GOP states weigh limits on how race and slavery are taught – Associated Press

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) Complaining about what he called indoctrination in schools, former President Donald Trump created a commission that promoted patriotic education and played down Americas role in slavery. But though hes out of the White House and the commission has disbanded, the cause hasnt died. Lawmakers in Republican states are now pressing for similar action.

Proposals in Arkansas, Iowa and Mississippi would prohibit schools from using a New York Times project that focused on slaverys legacy. Georgia colleges and universities have been quizzed about whether theyre teaching about white privilege or oppression. And GOP governors are backing overhauls of civic education that mirror Trumps abandoned initiatives.

Republicans behind the latest moves say theyre countering left-wing attempts in K-12 schools and higher education to indoctrinate rather than teach students. Teachers, civil rights leaders and policymakers are fighting back, saying students will suffer if states brush over crucial parts of the nations history.

The idea of simply saying youre not going to use certain materials because you dont like what theyre going to say without input from professionals makes no sense, said James Grossman, executive director of the American Historical Association.

Statehouse fights over whats taught in public schools are nothing new. Arkansas lost a court battle over a 1981 law that required the teaching of creationism in its classrooms, and in recent years conservatives have waged battles over how evolution, climate change and other topics are taught. But the latest efforts show just how much Trumps rhetoric on race continues to resonate in the mostly rural and white states he won.

The proposals primarily target The New York Times 1619 Project, which examined slavery and its consequences as the central thread of U.S. history. The project was published in 2019, the 400th anniversary of the first arrival of African slaves. The project was also turned into a popular podcast and materials were developed for schools to use.

A measure pending in Arkansas Legislature criticizes the project as a racially divisive and revisionist account of history that threatens the integrity of the Union by denying the true principles on which it was founded.

Republican Rep. Mark Lowery, who sponsored the measure, called slavery a dark stain, but said the project minimizes the Founding Fathers and cited criticism from some historians about parts of it.

It should not be taught as history, he said.

Republican U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas has also been a frequent critic of the project.

Nikole Hannah-Jones, who won a Pulitzer Prize for the lead essay in the project, called it a work of journalism that wasnt intended to replace whats being taught in schools. Born and raised in Iowa, one of the states looking to prohibit the projects use, Hannah-Jones said its clear the project is being used to whip up political fears.

Its one thing to not like a particular piece of journalism, its another thing to seek to prohibit its teaching, she said.

The Pulitzer Center, which partnered with the Times to develop 1619 Project lesson plans, said its heard from more than 3,800 K-12 teachers and nearly 1,000 college educators who planned to use them. Of those, only about two dozen were from Arkansas.

Jonathan Rogers, a journalism teacher at Iowa City High School, said hes used the projects podcast in his classes.

(Students) definitely responded to thinking about using different sources or alternative storytelling, Rogers said. Also, just hearing Black voices is so important when were talking about diversity and perspectives, whether its historical events or current events.

Other measures would go even further than targeting the 1619 Project, including a broader bill Lowery said hes reworking that currently calls for banning courses that promote social justice for one racial group. In Oklahoma, one bill would allow teachers to be fired for teaching that the U.S. is fundamentally racist, or other topics deemed divisive.

Critics say that, besides eating away at local control, the proposals show an unwillingness to address the countrys shortcomings as well as its successes.

This country does have a history that we have to reckon with and that sometimes our education system glosses over, said Rep. Emily Virgin, the top Democrat in the Oklahoma House.

After taking office, President Joe Biden revoked the report submitted by the commission Trump formed in response to the 1619 Project. Widely mocked by historians as political propaganda, Trumps 1776 Commission glorified the countrys founders and played down the role of slavery.

American parents are not going to accept indoctrination in our schools, cancel culture at work, or the repression of traditional faith, culture and values in the public square, Trump said when he announced the panel last year.

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, a close ally of Trumps, last month proposed $900,000 to ramp up her states civics curriculum to emphasize the U.S. as the most unique nation in the history of the world. Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves is proposing a $3 million Patriotic Education Fund to combat what he called revisionist history.

Across the country, young children have suffered from indoctrination in far-left socialist teachings that emphasize Americas shortcomings over the exceptional achievements of this country, Reeves said when he announced it.

In Texas, where academics have long clashed with the states GOP-controlled education board on controversies that include lessons exploring the influence Moses had on the Founding Fathers, Gov. Greg Abbott last week told lawmakers that students must learn what it means to be an American and what it means to be a Texan. But Abbott hasnt elaborated on what changes he may seek.

Its unclear how far these proposals will go, even in solidly red states. Two Mississippi Senate committees ignored, and killed, the 1619 Project ban.

In Arkansas, Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson has said he believes such issues are usually better addressed locally. Hes asked the states top education official to work on alternative legislation that would allow parents to challenge instructional material at the local level.

The proposed limits especially strike a nerve in Arkansas, where divides over race remain more than six decades after the 1957 integration of Little Rock Central High School. Until 2018, the state commemorated Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lees birthday on the same day as Martin Luther King Jr.

One member of the Legislative Black Caucus said she was worried about the proposals effect on the states image.

It will have an economic impact because it will seem as if this state is running from its own history, said Democratic Sen. Linda Chesterfield, a Black retired history teacher.

___

Associated Press writers Sean Murphy in Oklahoma City, Ryan Foley in Iowa City, Stephen Groves in Pierre, South Dakota, Paul Weber in Austin, Texas, and Emily Wagster Pettus in Jackson, Mississippi, contributed to this report

Continue reading here:

GOP states weigh limits on how race and slavery are taught - Associated Press

Opinion: Punishing Donald Trump wont bring nation together – The San Diego Union-Tribune

Re Opposing views on whether Joe Biden should pardon Donald Trump (Jan 20): As a Republican, I accept that Joe Biden is our president. Biden says he is going to unite us as a nation. I want him to succeed just as I did for past presidents. Trump lost the election. He had every right to challenge up until Jan. 6 just as others did before him.

Why is it that those on the left wanted to impeach Trump for a second time? He did not incite by his speech and the radicals had an organized goal planned. How does a second impeachment of a now-private citizen Trump unite us as a nation today?

What a colossal waste of time for the American people and President Biden. Biden should take a stand, carpe diem and just say no.

Derrick HaunValley Center

Opinion resources

The U-T welcomes and encourages community dialogue on important public matters.

Perhaps the ultimate oxymoron can be summarized by glancing at the San Diego Union-Tribune headlines of Jan. 23, Senate agrees to begin impeachment trial Feb. 9 and Jan. 24, How does a nation heal?.

Daniel CollinsSan Diego

Go here to see the original:

Opinion: Punishing Donald Trump wont bring nation together - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Did Donald Trump and His Supporters Commit Treason? – The New Yorker

For years, CarltonF.W. Larson, a treason scholar and law professor at the University of California, Davis, has swatted away loose treason accusations by both Donald Trump and his critics. Though the term is popularly used to describe all kinds of political betrayals, the Constitution defines treason as one of two distinct, specific acts: levying War against the United States or adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. Colluding with Russia, a foreign adversary but not an enemy, is not treason, nor is bribing Ukraine to investigate a political rival. Ordering the military to abandon Kurdish allies in Syria, effectively strengthening ISIS, is not treason, eitherthough that is getting warmer. During Trumps Presidency, Larson told me, his colleagues teased him by asking, Is it treason yet? He always said no. But the insurrection of January 6th changed his answer, at least with regard to Trumps followers who attacked the Capitol in an attempt to stop Congresss certification of the election. Its very clear that would have been seen as levying war, he said.

Both of Trumps impeachments, in 2019 and 2021, were for high crimes and misdemeanors, but the Constitution also names treason as an offense for which a President can be impeached. Individuals, including a former President, may also be criminally punished for treason, perhaps the highest offense in our legal system, carrying the possibility of the death penalty. Fearing abuse of treason charges, the Framers gave treason a narrow definition and made it extremely difficult to prove.

The Treason Clause dictates that a conviction can rest only on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. Partly as a result, there have been around forty treason prosecutions. No American has been executed for treason against the U.S., although Hipolito Salazar (a Mexican who officials thought was American) was federally executed for treason during the Mexican-American War, and some states have executed people for treason, including the abolitionist John Brown.

Larson wrote in his book On Treason: A Citizens Guide to the Law, from 2020, that the Framers had a very specific image in mindmen gathering with guns, forming an army, and marching on the seat of government. Few events in American history, if any, have matched that description as clearly as the insurrection of January 6th, which, court documents suggest, was planned by milita members who may have intended to capture elected officials. The American most associated with treason was one who did not levy war but rather gave aid and comfort to the enemy: Benedict Arnold. He at first fought heroically in the Revolutionary War but then attempted to aid the British; he fled to the enemy when his betrayal was discovered, and so was never punished. Treason prosecutions for levying war were brought against some individuals who took part in the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794, in which armed men burned down a tax collectors house, and the Fries Rebellion of 1799, in which armed men stormed a prison and forced the release of tax resisters. Both resulted in conviction followed by pardon. The Jefferson Administration prosecuted the former Vice-President Aaron Burr, in 1807, for allegedly conspiring with a group of armed men to overthrow the U.S. government in New Orleans, but he was acquitted. In connection with that planned rebellion, the Supreme Court held that a mere conspiracy to levy war does not count as actually levying war. Another treason case resulted from the Christiana Riot, in which dozens of men fought the return of slaves to their owners as required by the Fugitive Slave Act. Supreme Court Justice Robert Grier, presiding at trial (as Justices did in those days), held that levying war had to involve an intent to overthrow the government or hinder the execution of law.

Southern secessionists who waged war against the United States were treasonous under any reading of the Treason Clauses levying war standard. Jefferson Davis, the former U.S. senator turned President of the Confederacy, was indicted for treason in 1866. Before trial, however, Chief Justice Salmon Chase made clear his view that the Fourteenth Amendment, which had been ratified a few months earlier, precluded any other treason penalties for Confederates. Section 3 of the amendment bars from holding public office anyone who took an oath to support the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection against or gave aid or comfort to the enemies of the United States. Because of the Chief Justices interpretation, President Andrew Johnson gave up on the prosecution of Davis and granted amnesty to all former Confederates if they swore an oath to defend the Constitution and the Union.

In the past century, federal treason prosecutions generally have been aid and comfort cases. After the Second World War, a Japanese-American woman named Iva Toguri DAquino, better known as Tokyo Rose, was convicted of treason for broadcasting anti-American propaganda on Radio Tokyo; she was pardoned in 1977, after witnesses recanted. The poet Ezra Pound was famously prosecuted for Fascist propaganda broadcasts on Italian radio; the case was dropped in 1958, when he was found incompetent to stand trial. During the Cold War, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted and executed for conspiracy to commit espionage, not treason; the Soviet Union was not technically an enemy. After a half century of no federal treason cases, the indictment of the Al Qaeda spokesman Adam Gadahn, in 2006, was the first to concern giving aid and comfort to an enemy that was not a nation. Had Gadahn ever been tried, the defense might have argued that a terrorist group such as Al Qaeda isnt an enemy as envisioned in the Treason Clause, though a federal district court assumed, in 2013, that it was. Gadahn was killed in Pakistan in 2015, by a C.I.A. drone strike.

Since the Capitol insurrection, there has been little talk of treason charges. Carlton Larson suggested that this was because everybody now tends to think of treason as mostly aiding foreign enemies. In his book On Treason, he even states that levying war is arguably archaic, of interest only to historians, and that, in the twenty-first century, armed rebellions to overthrow the government are simply not going to happen. But, to the Framers, such an insurrection was a paradigmatic case of treason. The founding-era Chief Justice John Marshall held in the treason trial of Aaron Burr that levying war entails the employment of actual force by a warlike assemblage, carrying the appearance of force, and in a situation to practice hostility. If some of those who attacked the Capitol assembled in order to incapacitate Congressperhaps even by kidnapping or killing lawmakersthen their actions could be construed as an attempt to overthrow the government, and federal prosecutors could plausibly consider treason charges. As Larson put it, At some point, you have to say, if thats not levying war against the United States, then what on earth is?

Last Tuesday, Mitch McConnell, who is now the Senate Minority Leader, said that the attackers tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like, offering a narrower purpose than government overthrow. Investigators examining the emerging evidence on the scope of the plot might disagree. Federal law also makes it a separate felony for anyone who owes allegiance to the U.S. and knows of the commission of any treason to conceal it or not tell authorities. That vastly widens the net of those who could potentially be charged, including friends, acquaintances, and co-workers of the attackers. (Since the attack, many such individuals have, in fact, come forward to give information to law enforcement.)

The Treason Clauses strict evidentiary rule of two witnesses to the act makes it exceedingly difficult to convict anyone of treason, even with so much conduct captured on video. But a treason case against Trump himself might conceivably be built, if prosecutors could establish that he knew in advance that his supporters planned to violently assault the Capitol, rather than peacefully protest; that he intended his speech urging them to fight harder to spur them to attack Congress imminently; and that he purposely didnt do anything to stop the insurrection while it was unfoldingor, worse, intentionally contributed to a security failure that led to the breach. Then Trump would have engaged in treason along with supporters who attempted, in his name, to overthrow the U.S. government. At a minimum, it appears that Trump, along with top government officials, was aware that his followers were planning acts of violence. Trump did, however, say, in the midst of his incendiary speech, I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.

Short of treason, a related federal law prohibiting rebellion or insurrection states that a person who incites any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, has committed a serious felony and is disqualified from holding federal office. This description is similar to the current article of impeachment against Trump: for inciting violence against the Government of the United States. If two-thirds of senators vote to convict Trump, a majority of the Senate could then vote to bar him from future federal office. But a Senate conviction requires the votes of at least seventeen Republicans and, so far, looks unlikely. A federal criminal conviction for inciting rebellion or insurrection may offer an alternative route to disqualifying Trump from holding office.

For the time being, the government has indicted more than a hundred and fifty people for crimes related to the insurrection, including unlawful entry, disorderly conduct, theft, destruction of property, firearms offenses, assault on police, conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, obstruction of justice, and even curfew violation. Ongoing investigations will likely produce more indictments. In addition to potential homicide and terrorism charges, prosecutors have pledged to pursue the charge of seditious conspiracy. That crime overlaps with but covers more than treason; federal law defines it as any conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States.

While federal prosecutors could charge some of the leaders of the riot with treason, seditious conspiracy would be far easier to prove. It is clear that the rioters goal was, at a minimum, to delay Congresss legally mandated counting of electoral votes. Prosecutors would need to prove that two or more people had agreed to undertake the seditious conduct, but, with respect to the rioters who were explicit about their aims and cordinated their actions, the evidence may well be sufficient, particularly given the violent result. More evidence might even enable charges against individuals who conspired to attack the Capitol but didnt take part in the events. Some of those individuals might be elected officials. Representative Mikie Sherrill, a Democrat of New Jersey, has alleged that unnamed members of Congress had groups coming through the Capitol that I saw on January 5th, a reconnaissance for the next day. Soon afterward, the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the Capitol Police opened investigations into what roles members might have played in the siege.

