Ralph Nader Hour - Sunday, May 10, 2026

Summary

Ralph Nader Radio Hour – May 10, 2026: The Supreme Court, Voting Rights, Race, and Class with Adolph Reed
Podcast: KPFK – Ralph Nader Radio Hour | Hosts: Ralph Nader, Steve Scrovan, David Feldman | Guest: Adolph Reed

Episode Overview

Main Theme:
This episode focuses on the recent Supreme Court decision that effectively dismantled Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, exploring its implications for racial gerrymandering, American democracy, and the interplay of race and class in U.S. politics. Ralph Nader and co-hosts engage political scientist Adolph Reed to provide a counterintuitive and critical perspective, challenging conventional narratives and emphasizing the need to unite working-class Americans across racial lines.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Background on the Supreme Court’s Ruling

• Context:

  • The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision authored by Samuel Alito, ruled that Louisiana’s redistricting was political, not racial, thus undermining voting protections for minorities ([00:55], [04:41]).
  • The plaintiff was identified as a MAGA activist and January 6th participant, adding to the controversy ([04:41]).
  • The ruling builds on a pattern of the Roberts Court weakening civil rights legislation.

• Reed’s Analysis:

  • Clarification Needed: The distinction between protecting the right of Black citizens to vote for candidates of their choice, versus the right to be elected ([05:17]).
  • Historical Perspective: Disenfranchisement wasn’t solely based on white supremacy; it was also strategic—Black voters opposed Democrats, now Republicans use similar logic ([05:17]).

  “The race explanation that disfranchisement then and by implication now was all about white supremacy is itself a little unnuanced... They also were committed to disfranchising black voters because blacks... were much more likely to vote for the Republicans... The reverse is true now."
  — Adolph Reed [05:17]

---

2. Diversity in Congress: Promise vs. Reality

• Nader’s Critique:

  • Rise in minority and female representatives hasn’t translated into progressive policies or effective resistance to corporate interests ([06:57]).
  • Congressional Black Caucus described as “the most conservative black representation in American history,” often reluctant on major issues ([06:57]).
  • Corporate influence transcends race and gender: “Corporations just want control. They don’t care whether they’re controlling whites, blacks, women, gays, doesn’t matter.”

    “What’s happened is we have a Congressional Black Caucus, which is about the most conservative black representation in the Congress in American history... festooned with corporate presence, corporate donations, corporate signs.”
    — Ralph Nader [06:57]

• Potential Consequences of the Ruling:

  • Might redistribute Black voters into majority-white districts, possibly energizing new political organizing and cross-racial alliances ([10:02]).
  • Reed agrees this “may shake up things” and challenge complacency and gatekeeping in Black politics ([10:46]).

---

3. Class vs. Race – The Central Argument

• Reed’s Core Proposition:

  • Race often serves as a shorthand for class or a “camouflage that makes class disappear or seem to disappear” ([12:08]).
  • American political discourse since WWII has artificially separated race issues from class and economic ones ([12:08]).
  • Raising class issues threatens the status quo as it unites poor and working people of all races; thus, discussion of class is marginalized or censored ([13:25]).

  “Race is from one angle, a shorthand for making class judgments. From another angle, it's a camouflage that makes class disappear or seem to disappear.”
  — Adolph Reed [12:08]

  “Once you start talking about stuff like access to healthcare, housing, education, a decent income and a modicum of economic security... the race differences disappear.”
  — Adolph Reed [14:32]

• Barriers to Class Politics:

  • Public discourse policed by capitalist interests.
  • Unions of race and class in activism rarely given national platform.
  • Work must be grassroots, reaching working people where they are, not just urban progressive enclaves ([14:32]).

---

4. Gerrymandering: The Mechanics & Alternatives

• Nader on Solutions:

  • Congress could pass corrective legislation.
  • At-large elections where representatives are elected statewide.
  • Proportional representation to ensure more accurate reflection of voters ([17:33]).

  “Politicians pick the voters rather than the voters pick the politicians.”
  — Ralph Nader [17:21]

• Reed’s Pragmatic View:

  • Legislative fix is most feasible given U.S. political culture’s resistance to fundamental change ([19:24]).
  • At-large elections can exacerbate elite influence.
  • Proportional representation would require high political engagement and faces incumbent opposition ([19:24]).

---

5. Impeaching the Supreme Court Justices: An Unorthodox Proposal

• Nader’s Three Articles for Impeachment: ([24:51])

  • Systematic rollback of civil rights and access to justice.
  • Consistent preference for corporate over human interests (“taken corporate personhood to a level... never intended”).
  • Expansion of presidential power (“creating an imperial, unaccountable presidency”).

  “The six justices have dismantled the judicial branch in terms of its function of holding the executive branch, the presidency, accountable on matters of great gravity.”
  — Ralph Nader [24:51]

• Building a Movement:

  • Raising impeachment during congressional recess and at the grassroots.
  • Shadow hearings as precedent for public pressure ([26:54]).

  “That’s the sequence, people.”
  — Ralph Nader [28:17]

• Reed’s Assessment:

  • Agrees in principle but urges direct-to-people mobilization and skepticism of relying on institutional Black groups as gatekeepers ([29:22]).

---

6. The Role of Black Political Leadership and Civil Rights Groups

• Critique of Civil Rights Organizations:
  • NAACP and similar groups now serve elite Black interests rather than broader civil rights ([29:22]).
  • Need to bypass institutional gatekeepers and organize at the community level ([29:22]).

---

7. The Myth of “Post-Racial” America and Segregation’s Reality

• SCOTUS Arguments:

  • Conservative justices advance a so-called colorblind doctrine, which Reed labels as “disingenuous” and reminiscent of 19th-century backlash against civil rights ([31:02]).

  “You know you’re lying and your base knows that you’re lying, but you’re going to do it anyway.”
  — Adolph Reed [31:02]

• Segregation Today:

  • Patterns persist due to market forces, not just law; re-segregation is endemic; gerrymandering often negotiated by Black and Republican politicians for mutual “safe seats” ([34:51]).
  • Section 2 still relevant, but the problem is complex and includes class politics ([34:51]).

---

8. Broader Political Context – Passivity of Former Presidents

• Nader’s Question:

  • Why are former Presidents (Biden, Obama, Clinton, Bush) so silent and inactive in the face of this democratic crisis? ([37:50])

• Reed’s Response:

  • None represent genuine opposition to the status quo; neoliberal legacy runs through all, including Obama (“I knew him when he was a caterpillar... never had great expectations for him”) ([38:55]).

