If you have attended a city council meeting, or port police session, or watched the news of late you will likely have heard someone talking about less-lethal means of force that the police can use instead of firearms. They’re often touted as a safer, more humane way for law enforcement to take down people suspected of a crime. Still, in the wake of the police killing of 50-year-old Alejandro Campos Rios outside of a McDonald’s in Fullerton, the question of how safe these less-lethal weapons are comes to the fore once again.
As recently released body camera footage shows, Rios was approached by the police, who claimed he was “acting erratically” outside of a McDonalds, the video shows him swinging his belt and singing in Spanish. When Rios refused to lower the belt, the police responded by tasing him twice before shooting him with four bean bag rounds also known as “kinetic impact projectiles” or KIPs one of which pierced his chest cavity and killed him.
Though Rios’ killing happened in Orange County, the use of so-called less-lethal weapons is an issue that affects all of us. In the recent port police budget that was shared thanks to AB 481, a large amount of the military spending that the port police reported was on “less-lethal” weapons. In the 22/23 period, they bought 2,500 12 Gauge Kinetic Energy Projectiles and requested the same amount for the 23/24 period. They also requested hundreds of other KIPs including 100 40mm Kinetic Energy Projectiles at $18.50 per unit and 500 40mm Kinetic Energy Projectiles (foam-tipped) at the same cost. These are military weapons that are being utilized in our communities and can be just as dangerous as live ammunition and firearms.
While the concept of “less-lethal” weapons is well known, what often isn’t talked about is that the “safer” weapons are military-grade equipment that the U.S. Military first developed for use in Hong Kong in the ’50s to deal with protestors, and that mindset of using KIPs as a tool of repressing free speech has continued throughout the decades. Over the years the technology has evolved with the introduction of rubber bullets, tasers, and bean bag projectiles which have caused injuries at protests across the globe as well as being taken up by local police forces as an apparently “safer” way of apprehending suspects.
In the 2023 Amnesty International and Omega report The Global Abuse Of Kinetic Impact Projectiles, the organization highlighted the danger and impact of KIPs during the period of the Black Lives Matter protests across America in 2020. “Physicians for Human Rights found that police forces had shot at least 115 people in the head and neck with KIPs across the USA in the first two months of protests after the killing of George Floyd, at least 30 of whom had suffered permanent eye damage.”
In that same report, we learn that “A systematic review of medical literature published between 1990 and June 2017 on deaths and injuries resulting from the use of KIPs, found that at least 53 people had died as a result of injuries sustained by KIPs, with 300 people suffering permanent disability.” Though the reality is the number is much higher in the U.S., seeing as reporting on the use of “less-lethal” force is relatively new at the federal and state level.
The Office of Government Accountability recently released a report called “Federal Agencies Should Improve Reporting and Review of Less-Lethal Force,” which shows that reporting on the use of less-lethal rounds is still deeply flawed. While some of the suggestions from the report have been taken on by some departments, many are still open. For example, one of the suggestions that has not been taken on: “The Attorney General should develop standards for its component agencies on the types of less-lethal force that should be reported when used.”
LAPD use of munitions and equipment. File photo
When it comes to Los Angeles specifically, a 2024 report revealed that less-lethal force is relatively ineffective in subduing suspects with less than a 38% success rate. The report states that “In eight of the 133 instances where the less-lethal projectiles were deployed last year, they failed to stop their targets and officers then shot the individuals with firearms.”
That’s especially relevant here as the report was commissioned after the police killing of 36-year-old Jason Lee Maccani in a Skid-Row building, where he was found holding a plastic fork during a mental health crisis and “acting erratically” and after the attending officers deployed three bean bag rounds to no avail, Maccani was then was shot and killed by the police.
All of this begs the question: Why are the police — and specifically in our case, the port police — spending so much money on dangerous munitions rather than training their officers in de-escalation tactics? It should be noted that when the port police were asked how much they spent on de-escalation training for their officers at their recent AB 481 meeting about military spending they declined to answer, claiming that wasn’t under the bill’s purview.
You may recall that my last column here dealt with the Shen Yun performance, the one you’ve seen advertised incessantly with advertisements everywhere heralding “China before Communism.” Within hours of that editorial being published online, we received a very long rebuttal titled, “Grave concern about your recent article on Shen Yun,” which you shall see I’ve actually published in full in this edition. Larry Liu, Ph.D., the deputy director of Falun Dafa Information Center’s government and advocacy, which is the public relations (propaganda) arm of the Falun Gong religious cult that has been oppressed and persecuted in China.
My good friend reported that the performance was delightful and the propaganda was light or subtle. Most of the very best stuff actually doesn’t appear as propaganda on the surface.
However, more to the point of dealing with the complaint from the deputy director of government and advocacy at DAFA (a euphemism for the Ministry of Propaganda), I need to point out that according to his online biography he has served as a liaison to the U.S. Congressional offices and his comments have been published in the Washington Post, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Boston Globe, and elsewhere. Dr. Liu also holds a Ph.D. in statistics from Washington University in St. Louis, and a BS in applied mathematics from Tsinghua University in Beijing.
There’s nothing there to indicate he has a working knowledge of either politics or media literacy. The following was my immediate response to his complaint:
I believe that you are missing the point of my editorial, which is that Shen Yun is part of the propaganda of the Falun Gong which seems to be your primary role at the Falun Dafa Information Center. I don’t doubt that your religious group has been brutally persecuted in China, however, the definition above shows primarily how religious groups such as yours are regarded, especially since you are engaged in lobbying Congress, supporting certain extremist candidates, and attempting to influence the American public opinion by a coordinated campaign of misinformation. As far as using the term “cult” and equating it with using racial slurs against Black or Jewish people is sheer spin on what is the clear intention of your group– to deflect criticism.