If evidence were to emerge that members of Congress intentionally aided or incited the attack, they may face criminal consequences. Its more likely, however, that Republicans who amplified Trumps election-fraud lies will be sanctioned by their colleagues. Seven Democratic senators have filed an ethics complaint against the Republican Senators Ted Cruz, of Texas, and Josh Hawley, of Missouri, who led the effort to overturn the election in Congress. Representative Cori Bush, a Democrat of Missouri, has introduced a House resolution to investigate and potentially expel members of Congress who challenged states electoral votes. Bush said, in a tweet, that they incited this domestic terror attack through their attempts to overturn the election. Mitch McConnell may agree. He has pointedly acknowledged that the mob was provoked by the President and other powerful people, implying that fellow-lawmakers might bear responsibility. But, whatever moral condemnation or political remedy is appropriate, criminal charges cannot be brought against congresspeople such as Hawley and Cruz solely for using a legal process to challenge electoral votes in Congress. It is unlikely that any Republican politician thought theyd succeed in overturning the election, and it may be hard to distinguish their moves in Congress, at least legally, from a few Democrats challenges to states electoral votes in 2001, 2005, and 2017.

Even if Congress doesnt censure or expel any of its members, the Senate declines to convict Trump, and federal prosecutors decline to bring charges against any of them, Trump and lawmakers who tried to overturn the election could still be held accountable through Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, the same provision that was intended to prevent former Confederates from holding office. If Trump and the officials tried to run for office again, a lawsuit could claim that they engaged in insurrection or rebellion within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, and, if the evidence bears it out, some could be disqualified from holding office. But, apart from any of these remotely possible legal remedies, Republicans who helped foment the attack are facing political repercussions: in the weeks since the riot, Hawley has had a fund-raiser and a book contract cancelled, and Missouris two biggest newspapers have called for his resignation. But, alas, in our divided country, Republican officials who denounced the insurrection or voted to impeach Trump may also face the ire of many Republican voters.

Excerpt from:

Did Donald Trump and His Supporters Commit Treason? - The New Yorker

Rocky River Republican Rep. Anthony Gonzalez gets flak for voting to impeach President Donald Trump but doesn – cleveland.com

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Rocky River Republican Rep. Anthony Gonzalez was walking to his Capitol Hill office from the House of Representatives floor when the commotion began on Jan. 6.

Rioters were storming the U.S. Capitol. Everyone had to shelter in place. He barricaded himself in his office with staffers, and watched the chaos unfold on television and social media. He changed from his suit to workout gear, in case he needed to make a run for it. He called contacts in the administration of outgoing President Donald Trump in an effort to secure aid for overwhelmed Capitol Police officers.

As the rampage persisted, Gonzalez was appalled when Trump posted a Twitter statement that aggravated tensions by attacking Vice President Mike Pence based on what Gonzalez calls a perverted reading of the Constitution. Trumps posting said Pence didnt have the courage to reject the electoral votes that Congress was tallying to formalize Joe Bidens victory over Trump. Rioters at the Capitol chanted Hang Mike Pence throughout the disturbance, even though Pence lacked authority to do Trumps bidding and courts throughout the nation rejected Trumps claims that Bidens win was fraudulent.

I like to think that no matter who is the perpetrator, whether its a foreign actor or domestic actor, if somebody is attacking the United States Congress, the President of the United States will step up and do everything to stop it and stop it immediately, Gonzalez said. Instead, we saw what amounted to escalation, indifference for a period of time and then a sort of ham-handed attempt at calming the situation that didnt happen until hours into the insurrection.

A week later, Gonzalez was among 10 Republicans in the House of Representatives who voted to impeach Trump on an incitement of insurrection charge for his role in provoking the mob that attacked Congress and caused five deaths, including that of a Capitol Police officer. Since then, some Trump loyalists have turned their fury on Gonzalez and other Republicans who backed impeachment. Gonzalez has increased security for himself and his family due to threats.

Its concerning, but were managing it, says Gonzalez, who declined to further discuss the threats.

In an interview with cleveland.com/The Plain Dealer, Gonzalez talked about the riot and its aftermath, the impeachment vote, his political future and the future of the Trump and the Republican Party.

Pushback, praise on impeachment vote

Among those who have conveyed their displeasure with Gonzalez vote is Trump himself. Gonzalez says Trump - whose policies he supported in 88.6% of votes during his first congressional term - indirectly let him know hes unhappy. He says Republican leaders in Ohio also conveyed their vexation to him in different ways.

Members of his party in the House of Representatives havent tried to sanction him the way theyre trying to oust House Republican Conference Chair Liz Cheney of Wyoming from her leadership post for backing impeachment. Gonzalez calls the effort to sanction Cheney silly and petty, since Republican leaders told their members to vote their conscience on impeachment, and thats what he and Cheney did.

He says a handful of his GOP colleagues in Congress told them they would have liked to vote to impeach Trump, but their districts wouldnt allow it.

I dont know if my district will allow it for me, but I think were supposed to be here to do what we think is right, says Gonzalez. And your commitment to your oath should be far stronger than your commitment to your job.

Among constituents in Gonzalez current V-shaped district that includes parts of Cuyahoga, Medina, Summit, Portage and Stark counties and all of Wayne County, Gonzalez says theres a faction that enthusiastically agrees with his stance. A a second group disagrees with his vote but understands why he did it, and a third group is furious with him. Gonzalez says hes been trying to explain his vote to as many people as he can, and will have a tele-townhall on Thursday where he can communicate his reasoning to thousands of constituents and hear their concerns.

One of the things thats become obvious to me is, no matter where you are on it, theres a lot of emotion around the vote, says Gonzalez. And theres a lot of emotion around changes that were seeing in the country. One of my goals is to provide as many forums as possible for voters to engage with me and engage with each other, so that we can hear where the community is on on this issue. Were going to keep doing that across the district, as long as it takes. And I think that ultimately will be healthy, because people have a lot to get off their chests right now. And Im hearing it day to day in our conversations.

What the political future holds

Gonzalez did not face a primary contest in 2020 and won the general election with 63.2 percent of the vote. He thinks theres a good chance hell face a primary challenge in 2022 but believes it wont materialize until after the states congressional maps are redrawn and his districts geography is reset. He won the 2018 general election with 56.7 percent of the vote after winning 53 percent in a three way Republican primary with former state legislator Christina Hagan and physician Michael Grusenmeyer. Hagan, who lost a 2020 bid for Congress against Democrat Tim Ryan in a neighboring district, says she wont rule out a rematch with Gonzalez in 2022.

I dont live my life in fear of primaries, says Gonzalez, who had $564,935 left in his campaign account at the end of 2020, after raising $2,393,597 and spending $1,895,208 on his reelection. I didnt do it for the first two years, and Im not going to do it for the next two years.

Gonzalez says its very, very, very unlikely that hell pursue the U.S. Senate seat that will be vacated by Republican Rob Portmans decision to not seek re-election next year, but he doesnt want to disqualify the possibility. He said some people are urging him to run, and others say hed be a fool to do so. He says he hopes whoever gets the seat can be as effective on behalf of Ohio as Rob Portman was.

I never close the door on anything, says Gonzalez, who was a wide receiver for Ohio State University and the Indianapolis Colts before he entered politics. When coaches are having a good season, the media will ask about rumors theyre taking a job with the Miami Dolphins. Theyll say absolutely not, and then three weeks later they take the Miami Dolphins job. That looks silly, so Im not going to play those games. You never say no. Thats my answer.

Rejecting extremism

Gonzalez says he expects Trump will try to stay engaged in Republican politics for as long as he can, but he cant predict Trumps role or whether hell seek the White House again. Gonzalez does not think it would be a good idea for Trump to start a third political party, as Trump has discussed. Gonzalez thinks it would be a better idea for the Republican Party to retain Trumps successful policies but make sure that some of these extremist fringe movements that have attached themselves to the GOP umbrella know that there is no home in this party for anti-Semitism or extremism or political violence or QAnon conspiracy theories.

I think we all have a responsibility in elected office for when we see it, to call it out for what it is, says Gonzalez, adding that Democrats also have their fringe adherents in the Antifa movement.

He says he is still reviewing past behavior by his newly elected Republican colleague from Georgia, Marjorie Taylor Greene, whom Democrats have suggested should be expelled from Congress or removed from her assignment on the House Education and Labor Committee after making controversial statements that include espousing conspiracy theories and contending that several school shootings were hoaxes.

If youre advocating for political violence against anybody, if youre harassing teenagers and telling them that they werent involved in a shooting or that it was a false flag, this is just disgusting behavior, frankly, and it is nothing I want to associate myself with, says Gonzalez. And I hope others feel the same way.

Because Greenes constituents were aware of her views before she was elected, Gonzalez says he does not think she should be ejected from Congress but said removing her from committees should be looked at because participation on congressional committees is an honor that you earn.

The Republican agenda

Gonzalez argues that Trumps stances on issues like trade, taxes, energy independence and foreign policy were spot on for Ohio, which is why the states voters supported him by eight percentage points in the 2016 and 2018 presidential elections. He says the Republican Party needs to retain the goodness associated with these policies and what they represented for Ohio, which was a strong, robust economy and get rid of some of the more extremist rhetoric and behavior that attached itself, wrongly I would argue, to this movement and make sure that were very clear that things like political violence, and the mobs and the insurrections and some of these conspiracy theories just have no place in conservatism.

He said the Republican Party in Ohio is controlled by voters, rather than Trump, and is as strong as it has ever been. Republicans hold nearly all Ohios statewide elected offices, and Gonzalez says he doesnt know of any QAnon or militia believers among Ohio Republicans in the state party or in elected office.

You see a lot of good, honest people who are doing a great job, and are representing traditional conservative Republican values, says Gonzalez.

During his initial two years in Congress, Gonzalez passed legislation including a bill that blocks national cemeteries from banning battlefield cross memorials, another to help the government fight realistic-looking fraudulent videos and photographs called deepfakes that could be used for scams, to sow public discord and endanger national security, and several bills that target misbehavior by China such as intellectual property theft. Over the next two years, he says hell focus on efforts to defeat the coronavirus and reduce prescription drug costs.

Currently, the United States subsidizes drug prices all around the rest of the world, Gonzalez says. Drug companies do the overwhelming majority of their research and development here, funded by the taxpayer. We get the drugs developed and then they sell them overseas at a fraction of the cost that they sell them here in the U.S.. Thats not fair.

He thinks it will be difficult for Republicans to pursue their agenda with Democrats controlling the White House and Congress for the next two years, and says Republicans will need to win back suburban voters by letting them know what we stand for, who we are, what we believe and what we reject.

He feels that ultimately, history will harshly judge those who supported rejecting the electoral votes of states that Trump contested on Jan. 6, because the point of doing so was to overturn a presidential election.

I hope we can all, over time, come to understand how dangerous it truly was, says Gonzalez. Theres a lot of people who are just never going to agree with the impeachment vote. But my hope is that over time, we will all look and say, You know what? The vice president cant pick the president. The Congress cant pick the president. The people in the states pick the president, and thats how it works in the United States. And the peaceful transition of power isnt some quaint idea thats nice to have. It is actually essential to a functioning democracy. Thats what I hope, more than anything else, that people think about these last three weeks.

Read more:

Sen. Rob Portman hopes for coronavirus compromise with Biden administration

Nina Turner takes big fundraising lead in congressional race to succeed Marcia Fudge; her donors include actress Susan Sarandon and entrepreneur Andrew Yang

Sherrod Brown hopes Senate can pass $15 hourly minimum wage and coronavirus aid for local governments with or without Republican support

Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan wont run for U.S. Senate next year

Senators grill Ohios Rep. Marcia Fudge at her confirmation hearing to be Secretary of Housing and Urban Development

Sen. Rob Portman backs measure to question constitutionality of impeaching former President Donald Trump

Rob Portman talks about his future plans and whats ahead for the Republican Party

Sen. Rob Portman announces he wont seek re-election

U.S. Capitol riot prompts Democrat Jeff Sites to seek Rep. Jim Jordans congressional seat

Ohio Congress members at President Joe Bidens inauguration hope for new era of cooperation

Several Ohio Congress members will skip Joe Bidens inauguration amid unprecedented security measures

Rep. Bob Gibbs and other Ohio Republican Congress members object to metal detectors to access House floor

Rocky River Republican Anthony Gonzalez votes to impeach President Donald Trump

House votes to impeach President Trump after last weeks U.S. Capitol riot, with all Ohio Democrats and one Ohio Republican in the majority

Read the rest here:

Rocky River Republican Rep. Anthony Gonzalez gets flak for voting to impeach President Donald Trump but doesn - cleveland.com

Dolly Parton Rejected The Medal Of Freedom From Donald Trump Twice. Here’s Why. – HuffPost

Country music icon Dolly Parton has revealed why she twice turned down former President Donald Trumps offer of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nations highest civilian honor.

In an interview on the Today show on Monday, the Jolene singer and lifelong philanthropist said it was just a case of bad timing. She also explained why shed be hesitant to accept the accolade now from President Joe Biden.

I couldnt accept it (from Trump) because my husband was ill and then they asked me again about it and I wouldnt travel because of the COVID, she recalled.

So now, I feel like if I take it, Ill be doing politics, so Im not sure, Parton continued. I dont work for those awards. Itd be nice, but Im not sure that I even deserve it. But its a nice compliment for people to think that I might deserve it.

I think everyone thinks you might deserve it, Today host Hoda Kotb responded. (Watch the video above).

Parton has contributed to a slew of charitable projects. She was cheered last year after it emerged she had donated $1 million to fund a vaccine for COVID-19. Its prompted calls for a statue of the singer at the Tennessee state Capitol in Nashville.

Former President Barack Obama admitted last year that not awarding the medal to Parton had been a screw-up of his administration.

Calling all HuffPost superfans!

Sign up for membership to become a founding member and help shape HuffPost's next chapter

Go here to see the original:

Dolly Parton Rejected The Medal Of Freedom From Donald Trump Twice. Here's Why. - HuffPost

Political correctness: how the right invented a phantom …

Three weeks ago, around a quarter of the American population elected a demagogue with no prior experience in public service to the presidency. In the eyes of many of his supporters, this lack of preparation was not a liability, but a strength. Donald Trump had run as a candidate whose primary qualification was that he was not a politician. Depicting yourself as a maverick or an outsider crusading against a corrupt Washington establishment is the oldest trick in American politics but Trump took things further. He broke countless unspoken rules regarding what public figures can or cannot do and say.

Every demagogue needs an enemy. Trumps was the ruling elite, and his charge was that they were not only failing to solve the greatest problems facing Americans, they were trying to stop anyone from even talking about those problems. The special interests, the arrogant media, and the political insiders, dont want me to talk about the crime that is happening in our country, Trump said in one late September speech. They want me to just go along with the same failed policies that have caused so much needless suffering.