---

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• On Congressional Diversity vs. Policy Impact:

  “Well, very little of that has occurred because corporations just want control. They don't care whether they're controlling whites, blacks, women, gays, doesn't matter.” — Ralph Nader [06:57]

• On Class Solidarity:

  “Once you start talking about... access to healthcare, housing, education... the race differences disappear.” — Adolph Reed [14:32]

• On Proportional Representation:

  “Incumbents, almost by definition, are going to be opposed to the PR system. So... you have to build support around an issue that a lot of people will not find sexy enough or meaningful enough to put much elbow grease into.” — Adolph Reed [19:24]

• On the Supreme Court:

  “The six justices have dismantled the judicial branch in terms of its function of holding the executive branch, the presidency, accountable on matters of great gravity.” — Ralph Nader [24:51]

• On ‘Colorblindness’ in Law:

  “I mean, it's all bogus, right? And I think it's all transparently bogus. And I find it really annoying when the public commentariat expects us to treat these claims as if they were genuine.” — Adolph Reed [31:02]

• On Black Leadership Gatekeeping:

  “I don't think it makes sense to think of these as civil rights organizations anymore... they're black interest group organizations, but... not a working-class friendly politics.” — Adolph Reed [29:22]

---

Timestamps for Major Segments

• Supreme Court ruling overview / Adolph Reed’s introduction: [03:37–05:16]
• Diversity in Congress and corporatism critique: [06:57–10:02]
• Race vs. class: The central argument: [12:02–14:32]
• Mechanics of gerrymandering and alternatives: [17:21–20:54]
• Impeaching Supreme Court justices: [24:51–28:17]
• Critique of Black political leadership: [29:22]
• Debunking “post-racial” claims and modern segregation: [31:02–37:25]
• On the passivity of ex-presidents: [37:50–39:57]
• Reed’s book recommendation and closing advice: [40:11–41:55]

---

Recommended Reading & Final Thoughts

• Book Recommendation:
  • Escape from Capitalism by Clara Matei — “...an immensely important book that helps to make sense of where we are and what’s going on around us and most importantly, why it’s going on.” — Adolph Reed [40:11]
• Reed’s Call to Action:
  • America faces a crossroads: either “a social democratic reorganization” or a slide toward fascism; tackling climate change requires challenging corporate property ([41:55]).

---

Summary Takeaways

• The Supreme Court’s latest Voting Rights Act decision reveals deep, ongoing manipulation of American democracy.
• Race and class remain inseparable but are kept artificially apart by powerful interests who benefit from division.
• Congressional diversity has not delivered substantive policy gains for marginalized people—due mostly to corporate capture.
• Systemic change (like proportional representation or Supreme Court reform) faces significant cultural and political barriers but must be pursued.
• Building authentic, working-class coalitions across racial lines is essential—the status quo will not yield change through established institutions or elite leadership.
• Listeners are called upon to engage directly, think critically, and mobilize locally for systemic reform and against rising authoritarianism.

---

For further details and links to Professor Reed’s work, visit RalphNaderRadioHour.com.

Transcript

[Alan Minsky]

Hold my hand,

[Bethany Baptist Church Announcer]

please. Join the Bethany Baptist Church of West Los Angeles with Pastor Greg Tyler for their 68th church anniversary on May 17th at 10:30am the theme is A Serving Church for a Coming lord. Guest speaker, Reverend Eugene Howard at Mary Magdalene Baptist Church, 5102 Southwestern Avenue in Los Angeles, California.

[Adolph Reed]

90.7 KPFK, Los Angeles. Stand up. Stand up. You've been sitting way too long.

[Steve Scroven]

Welcome to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. My name is Steve Scroven, along with my co host, David Feldman. Hello, David.

[David Feldman]

Hello, Steve.

[Steve Scroven]

And Hannah is out today, but we have the man of the hour, Ralph Nader. Hello, Ralph.

[Ralph Nader]

Hello, everybody. As usual, we have something special for all of you to do.

[Steve Scroven]

That's right, Ralph. This past week, the Supreme Court handed down a 6 to 3 decision that essentially gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights act of 1965. This act helped to end Jim Crow and expand political opportunities for racial minorities, especially black voters. The right wing majority claimed in an opinion authored by Samuel Leto that redistricting efforts in Louisiana were strictly political and not intentional racial discrimination. This is not the first time the Supreme Court, headed by John Roberts, has issued a ruling that has diluted this landmark civil rights legislation. To discuss this, we welcome back Adolph Reed, professor emeritus of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania and distinguished visiting professor at Montolio College. Professor Reid has written extensively about race and class and will give us his take on on this latest assault on social progress. As always, somewhere in the middle, we'll check in with our relentless corporate crime reporter, Russell Mokhyber. But first, the Supreme Court essentially allowed racial gerrymandering. What's to be done? Hi, everybody. Sorry to interrupt the show. This is Steve Scrovan, co host of the Ralph Nader Radio Hour, along with David Feldman and Ralph. And we are in fund drive here at kpfk. And I'm joined here by our executive producer, Alan Minsky. Alan, tell us about it.

[Alan Minsky]

Yeah, well, this is the KPFK fundraiser. This is where you out there get to support a radio station that only operates in the way it does. Totally independent, no corporate influence, no politicians telling us what to do, no authoritarians telling us what to do. And the reason it's that way is because you, the listeners, are how we stay operating. And we have these interruptions of our regular programming called Fun Drives. And we ask you to support us. And the best way to do that is to call right now at 8189-8557-3581-8985. Kpfk. Give what you can if you want a thank you gift in return, like say a KPFK T shirt or KPFK coffee mug, you know, just ask the person who answers the phone and they'll make that available to you as a thank you gift. But give what you can give. Think of $10 a month, maybe $5 a month, $20 a month. And do it now to support this incredible show, the Ralph Nader Radio Hour with the one and only Ralph Nader, the only public radio host right now who is named one of the 100 most influential Americans of the 20th century and one of the hosts on the show. Is it you, Steve, or is it is it Ralph Hangings? RALPH okay, so call 8189-8557-3581-8985 KPFK. Steve so head back to the show.

[Steve Scroven]

Let's do it.

[David Feldman]

David Adolf Reed is professor emeritus of political science at the University of Pennsylvania and distinguished visiting professor at Mount Holyoke College. His most recent books are the Jim Crow and Its Afterlives, no Politics But Class Politics, co authored with Walter Ben Michaels, and Black Studies, Cultural Politics and the Evasion of Inequality. The Farce this time co authored with Kenneth W. Warren. Welcome back to the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. Adolph reed, thanks, man.

[Adolph Reed]

It's good to be back.

[Ralph Nader]

Well, thank you, Adolph. Good to have you. Listeners should realize that this is going to be a counterintuitive program. We don't follow the party lines here and we think that class is very, very important, not just race. So let's get underway with this ruling a few days ago by the Supreme Court that's created an uproar out of Louisiana. Tell our listeners what it held and then we'll parse it.

