We live in a moment that is as critical for freedom as the American Revolution, the American Civil War, or the days following Pearl Harbor. In each of those moments, America moved the cause of freedom forward. In the Revolution, we declared our independence from the greatest empire of the day, fought for and won that independence, and then went on to establish a constitution that still gives us liberty under law more than two hundred years later. In the Civil War, we removed the great moral wrong of slavery. After Pearl Harbor, we shouldered the burden of World War II and the subsequent Cold War.

Sept. 11 represents a time just as critical in the history of the freedom. As we judge the generations of the American Revolution, the Civil War, or Pearl Harbor by their heroic response, so we shall be judged. We are engaged in what I believe is a noble crusade to bring freedom to the world. But that crusade is faltering now, in part because we have failed to ask some very fundamental questions.

This essay is intended to ask the most fundamental of those questions: Is freedom a universal human value, which all people in all times and places desire?

Our foreign policy since the time of Woodrow Wilson has been based in the belief that freedom is a universal value, one that is wanted by all people in all times. But why, if freedom is a universal value, has the history of the world been one of tyranny, misery, and oppression?

Socrates taught that our first task in any discussion is to define our terms. Thus, the starting point here is identifying what we mean by freedom. We never disagree, Socrates tells us, about empirical questions; it is about values that we disagree. No value is more charged with meaning than that of freedom.

If we carefully examine the ideal and reality of freedom throughout the ages, we come to the conclusion that what we call freedom is, in fact, an ideal that consists of three component ideals: (1) national freedom; (2) political freedom; and (3) individual freedom.

National freedom is freedom from foreign control. This is the most basic concept of freedom. It is the desire of a nation, ethnic group, or a tribe to rule itself. It is national self-determination.

Political freedom is the freedom to vote, hold office, and pass laws. It is the ideal of consent of the governed.

Individual freedom is a complex of values. In its most basic form individual freedom is the freedom to live as you choose as long as you harm no one else, Each nation, each epoch in history, perhaps each individual, may define this ideal of individual freedom in different terms. In its noblest of expressions, individual freedom is enshrined in our Bill of Rights. It is freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, economic freedom, and freedom to choose your life style.

In the United States, we tend to assume that these three ideals of freedom always go together. That is wrong. History proves that these three component ideals of freedom in no way must be mutually inclusive.

You can have national freedom without political or individual freedom; Iraq under Saddam Hussein and North Korea are examples. In fact, this national freedom, this desire for independence, is the most basic of all human freedoms. It has frequently been the justification for some of the most terrible tyrannies in history: Nazi Germany had national freedom but denied individual and political freedom in the name of this national freedom.

It is quite possible to have political and national freedom but not individual freedom. Ancient Sparta had national and political freedom, but none of the individual freedoms we expect today.

The Roman Empire represents two centuries that brought peace and prosperity to the world by extinguishing national and political freedom, but in which individual freedom flourished as it never had.

From the Declaration of Independence to the First World War, the history of our own country provides a dramatic example of the separation of these three component ideals of freedom. After 1776, the United States had national freedom. Adult white males also had political and individual freedom. White women had a considerable degree of individual freedom but no political liberty until 1920 and the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment. Until after the Civil War, African-Americans possessed neither political nor individual freedom. In 1857 the Supreme Court formally ruled that African-Americans did not have the right to individual or political freedom. The soldiers of the Confederacy fought valiantly for their political, individual, and national freedom while defending their right to deny individual and political liberty to a considerable proportion of their population.

Thus, clearly, throughout history, these three components ideals of freedom have not been mutually inclusive.

Had we learned this lesson of history, Americans might have avoided crucial mistakes in our recent foreign policy in the Middle East.

History demonstrates that one of the most basic human feelings is the desire for national freedom. You may hate your government, but if someone invades you, you may very well fight in defense of your country. Napoleon learned this in Spain. History should have taught us to be skeptical of the claim that we would be welcomed as liberators in Iraq.

A second lesson of history we should have pondered is that freedom is not a universal value. Great civilizations have risen and fallen without any clear concept of freedom. Egyptthe civilization that built the pyramids, that created astronomy and medicine, did not even have a word for freedom. Everything was under the power of the pharaoh, who was god on earth. Ancient Mesopotamia had a word for freedom, but that word had the connotation of liberties. It was something that the all-powerful king gave to you, like exemption from taxes, and that he could also capriciously take away from you.

In fact, it can be argued that the Middle East, from the time of the pyramids down until today, has had no real concept of freedom.

Russia from the time of Rurik, the first Viking chieftain of Russia in the ninth century, down to Vladimir Putin, has never developed clear ideas of political and individual freedom. Thus we should not have been surprised when the Russian Revolution led not to freedom but to Stalin and one of the bloodiest despotisms in history.

China has no tradition of political or individual freedom. The noble teachings of Confucius are all about order, not freedom.

In fact, the very beginning of civilizations in the Middle East around 3000 BCE and in China around 1700 BCE represented the choice of security over freedom. Civilization began with the decision to give up any freedom in order to have the security of a well regulated economy under a king. Time and again throughout history people have chosen the perceived benefits of security over the awesome responsibilities of freedom.

History thus teaches that freedom is not a universal value. Our Founders knew and acted upon the lessons of history. The Founders, unlike us, thought historically. They used the lessons of the past to make decisions in the present and to plan for the future. They understood that tyranny and the lust for power, not freedom, is the great motivating force of human action and of history. But the Founders also believed that the United States could chart a unique course in history

Our country does have a unique legacy of freedom. That is both a cause for hope and a caution as to whether our unique ideals of freedom can be transplanted to the rest of the world. For in the U.S. we have achieved a unique balance of national, political, and individual freedom.

We have never been conquered; we simply cannot imagine what it would be to be under the rule of a foreigner. Our experience is very different from that of France, for example, or Germany.

