Category Archives: Political Correctness

Free societies can thrive by rediscovering and acting on their strengths. Values, including those of personal responsibility, must be at the core of a revival.

After Russias full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022, it appeared that the United States and Europe had one clear policy toward Russia. NATO was again united and strong. Although military supplies for Kyiv were initially lackluster, unity prevailed on sanctions and support. The Ukrainians were defending themselves bravely and Russia faced a military and propaganda disaster. A Russian defeat was considered probable.

There was hope for improvement in the Middle East and the Abraham Accords allowed a rapprochement between Israel and the Arab world, starting with the United Arab Emirates and recently joined by Saudi Arabia.

Turkey brokered a grain export deal for Ukraine, normalized its relationship with Israel and worked toward resolving conflicts in the Caucasus and Caspian regions.

Although the theocratic regime in Iran brutally crushes any internal opposition, the mullahs managed to demonstrate a semblance of softer policy toward their enemy, Saudi Arabia, brokered by China.

These developments provided pleasant illusions of a West united against Russian expansionism, a more moderate Iranian regional policy and a silver lining of peace in the Middle East. But China and Russia remained elephants in the room. A utopian hope prevailed in Washington and the European capitals that a Sino-Russian alliance could be torpedoed and that third countries such as India and others mainly in the southern hemisphere could be convinced to take a stand, primarily against Russia. A victorious alliance of good democracies against evil autocracies was proclaimed. The G7 was revitalized to lead this crusade.

The Western response started promisingly. U.S. President Joe Biden and his European allies saw themselves as the saviors of liberal democracy and good in the world. Obviously, free and independent countries must fight to remain that way. Freedom is not granted, nor is the self-determination of countries. We must strongly support the independence of nations challenged by Russian imperialism and Chinese nationalism. It is also clear that we must resist the brutal systems prevailing in Iran, Russia and China.

But is the West willing and able to fight? In theory, the ability exists.

The beautiful but somewhat naive illusions nurtured over the last two years are starting to crack. The present crisis in the Middle East is a striking example. It is not only a regional conflict but also involves the major powers. This leads to patterns that mirror other existing or developing conflicts, such as Russia on Central Europe and the Indo-Pacific arena.

Geopolitically, we do not just have a conflict between free countries and aggressive tyrannies, as we had during the Cold War. We have increasingly assertive new and important players, not fitting any categories of the prevailing narrative of authoritarian vs. democracies. But this must not be the main problem.

The West must recognize its internal weaknesses. There is first a certain arrogance and hypocrisy in the lecturing of Western values. It tends to ignore other cultures while condemning its colonial past. Ironically, this paternalism is frequently considered a new form of colonialism.

Worse still is the increasing denial of the cultural and traditional foundations of Europe. These are based on Judeo-Christian values framed by Greco-Roman philosophy and law. It is also true that these notions were and are misused. But they were the basis that allowed the development from the Renaissance through the Enlightenment to achieve todays free societies. These traditions and developments allowed liberalism, democracy, separation of religion and state as well as the rule of law. The notion of personal responsibility was at its core. Freedom can only exist based on personal responsibility (a very strong notion in Christian teaching, however, one that is frequently ignored by churches and governments) and sheltered by the rule of law.

Mainly in Europe, this important basis is increasingly denied. Any mention of God or Christianity is abhorred in politics, as we have learned in numerous debates, including those on the acts of the European Union.

This loss of real values (not the prevailing political mantraof values) and personal responsibility reveals itself as a major weakness and threat to freedom, democracy and the rule of law. It is a political and institutional cancer. This loss of principles leads to overpowering technocratic structures. Institutions become ends in themselves. Political parties look for votes, rather than strive for the good of theres publica. The citizen becomes the subject of such institutions. Freedom is exchanged for an illusion of security.

The West is no longer persuasive.

The consequences are manifold. Advantageous standards that allowed the U.S. and Europe to become free and successful are overlooked. Other countries observe the decline. The West is not persuasive anymore. The biggest power, the U.S., is not able to put forth valid and convincing candidates for its highest office, while the situation in Europe is depressing and distressing. The political discussion becomes increasingly ideological as opposed to a positive debate of facts. It is also limited by the new creed of exaggerated political correctness, which, instead of avoiding hate speech, goes further and eliminates even the facts. This is a challenge to the freedom of expression. But itsecuresthe success of new parties, frequently branded as populists. They are generally marginalized by the established parties, who should instead be seriously trying to understand why large parts of the population vote for these so-called populists. In general, most voters do not participate in elections, a bad sign for the political class.

Politics has become a profession. This leads to an increasing distance between the ruling class and the people. A better exchange between politics and other professions should be achieved. The real concern is that it is mainly career politicians who sit in parliaments. They are nominated by their parties and become dependent on them. Their livelihood depends on reelection and allegiance to party doctrine. This limits their independence. Here a system of citizen-legislators would be advantageous.

To prevail, the present political system relies on a strong technocratic basis. The consequence is an oversized state that claims increasing accountability from its citizens. Excessive control and a stifling regulatory framework are dangerous steps. In this situation, the democratic system is somewhat analogous to autocratic systems. (Fortunately, in Western democracies, we can still criticize without going to jail.)

We must hope that the regenerative potential of freedom will grow in its crisis.

But what is the result when looking at the geopolitical situation and the position of the West? It really shows two spectrums: weak leadership and populism, as reelection becomes more important than accomplishment.

This is the real dilemma. The West loses its ability to be an example to the developing world. And this is the real challenge. Certainly, most countries such as India and other, mainly southern nations do not want to become dependent on Chinese Marxism. However, the West no longer presents a credible alternative with its value proposals. Demographic trends mainly favor the Global South. It would be good to support prosperous development without trying to enforce changes in culture and tradition.

Lets just take another example: the situation of Ukraine. This nation is fighting and suffering a huge toll in lives to preserve its self-determination. Rightfully, it is supported by NATO and the EU. The biggest risk for Kyiv, however, is to lose Western support. The possibility exists that weariness will grow, and weak Western leadership will feel compelled to force Ukraine into a dangerous cease-fire.

These weaknesses could result in a global loss of freedom. Autocracies and technocracies would rule globally.The Occidental culture has, however, outlived many challenges. We must hope that the regenerative potential of freedom will grow in its crisis.

For industry-specific scenarios and bespoke geopolitical intelligence,contact usand we will provide you with more information about our advisory services.

Receive insights from our experts every week in your inbox.

Read the rest here:

How the free world can prevail - Geopolitical Intelligence Services AG

While you can debate all you want about whether 1988sDie Hardis a Christmas movie (it is dont fight us on this point), you cant disagree with the fact that the movie depicts one of the all-time most memorable office holiday parties in cinematic history. A band of thieves posing as terrorists crash the Christmas Eve party on the 30th floor of Los Angeles new Nakatomi Plaza to rob millions in negotiable bearer bonds, only to be thwarted by party guest and New York City cop John McClain (played by a very young Bruce Willis). Besides being eminently re-watchable, the movie also provides valuable instruction on how to throw a proper office holiday party.