The Britannica Dictionary definition of CULT: a small religious group that is not part of a larger and more accepted religion and that has beliefs regarded by many people as extreme or dangerous.
In one online review of the Shen Yun 2024 performance, the reviewer observed that:
Shen Yun, as best I can tell, represents a new-age cult of Buddhism. Shen Yun presents itself as a historical performance of Chinese dance that attracts people to buy tickets, who then hear their message and support their cause.
As to Liu’s main contention on whether Falun Gong is a cult, I’ve spent some time wandering the avenues of history and have come to this conclusion: Cults are often offshoots of larger religions. Most recently, the Branch Davidians and Jim Jones’s Peoples Temple come to mind. They were scrutinized (some say persecuted), and so it has been down through history. The Puritans who came to North America were chased out of England. Many colonists came to America from England to escape religious persecution during the reign of King James I (r. 1603–1625) and Charles I (r. 1625–1649). Yes, that’s the King James whose bible many people still read. He wasn’t very tolerant of apostate beliefs.
Later on, after Joseph Smith discovered the golden tablets he invented the Mormon religion, a cult might be a better term, they were then chased out of Indiana, Missouri, and Illinois until finally landing in Utah. And they very much too were persecuted in this very nation founded upon the belief of “freedom of religion.” Of course, there was something about polygamy and stealing horses that the other Christians didn’t condone.
So, what essentially is “a cult”? I have come to the conclusion that all cults start with a charismatic figure, one who preaches the “true word of God” or says that only he knows “the truth.” Apparently, to my surprise, there are some 650 names of God in the King James version and outside of this there’s the chosen name of the deity you were raised with (Allah, Yahweh, Buddha, Vishnu, etc. There’s actually a book titled, 100 Names of God, by Christopher D. Hudson, but I digress.
The Falon Gong believers are persecuted in China, and Li Hongzhi is their undisputed founding leader who fled China in 1999 under threat of arrest.I do not dispute this. It is similar to how the Romans treated Christians for the first three centuries – they were a threat to the power of Caesar. It wasn’t until 313 CE, that Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, which accepted Christianity. Ten years later, it had become the official religion of the Roman Empire. Up until that time it was considered a cult and of course, the charismatic figure was Christ – the guy they named the religion for and of course he was persecuted by being nailed to the cross like a common criminal. Where does that leave us then?
I defend my use of the term cult with the Falun Gong not out of any malevolent intent but out of accuracy, nor do I hold any certain prejudice against them except for their incessant propagandizing and political influence peddling. It’s just like how I call out the White Christian Nationalists who believe that DJ Trump is the “savior of America.” They are a cult, and they are a threat to our republic and our democracy. Unlike the early Christians in Rome or the Falun Gong in China, DJT is not being persecuted. He is being PROSECUTED under the full extent of the law that holds all citizens to the same laws. That he twists and turns the spin claiming to be the victim is an odd sort of political theatrical martyrdom. It’s like he’s nailing himself to the cross that he built and then climbs up on it to say, “See what they’re doing to me”?
His political rallies and performances aren’t even as entertaining as the Shen Yun performance, but they are propaganda just the same. My critic, Mr. Liu, in his complaint, doesn’t really address my use of the term propaganda relating to Shen Yun because it’s undeniable.
Falun Gong is Not a “Cult” I hope this email finds you well. I am writing in regard to your recent article titled “The History of Propaganda”, in which you referred to Falun Gong as a “religious cult.”
To be clear, the “cult” label was coined by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) specifically to vilify Falun Gong and drive forward the violent persecution of millions.
Using this term to refer to Falun Gong is comparable to using racial slurs against Black or Jewish people. These terms are employed with the sole purpose of dehumanizing a group of people, and in so doing, facilitating horrific atrocities.
Yes, it’s that serious.
It has been well documented by human rights organizations, United Nations, and U.S. State Department that Falun Gong has been brutally persecuted in China on a large scale. Millions of Falun Gong practitioners have been detained, imprisoned, or tortured over the past two decades. The number of documented Falun Gong deaths due to persecution has surpassed 5,000. Another untold number of Falun Gong practitioners, likely hundreds of thousands, have been killed through forced organ harvesting, according to the China Tribunal’s testimony to the United Nations.
Falun Gong is not a “cult”
Falun Gong is a traditional Buddhist-based meditation practice whose core principles are truthfulness, compassion, and tolerance. According to the Chinese government’s own estimate, 70-100 million people practiced Falun Gong in China in 1999. Perceiving Falun Gong’s popularity and independence as a threat to its power, the CCP launched a brutal campaign to “eradicate” the group in July 1999.
But even the Chinese government has never truly considered Falun Gong a “cult”, though they have branded it this way to justify the persecution. In fact, Falun Gong was initially supported by the Chinese government for its moral teaching and health benefits.
A 2017 Freedom House report titled “The Battle for China’s Spirit” reads (p. 110), “Throughout the early and mid-1990s, Falun Gong, its practitioners, and founder Li Hongzhi enjoyed substantial government support and positive coverage in state media. Some state media reports from that period laud the health benefits of Falun Gong practice and show adherents receiving “healthy citizen awards.” In an event that would be unimaginable today, Mr. Li gave a lecture at the Chinese embassy in Paris in 1995, at the government’s invitation.”
