Dear Left Hook Readers,

November is almost over and we still have a long way to go to hit our second anniversary fund drive goal- if we don't meet it by the end of this month, we'll have to severely curtail and scale back our work here.

Left Hook started out as and remains the only independent leftist youth journal in this country. And by leftist, we don't mean the kind of "pander to the conservatives" politics you see from the Democratic Party and its hangers-on.

From the very beginning - far before it became popular - we took a principled stand against the war in Iraq, predicting the emergence of serious resistance early as November 2003. We've been publicizing and projecting the anti-war movement from the front lines, publishing countless ground reports, highlighting cases of abuse, interviewing student anti-war activists and veterans of the Iraq war, and demolishing pro-war arguments.

Young writers here have taken up a much wider range of important issues as well: from the oppression of Palestinians to the drastic costs of higher education in America, from the administration's malice in Katrina to the larger role of capitalism and neoliberalism in producing such tragedies, it's all been covered here in political analysis, cultural commentary, interviews, ground reports, and more.

And our material here is fresh, original, and from a unique youth perspective: not the same standard fare stuff reprinted and recycled all over the internet.

Of course, you already know all that - otherwise you wouldn't be reading this space right now, where we receive hundreds of visitors daily thanks to word of mouth and larger sites constantly linking to our material.

But you undoubtedly also know that, as a small, independent leftist site, we cannot continue without the financial support of our readers - that means you! There's just two of us students here at the helm, and though the cost of Ramen noodles remains relatively stable, we have to maintain our (pretty modest) funding goals to keep bringing you the quality and content you've been regularly enjoying here.

So please help keep Left Hook alive and donate today! Be it $10 or $100 - every bit that you chip in helps. Thank you.

Sincerely,
The Editors
Derek Seidman and M. Junaid Alam

Punishing Poor Schools: A Letter of Protest

- by Alex Sheremet

This is a letter I wrote the NYC Board of Education. My school has been officially declared an "impact school," and, upon the request of my English teacher, the class was to write a letter expressing its feelings regarding the unflattering label. "Impact schools" are supposedly poor, violent and plagued by inferior educational quality, problems to be "corrected" by turning the school into a police state.

If you found this piece useful, please keep us alive by making a donation to our second anniversary fund drive .

Dear Honored Guests,

I am writing to you in regards to the recent condemnation of Abraham Lincoln High School as an "impact school." Before I discuss the implications of the unflattering title, please allow me the time to examine the "impact" process that determines whether or not a school will be considered under such a category. I ask for your patience; I am sure anyone reading this letter already understands everything that will be discussed (although whether this is accompanied by feelings of guilt on the part of the Board of Education is an entirely different issue; for the sake of common sense I will assume that it has no effects on the minds of the bureaucrats that pass this oppressive condemnation, and if I am wrong, let it be known that your inaction to correct the city-wide problem has absolved me from attempting to better understand your intentions).

The process should be self-evident to anyone who understands the way the unjust local, regional, national and international bureaucracies function. For the sake of this letter I will focus on what is relevant-the regional/city bureaucracy: the New York City Board of Education. For "background" purposes let us examine the following scenario:

A scantly-funded school is established whose attendants are partly mostly from the lower end of the hostile socioeconomic chain (with the racial implications already obvious). Obviously, their social structure is disadvantageous from the very beginning and thus the school's future is determined at the moment of its conception. The possibility of change is grounded in the hope that the influx of the prospective applicants can be controlled. I do not mean the school controls the number of incoming students randomly; I mean that the school, to save itself from the condemnation of the "impact" status, must, with acute prejudice, discriminate against the incoming students based on their race. Due to Abraham Lincoln's standard of ethics, however, such despicable behavior is not practiced by the administrators. When the inevitable degeneration of the school's intellectual climate sets in, when a destitute and ignorant student body (proudly) makes its ignorance public via graffiti and violence, and when the physical structure starts to literally deteriorate, the administrators are considered to be at fault. Never mind the concepts of domestic neglect of students, cut-throat social arrangements, and the bloodthirsty-yet-insatiable economic structure-the "party line" declares such realities to be either laughable mythology or simply non-existent, whatever is more convenient-as it is still the fault of the administration as if they are able to control these external pressures and influences! There is, however, a solution that is proposed by the city's "think tank": turn the schools into a police state for prisoners.

"Zero tolerance" means disrespect; "security" means harassment; and "personal safety" means intimidation, abuse by the hands of the uniformed "masters," and the treatment of students by what they are perceived to be: irrational thugs incapable of their own judgment, untrustworthy, untouchable. For decoration the label of "impact" is applied and, finally, the "solution" is manifest as the aforementioned machine of authoritarianism, embellished for the sake of the observers whose delicate sense of conservative propriety is not to be offended. Addressing social concerns-the same social concerns that drive the students to violence, vandalism and the adoption of anti-intellectual attitudes-are beyond the scope of the Board of Education and the city; they would much rather, it seems, take the route they perceive to be less difficult and simply turn one form of distress into another without identifying and addressing the omnipresent source of anguish. They see the task as "impossible," so they brush it aside. They would much rather, it seems, focus on what is "practical" and "plausible"-that is, threatening administrators by waving the "impact status" magic wand in their faces, putting the blame squarely on the shoulders of those that have absolutely nothing to do with the collective consciousness of the socially neglected student body!