The folks at the Nakatomi Corporation did some things right and some things wrong when it comes to hosting annual holiday festivities. If you learn from their example this year, youll enjoy the holidays knowing that your office party wont lead to any human resources disasters or lawsuits.

Can I Get You Anything? Food? Cake? Some Watered-Down Champagne?

Any discussion of office holiday parties has to start with a discussion about alcohol the cause of many an HR headache. The alcohol was certainly flowing at the Nakatomi party: the moment McClain stepped into the office, a roving bartender offered him a glass of mystery punch. While theres nothing inherently wrong with having alcohol available at a holiday party, there are some established best practices when you throw adult beverages into the mix.

First, lets look at two of the things that Nakatomi did that you should emulate.

But there is a long list of things that Nakatomi could have done to handle its liquor better, so to speak. We have no idea if they offerednon-alcoholic alternativesto the guests. In fact, manager Holly Gennaro encourages her very-pregnant assistant Ginny to have some champagne, which is one of the more cringe-worthy moments of the movie. They also serve amystery punchto their guests, which (like spiked eggnog) is never a good idea. If your guests dont know what theyre drinking or how much alcohol they are consuming, they are more likely to become inebriated. Along those lines, shots are a bad choice nearly 100% of the time.

Another problem: the liquor flows freely with no oversight or limitations. In contrast, you might consider establishing adrink ticket systemso that your guests are limited in their alcohol consumption, are less likely to become drunk, and more likely to leave the party with their dignity fully intact. Moreover, you should aska few managersto forego drinking for the night. They can spot problems before they get out of hand, and hang out near the exit doors to prevent people from driving home if they walk out of the party more lit than the holiday tree.

We never find out if Nakatomi planned toclose the bar earlybefore the end of the party (as, alas, their party ended prematurely when Gruber and his boys roll up), but you should shut down access to alcohol about an hour before the end of the festivities to help your guests sober up so that they leave filled with holiday spirit, not alcohol and spirits. You can even hold an awards ceremony, make special announcements, or give away door prizes near the end of the evening to keep people sticking around.

Mr. Mystery Guest Are You Still There?

Guests at the office holiday party are a mixed bag our job is to let the good ones in and keep the bad ones out. Nakatomi Corporation made one smart move in this regard: theyinvited spouses and significant others to attend(well, at least one spouse that we know of).

Employees significant others do some of the babysitting for you, as their attendance will reduce the chances of crude and unprofessional behavior among your workforce. People tend to make more scrupulous choices when they are in the presence of loved ones. Likewise, those loved ones are likely to pressure their counterparts to act right.

At the same time, you should do your best toprevent unwanted gatecrashersfrom attending. It is doubtful that a band of well-armed European safe-crackers will crash your party, but it is possible that your employees friends might decide to stop in for the fun if nobody is guarding the door. That can be a recipe for trouble. Nakatomi stationed a building security guard in the lobby to admit known guests. Likewise, you should have someone make sure that the only people who are enjoying your party are invited guests.

Welcome To The Party, Pal!

Attendance at your party should bevoluntary, not mandatory. After all, you might have some employees whose religious beliefs prevent them from celebrating holidays. Or you might have those in recovery who would prefer not to be in the presence of liquor. Nakatomi violates this rule by holding the party at the office at the end of a workday (Christmas Eve, no less!), so if you do the same, make sure you let your employees know they dont have to stick around if they dont want to.

At the same time, dont be a Scrooge and make your employeeswork during the party. At the beginning of the movie, the party is already in full swing, and Gennaros assistant Ginny is still hard at work finishing up some paperwork while everyone else is having a good time. Besides being a possible wage and hour problem, this approach will surely kill everyones holiday vibe. If you want loyal employees with good morale, dont make them work late and miss the party.

Yippee-Ki-Yay, #$@&%*!

The whole point of hosting a holiday party is so that you can thank your employees and collectively have a good time with them. And while you dont want to be a party pooper, you also dont want the party to be so wild that it later becomes the festive centerpiece of a lawsuit. You should send a communication to all of your employees in advance of the party reminding them to keep it classy, aswork rules still applyduring the festivities.

This means that you should not tolerate untoward humor, illegal drug use (as demonstrated by the smarmy coworker Harry Ellis in someone elses office), sexual innuendos or misconduct (such as the amorous couple spending time in the private office), or any other unprofessional behavior. Let your employees know that they are still subject to your regular policies and that violations could lead to disciplinary consequences.

Im ArgyleIm Your Limo Driver

Another solid move by Nakatomi was hiring a private driver for their guests (or at least for McClain). Argyle the limo driver picked McClain up from the airport and was on standby to drive him wherever he needed to go after the party was over.

Were not saying you need to rent a fleet of limousines to chauffeur your guests around, but you shouldoffer rides to all attendees who are departing the party. You can pay for taxis or set up ride-share cars via a corporate account to make payment easy and rest easy knowing that you wont be held responsible for any injuries or deaths caused by drunk drivers. This extra expense is the best insurance to keep your employees and the general public safe and spare you from costly liability claims.

Now I Have A Machine Gun. Ho Ho Ho

The most memorable holiday decoration in the film was the plain, grey sweatshirt worn by one of the criminals, which McClain transformed post-mortem into a classic ugly Christmas sweater with a red Sharpie marker. But keen observers of the film will also note that Nakatomi also set up a few tastefully appointed Christmas trees around the office. Should you be worried if you want to set outholiday decorationsat your office party?

Although you may be concerned about political correctness run amok, you will be happy to hear that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has said that typical Christmas decorations wreaths, trees, holiday lights, Santa and reindeer, etc. are secular symbols and do not automatically create a religious discrimination situation in your private workplace. However, the EEOCs words of caution from its Compliance Manual are worth noting: As a best practice, all employers may find that sensitivity to the diversity of their workplace promotes positive employee relations. In other words, take the specific dynamics of your workplace into account before decorating for the holidays.

Regardless of your office dynamics, the cardinal rule of office holiday decorating isno mistletoe. Careful viewers will see that Nakatomi followed this rule: although they might have a legacy of greed around the globe, at least they knew well enough not to hang what amounts to an invitation for a sexual harassment lawsuit in the office. Avoid the mistletoe and avoid the problems it will inevitably create.

Nice Suit. John Phillips London. I Have Two Myself.

Certainly every workplace varies in its location on the style spectrum. Some offices embrace a more business casual, John-McClain-like approach with simple slacks and plaid button-ups. Others are more formal and favor black on black and expensive suits (perfectly coordinated with Heckler & Koch HK94 machine guns, which should be unwelcome at your holiday party and every other day at your office).