As elaborated in the same Freedom House report (p.112), the “cult” label only appeared in party discourse in October 1999, 3 months after the crackdown against Falun Gong. The report continues: “this suggests that the term was applied retroactively to justify a violent campaign that was provoking international and domestic criticism.”
There is a clear scholarly consensus that Falun Gong is not a cult. Ian Johnson, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, also a former journalist for the NY Times and WSJ who won the Pulitzer Prize for his reporting on Falun Gong, wrote in his book “Wild Grass”: “The group [Falun Gong] didn’t meet many common definitions of a cult: its members marry outside the group, have outside friends, hold normal jobs, do not live isolated from society, do not believe that the world’s end is imminent and do not give significant amounts of money to the organization. Most importantly, suicide is not accepted, nor is physical violence….[Falun Gong] is at heart an apolitical, inward-oriented discipline, one aimed at cleansing oneself spiritually and improving one’s health.”
Moreover, practicing Falun Gong doesn’t involve worship; learning Falun Gong is completely free, as all books and videos are free downloadable on the Internet; and soliciting donations is prohibited within the Falun Gong community. With no binding membership, everyone feels free to come and go. Today, Falun Gong is practiced by tens of millions of people in roughly 100 countries around the world.
Prof. David Ownby, a scholar on Chinese religions, notes in the preface of his book “Falun Gong and the Future of China” (Oxford Univ Press, 2008):
“The entire issue of the supposed cultic nature of Falun Gong was a red herring from the beginning, cleverly exploited by the Chinese state to blunt the appeal of Falun Gong and the effectiveness of the group’s activities outside China.”
For other misconceptions regarding Falun Gong, please visit
I understand that it might not be your intention to hurt anyone, but your statement of calling Falun Gong a cult incites hatred and discrimination towards tens of millions of people who practice it and adds fuel to the terrible persecution in China, as the CCP often translates and promotes Western media reports to justify its own propaganda to Chinese people.
I sincerely hope you can replace the word “cult” by a more accurate descriptor of Falun Gong, such as spiritual/religious group/movement.
Larry Liu, Ph.D. Deputy Director of Government and Advocacy Falun Dafa Information Center New York, NY
Re: The Fight for San Pedro’s Legacy Businesses I really enjoyed Emma Rault’s stories on gentrification and land flipping. I grew up in San Pedro but have since moved. The stories brought back great memories.
Alan Martin
RE: Reel San Pedro: That Time Columbo Stopped at Gun-Running Ring at the Port of Los Angeles, By Rosie Knight. Peter [Falk] was a student at Syracuse University when I arrived there as a Freshman!
Marylyn Ginsburg Klaus
Re: McOsker Motion Could Lead To Closure of Rancho LPG Keep it going Tim. It’s removal would be a tremendous accomplishment. An incident there would be disastrous. The blast radius is incredibly large.
Carlos M. Garcia
Re: China Shipping: Salvation or Original Sin Revisited? When will the harbor community learn? The Port does what it wants how it wants,and screw anyone who complains¡!!!
Plastic waste, like a silent invader, creeps into the waters of our world, threatening, suffocating, and entangling the marine life that calls it home. From the vast expanse of our oceans to the serene San Pedro waterways, the grip of plastic tightens, threatening the very essence of our natural habitats.
Eva Cicoria, a woman driven by her deep connection to nature, witnessed this onslaught firsthand. Her passion for the outdoors, nurtured during her youth and cultivated through years of exploration, stirred within her a fervent desire to protect the environment. As she paddled her kayak through the familiar waters of LA Harbor, she couldn’t ignore the growing presence of plastic waste.
“My affinity for our natural world has always driven me,” Cicoria declares, her voice resonating with determination. “I’ve explored the outdoors since my youth, leading trips with the San Pedro/Peninsula YMCA. But as I witnessed the harm we inflict on nature, my drive to protect it only grew.”
For years, Cicoria would embark on kayaking excursions in LA Harbor, drawn by its proximity to home and the opportunity for outdoor recreation and fitness. “As I navigated the waters, I found myself captivated by the diverse wildlife, often capturing moments with my DSLR camera. Amidst these moments of natural beauty, however, I couldn’t ignore the persistent presence of plastic debris floating in the harbor,” she says.
Initially, she would casually pick up the litter scarcely giving it a second thought. But as time passed, Cicoria began to notice an alarming increase in the amount of plastic waste. Concerned by the impact of this pollution on the marine environment, she sought assistance from the Port of Los Angeles (POLA) and other volunteers to address the issue.
“We faced resistance from POLA staff, who deemed it unsafe to conduct cleanup operations in certain areas of the harbor,” Cicoria remembers. Undeterred, she delved into research and discovered that POLA had a Water Resources Action Plan in place since 2010, outlining measures for facility inspections, litter removal, and educational initiatives.
“Armed with this knowledge, I raised my concerns during a public Harbor Commission meeting, highlighting the year-round nature of the pollution problem and its widespread impact on marine ecosystems. From single-use plastics littering the water to infrastructure damage caused by debris, the scope of the issue was clear.”
lastic collected from the Los Angeles Harbor on a kayak by Paddle Out Plastic volunteers. Photo courtesy of Paddle Out Plastic.
Through advocacy and persistence, Cicoria aimed to hold POLA accountable for implementing the measures outlined in the Water Resources Action Plan. By shedding light on the ongoing challenges faced by LA Harbor, Cicoria says she hoped to catalyze action and foster a culture of environmental stewardship within the community.
