise, remember, and rebuild. We can still teach our children the full truth, honor the voices that challenged us, and create public spaces where Malcolm’s name isn’t feared, but welcomed.

Because if we want justice, we can’t keep choosing comfort over clarity.

And if we want change, we’ll have to follow those who dared to say:

We didn’t come here to be liked. We came here to be free.

Happy 100th, Malcolm. We’re still listening.

And this time, we won’t forget.

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, or any other events because he will charge you a ton of money you couldn’t even make payments on.

Stop Blaming Leftists for Liberal Bullshit

How Neoliberalism Masquerades as Pragmatism, and Why It’s Failing Everyone Except the Donors

If you want to see neoliberalism in action, look no further than Pomona. From homelessness to land use to public-private partnerships, the city’s policies are a case study in how neoliberalism masquerades as pragmatic governance. As Part 1 explained, the real snake isn’t liberalism but neoliberalism, a corporate-friendly ideology embraced by both Democrats and Republicans for decades. But thanks to slick political branding, liberals are taking the heat for policies that were never meant to help regular people in the first place.

Homelessness isn’t a failure of the system. It’s a feature. Pomona’s entire governance model is a masterclass in shifting responsibility away from the state and onto nonprofits, private contractors, and ultimately, the residents themselves. And just a few blocks north, Claremont offers a quieter version of the same playbook—one that hides its exclusions behind college-town charm and progressive aesthetics.

The Neoliberal Blueprint: From Homelessness to Land Use

Homelessness: Managing Symptoms, Not Causes

Pomona’s approach to homelessness mirrors neoliberal strategies at the national level: decentralize responsibility, privatize services, and make sure the state doesn’t have to foot the bill. The city leans heavily on regional partnerships, outsourcing key services to nonprofits and faith-based organizations like the Tri City Mental Health Center and the Pomona Continuum of Care Coalition.

These partnerships might make services look efficient, but they’re really just a way to manage homelessness without addressing its root causes. In 2023, Pomona’s Point-in-Time Homeless Count showed a 14 percent increase in unsheltered individuals, exposing the limits of these stopgap solutions. Meanwhile, affordable housing construction continues to lag, with the city falling short of its Regional Housing Needs Assessment targets for very low-income units.

It’s a familiar move: rebrand cuts and outsourcing as innovation while ignoring the structural causes like rent hikes, wage stagnation, and the commodification of housing. And it’s not just Pomona. Claremont has consistently failed to meet its affordable housing goals as well, despite having more money, more land per resident, and far fewer excuses. Where Pomona outsources services to underfunded nonprofits, Claremont keeps poverty out of sight altogether through restrictive zoning, token planning efforts, and the quiet preservation of exclusivity.

Land Use: Privatization and Profit Over People

Neoliberalism isn’t just about outsourcing services. It’s about reshaping cities to serve private interests. Pomona’s land use policies are a textbook example. The city has prioritized commercial developments—parking lots, strip malls, and luxury housing—over public spaces or affordable housing. Community spaces that could serve the public good are instead converted into profit-driven developments, fueling gentrification and displacement.

This isn’t just bad planning. It’s a deliberate strategy to maximize profits for developers and private interests, often at the expense of the very residents who need housing the most. By treating land as a commodity rather than a shared resource, Pomona’s policies reflect the logic of deregulation and speculation.

Claremont’s version is subtler but just as damaging. Its charm is built on decades of exclusionary zoning and aesthetic preservation that keeps dense or affordable housing from entering the market. That’s not an accident—it’s policy. While Pomona gets blamed for visible poverty, Claremont’s affluence depends on limiting who gets to live there in the first place.

Public-Private Partnerships: Outsourcing Accountability

Pomona’s reliance on public-private partnerships extends beyond homelessness services. Essential public functions like fire protection and animal control are increasingly managed through private contracts rather than directly by the city. While this might look like efficiency on paper, it’s really about offloading responsibility and reducing public accountability.

The City Manager’s role now centers on contract oversight rather than public service. It’s a management style that treats residents as customers and government as a business. The result is a patchwork of services, each with different standards, limited oversight, and no one to blame when things go wrong.

And again, Claremont is not exempt. It outsources sanitation, contracts out landscaping, and delegates housing policy through technical consultants and planning workshops designed more to check boxes than build equity. Even when it has the power to lead, it prefers to manage from a distance. Both cities rely on the same operating system. They just wear different skins.

The Influence of Private Interests in Local Politics

If you want to know who really runs Pomona, follow the money. Campaign contributions from developers, contractors, and business associations shape local elections and drive the city’s priorities. Time and again, decisions favor commercial projects and privatized services over public goods.

This isn’t just a local trend. It reflects the national pattern of corporate influence in politics, where elected officials are forced to choose between their constituents and their donors, and the donors usually win. These policies are then rebranded as centrist compromises, when in reality, they are market-driven decisions that offload risk onto the public.

In Claremont, campaign donations are less obvious but just as decisive. Political caution, donor class preferences, and homeowner associations act as quiet enforcers of the same agenda. Protect property values. Avoid controversy. Keep things the way they are. Even progressive candidates learn quickly which fights they’re allowed to pick.

The Consequences: Fighting the Wrong Battles

Blaming leftists—or liberals—for Pomona’s policy failures is exactly what the real culprits want. It keeps the conversation focused on tone, rhetoric, and personalities while the underlying system continues to funnel resources upward. The same people who rail against government waste are often the first to privatize public services into oblivion. And the same voices who mock social programs are perfectly fine with taxpayers funding bloated contracts for private firms.

Meanwhile, the people advocating for real solutions—affordable housing, living wages, and public services that aren’t siphoned off by middlemen—are dismissed as naive or unrealistic. That’s the hustle. Any demand for systemic change is labeled radical, while business as usual gets to parade around as common sense.

Name the Real Enemy

Pomona’s policies are not mistakes. They are predictable outcomes of a political system designed to offload risk, shrink public responsibility, and transfer wealth into private hands. Claremont plays the same game with different aesthetics. Both cities are symptoms of a broader crisis.

The first step to fixing it is naming it. This is neoliberal governance, not liberal failure. And until we call it what it is, the same cycle will repeat: nonprofits stretched thin, contractors cashing in, and cities treating their residents like liabilities instead of people.

But it doesn’t have to stay this way. We already know what works. Cities that invest directly in housing, pay people living wages, and provide services without middlemen are not utopias—they’re just places where policy follows need instead of donors. It takes will. It takes organizing. And yes, it takes the guts to stop pretending that tinkering around the edges will fix what’s broken at the core.

Real solutions exist. We don’t need more blueprints. We need the courage to build.

Because if we don’t, the billionaires won’t just keep laughing. They’ll keep winning.

REFERENCES

Foundational Texts on Neoliberalism
Wendy Brown — Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution
David Harvey — A Brief History of Neoliberalism
Thomas Frank — Listen, Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People?

A scathing look at how Democrats embraced meritocracy and markets while abandoning working-class politics.

Adolph Reed Jr. — “The Limits of Anti-Racism” (essay)

Argues that elite liberalism uses symbolic politics to dodge material redistribution.
Lester Spence — Knocking the Hustle: Against the Neoliberal Turn in Black Politics

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, or any other events because he will charge you a ton of money you couldn’t even make payments on.

Claremont Might Legalize Airbnb Rentals. Lets be Honest, the Ban Never Really Existed Anyway.

The Claremont City Council is set to vote tomorrow, Tuesday, April 22, on whether to lift the city’s so-called ban on short-term rentals.

If Claremont’s leadership was actually honest, we would understand the ban was never real.

According to the city’s own 2024 staff report, there are currently 81 short-term rentals operating in Claremont, despite the official ban prohibiting rentals under 30 days. Nearly 80 percent are entire homes, and 88 percent are single-family properties—meaning they’re not just spare bedrooms, they’re full residences pulled off the long-term market. All are operating illegally, and the city knows it.

Enforcement has been nearly nonexistent.Since 2020, only 23 properties have received citations, and just 38 code violation cases have been opened in total. That’s not meaningful enforcement, that’s a quiet shrug from a city unwilling to confront a problem it’s already surrendered to.

The city relies on complaints, not active monitoring. There is no dedicated enforcement division, and platforms like Airbnb don’t check legality before publishing a listing. If a host gets caught, the fine is just $100 to $500. That’s just slap on the wrist - it’s less than they make in a weekend.

So now, instead of cracking down, the city is preparing to legalize what has quietly become the norm.

The proposed ordinance would create a permitting process, require proof of primary residence, ban commercial events like weddings, and limit where short-term rentals can operate. It’s being sold as regulation but let’s be clear, it is a retroactive permission slip for people who broke the rules and got away with it.

And the cost? Housing.

Short-term rentals take away homes out of the long-term rental pool. They reduce available housing, inflate rents, and create a fake “market rate” shaped by tourism demand instead of local need. STRs turn stable neighborhoods into rotating hotels. They profit the few while displacing the many.

This vote isn’t just about zoning. It’s about whether Claremont continues to chip away at its livability, one Airbnb at a time.

IS ANYONE ON THE DAIS WILLING TO SAY THIS OUT LOUD?

Legalizing STRs is just another case of the city privatizing public interest under the banner of “efficiency.” It is housing policy through a utilitarian lens, which is typical for politicians. Instead of looking through the lens of morality, this particular housing policy prioritizes whoever can extract the most profit, not who needs a place to live. This is the same logic that gutted public transit, hollowed out social housing, and turned basic needs into speculative assets. Airbnb is just the latest mask on an old face: commodification in the guise of choice.

If we keep designing cities for tourists instead of residents, we’re not just getting priced out, we’re watching it happen in real time.

The meeting is tomorrow at 6:30 PM at 225 W. Second Street. Public comments are due by 3 PM at CityClerk@claremontca.gov.

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, or any other events because he will charge you a ton of money you couldn’t even make payments on.