Regardless of your companys normal style, you should still maintain some semblance of a dress code, and your employees should stick with outfits that they would normally wear to work. You should communicate to your employees that they should dress appropriately since it is a work-related event. Revealing clothing is for the night club. Bloody, white muscle tanks are for fighting German terrorists. Neither of those styles have a place at the office holiday party.

Its Just A Small Token of Appreciation . . . Its A Rolex

Maybe youre thinking that all of this holiday party business sounds more like an obstacle course where you have to outmaneuver employees who are ready to hit you with a lawsuit. If you have an antisocial or poorly behaved workforce, it may be better to show your appreciation in a different way. Holly Gennaro was rewarded for her hard work for the year with a Rolex, for example. Your budget may not contemplate your employees walking out of the office dripping in company-gifted diamonds, but there are alternatives.

Some employees might prefer to take the time that would be otherwise spent at the party as PTO. You could also take the money that you would normally spend on the party and issue bonuses, gift cards, or other treats. Just remember that if you go this nontraditional route, any tangible gifts you offer up should be treated as supplemental wages subject to payroll and income tax.

Conclusion

Please contact your Fisher Phillips attorney with any questions about throwing this years company holiday party. We will continue to monitor the latest developments and provide updates as warranted, so you should ensure you are subscribed toFisher Phillips Insight Systemto gather the most up-to-date information.

The author would like to point out that, to the extent you arent convinced thatDie Hardis a Christmas movie, one of the main characters of the film is named Holly a clear reference to the prickly, green Christmas shrub.

Read more from the original source:

The Die Hard Survival Guide To This Year's Office Holiday Party - Fisher Phillips

Which issues matter most? Share of likely Republican primary voters who said before the debate that each issue was among the most important to determining their primary vote

The top {{ top_n }} issues are shown. Other issues are {{ other_issues }}. Respondents could select up to three issues from a list of 20, with additional options for something else and dont know. Only those who responded to both pre- and post-debate waves of our survey are included.

Finally, before the debate, we also asked likely Republican primary voters what issues would be most important in determining their primary vote. (Respondents were allowed to select up to three issues from a list of 20.) Once again, among Republicans who responded to both waves of our poll, getting inflation and costs under control and controlling immigration led the way, with 52 percent and 41 percent respectively. Since the previous debate, though, keeping America safe from foreign conflicts or terrorism has spiked in importance. Thirty percent of Republicans now name it as one of their top issues, compared with 17 percent in our survey ahead of the Sept. 27 debate. This is likely a result of the Israel-Hamas war, which broke out after the Oct. 7 surprise terror attack on Israel by Hamas militants. Appropriately, foreign policy was the focus of an extended segment at the debate.

Our post-debate poll also asked debate watchers whether the debate did a good or a bad job covering some of these issues. It found that viewers were generally happy with how the debate covered the topics most important to them. For instance, 38 percent said the debate did an excellent or very good job covering immigration, while only 19 percent said it did a poor or terrible job. And 34 percent said the debate did an excellent or very good job covering the economy, while only 17 percent said it did a poor or terrible job doing so.

Viewers were less happy with how the debate covered other topics, though. For example, only 20 percent said the debate did an excellent or very good job covering crime and public safety, and 28 percent said it did a poor or terrible job. And only 20 percent of viewers said the debate did an excellent or very good job covering wokeness or political correctness, while 34 percent said it did a poor or terrible job covering that topic.

Read the rest here:

Who Won The Third Republican Debate? - FiveThirtyEight

Devils Tower, the first national monument in the United States and a ubiquitous Wyoming landmark, wasnt always Devils Tower.

In a time where many geographic names are being changed to rectify cultural insensitivities of the past or political correctness of the present, a longtime debate about renaming Devils Tower continues to simmer.

Petitions have been submitted to the U.S. Board of Geographic Names proposing a new name for the 625-foot-tall pillar of volcanic rock. A 2014 petition suggested renaming tower and national monument Bear Lodge, which is what it was commonly called by the Lakota, Arapahoe, Cheyenne and other American Indian tribes long before the first white settlers spotted it.

Wyoming Senate President Ogden Driskill, R-Devils Tower, and his family have lived in the shadow of Devils Tower for more than a century. He doesnt oppose geographic name changes, but said the critical consideration when doing so is intent, both past and present.

He said the name Devils Tower isnt, and never was, offensive so theres not enough of a case to rename it.

I see it as a solution thats looking for a problem, he told Cowboy State Daily. It makes absolutely no sense.

There are many American Indian legends surrounding the towers creation and variations on its name.

The common thread between most stories is an omnipotent spirit lifting a rock off the ground to rescue a group of young girls or boys who sought shelter on it from giant bears pursuing them. The rescued children are represented by the Pleiades star cluster, which still looms over the rocks summit, and the clawing the giant bears left as deep grooves along its sides.

Bears are primary figures in many of these legends, which is why American Indian names associated with the formation include Bear's House, Bear's Lodge, Home of the Bear and Bear's Lair.

There are other names for the tower and legends built around it, but Bear Lodge is recognized as the most common name among the tribes that lived in the region before the first contact with white settlers.

The name Devils Tower came from the journals of Henry Newton, a geologist and mapmaker traveling with a U.S. Army expedition exploring the Black Hills in 1875. According to that history, Newton was told the spectacular geologic formation was The Bad Gods Tower and that tribes avoided the landmark and the surrounding valley because of its ominous association.

Driskill has read Newtons writings, in which he recorded that none of his Sioux guides would venture into the valley with him and noted that the entire region seemed devoid of recent American Indian habitation. That was enough for Newton to see validity in calling it The Bad Gods Tower, even though he knew American Indian religion and legend didnt include the concepts of the devil or heaven and hell.

When expedition leader Col. Richard Irving Dodge published the book The Black Hills in 1876, he called the landmark the Devils Tower, categorizing it as a name adopted with proper modification by our surveyors.

The details of this history are debated. Theres a theory that Newton and Dodge confused the Lakota words wakansica (meaning bad god or evil spirit) and wahanksica (for black bear.)

The National Park Service, which discusses the Devils Tower naming debate on the monuments website, says several maps from the same period and earlier designate the landmark as Bear Lodge or something similar. But Dodges book was a popular read when it was published, and Devils Tower (losing the possessive) became the most well-known name in popular culture.

The formation was officially designated as Devils Tower since 1890, the same year Wyoming became a state and the U.S. Board of Geographic Names was established by the U.S. government. On Sept. 24, 1906, President Theodore Roosevelt designated Devils Tower as the nations first national monument, further cementing the name.

Even in the 1870s, Newton and Dodge recognized their moniker wasnt a direct reflection of American Indian culture and legends but was consciously reflective of their understanding of it. For Driskill, thats enough to justify it remaining Devils Tower.