[Adolph Reed]

Well, yeah, the bottom line is that the decision and the plaintiff, it turns out, was a MAGA activist and a January 6th veteran. But the ruling basically invalidates the pre clearance section of the Voting Rights act and probably goes farther than that and its implications. I mean, I think, as Ralph suggested right before we started taping, I think the issues are a lot more complex than they seem to be or than seems to be the way that they are represented in the debate.

[Ralph Nader]

Discuss that.

[Adolph Reed]

Well, I mean, just to cut straight to the political case, I think there's a distinction between the acts guarantee that black citizens and others where pertinent who live in areas where there's been a history of suppression of race based I mean, suppression of the right to vote have the support of the federal government to make certain that black voters have the ability to Elect or to vote for, and I guess to elect candidates of their choosing, which is not the same thing as a right of black individuals to be elected to office. And I think that's one of the confusions that characterizes, frankly, both sides of the debate at this point. And I think that's definitely something that needs to be clarified. And as my co author, Kenneth Warren and I have argued, I mean, going back to the 19th century to disfranchisement at the end of the 19th century, the race explanation that disfranchisement then and by implication now was all about white supremacy is itself a little unnuanced, right? Because the white supremacist Democrats in the late 19th century were certainly committed to white supremacy as an ideology and the political program. But they also were committed to disfranchising black voters because blacks were, for reasons that made a hell of a lot of sense, not likely to vote for Democrats and were much more likely to vote for the Republicans. And the reverse is true now with Republican disfranchisers. They're certainly making use of the rhetoric of white supremacy. And I feel confident that most of them who do are themselves, in whatever ways, committed white supremacists.

[Ralph Nader]

My reaction to all this, I think, brings to the forefront a greater demonstration of political reality. Let's frame it with some statistics. There are now 67 black members of Congress. There are 56 Latino members of Congress. There are 154 women in Congress. This is out of 535 seats right now. The argument in the early days, Adolf, of the civil rights movement is if you increase diversity, you also increase diversity of public policy. So you have more blacks in Congress, more Hispanics in Congress, you're gonna have more attention to poverty, to corporate exploitation, to housing needs, et cetera. And the same is true for women that you have far more pressure for daycare, far more pressure for a variety of women. Rights in their health, economic rights, equality of pay, et cetera. Well, very little of that has occurred because corporations just want control. They don't care whether they're controlling whites, blacks, women, gays, doesn't matter. And what's happened is we have a Congressional Black Caucus, which is about the most conservative black representation in the Congress in American history. Look at poor Al Green from Texas, African American. He's being redistricted. He puts out the impeachment three times and he can't get any support from the Congressional Black Caucus against the most racist president in all directions. Not just talk, in all directions, repressing the vote, undercutting the social safety, anti poverty food stamps, the SNAP program, getting poor people off of Medicaid, gutting Meals on Wheels, gutting Head Start, which has been a great success. And that's what you have. If you look at the Commercial Black Caucus annual convention at the Washington Hilton, it's festooned with corporate presence, corporate donations, corporate signs. So here's the argument. The argument is that overwhelmingly black districts with black representatives in Congress have become too complacent. They don't have any competition. They get reelected every two years. Very few are in the Senate, as you know. And what we've seen here is increasing corporatism, reactionary type behavior. I mean, they should be militantly organized against the fascist, dictatorial, maniacal, unstable, crazed Wall Street Donald Trump. And you don't see it. So here's the suggestion. This Supreme Court case may shake up things. It may shake up things and distribute the black vote in now which are heavily white districts. It may bring younger African Americans to the fore who, who know the difference between class and race. What do you think about it?

[Adolph Reed]

Look, Ralph, I think it's an argument that stands on its own terms. I mean, I think back to 2016 and 2020, where the black Caucus were the shock troops or the Wall street wing of Democratic Party leading the charge against Bernie Sanders. I mean, the concern is, look like the best that we can make of it is because it is a horrible thing that the Supreme Court did and that the Republicans are doing. And if we start looking for ways to make the best of a bad situation, I think that's a reasonable way to look at things right as they are now.

[Ralph Nader]

Well, there's no doubt it was a racist decision. Alito's record is clear on that. But I'm saying it might have different consequences.

[Adolph Reed]

Right. Well, look, I'll be honest, man. I mean, some of my friends and I have been talking about this, have been bouncing this idea back and forth since, frankly, even before the court handed down the decision. Well, just in thinking about developments in black politics across the board. And I mean, the idea that all that black voters are supposed to get out of politics is the representation of people who look like them and share in the same racial identification has also fueled backward turns, like how all of a sudden the biggest issue in black American politics supposedly had become the racial wealth gap, which boils down to a complaint that rich black people aren't as rich as rich white people are. So, yeah, I mean, shaking up or reshuffling the deck for how we might Begin to try to determine the stakes of black Americans engagement in national politics is something that needs to happen no matter what brings it about. I mean, this is not the ideal way for it to be brought about because obviously what Alito and that majority are doing is just the same old kind of scapegoating that the race idea has always performed for the reactionaries. So we have to play the hand we've been dealt, and this is the hand that we've been dealt.

[Ralph Nader]

Discuss for our audience, Adolph, your views on class as distinguished from race.

[Adolph Reed]

Well, I think, simply put, race is from one angle, a shorthand for making class judgments. From another angle, it's a camouflage that makes class disappear or seem to disappear. And it's been that way since a concept emerged right in the 17th and 18th centuries. And one of the problems that we've had in black politics, but in American politics across the board since the end of World War II is the combination of McCarthyism and as the stick and emergence of sort of racial liberalism that was disconnected from class and political economy as the carrot has shaped the evolution of American politics for all of my life, and I think all of yours too, Ralph, in ways that have finally come home to roost in the sense that by making class invisible, not just in relation to race, but across the board through the construct, for instance, of this fictitious notion of a middle class that somehow includes a steel worker who is able to buy a house with a VA loan and a neurosurgeon as being joined together or billionaires being joined together under the status of homeowners, was also about making class invisible. And here we are.

[Ralph Nader]

Yeah. Well, our common friend, Bishop Barber tried to get class in the public dialogue, in the political dialogue. He wrote a book where the title was White Poverty on white poverty.

[Adolph Reed]

Oh, yeah.

[Ralph Nader]

60 million poor whites in the U.S. and guess what? Although he would get a lot of coverage for his moral Monday's protest in North Carolina, et cetera, he got censored out. It wasn't reviewed in the New York Times. He got very few interviews. We had him on the show. So there is a real nerve here that is touched when you start raising class. Because what class does is unite poor whites and poor blacks, unites left and right who are exploited by these corporations beyond the mere exploitation economically, as the corporations move to dominate our entire country and turn it into a deep corporate state where corporate power controls government and turns it against its own people. You find when you talk about class that you don't get much coverage. It doesn't go anywhere Compared to talking about race?