Prop 13 Is Killing California, But We’re Too Nostalgic to Admit It

There’s no polite way to say it, but proposition 13 has slowly killed California, gutted our schools, choked out our housing market, and shielded corporations from paying their fair share. But try bringing that up in a room full of California homeowners and you’ll be met with something between a hiss and a heart attack, especially from those in burbs.

Prop 13 has become a sacred cow, sold to us as the measure that saved homeowners from being taxed out of their properties. And while it may have once served a purpose, today it’s a policy zombie, dead logic still roaming the halls of Sacramento, kept alive by nostalgia, fear, and misinformation.

Let’s break the myth: Prop 13 doesn’t protect the working class, it protects those who bought early and big. The system punishes new homeowners and renters, locks in generational inequality, and grants absurd tax breaks to corporations that haven’t had their properties reassessed since the late 1970s [1].

While you’re paying market rate for a one-bedroom in Pomona, Chevron is sitting on commercial land taxed like it’s 1982. Is that fairness? Is that equity? No, it’s a long con dressed up as property rights.

And let’s not forget how Prop 13 gutted funding for public schools and local services. Before 1978, California ranked among the top states for education funding. Now? We’re lucky if schools have working HVAC systems. That isn’t accidental. That’s what happens when you starve local governments for decades and expect them to run on fumes and bake sales [2].

Prop 13 was a political coup wrapped in populist language. It passed with bipartisan support, but its legacy is bipartisan failure. Even Jerry Brown, who was governor when it passed, embraced it after the fact. No one wanted to touch the “third rail” of California politics, even as the damage became obvious.

SO WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT IT?

We stop pretending this policy is sacred. We start telling the truth about who it protects and who it punishes. That means having the courage to:

Close the commercial loopholes. It’s obscene that Disneyland and Chevron are taxed like it’s still 1978 while working families pay full freight. The 2020 attempt (Prop 15) to fix this nearly passed. With better organizing and clearer messaging, it could pass next time [3].

Introduce a progressive reassessment structure. We can protect elderly and low-income homeowners while still updating the assessed value of properties, especially investment homes and land banking schemes that drive up rent and displacement.

Use the additional revenue to reinvest locally. Public schools, housing, transit, and healthcare have all been starved for decades under Prop 13. Restoring local funding would actually make California livable again—not just for the wealthy, but for working people who built this state.

This isn’t about punishing success, it’s about undoing structural protections for inherited wealth and corporate hoarding that are actively destroying access to opportunity for everyone else.

And yes, the governor matters. And yes, so do state policies. But let’s stop blaming every problem in California on whoever’s in office and start calling out the policies that have quietly driven this crisis for decades.

Because while we’re yelling at governors, blaming immigrants, and pointing fingers at social programs, the real culprit has been quietly sitting there for decades, untouched and untouchable.

But maybe it’s not untouchable anymore.

Maybe The Pomonan just touched it.

This is your sacred cow. Consider it tipped.

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, because he will charge you a ton of money.

Stop Blaming Liberals for Neoliberalism Bullshit

How the Two-Party System Protects the Rich and Leaves You Behind

Let’s cut the crap, if you think “liberals” are to blame for the economic hellscape we’re living in, you’ve been conned. The real snake is neoliberalism, a corporate friendly ideology that both Democrats and Republicans have been shoving down our throats for decades. But thanks to some corny slick ass political branding and media twist, liberals are the ones being blamed while the actual offenders walk right past you.

Conservatives love to blame liberals for everything, (especially suburbia) from skyrocketing rents to wage stagnation, but here’s the kicker: those are the direct results of free market policies championed by the right and center left Democrats. Meanwhile, disillusioned Democrats are all pissy, fighting amongst their own party members for selling out to Wall Street and calling it “progress.”

So let’s sort through the shit and figure out why liberals are getting blamed for neoliberalism’s mess, and why that’s exactly what the real culprits want.

The Bait-and-Switch: Liberalism vs. Neoliberalism

First, a little context. When we talk about “liberals” in America, we’re usually talking about people who want a stronger social safety net, higher taxes on the rich, and regulations to keep corporate assholes in check. Think FDR’s New Deal or LBJ’s Great Society.

Neoliberalism, on the other hand, is the polar opposite. It’s about slashing regulations, cutting taxes for corporations, and letting the free market solve everything, even when it screws over working  people. This isn’t some fringe theory; it’s been mainstream U.S. policy since at least the 1980s.

The problem is, the line between these two ideologies has been intentionally blurred. Neoliberalism got branded as “centrist” or even “progressive,” which is like putting lipstick on a pig and calling it a prom queen. Both parties ran with it, but liberals, especially the ones who still believe in social safety nets and fair wages, got stuck with the blame.

How Both Parties Sold Us Out

The love affair with neoliberalism started with Ronald Reagan, who cut taxes for the rich, gutted regulations, and kicked unions in the teeth. But it didn’t stop there. The real betrayal came in the 1990s when Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party hopped on the neoliberal bandwagon. Here’s what that looked like:

  • NAFTA: Clinton’s free trade deal was sold as a win for American workers. In reality, it was a gift-wrapped handout to corporations that offshored jobs faster than you can say “outsourcing.” Manufacturing towns across the U.S. are still paying the price.

  • Welfare Reform: The 1996 welfare reform law gutted federal aid programs and left millions of low-income Americans screwed. Clinton called it “ending welfare as we know it,” but what he really did was kick people while they were down.

  • Financial Deregulation: Repealing the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 gave Wall Street the green light to gamble with the entire economy. Less than a decade later, the 2008 financial crisis proved just how much of a disaster that was.

Obama didn’t help much, either. Sure, he passed the Affordable Care Act, but he also cozied up to Wall Street, bailed out the banks, and pushed the Trans-Pacific Partnership, another neoliberal trade deal that would’ve screwed American workers even more if it hadn’t died in Congress.

So Why Do Liberals Get the Blame?

If both parties embraced neoliberalism, why do liberals get most of the heat? Here’s the brutal truth: it’s part political strategy, part betrayal, and part sheer stupidity.

1. Betrayal of Expectations

• People expect Republicans to carry water for corporations, that’s not news. But liberals are supposed to stand up for the working class, regulate Wall Street, and actually care about inequality. When Democratic leaders started pushing neoliberal policies, it felt like a knife in the back.

2. Conservative Bullshit Tactics

• Conservatives have spent decades turning “liberal” into a catch-all insult for anything they don’t like. By branding neoliberal policies like deregulation and welfare cuts as “liberal failures,” they managed to deflect blame from their own free-market fanaticism. It’s a slick con, and it worked.

3. The Leftist Roast Session

• The loudest critics of neoliberalism aren’t conservatives, they’re people on the left. When Bernie Sanders and groups like Occupy Wall Street called out the Democratic Party for selling out, they ended up reinforcing the idea that “liberals” were to blame for everything. That’s not what they meant, but that’s how it landed.

4. Media Brainwashing

• The mainstream media loves to blur the lines between liberalism and neoliberalism, mostly because they’re owned by the same corporate interests that profit from keeping us confused. By presenting neoliberal policies as “centrist” or even “progressive,” they’ve made it damn near impossible for most people to tell the difference.

The Consequences: Fighting the Wrong Battles

Blaming liberals for neoliberalism is a waste of time, and it’s exactly what the real culprits want. While we’re busy throwing punches at each other, corporate power is getting stronger, inequality is getting worse, and the same policies that got us into this mess are still running the show.

If you’re a conservative who actually gives a damn about economic fairness, you should be just as pissed at corporate power as any leftist. And if you’re a Democrat who’s sick of getting screwed by your own party, it’s time to stop settling for candidates who just slap a rainbow sticker on neoliberal policies and call it a day.

What Needs to Happen Now

Step one is getting our definitions straight. If you think “liberal” means deregulation and free-market worship, congratulations, you’ve been played. Neoliberalism is the real enemy, and both parties are guilty.

Step two is demanding more from our so-called leaders. For Republicans, that means actually standing up to corporate power instead of just whining about “woke” culture. For Democrats, it means ditching the Wall Street cash and going back to actual liberal values, like protecting workers, regulating corporations, and making sure regular people can afford to live.

If we can’t do that, we might as well just roll out the red carpet for the billionaires and get used to living in a corporate-owned dystopia.

The bottom line is this: blaming liberals for neoliberalism’s failures is not just wrong, it’s exactly what the people in power want. By keeping us confused and divided, they get to keep raking in profits while we fight each other over scraps.

So let’s call out the real villains: the politicians in both parties who sold us out for campaign donations and boardroom gigs. Let’s stop pretending that liberals and neoliberals are the same thing, and start holding the real culprits accountable, for once.

Because if we don’t figure this out soon, we’re going to keep blaming the wrong people while the billionaires laugh all the way to the bank.

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, because he will charge you a ton of money.

What Would Pomona Be Without Cronyism? A Better City, Probably

Ah, the cost of political integrity in Pomona. Just $400, give or take a technicality. In the grand bazaar of campaign finance violations, it was reported that our very own City Council woman, Elizabeth Ontiveros Cole has been fined yet again by the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). And let’s be honest, if campaign violations were a sport, Pomona officials would be perennial champions, because they usually go unchecked and are not held accountable, unless, of course, it’s by La Nueva Voz, the small, biased paper that proudly calls itself “Pomona’s Only Local Newspaper,” yet refuses to play fair.

For those keeping score at home, which we know rarely happens in Pomona, Cole’s latest fine landed her on an exclusive “short list” of Los Angeles County public officials with FPPC violations. That’s right, out of the entire county, she managed to make the cut. An achievement worthy of a plaque or at least a participation trophy.

But let's get into the allegations. The FPPC dinged Councilwoman Cole for failing to disclose campaign contributions in a timely manner. Basically, she took money but forgot to tell the public about it until after it mattered. But don’t worry, it was all just a tiny misunderstanding. You know, the kind that regularly happens when people in power are caught being less than forthcoming.