It absolutely in no way was intended to be derogatory or offensive to anybody, he said. It was named with the best interpretation they could find at the time. The intent is where its at in all of this.

Driskill cited several resolved and ongoing petitions to rename Western landmarks like the more than 40 places with the word squaw throughout Wyoming as justifiable and appropriate. Squaw is a recognized derogatory term for American Indians, and the U.S. Board of Geographic Names has repeatedly voted to remove the slur from landmark names.

When names or comments are made with intent for ill will, they absolutely need to be corrected, and theyre wrong, Driskill said. Its as wrong as it gets.

Even amongst those debating the name of the monument, the majority consensus is that Devils Tower was not given out of malice or with the intent to defame anyone. Still, many see the name change as an appropriate correction of a misunderstood history that should be taken seriously.

Devils Tower perhaps Wyomings most recognizable landmark that most visitors know as Devils Tower. Beyond semantics and cultural history, Driskill believes changing the name would directly impact the communities in northwest Wyoming.

Everyone knows what Devils Tower is, he said. Were not a huge national deal, but were known nationwide.

In an already remote and sparsely populated area, Devils Tower National Monument brings tourists to the region and benefits several local economies. Driskill said a name change wouldnt stop tourism altogether, but it could make many people unfamiliar with a landmark they already know.

They certainly arent going to know what (Bear Lodge) is. Itd be tough for tourism, he said.

Driskill cited a recent renaming in the Black Hills of South Dakota as an example of how a well-intentioned effort to be more culturally sensitive wasnt so simple.

On Aug. 11, 2016, the U.S. Board of Geographic Names changed the name of Harney Peak, the highest point in South Dakota, to Black Elk Peak. The peak had been named for U.S. General William S. Harney, who led U.S. Army troops during the Battle of Blue Water Creek in September 1855, where dozens of Brul Sioux women and children were killed and captured.

The new name was selected to honor the Sioux medicine man Black Elk, who fought at the Battle of Little Bighorn and survived the Wounded Knee Massacre.

Driskill supports that name change and the intention behind it. However, given the Siouxs history in the Black Hills, hes curious that the peaks new name was selected to honor that tribe, to the exception of many others that historically lived in the region.

Black Elk was a very famous, revered Sioux, he said. But he also happened to be one of the ones that kicked the tribes out who were there before the Sioux. Theyre fairly new to the Black Hills. Do we think the tribes that were there before think renaming the peak after a warrior who kicked them out of the Black Hills is a good thing?

Renaming Devils Tower to Bear Lodge would reflect a common name for the landmark among many American Indian tribes that lived in the area, but not all of them, Driskill said. The Black Elk renaming is a historical parallel that many Americans can relate to as an example of that mentality.

Does England think George Washington is as neat as we think he is, he said.

Regardless of the debates and disparities, Driskill sees every piece of history associated with Devils Tower as stories that can, and should, be told. There isnt a problem with the name, but there is a solution in the venue.

One of Driskills goals is to see a new visitor center built at Devils Tower National Monument. A new facility could be designed so everyone who visits the national monument is exposed to the history associated with the landmark and everyone associated with it.

We desperately need a new visitor center, he said. Id love to see it be built in conjunction with the tribes to let them tell their story. They absolutely need a platform to talk about what happened in the Black Hills, because it was their area.

In the meantime, there isnt an active effort or consideration to change the name of Devil Tower. That would require a vote by the U.S. Board of Geographic Names.

On Jan. 22, 2021, U.S. Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyoming, introduced a bill to the Senate that would have prevented the renaming of Devils Tower. The bill was cosponsored by Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyoming, but it did not receive support and has not been reintroduced.

Driskill called Wyomings congressional delegation absolute heroes for recognizing what Devils Tower means to Wyoming and the nation and trying to preserve it. Still, hes concerned that a future effort to redesignate the national monument could get enough momentum to make a change.

Its been a very tough deal through the years, he said. We need to promote equity and fairness and let everyone tell their story. There needs to be an awareness of whats there. But they probably have a better chance of telling their story their way than they do renaming it the other way.

Original post:

Although Many Have Tried To Change Name Of Devils Tower ... - Cowboy State Daily

Coopers hawk, Wilsons warbler, Henslows sparrow these are all familiar species to members of Chicagos birding community.

And theyre about to disappear. The names, that is, not the birds.

In a statement that sent shockwaves among the nations birders, the American Ornithological Society (AOS) announced last week that, starting in 2024, it will begin the process of renaming all eponymous birds birds named after people. People like William Cooper, Alexander Wilson and John Stevens Henslow.

The decision will apply only to English bird names under the societys jurisdiction in North America, the organization said, with an initial focus on the 70 to 80 eponymous bird species found primarily within the U.S. and Canada. (Scientific names will not be affected.)

There is power in a name, and some English bird names have associations with the past that continue to be exclusionary and harmful today. We need a much more inclusive and engaging scientific process that focuses attention on the unique features and beauty of the birds themselves, said Colleen Handel, president of AOS and a research wildlife biologist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Alaska.

Walter Kitundu, a member of the grassroots Chicago BIPOC Birders group, applauded the move by AOS.

There are a lot of unsavory characters who now have multiple species named after them, who were proudly racist and acted upon those views in despicable ways, Kitundu said. For birds unfortunate enough to have been saddled with these names, theres now an opportunity to gift them with descriptive and hopefully poetic names.

Beyond the instances of bad actors whose beliefs and deeds sully the birds to which theyve been attached, eponymous names in general lack relevance in terms of bird identification, he added. It strikes me that having a hummingbird of the North American West named after an Italian duchess isnt necessary or helpful in the least.

Removing not just the name but the apostrophe s accompanying it, which suggests ownership, restores birds dignity as entities unto themselves.

We are part of a large and complex web of life and not a single animal needs to carry the name of a human being, Kitundu continued. These shifts are important in shaping a relational view of nature. And that view allows us to better grasp the impacts of our behavior on the beings we share the planet with, and understand how to move in ways that support and nurture all forms of life.

A Henslow's sparrow, named for John Stevens Henslow, a mentor to Charles Darwin. This grassland bird has been in decline due to loss of habitat. (Jim Hudgins / U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Midwest Region).

But while the news drew praise from some quarters, it provoked vehement opposition elsewhere. Many who disagreed with AOS were particularly offended by the plan to do away with all eponymous names of both good guys and bad (and they are, by and large all men) without exception.

On social media, criticism was heaped on AOS for bowing to political correctness, along with defiant declarations of Well call them (birds) whatever we want.

There are areas of the birding community ... that are a dumpster fire, Edward Warden, president of the Chicago Ornithological Society, said of the eruption of non-civil discourse in certain circles.

Chicagos birding community has been largely supportive of AOS, with pockets of light dissent, said Warden. Despite the potential for divisiveness, he called the AOS decision the best possible one for both supporters and detractors alike," adding that "this is far from the first time birders have had to get used to new names.