[Adolph Reed]

Yep, seems that way. I mean, look, at this point, I think the real conversations that need to be had aren't in the sort of world of public chatter anyway, right? I mean, the price of the ticket of entry into that conversation is being on the side of the capitalist class against the rest of us. Where we really need to concentrate our efforts is in talking to working people. Because what I've found in that sphere of my work and all my friends, that once you start talking about stuff like access to healthcare, housing, education, a decent income and a modicum of economic security to be able to survive a catastrophe, the race differences disappear. Right. And people participate in that conversation because they understand we all have the same problems. That's what the overlords and their minions in both parties, right? I mean, Ralph, I know that you remember our slogan in the Labour Party was the bosses have two parties, we should have at least one. And that's the conversation that they're dead set against us having. And that's the one that we have to have. And now that literal fascism is banging on the door. I mentioned to Steve that I just finished reading an article by Clyde Barrow on Christofascism in Texas that is absolutely chilling. They have complete control of the state, but with this horrible ideology, and that's what we need to win people from preemptively. Because once one becomes an ideologue, it's very difficult to change our minds because the network effects and all the rest of that, and especially if the ideology is steeped in conspiracy theory, because for conspiracists, the absence of evidence is only proof of the depth of the conspiracy. So that's the waste of time. But the most important work for us to do is to connect with those working people out there all over the country and not just in Brooklyn coffee houses, to begin working to craft an alternative way of thinking about the stakes of politics and who's zooming who. I mean, even in western Massachusetts, the public utility company was given license to gouge consumers. And this is left leaning one in Massachusetts, supposedly to set extraordinary rates to make up absurd charges, you know, to gouge consumers coming and going. And it's funny, I mean these are technically publicly regulated monopolies, but all the regulation means is like an entry ticket to a casino lets them steal from us. So yeah, I mean, people aren't stupid. They know what's going on. And as the late Tony Masaki often said, what the Democrats have to offer doesn't amount to a hill of beans. And if Our side is not able or refuses to offer honest explanations of why people are suffering and credible roots out of the suffering, then these much more dangerous forces in American politics are going to do it with nasty, just those stories and that's what they've done.

[Ralph Nader]

Let's get back to gerrymandering. I don't want to underestimate the malicious effect of gerrymandering, which is another word for saying the politicians pick the voters rather than the voters pick the politicians. Right?

[Adolph Reed]

Yes.

[Ralph Nader]

There are three ways the Supreme Court decision can be overcome. One is for Congress to pass legislation. The second is to have at large elections like if there are six members of Congress, if the six members of the House from a state, they run statewide so the top six candidates get elected. And the third is proportional representation, where right now we have a winner take all system. If you're part of the 49% of the vote, you don't get any power. The 51% gets it all. And a lot of European countries have proportional representation, so everybody's vote counts. Now, I don't know the extent to which the reaction to the Supreme Court decision which may cost 13 black House seats in the South. We don't quite know how it's going to work out for the Democrats. But we need to start mobilizing here. Instead of simply throwing darts at the Supreme Court decision, we're going to get listeners to talking very shortly about collective impeachment of the six injustices. The Supreme Court will show you the case is overwhelming and reflects the Founding Fathers premonition, which is why they included judges, federal judges under the impeachment clause, not just the president or the vice president or high executive branch officials. What do you think of these approaches? Running at large? There are some cities that do that. So you get the top six or seven in a city get elected instead of the running from a neighborhood in the city. What do you think of proportional representation? And you think there's going to be any black mobilization while they have the members in the House and Senate and a little in the House mostly to get legislation to overrule this. I haven't heard much talk about that in the last week.

[Adolph Reed]

No, no, I haven't either. Yeah, I mean those three options. Of the three options, I think the most likely is the first. And in a way it's easiest that if Democrats can get control of both houses of Congress and push legislation, and this presumes that in 2028 the Democrats get the White House also, then they can overturn the actions of the supreme court. In that way, the at large elections thing can be kind of complicated, right. I think because at the municipal level too, it has also been a way for corporate interests or for the wealthy to exert disproportionate influence in local electoral politics because of the relative costs of winning at large as opposed to winning from a single member district. The proportional representation is a great idea, but what I think is a catch 22 is that you've already got to have a measure of political sophistication among the electorate to vote in a proportional system where incumbents almost by definition going to be opposed to the PR system. So I mean, that's a tough one, right? Because you have to build support around an issue that a lot of people will not find sexy enough or meaningful enough to put much elbow grease into trying to win. So I think the best hope for the short term and this while trying to do the public education that would be necessary to pursue either option two or option three, the best hope is winning back Congress and like then, the presidency in 2028.

[Ralph Nader]

This is Ralph Nader. KPFK was the original home of the Ralph Nader Radio hour. And after 12 years and 625 shows, we're still going strong. So please show your appreciation for this program and all the other programs on KPFK that bring you voices, ideas, proposals, exposes that you will not hear in the mainstream corporate media. KPFK is beholden to no one but you, the citizens. Please donate generously.

[Alan Minsky]

So call 8189-8557-3581-8985, KPFK.

[Ralph Nader]

And by the way, as Eric Holder, former attorney general under Obama, said on NPR a few days ago, this decision affects state legislatures as well, the makeup of state legislature.

[Adolph Reed]

Yeah, I mean, I'm in the weeds now where I mean, the governor just canceled the election.

[Ralph Nader]

It's interesting you say that because Trump has again renewed his demand to cancel the the November elections. You got to credit the guy with being open. He's no Nixon curled up in a dark corner.

[Adolph Reed]

No, no, no.

[Ralph Nader]

He demands the states cancel elections and rig maps for the gop. He knows that he's going to be very vulnerable to impeachment if that does not happen. Which people say, well, he's crazy. You can't cancel elections. Well, he can invoke the Insurrection act, say there's a national emergency, national security, and then he can seize the state election machinery. He can seize the ballots, and he's perfect capable of that because he knows he may be impeached and removed from office.

[Adolph Reed]

Yeah, he's dangerous. And he's especially dangerous because he's weak and fearful.