Even better, there was an investigation into whether she accepted money from a business with a financial interest in something she voted on. What the rest of us would call a “conflict of interest” and what elected officials and their gatekeepers in Pomona just call Tuesday. But in a shocking turn of events, the FPPC concluded that there wasn’t enough evidence to pursue further action. It’s the political equivalent of saying, “We know you did something sketch, but we can’t quite prove it, so… carry on.”

Now, in a city with a rich history of the usual “coincidental” decision making that just happens to favor well connected donors, Cole is in good company. Cronyism in Pomona is less of a scandal and more of a municipal tradition. Without it, what would we have left? Honest governance? Public accountability? A city council that works for its residents instead of its benefactor? How boring. 

But let’s entertain a radical idea for a moment, and yes it’s understood, many Pomonans don’t like anything radical, although their Jesus was a radical. Anyway, what would Pomona be without cronyism? Well, for starters, public projects might actually serve the public instead of well connected developers, even the local ones that make attempts at pushing statutes through committees and commissions. The city’s budget might prioritize the needs of residents instead of padding the pockets of those with the right political connections. Imagine a Pomona where small businesses get the same opportunities as the ones owned by campaign donors and beyond. Where votes on city contracts and zoning laws aren’t quietly influenced by backdoor deals.

A Pomona without cronyism might have a city council that actually debates policies based on what’s best for the community, rather than what’s best for their next campaign fundraiser. Maybe residents would feel like they had a real say in local government, instead of watching from mid court as the usual political regulars cut deals behind closed doors. Maybe, just maybe, people would trust their local government.

But let’s be fair, why should Cole be singled out when she’s simply playing the game the way it’s always been played? If anything, Pomona should start awarding trophies for this stuff. “Most Creative Use of Loopholes,” “Best Performance in a Conflict of Interest Investigation,” or my personal favorite, “Excellence in Pretending Not to Know.”

Of course, if we did decide to flip the script, let’s try a revolutionary concept. How about we stop electing people who treat campaign finance laws like optional side quests? What if, and hear me out, we demanded transparency from the officials who claim to serve us? I know, I know, it’s a radical idea. But hey, if Cole can make the FPPC’s “short list,” maybe Pomona voters can make a “short list” of politicians who actually deserve their support.

Crazy thought, right?

Lastly, while La Nueva Voz has gone to impressive lengths to detail every check, contributor, and technical filing misstep tied to Ontiveros-Cole, it’s worth asking: where is this energy when others in City Hall face questions of accountability? Selective scrutiny isn’t journalism, it’s just an obvious attempt to play watchdog while wagging the tail for their favorites. 

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, because he will charge you a ton of money.

Red, White, and True: Kendrick Lamar’s Powerful Statement on Black Identity in America

A beautiful day on Americas’s favorite holiday “the Super Bowl”. But for us, it was a day filled with art, (of course), a lovely brunch, and dinner bringing together the best of food culture and “America’s celebration”.

Starting with an inspiring visit to the Hammer museum, immersing ourselves in the creativity of Alice Coltrane before indulging in a feast of flavors. Then a visit to Bar Ama after to set the tone. Starting with apps then a rich and savory mushroom birria as the main course. To close the day on a sweet note, we enjoyed a decadent pistachio cheesecake, perfectly paired with a glass of wine and a classic martini because the perfect ending are great drinks.

When the evening unfolded we caught a glimpse into Kendrick Lamar’s Super Bowl performance, which was masterful in symbolism, a blend of hip hop excellence with social commentary. The cast of all Black dancers adorned and draped in red white and blue hoodies representing the American flag highlighted themes of ownership, and cultural reclamation. This symbolic performance suggested that Black Americans are an integral part of the nation’s fabric despite historical and continuous struggles we face, while Samuel L. Jackson as Uncle Sam critiqued patriotism. Performing on top of a Buick Grand National, hence GNX the name of his newest album.

Lamar's performance was a celebration to emphasize themes of strength, resilience, resistance, and Black identity, it was a reference to our resilience and cultural history.

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, because he will charge you a ton of money.

Protecting Immigrants

Photography Courtesy of Julian Lucas
Originally Published for Vice Media ©2014

There are some very good bills just introduced in the California Assembly and Senate seeking to provide some protection for immigrants. California’s AB 49 and SB 48 aim to keep federal agents from detaining undocumented students or their families on or near school property without a warrant. While these bills, if passed, would not override federal law, they would work to make it safer for children of immigrants to attend school by making it harder and more time-consuming for agents to enter schools or daycare centers. It is limited—it would delay arrests, though it would not stop them.

In 2014, Murrieta, California, became the site of intense protests as demonstrators clashed over the arrival of buses carrying immigrant families. Protesters held signs with messages like “Save our children from diseases” and “U.S. citizens don’t get a free pass—why should illegals?” These slogans reflected the fear and resistance some Americans feel toward undocumented immigration, even as immigrant families seek safety and stability. That divide remains stark today.

It is important to keep students in school learning, documented or undocumented—not only for their future but for ours as well. Education is one of the most effective tools to create opportunity and stability, both for individuals and for communities as a whole.

There is also the fiscal side of things to consider. Right now (this changes in 2026), the money our schools receive is tied to attendance. Fear of detention or deportation discourages parents from sending their children to school, which not only disrupts their education but also puts school funding at risk.

Currently, 12% of California students have at least one undocumented parent. These children are part of our community and deserve access to a safe and stable education.

Contact your California Senator or Assembly member and ask for their support for AB 49 and SB 48. President Trump intends to “make good” on his campaign promises. Californians need to step up and do what we can.

Update: On April 7, Immigration enforcement officers from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security attempted to enter two Los Angeles Unified School District elementary schools, but were denied entry by school administrators.

This appears to be one of the first confirmed attempts of immigration enforcement seeking to enter schools since a change in federal policy allowing it.

School leaders at LAUSD’s Russell Elementary School and Lillian Street Elementary School checked with their district leadership and legal counsel before turning away the agents.

DHS later said the officers left “without incident” after school leaders refused to share information on the children without a court order or warrant. At the time, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) maintained that the incidents were “wellness checks on children who arrived unaccompanied at the border.” They also stated that they had received permission from the students' guardians.

However, later when school officials contacted the students' guardians, the guardians said that they had not been contacted by the DHS.

According to California's two U.S. senators, Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, who spoke directly with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, the agents falsely told school staff they had permission from the students' families to speak with them,

Later, on April 11, Tricia McLaughlin, DHS assistant secretary for public affairs said that, “This had nothing to do with immigration enforcement,” in a statement to K-12 Dive. McLaughlin said the check was to ensure the children “are safe and not being exploited, abused, and sex trafficked.”

Update: as of late Tuesday, January 21, 2015, the Trump administration has, according to Newsweek, " reversed longstanding policies that restricted immigration enforcement at sensitive locations such as schools, churches, and hospitals."



Find Your California Representatives
California Legislative Information

Pamela Casey Nagler is currently finishing her book, A Century of Disgrace: The Removal, Enslavement, and Massacre of California’s Indigenous People 1769 - 1869.

Victory Gardens: Where Did They Go? Has Patriotism Traded Roots for Asphalt and Symbols?

Illustration by Julian Lucas ©2024

In the 1940s, American patriotism got their hands dirty. During World War II, “Victory Gardens” sprouted in backyards, empty lots, schoolyards, and public spaces. Although originally called war gardens during World War I beginning in 1917. At their peak, nearly 20 million gardens produced an estimated 40% of the fresh vegetables consumed in the United States. The phrase "victory garden" was first used by the head of the National War Garden Commission, Charles Lathrop Pack during the end of World War I. The word was so popular that it was used again during World War II, when victory gardeners returned to duty. It was more optimistic than "war garden. "These gardens were a response to wartime rationing and strained supply chains, but the gardens were also a powerful symbol of solidarity and resilience. Families, schools, and entire neighborhoods participated, showing that patriotism was a communal effort rooted in a palpable action. 

Victory Gardens were a source of food, but more over they were a cultural movement. Public campaigns encouraged Americans to see gardening as a civic duty, with posters urging citizens to Dig for Victory. Magazines published gardening tips, and communities came together to share seeds and tools. These efforts embodied elements of socialism prioritizing the collective good over individual profit. This means, the Silent Generation, parents of the Baby Boomers, was focused on mutual aid and ensuring that everyone had access to the resources and knowledge they needed to contribute. This sense of shared purpose was a stark contrast to the hyper individualism that dominates present American culture.

WWII Victory Garden Campaign 1942

A Resident of Southwest Washington, DC and her Victory Garden.” Note the service flag in her window. Two stars means two family members serving in the war. Photo by Joseph A. Horne, Office of War Information, June 1943.

Furthermore, the Black community also participated by growing food in their backyards as they were accustomed to gardening. Their resilience persevered during during the time of Victory Gardens because Jim Crow Laws, segregation, and lynching’s were still common. Segregation made it more difficult for Blacks because of the limited access to high quality seeds.

Additionally, Japanese Americans were also encouraged to grow gardens on camp property during the war, despite being forced to relocate to internment camps because of discrimination as well.

In the modern day, collaborative attitudes have diminished. Instead of repurposing public and private land for food production, modern America has embraced privatization and industrialization, additionally consumerism and performative patriotism. Big trucks with American flags as large as king-size bed sheets flapping in the wind, along with social media posts proclaiming allegiance to the nation. The symbols of patriotism are everywhere, flags hanging from houses or planted in green suburban lawns, campaign signs with slogans draped over freeways, and president-branded t-shirts and caps becoming a fashionable trend. However, the substance, acts of service, community building, and self reliance, is increasingly absent. Meanwhile, growing your own food, once seen as a patriotic duty and some has also associated to poverty as it was a necessity for people who couldn’t afford to purchase food from the grocery stores on a regular basis, more so in rural areas. Today, the concepts of growing your own food and farm-to-table dining are often viewed by some as leftist, socialist, or liberal niche interests and are not always taken seriously. However, those who truly understand the value of these practices, particularly people from densely populated and diverse cities, view them as a more health conscious and environmentally responsible alternative to industrialized food, which is commonly served at chain restaurants. Many local restaurants have embraced the farm to table concept. At such places, the commitment to sourcing fresh, local ingredients is evident from the moment you sit down, with servers often highlighting that their food comes directly from local farms.