Indeed, the AOS announcement comes on the heels of Chicago Audubon Society changing its name to Chicago Bird Alliance, removing the association with John James Audubon, whose towering reputation as a naturalist has been tainted by a fuller picture of his legacy, which also includes buying and selling slaves, plagiarism and the exploitation of natural resources.

Just like our decision to move away from the Audubon name, I think our constituents realize that we need to build a more just and inclusive society, said Judy Pollock, president of Chicago Bird Alliance. That includes looking to the future and not our past, which holds so much pain for some groups.

How Did We Get Here?

A thick-billed longspur, formerly known as McCown's longspur. The bird was renamed in 2020, due to John P. McCown's legacy as a Confederate general and record of warring against Indigenous people. (Scott Somershoe / U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Mountain-Prairie Region)

Issues surrounding eponymous bird names had been bubbling under the surface for years, but boiled over in 2020.

The murder of George Floyd and the racial profiling of Black birder Christian Cooper prompted a group of ornithologists to form Bird Names for Birds, a movement that called on AOS and its North American Classification Committee to eliminate all eponymous names.

Eponymous common names are essentially verbal statues. They were made to honor the benefactor in perpetuity, and as such reflect the accomplishments and values that the creator esteemed, the founders of Bird Names for Birds wrote to AOS.

Apart from perpetuating colonialism and racism, and upholding people who often have objectively horrible pasts, eponymous names do a disservice to birds, Bird Names for Birds argued.

Birds are magnificent creatures, full of fascinating behaviors and exquisite plumages, the group said. Birds deserve to be celebrated for the evolutionary history that has shaped their particular traits, not for the moment when someone shot and dissected them.

AOS responded by creating an ad hoc English Bird Names Committee tasked with recommending the criteria that would be used to determine which bird names should be changed. Ultimately the committee concluded and AOS leadership agreed that a case-by-case consideration of every eponymous bird would be intractable, AOS said in a statement.

Any effort to make such judgments on past and present human figures would invariably be fraught with difficulty and negativity and become an unwelcome public and scientific distraction, the organization explained.

So, all eponymous names are set to go the way of the passenger pigeon. A handful of names, yet to be determined, will be part of a 2024 pilot that will introduce the process to be used going forward.

Big Trigger Moment

A Wilson's warbler. The name won't help ID this bird, best known for its black cap. (Lisa Hupps / U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Alaska Region)

For Jorge Garcia, who began birding four years ago and is also a member of Chicago BIPOC Birders, eponymous bird names have been a personal challenge and annoyance in more ways than one.

They have certainly been unhelpful in my learning of birds, as well as in my teaching and public engagements around them, said Garcia, volunteer coordinator for Openlands, including the organizations Birds in My Neighborhood program.

He cited Swainsons thrush, Swainsons warbler and Swainsons hawk as examples of birds that couldnt be more different, but share a name for reasons lost on a newbie attempting to make an ID.

Even more confounding are the five Wilson species, Garcia said, not to mention the Lincolns sparrow, which isnt named for the Lincoln (Abe), as a person might logically assume, but merely a Lincoln (Thomas, friend of Audubon).

The species that exemplifies not only Garcias struggle with eponymous birds but also illustrates the broader conundrum facing AOS, is the Coopers hawk.

These crow-sized hawks one of the more common eponymous birds found in Chicago are known for their great bursts of speed, powerful wingbeat, and a profile thats been compared to a flying cross, thanks to the birds short wings and long tail. None of these traits is suggested by the name Cooper, bestowed on the bird to honor William Cooper, who collected the specimens used to ID the hawk.

My first time seeing a Coopers hawk led me to unnecessarily search up who and why this persons name was attached to such a neat animal, Garcia recalled.

It was hard to care about the man who came up, in part because I was more interested in the bird, but also because by then Garcia had come to associate the surname Cooper with Amy Cooper, the White woman who accosted Christian Cooper in New Yorks Central Park, he said.

That incident was a big trigger moment for me to be more active online about my newfound hobby, realizing how important representation is, Garcia said. While I still use the name Coopers hawk often, I have made sure to allude to alternative names for this bird when possible in my work.

In this context, if AOS had decided to consider each eponymous bird individually, which interpretation of Cooper would hold sway? The one referencing a little known but influential 19th Century naturalist or the one connected to a particularly ugly episode of racism?

As AOS said: intractable.

Can History Be Erased?

A Swainson's thrush. Not to be confused with a Swainson's warbler or a Swainson's hawk. (ksblack99 / Flickr Creative Commons)

So whats to become of Cooper? Or Wilson? Or Henslow?

The notion that eliminating all eponymous bird names will somehow erase or negate the accomplishments and discoveries of perfectly decent naturalists and ornithologists is a concern that doesnt hold water, said Kitundu.

Those historical figures dont disappear when the birds who bear their names are given new ones, he said. People who want to know about those figures arent going to suddenly find themselves without resources. The people who made contributions, along with the odious figures, are still there for anyone who seeks to honor or rebuke them. Its just that now we dont have to celebrate them via bird names and we can uplift the birds themselves.

As for the argument that people like Audubon shouldn't be judged by todays standards, Kitundu rebuts that as well.

Its the old person of his time argument, as if abolitionists were not also of their time, he said.

Rather, the AOS decision is an example of people knowing better, and doing better, said Kitundu.

There is no need to hold on to problematic practices because of nostalgia, he said. I for one am happy about the proposed changes and excited to learn each and every new name and will share them with my young child when we are birding in years to come.

Contact Patty Wetli:@pattywetli| (773) 509-5623 |[emailprotected]

View post:

North American Birds Named After Bad People Will Get a New ... - WTTW News

About 50 University of Michigan community members gathered at the University of Michigan Museum of Art Wednesday evening for a panel event and viewing of Imagining the Indian, a documentary exploring the fight against Indigenous mascoting. The Research for Indigenous Social Action and Equity Center organized the documentary event, which featured a panel of prominent Indigenous activists.

The film chronologically follows the work of activists, professors and Indigenous peoples in their fight against Indigenous mascoting, including the mascots for popular sports teams such as the Kansas City Chiefs and the Atlanta Braves, which were accused of using racist and stereotypical depictions of Indigenous peoples by Native activists.

After the documentary screening, attendees were given the opportunity to ask questions to the panelists. Suzan Shown Harjo activist, journalist and poet who received the 2014 Presidential Medal of Freedom from former President Barack Obama joined virtually as a panelist. Harjo, who was featured prominently in the documentary, said she believes in the significance of personal narratives.

You dont have to be a scientist, you dont have to be a writer, you dont have to be the person in any organization, Harjo said. No, in my experience, this happened, this is my lived experience, or this happened to me, or this happened to my family. And thats so important for people to know.