Trump claimed that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were willing to let ordinary Americans suffer because their first priority was political correctness. They have put political correctness above common sense, above your safety, and above all else, Trump declared after a Muslim gunman killed 49 people at a gay nightclub in Orlando. I refuse to be politically correct. What liberals might have seen as language changing to reflect an increasingly diverse society in which citizens attempt to avoid giving needless offence to one another Trump saw a conspiracy.

Throughout an erratic campaign, Trump consistently blasted political correctness, blaming it for an extraordinary range of ills and using the phrase to deflect any and every criticism. During the first debate of the Republican primaries, Fox News host Megyn Kelly asked Trump how he would answer the charge that he was part of the war on women.

Youve called women you dont like fat pigs, dogs, slobs, and disgusting animals, Kelly pointed out. You once told a contestant on Celebrity Apprentice it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees

I think the big problem this country has is being politically correct, Trump answered, to audience applause. Ive been challenged by so many people, I dont frankly have time for total political correctness. And to be honest with you, this country doesnt have time either.

Trump used the same defence when critics raised questions about his statements on immigration. In June 2015, after Trump referred to Mexicans as rapists, NBC, the network that aired his reality show The Apprentice, announced that it was ending its relationship with him. Trumps team retorted that, NBC is weak, and like everybody else is trying to be politically correct.

In August 2016, after saying that the US district judge Gonzalo Curiel of San Diego was unfit to preside over the lawsuit against Trump Universities because he was Mexican American and therefore likely to be biased against him, Trump told CBS News that this was common sense. He continued: We have to stop being so politically correct in this country. During the second presidential debate, Trump answered a question about his proposed ban on Muslims by stating: We could be very politically correct, but whether we like it or not, there is a problem.

Every time Trump said something outrageous commentators suggested he had finally crossed a line and that his campaign was now doomed. But time and again, Trump supporters made it clear that they liked him because he wasnt afraid to say what he thought. Fans praised the way Trump talked much more often than they mentioned his policy proposals. He tells it like it is, they said. He speaks his mind. He is not politically correct.

Trump and his followers never defined political correctness, or specified who was enforcing it. They did not have to. The phrase conjured powerful forces determined to suppress inconvenient truths by policing language.

There is an obvious contradiction involved in complaining at length, to an audience of hundreds of millions of people, that you are being silenced. But this idea that there is a set of powerful, unnamed actors, who are trying to control everything you do, right down to the words you use is trending globally right now. Britains rightwing tabloids issue frequent denunciations of political correctness gone mad and rail against the smug hypocrisy of the metropolitan elite. In Germany, conservative journalists and politicians are making similar complaints: after the assaults on women in Cologne last New Years Eve, for instance, the chief of police Rainer Wendt said that leftists pressuring officers to be politisch korrekt had prevented them from doing their jobs. In France, Marine Le Pen of the Front National has condemned more traditional conservatives as paralysed by their fear of confronting political correctness.

Trumps incessant repetition of the phrase has led many writers since the election to argue that the secret to his victory was a backlash against excessive political correctness. Some have argued that Hillary Clinton failed because she was too invested in that close relative of political correctness, identity politics. But upon closer examination, political correctness becomes an impossibly slippery concept. The term is what Ancient Greek rhetoricians would have called an exonym: a term for another group, which signals that the speaker does not belong to it. Nobody ever describes themselves as politically correct. The phrase is only ever an accusation.

If you say that something is technically correct, you are suggesting that it is wrong the adverb before correct implies a but. However, to say that a statement is politically correct hints at something more insidious. Namely, that the speaker is acting in bad faith. He or she has ulterior motives, and is hiding the truth in order to advance an agenda or to signal moral superiority. To say that someone is being politically correct discredits them twice. First, they are wrong. Second, and more damningly, they know it.

If you go looking for the origins of the phrase, it becomes clear that there is no neat history of political correctness. There have only been campaigns against something called political correctness. For 25 years, invoking this vague and ever-shifting enemy has been a favourite tactic of the right. Opposition to political correctness has proved itself a highly effective form of crypto-politics. It transforms the political landscape by acting as if it is not political at all. Trump is the deftest practitioner of this strategy yet.

Most Americans had never heard the phrase politically correct before 1990, when a wave of stories began to appear in newspapers and magazines. One of the first and most influential was published in October 1990 by the New York Times reporter Richard Bernstein, who warned under the headline The Rising Hegemony of the Politically Correct that the countrys universities were threatened by a growing intolerance, a closing of debate, a pressure to conform.

Bernstein had recently returned from Berkeley, where he had been reporting on student activism. He wrote that there was an unofficial ideology of the university, according to which a cluster of opinions about race, ecology, feminism, culture and foreign policy defines a kind of correct attitude toward the problems of the world. For instance, Biodegradable garbage bags get the PC seal of approval. Exxon does not.

Bernsteins alarming dispatch in Americas paper of record set off a chain reaction, as one mainstream publication after another rushed to denounce this new trend. The following month, the Wall Street Journal columnist Dorothy Rabinowitz decried the brave new world of ideological zealotry at American universities. In December, the cover of Newsweek with a circulation of more than 3 million featured the headline THOUGHT POLICE and yet another ominous warning: Theres a politically correct way to talk about race, sex and ideas. Is this the New Enlightenment or the New McCarthyism? A similar story graced the cover of New York magazine in January 1991 inside, the magazine proclaimed that The New Fascists were taking over universities. In April, Time magazine reported on a new intolerance that was on the rise across campuses nationwide.

If you search ProQuest, a digital database of US magazines and newspapers, you find that the phrase politically correct rarely appeared before 1990. That year, it turned up more than 700 times. In 1991, there are more than 2,500 instances. In 1992, it appeared more than 2,800 times. Like Indiana Jones movies, these pieces called up enemies from a melange of old wars: they compared the thought police spreading terror on university campuses to fascists, Stalinists, McCarthyites, Hitler Youth, Christian fundamentalists, Maoists and Marxists.

Many of these articles recycled the same stories of campus controversies from a handful of elite universities, often exaggerated or stripped of context. The New York magazine cover story opened with an account of a Harvard history professor, Stephan Thernstrom, being attacked by overzealous students who felt he had been racially insensitive: Whenever he walked through the campus that spring, down Harvards brick paths, under the arched gates, past the fluttering elms, he found it hard not to imagine the pointing fingers, the whispers. Racist. There goes the racist. It was hellish, this persecution.

In an interview that appeared soon afterwards in The Nation, Thernstrom said the harassment described in the New York article had never happened. There had been one editorial in the Harvard Crimson student newspaper criticising his decision to read extensively from the diaries of plantation owners in his lectures. But the description of his harried state was pure artistic licence. No matter: the image of college students conducting witch hunts stuck. When Richard Bernstein published a book based on his New York Times reporting on political correctness, he called it Dictatorship of Virtue: Multiculturalism and the Battle for Americas Future a title alluding to the Jacobins of the French Revolution. In the book he compared American college campuses to France during the Reign of Terror, during which tens of thousands of people were executed within months.

None of the stories that introduced the menace of political correctness could pinpoint where or when it had begun. Nor were they very precise when they explained the origins of the phrase itself. Journalists frequently mentioned the Soviets Bernstein observed that the phrase smacks of Stalinist orthodoxy but there is no exact equivalent in Russian. (The closest would be ideinost, which translates as ideological correctness. But that word has nothing to do with disadvantaged people or minorities.) The intellectual historian LD Burnett has found scattered examples of doctrines or people being described as politically correct in American communist publications from the 1930s usually, she says, in a tone of mockery.

The phrase came into more widespread use in American leftist circles in the 1960s and 1970s most likely as an ironic borrowing from Mao, who delivered a famous speech in 1957 that was translated into English with the title On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among the People.

Ruth Perry, a literature professor at MIT who was active in the feminist and civil rights movements, says that many radicals were reading the Little Red Book in the late 1960s and 1970s, and surmises that her friends may have picked up the adjective correct there. But they didnt use it in the way Mao did. Politically correct became a kind of in-joke among American leftists something you called a fellow leftist when you thought he or she was being self-righteous. The term was always used ironically, Perry says, always calling attention to possible dogmatism.

In 1970, the African-American author and activist Toni Cade Bambara, used the phrase in an essay about strains on gender relations within her community. No matter how politically correct her male friends thought they were being, she wrote many of them were failing to recognise the plight of black women.

Until the late 1980s, political correctness was used exclusively within the left, and almost always ironically as a critique of excessive orthodoxy. In fact, some of the first people to organise against political correctness were a group of feminists who called themselves the Lesbian Sex Mafia. In 1982, they held a Speakout on Politically Incorrect Sex at a theatre in New Yorks East Village a rally against fellow feminists who had condemned pornography and BDSM. Over 400 women attended, many of them wearing leather and collars, brandishing nipple clamps and dildos. The writer and activist Mirtha Quintanales summed up the mood when she told the audience, We need to have dialogues about S&M issues, not about what is politically correct, politically incorrect.

By the end of the 1980s, Jeff Chang, the journalist and hip-hop critic, who has written extensively on race and social justice, recalls that the activists he knew then in the Bay Area used the phrase in a jokey way a way for one sectarian to dismiss another sectarians line.

But soon enough, the term was rebranded by the right, who turned its meaning inside out. All of a sudden, instead of being a phrase that leftists used to check dogmatic tendencies within their movement, political correctness became a talking point for neoconservatives. They said that PC constituted a leftwing political programme that was seizing control of American universities and cultural institutions and they were determined to stop it.

The right had been waging a campaign against liberal academics for more than a decade. Starting in the mid-1970s, a handful of conservative donors had funded the creation of dozens of new thinktanks and training institutes offering programmes in everything from leadership to broadcast journalism to direct-mail fundraising. They had endowed fellowships for conservative graduate students, postdoctoral positions and professorships at prestigious universities. Their stated goal was to challenge what they saw as the dominance of liberalism and attack left-leaning tendencies within the academy.

Starting in the late 1980s, this well-funded conservative movement entered the mainstream with a series of improbable bestsellers that took aim at American higher education. The first, by the University of Chicago philosophy professor Allan Bloom, came out in 1987. For hundreds of pages, The Closing of the American Mind argued that colleges were embracing a shallow cultural relativism and abandoning long-established disciplines and standards in an attempt to appear liberal and to pander to their students. It sold more than 500,000 copies and inspired numerous imitations.

In April 1990, Roger Kimball, an editor at the conservative journal, The New Criterion, published Tenured Radicals: How Politics Has Corrupted our Higher Education. Like Bloom, Kimball argued that an assault on the canon was taking place and that a politics of victimhood had paralysed universities. As evidence, he cited the existence of departments such as African American studies and womens studies. He scornfully quoted the titles of papers he had heard at academic conferences, such as Jane Austen and the Masturbating Girl or The Lesbian Phallus: Does Heterosexuality Exist?

In June 1991, the young Dinesh DSouza followed Bloom and Kimball with Illiberal Education: the Politics of Race and Sex on Campus. Whereas Bloom had bemoaned the rise of relativism and Kimball had attacked what he called liberal fascism, and what he considered frivolous lines of scholarly inquiry, DSouza argued that admissions policies that took race into consideration were producing a new segregation on campus and an attack on academic standards. The Atlantic printed a 12,000 word excerpt as its June cover story. To coincide with the release, Forbes ran another article by DSouza with the title: Visigoths in Tweed.

These books did not emphasise the phrase political correctness, and only DSouza used the phrase directly. But all three came to be regularly cited in the flood of anti-PC articles that appeared in venues such as the New York Times and Newsweek. When they did, the authors were cited as neutral authorities. Countless articles uncritically repeated their arguments.

In some respects, these books and articles were responding to genuine changes taking place within academia. It is true that scholars had become increasingly sceptical about whether it was possible to talk about timeless, universal truths that lay beyond language and representation. European theorists who became influential in US humanities departments during the 1970s and 1980s argued that individual experience was shaped by systems of which the individual might not be aware and particularly by language. Michel Foucault, for instance, argued that all knowledge expressed historically specific forms of power. Jacques Derrida, a frequent target of conservative critics, practised what he called deconstruction, rereading the classics of philosophy in order to show that even the most seemingly innocent and straightforward categories were riven with internal contradictions. The value of ideals such as humanity or liberty could not be taken for granted.

It was also true that many universities were creating new studies departments, which interrogated the experiences, and emphasised the cultural contributions of groups that had previously been excluded from the academy and from the canon: queer people, people of colour and women. This was not so strange. These departments reflected new social realities. The demographics of college students were changing, because the demographics of the United States were changing. By 1990, only two-thirds of Americans under 18 were white. In California, the freshman classes at many public universities were majority minority, or more than 50% non-white. Changes to undergraduate curriculums reflected changes in the student population.

The responses that the conservative bestsellers offered to the changes they described were disproportionate and often misleading. For instance, Bloom complained at length about the militancy of African American students at Cornell University, where he had taught in the 1960s. He never mentioned what students demanding the creation of African American studies were responding to: the biggest protest at Cornell took place in 1969 after a cross burning on campus, an open KKK threat. (An arsonist burned down the Africana Studies Center, founded in response to these protests, in 1970.)

More than any particular obfuscation or omission, the most misleading aspect of these books was the way they claimed that only their adversaries were political. Bloom, Kimball, and DSouza claimed that they wanted to preserve the humanistic tradition, as if their academic foes were vandalising a canon that had been enshrined since time immemorial. But canons and curriculums have always been in flux; even in white Anglo-America there has never been any one stable tradition. Moby Dick was dismissed as Herman Melvilles worst book until the mid-1920s. Many universities had only begun offering literature courses in living languages a decade or so before that.

In truth, these crusaders against political correctness were every bit as political as their opponents. As Jane Mayer documents in her book, Dark Money: the Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right, Bloom and DSouza were funded by networks of conservative donors particularly the Koch, Olin and Scaife families who had spent the 1980s building programmes that they hoped would create a new counter-intelligentsia. (The New Criterion, where Kimball worked, was also funded by the Olin and Scaife Foundations.) In his 1978 book A Time for Truth, William Simon, the president of the Olin Foundation, had called on conservatives to fund intellectuals who shared their views: They must be given grants, grants, and more grants in exchange for books, books, and more books.

These skirmishes over syllabuses were part of a broader political programme and they became instrumental to forging a new alliance for conservative politics in America, between white working-class voters and small business owners, and politicians with corporate agendas that held very little benefit for those people.

By making fun of professors who spoke in language that most people considered incomprehensible (The Lesbian Phallus), wealthy Ivy League graduates could pose as anti-elite. By mocking courses on writers such as Alice Walker and Toni Morrison, they made a racial appeal to white people who felt as if they were losing their country. As the 1990s wore on, because multiculturalism was associated with globalisation the force that was taking away so many jobs traditionally held by white working-class people attacking it allowed conservatives to displace responsibility for the hardship that many of their constituents were facing. It was not the slashing of social services, lowered taxes, union busting or outsourcing that was the cause of their problems. It was those foreign others.