"Sow the Seeds of Victory!" poster by James Montgomery Flagg, c. 1917. Library of Congress.

The rise of neoliberal policies, championed by politicians on both sides of the aisle, has prioritized privatization over public welfare. Food production has been monopolized by massive corporations focused on profits. Urban food deserts have been flooded with unhealthy processed options, while fresh, affordable produce remains scarce. Land once accessible for community or agricultural use has been parceled out for private development, turning potential gardens into parking lots, strip malls, and luxury housing, all done in the name of the almighty dollar.

Public spaces like parks and sidewalks, which were integral to the Victory Garden movement, are now largely overlooked as resources for combating food insecurity. During World War II, parks and other communal spaces were repurposed for food production, serving as hubs for community gardening. Today, these same spaces are either privatized, with the use of a BID (Business Improvement District) heavily policed by the BID with the use of private security, or restricted in ways that make them inaccessible for urban agriculture. For example, beautification ordinances or privatization deals often prioritize aesthetics and corporate interests over utility and community needs. Sidewalks, which could host planter boxes or small-scale gardens in dense urban areas, are treated as commercial spaces or are heavily regulated to limit community use.

'Dig for Victory' campaign was set up during WWII by the British Ministry of Agriculture. Published 1939

The Victory Garden movement wasn’t just about food, it was about empowerment and resilience. It showed that, in times of crisis, communities could take action to address their own needs. It provided a sense of control and pride at a time when global events felt overwhelming. Imagine how this ethos could transform neighborhoods in food deserts today, where access to healthy food is limited by systemic neglect and corporate-driven policies.

In neighborhoods like Pomona and Claremont, and other surrounding cities vacant lots and neglected public spaces could be transformed into thriving urban farms, although it is understandable the empty lots are privately owned. Instead of being seen as an eyesore or impractical, these spaces could become the heart of a modern “Victory Garden” movement, one that combats food deserts, fosters community, and challenges the dominance of profit-driven food systems.Additionally, Victory Gardens can go as far as to broaden its reach by collaborating with restaurants, bringing the farm to table culinary experience to life. This would mean instead of your salad coming from bagged treated lettuce, it would come directly down the street from the Victory Garden. 

Published 1917 Courtesy of Library of Congress

If patriotism is about having pride and loving your country, it must also mean caring for all its people, not just protecting corporate profits or only a certain group of people. A modern “patriotic gardening” movement could reclaim urban spaces, empowering all disinvested communities throughout America to combat food insecurity. By reinvesting in public spaces and rejecting neoliberal policies that prioritize profit over people, we could bring the spirit of Victory Gardens back to life.

Real patriotism isn’t performative. It’s all about action, getting your hands dirty to build something sustainable. Today, planting a garden could be one of the most radical acts of modern patriotism, opposing privatization and empowering communities. The seeds of a more equitable America are waiting to be sown, it’s time we planted them.

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, because he will charge you a ton of money.

Rest in Power: Former President Jimmy Carter on Israel/Palestine

President Carter was a supporter of Israel - and Palestine. In March 1977, at the beginning of his presidency, he announced, “The first prerequisite of a lasting peace is the recognition of Israel by her neighbors, Israel’s right to exist, Israel’s right to exist permanently.” 

Carter never wavered from that position, despite condemnations hurled at him by Israelis and Israel’s
American boosters for the rest of his life because Carter also supported Palestinian rights.

Later, in his book published in 2006, Palestine: Peace not Apartheid, the former President advocated for the Palestinians:

“Peace will come to Israel and the Middle East only when the Israeli government is willing to comply with international law…It will be a tragedy – for the Israelis, the Palestinians, and the world—if peace is rejected and a system of oppression, apartheid, and sustained violence is permitted to prevail.”

And he told journalist Amy Goodman in 2007:

“And the word “apartheid” is exactly accurate. Within Palestinian territory, they are absolutely and totally separated, much worse than they were in South Africa, by the way. And the other thing is, the other definition of “apartheid” is, one side dominates the other. And the Israelis completely dominate the life of the Palestinian people.”

RIP, President Jimmy Carter. We are grateful for your service.

Pamela Casey Nagler, Pomona-born, is an independent scholar, currently conducting research on California’s indigenous people, focusing on the Spanish, Russian, Mexican and US invasions between 1769 and the 1860s. The point of studying this history is to tell us how we got here from there. 

Turning Back the Pages: 15 (or so) Takeaways from Jimmy Carter's 1976 Playboy Interview

Playboy Magazine, founded by Hugh Hefner on April 9, 1926, became an iconic publication celebrated not only for glamor nude photography, but also for its exceptional journalism. On March 18, 2020, just days after the world shut down due to the pandemic, CEO Ben Kohn announced that the Spring issue would be the last to be printed, marking the publication’s transition to an online-only format.

Hugh Hefner, a Chicago-born publisher and editor, created more than just a magazine he built one of the most recognizable global platforms of its kind, offering content that appealed to diverse audiences. Hefner once explained his view of obscenity as “racism, war, and bigotry,” rejecting the notion that sex was taboo. He famously stated, “What a cold world this would be if we weren’t sexual beings. That’s the heart of who we are.”

Hefner was also a passionate supporter of civil rights, though that deserves a deeper exploration in another article.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter made an unexpected and bold move during his presidential campaign, by giving an interview to Playboy magazine. It was a surprising choice, given the magazine’s provocative reputation, but Carter wasn’t one to shy away from connecting with people, even through unconventional means. At a time when trust in government was at an all-time low, Carter saw this as an opportunity to speak directly to Americans about who he was, his values, struggles, and hopes for the country.

One of the most talked about moments from the interview was Carter’s admission of having “lust in his heart.” It was a raw and deeply personal statement, rooted in his Christian faith, where he confessed that, like everyone else, he wasn’t perfect. He struggled with temptations, just as we all do. By sharing this, Carter wasn’t just baring his soul he was reaching out to voters in a deeply human way, showing that even a man running for president had flaws and wrestled with moral challenges.

Carter also wanted to make one thing clear, his faith shaped his values, but it wouldn’t dictate how he governed. He strongly believed in the separation of church and state. To him, America was a place for everyone, no matter what they believed. His faith gave him the foundation to serve others, but he wasn’t about to impose those beliefs on anyone else. It was a balancing act, but one he thought was essential for fairness and unity.

At the center of Carter’s campaign was a promise of honesty and transparency. He had seen how scandals like Watergate and the Vietnam War had shattered the public’s trust in government. Carter wanted to change by turning the page on that chapter of American politics. He spoke openly about his frustration with the lies and secrecy that had become so common, and he promised to lead with integrity. For Carter, leadership wasn’t about power it was about trust and service. Wished more presidents were like this, including state and city politicians.

Though many people would think the goal of a president is to be a fixer of politics, however, Carter’s vision wasn’t just about fixing Washington, it was about people. He cared deeply about human rights, both in other parts of the world and at home. On the global stage, he promised to stand up for freedom and justice. At home, he was committed to civil rights, a passion that came from growing up in the segregated South. Carter had witnessed racism up close and knew it wasn’t just a Southern problem it was a moral failing that the entire nation needed to address.

Furthermore, humility was another cornerstone of Carter’s beliefs. He didn’t see leadership as a stage for self-promotion but as a duty to serve others. He talked about the dangers of pride in politics, warning that arrogance and self righteousness could lead to destructive choices. Instead, he championed humility and forgiveness, believing that progress came from understanding, not division.

Being raised in rural Georgia, was a big part in shaping who he was. He often credited his early years with teaching him the values of hard work, honesty, and empathy. Those lessons stayed with him, guiding his vision for America, a country where people worked together, treated each other with kindness, and overcame challenges as one.

Additionally, Carter wasn’t afraid to push back against the superficiality of politics. Carter believed voters deserved sincerity, not empty promises or the usual cony political commentary. He wanted people to see him as he was flawed, honest, and genuinely trying to do the right thing.

Even his decision to give the Playboy interview reflected his approach. Carter knew the magazine had a controversial reputation, but he also recognized its broad reach. He didn’t shy away from the opportunity to engage with people where they were, even if it meant raising a few eyebrows. To him, it was worth it if it allowed him to connect authentically with a wider audience.

Ultimately, Carter’s Playboy interview was more than just a campaign moment, it was a reflection of who he was as a human. It showed his willingness to be vulnerable, his commitment to integrity, and his belief in leading with humility. At its core, it captured the tension between a nation that publicly clings to puritanical values but often struggles with contradictions behind closed doors, which is more prevalent in the political landscape today. Carter wasn’t afraid to confront those complexities, offering a vision of leadership that was as real and human as he was.

Julian Lucas, is a darkroom photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, because he will charge you a ton of money.

Claremont: Your Theater is Circling the Drain – Rediscover the Magic Before It’s Gone

Run Lola Run
Laemmle Claremont 5
Photography Julian Lucas ©2024

Claremont, California, has long prided itself on being a hub of intellectual vibrancy. Surrounded by a cluster of colleges with a three billion dollar endowment, and a rich history of creativity. Claremont used to be an artistic exploration that thrived. The emphasis here is on "used to be." These days, it feels like everything dope (cool) has been plundered. Those who were lucky enough to experience Claremont’s once bustling art scene probably yearn for the good ol' days when it was more avant-garde and less chain consumerism focused entities. Ironically, Claremont is often called the "City of Trees and PhDs." You’d think a city that bills itself this way would have at least one bookstore, right? But Claremont did have bookstores! In fact, it used to have several. Like anything else good, those have whistled away with the wind.