Undeterred by bureaucratic hurdles, Cicoria turned to action. Armed with evidence from the Port of LA’s neglected Water Resources Action Plan, she confronted authorities. “I demanded accountability,” she says. “It’s not just a winter problem; it’s year-round, threatening sea grass, kelp beds, and marine habitats. I couldn’t turn a blind eye,” she recalls. “The riprap around Angels Gate Lighthouse and Cabrillo Marina teemed with plastic waste, endangering marine life, it’s too much.”
The turning point came in June 2019 when Cicoria launched Paddle Out Plastic on World Oceans Day. With a simple mission to inspire fellow paddlers to join the fight against plastic pollution, she embarked on a journey that would bring together a community of like-minded individuals dedicated to protecting our oceans.
The work of Paddle Out Plastic goes beyond mere cleanup efforts. Cicoria and her team meticulously document every piece of litter they retrieve, providing valuable data to support citizen science initiatives. Through the Marine Debris Tracker app sponsored by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, they log their findings, highlighting the staggering impact of plastic pollution on our marine ecosystems.
“We had to take matters into our own hands,” she asserts. With volunteers and her husband Ken by her side, they embarked on a massive cleanup mission, retrieving well over 260,000 pieces of litter since then. “Almost all plastic,”Cicoria says.
What sets Paddle Out Plastic apart is its grassroots approach to advocacy. Ciccoria and her team engage with policymakers, urging them to confront the harsh reality of plastic pollution and implement effective strategies for waste management and reduction. Their efforts extend to educating the public about the pervasive threat posed by single-use plastics and the urgent need for collective action.
One of the most striking aspects of Paddle Out Plastic’s work is the sheer volume and variety of plastic waste they encounter. From foam cups and food containers to fishing gear and tarps, no corner of LA Harbor is untouched by the scourge of plastic pollution.
“Among the debris are also food wrappers, straws, lids, bubble wrap, sports equipment, beach toys, balloons, boat fenders, buckets, boots, flip flops, fishing gear including lines and bobbers, and tarps. In addition to these larger items, we regularly come across smaller plastic pieces like lighters, cigarette mouthpieces, and dental floss picks, highlighting the pervasive nature of plastic pollution in our waterways. Occasionally, we stumble upon more peculiar items, including a suitcase, a car battery, rubber mats, a safety cone, a skateboard, and even a grappling hook. Notably, we once retrieved a plastic netting-wrapped boom — ironically similar to those used to block debris flow. It appeared to have broken free, likely en route to the Pacific garbage patch, before we intercepted it during our cleanup efforts,” Cicoria shares.
The volume of plastic collected by Cicoria and her team is a staggering testament to the scale of the problem.
Their efforts extend beyond cleanup. “We rescue birds entangled in fishing gear,” Cicoria says, her voice tinged with urgency. “Under LA Harbor’s fishing pier, we remove deadly traps for unsuspecting birds. The progress we are making to remove plastic from our waterways is not enough. We are paddling against a current of single-use plastic proliferation that must abate.”
But challenges abound. “Weather, limited resources and time constraints hinder our mission,” Cicoria admits. “Yet we persevere, fueled by our commitment to the cause.”
To combat plastic pollution, Cicoria urges collective action.
“Follow Paddle Out Plastics on social media, join cleanup efforts and exercise care with equipment. If you have a kayak or stand-up paddle join us for a paddle out,” she implores. “Every action counts in the fight against plastic waste.”
Despite the odds, Cicoria remains optimistic.
“Communities worldwide are uniting against plastic pollution,” she states. “With each effort, we inch closer to a cleaner, safer future for our waters and marine life.”
Cicoria’s tireless dedication serves as a beacon of hope, inspiring individuals worldwide to join the battle against plastic pollution this Earth Day and every day.
Eva Cicoria pulls plastic out of the Harbor. Photo courtesy of Paddle Out Plastics
Engage in the Fight Against Plastic Waste
There won’t be a single solution.
Yet, single-use plastic is the most common element found in plastic waste.
Join us in taking action against ocean litter. California has led the charge by banning single-use plastic bags and prohibiting microplastics in wash-off items like facial scrubs, but there’s still much to be done.
The federal government has stepped up with the Break Free From Plastic Pollution Act of 2021, but progress is slow and industries are resistant. Together, we can create a healthier, more sustainable, and equitable future. Take a stand and make a difference today.
Reduce your use of plastic, especially single-use plastic.
Buy in bulk when possible.
Recycle properly.
Participate in clean up efforts.
Join Paddle Out Plastic on a paddle out. Anyone with a vessel such as a kayak or stand up paddle is welcome to join.
Look up at Paddle Out Plastic on Facebook and Instagram and join the fight against plastic waste.
This Earth Day, raw politics is the greatest threat to the environment. With the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act — scaled back as it was — Joe Biden has done more to fight the climate crisis than all other presidents combined. He’s running against Donald Trump, the most extreme climate denier and anti-environment president we’ve ever had. In office, he withdrew America from the Paris Accords — the international climate change treaty — and rescinded more than 100 environmental rules. If elected again, the Koch-funded, Heritage Foundation-spearheaded Project 2025, is a blueprint for his administration that casts climate as a “pseudo-religion,” aimed not just at reversing Biden’s policies but attacking the very capacity to formulate climate policy going forward.
In short, “It’s not hyperbole to say that the outcome of the 2024 presidential race will determine how fast the world’s second-biggest carbon polluter can change its course and, by grim consequence, the fate of vulnerable communities around the globe,” as Jeva Lange wrote for Heatmap in December.
While the media downplays it, “Climate and clean energy messaging moves voters toward Biden, with a significant 10-point net swing in the trial heat,” Hart Research and Climate Power reported on the results of their late January survey of voters in nine swing states.