PC was a useful invention for the Republican right because it helped the movement to drive a wedge between working-class people and the Democrats who claimed to speak for them. Political correctness became a term used to drum into the public imagination the idea that there was a deep divide between the ordinary people and the liberal elite, who sought to control the speech and thoughts of regular folk. Opposition to political correctness also became a way to rebrand racism in ways that were politically acceptable in the post-civil-rights era.

Soon, Republican politicians were echoing on the national stage the message that had been product-tested in the academy. In May 1991, President George HW Bush gave a commencement speech at the University of Michigan. In it, he identified political correctness as a major danger to America. Ironically, on the 200th anniversary of our Bill of Rights, we find free speech under assault throughout the United States, Bush said. The notion of political correctness has ignited controversy across the land, but, he warned, In their own Orwellian way, crusades that demand correct behaviour crush diversity in the name of diversity.

After 2001, debates about political correctness faded from public view, replaced by arguments about Islam and terrorism. But in the final years of the Obama presidency, political correctness made a comeback. Or rather, anti-political-correctness did.

As Black Lives Matter and movements against sexual violence gained strength, a spate of thinkpieces attacked the participants in these movements, criticising and trivialising them by saying that they were obsessed with policing speech. Once again, the conversation initially focused on universities, but the buzzwords were new. Rather than difference and multiculturalism, Americans in 2012 and 2013 started hearing about trigger warnings, safe spaces, microaggressions, privilege and cultural appropriation.

This time, students received more scorn than professors. If the first round of anti-political-correctness evoked the spectres of totalitarian regimes, the more recent revival has appealed to the commonplace that millennials are spoiled narcissists, who want to prevent anyone expressing opinions that they happen to find offensive.

In January 2015, the writer Jonathan Chait published one of the first new, high-profile anti-PC thinkpieces in New York magazine. Not a Very PC Thing to Say followed the blueprint provided by the anti-PC thinkpieces that the New York Times, Newsweek, and indeed New York magazine had published in the early 1990s. Like the New York article from 1991, it began with an anecdote set on campus that supposedly demonstrated that political correctness had run amok, and then extrapolated from this incident to a broad generalisation. In 1991, John Taylor wrote: The new fundamentalism has concocted a rationale for dismissing all dissent. In 2015, Jonathan Chait claimed that there were once again angry mobs out to crush opposing ideas.

Chait warned that the dangers of PC had become greater than ever before. Political correctness was no longer confined to universities now, he argued, it had taken over social media and thus attained an influence over mainstream journalism and commentary beyond that of the old. (As evidence of the hegemonic influence enjoyed by unnamed actors on the left, Chait cited two female journalists saying that they had been criticised by leftists on Twitter.)

Chaits article launched a spate of replies about campus and social media cry bullies. On the cover of their September 2015 issue, the Atlantic published an article by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff. The title, The Coddling Of the American Mind, nodded to the godfather of anti-PC, Allan Bloom. (Lukianoff is the head of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, another organisation funded by the Olin and Scaife families.) In the name of emotional wellbeing, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they dont like, the article announced. It was shared over 500,000 times.

These pieces committed many of the same fallacies that their predecessors from the 1990s had. They cherry-picked anecdotes and caricatured the subjects of their criticism. They complained that other people were creating and enforcing speech codes, while at the same time attempting to enforce their own speech codes. Their writers designated themselves the arbiters of what conversations or political demands deserved to be taken seriously, and which did not. They contradicted themselves in the same way: their authors continually complained, in highly visible publications, that they were being silenced.

The climate of digital journalism and social media sharing enabled the anti-political-correctness (and anti-anti-political correctness) stories to spread even further and faster than they had in the 1990s. Anti-PC and anti-anti-PC stories come cheap: because they concern identity, they are something that any writer can have a take on, based on his or her experiences, whether or not he or she has the time or resources to report. They are also perfect clickbait. They inspire outrage, or outrage at the outrage of others.

Meanwhile, a strange convergence was taking place. While Chait and his fellow liberals decried political correctness, Donald Trump and his followers were doing the same thing. Chait said that leftists were perverting liberalism and appointed himself the defender of a liberal centre; Trump said that liberal media had the system rigged.

The anti-PC liberals were so focused on leftists on Twitter that for months they gravely underestimated the seriousness of the real threat to liberal discourse. It was not coming from women, people of colour, or queer people organising for their civil rights, on campus or elsewhere. It was coming from @realdonaldtrump, neo-Nazis, and far-right websites such as Breitbart.

The original critics of PC were academics or shadow-academics, Ivy League graduates who went around in bow ties quoting Plato and Matthew Arnold. It is hard to imagine Trump quoting Plato or Matthew Arnold, much less carping about the titles of conference papers by literature academics. During his campaign, the network of donors who funded decades of anti-PC activity the Kochs, the Olins, the Scaifes shunned Trump, citing concerns about the populist promises he was making. Trump came from a different milieu: not Yale or the University of Chicago, but reality television. And he was picking different fights, targeting the media and political establishment, rather than academia.

As a candidate, Trump inaugurated a new phase of anti-political-correctness. What was remarkable was just how many different ways Trump deployed this tactic to his advantage, both exploiting the tried-and-tested methods of the early 1990s and adding his own innovations.

First, by talking incessantly about political correctness, Trump established the myth that he had dishonest and powerful enemies who wanted to prevent him from taking on the difficult challenges facing the nation. By claiming that he was being silenced, he created a drama in which he could play the hero. The notion that Trump was both persecuted and heroic was crucial to his emotional appeal. It allowed people who were struggling economically or angry about the way society was changing to see themselves in him, battling against a rigged system that made them feel powerless and devalued. At the same time, Trumps swagger promised that they were strong and entitled to glory. They were great and would be great again.

Second, Trump did not simply criticise the idea of political correctness he actually said and did the kind of outrageous things that PC culture supposedly prohibited. The first wave of conservative critics of political correctness claimed they were defending the status quo, but Trumps mission was to destroy it. In 1991, when George HW Bush warned that political correctness was a threat to free speech, he did not choose to exercise his free speech rights by publicly mocking a man with a disability or characterising Mexican immigrants as rapists. Trump did. Having elevated the powers of PC to mythic status, the draft-dodging billionaire, son of a slumlord, taunted the parents of a fallen soldier and claimed that his cruelty and malice was, in fact, courage.

This willingness to be more outrageous than any previous candidate ensured non-stop media coverage, which in turn helped Trump attract supporters who agreed with what he was saying. We should not underestimate how many Trump supporters held views that were sexist, racist, xenophobic and Islamophobic, and were thrilled to feel that he had given them permission to say so. Its an old trick: the powerful encourage the less powerful to vent their rage against those who might have been their allies, and to delude themselves into thinking that they have been liberated. It costs the powerful nothing; it pays frightful dividends.

Trump drew upon a classic element of anti-political-correctness by implying that while his opponents were operating according to a political agenda, he simply wanted to do what was sensible. He made numerous controversial policy proposals: deporting millions of undocumented immigrants, banning Muslims from entering the US, introducing stop-and-frisk policies that have been ruled unconstitutional. But by responding to critics with the accusation that they were simply being politically correct, Trump attempted to place these proposals beyond the realm of politics altogether. Something political is something that reasonable people might disagree about. By using the adjective as a put-down, Trump pretended that he was acting on truths so obvious that they lay beyond dispute. Thats just common sense.

The most alarming part of this approach is what it implies about Trumps attitude to politics more broadly. His contempt for political correctness looks a lot like contempt for politics itself. He does not talk about diplomacy; he talks about deals. Debate and disagreement are central to politics, yet Trump has made clear that he has no time for these distractions. To play the anti-political-correctness card in response to a legitimate question about policy is to shut down discussion in much the same way that opponents of political correctness have long accused liberals and leftists of doing. It is a way of sidestepping debate by declaring that the topic is so trivial or so contrary to common sense that it is pointless to discuss it. The impulse is authoritarian. And by presenting himself as the champion of common sense, Trump gives himself permission to bypass politics altogether.

Now that he is president-elect, it is unclear whether Trump meant many of the things he said during his campaign. But, so far, he is fulfilling his pledge to fight political correctness. Last week, he told the New York Times that he was trying to build an administration filled with the best people, though Not necessarily people that will be the most politically correct people, because that hasnt been working.

Trump has also continued to cry PC in response to criticism. When an interviewer from Politico asked a Trump transition team member why Trump was appointing so many lobbyists and political insiders, despite having pledged to drain the swamp of them, the source said that one of the most refreshing parts of the whole Trump style is that he does not care about political correctness. Apparently it would have been politically correct to hold him to his campaign promises.

As Trump prepares to enter the White House, many pundits have concluded that political correctness fuelled the populist backlash sweeping Europe and the US. The leaders of that backlash may say so. But the truth is the opposite: those leaders understood the power that anti-political-correctness has to rally a class of voters, largely white, who are disaffected with the status quo and resentful of shifting cultural and social norms. They were not reacting to the tyranny of political correctness, nor were they returning America to a previous phase of its history. They were not taking anything back. They were wielding anti-political-correctness as a weapon, using it to forge a new political landscape and a frightening future.

The opponents of political correctness always said they were crusaders against authoritarianism. In fact, anti-PC has paved the way for the populist authoritarianism now spreading everywhere. Trump is anti-political correctness gone mad.

Follow the Long Read on Twitter at @gdnlongread, or sign up to the long read weekly email here.

More:

Political correctness: how the right invented a phantom ...

Proud Boys’ party is over: Trump fans throw tantrums because they’ve lost more than an election – Salon

In vino veritas, or perhaps more appropriately, in Bud Light veritas: These were the words that came to mind while I watchedSaturday's Proud Boys riot in Washington, D.C.

For years, the Proud Boys have angrily resisted critics who say the group is racist, claiming instead to be for "Western chauvinism."Before the heat got to him and he quit, Proud Boys founder (and onetime Vice co-founder) Gavin McInnes described the group as being "alt-right without the racism." The Boys'insistence that they are absolutely, definitely not a bunch of racistseven led to ugly infighting when a splinter group broke off over the refusal of group leaderstocommit to overtly white nationalistbeliefs.

But on one Saturday night in Washington, fueled by alcohol and rage over Donald Trump's electoral defeat, the pretense that "Western chauvinism" is not a racist ideology collapsed. After hours of drinking and ginning themselves up, the Proud Boys stole Black Lives Matter flags and targeted counter-protesters who were gathered in Black Lives Matter Plaza. A group of Proud Boys dramatically lit a large Black Lives Matter flag on fire, while flashing the "OK" sign, which of late has been appropriated by racists as a "white power" symbol. Vandalismat two historically Blackchurches,Asbury United Methodist Church and Metropolitan A.M.E. Church, is being investigated as a hate crime.Four people were stabbed in altercations between the Proud Boys and counter-protesters.

Saturday's rally was ostensibly about protesting Trump'sloss and claiming that he wasthe victim of a "rigged" election. But with inhibitions loosened by booze, angerand literal (as well as metaphorical)darkness, the truth was illuminated: The rage about Donald Trump's electoral fateis about racism.It's a part of the growing fury taking hold of conservativesastheir control over American culture slips further and further out of their grasp. Trump is just the latest vehicle for this anger, but this story is about a lot more than him. It's bigger even than electoral politics. This is about a more fundamental issue: over Who gets to define America,and the widespreadreactionary outrage over being outnumbered by more liberal, more diverse and more cosmopolitan Americans, and feeling unable to stop the tide of progress.

Trump was able to amass an extraordinary 74.2 million voters with a message of resentment at "political correctness" and "woke" culture, a story about how conservative white people are supposedly being victimized by a changing America. But as much as that campaign whipped up millions of Americans, at the heart of it all was a misdirection. What conservatives really want iscontrol over the culture. Thatisn't something that can be won at the ballot box, and they know it.

If the actual goal of the angry right werecontrol over governance and policy, they should be thrilledby the past year.

Despite Trump's defeat, the GOP has maintained control over the Senate (pending the results of Georgia's runoff elections next month) and gained at least 10 seats in the House, nibbling the Democratic majority down to a bare minimum. They have alsopacked the federal courts so thoroughly that meaningful Democratic legislation may be impossible to enact for at least a generation. Unless Democrats can pull upsets in both of the Georgia races to be decided on Jan. 5,incoming President Joe Biden will be hamstrung by all-too-familiar obstructionist Republicans.

But instead of being happy or at least begrudgingly accepting what was mostly a win for Republicans, the right has exploded inrage. That's because Donald Trump's defeatwas a reminder thatno matter how much Republicans maintain power through a drastically tilted electoral playing field, conservatives are still, culturally speaking, a minority and one that's shrinking rapidly, at that.

This is why right-wingers always act like angry losers, no matter how many political wins they stack up. There's a limit to how much cultural change can be reversed at the ballot box or even in the courts. Of course, thepolicy fights over police reform, reproductive rights, same-sex marriageand immigration matter quite a bit to real people's lives. But even when the right wins on policy, the cultural changes racial diversity, women's increased equality, the mainstreaming of LGBTQ people march on. That's why Proud Boys targetedBlack Lives Matter iconography instead of, say, the offices of Democratic Party leaders or progressivethink tanks.

The same weekend that Proud Boys were throwing a public tantrum in Washington, Cleveland's baseball team finally gave in to longstanding pressure and announced itwould drop its venerable but racist name, the "Indians." The move comesafter the NFL team in D.C. dropped its formername, which was a far more viciousslur against Native Americans. Trump, unsurprisingly, whined about the Clevelanddecisionon Twitter, calling it "Cancel culture at work," even though the team's privateownersmade the decisionand its players will take the field next season as usual. Even in using thatterm, Trump tacitly admittedthat his poweras president, andas massivecultural icon to the right, can do nothing to stop the anti-racist pressure campaign that caused thename change.

Trump's ultimately futile war over the military's move toban Confederate iconography and rename bases currently named after Confederate figuresis similar. That'sa lost cause, and not just because Trump will soon leave office and the military will just proceed with itsplansunder Biden. Military leaders are making these decisions themselves,reflecting changes that have already occurring withinmilitary culture as the services have becomemore racially diverse and more open towomen.

There are any number of otherexamples. Even as the right keeps on railingagainst these cultural changes, it can't help but reflect them. For instance, Saturday's right-wing rally featured an extremely lame hip-hop act, juxtaposing right-wing cultural appropriation with overt acts of racism. But this seeming contradictionis just SOP for Trumpers. Trump himself would dance badly to songs by the Village People at rallies where he'd promise to appoint more right-wing judges to strip LGBTQ people of their rights.

What else are conservativessupposed to do? Have crap music at their events? Even "Western chauvinists" understand thatif they limitthemselves to white, straight,conservative-oriented music, they're doomed to host a lame party. So they borrow very heavily from the samecultures they view as an existentialthreat to "America."

Again, that's why right-wingers eternally act likevictims, no matter how many electoral wins they rack up. "MAGA" was a promise to restore a fantasy version of an American white-bread past. The entire Republican National Convention was a lengthy whine about "cancel culture" and "political correctness," which areright-wing scare terms to demonize shifting social mores that reject open bigotry. The implicit promise was that, by electing Trump for four more years, he would make it socially acceptable to be shitty again. That promiseturned out more than 74 million people.