But this article isn’t really about bookstores, although I have to say, Mirrored Society Bookstore was something else. It was a fine art bookstore that specialized in limited edition photobooks, and let's just say it was probably the most artistically innovative, avant-garde, and dare I say controversial bookstore in all of suburbia. I mean, where else could you walk in and buy a signed book by Nobuyoshi Araki, imported straight from Japan, or pick up a title like Street Walker by Scot Sothern. Yeah, that last one definitely earned us many side eyes and warnings from the suburban crowd. But hey, we were pushing the envelope right off the table and into uncharted territory. Although we thought we'd be embraced given Claremont’s cultural history, we weren't. It was quite the opposite.

Today, Claremont has transformed, and in the process, it has lost its creatives. What was once a thriving hub for artistic expression has begun to change in ways that risk stifling that very spirit. The arrival of more corporate chains and the growing trend toward mainstream establishments are slowly reshaping Claremont’s unique cultural landscape. The 1990s era of the dimly lit coffee shops has vanished and for those who remember, the bohemian, feminist, and "hippie art” paintings of trees or abstract self nudes adorning the off white walls, mismatched chairs surrounding coffee stained tables, and teas from around the world lining the entire counter. Additionally, these spaces were home to uncensored conversations about anything and everything, free from someone becoming triggered, offended, or distractedly reaching for their phone to scroll due to a dwindling attention span.

Now coffee shops have the aesthetics of a dentist office with lifeless blank white walls. iPads are used for cash registers, matching furniture, youngsters trying to live a hippie life, however are more sensitive to conversations, everyone gets triggered, and now more than ever humans have lost conversation to scrolling or constantly checking their phones.

But let's get into it. Now is a crucial time for the community to recognize what it stands to lose especially when it comes to independence.

Laemmle Theatre, a haven known for its independent, international, and art house cinema serves as a sharp reminder that Claremont’s film scene is at a crossroads. Laemmle is more than just a movie theater; it's a cultural hub, offering an array of films, but it's time for Laemmle to start pushing the boundaries a bit and offer more films that represent the LGBTQ+ community and more indie and foreign films. How about showcasing films shot on 35mm? Why not take it back to the old school with screenings of films like Y Tu Mamá También? It might piss a few people off, but who cares, it would undoubtedly attract and broaden the range of audiences who can love and appreciate those kinds of films. And yes we understand old films can be streamed. But you can also pop popcorn at home. That has never stopped anyone from buying theater pop corn.

Anyway, Claremont continues to face a void that needs to be filled. Maybe more screenings of independent films out here in the 909? Make those cool actors drive 30 miles east to do talks out this way, because doesn’t suburbia matter? 

The shift towards conformity has threatened and has drowned the free-spirited essence that has defined the city’s charm. The soul of Claremont has slowly been redefined by chain driven consumerism, and the cultural vibrancy that once drew artists, thinkers, and nonconformists to the area is in danger of becoming a mere shadow of its former self.

This cultural shift highlights the significance of the arts, including galleries, museums, indie films, and the cultivation of an environment where alternative voices can thrive. This is not just about cinema; it's about preserving Claremont’s identity as a place where creativity is celebrated, controversy is embraced, and nonconformity isn’t just tolerated, but actively encouraged. In a world where mainstream entertainment often leans toward homogenized, feel-good content, Claremont’s film scene needs to be a place that challenges its audience, that sparks discussion, and yes—sometimes creates controversy.

The recent events of Laemmle Theatre announcing its closure and most recently being added to an auction which failed, doesn’t have to signal the end of independent films in Claremont. Rather, it should be a catalyst for reinvention. However, with reinvention comes creativity, yes money as well, it's understandable. 

But the question remains, is there still a driving culture of creativity within a city that prides itself as “the city of trees and PhDs? Is there enough interest that would spark more interest for indie films to thrive? 

What about such initiatives as a film festival? It would not only fill the cultural void but also attract diverse audiences from around the world to celebrate creativity, and put Claremont on the map as a hub for independent and artistic cinema. With its intellectual resources and diverse population, Claremont is uniquely positioned to host a festival that celebrates films which push boundaries, provoke thought, and explore new ways of storytelling. By focusing on the kind of films that are often sidelined by major studios, Claremont could carve out a niche for itself as a cultural hotspot for filmmakers and film lovers alike.Claremont is a college town, how about partnering with the colleges, maybe Pitzer College? This is a potential rallying point for Claremont’s creative community, providing a platform for local filmmakers and drawing audiences who crave more than just commercial blockbusters.

But to make this a reality, the community must step up. It’s not enough to hope for change from the top down; residents, students, and local leaders need to show active support for indie cinema by attending screenings, encouraging local theaters to take risks, and advocating for more diverse programming. Claremont must recognize that this city isn’t just a place where people go to eat burgers, drink beer and ladies go to get their hair done, it’s a space where art should challenge, inspire, and at times, provoke.

Moreover, Claremont must remember that part of what makes it special is its willingness to embrace controversy and nonconformity. It’s time for Claremont to make a stand. The city should become a place where unconventional stories can be told and where the celebration of art doesn't have to come with a safe, mass-market appeal. We need more films that question the status quo, more films that engage with pressing social issues, and more films that stir the pot.

In short, Claremont’s film scene needs to evolve to match the intellectual and fill the void of the artistic energy in the city. By embracing indie films, hosting a film festival, and supporting unconventional storytelling, Claremont can assert itself as a city that values culture over convenience and creativity over conformity. It’s time to push back against the growing tide of uniformity and reclaim Claremont's place as a haven for free thinkers, artists, and filmmakers.

Claremont can’t stand to lose Laemmle Theatre. This is an opportunity, It’s a call to take action, a chance for the Claremonters to step up and ensure that the city remains a place where independent cinema can thrive. But to do so, residents and leaders must recognize what they stand to lose, and take deliberate steps to ensure that Claremont continues to be a space where controversy is welcomed, and creativity is celebrated. If the city wants to preserve its unique identity, it must embrace the films that reflect the diverse, intellectual, and nonconformist spirit that made Claremont great in the first place.

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, because he will charge you a ton of money.

Pomona’s Parched Press: Navigating Life in a News Desert

According to a report by Northwestern University, “The U.S. saw the loss of an average of two newspapers per week between late 2019 and May 2022, leaving an estimated 70 million people in places that are already news deserts and areas that are in high risk of becoming so. . . . If the trend continues, a third of newspapers will be lost by 2025.”

Collage by Julian Lucas ©2024

Here in Pomona, if this election cycle demonstrated anything, it demonstrated the ramifications of losing the local press. Traditionally, local news has played a critical role in holding power to account, informing residents about local events, and fostering community engagement. However, this election cycle, without adequate local reporting, we were left in a swirl of rumor and innuendo that proved hard to refute. Many discussions dissolved into social media trolling. Citizens, barraged with scandalous accusations, watched as our city became more polarized than ever.

This election cycle, voters were basically left to their own devices, and individuals conducting their own research found out that it was not an easy task. Even attempts to locate something fairly simple and fairly straightforward like campaign financing was fraught with obstacles and obfuscations. The City of Pomona’s website led citizens on a bewildering wild goose chase this election round.

In this, Pomona is simply following a disturbing national trend. Across the country, once vibrant newsrooms that have served as the backbone of our local communities, have diminished, leaving many regions without reliable sources for news. Taking into consideration the size of Pomona (population 145,000), the choices are slim indeed. Voters are basically limited to the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, La Nueva Voz, social media (Facebook, Instagram, Nextdoor), and yours truly, the Pomonan. While Pomonans may not know about the circumstances and conditions of the local newsrooms, they know firsthand what it is like to live in a news desert.


So what are we receiving, and are not receiving, from these news sources?

Though many think of the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin as a local, it really is not. In actuality, it is part of a vast news conglomerate, only masquerading as a local news outlet with but a handful of local reporters. Founded in 1885, over the years, it earned a well-deserved reputation as an independent local newspaper but, in 1999, it was sold to the Southern California News Group (SCNG) which publishes 11 Southern California dailies among other things. Few people recognize that SCNG controls much of Southern California so-called local reporting. With a readership of 6.2 million, it is a big stretch to say their concerns are local. But that is not the extent of it. SCNG is, in turn, operated by Digital First Media (aka the Tribune News Media Group), which is the second biggest newspaper company in the country with 77 daily newspapers. Digital First media, in turn, is owned by the hedge fund, Alden Global Capital, a firm with a reputation for eviscerating independent news sources by prioritizing short-term profits over journalistic integrity and service to the community.

Newspapers have faced an unprecedented decline in recent years, for all sorts of economic reasons, but certainly the entry of the hedge funders and private equity firms into the local news market have resulted in gaps in community reporting and information dissemination. Vanity Fair’s media reporter, Joe Pompeo, in his February 5, 2022, article, The Hedge Fund Vampire That Bleeds Newspapers Dry, skewered Alden Global Capital for its predatory behavior: “In its mission to squeeze the last profits out of newspapers, Alden Global Capital has eliminated the jobs of scores of reporters and editors, and decimated journalism in cities all over the country.”

When Alden Global Capital gutted the Chicago Tribune, its reporters wrote, “This stripping of assets built the personal wealth of Alden investors but crippled news outlets that have been vital to American democracy.”

Washington Post media critic Margaret Sullivan called Alden Global Capital  “one of the most ruthless of the corporate strip-miners seemingly intent on destroying local journalism.” She explains that the profit-driven model has led to layoffs, reduced coverage, and the closure of entire newsrooms. Further, she calls this the “ghosting” of local journalism. Once-thriving newsrooms have been hollowed out, leaving behind only a shadow of their former selves.

And research analyst Doug Arthur described Alden Global Capital as “the ultimate cash flow mercenary. They want to find cash flow and bleed it to death.”

During its heyday, the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin (IVDB) was much more rigorous and deeply embedded in the community, playing a vital role in fostering civic engagement and accountability. Today, the diminished coverage under ownership by a hedge fund, leaves a void in the community, underscoring the broader consequences of dwindling local news sources.