We take political freedom for granted. We have regular elections no matter what the circumstances. In 1864, in the midst of the greatest war in our history, we held elections. The Europeans wondered after 9/11 what would happen to America; we went ahead with another election. In a way it is a good thing we are so secure in this freedom that we take it for granted. With that comes our deep love of the Constitution. Of course, Americans may not know what is in the Constitution, but they know it is good and resent any effort to tamper with it.

As to individual freedom, where could one have so much of it, including the basic freedom to create a better life for yourself and your children? People clamor to get into America, because individual freedom opens up a whole new world.

So how did we come to this unique legacy of freedom? Again, history is our guide. Our American legacy of freedom is the product of a unique confluence of five historical currents.

First, there is the legacy of the Old Testament, the idea that we are a nation chosen by God to bear the ark of the liberties to the world. Our Founders believed that deeply. Abraham Lincoln believed it deeply. Franklin Roosevelt believed it.

The second current comes from classical Greece and Rome. The legacy of Greece and Rome is the very basic one of self-government, consent of the governed. The kings of Babylon were chosen by God, Saul was chosen by God. The pharaoh was God on earth. But in Greece and Rome, men said We are free to govern ourselves under laws that we give ourselves.

Thirdly, Christianity took the idea of Natural Law from Greece and Rome and turned it into the belief that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The freedom that for the Greeks and Romans had been limited to the citizens of Athens or Rome now became a universal proclamation under Christianity.

Fourthly, England gave us the notion that government is under the law, no matter how powerful that government is. In the Watergate hearings, Sen. Herman Talmadge (D-Ga.) quoted the old saying that the wind and rain might enter the cottage of a poor Englishman, but the king in all his majesty may not. The law governs the king himself, and our Congress, senators, and president. As Harry Truman said, any time an American president gets too big for his britches, the people put him back in his place.

Fifthly, there is the contribution of the frontier. From the very beginning, America has been about the frontier. It is what led men and women to Jamestown and Plymouth. The frontier was the vast, seemingly endless land stretching before us. The frontier meant equality of opportunity. Even the best ideals of Greece or Rome or England could never flourish, because they were always cramped. But here there was land and the ability to start over again. This mattered more than all the ancient hatreds and class frictions that had existed under the old world. We cannot understand why Bosnians, Serbs, and Croats speak the same language but kill each other. Their hatreds have been festering for centuries, but here they pass away. That has been the unique gift of the frontier.

The existence of these elements in other nations and civilizations only underscores the uniqueness of the American experience of freedom. Russia has the tradition of Greece and Rome, Christianity, the tradition of the Old Testament; and it has a frontier. But it lacks that English sense of government under the law. So the frontier in Russia becomes the home of the gulag. Latin America has the tradition of Christianity and the Old Testament, and of Greece and Rome, and of the frontier. But Spain lacked the powerful English concept that government is under the law. Thus Latin America, despite its industrious and intelligent population and its natural resources, has never developed a stable basis for political and individual freedom.

Our heritage of freedom has been forged in war and hardship as well as in prosperity. Our national independence was proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence. Name another nation in history founded on principles. An Italian or German will say you are an Italian or German because you speak Italian or German. Traditionally, you were born an Englishman; you were geographical accident. But in America we have said from the start that everyone can come here from wherever they wish. They can speak whatever language is their mother tongue and practice whatever religion they want. They become an American by adopting our principles.

The principles proclaimed in 1776 are the noblest of all principles: we hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with the unalienable right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

The proclamation of these ideals in the Declaration of Independence is based on the belief in absolute right and absolute wrong. You can deny that today. We seem to have a society that believes there is no such thing as truth. Ethics is all a matter of circumstances. But the Founders believed in eternal truths, valid in all places and all times. And they believed that governments are instituted among men to achieve those goals. That is the purpose of government. And if a government does not fulfill those goals, you have not only the right but the duty to overthrow it.

The absolute truths of the Declaration of Independence are founded on a belief in God. God appears four times in the Declaration of Independence: Natures God, the Creator, Supreme Judge of the world, Divine Providence.

Thus our national freedom is founded on absolute truth and upon a belief in God.

As the Declaration of Independence is the charter of our national freedom, so the Constitution is our charter of political freedom.

When that constitution was brought forth in Philadelphia, we were thirteen straggling republics along the eastern seaboard. If Benjamin Franklin or George Washington wanted to go somewhere, they went in the same way Cicero or Caesar did: they walked, rode, or sailed. If they wanted to communicate, they did it the same way Caesar or Cicero did. George Washington received inferior medical care to what a Roman gladiator got in the first century CE. And yet that same constitution gives us liberty under law and prosperity in a world of technology that Benjamin Franklin could not even have imagined and when we are superpower of the world. We should never take this extraordinary achievement for granted.

The American people in their wisdom would not ratify this constitution without the promise of a bill of rights. It seems to us extraordinary today that the first Congress kept its promise; and in short order set down and produced the Bill of Rights, which still guarantees these fundamental freedoms of individual liberty.

But there was still slavery, written into the Constitution. God is not mentioned once in the Constitution, but slavery was made the law of the land. To remove that wrong of slavery we fought the bloodiest war in our history, in which 623,026 Americans died. It produced men of great honor and integrity on both sides. It was finally resolved at Gettysburg.

When Abraham Lincoln went to Gettysburg to redefine our mission, he started with the Declaration of Independence. Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. It was unique because it was dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. In one sentence he told Americans why they were fighting the war, to see whether any nation so conceived and dedicated could long endure. In all the rhetoric we had about Vietnam and all that we have heard about Iraq, we have not been told so simply why we were at war.

Lincoln then went on to state that this civil war was a challenge laid upon this nation by God. The more Lincoln grappled with why this terrible war had come, the more convinced he had become that it was sent by God to punish us for the fundamental wrong of slavery. He told Americans that we must resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain and that this nation under God should have a new birth of freedom. And that government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth.

So this war that had cost so many lives was resolved in a way that no other nation would have. The Confederates simply pledged their word not to take up arms and to go home. The reconciliation began. I think that too is unique in history.

With the Civil War we see the growth of democracy, the move towards extending the franchise to women, 18 year olds. They all become part of this political freedom.