[Ralph Nader]

Exactly. He's plummeting in the polls. The Republicans in Congress are getting very nervous about a disaster in November, and their political future is more important to them than Trump, who is now a lame duck. That's what happened with Nixon after he won 49 out of 50 states in 1972 with 60% in the polls in 18 months. He was out of there because the GOP feared the 1974 election collapse. Now let's discuss something that's almost never discussed. We're talking with Professor Adolph Reed, taught for many years at the University of Pennsylvania, has a huge number of books and articles to his credit, and he's now teaching at Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts. The impeachment collectively of the six injustices of the Supreme Court, as I call them under our Constitution, when they are confirmed to become Associate justice of the Supreme Court, it's for life. So, number one, they're not accountable. They don't have terms that are renewable. And of course they're not elected. They're nominated and confirmed by the Senate. So they bear a heavy burden of internal accountability and responsibility and self discipline. Well, look at the six justices that you. The six three decisions, etc. Here are the three counts and articles of impeachment. I would put against them a consistent attack on the nation's civil rights and access to justice or access to the courts. A consistent attack, as we've seen recently in the dismantling of Section 2 of the Civil Rights Act. The second is a consistent preference of corporations over human beings. That is, they have taken the corporate personhood to a level where corporations have all the rights under our Constitution except the right against self incrimination that human beings have. Yet they have all kinds of privileges, immunities, power over capital, technology, labor that even rich individuals don't even approximate. So what they've done is turn the Constitution upside down. Because the Constitution starts with we the people. It didn't say we the corporations or we the Congress and we the people and corporations and company. The word corporation and company never appears in the Constitution, and yet the Supreme Court consistently votes against four corporations, against consumers, against labor, against the environment, against standing to sue by taxpayers, against government corruption and surrender to corporate power. The third article of impeachment is consistent empowering of the presidency, creating an imperial, unaccountable presidency, shattering the separation of powers, which is a sacred doctrine by our Founding Fathers and our Constitution. Separation of powers between Executive and legislative and judicial branches. And the decision of the six in the summer of 2024, called Trump versus the United States, in effect gave immunity from criminal prosecution to sitting presidents on matters of public policy, which they didn't define. It was defined by Sotomayor and her dissent as to what presidents now can do, including assassination of their opponents. She had that in her dissent. So these are three powerful arguments. And what they come down to, Adolph, is that the six justices have dismantled the judicial branch in terms of its function of holding the executive branch, the presidency, accountable on matters of great gravity. Your response?

[Adolph Reed]

Well, it sounds right to me, and it's a great idea. I mean, the question is, you know, where does the political movement. How do we build a political movement that would bring pressure on the existing Congress to pursue that course? Right. And that's the question.

[Ralph Nader]

Well, first we have to raise it during the recess when Congress comes back, almost the entire summer, they take off. It's really amazing. And they're down there shaking hands, going from one clam bank to another or whatever. People have to say, we have to impeach these justices. Remember, there is a big impeachment drive by the right wing against Earl Warren, who is chairman, who is the chief justice, because of his Brown versus Board education decision. It's not without precedent, but I mean, these justices, I mean, they tower above anything that past justices collectively have done against our republic and the Constitution for which it stands. So you get it discussed out there, people raise it, start talking about it. Then people come back and they start talking about it in Congress. They say, you know, we were out there campaigning and there are people raising impeachment against the justices of the Supreme Court. Then you get a group of members of Congress who put in articles of impeachment asking for hearings. If there are no hearings, because the Republicans control the hearing process, they hold shadow hearings. There's nothing to stop a member of Congress from holding a shadow hearing. You remember Mike Gravel held a hearing on the Pentagon Papers and he was the only one in the room back years ago. So that's the sequence, people.

[Adolph Reed]

Yeah. And that's what the audience ought to hear. But that's what people need to pick up and begin to agitate around, among other things. Right. At the local level. Right. Because that's where it's going to have to come from.

[Ralph Nader]

I'm really amazed that none of this has come from the NAACP or other black civil rights groups, because you remember the, the Washington Post recently, you may have read it, had a big article on the white Supremacy positions of Felon Elon Musk and his poisonous tusks, as I described. It's really amazing. Here's the richest guy in the world. He's like worth $600 billion, and he's spewing this stuff over the Internet, over his own sites, like nonstop, saying it's white people who are the victims and it's white people who are being persecuted. And the article was very extensive in the Washington Post, and yet there was no quote by the naacp. There's no ferment like there was years ago. They don't pounce on these mega racist positions like they used to. Why?

[Adolph Reed]

Well, what's happened, Ralph, is that what we think of as race politics today has long since become a class politics, but it's not a working class oriented politics. It's a politics that's about trying to narrow the gaps, whatever the gaps may be, between rich black people and rich white people. And that's what that politics is all about. I don't think it makes sense to think of these as civil rights organizations anymore. I mean, they're black interest group organizations, but the interest group politics, like for others, is not a class politics, is certainly not a working class friendly politics. And I think we need to figure out ways to bypass those organizations to talk to black Americans more directly and not to accept their insistence that they be seen as gatekeepers for 40 million black people's aspirations. So I think we need to forget about or not have any expectations of political decency coming from those groups, to be honest.

[Ralph Nader]

Let's go to Steve Adolf.

[Steve Scroven]

Well, it seems like we've wandered a bit far from the Voting Rights act, which this is not the first attack on it. This is, I think, at least the third Supreme Court decision that has attacked it. And it seems like the conservative justices feel that they live in a post racial world where it's the. I don't see color. John Roberts famously said, and I think this was in the context of affirmative action, quote, the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race. Could you comment on that mindset?

[Adolph Reed]

Yeah, sure. I mean. Well, first thing I'd say is it's disingenuous, of course. And I mean, another thing that comes to mind in, like this case is, you know, in 1883, Justice Joseph Bradley, in an opinion that overturned the 1875 civil rights law, asked when a Negro was going to stop being the special favorite of the laws. So that was like 15 years after ratification of the 14th amendment. So in retrospect, it looks pretty foolish or I mean, disingenuous. But when these justices who are the minions of a political disposition that has always or since passage of the 64 and 65 landmark laws has an effect, attempted to use or to do what the Maoists used to call using the red book against the red book by invoking cliches from Martin Luther King like, you know, the dream of a colorblind society to support stepping up racial discrimination. Right. Under the guise of not seeing color. Well, I mean, it's disingenuous. It's consistent with the mindset of the fascist agitator. Right? You know you're lying and your base knows that you're lying, but you're going to do it anyway. So from my perspective, I can't take any of those claims seriously or don't accept for a second that any one of them is genuinely committed to an ideal of post racialism, whatever that supposed to mean. Anyway, maybe Amy Coney Barrett, because she's adopted black kids and has some weird views about a lot of things basically. And it might just be that I'm simply not giving her enough credit for being as evil and duplicitous. Right? Because she's a woman in. And as a Catholic schoolgirl who went to the same high school that two of my cousins went to around the same time actually. But yeah, I mean, I think it's all bogus, right? And I think it's all transparently bogus. And I find it really annoying when the public commentariat expects us to treat these claims as if they were genuine. And I'm not saying after you're doing it, I know better. Right. But that's also kind of where we are and I think it's helpful, it's better all the way around for us to think about the questions of the impact of their actions in concrete terms. Right. In terms of who's likely to benefit and who's likely to lose from the policies and interpretations that they impose. So I mean, I remember. I know you do too. I think we may still have been, we may have been a public citizen board together and, but I forget. But all the kind of post racial chatter around Obama's election too. It's just somewhere between the wishful thinking, you know, good or well intentioned wishful thinking and the silly kind of political dilettantism. So I think you asked me what time it was and I gave you a disquisition on how to make a watch.