At best, the IVDB sends out a reporter a couple of times a year to visit City Council chambers, and it is common practice for the San Gabriel News Group to print the same editorial in all 11 of its dailies. If a reader wants to rebut that editorial, their letter to the editor (if accepted), only appears in one local - and none of the others. In order to truly rebut the editorial, the reader would have to submit something like 11 letters to all of the dailies and they would have to, in turn, be accepted and printed by all of them. Commonly, the editorials SGNG prints skew conservative or libertarian due to the monied interests of the hedge fund and private equity fund owners.

Pomona’s other local news source is La Nueva Voz (LNV), “the little engine that could.” With limited resources, it punches above its weight, but there is no way that LNV can provide the “comprehensive coverage of community and business news,” as it claims to cover, since it only publishes once a month. And even though La Nueva Voz also calls itself a “bilingual (English/Spanish) community newspaper” this is not consistently reflected in its pdf and print publications. It is an admirable stretch goal that LNV doesn’t meet.

However, that’s not the worst of it. La Nueva Voz, dependent on local advertisers, is consistently biased in its reporting, highlighting candidates, politicians, structures that support and prop up the power elite. More often than not, it supports politicians and perspectives that align with their own interests, shielding those they favor from criticism and while placing their rivals it does not favor under intense scrutiny.

A case in point is La Nueva Voz’ recent, very biased coverage of Measure Y, the Kids First Initiative. In La Nueva Voz November 28th edition, publisher Jeff Schenkel tips his hand when he editorializes against the Initiative in what LNV posts as an article reporting on the passage of Measure Y.

In the second line of the first paragraph of his article, LNV’s publisher suggests that the Measure may be challenged in the courts before it is ever implemented, even though the publisher fails to report who plans to challenge it and on what grounds. Buried deep into the article, the publisher admits he has no particular intel to divulge. In the 24th paragraph, the publisher quotes Councilmember Steve Lustro as saying he “had not heard about anyone saying the city would file legal action if the measure passed.”

The publisher, though he asserts that legal action is imminent, he has no particular news or intel to report. The Pomona’s City Council has not yet brought up the matter publicly which raises the issue of journalistic integrity. With no substantiation or authentication of his claim, should his readership be grateful that he is circulating a whisper campaign that is occurring from behind the scenes of the power elite? Or should his readership be dismayed because it appears that he is goading our elected and appointed officials to undermine the Kids First Initiative even after it achieved a clear majority (62.5%) in November’s election?

In his third paragraph, the publisher casts doubt on the Measure’s supporters saying that they “tout” the advantages of youth programs - as if research and statistics have not backed up their supposition. And in the fifth paragraph, the publisher opines that the supporters and voters who passed the Initiative are ignorant, by saying, “the way these things generally work out, the title of the measure is often the only thing voters read before marking their ballots.” 

What is particularly damning to La Nueva Voz is that the publisher attacks Measure Y’s supporters, but does not include comments from them or a mention that he attempted to reach out to them.

In the publisher’s ninth paragraph of his article, he asks the rhetorical question, “Did we mention that the two biggest funders of the measure were outside of Pomona?” This became a tired trope of the opposition to Y campaign, but here the publisher fails to mention that the opposition to Measure Y also took money from out-of-towners.

The publisher suggests that there is something spurious about taking money from two California-based non-profits - one from the Bay area and one from LA. However, any scrutiny reveals that both of these are organizations who have pledged their support for early childhood education and human rights issues in the state and in the county. Pomona, on the edge of Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, is often forgotten when money and resources are distributed, so it is difficult to discern why the publisher is so upset that a non-profit in Pomona accepted funding from an LA County-centric non-profit that wants “to transform Los Angeles in areas of education, health, immigration and housing.” His criticism seems weak and suspect, indeed, considering Pomona’s socio-economic challenges. It would seem that few would refuse such help, if offered.

More fittingly, maybe the more appropriate nickname for La Nueva Voz should be ‘the little engine that should.’ It should be a reasonable voice, but it does not quite reach its potential. Still, in a vast sea of near nothingness, La Nueva Voz occupies an important niche. It remains as a commendable effort to deliver local news against the odds.

Pomonans, following the national trend, have turned to social media (Instagram, Facebook, Nextdoor) for news, clinging to it for its convenience and speed in spite of the fact it has proven to be both unreliable and inaccurate. Commonly, no one is fact-checking. News on social media consists of short sound bites rather than sustained logical reasoning - and people feel free to shamelessly attack others. Few would dispute the fact that social media serves up its ‘news’ on a platter of snarkiness. Even though most sites post community standards, few abide by the rules, especially if they’re the moderator. For the most part, sites go unmonitored. Where social media is concerned, it is still the wild, wild west.

Finally, there is one more source - The Pomonan. That said, The Pomonan is not even trying to fill the local news void. A fiercely independent news source, upon occasion it steps in to answer the gaping needs of a population thirsty for information, however,  nobody ever should or would turn to The Pomonan to get their daily dose of news. People turn to The Pomonan, a digital global magazine operating without advertisers, for local information when they want commentary delivered with a little salt and pepper. The Pomonan exists as a catalyst for change and its function is to encourage dialogue.

So, there it is. Pomona has become a textbook case of what happens when local journalism vanishes. The result?  less civic engagement, less meaningful discourse, more divisive polarization - and in the end, we are less for it.

Pamela Casey Nagler, Pomona-born, is an independent scholar, currently conducting research on California’s indigenous people, focusing on the Spanish, Russian, Mexican and US invasions between 1769 and the 1860s. The point of studying this history is to tell us how we got here from there. 

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of weddings or quinceaneras, because he will charge you a ton of money.

,

Do we feel safer every year the police budget increases?

,

Photography ©Julian Lucas

Updated 12/06/2024 5:52pm PT

More than half of the City of Pomona’s budget goes toward funding the Police. This is historically true, and it is still true today. It is an emphasis that we need to continually scrutinize - even with the recent passage of Measure Y that reallocates 10% of the City’s General Funds to child and youth services by the years 2030-2031. 

Pomona’s police budget has increased about $20 million since 2020, and currently $80 million is allocated for Police. This was enabled, in part, with the voters’ approval of the 0.75% sales tax in 2018, and again in spring of 2024, that has resulted in an influx of about 16.8 million more dollars per year to the City’s General Fund.

It is a sobering fact that at the same time as the police budget has increased, the City’s homicide rate has basically remained the same. Since 2016, the City has averaged about 17 homicides a year. Which means that preventing violent crime remains a constant and ongoing concern, raising all sorts of basic questions:

Is the amount of funding devoted to policing translating into safer streets and effective crime reduction, or is this funding failing to address the root causes of violence?

Will allocating a slightly bigger slice of the City’s overall budget to youth programs, with the passage of Measure Y, help us secure safer streets and see a reduction of crime?

Now that our governing bodies, the City Council and Commissioners, are charged with allocating more funds toward child and youth services, are the individuals that make up the governing body, including Pomona’s Mayor, capable of being creative enough to manage a large city like Pomona?

Many members of the City Council and various commissions actively campaigned against Measure Y. Among them was the Pomona Police Officers Association, which contributed nearly $25,000 to the "No on Measure Y" campaign opposing the Pomona Kids First Initiative. Despite their efforts, the measure passed with a 62.5% majority. Their slogan? “The Wrong Way to Help Pomona’s Children.”

This raises an important question: given their level of opposition to Pomona’s Kids First Initiative, are they capable of making the new funding formulas work?

The City’s traditional disproportionate focus on police, while homicide rates remained roughly the same, means that there continues to be room for reflection and re-evaluation. It is with great hope that by enhancing support for community-driven initiatives and preventative strategies, Pomona can build a more holistic approach to public safety. It is also with great hope that focusing funding for youth will not only address the immediate needs of our young population, but also address long-term reductions in crime.

THE NUMBER OF HOMICIDES SINCE 2016:

2016: 13 Homicides
2017: 17 Homicides
2018: 17 Homicides
2019: 12 Homicides
2020: 13 Homicides
2021: 21 Homicides
2022: 19 Homicides
2023 :  (Pending) Discrepancy

In 2023, there was a body found  “in front of a house on Towne Ave, titled, ‘Suspicious Death’ (Reference# P000288-091324).This unfortunate incident, which took place July 1, 2023 at 5:45 am has not been included in The Pomonan Homicide Report count. When the Pomonan submitted a public records request on this incident, the city’s response was vague and only stated information of what officers observed upon their response. The request did not state if this incident was deemed a homicide.

After submitting a public records request for the total number of homicides in 2023, the city reported a figure of 14. However, our independent review and cross-referencing of the data revealed the actual total to be 16. Notably, the city's report included one incident classified as manslaughter, which does not meet the criteria for homicide.

This raises important questions about whether all homicides are being accurately reported in the city’s crime data. Are all homicides being included in the official reports, or are some intentionally left out and swept under the asbestos, making it appear that the homicide rate is decreasing when it may not be?

Do we feel safer every year the police budget increases? 

Rep Norma Torres Votes to Give Trump Unchecked Power to Pursue His "Domestic Enemies"

On November 21, Pomona’s Congresswoman Norma Torres, a Democrat, sided with the House Republicans to pass an act that would allow the US secretary of treasury to revoke an non-profit organization’s tax-exempt status by labeling it as “terrorist-supporting.”

This Act, called the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act, comes with few checks and balances, and the vast majority of Democrats are wondering why, in this political atmosphere, with a newly-elected president who has vowed to use his presidential powers to wreak vengeance against his “domestic enemies,” Democrats would support such an act.