“It is a mistake to assume that voters remember Trump’s record and how destructive it was”, they wrote. “They must be reminded that he was a consistent climate denier, opposed clean energy, and was the worst environmental president in history.”
What’s more, they said, “Contrast is key. Biden’s accomplishments are not widely known and voters give him little credit for his own wins. Biden’s standing improves significantly when contrasted with Trump’s record as president.”
Though not the only race that matters, the presidential race sets a tone echoed at every level, down to the most local. And every race has some climate impact.
This comes at a time when a super-majority of Americans recognize the climate crisis as a serious threat to humanity and support policies to address it — though they significantly underestimate how many others share their concerns. One recent international survey found that 77% percent of Americans believe climate change is “a serious threat to humanity” while another found that almost half (48%) would even be willing to give 1% of their income to tackle climate change, while the perception was that only 33% would say willing.
So, recognizing how many people support climate action — and thus, how possible success is — may be key to actually achieving it. Coherent understanding is our superpower — understanding the threat, understanding the solutions, understanding our power and understanding the enemy.
Signs Of Hope In Primary Results
There were clear signs of this working in California’s primary election, when oil-backed candidates were soundly defeated despite massive cash advantages. “Despite being outspent 10 to one, we beat back Big Oil in the toughest fights in the state,” said California Environmental Voters CEO Mary Creasman. “In the last few weeks, corporate polluters pushed over $8 million into key legislative races, clearly trying to sidestep our recent winning strategy of using their spending against them by pulling the curtain for voters on who the oil-backed candidates are. This last-minute push highlights that they know their money is toxic in politics.”
Lateefah Simon, who succeeding Rep. Barbara Lee in Congress. File photo
What’s more, all three representatives who ran for U.S. Senate are being succeeded by “climate champions” according to CEV’s senior political and organizing director, Mike Young: Laura Friedman, succeeding Adam Schiff, Lateefah Simon, succeeding Barbara Lee, and Dave Min, succeeding Katie Porter. Only Min faces a tough race. Along with Friedman, he cited two other LA-area representatives-to-be — Luz Rivas and Gil Cisneros. “This new class we are sending is the strongest climate class to DC California has ever sent,” Young told Random Lengths, “which makes it possibly and probably the strongest class of new legislators ever.” He also cited two other climate champions in competitive races this November, so it could be even stronger.
Dave Min who is succeeding Rep. Katie Porter. File photo
“Oil didn’t get its money’s worth,” in legislative races, he added. “They push a big game about how important they are,” but “voters like, they didn’t like ’em. Voters know that oil is toxic and legislators should know that oil is toxic and environment’s the right side.”
These California victories are nationally important — and vulnerable to counter-attack, he noted. Policies laid out in Project 2025 “explicitly go after California and our clean-air and clean vehicle laws,” he said. “It is part of their actual plan to try to devastate California and prevent California’s climate leadership from taking effect on the rest of the country.”
The New Denialism
Another, more ambiguous, sign of progress was a January report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), which found a dramatic change in climate denial tactics from 2018 to 2023 on YouTube, the leading source of information for younger voters. “Climate deniers can no longer pretend climate change isn’t happening – so they’ve changed their strategy,” CCDH explained. “New Climate Denial narratives that aim to undermine the climate movement, science, and solutions, now constitute 70% of climate denial content on YouTube in 2023,” double the amount in 2018. And specific claims that climate solutions won’t work, jumped from 9% to 30% over that time. Meanwhile, claims that “global warming is not happening,” one of the main “old denial” claims the study tracked, fell from 48% of all denial claims to just 14%.
“The climate movement has won the argument that climate change is real and that it is hurting our planet’s ecosystems,” CCDH founder Imran Ahmed told CNN. So now, “climate deniers have cynically concluded that the only way to derail climate action is to tell people the solutions don’t work.” But they’re also minimizing what the impacts would be — even claiming they would be beneficial — and intensifying attacks on climate scientists and activists. “They don’t care about saving the planet,” Glenn Beck said in one video they cited. “This is all about gaining power and control over you.” It’s the same kind of victimhood narrative MAGA Republicans have made central to every aspect of their politics.
Trump himself is a bit behind the times. His signature denialist line is to call climate change “a Chinese hoax,” and he continues to deny climate is changing, or that sea level is rising significantly, even as homeowner insurance is rapidly disappearing in his new home state of Florida, due to skyrocketing climate threats. His attitude toward global warming, though hostile, seems variable: It’s a secondary if not tertiary concern, subsumed by his other obsessions — demonizing the Chinese, mocking experts, attacking and belittling enemies (think Gavin Newsom with California’s wildfires), as well as continuing personal and business vendettas, the origin of his repeated complaints about windmills. He will, it seems, grab any petty grievance, anything that pops into his head to avoid actually talking about climate.
“He may say anything that pops into his head, but he’s damn good at it and is playing the media like a piano,” said Stephan Lewandowsky, a cognitive scientist who’s studied multiple forms of deception and denialism. “I published a paper on this a few years ago.” That paper showed that “increased media coverage of the Mueller investigation is immediately followed by Trump tweeting increasingly about unrelated issues. This increased activity, in turn, is followed by a reduction in coverage of the Mueller investigation.” In short, he’s a master at distraction.
What’s more, Lewandowsky said, “There is also reasonably good evidence that Trump knows that he is lying,” contained in another paper that’s currently under review. That paper also cites the example of fossil-fuel industry leaders “in particular ExxonMobil,” who “were fully aware of the reality of climate change and its underlying causes while simultaneously expending large sums to deny its existence in public and to prevent Congress from enacting climate-mitigation legislation.”