This nation has continued in a unique course of freedom. In World War II we fought and won the war in the name of democratic freedom. We could have withdrawn the way we did after World War I. But we recognized that isolationism had been a mistake. So we shouldered the burden of the Cold War.

Now we have been called again, and the question is, will we find the leadership to tell us why this great challenge is there? Will we find the will to resolve this struggle? Will we find the understanding among ourselves to see the great task that, as Lincoln said, is still before us?

I speak to you not only the legacy of America, but of destiny. I believe that no people in history have ever been more magnanimous, generous, courageous, willing to forgive and forget, and willing to help the world than have the Americans. So after World War II, we raised Germany and Japan up. This remains our greatest foreign policy triumph. We took those two nations that had no long tradition of freedom and made them into viable, prosperous democracies.

Today, because of the United States, more people throughout the world live in freedom than any time in history. If we are willing to accept the challenge, it may yet be our destiny to change the course of history and to establish freedom as a universal value.

Excerpt from:

Freedom: The History of an Idea - Foreign Policy Research Institute

In betweenthe Lakes Region and the White Mountain Region of NH, Freedom is a small town surrounding a little village. Take a walk through the village on a Saturday evening and youll encounter few cars, but enjoy the white picket fences, well-kept homes and large barns that hint of the towns history.

Freedom? In 1831 the village of North Effingham voted to secede from Effingham, and in 1832, the new town celebrated its independence by changing its name to Freedom.

For a tangible taste of Freedom history, visit The Historical Societys charming museum where lemonade and cookies are served to visitors on summer afternoons. Members can also provide a quick sketch of the history of Freedom as seen in the houses standing along the quiet village streets.

Every year in August the community of Freedom celebrates Old Home Week, a New Hampshire tradition that was officially recognized by Proclamation in the New Hampshire State Legislature in 1913.

In the Village youll find the Town Hall, a Protestant church, Masonic Lodge and the Freedom Village Store: a non-profit, volunteer run store where you can get a cup of coffee, buy a newspaper and catch up with your neighbors. Just around the corner,the Public Library is open several days a week.

Go here to see the original:

Town Of Freedom Official Site

This year, Pence has taken on a new persona among the crowda Trump era castoff who is probably better off not showing his face. And he seems to know it. The former veep was invited to the conference but decided not to attend. It was the first time Pence had missed the conference in five years.

I was such a big fan of his but that part of the Republican Party is the educational elites the old horses are on their way out, said Mary Obersteadt, the immediate past president of Nashville Republican Women. She wore rhinestone Trump and DeSantis pins on her conference lanyard. I respect him for what he did and how he served this nation but hes so disappointing when he - he should have communicated and stayed with Trump with Jan. 6, they should have been on the same level.

Pences absence from this years conference was due to a scheduling conflict, according to the conference organizers and Pences team. On Thursday, he attended a roundtable with Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine.

But while he still is rooted in the Christian conservative community, having attended an event with the Coalition in North Carolina to engage Chrisitan voters in the Charlotte area, his decision to skip the Faith & Freedom gathering underscores the crossroads he currently finds himself in politically.

I think hes seeking Gods direction for his decision on what to do next, said Dr. Robert Jeffress, pastor at First Baptist Dallas, who is close to both Pence and Trump, and sits on the advisory board for Pences political group, Advancing American Freedom.

At a time when Pences main ideological causes are on the cusp of historic successwith the Supreme Court set to overturn the landmark abortion rights case, Roe v. Wade he finds himself in the thick of intra-party drama. This week, the House select committee investigating the riots on Capitol Hill zeroed in on Pences decision to resist Donald Trumps pressure for him to block certification of the Electoral College vote count.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump points to the crowd after giving the keynote address at the Faith & Freedom Coalition during their annual "Road To Majority Policy Conference" on June 17, 2022 in Nashville, Tennessee.|Seth Herald/Getty Images

While Pence has, so far, dodged discussing the committees proceedings, Trump used his own appearance at the Faith & Freedom conference to attack his veep.

Mike Pence had a chance to be great, he had a chance to be frankly historic, Trump said. But Mike did not have the courage to act.

It was a remarkable moment for a conference that in past years served as a celebration for the former vice president as a top conservative Christian leader. But things have changed since Trump left office. Last year, in the shadow of Jan. 6, Pence was jeered by the crowd and called a traitor while on stage. Now, when asked about what they think of Pence or how they view his political future, attendees sighed or visibly shrugged.

Thats a good question, said Sandi McGuire, a Christian minister from Raleigh, North Carolina. I havent seen him much. I dont like speaking adverse toward anyone, he did great work. He came here last year and a percentage booed him. Im not sure in fairness where he is. I wish him the best but he hasnt been anywhere to be found.

Its kind of hard, its a hard one, said Emily Hinojos from Rutherford, N.C. when asked about Pences political future. I dont know where hes at since Jan 6. Its hard to tell youre not in their shoes but we would have liked him to support Trump better.

The mood of the crowd at Faith & Freedom reflected the degree to which Republican politicians are judged not so much by their ideologies but by their relationship to Trump. Ralph Reed, a Republican strategist and founder of the Faith & Freedom Coalition, is close with both Trump and Pence. But when asked if he was surprised by Trumps attacks, he would only say he consulted with Trumps speechwriters yesterday.

If Mike Pence wanted to come and wanted to offer a rejoinder to these folks, he could have done it. Im not saying he should have done it. I told him when I saw him a couple weeks ago, no harm no foul, but I said I want you here next year and hell be there, Reed said to a small group of reporters after Trumps speech.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump exits the stage after giving the keynote address at the Faith & Freedom Coalition during their annual "Road To Majority Policy Conference" on June 17, 2022 in Nashville, Tennessee.|Seth Herald/Getty Images

Pences own relationship with Trump is deeply complicated. For a few months after leaving the White House, the two would occasionally speak. But they havent talked for a year now even though their paths have occasionally crossed, including when both men addressed top Republican donors at a retreat in New Orleans in March. Trump continues to admonish his former vice president in public, while Pence has remained firm in his decision to certify the election.