Make no mistake, Trump did a lot of damage in four years: He wrecked the economy, unleashed a pandemic, made the lives of immigrants miserable androlled back environmental protections the list goeson. But he wasn't able to dothe one thing that his supporters most dearly wanted, which was to remake the culture in their image. He couldn't do that in four years, and he wasn't going to do it in eight. It's not impossible to use political power to do such a thing the Jim Crow South and Nazi Germany being the most obvious examples but it generally requires heavy-handed state violence and censorship crackdowns that Trump flirted with but was never remotelyable to implement on the scalenecessary to fulfill those MAGA desires.

None of which is to say that everything will bejust dandy now that Trump is leavingoffice. Racism, sexism, homophobia and other bigotries continue to be a major poison. Systematic racismstill creates majorinequalities in health, wealth and other social markers.To say that the culture is changing isn't to say that it haschanged, and the right-wing assault on human rights is causing real people real pain every day. But none of these realities placate conservatives, who are still enraged that progressives continue to push for and often gain ground, especially in the cultural sphere.

And nowa neofascist movement has been unleashed in the U.S. Trump's failed coup was, for him, about ego and power. For his supporters, however, it was a symbol of their long-term hopes of managing to wrest back control over the culturedespite being both outnumbered and largely incapable of generating attractive cultural touchstones to lure other Americans to their side. The right islosing the culture war, and itsanger over that willcontinue to grow, even asTrump himself is pushed out of the spotlight.

Go here to see the original:

Proud Boys' party is over: Trump fans throw tantrums because they've lost more than an election - Salon

Empowering Student-Athletes Is at the Heart of an Exciting New Fellowship – UVA Today

Anybody whos ever run, at either a competitive or recreational level, knows that the mental challenges of exercise are sometimes far greater than the physical ones.

Thats just one reason why Emma Myer, a second-year University of Virginia student who is a member of the track and field and cross country teams, was intrigued by the opportunity to take part in the Citizen Leaders and Sports Ethics Community Impact Fellowship, a new leadership program for student-athletes started by UVA Athletics and UVAs Contemplative Sciences Center.

Myer was joined in the 12-month fellowship, which started last spring, by Madeleine Boylston, a second-year student on the volleyball team; Morgan Murphy, a second-year on the softball team; and Quentin Matsui, a second-year on the lacrosse team.

Fellows identify a specific, pressing challenge to the well-being or flourishing of their teammates or the larger community of student-athletes at UVA, then spend their fellowship year designing and implementing programs to overcome those challenges with evidence-based tools, such as mindfulness meditation and other contemplative practices.

The fellowship aims to empower student-athletes to address unique issues they face particularly the strain of balancing competitive sports pressures with academic responsibilities and social and emotional well-being.

Our goal is to propel them toward their own interests, their own values, their own life goals, said Heather Downs, director of academics at UVA Athletics. Were integrating a lot more reflective experiences so that students can really dig deep and figure out more about themselves. Student wellness is the motivating factor for everything were doing.

Leslie Hubbard, the Contemplative Sciences Centers program director for student engagement and contemplative instruction, said the fellowship is designed as an opportunity for student-athletes to become community leaders.

It allows them the chance to develop the knowledge and long-term skills to pursue more engaged, healthy, values-driven and successful personal, professional and civic lives, at UVA and beyond, she said.

Heres a look at what Myer, Boylston and Murphy have been working on since the programs inception.

The Challenge: The specific challenge that I identified and wanted to work on was mental strength. Mental strength within an endurance sport is probably just as important as, if not more important than, an athletes physical capabilities. Mental strength is something that is hard to practice and make better, so my goal is to provide resources and helpful skills in order to strengthen my teammates mental strength capacity.

The Plan: My plan for informing my fellow teammates about mental strength and what they can do to build their strength is through a blog. I have been uploading blog posts every two weeks with stories, information or helpful tips to increase mental strength, on and off the track.

When I was chosen for this fellowship, the coronavirus pandemic had not yet hit our country, so I didnt originally plan to incorporate it, but I have included, and plan to include, more posts about time management, stress and handling the coronavirus pandemic as a student-athlete.

I have uploaded a post about mindfulness meditation and its benefits to running on my blog. Most people dont know what mindfulness is in-depth and its true benefits, so I tried to inform my teammates on a basic level and educate them on how it can help them in practice and while competing.

The Takeaways: In surveys, I plan to ask my teammates if they use the practices Ive taught them, and if they have, has it helped them? I will also assess if they are more knowledgeable about mental strength itself and how much power it has over your performance.

Overall, my fellowship experience has been great. Ive had the chance to get to know Leslie Hubbard more and learn important information from her. I look forward to continuing this journey.

Although my job in this fellowship is to teach and implement tactics for my teammates to use, Ive also learned so much by doing research and finding out what mindfulness meditation can really do for a runner.

The Challenge: The challenge I decided to focus on was the lack of connection between athletes and the larger community. I think athletes miss out on connections with a bigger purpose and sense of community due to chaotic schedules and a lot of stress. I really wanted to find a way for UVAs athletes to come together and work toward a bigger purpose or goal.

The Plan: I decided to partner with UVAs Team Impact, which is a national organization that works with college athletics to provide children with chronic or life-threatening illness a support system, to create an event. This event will allow each team and their Team Impact matches to connect with one another and other teams.

While we are not using meditation or mindfulness techniques in my fellowship, we are focusing on connection. Connection is important to stay healthy and lead a purposeful life, and it is a prominent dimension to the contemplative sciences.

The Takeaways:

We are still in the planning process of how we will measure the effectiveness of the project. We are hoping to use surveys to determine whether or not those who participated felt that they were connecting to a larger community and better connected to UVAs athletic community.

I have really loved my experience working on this fellowship so far. My adviser, Leslie Hubbard, has been great to work with, and this fellowship has really pushed me out of my comfort zone.

This fellowship has really pushed me to become a better leader and organizer. Due to COVID-19, our plan had to be adjusted constantly and we had to adapt very quickly because of different circumstances. We faced many obstacles in the planning stages and we had to be very flexible and inventive to work around a lot of restrictions. I had to learn to think out of the box.

The Challenge: When I first started this project, my team was facing a lot of injuries. There was just injury after injury, and its hard to keep the performance at a high rate when players are going in and out. So the pressing challenge that I focused on was the how to keep team chemistry when the team and players on the court are continuously changing. How do we keep our team chemistry/groove/mojo through adversity?

The Plan: My project focuses on team chemistry. It is about improving the relationships on the team, on and off the court, because I strongly believe that off the court is just as important as on the court.

I am using the platform Flipgrid, where the team can individually send in video responses to questions another member asks. For example, What do you hate people saying to you when you make a mistake? or What type of practice do you thrive in? Serious or light-hearted?

Questions like those to get to know each other better. In the ideal world, we would be doing these small team-building activities together, but with everything going on I had to change the project a little bit.

The Takeaways:

I think this project highlights the importance of the mind when it comes to sports. Our mental game is a HUGE factor to our performance and playing such a team sport like volleyball, it is so important to find the trust and vulnerability and other aspects of wellbeing with each other that the contemplative sciences explores.

The fellowship experience has been so fun. Leslie is amazing and so supportive and helpful with coming up with ideas and being creative during this time. Its not that easy to do this during the circumstances, but I think Leslie, the other fellows and I have adapted pretty well.

See more here:

Empowering Student-Athletes Is at the Heart of an Exciting New Fellowship - UVA Today

The Singularity: Just Another Chapter | by Michael Woronko | The Apeiron Blog | Oct, 2020 – Medium

The premise is this: spending so much time with our heads in the digitized clouds of technological innovation, we ourselves are adopting the very qualities that we seek to instill into our creations.

Weve created processors and supercomputers that can operate with the kind of efficiency that we cant even begin to understand and, while were itching to literally incorporate such technical savvy into our own organs, weve begun to emulate these desired characteristics however we can.

We want to be efficient. We want to be optimized and we want to view ourselves as upgradable. We want more RAM, faster processors, more user-friendly interfacing, improved connectivity, a better battery. And were working on it, furiously.

But how far is too far?

Its almost asinine to suggest that we should halt such progress because, after all, progress is progress. Why not improve ourselves at such a relentless capacity?

Eventually, we have to examine the meaning which underlies the sense of progress. We ought to realize what it is were hurdling towards and we ought to stop to contextualize the journey rather than the destination.

Assume that we bring ourselves to a state whereby we can install applications into our consciousness that eliminate the need for sleep. Suddenly, we gain a tremendous amount of time. Assume that we also adopt the capability to calculate like a quantum computer and exist in a state of optimized rationality.

Where is the reward to be found in this incessant and pursuit of perfection?

Is it in the fact that we can work harder for the corporations which employ us, or in the idea that we can now add more to our itineraries? Is it really a blessing to be able to fit five lifetimes in the span of one or might we be losing something in the simplicity of life today, something that may have already been lost when compared to the simplicity of yesterday.

Already we may miss the idle time that used to be afforded to us and the peace of mind before social media exploded into our existence; already we may envy the stillness and gentle lucidity of the natural human experience.

When we step back to look at whats really happening, we can almost classify our behavior as rather juvenile. Like children who become enamored with something they so desperately want to emulate, were willing to lose ourselves in our obsessions and drift along into the echelons of novelty as we forego the fundamental elements of human existence.

To simply live, disentangled from the contexts and constructs. To free ourselves from the traps of the hyper-obsessions which currently zip about, telling us what specific sort of diet and nutrition scheme works best or how we ought to think about thinking so we can think more efficiently.

The singularity ahead maybe its not about us creating self-aware technology or being able to slip into some eternally-comfortable form of virtual reality; maybe its not about us integrating with technology on a physical level but, rather, in a complete mental capacity, whereby we effectively become what were looking to create.

Read this article:

The Singularity: Just Another Chapter | by Michael Woronko | The Apeiron Blog | Oct, 2020 - Medium

Why A Gamer Started A Web Of Disinformation Sites Aimed At Latino Americans – FiveThirtyEight

This article was written in collaboration with First Draft, a nonprofit organization that provides investigative research to newsrooms tracking and reporting on mis- and disinformation.

When we picture the entity behind a network of disinformation websites, a few archetypes spring to mind: shadowy figures intent on interfering with democracy, Russian agents, Macedonian teens. Not usually included: a gamer from a suburb of New York City who sells coffee beans with his wife at the local farmers market on weekends. But thats precisely who was behind three sites that, until last week, were pumping out misleading, hyperpartisan Spanish-language content on both the left and right. They were just a few sites in a broader ecosystem of misinformation and disinformation that spreads such narratives to millions of Americans. But their story has something to tell us about the misinformation industrial complex overall.

Sean Reynolds, a YouTuber, gamer and entrepreneur, was the owner and operator of three websites and affiliated Facebook pages that peddled in misinformation, predominantly in Spanish. The existence of the network was first reported by Politico last week, but an exclusive interview with Reynolds revealed why he started the sites.

Namely, he said, he saw an opportunity.

These websites and the content on them do not reflect my personal political leanings, Reynolds wrote in a direct message on Twitter. I am non-discriminating towards opportunities where there is demand and no supply, which in this case, there was no political opinion pieces written in Spanish on Facebook, so I found writers (ghostwriters) interested to fill that demand. Reynolds did not respond when FiveThirtyEight asked whether he speaks Spanish but did say he does not personally write the content on the sites. In a video he posted on his gaming channel, he identified as half Jamaican and half German.

Since 2017, Reynolds has operated the three websites and their affiliated Facebook pages: PoliticaVeraz.com, which published right-leaning content, AlertaPolitica.org, which published left-leaning content, and LeftOverRights.com, a left-leaning site which initially ran English-language stories but switched to publishing in Spanish this August. When all three sites were active, they would each regularly publish 5-10 stories per day and then spread those stories through Facebook, where they would typically attract thousands of shares. After FiveThirtyEight contacted him, Reynolds took all three sites and their Facebook pages offline.

A FiveThirtyEight investigation found multiple links that tied Reynolds to the sites, including a common server and IP address among his personal website and his other confirmed businesses, the same Google AdSense and Analytics code for his personal sites and these pages and corporate records listing Reynolds as a process agent for both Left Over Rights LLC and Alerta Politica LLC (there was no record of an LLC for Politica Veraz). Reynolds also confirmed to FiveThirtyEight that he ran the sites.

Much of the content these sites published was misleading and hyperpartisan. A recent story on Politica Veraz, for example, claimed that Joe Biden had forgotten the words to the Pledge of Allegiance, when in actuality he quoted part of the pledge for emphasis in a speech. Meanwhile, recent stories published on Left Over Rights deployed spin from a left-leaning perspective, such as a story about the vice presidential debate declaring Sen. Kamala Harris had destroyed Vice President Mike Pence by asking him not to interrupt her.

The disinformation on Politica Veraz, in particular, often echoed messaging that was already circulating in far-right communities online and among followers of the QAnon conspiracy theory, pushing it towards a more mainstream audience. One article claimed that President Trumps life was in mortal danger after he gave a speech at a Whirlpool Corporation Manufacturing Plant in Clyde, Ohio, where he said he had many enemies and that this may be the last time you see me for a while when discussing lower prices for pharmaceuticals. And while Reynolds said the sites content had minimal reach, that story was shared more than 6,000 times on Facebook, according to social media data tool BuzzSumo, and received nearly 40,000 interactions (reactions, shares, and comments combined). Similar messaging had been amplified by right-leaning users on Twitter before the Politica Veraz piece was published, including a tweet from an account that regularly shares theories associated with QAnon that was retweeted or quote tweeted more than 12,000 times.

Reynoldss sites are far from the only source of misinformation targeting the Latino community. There are sites, Facebook pages and YouTube channels that operate on the margins, attracting little mainstream notice while garnering audiences in the hundreds of thousands. Their stories rife with misleading spins on the news and outright falsehoods are shared across social media and privately in messaging apps. They target communities that have fewer trusted sources that cater directly to them, according to media experts we spoke to, and amplify misinformation originating from extremist communities. And experts say this kind of misinformation can lead to voters not only being misinformed, but also feeling disillusioned by the political process.

Nevertheless, Reynolds said his goals werent necessarily to inform, misinform or disinform, but to make a little bit of money. So little money that he didnt think twice about taking the sites down as soon as he was contacted by a reporter.

I will say, though, that these websites (all three) were scheduled to be fully closed after the months of not posting and not generating any income to keep them running, Reynolds wrote. (Two of the sites stopped uploading new posts in August and September, respectively.) But now Im getting contacted about them, and I just dont have time for anything else, so I will have their closings sped up.

Reynoldss sites represent a brand of misinformation fueled by the ease and profitability of building an audience on social media, according to Joan Donovan, a researcher of disinformation at Harvard University.

Social media companies have incentivized disinformation by rewarding it with financial dollars, Donovan explained. The fact that he was targeting Latinos with Spanish-language disinformation or misinformation from either side of the aisle shows a kind of willingness to create chaos so long as it makes money.