Aviva Kempner and Ben West co-directors, co-producers and co-writers of Imagining the Indian also spoke on the panel. Kempner and West spoke on their motivations behind making the film and highlighted how many Indigenous people in the United States have spent years watching offensive and inaccurate portrayals of their culture. West said film is a way for Indigenous people to share their own experiences on a screen.

As my father says in the film, We need to tell our own stories, West said.

U-M Psychology professor Stephanie Fryberg, member of the Tulalip Tribes in Washington State, explained why she has devoted so much time to combating racist mascots in schools.

The Native mascot is a symptom of a society that continues to dehumanize us, Fryberg said.

Yancey Burns, co-producer and co-writer of the documentary encouraged audience members to join in advocating for change and Indigenous visibility.

It took so many hands, hearts, minds, energies, etc., to make this film happen, Burns said. And were just so appreciative of everyone now that you folks have seen the film, and youre part of the audience, youre part of the team. So we need you all to join the fight as well.

Fryberg said she felt it was important to distinguish the films motivations from those of performative activism, which she said played a large role in diminishing major social movements.

One of the things that we hope we did justice and comes through in the film (is) this is not a matter of opinion, or wokeness, or political correctness any longer, Fryberg said.

West also highlighted how the atrocities of the genocide of Indigenous peoples in the United States are too often reduced to a textbook conversation rather than being fully mourned and educated upon.

We are living, breathing, contemporary Native people and we historically have been reduced in a museum setting, to artifacts, to rows that are behind glass to look at, West said. Genocide must be acknowledged We are human beings, just like you are.

Harjo said the fight against Indigenous mascoting embodies various aspects of Indigenous culture that have become stereotyped and misunderstood.

We have history all over it, we have relatives all over it, Harjo said. We have everything but ownership and control. But we still carry out our responsibilities to it. We still have that treaty relationship. That means were going to strive for these things. And were going to fight like hell and fight in court and Congress and anywhere else for our rights under those treaties.

Daily News Contributors Lauren Kupelian and Gillian Reynolds can be reached at laurkup@umich.edu and gillyr@umich.edu.

Read more here:

"Imagining the Indian documentary combats Indigenous mascoting - The Michigan Daily

Disney has held a strong hold over the film industry for decades.

When imagining Disney, joy likely immediately floods ones mind. Beautiful memories of the pure days of childhood can be reminisced upon, with iconic films, shows and characters that instilled happiness, taught lessons and brought an enormous amount of color to the world. Though often created for a younger demographic, the productions are thoughtfully formulated, with relatable character struggles and dilemmas that all ages can relate to. As a result of the quality and concepts, the money followed Disney in droves, creating a multi-billion dollar industry that reigned supreme in cinema. So why is that success fading away?

Disney is evidently still an influential and dominant corporation. But according to The New York Times, their stock is down 56 percent and they have lost $512 million on the streaming service Disney Plus alone. With America attempting to become more progressive in its viewpoints, contrasting opinions are always manifested into being discriminatory and hurtful as quoted from TU Delta, in the wake of the woke movement, the cancel culture is emerging, a type of excessive political correctness that attempts to silence people with unwelcome opinions.

Therefore, out of fear of being canceled, which can result in consequences such as job loss and social ostracization, one type of ideology is constantly pushed in articles, speeches and now even movies, something Disney has been completely obsessed with to be seemingly modern.

As a result of rising women empowerment movements, Disney has continued to solely portray female roles as warriors and powerful leaders like in the productions of She-Hulk and Captain Marvel, which has been negatively received by people of all backgrounds and origins. However, contrary to claims of misogyny and non-inclusivity of critics, other characters that were created similarly such as Black Widow, Scarlet Witch and the cartoon Mulan were greatly received. So what makes them different?

Story continues below advertisement

The main reason is the personalities of these modern female characters, women who are seemingly perfect individuals, with shallow, haughty personalities and neither flaws nor challenges that they dont immediately overcome. They are written extremely two-dimensionally, claiming that to be portrayed as a strong woman, one needs to fit a specific role and constantly radiate confidence and invincibility, something that isnt representative and attainable by the average female.

Additionally, they are made to never have meaningful emotions, love for another or a desire to become a wife and a mother, almost as if these acts imply weakness. Contrary to these points, freshman Ariana Rao said, The idea of raising or having a family is really hard. Wanting to have a family means they have to go through childbirth which is in itself a really difficult taskit is a portrayal of a strong woman because it shows that they are willing to do that to create and raise a family.

The actress Elle Fanning, who played Aurora in the live-action Maleficent, has even publicly voiced her opinion about such controversies with similar statements. Fanning said, I think its a nice message to tell women, its okay to be comfortable in your femininity. Kindness is not weakness its quite the opposite.

She has also spoken about the personality of Aurora, a character that most of modern society views as anti-feminist because she mainly dreams of a significant other in her life, stating that Aurora is a very romantic princess she dreams of being married and becoming a mother and theres nothing wrong with that. It doesnt make a woman less strong because she wants that. I think thats actually a very modern take.

Much of Disneys issues also stem from recent sequels and live actions that utilize the same characters and names to garner attention, while drastically altering the stories to push political agendas, shown by the racial swapping of existing characters. The negative comments arent solely because of having actors of various ethnicities playing traditionally white roles, it is an issue of sacrificing quality, content, and messaging.

To expand on this claim, Rao has also said, Having a diverse cast is a great thing, but if the actors or actresses arent that good but they are diverse, that isnt fair to the other actors who maybe dont have that much of a diverse background but are still a better choice for acting.

This statement is comparable to Disneys constant act of checking certain boxes for liberal ideologies to be showcased when mindlessly swapping the ethnicities of characters and claiming that to be a representation of diversity. Audiences just desire creative tales, and only with new innovative stories, diversity of thoughts and actors can be incorporated into plots to ensure a high caliber of quality that isnt forced, approached half-heartedly and made to be the central purpose.

Excerpt from:

Disney's downfall attributed to cancel culture The Tide - The Tide

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

Vladimir Putin had been instigating antisemitism in Russia long before the lynch mob stormed the airport in Dagestans capital Makhachkala, Aleksandar oki writes.

Islamophobia and antisemitism have been on the rise worldwide since the beginning of the Hamas-Israel conflict.

Both stem from two general kinds of racism: the grassroots one, which tends to originate in parts of society at the base level, and the top-down one, which is spread from those in power and their exponents.

As such, top-down racism is unthinkable in our day and age, as it would go against the basic moral principles of contemporary democratic societies.

On the other end of the political spectrum, autocratic leaders more often than not intentionally instrumentalise historical divisions in their societies including ethnic, religious, racial or class ones.

Dictators strive to profit from tensions in society in order to prevent various societal groups from uniting against their rule. Autocrats tend to know when and exactly how to stir and agitate certain social groups when they believe it's necessary.