[Steve Scroven]

So. Right, that's fine.

[Ralph Nader]

Let's go to David.

[David Feldman]

We had Jonathan Kozil on the show last week and he famously wrote 20 years ago that our schools are more segregated now than they were before Brown v. Board of Education. So my question is, in light of this Kalay decision from Alito, my question is, does segregation still exist in the old Confederacy? Because I think most Americans don't understand what a majority minority congressional district is. It seems to me institutionalized racism forced black people to live together. And the purpose of a majority minority congressional district was to give black people representation in the House of Representatives. Are black people still clustered together in the Old South? Does segregation still exist? And Therefore does Section 2 of the Civil Rights act of 1965 still mean something?

[Adolph Reed]

Yeah, the short answer, especially to the Section two question is yes, it does. I think it's important for us to make a distinction between a social order based on codified and enforced racial hierarchy, which is what the Jim Crow order was and patterns that produced through political economy were without the coercive force of law. And the patterns and the latter are more the product of capitalism's forces of a market mechanism with public support of distributing good and bad outcomes up and down the society. And the fact that those patterns tend to be racialized, at least in proportions, is a product of that old order that persists right in the south by the old Confederacy. And you know, that's true. But the story is more complicated in the sense. Well, in two senses. One, in the sense that blacks are now much more likely to participate in the zooming as they are in the being zoomed, basically. And that's one of the reasons that I don't like the rhetoric of new gentrification, because it makes what's a political economic dynamic that supported public support of privately appropriated Ruby redevelopment. But it makes it seem like a cultural problem which can be solved by cutting some black or Hispanic people in at the top. Right. So does that. But also it's problematic in the sense that I'm sure you guys all can recall this, but going back to the 90s and periodically, there's been a problem. Black Democrats in state reapportionment processes aligning with the Republicans to produce super majority black districts whose main virtue is being safe in exchange for safe Republican seats that abut them. And what I like to think of, there's a case of trading a 70% black district with three 20% black districts around it that are safe, instead of an arrangement that has one, say 55 or 50% black district which may not always elect a black candidate, but would be a district in which black voters preferences can be heard and have some impact and maybe a district that's like 40% black, where perhaps not a black, but at least a white, liberal or Democrat could be elected sometimes. So there's politics that plays out there too, we have to take into account. So I hope that's an adequate response.

[David Feldman]

Well, we need more Congress members. There are 435 that's been locked since, I believe, 1913. It's based on the 19. I think it's the 1910 census. Based on a population of 100 million as opposed to 350 million. We should have at least a thousand members of the House of Representatives.

[Adolph Reed]

Yeah, that's not a bad idea.

[Ralph Nader]

We've noted on this program more than once about the excessively quiet posture of ex presidents Biden, Obama, Clinton and even Bush, who hates Trump. They have huge followings. Tens of millions of people voted for them. They can get immediate media, they can raise money and create powerful lobbies for impeachment in every congressional district. They're being battered and slandered almost daily by Trump, especially Biden. Why are they so recessive? Why can't they achieve a higher significance of themselves and fulfill the trust that's still implicit in them by tens of millions of the voters who supported him? They could change the whole equation against Trump from the grassroots up and encourage other retired politicians to enter the fray as advocates to restore the republic. What's your view on these past presidents, especially Obama, who still has a huge following in this country?

[Adolph Reed]

Well, Ralph, you recall that I, as I sometimes will describe it, you just happened to be in the birthing room at the outset of Obama's political career. So I got to watch him emerge as a butterfly. But I knew him when he was a caterpillar too. So my expectations for Obama have never been very great. But Clinton was the guy. Clinton was America's Tony Blair, right? I mean, he's the guy who sealed the deal on consolidating neoliberalism institutionally. And I was just reminded a couple of days ago that Biden gave the eulogy at Strom Thurman's funeral, for God's sake, and was co sponsor of the odious Primax. So it's not like any one of those guys is actually worth anything. And they are where I would expect them to be now. And I mean, don't forget before, in his first meeting with the Wall street types after his election, said, boys, I'm all that's standing between you and the pitchforks when you should have had a pitchfork.

[Ralph Nader]

Well, we're running out of time. Two questions. One is, of all the books you've read, which one would you like people to read right now, given today's politics? And is there anything else you'd like to say to our listeners? Sure.

[Adolph Reed]

The book I recommend at the moment is by the economist Clara Matei, M A T T E I and it's called Escape from Capitalism. And it's something everybody needs to know. It's an immensely important book that helps to make sense of where we are and what's going on around us and most importantly, why it's going on. And the other thing I would say is that we've been, and this is the book I'm trying to finish this summer, but that we've been making compromises with unchallenged capitalist class power since the end of World War II, and it pretended that class forces don't exist, that a political economy doesn't have anything to do with inequality, and that there's such a thing as an American exceptionalism that shows up in harmony between workers and employers. They started to disabuse us of that fiction in the 1970s, and our side still hasn't faced up to the realities of what we're up against. And now it's at the point where I think we're at the equivalent of a T intersection, where there are only two ways forward. One is to the left turn towards something that looks like a social democratic reorganization of the society. And I want to underscore that there's no way to even begin seriously to think about tackling the grave climate crisis unless we can imagine imposing controls on capitalist property, corporate property, or the other turn is to the right toward fascism. And I think we've exhausted the opportunity or the occasions for what my son has long described as the Democrats. Me, too. But not so much way of trying to position themselves against the Republicans. That's it for me.

[Ralph Nader]

And some more of this listeners was expressed in one of Professor Reid's more recent books in 2023 with Walter Ben Michaels. The book's titled no Politics But Class Politics. Thank you very much, Adolph.

[Adolph Reed]

Take care, guys. Good to see you all.

[Steve Scroven]

We've been speaking with Adolf Reed. We have a link to his [e-mail] when we come back, Ralph and our resident constitutional law expert, Bruce Fine will tell us what what we can do to help compel Congress to impeach Donald Trump. But first, let's check in with our corporate Crime reporter Russell Mokhyber.