Its not as if the content was simply a translated version of English-language misinformation, either. It clearly targeted the Latino community, playing into existing fears such as worries about socialism, given its history in authoritarian Central and South American governments.

Some of the key narratives are around the perceived threat of socialism coming into the United States, and connecting that to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, said Jacobo Licona, a disinformation researcher for Equis Labs, a Latinx voter research group. Another one we often see is trying to discredit Black Lives Matter and paint them as violent. Since the murder of George Floyd, weve seen an increased effort by these bad actors in Latinx spaces to fuel racial tension in Black and brown communities.

Politica Veraz regularly posted stories that played into these threads, like one that called the Obamas Marxists or another that inaccurately reported two Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department deputies shot in Compton were ambushed by Black Lives Matter.

This misinformation is being seeded in the midst of an election where Latino voters represent a powerful voting bloc. While Trump is trailing Biden among Latino voters in national polls, the margin is narrower in the key battleground state Florida. In a Univision poll released on Sept. 28, 52 percent of Latino voters nationally said they planned to cast a ballot for Biden, compared to 19 percent who were committed to Trump. But in Florida, 36 percent of Latino voters said they favored Trump.

Reynolds said his content was not effective and that the sites were not profitable or popular, and that he had been planning to shut them down before he was contacted by FiveThirtyEight. But data tells a different story. Combined, the three sites Facebook pages had nearly 1 million likes and followers, and Politica Veraz alone attracted more than 500,000 interactions on its Facebook posts since July, according to data from Crowdtangle.

The allure of sensational, emotionally provocative misinformation is well documented. But this content was also able to appeal to an audience facing a dearth of targeted media, according to Randy Pestana, the assistant director of research at Florida International Universitys Institute for Public Policy.

The media outlets that appeal to Hispanics are limited. There are not a lot of them out there, and the ones that are out there more recently have been called fake news, Pestana said. Theres this movement where everything is fake news if it doesnt align with your opinion.

He also noted that many Latino Americans consume news through social media, including Facebook and WhatsApp, making it easier for this kind of content to spread. The share of Latino Americans who get their news from the internet is higher than that of the U.S. population overall, according to surveys from the Pew Research Center. In a 2016 survey, Pew found that 74 percent of Latino respondents got their news online on a typical weekday, whereas a 2017 Pew survey found that 43 percent of the total population often got their news online. And while social media platforms have been cracking down on English-language misinformation to a certain degree, Spanish-language disinformation doesnt always receive the same treatment, Pestana said.

Reynoldss sites are now shut down, but there are plenty of other misinformation sources targeting Latino Americans. As we head into the final weeks of an election, many members of one of the most influential voting blocs continue to be bombarded with false information.

The worst examples of the potential consequences of this is what we saw in 2016: People felt so disenfranchised by the political process that they opted not to participate in it, said Steven Renderos, the executive director of MediaJustice, a nonprofit that focuses on racial inequality in communications. Thats the risk were facing here today, that people will just opt out of engaging.

More here:

Why A Gamer Started A Web Of Disinformation Sites Aimed At Latino Americans - FiveThirtyEight

‘I’m a big deal in my living room’: Jane Gazzo talks radio, TV and the future of music – Sydney Morning Herald

Jane Gazzo, presenter of The Sound, has been hosting the ABC show from her home.

What were the highlights for you of the first season?

Interviewing Kylie from London over Zoom to talk about her new album, that was really special. And some of the co-hosts we had, like Russell Crowe, and Bryan Brown in the first episode and it turned out he knew Lime Cordiale really well, he'd watched them grow up. But then there were some of the performances you won't forget in a hurry. I'm talking about Tones and I singing Never Seen The Rain and it literally does rain that was never in the script, it just started raining in the last take we did for her. Bliss n Eso performing live on Centrepoint Tower: that was just crazy. Amy Shark in the Bennelong restaurant at Sydney Opera House; she had this Australian choir behind her and it just looked beautiful. They're some of the things that spring to mind.

You've been in the business a while now do you ever still get starstruck by the people you get to meet?

I'm not sure if it's "starstruck", but I do get a certain nervousness before a big interview. Certainly with Kylie I was really nervous and I didn't want to stuff that one up. Luckily I didn't ... but yeah, those thoughts go through my head along the lines of, "Will they like me? Will they warm to me? What's the first question I need to ask here?" I always think of those things.

How do you deal with people who might be starstruck talking to you?

Oh, I don't think they're starstruck when they talk to me.

Well I'll have to disagree with you there. Youre a big deal.

Yes, I'm a big deal in my living room. My kids think I'm a big deal.

It is the year 2020: at this point in history, is music still good?

Music's better. We're not confined to our garages anymore. It's not just about kids playing in their garages and forming bands with their mates anymore, it's about the kid who's a loner in his bedroom working on sounds, uploading them to YouTube or Spotify or Bandcamp. It's the making of the bedroom DJ and the bedroom musician. It's been a decade of collaboration, too, where once collaborations were not that common, now you look at the charts and it's such-and-such featuring with such-and-such. Collaborations have come to the fore and a lot of artists talk about collaborating very early on in their careers now where once they would probably hone their craft a little bit more, back in the day.

Loading

So it's a more open field.

I think there are so many more avenues and so many more ways now to get your music heard. Is that a good or a bad thing? It's neither, it just is. A lot of artists talk about the frustration of trying to get heard, but I think it's still about the song. It's always been about the song. As long as there's a good song, I think it will get heard amongst all the avenues there are.

As I get older, I find it harder to stay aware of what's current in music. Is that a challenge for you?

Not so much a challenge, only because I have young kids, and also I lecture at the Australian College of the Arts I teach music industry, and every week I ask my students what they're listening to and they keep me across a lot of stuff. I still listen to radio, that's still my first port of call; that's something that's ingrained in me. I started out listening to community radio, that's how I discovered bands, and I still go to radio. I'm still grateful we have community radio in Melbourne, PBS is probably my go-to. And with The Sound as well, I'm inundated with new music.

How important is a show like The Sound to the Australian music industry?

I don't think we can underestimate how important it is to have an Australian music television show on free-to-air. We haven't had that before The Sound for a long, long time. When we look back on 2020, historically and musically, how will we know what's happening? I think what The Sound has achieved is it's not only highlighting our emerging talent and established talent, it's documenting this period. I think that's really important, because as a music lover I go back to Recovery and Countdown and Sounds and Video Hits, and it's always wonderful to look at those YouTube clips and see what we were listening to back then. I think it's been really important to document 2020, because it's been such an unusual and challenging year for our arts and music industry. But also, for many of those artists it was their first time ever on television, so these are really special moments not only for the artists but also for the viewers who get to meet these artists.

Season 2 of The Sound airs on ABC on November 1.

Read the original here:

'I'm a big deal in my living room': Jane Gazzo talks radio, TV and the future of music - Sydney Morning Herald

I didnt even know I was doing this: Meth addiction blamed for mans child exploitation stash – NEWS.com.au

A man convicted of using WhatsApp to share explicit child exploitation files says he was so high on ice he didnt even remember downloading them in the first place.

Logan car detailer Jarrod Andrew Swanson, 38, hung his head in the dock and buried his face in his hands throughout Wednesdays proceedings as details of the explicit files concealed on two phones were read out in court.

He became emotional as he told the court of his drug addiction, saying he couldnt even remember accessing the images.

I didnt even know I was doing this s***, Swanson cried.

I dont remember where or how I got it but obviously its been found in my possession.

Swanson represented himself as he entered pleas of guilty at Brisbane District Court on Wednesday to possessing child exploitation material and two counts of using a carriage service to transmit child pornography material.

The court was told federal police officers swooped on his Browns Plains home on June 6 last year over allegations he had been uploading child pornography.

Two Samsung phones, both containing child exploitation files, were seized during the execution of the search warrant.

Crown prosecutor Sam Hill said the second phone had a setting activated that did not display some secured folders, requiring a code to unlock them.

The court was told Swanson used WhatsApp to distribute several child pornography videos on two occasions in May.

When he was arrested by police, Swanson was offered an interview but it did not take place as he was under the influence of drugs at the time.

Judge Ken Barlow sentenced Swanson to 12 months jail for the carriage services charges but ordered he be released immediately if he entered a recognisance of $1000 and be of good behaviour for two years.

He handed down another 12 month sentence for the possession charge but suspended it for two years.

Judge Barlow took into account Swansons attempts at rehabilitation and gave him the benefit of the doubt on his claims about drug use.

Ive never denied not having this stuff on my phone, Swanson told the court.

I dont go looking for kiddie porn that doesnt do anything for me.

I just want to be there for my family, I didnt want any of this s*** to happen, I didnt go looking for it.

Link:

I didnt even know I was doing this: Meth addiction blamed for mans child exploitation stash - NEWS.com.au

Q: First FSE WordPress Theme Now Live – WP Tavern

Q WordPress theme screenshot.

Themes Team representative Ari Stathopoulos is now officially the first theme author to have a theme in the directory that supports full-site editing (FSE). With a slimmed-down beta release of FSE shipping in WordPress 5.6 this December, someone had to be the first to take the plunge. It made sense for someone intimately familiar with theme development and the directory guidelines to step up.

In many ways, it is a huge responsibility that Stathopoulos has taken on. Until one of the default Twenty* themes handles FSE, the Q theme will likely be one of the primary examples that other theme authors will follow as they begin learning how to build block-based themes.

Earlier this month, I used Q to test FSE and determine how much it had advanced. It is at least months away from being ready for use in production. The beta release in 5.6 is more or less just to get more people testing.

Stathopoulos has no plans to make Q much more than a bare-bones starter or experimental theme. It is almost a playground to see what is possible.

Q was born out of necessity, he said. I couldnt work on full-site editing or global styles without having a base theme for them, so for a while, I had it in a GitHub repository. I decided to release it to the WordPress.org repository because I think I might not be the only one with those issues. Downloading a theme in the dashboard is easier than cloning a repository for most people.

Existing block-based themes are few and far between. Automattic and some of its employees have some experimental projects, but none of those are in the official directory for anyone to test. Stathopoulos wanted a base theme that was unopinionated in terms of design that would allow him to work on FSE, test pull requests, and experiment with various ideas.

It has some ideas for things that ultimately Id like to see implemented in FSE, and its a playground, he said. For example, the addition of a skip-link for accessibility in the theme, an implementation for responsive/adaptive typography, and conditional loading of block styles only when they are used/needed. These are things that I hope will be part of WordPress Core at some point, and the Q theme explores ideas on how to implement them.

He began work on the theme over a year ago and continues working on it as a side project. He said Yoast, his employer, fully supports the idea of creating things that are beneficial for other theme designers and WordPress core.

End-users must install the Gutenberg plugin and activate the experimental FSE feature to use the theme or any similar theme. Currently, FSE is missing many key features that make it viable for most real-world projects. However, theme developers who plan to work with WordPress over the next several years will need to begin testing and experimenting. Q makes for a good starting point to simply get a feel for what themes will look like.

The biggest issue was and still is keeping up with Gutenberg development, said Stathopoulos. Many things are currently fluid, and they happen at a very high pace. The reason I created the theme was because other themes I was testing, as part of my contribution to the Themes Team, were not properly maintained or updated. I wanted to create a starter theme that can be used as a starting point for others as well.

One of the biggest questions still hanging in the air is what the timeline will look like for publicly-available, block-based themes. Will 2021 be the year they take over? That is unlikely given the features current state. However, there will be a point where developers are no longer building classic or traditional themes.

I think were going to see a lot more FSE themes in 2021, said Stathopoulos. It might take a couple of years before they become the standard, but after the release of WordPress 5.6, I hope there will be a lot more development and focus on FSE and global styles. Whether we see more FSE themes or not depends on when some things get merged in WordPress core.

He pointed out some critical missing features from Gutenberg at the moment. The big one is that the Query block, which is the block that displays posts on the front end, does not inherit its options from the global query. Essentially, this means that, regardless of what URL a visitor is on, it displays the latest posts.

Once these things are addressed, and blockers for theme builders get resolved, I expect well see an explosion of good FSE themes being built, he said.

Stathopoulos is most excited about the prospect of seeing more design standards come to core. Currently, there is no consistency between themes. Theme authors can use any markup they want. Switching themes affects a sites structure, SEO, accessibility, speed, and many other things.

My advice to theme developers who want to start tinkering would be to start with something simple, he said. Its tempting to add extremely opinionated styles, for buttons for example, but more and more things get added every day to the editor like a border-radius setting for buttons. Theme authors should avoid the trap of designing an FSE theme having in mind what the editor currently does. Instead, theme authors should strive to build something having in mind a vision of what the editor will eventually become.

Because Stathopoulos is a representative of the Themes Team, he also has some insight into the shift in the coming years for guidelines and what steps authors might need to take. While it is too early for the team to begin making decisions, its members are already thinking about forthcoming changes.

Change is always difficult, especially when its for something this big, said Stathopoulos. It will be a bumpy ride, and it will take time. WordPress theming is a huge industry. For a while, classic (for lack of a better word) themes will continue to be a viable solution for theme developers who didnt have time to catch up. But not forever.

Some may look back at previous major shifts and worry about what the future theme directory guidelines may ask. In 2015, the team required all theme options to use the customizer. This was after a three-year wait for theme authors to organically make the switch. Given that FSE will be a much larger departure from norms and dislike of the Gutenberg project from segments of the development community, it could be a rough transition.

At some point, FSE themes will become the industry standard and what the users want, said Stathopoulos. Personally, I hope no one will want to upload a classic theme in the w.org repository in 2025 when the industry has moved on. It would be like uploading today a theme that is using tables and iframes for layouts.

He said that sufficient time would be given for the eventual transition. However, the team will likely prioritize FSE-based themes. They are cognizant of how much of a shift this will be and will plan accordingly when the time comes.

Like Loading...

View original post here:

Q: First FSE WordPress Theme Now Live - WP Tavern

Why #ArrestAjazKhan is trending on Twitter? Everything you need to know – Newsd.in

Actor Ajaz Khan who shot fame after his appearance in Bigg Boss 7 is often into the spotlight due to his controversial statements. This time a video of the actor is doing rounds on the internet where he can be seen abusing the Hindu Pandits.

After the video went viral, several people, including BJP leader Kapil Mishra, has demanded an immediate arrest of Ajaz Khan.

However, the video is a year old. It was uploaded by Khan on his YouTube channel on September 8, 2019. During that time, a young man from Delhi was lynched. On the same issue, Ajaz Khan abused the Hindu Pandits and tagged them as murderers.

After the video went viral on October 22, netizens have been demanding Ajaz Khans immediate arrest. #ArrestAjazKhan is trending on the microblogging site, Twitter.

Earlier this year in April, Ajaz Khan was arrested for allegedly uploading an objectionable Facebook post. Khan was also arrested in July 2018 for posting objectionable videos that could have allegedly caused enmity among communities, police said at the time. Before that, he was held for allegedly possessing banned drugs in October 2018, police said, according to media reports.