In all fairness, Torres was not the only Democrat who voted in favor. However, she is one of a minority of fifteen who have won the dubious distinction of crossing party lines to favor an Act that would only make it easier for the President-elect to pursue his enemies. The other Democrats include: Colin Allred (Texas), Yadira D. Caraveo (Colorado), Ed Case (Hawaii), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Don Davis (North Carolina), Jared Golden (Maine), Vicente Gonzalez (Texas), Suzanne Marie Lee (Nevada), Jared Moskowitz (Florida), Jimmy Panetta (California), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Washington), Brad Schneider (Illinois), Tom Suozzi (New York) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Florida).

Last week, the same bill failed to advance out of the House because it failed to garner the two-thirds majority needed to pass during a suspension of the lower chamber’s rules. It was subsequently sent back to committee and retooled for a simple majority vote. While 52 Democrats voted for the bill previously, enormous pressure was applied to get those who backed the bill last week to come out against it.

The bill was originally aimed at curtailing the legal actions of pro-Palestinian protesters, and is extremely problematic as it messes with citizens’ basic right to free speech as outlined in the First Amendment of the Constitution. It's also redundant. It is already illegal to provide material support to terrorist organizations.

While it is unlikely that President Joe Biden will sign this bill into law, the same cannot be said for President-elect Trump. The bill, if passed, would make it possible for his administration to place punishing sanctions on many activist organizations, certain universities along with any number of news outlets to raise or bank money. The Act would prevent sanctioned organizations from pursuing legal recourse to plead their case.

Pomonans, who voted overwhelmingly for Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris, should be wondering why their House representative Norma Torres, sided with the Republicans this round. Norma Torres, whose interest are you representing?

The Pomonan editorial board consists of opinion journalists whose perspectives are shaped by their expertise, research, discussions, and established principles. This board operates independently from the newsroom.

Holding Commissioner Appointees, and Elected Officials Accountable

It's election time, (ballots drop October 7), and it's well past time for both elected and appointed officials to begin holding themselves accountable when they campaign on issues.  Every time they weigh in on a measure or issue in the press or on social media, their statements should be accompanied with the simple statement:

"[Name of an appointed or elected official] is the [official title] for the City of Pomona, but the opinions expressed here are solely my own.

Other cities and school boards require this. It's written in their protocols and considered best practice. 

C'mon Pomona leadership, it's time to ensure that you separate your personal politics from the position you were either elected or appointed to. Stop abusing your power.

The Pomonan is the cultural structure, empowering visionaries to propel the global society to the future.

In the Face of Rising Heat, OSHA’s New Rule is an Indispensable Protection for Workers 

Photography courtesy of Julian Lucas

So far, 2023 has been the hottest year on record. With wet-bulb temperature heatwaves and heat-related ailments on the rise, it becomes ever more obvious that capitalist-caused climate change is an existential threat to the human race, and to the majority of life on Earth. Immediately - indeed, in the past - it has already been an existential threat for those most vulnerable to extreme weather conditions, and most especially the global working class. Day laborers, construction workers, farmworkers, warehouse workers, just to name a few, all face the dangers of extreme heat at the workplace every single day. It is for this reason that the Pomona Economic Opportunity Center has devoted such time and effort to outreach to its members and community about newly proposed heat-related OSHA regulations. 

“The Biden-Harris administration has unveiled a proposed OSHA rule aimed at protecting roughly 36 million workers from health risks posed by extreme heat,” the Occupational Health and Safety Magazine (OHS) reported on July 9th, 2024. “If finalized, this would cover indoor and outdoor work settings, aiming to reduce heat-related injuries, illnesses and fatalities.” 

According to the OHS, the new OSHA regulations include more thorough evaluations of heat risks in the workplace, as well as the wider application of measures to improve workplace conditions, such as mandatory provision of free drinking water on-site, enforced rest breaks and controls on indoor temperature. New and returning employees not yet acclimated to extreme heat would receive extra attention. 

In a recent statement in regards to these new nationwide regulations, Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health Doug Parker said “Workers all over the country are passing out, suffering heat stroke and dying from heat exposure from just doing their jobs, and something must be done to protect them.” 

The new rules were proposed on July 2nd, 2024, under the name “Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings.” Along with the regulations discussed above, the new rules would mandate that workplaces “implement control

measures at two distinct heat exposure thresholds.” Morgan Lewis reports that the two heat exposure thresholds are the following: 

“An ‘initial heat trigger’ equal to a heat index of 80 degrees Fahrenheit or a ‘wet bulb globe temperature’ equal to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Recommended Alert Limit 

A ‘higher heat trigger’ equal to a heat index of 90 degrees Fahrenheit or a ‘wet bulb globe temperature’ equal to the NIOSH Recommended Exposure Limit” 

When these thresholds are reached, Morgan Lewis goes on to provide the full list of control measures discussed briefly above. In addition to the threshold-control measures, employers are required to draft and present a plan for their workplace, “referred to as the Heat Injury and Illness Prevention Plan (HIIPP), containing worksite-specific information developed with the input of ‘non-managerial employees and their representatives.” That workers themselves would be consulted in the drafting of these on-site plans, should this new rule be implemented, would be a significant victory for the working class, a testament to our capacity to fight for our demands and make our voices understood by employers and the state. 

Among other things, HIIPPs must include: (a) A comprehensive list of all work activities covered; (b) All policies and procedures necessary to comply with the standard; and (c) A heat illness and emergency response plan.

However, this new set of rules, despite the glaring and obvious need of them in the face of the growing ecological crisis, will likely meet with opposition in the Supreme Court. In a recent court-ruling, Republican-led states and anti-regulatory interests have contended that Congress unconstitutionally delegated its powers to the executive branch by giving “such broad authority to the agency [OSHA],” the agency responsible for setting and enforcing all workplace standards. In other words, while this charge was dismissed by the court, two dissenting justices - Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch - are questioning OSHA’s right to exist, let alone expand upon already insufficient controls.

Taking the long view, it is no exaggeration to say the most basic and essential right of working people - the right to life and safety - is in jeopardy. Not only is it a question if these vital regulations will be implemented in the near future, but OSHA’s capacity to function in any capacity may be undermined, if the two dissenting Justices - and the rapacious business interests they represent - have their way in a future court ruling. As always, it is class struggle, the willingness of working people everywhere to organize, fight and take command, that will decide these vital questions. The clock is ticking.

SPANISH TRANSLATION 

Ante el Aumento del calor, la Nueva Regla de OSHA es una Protección Indispensable para los Trabajadores

Hasta ahora, el 2023 ha sido el año mas caluroso en registrado. Con el aumento ahumento  de las olas de calor de bulbo húmedo y las dolencias relacionadas con el calor, se vuelve cada vez más obvio que el cambio climático causado por el capitalismo es una amenaza existencial para la raza humana y para la mayoría de la vida en la Tierra. Inmediatamente -de hecho, en el pasado- ya ha sido una amenaza existencial para los más vulnerables a las condiciones climáticas extremas, y muy especialmente para la clase trabajadora mundial. Los jornaleros, trabajadores de la construcción, trabajadores agrícolas, trabajadores de almacenes, solo por nombrar algunos, enfrentan los peligros del calor extremo en el lugar de trabajo todos los días. Es por esta razón que el Centro de Oportunidad Económica de Pomona ha dedicado tanto tiempo y esfuerzo a comunicar a sus miembros y a la comunidad sobre nuevas propuestas sobre medidas relacionadas con la calor por Cal OSHA 

“La administración Biden-Harris ha presentado una regla propuesta de OSHA destinada a proteger a aproximadamente 36 millones de trabajadores de los riesgos para la salud que plantea el calor extremo”, informó la Revista de Seguridad y Salud Ocupacional (OHS) el 9 de julio de 2024. “Si se finaliza, esto cubrirá entornos de trabajo interiores y exteriores, con el objetivo de reducir las lesiones, enfermedades y muertes relacionadas con el calor”.

Según la OHS, las nuevas regulaciones de OSHA incluyen evaluaciones más exhaustivas de los riesgos de calor en el lugar de trabajo, así como la aplicación más amplia de medidas para mejorar las condiciones del lugar de trabajo, como el suministro obligatorio de agua potable gratuita en el lugar, descansos obligatorios y controles. sobre la temperatura interior. Los empleados nuevos y recurrentes que aún no se hayan aclimatado al calor extremo recibirán atención adicional.

En una reciente declaración  con respecto a estas nuevas regulaciones a nivel nacional, el Subsecretario de Seguridad y Salud Ocupacional, Doug Parker, dijo: "Los trabajadores de todo el país se están desmayando, sufriendo insolación y muriendo por exposición al calor simplemente por hacer su trabajo, y se debe hacer algo". hecho para protegerlos”.

Las nuevas reglas se propusieron el 2 de Julio de 2024  , bajo el nombre "Prevención de enfernedades y lesiones por calor en trabajos interiores o exteriores."  Junto con las regulaciones discutidas anteriormente, las nuevas reglas exigirán que los lugares de trabajo “implementen controles medidas en dos umbrales distintos de exposición al calor”. Morgan Lewis informa que los dos umbrales de exposición al calor son los siguientes:

“Un ‘desencadenante de calor inicial’ igual a un índice de calor de 80 grados Fahrenheit o una ‘temperatura global de bulbo húmedo’ igual al límite de alerta recomendado por el Instituto Nacional de Seguridad y Salud Ocupacional (NIOSH) 

Un 'desencadenante de calor más alto' igual a un índice de calor de 90 grados Fahrenheit o una 'temperatura global de bulbo húmedo' igual al límite de exposición recomendado por NIOSH”.

Cuando se alcanzan estos umbrales, Morgan Lewis proporciona la lista completa de medidas de control analizadas brevemente anteriormente. Además de las medidas de control de umbrales, los empleadores deben redactar y presentar un plan para su lugar de trabajo, “denominado Plan de Prevención de Enfermedades y Lesiones por Calor (HIIPP), que contiene información específica del lugar de trabajo desarrollada con el aporte de 'no profesionales'. empleados directivos y sus representantes”. Que los propios trabajadores sean consultados en la redacción de estos planes in situ, en caso de que se implemente esta nueva regla, sería una victoria significativa para la clase trabajadora, un testimonio de nuestra capacidad para luchar por nuestras demandas y hacer que los empleadores entiendan nuestras voces. y el estado.