In recent months, Pence has turned his focus to the midterms. Hes offered endorsements in key midterm races like Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and held a fundraiser for incumbent Rep. Steve Chabot on Thursday. On Monday, he is set to deliver a speech on the economy at the University Club of Chicago.

Our path is a little bit different than everybody else is at this point, said a person close to Pences political operation, who defended Pences decision to not go to the Nashville cattle call. And whether he decided to do this thing or not, he doesnt have to go there to get coverage.

But its unclear how Pence can build up a national profile if he were to lose the full support of his bedrock constituency: Evangelicals. Not everyone in his camp is worried. Aides to Pence say he holds appeal across the Republican party.

Vice President Pence checks the hawk lane. He checks the traditional GOP lane. And obviously probably the biggest one is the Evangelical lane, said the Pence ally.

And Bob Vander Plaats, president and CEO of The Family Leader, a conservative Christian parent organization for the Iowa Family Policy Center, said Pences support remains strong among social conservatives and Evangelicals in Iowa, especially as support of Trump wanes.

Not to play Bob Seger on you, but I think theyre looking to turn the page, Vander Plaats said of Iowa voters he talks to. Take the best of Trump, and lets see if Ron DeSantis can carry on that fightor Mike Pence or Mike Pompeo or Ted Cruz or whoever you throw into that match.

But among those in Nashville this weekend, Pence seemed more a relic of the past than an element of the future. None of the merchandise stalls that lined the entrance to the conference ballroom featured Pences name, while there were piles of red, white, and blue Trump and Trump 2024 t-shirts and hats for sale.

I feel like he was mistreated so long he wanted to give his soul a break and his family. I dont think its political, its personal he doesnt want to get attacked right now, said Krista Kiepke from Clarksville, Tenn. Jesus himself removed from the disciples to refresh so he could do his job so I look at it as that.

Read this article:

Pence skips Faith & Freedom conference. Is attacked by Trump anyways. - POLITICO

Juneteenth, also known as Freedom Day, takes its name from June 19, 1865, the day General Gordon Granger and Union troops finally arrived in Galveston, Texas, and announced to slaves in the state that they were freean entire two-and-a-half years after Abraham Lincolns Emancipation Proclamation, the executive order outlawing slavery in the United States. Though Juneteenth has been observed by many Black Americans since 1866, often with parades, picnics, and other celebrations, its declaration as a federal holiday in 2021 has highlighted both the continued tragic effects of chattel slavery and the irreplaceable contributions of Black Americans and the descendants of slaves. In observance of that ideal, Apple Music celebrates Juneteenth 2022 with Freedom Songs, a collection of exclusively commissioned new songs from Black creatives like Elena Pinderhughes, Kranium, Lupe Fiasco, Alex Isley, 6LACK, and Brittney Spencer, to name a few. Some have contributed original compositions, while others have chosen to cover existing songs that speak to the spirit of the holiday. Listen to the stories their selections tell as we celebrate Juneteenth and the invaluable legacy of Black music.

*Bun B, This Is What We Do* If you didnt know me and you heard this song, at the very least you would see that Im about family, Im about tradition, Im about legacy and heritage, Bun B says of This Is What We Do, his contribution to Apple Musics Freedom Songs 2022. And that you should be, too. Because Juneteenth is not justobviously, its an African American historical event, but its also just American. Juneteenth is a way of acknowledging, Yes, this happened in America. Yes, we started the process of dissolving it, but it was a very slow and steady process that is still not fully formed. We always have to be aware of that.

*Elena Pinderhughes, Get Away*For Juneteenth 2022, California-born singer and flautist Elena Pinderhughes wrote Get Away, which speaks to the gratitude she has for being able to free her mind. Ive been celebrating how people are breaking out of boundaries, creating new ways of being and making, Pinderhughes says. Ive been celebrating the increased conversation around the importance of Black mental health and self-care and the ways that we are demanding our rights to it. I continue to celebrate the power of Black women and the change that we make. I also think of the words of the poet Lucille Clifton: Come celebrate with me that everyday something has tried to kill me and has failed.

*Alex Isley, We Are One*R&B singer-songwriter Alex Isley chose to take on We Are One by Maze Featuring Frankie Beverly, because their music is just so celebratory and filled with so much joy. Juneteenth, in particular, is a holiday on which Isley says she can look inward and appreciate her journey as a Black creative. Theres power in my authenticity, and Im just grateful for life, Isley says. I am a daughter, Im a mother, Im a friend. So, just practicing gratitude, I think thats a big part of Juneteenth: the gratitude and celebration of who we are and the pride of that and the beauty and the richness of our culture and our power.

*Lupe Fiasco, Galveston*I try to make things that establish emotion and utility so that not only can people feel it, but they can actually do something with it, Lupe Fiasco says. Theres only so much utility you can have in music, but it all boils back down to education and instruction. For Apple Musics Freedom Songs 2022, Fiasco created Galveston, a song that forces us to reckon with the unimaginably high cost of freedom. Galveston is about taking Juneteenth, which is normally a celebration of a very specific set of eventsthe manumission from slavery of Black folksand approaching it from a different angle, Fiasco says. Looking at it as the impact of it, versus the event. And one of the impacts of Juneteenth was that the abolition of slaveryit introduced all of this other extra tension and new realities, and some of those new realities werent that good. So, 1865, you get abolition of slavery, Emancipation Proclamation, all that good stuff, end of the Civil War. But that same year, you also get the birth of the Ku Klux Klan. So, to me, it was a life-and-death type thing where death was brought to one thing, but then it created lifeit gave birth to another thing.

