The Daily Star (DS): John, we met at one of the first major anti-war rallies in New York. It was an amazing moment, most of New York out on the streets, sending a loud and clear pacifist message. What is your involvement with the anti-war movement? Any thoughts on how effective it has been?

John Whitlow (JW): I think the amazing thing about these rallies has been the collective energy level of the participants. There was a sense that we had the ability to halt this runaway train of US foreign policy. Sadly, that turned out to be wrong, though I think we may have slowed it down a bit. My own involvement with the anti-war movement came mostly through organising at my law school. I was still a student at the time, and we worked for months, in a lot of different ways, to generate opposition to the war. As for how effective the anti-war movement has been over the last 2 years, it's tough to tell. The war wasn't stopped, and in fact it's still going on. So in that ultimate sense we haven't been successful. But in other, subtle ways, I think such a strong, outward showing of dissent has had an impact. In recent weeks, two of the largest labor unions in the U.S. have called for an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq; and, overall, countless Americans have become politically active because of the organising efforts of some pretty dedicated people.

DS: You are, by my description, a radical legal activist. You have chosen the difficult field of housing rights law. Can you talk a little bit about the work you do? What are the challenges and victories?

JW: I represent indigent clients who are in the process of being evicted from their apartments. In many cases, if the evictions go through, these individuals will be homeless. So the stakes are pretty high. Also, your readers in Bangladesh should know this -- the housing market here is totally outrageous. It's a little tough to get a handle on this if you haven't lived in New York City. Even those of us that earn a decent living can hardly afford apartments. So you can imagine what it's like if you're unemployed and/or disabled, as many of my clients are.

The truly frustrating part of the job is seeing, first hand and on a daily basis, how slanted the legal system is against poor people. We can only represent a small percentage of the people faced with eviction, so most go to court without a lawyer and without knowing their rights. They are faced with arcane legal language and over-zealous attorneys. It's really a rough situation. As for the victories, it's certainly gratifying when a client gets to keep their apartment and not get evicted, but often the victories are pyrrhic. Even though you've just won a case, so many more people around you are losing all the time. What's really needed is serious structural change in American housing policy, as well as a shift in the way housing is viewed. It needs to be seen as a basic human right instead of a privilege.

DS: You are dealing with the massive, but invisible portion of American society that is completely neglected by the economic structure. Why is this happening in the wealthiest nation on earth? What are the race dynamics of this economic discrimination?

JW: It's interesting that you use the word 'invisible' because I think, to people outside the U.S., we appear to be a nation of pretty affluent people. But that's really not true. We don't have people starving to death as in some parts of the world, but we have a significant number of people who are very poor -- I'm talking about people who can't find a job or have to work overtime at several low-paying jobs just to make ends meet, and people who can't afford health insurance and live largely without access to medical care.

As you point out, the fact that such a high level of poverty exists in the wealthiest nation in the history of the world is astounding. There's definitely a tremendous amount of income inequality in the U.S., and it's definitely influenced by race. Without going into the whys and hows, we still live in a society fraught with institutional racism. People of colour and immigrants have it much tougher than their white, native-born counterparts. At the same time, it should be mentioned that there are plenty of poor white people as well. It's a complicated problem. As far as solutions, I think our political system is virtually bankrupt-- with two major parties that essentially represent the same narrow set of elite economic interests. If we're going to do anything about issues of income inequality and systemic racism, we're going to need to build political institutions that work across racial lines and address problems like health care, jobs, and education. It's hard to see that happening in the current political climate, but we can't lose hope.

DS: The recent film The Corporation made a devastating critique of corporate power. The film seemed to end with the hope that corporations can be forced to reform themselves. Do you think this is realistic? Can corporations reform? Can capitalism fix itself?

JW: In my opinion, no powerful institution, whether it's apartheid South Africa or Corporate America, ever reforms itself voluntarily. Reform has to be spurred on by some sort of social movement that seriously threatens the institution's viability. So if corporations do in fact reform -- and I wonder what that word entails -- I think it will only come about as a result of the pressure put on them from outside. As for whether capitalism can fix itself, that's such a loaded question. The system's certainly been able to 'fix' itself in the past. Just look at the Great Depression. But I don't think that's exactly what you meant by the question. If you're asking whether capitalism can become more socially responsible by itself, I'd say the weight of historical evidence indicates that it can't. Historically, the system has adapted, but only after some combination of social-political upheaval and economic crisis.

DS: You were one of millions of Americans who went to see Michael Moore's anti-Bush doc Fahrenheit 9/11 opening night, contributing to the film's immense success ($92 million to date, highest grossing documentary of all time). But I understand you have some critiques of this film. What was missing?

JW: First of all, I thought the film was very powerful. I've heard stories of conservative people's minds being opened by it. Even families of GIs who are fighting in Iraq have applauded the film. These are powerful social changes, and shouldn't be discounted. But the film also had some serious blind spots. In depicting the repressive, big-brother-like quality of many of Bush's domestic policies in the wake of 9/11, Moore hardly even mentions -- and doesn't show -- any examples of the thousands of South Asians and/or Muslims who were rounded up, detained, and in many cases deported from the U.S. These detentions disrupted families and communities, and led to zero terrorism convictions by the government. The fact that this wasn't explored in the film is a serious oversight.

DS: Over the last four years, America's image and standing has plummeted all over the world. A deadly strain of anti-Americanism is inspiring violent terrorist movements. Is there a solution that is in American hands?

JW: I don't doubt that America's image has plummeted all over the world. Certainly, when I've traveled abroad since George Bush took power, I've noticed that people I run into don't have kind words for our foreign policy. But it's dangerous to assume our image was squeaky clean prior to Bush. Under Clinton, a U.S. president with a popular world image, the government hit Iraq with brutal economic sanctions that killed an estimated 500,000 Iraqis. Clinton also presided over a Middle East peace process that was as one-sidedly pro-Israel as any other US administration. Without a doubt, Bush is a nightmare, far worse than Clinton. His foreign policy has been reckless and corrupt. And while there is a difference between him and John Kerry, I don't think that difference is as stark as many believe. Don't get me wrong: I'll be ecstatic if Bush is defeated; I just won't be ecstatic if Kerry is elected.

DS: What are some of the books and thinkers that can serve as inspiration for the new generation of progressive activists, especially as they deal with corporate power and neo-empire?

JW: Of course you've got the usual suspects: Noam Chomsky, Arundhati Roy, Naomi Klein, Edward Said, Angela Davis, Mahmood Mamdani. But I've got a suggestion that I think will surprise your readers. I just finished a book by Michael Parenti called The Assassination of Julius Caesar. It's about the role of class power in the politics of the Roman empire. Though the subject matter is not contemporary, the book is full of lessons that ring true today: politicians, representing different factions of the elite, keeping the rabble in line with a mixture of force and consent. It's a really good read. Beyond that, I think people on the left need to study and understand global economics. There's no way to analyse what's going on in the world right now if we don't seriously engage the economic dynamics that are at play.