Entre otras cosas, los HIIPP deben incluir : (a) Una lista completa de todas las actividades laborales cubiertas; (b) Todas las políticas y procedimientos necesarios para cumplir con la norma; y (c) Un plan de respuesta a emergencias y enfermedades causadas por el calor.

Sin embargo, este nuevo conjunto de reglas, a pesar de su evidente y evidente necesidad ante la creciente crisis ecológica, probablemente encontrará oposición en la Corte Suprema. En un fallo judicial reciente, los estados liderados por los republicanos y los intereses anti-regulatorios han sostenido que el Congreso delegó inconstitucionalmente sus poderes al poder ejecutivo al otorgar "una autoridad tan amplia a la agencia [OSHA]", la agencia responsable de establecer y hacer cumplir todas las leyes. estándares laborales. En otras palabras, si bien el tribunal desestimó este cargo, dos jueces disidentes, Clarence Thomas y Neil Gorsuch, están cuestionando el derecho de OSHA a existir, y mucho menos a ampliar controles ya insuficientes.

A largo plazo, no es exagerado decir que el derecho más básico y esencial de los trabajadores -el derecho a la vida y a la seguridad- está en peligro. No sólo es una cuestión si estas regulaciones vitales se implementarán en el futuro cercano, sino que la capacidad de OSHA para funcionar en cualquier capacidad puede verse socavada, si los dos jueces disidentes - y los intereses comerciales rapaces que representan - se salen con la suya en el futuro. fallo de la Corte. Como siempre, es la lucha de clases, la voluntad de los trabajadores de todas partes para organizarse, luchar y tomar el mando, lo que decidirá estas cuestiones vitales. El reloj está corriendo.

Beau Zinman is a Pitzer Graduate of Philosophy and a Volunteer at Pomona Economic Opportunity Center.

Behind the 6 P’s

Behind the Six P’s–The reputation of Holt avenue in Pomona goes beyond the Indian Hill Mall. Everyone in the surrounding cities knows about it.

The street is known for unhoused people, sex workers and street vendors.

Its reputation is a shadow looming over the officials running the city and now the city council and the mayor want to turn Holt into a Business Improvement District to improve its conditions.

According to the US Department of Transportation, Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) are privately-directed and publicly-sanctioned organizations that supplement public services within geographically defined boundaries by generating multi-year revenue through a compulsory assessment on local property owners and/or businesses - which basically means - BIDs are privatized public places that use funds to: BIDs are privatized public places that use funds to:

  • Promote business and events within the boundaries 

  • Patrols it with private security 

  • Keep the area clean.

The function of a BID is to monetize gentrification and criminalize loitering, by keeping unwanted individuals from the area. Under a BID, the funds, generated from increased taxation on property located in the district, are set aside for promotion, security and clean-up, and are managed by a selected board of directors.

Lisa Marie Alatorre from the San Francisco Coalition on Homelessness described the work of BIDS as “Jim Crow laws” and described them as a way to promote “discriminatory policing practices to simply remove people deemed unwanted from certain parts of town.”

Downtown Pomona is currently operating under a BID until 2028 under the management of the Downtown Pomona Owners Association (DPOA). From 2021 through 2022, DPOA spent $306,373 on private security, even though the area remains covered by a police force that operates with 49.8% of the city’s budget. Private security cannot arrest an individual, but they can call the police on any 'suspicious' activities, according to American Global Security.

From 2021 through 2022, DPOA spent $306,373 on private security. The area is still covered by a police force that will be given 49.8% of the city’s budget for the new fiscal year. Private security cannot arrest an individual but they can call the cops on any “suspicious activities,” according to American Global Security.

In regards to dealing with the problems of Holt, the city of Pomona wants to adopt a BID in order to hire a professional ‘rat’ to call the cops on any activity that a business owner deems 'suspicious.' Creating a BID on Holt will give property owners major influential power. Typically, a BID board of directors includes the district’s property owners. 

Creating a BID will also give major influential power to property owners. The board of directors for BIDs typically includes property owners of the area. The tax forms from 2022 indicate that the DPOA board of directors includes two members of the Tessier family. 

The tax forms from 2022 indicate that the DPOA board of directors for downtown Pomona includes two members of the Tessier family who run Arteco Partners, the current owner of the Progress Building and its basement art gallery; the Founder's Building; the Union Block; the Fox Theater; the Glass House; Acerogami; the Oxarart Block; the Wright Brothers Building; the Wurl Building; the Armory Lofts; the Tate Building; the Opera Garage; the Civic Center; and the School of Arts and Enterprise. Arteco Partners have a negotiating deal with the city of Pomona to buy more land in the downtown area and build more apartments that would only serve to increase their monopoly of downtown Pomona.

The Arteco Partners have a negotiating deal with the city of Pomona to buy more land in the downtown area and build apartments to complete their monopoly of the heart of Pomona. 

Not only will a BID on Holt Avenue pass the problem to someone else, it will give property owners the power to increase rent on the local businesses and drive them away.

To quote “Mad Max: Fury Road,” "Where must we go, we who wander this wasteland, in search of our better selves?"

The city of Pomona claims that its mission is to improve the quality of life for its diverse community, yet the changes its officials want to make will only drive the diverse community into the Wasteland known as Victorville and sell their soul to vegan milkshakes and spa water. 

The Pomonan is the cultural structure, empowering visionaries to propel the global society to the future.

Life in Pomona 20 Something Years ago: In Pictures

Published 2/21/2024 | 9:04am PST

Twenty-something years ago, Pomonans embraced the underground and packed art exhibitions. Families and artists found affordable rent, sort of. Families and artists were able to pay affordable rent, kind of. Of course, those were different times, but not in a way that made them unrecognizable.

Rockers hanging out at Thomas Square
Julian Lucas ©2000

Published 02/20/204 12:00 am | PST

Did you know that the attack on the Twin Towers occurred 23 years ago, in 2001? That same year introduced us to some of our favorite independent films, such as Amélie, Requiem for a Dream, and Y Tu Mamá También.

Y Tu Mamá También taught us that both self-pleasure and sex with others are acceptable, while also exploring themes of self-discovery and loss. Requiem for a Dream taught us about mental illness wasn’t talked about, including drug addiction as a disease. It also taught us about belonging, wealth, family and the past. And we learned to enjoy life’s simple pleasures in Amelie.

LIFE IN POMONA
Pomona has never fully transformed from its gritty, 1980s South Central ambience into the haven many hoped it would become—and still hope it will one day. Although if we go back to the earlier years it was once a booming city. The city of 155k people even received some publicity being named in multiple films, including films such as the 1967 “Look Whose Coming to Dinner, staring Sidney Portier.

However, the early 2000s were also a boom period—not so much in films, but in hip hop songs that glamorized pimping, "the hoe stroll," and the selling of sex, as popularized by artists like Sugafree.

New York-style lofts in downtown Pomona served as backdrops for porn movies, while strip clubs and “massage parlors”—which were really fronts for rub-and-tug services—occupied storefronts along the corridors.

Although police brutality existed, there weren’t any activists staging rallies or protests on city council nights. The only activism was activism through art. 

Pomona PD frisking an unhoused individual at Veterans Park.
©2001 Julian Lucas

Pomona PD Patrols Second Street on Bike
Julian Lucas ©2001

Backpack Hip Hop heads hit Pomona like a domino affect in the early 2000s, but people still wanted to dance, although there weren’t any dance clubs in Pomona, you could still crash someones quinceañera or wedding reception. 

Urban Ecclectic
Julian Lucas ©2002

Globe Clothing Store (in store)
Julian Lucas ©2001

Globe Clothing Store (in store)
Julian Lucas ©2001

Globe Clothing Store (in store)
Julian Lucas ©2001

People Dancing at a Quinceañera
Julian Lucas ©2001

People Dancing at Quinceañera
Julian Lucas ©2001

Quinceañera
Julian Lucas ©2001

Young lady at her quinceañera
Julian Lucas ©2001

Accompanying underground Hip Hop was Rock en Espanol. Tower Records was a haven for CDs and magazines from all over the world and unfortunately closed in 2006. But we could also purchase our music and our studded belts, buttons of our favorite punk band, and band shirts from the Rio Rancho swap meet attached to Cardenas. Tijuana No! and Mana were of my favorites.

Raquel (Rachel) Rio Rancho Mall
Julian Lucas ©2002

El Taco Nazo, El Merendero, and Juan Pollo were the only restaurants in the downtown area. Taco Nazo was special. It was the hangout during the day and at night the restaurant featured poetry night on Thursdays, called A Mic and Dim Lights, hosted by educator Cory ‘Besskep’ Coffer, who is the original poet who brought poetry to Pomona.

Reyna in the kitchen of Taco Nazo 2001

Kayla Owner of Funky Thangz sitting at Taco Nazo 2002

Mike and girlfriend owner of Futures Collide 2001

Rockers hanging out at Thomas Square during Glass House Concert
Julan Lucas ©2001

Rockers hanging out at Thomas Square during a Glass House Concert
Julan Lucas ©2001

Rockers hanging out at Thomas Square during a Glass House Concert
Julan Lucas ©2001

Rockers hanging out at the Glass House
Julan Lucas ©2001

OG Homies
Julian Lucas ©2001

Homies in front of the Armory Building
Julian Lucas ©2001

Today there are rules and rules for artists, there is privatization of public streets and sidewalks, there is conformity, and there is censorship, Pomona’s politicians use art walk nights as their platform, and thats unfortunate. 

Julian Lucas, is a photographer, a purveyor of books, and writer, but mostly a photographer. Don’t ever ask him to take photos of events. Julian is also the owner and founder of Mirrored Society Book Shop, publisher of The Pomonan, founder of Book-Store, and founder of PPABF.