*Eladio Carrion, El Sol Va a Salir*For his contribution to Freedom Songs 2022, Puerto Rican MC Eladio Carrin created El Sol Va a Salir, a song inspired by one of the greatest hip-hop storytelling tracks of all-time. I did this song with [producer] Vinylz, and the second I heard the beat, it gave me a vibe of the Eminem Stan song that he writes to a fan, Carrin says. I thought it would be a cool ideasince I have a few friends that are in jail right nowto make a song as if someone was in jail writing to their family members. It could be an innocent person or someone that regrets what they did. And its just the person saying, I know things are bad right now, but I know that the suns going to come up, and theyre going to be good days.

*Jlin, I Am*If I Am was the only song that someone ever heard from me, I would just want them to feel my vulnerability, Indiana-hailing DJ and producer Jlin says. Its a percussion conversation. In African culture, drums are a form of communication. They were before and after colonization, so I just wanted to hone in on that and just have a conversation with percussion.

*SEB, Paranoia*For Chicagoans of a certain age, the influence of Chance the Rapper was inescapable. LA-based singer and producer SEB, who spent some of his formative years in Chicago, chose to cover Chance and Nosaj Things Paranoia for Freedom Songs 2022 for that very reason. I picked Paranoia because it just brings me back to Chicago, SEB says. I first heard that song when I started traveling to the South Side for school, so that really made it hit hard. It was two very different environments going from the North Side to the South Side every day. I decided to totally reproduce the song to paint a better picture of what I was seeing.

*Kranium, Revolution*For his contribution to Apple Musics Freedom Songs 2022, Kranium covered Dennis Browns Revolution, a 1983 song the Jamaican singer notes is as relevant today as it ever was. A lot of stuff that is being said in that song is actually something that we are living with until this day, he says. The choice to cover Brown was also a means of bridging the gap between the dancehall of today and the reggae Kranium was raised on. Growing up, Dennis Brown was one of our favorite singers, he says. Thats the Crown Prince of Reggae. Were considered the new-school singers, so I wanted to make sure that I keep it 100 percent pure and real, showing respect to the great Dennis Brown but still putting my own Kranium swing into it.

*Cautious Clay, Been in the Way*I was really trying to capture the many things that can be in the way of allowing us to relate to each other and the people that we care about, Cautious Clay says of Been in the Way." "I kind of come in hot with religion, [with] wrist blood being sort of a signifier of Jesus and how organized religion can sort of have its negatives in some cases and is sometimes used for power rather than for actual spirituality. And then I move on to rose gold, which in many ways signifies wealth and beauty and how that can get in the way of relationships with depth. So, its all things that we face in our lives that I find super important.

*Denzel Curry, 1st Quarter*For his contribution to Apple Musics Freedom Songs 2022, Florida MC Denzel Curry created 1st Quarter, a song he says is about celebrating how far hes already come in his young life. Its an accomplishment to make it through the first quarter of my life, Curry says. Especially as a Black man in America. When it comes to the type of legacy hed like to leave behind and even how his supporters can ensure their own, his advice is simple: Do what you do, do whats right, and be legendary.

*6LACK, Umi Says*When I hear the word legacy, I think of purpose, I think of what you leave on this earth when youre no longer physically here, the impact you make, the lives you change, the stories that youve created, 6LACK says. For Freedom Songs 2022, the Atlanta crooner covered Mos Defs 1999 classic Umi Says, a choice he claims was a no-brainer when a manager suggested it to him and his team. My brother Forward Slash led the way with the soundscape, 6LACK says, and I just came through and did my best cover.

*Brittney Spencer, More Than Perfect*Growing up, I didnt see a lot of peoplein fact, anybodydoing what Im doing today, country singer Brittney Spencer says, commenting on the traditional lack of Black faces in country. I didnt realize until my adult years that that sort of image has shaped what I thought I could do in the world, who I could be in the world, and knowing that if maybe even one person is seeing what Im doing today, they might decide a lot quicker than I did that they can actually go for something thats really on their heart. For Juneteenth 2022, Spencer cooked up More Than Perfect, a song focused on inner beauty. Its about not putting so much weight and stock into appearance as if it could ever tell the full story of who a person is, she says. An artful display of fashion and tattooswhich I haveand makeup and filters and all these things, it will never tell you about someones character, their dreams, their aspirations, the things they care about, the people they care for. Itll never tell you the whole story because it just simply cant.

*Moliy, The Place*I love being appreciated for what I do and how far Ive come, Moliy says. Theres so much that Im yet to see and do, but just knowing anything can happen at any moment of my journey as an artist is really exciting. In my world, every song I create is literally a stepping-stone to building my legacy. For Apple Musics Freedom Songs 2022, the Ghanaian American singer created The Place, a song about the kind of society we all dream about living in. The Place is about hope and wanting to belong somewhere safe, Moliy says. Somewhere that love and light reigns, where everyone can thrive without the need to do evil and knowing theres like-minded people out there who all want the same.

*WSTRN, Free Your Mind*UK collective WSTRN delivered Free Your Mind, a song they say is about overcoming adversity. Its about acknowledging the power of unity and being free, vocalist Haile says. Accepting that obstacles will cross your path but knowing that holding onto faith can always get you through anything. Louis Rei adds that he wanted to speak to people destined for bigger things but who might not yet understand their own potential. My verse, especially, is targeting those that have a light within them, but they come from a dark place, he says. And its very much reflective of that and asking oneself questions to attain greatness and overcoming and becoming the higher vibration of yourself.

*Damien Sneed, Sequestered Thoughts*Juneteenth is observed as a celebration, Damien Sneed says. For me, its also a moment to understand and recognize the plight of my ancestors and all of those from the African diaspora and the African American diasporaI am celebrating the moment in time to use my art, my creativity, my musical voice, to give voice to those who dont have a voice. For his contribution to Apple Musics Freedom Songs 2022, the pianist and composer wrote Sequestered Thoughts, a piece he says was born of isolation but that might bring people together in its expression of everyones need to have their humanity recognized. The pandemic was a jolt for me, Sneed says. I had just finished a 40-city tour, and I was at home alone in New York City, sequestered in place. This composition is meant to evoke confinement, hope, and the will to survive. Also, it represents something that was birthed out of the untimely murder of George Floyd. So, the piece also resonates with protests against all types of violence, racism, and oppression.