[Russell Mulkhyber]

From the National Press building in Washington, D.C. this is your corporate Crime Reporter Morning minute for Friday, May 8, 2026. I'm Russell Mulkheimer. Developers in Archbald, Pennsylvania, plan to build six sprawling data center campuses in town to power the demand for artificial intelligence, eventually covering about 14% of the town's land. Those campuses would include 51 data warehouses, each about the size of a Walmart Supercenter, including seven buildings encompassing more than a million square feet. That's according to a report in the Washington Post. For years, developers plans to make the community, which sits beneath a major interstate power line, a hub for data storage went largely unnoticed. But as word began circulating last year about borough council zoning changes to allow for the development, residents rebelled and have launched one of the most contentious grassroots campaigns in local history. For the corporate Crime reporter, I'm Russell Mulcaiber.

[Steve Scroven]

Hi, everybody. This is Steve Scrovan, co host of the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. And it's fun drive time here at kpfk. And when that happens, I get to talk to my good friend and our executive producer, Alan Minsky. Hello, Alan.

[Alan Minsky]

Hello, Steve.

[Ralph Nader]

Great to be with you.

[Steve Scroven]

It's great to be with you. We talking with Adolf Reed on the Ralph Nader Radio Hour and about the Supreme Court's decision to put the final stake in the heart of the signature civil rights legislation, the Voting Rights act of 1965, and getting Adolf's rather subtle take on that. So, yeah, here we are. Here we are. What's your take?

[Alan Minsky]

Well, my take is that when the Ralph Nader Radio Hour began, one of the things that David Feldman and I were thinking, and then we got in dialogue with yourself, and then we got into dialogue with Ralph Nader, but we didn't share this part with Ralph was who really understands how American society operates better than anyone else. And we certainly couldn't couple with anybody who would surpass Ralph Nader in that regard. You know, the role of corporations as powerful institutions, our society, the structure of the Constitution, the power and limitations of government, limitations as it's currently practiced in. In spheres that would help people not so limited in ways that help the powerful and the wealthy. And the. Ralph really understands it. And, you know, we are in the most severe crisis for the Democratic Republic of the United States of America. Only rivaled by the Civil War, I guess. I guess at this point, still probably surpassed by the Civil War. But nothing else comes close.

[Steve Scroven]

No surpassed by the Civil War, but we're getting close. It's. And the Thing about why KPFK was the home station for the Ralph Nader Radio Hour. And we've always really appreciated that and the importance of supporting KPFK is Ralph Nader is an historical figure and we, KPFK is a radio show. It's been 12 years now where we've been able to engage with this historical figure and get his take on national events, world events, cultural events. And that's something that's, it's why KPFK and the Pacifica stations exist. So these voices can still be heard.

[Alan Minsky]

Yeah, absolutely. And you know, talk about something that's necessary at this moment is truly independent media. And Pacifica Radio really being the first independent public media network in the country. Launched in 1949 in Berkeley, California, came down to Southern California and New York City and 1959 and it is still going. And the reason it's remains so just unwaveringly independent is it's never relied upon funding other than the listeners supporting the station. Now we've had matching money at times from the government, but that's never amounted more than, and certainly always under 20% of any of the stations, five stations budgets and, and usually down around 11, 9% or something like that. So nothing on the order of the support and interference that would be seen over at the NPR stations. And of course there they have massive corporate underwriting and we have none of that. And that what's happening in media right now is such a central part of the rising authoritarianism. That's so, you know, gonna, it's really. We're right on the cusp of having the whole, you know, freedom and free flow of information just be overwhelmed and suppressed in the United States of America. This radio station, this radio station is the antidote folks. So please support 8189-8557-3581-8985 kpfk. You don't have to support it with your dollars. Donate today whatever you can. There are many thank you gifts you can pick up from the folks you speak to when you call 818-985-5735. But also think about you. Get involved with station, promote the station. It really is unique and essential in the manner it operates as a truly free and independent media outlet. Be aware of it, let your friends know about it. And it certainly, if they come for it, will really be a canary in the coal mine. The right here in Los Angeles. You know, unfortunately, Netflix was bidding for control of Warner Brothers and seemingly has not won out. And that means not just CBS but CNN basically are in the hands of the allies of this reactionary, authoritarian administration. Free media is in danger in this country. And Pacifica Radio is free media's champion.

[Steve Scroven]

And Ralph is always talking about citizen action. He is all about citizen action. And it is so important for people to support the independent radio that goes over the public airwaves. We own these airwaves. And as Alan is indicating, with all of these mergers going on and Jeff Bezos owning the Washington Post and the Ellisons, owning or trying, you know, owning CBS and trying to take over Time Warner and Paramount and Elon Musk who took over Twitter and called it X. One of the worst names of a social media outlet, by the way.

[Alan Minsky]

Except Grok is just as bad or worse even. I think he's got great naming skills.

[Steve Scroven]

Yeah, he names everything X. He names his kid X. And it's not Xavier. It's after some element on the periodic table or something. But those are the people who are controlling the big corporate media. And this is why independent media is so important. This is where you get your voice heard. This is where you hear people like our guest Adolf Reed, that you won't hear anywhere else.

[Alan Minsky]

And to go back to your point about providing Ralph Nader with a weekly outlet, I think of, you know, that whole narrative of you dying. You sort of go up to, I suppose, the pearly gates in the certain religions, mythology, and you meet some guy whose name is Peter and he judges you. And I think when that happens to me, if that happens to me, and they see that I facilitated that Ralph Nader having a voice in American media at a point where the powers that be had thought they had a marginalized to such an extent that people wouldn't have access to his voice, I'm gonna

[Ralph Nader]

get a lot of.

[Alan Minsky]

A lot of pluses up there.

[Steve Scroven]

You are. Unless Larry Ellison and David Ellison are able to merge heaven and hell, that

[Alan Minsky]

would be a very dismaying encounter at that moment.

[Steve Scroven]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's the merger. That's the merger everybody's waiting for. So give out that number again, Alan. You're very good at that.

[Alan Minsky]

8189-8557-3581-8985. KPFK, please give what you can. 120 pledge of support. You can spread that out to $10 a month. I'm pretty good at, you know, dividing by 12. So $60 is $5 a month. I'm pretty sure that $240 is $20 a month. Give whatever you can. Make it a monthly rolling donation and. And let everyone, you know, know about KPFK Radio. And, you know, it's been a paradoxical time for Pacifica Radio that I've been involved all these decades.

[Ralph Nader]

It's.

[Alan Minsky]

It's had a lot of struggle. The most successful show by orders of magnitude in the history of the network, which is Democracy now, which, you know, really arguably remains the most important media project in the country. And then independent shows like Ralph Nader Radio Hour. You know, John Weiner now is the host of the Nation podcast. Suzy Weissman, kpfk. Susie Weissman is the host of Jackaman's podcast. It's an incredible array of talent at the station, so please support it at 8189-8557-3581-8985. Kpfk. And it still has David Feldman once a week over the airwaves. So that's also, you know, priceless.