Yet, sometimes these actions spiral out of control and produce unwanted results. That was the case with the recent anti-Jewish riot labelled by some as a pogrom at the Dagestan international airport.

Ever since the beginning of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Kremlin has not shied away from stirring up anger and contempt against those of Jewish background or Jewish identity in general.

The dominant discourse spread by Moscow's power circles has been marked by a key talking point that can be summarised as the Anglo-Saxons (meaning, the West) have installed a Jewish puppet whos not even Jewish in a fundamental sense in Kyiv to cover up the contemporary Ukrainian Nazism."

This toxic notion has been thoroughly debunked, yet, this is almost exactly what Russia's Vladimir Putin said on 5 September, just two months before the antisemitic lynch mob stormed the airport inDagestans capital Makhachkala.

Western curators put at the head of contemporary Ukraine a personan ethnic Jew, with Jewish roots, with Jewish origins. And thus, in my opinion, they seem to cover up a certain anti-human essence, which is the foundation, the basis of the modern Ukrainian state, Putin said.

With the Kremlin's supposed denazification of Ukraine as the ideological basis for the legitimisation of its invasion of a neighbouring country, Putin has in fact repeatedly questioned Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyys Jewish identity while also using it against him.

I have had many Jewish friends since childhood. They all say, 'Zelenskyy is not Jewish, he is a disgrace to the Jewish people' Zelenskyy is a man of Jewish blood. Yet with his actions, he covers up these neo-Nazi monsters, Putin said earlier in June.

On 22 October, a week before the Dagestans international airport rampage, a well-known state propagandist, Dmitry Kiselev, said on state TV that antisemitism is a cultural norm for hundreds of millions of Muslims, passed on from one generation to another. And no amount of political correctness can do anything about it.

This statement is indeed both Islamophobic and antisemitic. However, the same Russian state TV channels have, like the Kremlin, papered over their latent Islamophobia by taking a clear pro-Hamas position and placing tradition at the cornerstone of politics. This is why these kinds of messages were easily interpreted by some in the Northern Caucasus a traditionally Muslim-majority region as a way to legitimise hate and declare an open hunt on Jewish people.

It is also clear why the instigators believed there would be no pushback from the authorities, and why they ended up being treated much more leniently than Russian anti-war protesters, for example. Why would a country, which supports Hamas and claims that antisemitism is "tradition", persecute them if they embarked on an antisemitic campaign? And isn't this undertaking essentially just a fervent display of support for the state?

Besides official ties of the Russian leadership with Hamas, the mainstream media discourse in Russia has been clearly anti-Israel ever since Hamas' militants organised and conducted a massacre of Israeli civilians on 7 October.

There wasnt a single statement denouncing Hamas as an extremist or terrorist organisation in the Russian state media only calls for an independent Palestinian state and accusations against Israel of cynically murdering Palestinian civilians.

All of this is quite the opposite of responsible Western leaders, intellectuals and media pundits who always make it clear that the Hamas militants committed a horrible act of violence while voicing their legitimate concern for the protection of the Palestinian civil population.

This is the only way to combat antisemitism and send a clear message to society: terrorism is not acceptable under any circumstance, and any violent act or hate speech incident against Jewish citizens in the democratic world will be severely persecuted in accordance with the law.

This, of course, doesnt mean that protests in support of Palestine and Palestinians are or should be stigmatised. In fact, it means that there simply has to be a clear dividing line between propagating Hamas terrorism and supporting Palestinians.

Such a clear line was never drawn in Russian media. Instead, the Russian state sent a direct, malignant signal inciting its already highly antisemitic and intolerant society: Jews are Nazis in Ukraine, and they are now intentionally killing Palestinian children.

So if you were just a regular consumer of mainstream TV content in Russia, you would end up believing that taking the fight to nominally Jewish passengers of a flight from Tel Aviv that had landed in Makhachkala is a patriotic act in every possible sense.

In the end, Putin blamed the US for an easily anticipated explosion of antisemitism in Russia. It is necessary to know and understand where the root of evil is, that spider who is attempting to wrap the entire planet, the entire world, into its web, he said after the Dagestan riot.

Yet, the responsibility for the hate lies squarely on Putin and Russia. Russian propaganda has been demonising Ukrainians for almost a decade. Now its the turn of Russias Jewish population to be stigmatised, just like it was many times through history. And if Putin keeps having it his way, in the end, there will be no one left to hate.

Aleksandar oki is a Serbian political scientist and analyst with bylines in Novaya Gazeta. Formerly, he was a lecturer at RUDN University in Moscow.

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at view@euronews.com to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Continue reading here:

The Kremlin fuelled antisemitism at home. Then it blew up - Euronews

Photo: Venice Film Festival

Before this week, I would never have called the presence of movie stars in any given room keenly necessary. A few days into the 2023 Venice Film Festival, I have had the chilling realization that, should the Screen Actors Guild strike lurch on due to the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers stubbornness and greed, and we are subsequently forced to continue to live in a world without celebrities, things might descend into unbearably dull chaos. By way of example, I offer you a snapshot of the festivals press conferences, during which the vibes have been decidedly off since day one.

Things began entertainingly enough on Thursday, with Caleb Landry Jones, one of the only actors allowed at the fest due to his film Dogman reaching an interim agreement with SAG, beginning the press conference by speaking in a Scottish accent. (He is from Texas.) French director Luc Besson, looking vaguely and uncharacteristically concerned, attempted to explain. Just for you to know, hes working on a character in Scotland, so its not his normal voice, but he needs to stay in character. And so if you dont understand so much the accent, it is brilliant accent, but Jones smiled slowly, perhaps a little Scottishly. Itll be better in the film, he said.

Besson, who has since been excoriated for his film, talked about how he and Jones joined a spa together to lose weight before filming. I want him to lose 20 kilos and I try to lose 10 at the same time, Besson said cheerfully. One journalist asked Jones a long question about whether, for him, acting and music are part of the same universe, where you can live out very different made up characters, or is that more of a vehicle where you can express your true self? Jones exhaled. More or less, he said. He did not elaborate. Tragically, this was the last bit of raw actorly weirdness we would get.

The Ferrari press conference was relatively normal because that films production team also reached an interim agreement and its conference was thus attended by stars Adam Driver and Patrick Dempsey, who are both hot and charming and talked shit about Netflix and Amazon and told little on-set stories about cars and sandwiches. Bradley Cooper did not attend the conference for Maestro out of solidarity, which means we will maybe never get to hear him defend the nose of it all while getting visibly, maybe even theatrically annoyed. At the Poor Things press conference, Yorgos Lanthimos looked pained as he lamented the absence of the films incandescent star and executive producer, Emma Stone, and had to carefully answer questions about her wild sex scenes that would have been way more fun to hear about from her perspective.