*Koryn Hawthorne, I Need You Now*Anytime I record a cover, I always do my best to try to make sure I put a little bit of myself into it, Koryn Hawthorne says. I feel like weve done a good job of that on this record. It has slight R&B vibes, but it still has the true heart of worship in it. Hawthorne, a gospel vocalist who can also boast having once earned a spot as a finalist on The Voice, chose Smokie Norfuls I Need You Now for her contribution to Apple Musics Freedom Songs 2022. The song, she says, will only ever bring her good memories: I am a huge Smokie Norful fan. This song, in particular, has been a staple throughout my entire life. I feel like, at any given moment, I could play this song and be taken back to a special place.

View post:

Juneteenth 2022: Freedom Songs on Apple Music

Join the ALA Intellectual Freedom Round Table (IFRT) and the Freedom to Read Foundation (FTRF) along with banned author David Levithan, library professionals, authors, and friends for this 2022 Freedom to Read Celebration, Merritt Fund fundraiser, and reception. The organizations will honor the recipients of the FTRF Roll of Honor Award, John Phillip Immroth Memorial Award, Gerald Hodges Intellectual Freedom Chapter Relations Award, and Eli M. Oboler Memorial Award.

Were excited to have author David Levithan launch the evening by sharing his remarks, and experience, with intellectual freedom and censorship. David is a childrens book editor and the author of several books for young adults, including Lambda Literary Award winner Two Boys Kissing; Nick & Norahs Infinite Playlist, Naomi and Elys No Kiss List, and Dash & Lilys Book of Dares (co-authored with Rachel Cohn); Will Grayson, Will Grayson (co-authored with John Green); and Every You, Every Me (with photographs from Jonathan Farmer). David was named the recipient of the Margaret A. Edwards Award for his contribution to YA literature. His newest book, Answers in the Pages, was released through Penguin Random House in May. This title has a timely topic as it addresses speaking up and coming out as parents lobby to ban a beloved book from the school curriculum.

The following 2022 intellectual freedom award recipients will be honored at the event.

Add the celebration to your Conference Scheduler.RSVP to attendEvent Date: Friday, June 24th at 7pm - 8:30pm ET.Location: Marriott Marquis, Univ of DC & Catholic UnivCost: Suggested Donation: $20.00 (checks and cash preferred) to benefit the Leroy C. Merritt Humanitarian Fund (one free drink ticket included)

FTRF and IFRT wish to thank Penguin Random House for their generous sponsorship of the Freedom to Read Celebration.

About the Freedom to Read FoundationThe Freedom to Read Foundation has been working on behalf of librarians and others to protect the First Amendment for over 50 years. Because FTRF is a non-profit, the staff and trustees may also litigate on behalf of First Amendment issues, as well as educate and advocate. The FTRF board of trustees includes representatives from each of ALAs roundtables. This ensures that librarians representing all forms of library work can bring their voices and concerns to FTRF and carry back valuable information.

About the Intellectual Freedom Round TableThe Intellectual Freedom Round Table of the American Library Association provides a forum for the discussion of activities, programs and problems in intellectual freedom of libraries and librarians; serves as a channel of communications on intellectual freedom matters; promotes a greater opportunity for involvement among the members of the ALA in defense of intellectual freedom; and promotes a greater feeling of responsibility in the implementation of ALA policies on intellectual freedom.

About the Office for Intellectual FreedomEstablished December 1, 1967, the Office for Intellectual Freedom is charged with implementing ALA policies concerning the concept of intellectual freedom as embodied in the Library Bill of Rights, the Associations basic policy on free access to libraries and library materials. The goal of the office is to educate librarians and the general public about the nature and importance of intellectual freedom in libraries.

About the Merritt FundThe LeRoy C. Merritt Humanitarian Fund was established in 1970 as a special trust in memory of Dr. LeRoy C. Merritt. It is devoted to the support, maintenance, medical care, and welfare of librarians who, in the Trustees opinion, are: Denied employment rights or discriminated against on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, race, color, creed, religion, age, disability, or place of national origin; or Denied employment rights because of defense of intellectual freedom; that is, threatened with loss of employment or discharged because of their stand for the cause of intellectual freedom, including promotion of freedom of the press, freedom of speech, the freedom of librarians to select items for their collections from all the worlds written and recorded information, and defense of privacy rights.

Link:

Freedom to Read Celebration, Supporting the Merritt Fund, and Featuring Banned Author David Levithan - ala.org

This story was originally published June 15, 2022, as part of aspecial Juneteenth projectby Capital B News and Vox which explores the ongoing struggle for freedom for Black Americans.

Born into slavery, Henrietta Wood was legally freed in 1848 in Ohio when she was about 30. She only basked in that freedom for five years.

In 1853, a white sheriff empowered by the Fugitive Slave Act abducted Wood and sold her back into bondage, taking her on a journey from Kentucky to Mississippi and finally to Texas, where shed toil on a plantation through the Civil War. Though President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, Wood did not regain her freedom until 1866, months after Union soldiers traveled to Texas on June 19, 1865 Juneteenth to enforce emancipation.

Wood whose pathbreaking storywas only recently surfaced returned to Ohio and sued her abductor for $20,000 (worth more than $440,000 today). In the lawsuit, she claimed that because she had been abducted, sold back into slavery, and lost wages (about $500 per year), she was entitled to payment.

After eight years of meandering litigation, 12 white jurors in a federal courtroom in Cincinnati found Woods claim valid and assessed her damages at $2,500. The final decision was just a pittance compared with what Wood demanded, but 144 years later, it remains the largest known payment ordered by an American institution in restitution for slavery.

Woods story was widely covered at the time for its singularity, but fell out of the news as white Americans tried to distance themselves from slavery and its aftermath. Yet the questions that Woods victory raised then are the same ones hanging sullenly over America today.

Who will recompense the millions of men and women for the years of liberty of which they have been defrauded? an 1878 New York Timesarticleabout the courts decision asked. Who will make good to the thousands of kidnapped freemen the agony, distress, and bondage of a lifetime?