Looking Toward November
Despite such massive deception, climate action now enjoys supermajority support, as already noted. For California voters activists, and donors, that means a two-fold priority: both electing climate champions, and winning as many flippable seats as possible. When it comes to Congress, California and New York are the swing states. Both have enough flippable districts (won by Biden in 2020, but by Republicans in 2022) to determine control of the House, along with vulnerable seats Democrats need to keep. For the class of climate champions, Young cited to really make a difference, they need to be part of a majority.
That’s just the philosophy adopted by Indivisible San Pedro, which is working in coordination with two larger groups, according to founding member Peter Warren. First, “Field Team 6, which is the only year-in, year-out partisan registration effort to recruit likely Democrats to vote,” and second, the California Grassroots Alliance, dedicated to winning in six crucial swing districts. “They all went Biden in 2022, but only one of them was won narrowly by a Democrat in 2022,” Warren said. “That was CA47,” the district Indivisible San Pedro focused on previously when Katie Porter won, and the one they’ll be focusing on again, to elect Dave Min.
“The motto of the Alliance is: The Road to the House Majority Runs through California. Without a working majority in both houses of Congress for the Democrats, nothing really good for climate, reproductive rights, voting rights, gun safety, health care, taxes, or most anything, gets done,” Warren said.
One other seat the Alliance has targeted involves a climate hero cited by Young. “We certainly hope we get someone like a George Whitesides, who has a math and science background on climate,” Young said. “I’ve never met any candidate who knows more of the actual science on climate than George Whitesides.” A former NASA chief of staff, he’s running against Mike Garcia in CA-27, in northeast LA County. As the first CEO of Virgin Galactic, he created hundreds of jobs in the district’s Antelope Valley, and he founded Megafire Action, an organization dedicated to solving the megafire crisis.
Jessica Morse, who’s served as deputy secretary for forest and wildland resilience at the California Natural Resources Agency, is another wildfire expert hailed by Young running in a contested district — California 3. Although not on the Alliance’s list, it’s also a winnable race. “These are people running in really tough seats,” Young stressed. “If you get them elected and get them in, they will be policy experts on our issues” who will “not just give us the majority that we need to move this in the house, but also the policy expertise that we need to pass really strong bills.”
Ballot Measures And Regulatory Battles
In addition to the legislative races, there are two ballot measures to worry about, Young warned. First is an oil-industry-sponsored referendum to repeal SB 1137, which established 3,200 feet set-back zones around sensitive receptors (residences, schools, healthcare facilities, etc), where new oil drilling is prohibited. Oil companies spent $20 million just to gather signatures to put it on the ballot, and “In the primary, they started investing in messaging to try to win that referendum fight,” Young said. “California has the strongest setbacks in the country, the strongest distance between oil derricks and people’s homes, daycare, schools and hospitals. And they are spending, they’re prepared to spend tens of millions of dollars in the general election to try to undo that.”
But, “there’s another big threat that’s worth watching, that I think is far less discussed,” he said. It’s a ballot proposition from the California Business Roundtable that would make it much harder to pass budgets and taxes, which is currently being challenged in California’s Supreme Court. If it does make it onto the ballet, Young said, “Voters need to know this is a really deceptive measure and it really could undo a ton of climate policy. … It would actually undo popular things that we already passed, such as the funding for the Safe and Affordable Drinking Water Act,” as well as “money that we raised for addressing plastics pollution… the most aggressive plastics reduction policy in the country” with funding targeting “historically excluded communities that are heavily impacted by plastics pollution.”
While these are the major electoral battles on the table, elections are only one part of the political process. Regulatory battles are equally important, particularly where port pollution is concerned. This year, long overdue action is expected from the Air Quality Management District on indirect source rules (ISRs) covering the ports and related railyards — the largest source of pollution in Southern California. How much these ISRs actually do to reduce pollution and community health impacts greatly depends on how stringently and well-targeted they are, which in turn depends on political will. This is why nine climate, environmental justice and community organizations will hold a rally and “die-in” on the steps of Los Angeles City Hall on April 26, to call on Mayor Karen Bass to follow through on promises made in her election campaign.
“The fight for health and environmental equity in Los Angeles and Long Beach for our frontline, Black and brown, working-class communities has been an ongoing struggle for decades–and still, every election cycle our hopeful communities will turn out and vote for elected officials who promise to rectify this history of environmental racism — only to be disappointed,” Pacific Environment Climate Campaigner Cristhian Tapia-Delgado told Random Lengths.
“This is why, Pacific Environment — in tandem with members of T.H.E. Impact Project are calling on Mayor Karen Bass to stick to her campaign promises of working with all levels of government to reduce the negative health and environmental impacts of fossil-fueled pollution,” he said. “In her mayoral campaign, Mayor Bass promised zero-emission ports by 2030 and to transition the city away from its dependency on fossil fuels to rectify the historical harm that the goods movement has had. We’re now asking her to deliver on these promises by supporting South Coast AQMD’s Rail and Ports ISR.”
As with the still-ongoing China Shipping lawsuit, the gap between promises and reality takes its toll on health, lives and faith in the system. Restoring faith is a key ingredient to everything else.
Often used as a pejorative, the term “disco” covers some of the finest and funnest music made from the mid- 1970s to the early ‘80s. While great hooks and pulsing rhythms are obvious parts of the formula, it’s often careful songcraft and extensive production that puts disco classics over the top.