[Steve Scroven]

That's the bonus.

[Alan Minsky]

Yes.

[Steve Scroven]

You can't put a. You can't put a price on that. No, not. Not on Feldo.

[Alan Minsky]

Well, 8189-8557-3581-8985. KPFK. Yeah. By the way, just the other day, the New York Review of Books I saw had an article about a book that documents the history of Fire Sign Theater, a comedic troupe that many people felt was. Was the American version of Monty Python. In the late 60s, on par with Monty Python. In fact, it was hugely popular across the country, and it was started at KPFK radio. It was a KPFK radio show called Radio Oz and Fire Sign Theory. You can look it up. It's forgotten by many people, but not by those who listened at the time. They recall it through a sort of haze, but as being incredibly brilliant.

[Steve Scroven]

Incredible legacy. It's an incredible legacy this. This station has. And. And we need to support that.

[Alan Minsky]

And, you know, what apparently happened with Fireside Theater is the guys themselves, they like their jokes becoming increasingly arcane and sophisticated, and they lost their mass audience in the early 70s to their just compulsion to really find things that were funny to themselves, but maybe were a lot of jokes that weren't done by a broader public. So Monty Python didn't quite do that. You know, they had. They had fun comedies about crucifixions and, you know. Yeah, stuff like that. Meaning of life, you know. But, hey, those guys have been on KPFK quite a bit. You know, Spinal Tap, the core Spinal Tap met at KPFK radio to do the readings of the Watergate tapes.

[Steve Scroven]

Oh, wow.

[Alan Minsky]

Yep.

[Steve Scroven]

Wow.

[Alan Minsky]

Yeah. So incredible history here, but no date, no date greater than that. Date when Barack Obama gave a State of the Union. And we decided we wanted the best person we could think of to comment with an alternative State of the Union. And David Feldman and I decided the best person we could think of was Ralph Nader. And we called Steve Scrogan up and he got us in touch with Ralph. That was the launch of the Ralph Nader Radio show.

[Steve Scroven]

Yep. Back. Back in. I think it was January 2014. And by March, we had convinced Ralph. And now this episode you're listening to now is episode 636. This is. You know, Ralph is the Iron Man. His, his. His idol. As a child growing up, he was a. A Yankee fan, which was his only. He said his only concession to Empire because he grew up in Connecticut, was Lou Gehrig, the iron before Cal Ripken broke his record. And. And a fatal disease had to wipe out. Had to break Lou Gehrig's record. So Ralph just shows up. And that's what we're asking you to do.

[Alan Minsky]

Show up for KPFK, 8189-8557-3581-8985 KPFK.

[Ralph Nader]

Call now.

[Alan Minsky]

Give what you can. And thank you so much, Steve Scroogen for the Ralph Nader Radio Hour.

[Steve Scroven]

Thank you, Alan.

[Ralph Nader]

This is Ralph Nader, and KPFK is in fund drive this month. If you want to continue to hear the program and others like it, please listen to Alan and Steve and give generously. Also, ask some people of means to give generously. They need the truth, too.

[Alan Minsky]

So call 8189-8557-3581-8985. KPFK.

[Bethany Baptist Church Announcer]

Musicians in Action, Inc. Presents Celebrating Our Mothers, an evening of musical splendor. Three tenors and a baritone. This Saturday, May 16 at 5pm Special guest, Greater Ebenezer Baptist Church Male Chorus. This event will be held at People's Independent Church of Christ at 5856 West Boulevard in Los Angeles. This is a free event. Please join us.

[Brad Friedman]

Hey, this is Brad Friedman of the Bradcast, heard right here on kpfk. Sometimes when you listen to the station during a fun drive, you might feel like we're not talking to you. Maybe you feel like your contribution would not be enough. Well, I'll tell you a secret. Every contribution is really important, especially right now. Whether It's a single $25 gift, installments of 10, 20, $50 a month or more. Every listener's financial investment is valued. You depend on us to stay abreast of the news of the day, to know what's going on in our community and in our world. Also to offer great music and cultural programming. And we depend on you to help provide the funding that makes it all possible. Every pledge is important. Every donor is important, no matter what the size check is that you are writing. So please call 818-985-5735, that's 818985 KPFK. Or go to kpfk.org and pledge securely online. We appreciate every contribution, especially your.

[Bethany Baptist Church Announcer]

Please join the Bethany Baptist Church of West Los Angeles with Pastor Greg Tyler for their 68th church anniversary on May 17th at 10:30am the theme is A Serving Church for a Coming lord. Guest speaker Reverend Eugene Howard at Mary Magdalene Baptist Church, 5102 Southwestern Avenue in Los Angeles, California.

[Ralph Nader]

California primary is June 2nd. Mail in ballots have already gone out.

[Adolph Reed]

We're supposed to elect a new governor and mayor. I like to vote specifically for the mayor, but I don't know the candidates or the policies.

[KPFK Mayoral Forum Announcer]

Don't you worry about a thing. KPFK has cut to the Chase is hosting a mayoral forum. We've invited all the candidates. So join us Saturday, May 16th from 4pm to 6pm yes. Meet the candidates live and in person and ask your questions. Who are the candidates? What do they believe in? Who is taking money and from whom? How about reimagining policing? Questions from our media panel and you the audience. Yes, y'.

[Adolph Reed]

All.

[KPFK Mayoral Forum Announcer]

These are dire times. Broken promises, monetary influences and corruption. Let's be educated. Join us Saturday, May 16th at 4pm RSVPventbright.com and search for kpfk support comes in part by the Harriet Tubman center for Social Justice. This is Kpfk 90.7 FM, Los Angeles,

[Jeanne Sakata / Estee Chandler]

Louisiana. TheatreWorks airs here on Kpfk every Sunday evening from 10:00pm until midnight. Coming up. Tonight, a team of lawyers fights to overturn the conviction of three Japanese Americans unjustly sentenced for resisting the World War II mass incarceration of all Japanese Americans on the West Coast. To be able to reopen Fred's case after so many years, to maybe vindicate our families too for us all. By Jeanne Sakata I would pay to be on this team next time on LA TheatreWorks. That's LA Theatre Works coming up here on kpfk tonight at 10pm Hi, I'm

[KPFK Mayoral Forum Announcer]

Danny Glover and you're listening to fiercely independent KPFK 90.7 FM in Los Angeles, 98.7 FM in Santa Barbara and [e-mail] radio. Powered by the People.

[Ralph Nader]

Welcome to Middle east in Focus.

[Jeanne Sakata / Estee Chandler]

I'm Estee Chandler, undoubtedly Southwest Asia and

[Adolph Reed]

North Africa, commonly referred to as.