Go here to read the rest:

Why #ArrestAjazKhan is trending on Twitter? Everything you need to know - Newsd.in

FAA cuts the red tape for commercial rocket launches (and landings, too) – Space.com

Commercial space is about to become more accessible than ever before.

Today (Oct. 15), the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) announced that it has published a new launch and re-entry rule known as the Streamlined Launch and Re-entry Licensing Regulation-2 (SLR2). The new rule aims to increase launch and reentry access for commercial space companies while maintaining safety.

"We've seen the first launch of American astronauts into orbit aboard an American-built rocket since the end of the space shuttle program ... to the International Space Station," United States Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao, said in a news conference today, referring to SpaceX's two-month Demo-2 mission, which lifted off on May 30.

"Our country is headed towards a record year in commercial space, and our goal in finalizing this new regulation is to keep it that way," Chao said.

"We're cutting the red tape that has held this industry to the launch pad for far too long," FAA assistant administrator for communications Brianna Manzelli said at the news conference.

Related: Trump's Space Policy Directive 2 could make life easier for SpaceX & others

This new rule is rolled out under the President's Space Policy Directive-2 (SPD-2), which was enacted in 2018. SPD-2 guides the Secretary of Transportation to create a new regulatory structure for launch and re-entry activities. The directive also advises the Secretary to consider allowing commercial operations to launch and re-enter Earth's atmosphere with just a single license (as opposed to having to get a new license for individual activities).

And with SLR2, the FAA has done just that. Now, only a single license is required "for all types of commercial space flight launch and re-entry operations," according to SLR2, which "increases flexibility for launch and re-entry vehicle operations."

With SLR2, the FAA aims to streamline launch and re-entry procedures, so, "while it is laser-focused on public safety, it only regulates to the extent necessary," Wayne Monteith, the FAA's associate administrator for commercial space transportation, said during the news conference today. "The goal is to simplify the licensing process and a lot of novel operations, reduce costs and positioning both the industry and the FAA for the rapid increase in the number of launches that are coming, all without compromising safety."

One interesting component of this new regulation sort of gets rid of the old rules that stated that the license for a launch would "begin" or take effect upon arrival at the launch site for example, the gate at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida.

Instead, now, "an individual company can, in essence, negotiate with us when they want the license to begin," Monteith said. "It reduces [the] burden on the individual stakeholder. And it certainly reduces [the] burden on government to monitor operations that have little to no impact on public safety."

Email Chelsea Gohd at cgohd@space.com or follow her on Twitter @chelsea_gohd. Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom and on Facebook.

See the original post here:

FAA cuts the red tape for commercial rocket launches (and landings, too) - Space.com

The future of the U.S. Coast Guard is in outer space – Brookings Institution

In December 2018, the U.S. Coast Guard joined the space faring community. It teamed up with the Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Division and SpaceX to execute the launch of two small cube satellites (cubesats) Yukon and Kodiak as part of the Polar Scout program.

These two cubesats were intended to serve as the vanguard of enhanced telecommunications coverage in the Arctic, a domain that has always been important but is of increasing strategic significance today because it is at the intersection of great power competition and global climate change. In short, a warmer climate results in greater access; greater access results in greater maritime traffic, including by Russia and China. The Chinese, in particular, are constantly pressing to exploit resources the world over, be it living marine or hydrocarbon-based. Likewise, greater traffic means more need for increased governance presence to ensure safe, rules-based operations within the Arctic.

The Coast Guard is statutorily charged with serving as the United States Arctic governance presence. This means the Coast Guard increasingly requires the ability to communicate over-the-horizon thus, Polar Scout. And while the Coast Guard lost linkage to Yukon and Kodiak shortly after launch, the mere fact that the service had the vision to go boldly to the heavens to meet that need should be a forerunner of things to come.

Space issues are a hot topic in 2020. Indeed, we are at the start of a second great space age, one that is shaping up to be turbo-charged by the commercial market and the seemingly never-ending, exponentially increasing power of computer processing. The United States is pursuing the Artemis Accords, the Space Force is getting off the ground, NASA is looking towards Mars (but first to the moon! To stay!), and commercial space pursuits are booming. The Coast Guard has already gotten in the game, but it must continue to seriously consider space as it develops budgets and strategies for the future.

To succeed as an information-age military service and total-domain governance agency in the 21st century, the Coast Guard should view space through three lenses. First, how can the service best capitalize on cheap, ready access to space to facilitate its missions, as it had already started to do so with the Polar Scout launches? Second, how do commercial space efforts interact with the maritime industry and maritime domain; and to what extent, if any, does the Coast Guard need to adjust or modify its extensive suite of operating authorities and regulations to ensure that any risk to the safety and security of the maritime is adequately addressed? And third, how can the Coast Guard, as part of the joint force, assist the Space Force in executing the latters own responsibilities?

The Coast Guard should lean hard into the increased, affordable access to space that commercial space opportunities provide. This will require both a focused staffing and budget commitment, but every established position established and every spent dollar will pay dividends in terms of enhanced mission effectiveness and efficiency savings. Nearly every one of the Coast Guards 11 statutory missions can be better facilitated by improved access to space-based capabilities, whether theyre organic Coast Guard capabilities or capabilities provided by a partner department or agency. For example, various types of space-based surveillance can assist with many Coast Guard missions. These missions include maritime law enforcement (specifically drug interdiction), intelligence, buoy tending, vessel traffic management, and icebreaking.

Thus, the Coast Guard should develop a space-focused program office to integrate space considerations throughout its extensive mission set. As a start, this office should ensure that Coast Guard assets still in development specifically the Polar Security Cutter (PSC), any follow-on icebreakers, and the Offshore Patrol Cutter account for the space, weight, and power requirements to ensure access to secure satellite uplink/downlink data. This is especially important with respect to the PSC and any additional icebreakers, considering where they are intended to operate. Focusing here could allow these vessels to serve as information-age ocean station sentinels in a manner quite similar to that legacy Coast Guard mission, but updated with a modern twist to account for the value of orbital real estate at the poles.

Finally, while the Coast Guard Academy should absolutely be commended for its effort and initiative in helping to facilitate space operations for the Coast Guard, the Coast Guard should review and assess whether it is best served by having its sole continental U.S. terrestrial satellite link in New London, Connecticut, staffed primarily by cadets. It may be better served by adding additional stations, partnering with its sister-services, or fully committing to the concept, with an appropriately funded and dedicated support staff that would ideally report to the Coast Guards new space program office described above.

Next, the Coast Guard should immediately undertake a cross-program, deep review of how commercial space interacts with the maritime industry and within the maritime environment. It should develop a Space Operations Strategic Outlook, akin to its recent product with respect to the Maritime Transportation System, Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing, and specifically its forward leaning Cyber Strategy. While the Coast Guard has long supported safe and secure space operations where those operations intersect with the maritime domain (and there are certainly pockets of excellence, like Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville), as commercial space proliferates, there is a more acute need to establish space competencies across the entire Coast Guard.

For example, at least one commercial space company is actively refining its ability to recover its reusable rockets and pieces thereof at sea. This same companys main test facility also happens to be close to a major commercial ship channel and the intracoastal waterway. This leads to questions as to whether the Coast Guard has sufficient authority, regulatory tools, capacity, and capability to best identify and manage any risk to maritime operations or the marine environment posed by the companys test operations. Further, NASAs most recent human space flight mission used commercial space and was recovered at sea with a bit of drama, because spectator vessels were operating too close to the recovery zone. Here, as a helpful start, the current version of the 2019 Coast Guard Authorization Act, H.R. 3409 which the House of Representatives has passed includes some statutory language (Section 311) that would extend Coast Guard Captain of the Port Authority out past its default 12 nautical-mile range to facilitate safe and secure space operations at sea. Extending this authority is just one piece of the puzzle. Doing the assessment and developing a space-focused strategic outlook would help bring these issues into focus and clarify how the Coast Guard intends to address them. It will also inform and educate the public and the commercial space community of the challenges and opportunities that exist at the intersection of the space and maritime domains.

Finally, the Coast Guard should partner with the newly formed Space Force, to provide competencies that may be useful to the Space Force in the space domain. For example, space search and rescue comes to mind. Despite the ongoing debate over the nature of the Space Force and when/if it will be stationing its members in space, it is clear that commercial space entities fully intend a rapid increase in human space flight. It seems reasonable to believe that if the Space Force were to establish a full-time human presence in orbit, it should have the capability to render assistance to distressed space farers if needed. This is, of course, also consistent with the Outer Space Treaty and the Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, both of which the United States is party to. But currently, there is no specific domestic authorizing statute that would allow for a U.S. government agency to actually conduct such operations. The Coast Guards broad search and rescue authority (14 U.S.C. 521) and the affirmative legal duty of mariners to render assistance to each other when in distress codified in U.S. law (46 U.S.C. 2304) both would provide excellent models for developing a domestic law foundation for space-based search and rescue operations. It would benefit the Space Force to have the Coast Guard assist with this and similar analysis and, if necessary, legislative drafting assistance across the entire space governance realm. Additionally, the Coast Guard should consider what personnel support it can provide to U.S. Space Command on detail, so that Space Command becomes more familiar with Coast Guard space equities and so the Coast Guard can begin to build its own space competence.

It is fair to say that outer space and the Coast Guard are two terms that on their face, do not seem to have much in common. Indeed, many people are shocked when they learn about the Coast Guards broad responsibilities here on Earth. But, in the new space age of the 21st century, comparatively cheap, ready access to space is a once-in-a-civilization game changer. We are at the start of it right now, so now is the time for the Coast Guard and really any government agency with an operational mission set to seriously consider how space changes their game. Fully accounting for where the Coast Guard can factor space into its future planning is necessary to ensure that the service remains Semper Paratus to meet the challenges and capitalize on the opportunities space provides.

The views expressed are the authors alone and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.

View original post here:

The future of the U.S. Coast Guard is in outer space - Brookings Institution

Space Propulsion Market by Type, System Component, Platform, Orbit, End-user, Orbit, Support Service, and Region – Global Forecast to 2025 -…

Dublin, Oct. 16, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The "Global Space Propulsion Market by Type (Chemical Propulsion, Non-chemical Propulsion), System Component (Thrusters, Propellant Feed System, Nozzle), Platform (Satellite, Launch Vehicle), Orbit, End User, Orbit, Support Service, and Region - Forecast to 2025" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

The global space propulsion market is projected to grow from USD 6.7 billion in 2020 to USD 14.2 billion by 2025, at a CAGR of 16.2% from 2020 to 2025.

The market is driven by various factors, such as an increase in the number of space exploration missions, demand for LEO-based services, and increasing demand for advanced electric propulsion systems.

Some of the key players in the space propulsion market include Safran S.A. (France), Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings, Inc. (US), SpaceX (US), IHI Corporation (Japan), and Northrop Grumman Corporation (US). These players have their presence across various countries in North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, the Middle East & Africa, and South America.

COVID-19's Impact on the Space Industry

Launches: Many launch service providers are focused on upcoming launches that were delayed by some time. Rocket Lab (US) has suspended launches for the time being. Guiana Space Center, a French and European spaceport, has suspended flights. Arianespace (France) still launches from Baikonur, Russia. Soyuz MS-16 was launched in April 2020 with a new crew for the International Space Station (ISS), and in August 18, 2020, SpaceX launched its eleventh Starlink mission, which included 58 Starlink satellites and three of Planet's SkySats.

The space propulsion market faced a slight decline from 2018 to 2019 due to a decrease in the number of space launches. COVID-19 has also affected the import and export trading activities in the space industry. However, the expected rise in space launches from 2021 and beyond will drive the space propulsion market.

Satellites: The fastest-growing segment of the space propulsion market, by platform

By platform, the satellite segment is estimated to be the largest and fastest-growing segment in the space propulsion market. The growth of this segment can be attributed to rising small satellite launches for commercial and government applications. Large satellites, medium satellites, CubeSats, and small satellites, including nanosatellites, microsatellites, and minisatellites, play an important role in Earth observation, communication, and meteorology applications. These satellites are capable of monitoring cyclones, storms, El Nino, floods, fires, volcanic activities, earthquakes, landslides, oil slicks, environmental pollution, and industrial and power plant disasters

Government & defense segment is estimated to account for the largest market share in the year 2020

The government & defense segment is estimated to have the largest revenue market share in 2020. The growth of this segment can be attributed to increasing space exploration missions and rising space budgets. Defense organizations support the use of various types of satellites, such as remote sensing satellites, communication satellites, and surveillance satellites, for military operations and cyber operations. Support operations usually involve the launch of satellites with high-value payloads in space through Expendable Launch Vehicles (ELVs). They also ensure monitoring by facilitating the friendly use of space for various operations, such as surveillance, protection, and space intelligence analysis. For instance, the US Air Force regularly launches GPS and missile-defense tracking satellites and operates two classified X-37B robotic space planes.

Design, engineering, & operation: The fastest-growing segment of the space propulsion market, by support service

By support service, the design, engineering, & operation segment is estimated to be the fastest-growing segment of the space propulsion market. The growth of this segment can be attributed to the need for advanced design and engineering to reduce the costs and complexities of propulsion systems. The service team responds directly to customers requiring system-level technology and concept evaluation, analysis, and maturation; detailed system development and propulsion component integration; and test verification planning, evaluation, and certification. The design, engineering, & operation service also provides operational support for space transportation propulsion systems. The service provided ranges from small thrusters to large rocket engines, covering both earth storable and cryogenic propellants.

North America: The fastest-growing region in the space propulsion market

Based on the region, the space propulsion market in North America is projected to register the highest CAGR during the forecast period. The growing demand for commercial communication and imaging satellites, increasing deployment of small satellites, rising space exploration missions for interplanetary observations, and demand for resupply missions for International Space Station (ISS) are key factors expected to drive the market in North America. Globally, technological breakthroughs and resourceful insights obtained from past space missions have inspired new players to invest in this niche market.