What the writer recognized was the growing call for reparations that began at the close of the Civil War and continues to this day. When slavery ended, the federal government promised to provide 40 acres and a mule an idea proposed by Black leaders at the time to nearly 4 million recently freed men and women. The effort would have redistributed land previously owned by the Confederates, giving the formerly enslaved a chance to own their own land and become economically self-sufficient until the government, after Lincolns assassination,reneged.

That early proposal helped establish the concept of reparations as compensation to be paid to Black Americans for slavery. When it was overturned, the struggle for reparations only grew. Activists such asCallie Houseled a movement after Reconstruction and into the early 20th century to demand pensions for poor and aging formerly enslaved people, suing the federal government and arguing that it owed ex-slaves $68 million. HR 40, afederal billnamed after the federal promise more than 150 years ago for 40 acres of land, was introduced in Congress to task a commission to study and develop reparations proposals, but it hasfloundered in the Housefor more than three decades, leaving advocates wondering why America is still keeping freedom out of reach.

At the beginning of May, a coalition of organizers, including the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America (NCOBRA), Color of Change, and the Black Voters Matter Fund, sent aletterto President Joe Biden to demand that he create a federal commission by Juneteenth to study and develop reparations proposals for Black Americans. (The administration had not responded to the coalition by the time this article was published.)

The demand, the continued organizing for racial justice, and therecent recognitionof Juneteenth as a day of national importance calling for solemnity as well as celebration, have all brought a new wave of urgency to the centuries-long reparations debate.

We need something much more substantive than the Juneteenth federal holiday. We need reparatory justice, and we need it now, said Nkechi Taifa, the director of the Reparation Education Project, a nonprofit organization that teaches about reparations, and one of the signatories of the letter. Our communities are crying out for it. Our communities are demanding it.

Over time, a more comprehensive reparationsframework has emerged. In addition to cash payments, true reparations would be a program of acknowledgement, redress and closure for a grievous injustice including slavery, legal segregation (Jim Crow), and ongoing discrimination and stigmatization, economist William A. Darity and folklorist A. Kirsten Mullen argued in their 2020 bookFrom Here to Equality: Reparations for Black Americans in the Twenty-First Century.

Decades of demands on the federal government to atone for the harm it inflicted on enslaved people and the resultant racism, discrimination, and segregation that cripple the Black community today havent moved federal leaders to act, not toward acknowledgement nor apology, nor toward the kind of redress that economists say would be necessary to level the field for Black Americans.

Darity and Mullen estimate that restitution in the form of direct cash payments would cost the American government$10 trillion to $12 trillion, or about $800,000 for each eligible Black household. The payments could eradicate long-standingracial disparities in wealth, health, income, education, incarceration rates, and overall quality of life, experts have argued.

We dont have reparations right now because America isnt sorry. We have not had an adequate apology for slavery, said Edgar Villanueva, founder of the philanthropic organization Decolonizing Wealth Project, which funds reparative giving efforts. Theres a deep-seated fear of even the word reparations and a related scarcity mindset around Americas unwillingness to grapple with its history that connects back to colonization. So instead, were experiencing the rewriting of history, the banning of books, and a fear of truth-telling.

If the federal governments commitment to reparations is doubtful, at the local level, a movement is gathering.

Asheville, North Carolinas City Council established a Community Reparations Commission in 2020. That year, Providence, Rhode Islands mayorsigned an executive orderto pursue a truth-telling and reparations process in the city; Burlington, Vermont,establisheda reparations task force; and Wilmington, North Carolina,considered doing the same. The following year also saw momentum: California launched its reparations task force in 2021, while separately, a group of mayors, Mayors Organized for Reparations and Equity, pledged to pay reparations to small groups of Black residents in their cities to show the federal government what is possible. Greenbelt, Maryland, votersapproveda commission to study reparations, as didDetroit votersand the New York State Assembly.

Other forms of repayment that some have called reparations are worth noting. This year, in Evanston, Illinois, 16 Black families were selected at random from a pool of applicants to receive up to $25,000 in tax-free grants that can be used to pay for a home, pay off a mortgage or make home improvements. Almost 100 years after California seized a Black familys Bruces Beach property via eminent domain, the state agreed to return it to the descendants of the family who owned it. Finally, a judge last monthruled that the three known living survivorsof the1921 Tulsa white mob massacrecould move forward with their lawsuit seeking reparations, despite motions by the defendants, including the city of Tulsa, to dismiss the case.

If local leaders can find the space to grapplewith reparations, why cant the federal government?

At a federal level, President Bidens evolving stance on reparations illustrates the countrys glacial pace of change and glaring unwillingness to engage in the reconciliation that would bring healing and closure to the people it has harmed.

In a1975 interview, he criticized the idea: I do not buy the concept, popular in the 60s, which said, We have suppressed the black man for 300 years and the white man is now far ahead in the race for everything our society offers. In order to even the score, we must now give the Black man a head start, or even hold the white man back, to even the race.

As Biden campaigned for the presidency in 2020, however, the nation saw what may bethe largest uprising against systemic injusticeafter a white police officer murdered George Floyd in daylight, and he embraced the idea of studying reparations. But in the past two years, as he navigated his priorities and failed to garner enough congressional support to pass some of his biggest agenda items, his administration has put the idea out of view.

Beyond the few local lawmakers and federal officials who already back HR 40, support for reparations in general remains low. In 2014, 68 percent of Americans polled by YouGovopposed financial paymentsto Black Americans as compensation for slavery, Jim Crow, and redlining, while only 15 percent supported them. Recent polling found similar results. In 2020,63 percentof Americans polled by ABC News and the Washington Post opposed cash payments, while61 percentwere opposed in 2021. Yet in 2020, at the height of the Black Lives Matter protests, more people than ever (76 percent of Americans surveyed)agreedthat racial discrimination is a big problem in the United States.

Smaller-scale local programs help keep the reparations dialogue going and may bring the country closer to a wider-scale reparations program but they fall short of the countrys national imperative.