Roman Polanski did not attend the press conference for his latest directorial effort, The Palace, which is best viewed as a thought experiment: What if someone revived Garry Marshall against his will, gave him bad drugs, and forced him to direct Triangle of Sadness 2? Or what if you had committed a crime so terrible that you were only allowed to watch the first 12 minutes of a bot-generated streaming Christmas movie on loop forever until you begged for the sweet release of death? Or what if a bunch of wealthy elderly racists started their own Hallmark Channel (I guess Candace Cameron Bure already did that)? If Polanski had attended, he might have been extradited due to allegedly raping a teenager in the 1970s. None of its stars attended, either Mickey Rourke or John Cleese or whoever else is in this movie. Instead, Polanskis producer Luca Barbareschi showed up to say things like, I cannot speak for Roman but the 70s were not today. It was free sex for all. I could have a jail sentence for what I did in New York between 1974 and 1980 with the logic of todays political correctness.

Harmony Korine was indeed here for the premiere of Aggro Dr1ft, a movie inspired by Ed Hardy that features such edgy dialogue as, Dance, bitch. Dance, bitch. Oh, yeah. Dance, bitches. He was also there to promote his new multimedia design collective, EDGLRD, which aims to disrupt movies or something. Wearing a large demon mask, Korine sat down alongside his special effects director Joo Rosa and head of strategy and development Eric Kohn, who were both also wearing demon masks, likely to evoke the characters in the film, who do demonic things like storm moodily around Miami and put swords near their dicks while thrusting aggressively. They wore the masks the entire time, which is fine and cheeky enough, but lets not pretend that it isnt a sad substitute for actual movie-star charm and eccentricity.

Follow this link:

The Vibes Are Off at the 2023 Venice Film Festival - Vulture

Dreaming of freedom in his prison cell in Chateau dIf, Edmond Dantes the hero of Alexandre Dumas 1844 novel The Count of Montecristo dreams of the nearby port of Marseilles as a haven of peace and freedom. Two centuries later, Dantes might have revised his dream as Frances second largest city and biggest port is depicted as a European version of Chicago in the Prohibition times with gang warfare, shootings, protest strikes by police, and tension among communities routine features of daily life.

The usually tame French media describe the situation as a challenge to law and order while Frances ebullient Interior Minister and thus supreme chief of the police Gerard Darmanin talks of widespread incivility. President Emmanuel Macron goes further by warning about a loss of authority which he intends to correct by as yet unknown measures.

Loss of authority isnt limited to Marseilles gangs engaged in war over a bigger share of the drug market with Nigerian Yardies, North African fraternities and cabals from the Balkans trying to acquire, defend or expand their respective turfs. Authority is also under constant challenge in Paris itself where one could see numerous shop windows shattered by protesters in the recent riots against a two-year increase in the legal minimum retirement age. Even once sleepy cities such as Nimes and Limoges have been affected by loss of authority.

It is, therefore, no surprise that President Macron has chosen restoring the authority of the state as the main theme of his post-holidays political performance. In a press interview last week he mentioned the word authority 15 times, following that with an invitation to political parties and trade unions to attend meetings at the Elysees Palace to probe ways of restoring the seemingly lost authority of the state.

However, Macrons first moves and the ideas his entourage are circulating look more like dancing around the issue rather than addressing its root causes.

The first move has come in the shape of imposing a ban on the wearing of a North African folkloric dress, called abayeh, in public schools. The new Minister of Education Gabriel Attal presents the move as an urgent measure to protect the nations secular (laicitie in French) values.

This despite the fact that the French Council of Islamic Cult, a group funded by the government, has ruled that abayeh isnt an Islamic symbol.

Where does authority come from?

The classical answer is that it comes from the two key tools of persuasion and coercion that a properly constituted government has for imposing its decisions. Beyond that, however, one may argue that authority emanates from continuity of rules and mores, the accumulation of a cultural, including religious, heritage that transcends here-and-now considerations.

Seen in that light one might claim that France lost the concept of authority with its first Great Revolution in the 18th century.

The triple moto of that revolution- liberty, fraternity and equality- contradict the concept of authority which necessitates a hierarchy of social and thus political status. Liberty, not defined within legal limits, could encourage hyper-individualism if not anarchy. Fraternity would efface social, cultural, and religious distinctions and, ultimately responsibilities in the service of the state while equality represents a challenge to authority which is built on a hierarchy.

President Macron tries to address that problem by talking of duties as opposed to rights, something that contradicts the core values of the French Revolution. In the French Revolutions world view, citizens, regardless of whether they do their duties or not, have inalienable rights. In Macrons redefinition a citizens rights may look like rewards for duties performed.

But who fixes those rights and duties?

The answer offered is the shopworn clich of democracy which, in its naked form could mean the tyranny of a majority, in other words the worst kind of tyranny.

Could one talk of duties in the service of an autocratic regime that one hasnt chosen? Things become even worse when you form a government without a majority, as is the case in France and, in different forms, in many other Western democracies today.

That could lead to an odd situation in which you may be in office but not in power or, even if you manage to simulate being in power, you are not in authority. In the latter case coercion may appear as a substitute for authority, hence the widening and increasingly violent use of police to restore law and order.

Political correctness and the cult of the victim complicate the matter further.

If you talk of authority, such as the current governments in Hungary and Poland do, you are labeled authoritarian if not autocratic. And anyone claiming some kind of victimhood, historic, racial, religious, cultural, sex-based, or class-based could demand to be absolved from respecting any authority outside his or her own circle.

In the politically correct lexicon one talks not of obeying the law but of respecting it when one deems it worthy of respect. PC propagators also use consent as a substitute for obedience in a system based on law.

Thus, manufacturing ersatz consent becomes a business that, in the United States at least, is developed into an art if not a full-blown science.

Macrons device for manufacturing ersatz consent is the holding of referendums on key issues affecting the lives of citizens. He plans to amend the constitution to allow the governments to organize referendums on a wider range of issues. This, of course, is a means of downscaling the authority of representative democracy and a sign of political laziness. Complex social; economic and cultural issues cannot be decided with a yes or no by a public that is bound to lack the necessary information and probing skills even if, unlike all referendums held in France so far, a majority of those eligible to vote do go to the polls.

Kant cited three sources for authority: power, wealth and esteem. But that was when Europe had an authoritarian system in which monarchy, the wealthy aristocracy, and the church represented Kants triplets of authority.

Every system is corrupted by exaggerating its core value which, in this context, means that too much democracy corrupts the democratic system in which the pendulum moves either towards authoritarianism or governability.

In most western democracies today the pendulum is moving dangerously close to ungovernability often in the form of governments posturing to govern on a day-by-day basis. The challenge for Macron and others is to gingerly nudge the pendulum in the opposite direction. But dont hold your breath.

Originally posted here:

Democracy and the Crisis of Authority - Asharq Al-awsat - English