Key Topics Covered:

1 Introduction

2 Research Methodology

3 Executive Summary

4 Premium Insights

5 Market Overview5.1 Introduction5.2 Market Dynamics5.2.1 Drivers5.2.2 Restraints5.2.3 Opportunities5.2.4 Challenges5.3 Average Selling Price Trend5.4 Value Chain Analysis5.5 Ecosystem/Market Map5.6 COVID19 Impact: Ranges and Scenarios

6 Industry Trends6.1 Introduction6.2 Technology Analysis6.3 Key Market for Export/Import6.4 Patent Analysis6.5 Case Study Analysis

7 Space Propulsion Market, by Propulsion Type7.1 Introduction7.2 Chemical Propulsion7.2.1 Solid7.2.2 Liquid7.2.3 Hybrid7.2.4 Green7.3 Non-Chemical Propulsion7.3.1 Electric Propulsion7.3.1.1 Xenon7.3.1.2 Argon7.3.1.3 Krypton7.3.1.4 Hydrogen7.3.1.5 Others7.3.2 Solar Propulsion7.3.2.1 Solar Sail Propulsion7.3.2.2 Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP)7.3.2.3 Solar Thermal Propulsion7.3.3 Tether Propulsion7.3.4 Nuclear Propulsion7.3.5 Laser Propulsion

8 Space Propulsion Market, by System Component8.1 Introduction8.2 Thrusters8.2.1 Chemical Propulsionthruster8.2.1.1 Cold and Warm Gas Thrusters8.2.1.2 Monopropellant Thrusters8.2.1.3 Bipropellant Thrusters8.2.2 Electric Propulsion Thruster8.2.2.1 Gridded Ion Engine (GIE) or Ion Thruster8.2.2.2 Hall Effect Thruster (HET)8.2.2.3 High Efficiency Multi Stage Plasma Thrusters (HEMP-TS)8.2.2.4 Pulsed Plasma Thruster (PPT)8.2.2.5 Quad Confinement Thruster (QCT)8.2.2.6 Magneto Plasma Dynamic (MPD) Thruster8.2.2.7 Others8.3 Propellant Feed System8.3.1 Propellant Tanks8.3.1.1 Monopropellant Tanks8.3.1.2 Bipropellant Tanks8.3.2 Regulators8.3.1.1 High Pressure Regulator8.3.1.2 Low Pressure Regulator8.3.3 Valves8.3.4 Turbo Pump8.3.5 Combustion Chamber8.4 Rocket Motors8.5 Nozzle8.6 Thermal Control System8.7 Power Processing Unit (PPU)8.8 Others

9 Space Propulsion Market, by Platform9.1 Introduction9.2 Satellite9.2.1 Cubesat9.2.2 Smallsatellite (1-500Kg)9.2.2.1 Nanosatellite9.2.2.2 Microsatellite9.2.2.3 Minisatellite9.2.3 Medium Satellite (501-2500Kg)9.2.4 Large Satellite (>2500Kg)9.3 Capsule/Cargo9.3.1. Crewed Spacecraft or Human Space Flight9.3.2 Uncrewed or Unmanned Spacecraft9.4 Interplanetary Spacecraft and Probes9.5 Rovers/Spacecraft Landers9.6 Launch Vehicles9.6.1 Small Lift Launch Vehicles (<350,000 Kg)9.6.2 Medium to Heavy Vehicles (>350,000 Kg)9.6.3 Reusable Launch Vehicle

10 Space Propulsion Market, by Orbit10.1 Introduction10.2 Low Earth Orbit (LEO)10.3 Medium Earth Orbit (MEO)10.4 Geosynchronous Orbit (GEO)10.5 Beyond Geosynchronous Orbit

11 Space Propulsion Market, by End-user11.1 Introduction11.2 Government & Military11.2.1 National Space Agency11.2.2 Department of Defense (DOD)11.2.3 Others11.3 Commercial11.3.1 Space Launch Service Providers11.3.2 Satellite Operators and Owners

12 Space Propulsion Market, by Support Services12.1 Introduction12.2 Design, Engineering and Operation12.3 Hot Firing and Environmental Test Execution12.4 Fueling and Launch Support

13 Space Propulsion Market, Regional Analysis13.1 Introduction13.2 North America13.2.1 North America: COVID-19 Impact13.2.2 Tariff and Regulatory Landscape13.2.3 US13.2.4 Canada13.3 Europe13.3.1 Europe: COVID-19 Impact13.3.2 Tariff and Regulatory Landscape13.3.3 UK13.3.4 Russia13.3.5 Germany13.3.6 France13.3.7 Italy13.4 Asia-Pacific13.4.1 Asia-Pacific: COVID-19 Impact13.4.2 Tariff and Regulatory Landscape13.4.3 China13.4.4 Japan13.4.5 India13.4.6 South Korea13.4.7 Australia13.5 Middle East & Africa13.5.1 Middle East & Africa: COVID-19 Impact13.5.2 Tariff and Regulatory Landscape13.5.3 Saudi Arabia13.5.4 Israel13.5.5 Turkey13.5.6 South Africa13.6 South America13.6.1 Brazil13.6.2 Mexico

14 Competitive Landscape14.1 Introduction14.2 Market Evaluation Framework14.3 Market Ranking14.4 Market Share14.4.1 By Propellant Feed System14.4.2 By Electric Propulsion Thruster14.4.3 By Propulsion System14.5 Revenue Analysis of Top Five Market Player14.6 Key Market Developments14.6.1 Contracts14.6.2 New Product Launches14.6.3 Agreements, Partnerships, and Joint Ventures

15 Company Evaluation Matrix and Company Profiles15.1 Overveiw15.2 Company Evaluation Matrix Definitions and Methodology15.2.1 Star15.2.2 Emerging Leaders15.2.3 Pervasive15.2.4 Emerging Companies15.3 Company Evaluation Matrix, 201915.3.1 Strength of Product Portfolio15.3.2 Business Strategy Excellence15.4 Start-Up Matrix, 201915.5 Company Profile15.5.1 OHB SE15.5.2 Accion System15.5.3 Boeing15.5.4 Northrop Grumman Corporation15.5.5 Maxar Technologies15.5.6 Thales Alenia Space15.5.7 Airbus Defense and Space15.5.8 Vacco Industries15.5.9 Moog Inc.15.5.10 Cobham Mission Systems Wimborne Limited15.5.11 Ariane Group GmbH15.5.12 AST Advanced Space Technologies GmbH15.5.13 Stanford MU Corporation15.5.14 Bradford Space15.5.15 RAM Company15.5.16 Blue Origin15.5.17 SpaceX15.5.18 Sierra Nevada Corporation15.5.19 IHI Corporation15.5.20 Safran15.5.21 Rocket Labs15.5.22 Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc.15.5.23 Yuzhnoye SDO15.5.24 Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.15.5.25 Virgin Galatic15.5.26 L3Harris Technologies15.5.27 Fakel15.5.28 Enpulsion GmbH15.5.29 Busek Co. Inc.

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/mid9c2

Research and Markets also offers Custom Research services providing focused, comprehensive and tailored research.

See more here:

Space Propulsion Market by Type, System Component, Platform, Orbit, End-user, Orbit, Support Service, and Region - Global Forecast to 2025 -...

Kleos Space launch team arrive in India for final preparations before the imminent launch of mission satellites – sUAS News

Kleos Space S.A. (ASX: KSS, Frankfurt: KS1,) (KleosorCompany), a space-powered Radio Frequency Reconnaissance data-as-a-service (DaaS) companyconfirms that the team mission experts have arrived in Chennai, India in preparation for the launch of Kleos four Scouting Mission nanosatellites aboard PSLV C49 from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre.

The launch is due in early November 2020.

Kleos Spaces Gavin Bowyer supported by Ed Stevens from In-Space Missions and Marcy M. Rugland from Spaceflight arrived in Chennai on the 15thOctober 2020..

Gavin Bowyeris the MAIT (Manufacturing, Assembly, Integration and Test) Manager at Kleos Space having joined the Company at its formation from UK Space Company Magna Parva where he has overseen and built equipment for Mars and Mercury exploration missions over a 10 year Space career.

Ed Stevensis the Director of Space Systems at In-Space Missions, a Space as a Managed Service company, where he leads the design, build and operation of the companys satellites.Ed brings his 20+ years of space experience in design, build and launch to bear in providing support to Kleos in delivery of the Scouting Mission nanosatellites.

Spaceflight Mission ManagerMarcy M. Ruglandis an experienced engineering leader with a passion for commercial space and aerospace. As a Mission Director, she has overall technical and schedule responsibility for the KSM, meaning from the mission assignment to post-launch, including onsite launch campaign team leadership. Marcy also volunteers as a member of the steering committee of Ladies who launch.

The team will undergo a system checkout and mechanical inspection prior to battery charging, and fuelling. The satellites will be armed for flight, inserted into their dispensers and finally integrated onto the PSLV launch vehicle.

Andy Bowyer, CEO of Kleos Space added We are immensely proud of the entire team, launching satellites is always a huge challenge and the COVID-19 pandemic has made logistics and travel even more difficult, their dedication to getting our Scouting Mission satellites into orbit and to collecting data in order to deliver enhanced situational awareness for our customers has been remarkable.

About Kleos Space S.A.

Kleos Space S.A. (ASX: KSS) is a space enabled, activity-based intelligence, data as a service company based in Luxembourg. Kleos Space aims to guard borders, protect assets and save lives by delivering global activity-based intelligence and geolocation as a service. The first Kleos Space satellite system, known as Kleos Scouting Mission (KSM), will deliver commercially available data and perform as a technology demonstration. KSM will be the keystone for a later global high capacity constellation. The Scouting Mission will deliver targeted daily services with the full constellation delivering near-real-time global observation.

For more information please visit:www.kleos.space

Original post:

Kleos Space launch team arrive in India for final preparations before the imminent launch of mission satellites - sUAS News

Donald Trump Doesnt Seem to Know What Year It Is, Who Hes Running Against (Hint: Not Hillary Clinton) – Vanity Fair

When the FBI announced in October 2016 that it was reviewing new emails related to its investigation into Hillary Clintons use of a private server as secretary of state, it gave Donald Trump a priceless gift. Not because, as it turned out, Clinton had deliberately mishandled classified information or was about to be charged with a crime, but because it gave the impression of impropriety, which the reality-TV host rode all the way to the White House. Unfortunately for Trump, whose polling couldnt be worse, we are living in the year 2020 and he is running against Joe Biden, not Hillary Clinton. These are the sort of simple questions a doctor might ask a patient to assess whether theyve suffered a traumatic brain injury, yet, weirdly, it appears that neither the president nor his employees know the correct answers.

Speaking to Fox News on Friday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Dana Perino, Weve got the emails. Were getting them out. Were gonna get all this information out so the American people can see it. Youll remember there was classified information on a private server, should have never been there. Hillary Clinton should never have done that. It was unacceptable behavior. Its not the kind of thing that leaders do.... Classified information needs to stay on the right places. Secretary Clinton, when she was here at the State Department, did not do that.... Well get the information out that needs to get outas fast as we can. I certainly think therell be more to see before the election.

The news that the federal government is working on releasing Clintons emails as fast as it can, as though there are no other pressing issues to deal with, comes one day after Trump called in to Fox Business to rant about the fact that his former opponent hasnt been indicted (which may have something to do with the fact that she was cleared of wrongdoing), saying that he was not happy with Pompeo for failing to get her emails out to the public. (He also complained that his attorney general hasnt indicted Biden and Barack Obama, saying that Bill Barr will go down in history as a very sad, sad situation if he fails to prosecute the presidents enemies.)

In a sign of how utterly bizarre it is that Trump is screaming about Clintons emails and thinks releasing them might help his reelection chances, even some of the gang at Fox Business have wondered why he thinks voters care about any of this. President Trump didnt follow what theWall Street Journalwas saying in terms of staying on policy, anchor Dagen McDowell said following the interview with Maria Bartiromo. I am not sure it helped his campaign to talk about Hillary Clintons emails and going back down that rabbit hole like it was four years ago.... It was kind of, well, all over the place. It didnt really focus on the very issues of what the American people want to hear. Some of it did, but some of it clearly did not.

Anyway, its not clear what the president plans to do with his time should he lose in November and actually vacate the White House, but if he does and those close to him finally get him the help he needs, the odds are pretty high hell still regularly be calling in to Fox in 2024 claiming hes got classified information about Clinton thats going to shock voters like you wouldnt believe. Then hell whisper, I gotta go, theyre here while an orderlys key turns in the lock, adding, The DOJ doesnt want you to know this because its part of the deep state, but her husband had an affair with an intern. Its all there in the documents. Then the phone will drop and well hear him yell Stay back! Keep your hands off of me! Presidential harassment!

If you would like to receive the Levin Report in your inbox daily, clickhereto subscribe.

And speaking of Trumps mental faculties

Nancy Pelosi is supporting a bill that would create a panel to assess if the president is a stark raving lunatic who should be removed from office:

Pelosi on Friday backed the creation of a congressionally appointed commission that would determine whether a president is capable of performing his duties, insisting that it wasnt specifically about President Trump while suggesting that his recent diagnosis was the motivation for it. Pelosi said Trumps coronavirus infection has raised questions about presidential succession, which is governed by the 25th Amendment to the Constitution. Trump spent last weekend at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, setting off a flurry of inquiries about whether Vice President [Mike] Pence would assume authority, even temporarily.

Go here to see the original:

Donald Trump Doesnt Seem to Know What Year It Is, Who Hes Running Against (Hint: Not Hillary Clinton) - Vanity Fair

That Gallup poll doesn’t say what Donald Trump thinks it does – CNN

The Gallup data -- taken from a poll in the field from September 14 to September 29 -- shows that 56% of Americans said they consider themselves "better off" today than they were four years ago. (Roughly one in three -- 32% -- said they were worse off.)

And as Trump notes, that number is higher than the past times that Gallup has asked the question. In December 2012, 45% said they were better off than four years prior. In October 2004, it was 47%. And, going all the way back to July 1984, that number was at 44%.

In an email touting the "are you better off" numbers, Trump spokesman Steve Guest said, "This is a direct result of President Trump's policies. The American people are resilient, and they know they have a fighter in President Trump at the White House who spends every day working for them."

But here's the thing that both Trump and his campaign seem to miss: It is an incredibly damning indictment of Trump personally that, in a country where a majority of the people believe they are better off than they were four years ago, the incumbent President is currently losing badly in his bid for a second term.

What the Gallup numbers suggest is that even though people feel better off than they were at this time in 2016 -- a somewhat remarkable finding given the ongoing coronavirus pandemic -- they don't ascribe that better feeling to Trump and his policies. Or even if they do give Trump credit for feeling "better off" -- usually a measure of economic stability, optimism and well-being -- there are other things they prioritize when it comes to choosing the next president.

(Important note: The Gallup poll was conducted before the first presidential debate -- and Trump's erratic performance. It was also in the field prior to Trump's diagnosis last week with Covid-19.)

The message voters are sending is pretty clear: Many of them just don't like Trump personally.

That should be extremely worrisome for the President and his team. A majority of people feel better about their own lives than they did four years ago. With any past president, that would be a near-guarantee of a second term. Voters who feel like their own lives -- typically judged by their economic successes (or failures) -- are getting better have little interest in changing out the president.

That's a very, very tough nut for Trump to crack -- even if he had two years to do it. But he doesn't have two years. He has 25 days. Essentially he has to figure out a way to get credit for voters' positive feelings about their personal status while also somehow convincing them to prioritize that feeling over their personal dislike for him and the way he conducts himself in office.

What that Gallup poll that Trump and his campaign have touted actually tells us is that if Trump had been, well, a whole lot less Trump-y, he might be in a strong position to win a second term. But because Trump is Trump, he has managed to separate out voters' positive feelings about their lives from their feelings about him. People feel good about their situations, and Trump doesn't benefit.

Rather than pumping up that poll as proof of his successes, Trump should see the Gallup numbers for what they actually are: A blaring warning sign that he is headed toward a loss on November 3.

Follow this link:

That Gallup poll doesn't say what Donald Trump thinks it does - CNN