Although they generally went uncredited, string sections and even full orchestras are big parts of that story. Whether you know it or not, the Bee Gees, Chic, “I Will Survive”, “Disco Inferno” — none of it would pop aslike it does without all the stuff going on in the background.
On May 4, Long Beach Symphony will be joined by “disco tribute” band Classical Night Fever to produce the Disco Fever Dance Party. If you can just get past all that “fever” (which unfortunately puts one more in mind of the fad than the fab), you’ll be treated to a two-hour spectacle of disco classics with all the trimmings, including plenty of room to dance.
It’s the latest installment of Long Beach Symphony’s highly successful Pops Series, five offerings per season featuring music more classic thant classical. The past year alone has included concerts dedicated to the music of The Beatles, Fleetwood Mac, and The Rolling Stones.
Formed in 1934, Long Beach Symphony — then called the Long Beach Philharmonic — first staged what President Kelly Ruggirello labels a “pops-style” concert in 1958 by featuring a program of selections from Broadway musicals. Ruggirello says that in 1984 the Symphony moved its Pops shows from the Terrace Theatre to the Long Beach Arena toin order to enable attendees at the floor level to dance either at their tables or on one of two dedicated dance floors flanking the stage
But those dance floors have probably never gotten as much use as they will on May 4, because ever since Saturday Night Fever, even people who haven’t heard of Studio 54 generally equate disco with dancing.
Classical Night Fever certainly has itstheir act down. For the better part of a decade, Classical Night Fever has been laying down the boogie with orchestras from coast-to-coast, delivering ultra-tight versions of beloved disco hits while helping to set the mood both sartorially and terpsichoreally.
Ruggirello reports that the Symphony’s Pops concerts typically attract from 4,000 to 5,000 people, which is almost double the number attending traditional symphony programs. Pops attendees also get to come as early as 6:30 p.m. to “picnic” indoors— either BYO food/drink (yes, including your favorite libations) or have your meal catered by George’s Greek Cafe, Modica’s, or other local options — prior to the shows’ 8 p.m. start time.
This event may sell out, so if your boogie shoes are beckoning, get your tickets now. See you on the dance floor.
LARKSPUR – California took significant new climate action April 16 with another partner: Norway.
Gov. Gavin Newsom welcomed a delegation from Norway led by His Royal Highness Crown Prince Haakon. Following a stop at San Quentin focused on criminal justice reform, the California and Norway delegations visited the Larkspur Ferry Terminal – home to one of the world’s first clean hydrogen fuel cell passenger ferries – to sign a new Memorandum of Understanding or MOU to advance climate collaboration.
The MOU outlines four years of cooperation between California and Norway on clean energy, zero-emission transportation and ports, carbon removal and climate-smart agriculture. The text of the MOU can be found here
The two delegations also signed a joint statement highlighting the new areas of climate collaboration, existing work on economic development and continued partnership on criminal justice and prison reform.
Details: The text of the joint statement can be found here.
Gov. Newsom Announces Appointments SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom March 29 announced the following appointments:
Alan Arkatov, of Los Angeles, has been appointed to the Exposition Park and California Science Center Board of Directors. Arkatov has been Senior Advisor to Arizona State University President Michael Crow, Executive Director of the Learning Transformation Studies at Arizona State University, and Professor in the College of Global Futures and Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College at Arizona State University since 2023. He was the Katzman/Ernst Chair in Educational Entrepreneurship, Technology, and Innovation at the University of Southern California from 2014 to 2023, and Director of the Center for Engagement Driven Global Education (EDGE) at the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education from 2018 to 2023. This position does not require Senate confirmation and there is no compensation. Arkatov is a Democrat.
CALIFORNIA — In a landmark achievement for labor rights in the cannabis industry, UFCW cannabis delivery drivers and depot staff at 11 Eaze cannabis locations across California have reached a tentative agreement with cannabis-delivery company Eaze, averting a strike ahead of the 4/20 holiday. This tentative agreement, reached by a bargaining committee made up of Eaze employees represented by UFCW locals 5, 135, 324, and 770, comes after nine months of intense negotiations and preparations for an unprecedented state-wide strike.
The bargaining committee unanimously recommended that their coworkers ratify the agreement, which guarantees better pay, a fair process for reimbursement of the costs of operating their vehicles, hours of work, and a multitude of enforceable rights and protections on the job. Workers are expected to vote on ratification later this week.
The tentative agreement represents a significant win for workers, who have fought since August 2023 to secure a fair and equitable agreement.
“We are thrilled to have achieved such meaningful victories through our collective strength and solidarity,” said Ron Swallow, a delivery driver out of Eaze Van Nuys, and part of the UFCW Local 770 negotiating committee. “This contract will not only improve the lives of Eaze employees but sets a powerful precedent for labor rights within the cannabis industry as a whole.”
“As a member of the bargaining committee we bargained hard for this contract, and we feel good about the progress made from where we begin. We felt we needed to reject the company’s initial offer, and an overwhelming majority of Eaze members agreed, which brought the company back to the table,” said Giovanna Sanchez-Esquival, a driver at Element 7 in South San Francisco. “We are proud that as workers we stayed united and were able to reach the best deal possible, which gives every Eaze worker a raise, a path to a transparent and equitable reimbursement for their mileage and won the largest statewide contract of its kind for cannabis delivery.”
UFCW noted this tentative agreement marks a pivotal moment for cannabis workers in California, reaffirming their ability and power to negotiate for fair treatment and just compensation.
Success may have many fathers, but Sam Phillips was a particularly big daddy in the raising of rock ‘n’ roll. For example, his little Sun Records launched the careers of Elvis Presley, Carl Perkins, Johnny Cash, and Jerry Lee Lewis.