It is quite the sad reality indeed when a school's "blackness" determines its impact status. Normally, I would invoke the unspeakable term-"class"-to describe the possibility of impact status, but I, as well as the Board of Education, know very well that race and class are presently indistinguishable (despite the disgusting and earnest pleas to the contrary). Thus, when a school is granted impact status, or is closed down, or is looked down on with disfavor, it is likely-and, realistically, probable-that the particular school has a very black and brown student body. It is not a coincidence that the schools in the most depraved and economically destitute neighborhoods (whose racial make-up you can only imagine) were closed down for lack of funding, excessive violence, and etcetera, and thus, in turn, forced the new students into Abraham Lincoln, making the prospect of "impact status" all the more possible (and, obviously, that possibility correlates with the level of blackness). This process will continue and it will affect only the schools whose students were losers in the economic casino, unfortunately condemning us to an adverse social upbringing whose adversity is reflected in our behavior, unfortunately condemning us to the imposition of tyranny at the hands of school officials, and, of course, unfortunately condemning us to the reception of an unflattering label that has been made official by that same organized bureaucracy that reassures the student body that "we really do care about you!" Yet I am not mentioning anything that can be considered new; I am sure these issues have been brought up before and I am sure no one belonging to the bureaucracy is so psychologically dense as to not realize that these educational concerns and youth-related problems are a product of our collective social decadence and not the incompetence of the administrators. Your problem is not the recognition of the fact; your problem is the evasion of the recognized reality by the introduction of irrelevant quibbles whose nature needs not any further discussion.

Abraham Lincoln is not at that level yet. We will have to see how many more of your insolvent schools in the impoverished neighborhoods are closed down and how many more of those students are sent to this high school. Luckily, the phrase "police state" does not even apply to this particular "impact school"-probably the only one on that list that does not suffer the same predicaments as the others. There is, of course, a terrible presence: irresponsible young adults-I will not do something as vulgar as call them children because, unlike you, I approach them with understanding, not malice-with no sense of direction simply being idle in the hallways and in classrooms. The officials, however, would like to lead us to believe this phenomenon is quarantined to the "impact" (read-blackest) schools. Realistically, this phenomenon is present in every educational establishment in the city, from lower-class to middle-class (unsurprisingly, the elite high schools are free from the burden of idle students). Abraham Lincoln certainly is not a "special" case, and, in many respects, it functions better on a number of levels. The majority of the students have respect for the officials for two simple reasons: most of the authority figures have taken the time to develop a cordial relationship with the student body and also do not subject us to the tyranny that other schools are known for. There is plenty offered in terms of challenging academic courses-although the choice of taking such classes is entirely in the hands of the students. The incidents of violence are reported; others schools choose not to disclose such information. This may account for the disparity of "official" incidents between Abraham Lincoln and other high schools. Whatever the case may be, however, the reality remains intact: I feel safe walking the hallways and so do the vast majority of other students.

Despite your reassurances this "impact" declaration is not a blueprint for progress but simply a condemnation. Instead of rising out of relative obscurity for positive achievement, Abraham Lincoln will rise out of relative obscurity into infamy. The ignorant sentiments expressed by far too many will only be substantiated now through an "official" statement from the Board of Education (and we all know what kind of fetishism accompanies officialdom) yet such sentiments are meaningless considering that none of the school's detractors have even attended classes here. Hearsay is not credible evidence because it is not evidence at all-and this includes the supervisors that make occasional visits, shaking their heads at the alleged "mess" they are only perpetuating. Such is the behavior of the culprit that refuses to act since action would mean a de facto admittance of guilt and thus complicity with the problem.

I have said everything that is necessary and I hope you do not take this letter as a form of malicious disrespect. I may be a bit impertinent in your perspective but that is only because I am introducing the reality of the situation without sugar-coated language and equivocations. The nature of my demeanor-whatever it may be-is only a reflection of your progress and the wisdom of your decisions. If this demeanor is unacceptable then your progress is the same and wisdom is, in turn, absent from your decisions.

Again, I mean no disrespect, only an honest critique of your program and its ramifications on students as well as administrators, ramifications that more than justify my hostile tone. In turn, I expect some reciprocity through your kind consideration of the contents of this letter.

Very truly yours,

Alex Sheremet

If you found this piece useful, please keep us alive by making a donation to our second anniversary fund drive .

Alex Sheremet, 17, is a student at Abraham Lincoln High School in NYC. He has worked with the Global Youth Action Network, Democratic Socialists of America, and various other activist and school-related organizations. He can be reached at bekaymecca@yahoo.com.