Million Dollar Quartet memorializes the December 1956 night these seminal figures gathered at 706 Union Avenue in Memphis, Tennessee for a one-time-only jam session, adding fiction for spice and rewriting the song list to give us plenty of the ‘50s hits we associate with the foursome.
One short year ago, Perkins (Will Riddle) was top of the pops with “Blue Suede Shoes”. But it’s slim pickings since then, so he’s come to Sun Studio with his sidemen, bassist Jay (Benny Lipson) and drummer Fluke (Lonn Hayes), to try to churn out another hit. A fly in the ointment is Phillips’s (Adam Poole) latest find, the excitable 20-year-old Lewis (Garrett Forrestal), who’s aiming a lot higher than being a session piano player. After a few songs, Cash (David Elkin Simpson) pops in supposedly to wish Phillips a merry Christmas. And when Presley (LJ Benet) drops by with his girlfriend (Summer Nicole Greer) in hope of getting Phillips to come work with him at RCA, where’s he’s having success but not a lot of fun, the gang’s all here.
In addition to songs — there are always songs, wall-to-wall songs — Act One gives us four little flashbacks of how our stars came into Phillips’s life, while Act Two provides resolution to the pre-intermission cliffhanger (such as it is) regarding what will happen when Phillips learns that Cash is leaving Sun for Columbia Records.
As far as story goes, that’s pretty much it. But you don’t come to this for story: you come to see these icons do their thing, which happens only if the casting is right. It sure is here. With his deep bass voice, Simpson makes an especially convincing Man in Black (he’s even the tallest of the bunch, just like Cash was). Forrestal is a properly rambunctious Jerry Lee, and his sparring with Riddle is the source of most of Million Dollar Quartet’s (admittedly few and far between) yuks. And Benet evokes the young King without stooping to caricature.
Million Dollar Quartet is the rare musical where the musicians are on stage — and rarer still because the actors are the musicians. Lipson and Hayes underpin the proceedings with steady flair, Forrestal bangs away with great balls of fire, and Riddle’s guitar wins with both chunky rhythm and tasteful atmosphere.
As excellent as everyone’s solo vocals are, there’s an extra tingle when their voices blend together. We hear a hint of that in the simple harmony between Riddle and Forrestal during the refrains of “Who Do You Love?” Then comes the delight that is “Down by the Riverside” — only to be topped when the foursome is joined by Greer by “Peace in the Valley”.
Curiously, it’s a Greer solo number, “Fever”, that’s the most unexpected treat. Why this (fantastic) song is in Million Dollar Quartet I’ll never know, but musical director David Lamoureux’s simple yet stellar arrangement — delivered with true rapport by the band — send this one into the stratosphere.
There’s not much that director Tim Seib and company don’t get right. Those in the know will note the absence of Perkins’s adorable signature dance steps and that his guitar is too distorted for the era. But the choice to jazz up the foursome’s costumes from what they wear in the famous 1956 photo is spot-on. Two hours of Johnny Cash in a white shirt and light-colored jacket just wouldn’t be the same.
Although there’s not much to Million Dollar Quartet, anyone buying a ticket based on the premise should come away satisfied.
Million Dollar Quartet at Musical Theatre West Times: Fri 8pm, Sat 2pm & 8pm, Sun 1pm, plus Apr 18 7:30pm & Apr 21 6pm The show runs through April 28. Cost: $20–$125 Details: (562) 856-1999, musical.org Venue: Carpenter Performing Arts Center (6200 W. Atherton, Long Beach)
According to Theibeault, the concept for the show was to present work that explores “high chromacity,” using color as a visual force to “communicate emotion, empathy, memory and embodiment.” Artists were selected, in part, based on their connections to the CSULB community. “This includes alumni as well as those who have either taught or are currently teaching painting and color theory,” Thibeault said. “It was essential to maintain a balance that honored the distinct differences in approach, subject matter, and process evident across the artists’ works. This ensured that the exhibition would showcase a diverse range of artistic voices while highlighting the power and versatility of color in each piece.”
Constance Mallinson, GreenTrash, 2020. Photo courtesy of LBCG.
“We are thrilled to have Marie curating a show here at the Rod Briggs Gallery,” said Travis Stock-Tucker, Exhibition Coordinator for the Long Beach Creative Group. “Her years of experience as an artist and educator, and her deep connections with the Southern California creative community, have resulted in a spectacular show.”
“This exhibition presents an exciting and fulfilling opportunity to unite a diverse group of artists whom I’ve had the privilege of knowing and collaborating with throughout my career,” Thibeault said. “Teaching the Advanced Color class for painters at CSULB for over 33 years stands out as one of my greatest joys and personal achievements. Many of the artists featured in the show have a shared history, having crossed paths and developed their unique practices and careers over time. What unites us all is our deep-rooted love for and mastery of color, a passion that has driven me throughout my life.”
Perin-Mahler-Vanitas, 2024. Photo courtesy of LBCG.
Thibeault will also present a talk, “21st Century Color,” at the opening reception, May 17. Also on May 17 at 7:30, the LBCG will present the screening of a film related to the exhibition.
The LBCG is supported, in part, by the Port of Long Beach, the Arts Council for Long Beach, and the ongoing support of the Briggs Family Trust.
In Color
Time: 1 to 2 p.m., artist talk, May 17. Regular gallery hours are 1 to 4 p.m., Friday to Sunday
Cost: Free
Details: LongBeachCreativeGroup.com
Venue: Rod Briggs Gallery, located at 2221 E Broadway in Long Beach