No amount of material resources can ever compensate for what Black folks went through. Whatever ends up happening is going to be a negotiated settlement, Taifa said. Whether [reparations make] a material difference or not, the fact is theres a debt that is owed and a debt that is due. If I choose to just keep the money under my pillow and never do anything with it, thats my right.

Major questions motivate the activists and thinkers pushingfor reparations. Where would the descendants of enslaved Americans be if it werent for the more than 200 years of forced labor? Does the United States want to live up to the ideals and exceptionalism it has touted for centuries?

More than any logistical quandary about reparations, these questions lie at the heart of the fight. They get to the center of what America represents and whether it has the power to truly change. Our national debt is already now up to around $26-27 trillion given the money were spending on Covid, Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the conservative Cato Institute,told CNBCin 2020 about paying reparations. And were losing more money because were not picking up the revenue because economic growth is so slow right now. This hardly seems the time to burden the economy with more debt, more taxes. Essentially what you want to do is stimulate economic growth for all our benefits.

But most reparations advocates agree that stimulus plans that stand to boost all Americans wont close the Black-white wealth gap. They note that the formation of the republic after slavery intentionally excluded the formerly enslaved and their descendants in the decades after. During the Reconstruction era, Blacks were routinely disenfranchised, while the New Deal and GI Bill later also failed to fully include Black people. Even the passage of civil rights legislation didnt open the door for America to fully grapple with racism.

Questions about who should be eligible for reparations and how much ought to be paid remain.

Some believe that only descendants of people enslaved in the United States who can prove their lineage that at least one ancestor was enslaved can be eligible. (Californias task force, for example, decided that only residents with direct lineage to people formerly enslaved in America should be eligible for reparations.) The plan mapped out by Darity and Mullen adds that eligible recipients must pass an identity standard they must be able to prove that they self-identified as Black or African American for 12 years prior to the enactment of a reparations plan.

Others believe that eligibility must be more inclusive, arguing that Black people who are third, fourth, and fifth generation in the United States could be part of the global network of enslavement that saw their ancestors enslaved in the Caribbean or South America. They, too, have suffered under American racism and discrimination. The system of enslavement was intertwined to the point that we do not know and could never know for certain if ones ancestor was not harmed by US enslavers and the US government based on a geographical North American residence of enslavement, NCOBRA activists wrote in a memo.

Theres also discussion about the window for the reparations claim. Should 1619, the year enslaved people landed in Jamestown, Virginia, be the beginning date for the claim, or the year 1776, when America was founded?

What would constitute reparations? Some have argued that reparations dont have to be direct cash payments but can take the form of programs like housing vouchers, as in the case of Evanston, Illinois, or educational grants, as in the case of Georgetown University. The university has said it would help the descendants of enslaved people pay off school debts, an effort to contend with the fact that its founding relied on stolen Black labor. Some warn, however, that these limited programs can muddy efforts to secure federal cash payments. Reparations seems to be all over right now, but as we have these discussions, we have to be cautious [to not] water it down or let [reparations] be co-opted, Villanueva said.

Many also believe that there is a graveneed for a truth-telling effortthat makes way for an apology: Without acknowledgment and a formal apology from the federal government, there can be no closure. Though Henrietta Wood got money that helped her raise her son at the turn of the century, she never received an apology from the man who re-enslaved her. Nor did she get an apology for being born into a system that reduced her to bondage. Instead, Woods abductor tried to deny his crime and even boasted about growing famous for having bought one of the last slaves before the end of slavery.

He cannot escape the law, which will follow him and his property into the remotest nook of the Republic, the New York Timeswroteof Woods captor. Why should America?

Fabiola Cineas is areporter for Voxcovering voting rights, education, race, and policy.

More:

There's no freedom without reparations - The Connecticut Mirror

The craft of photography has arguably changed more in the last 20 years than in the century before it. With each improvement to the equipment comes the inevitable groans of many photographers who believe the technology takes away from the craft. Is that well-founded or mistaken?

I own a Fujifilm GFX 50R, a digital medium format body. On that body is a very fast manual focus lens that gives an ethereal, razor-thin depth of field on images taken with it, if you manage to nail the focus. Since getting this combination, I have become a little obsessed with shooting medium format images wide open. This isn't a unique enjoyment, and I'm sure many would criticize how much I choose to shoot wide open, although it's always just for fun, not for clients. There are a few reasons I like shooting this way. The first is obvious: I love the aesthetic created by a medium format sensor and f/1.4 on said sensor. Then, I also like the manual focus element when paired with the narrow depth of field. To get the style of image I want, I have to work rather hard; it's far too easy to miss focus entirely.

A friend of mine, an enthusiastic but rank-amateur photographer, has commented how much they like these shots on a number of occasions. We've discussed how I create the look and what goes into the shot. Then something happened that threw me through a loop. I took a snap on my iPhone of my girlfriend and son, and when my friend saw it, they commented how great the medium format look makes the shot. Now, this is an amateur (self-described), so no value in putting too much weight in the mistake, but I had edited the shot to look a bit like a medium format image, and it did look similar.

To create the same shot on my medium format body and manual focus lens would have been significantly more finicky and, in all likelihood, wouldn't have looked much different. It isn't news that phone cameras are tremendously powerful now and perpetually encroaching on dedicated camera territory. With a blend of AI and clever design, they can recreate many effects that used to be a bonafide skill in photography. The most recent example that has now reached a level where it is almost indistinguishable is long exposures.

Yes, there are still differences in the final result, particularly to the trained eye. Also, the file size and how malleable it is in post-processing are usually some way apart from dedicated cameras. But, on all of those charges, it almost never matters. Most people can't tell the difference, and most applications of an image will not show the image anywhere near its true dimensions. The more interesting question here is how all this technology impacts the photographer.

The dedicated camera versus a phone is a tired discussion. What is a more interesting discussion, to me at least, is how all of this technology changes the craft. After all, while phone cameras have been improving at a rate of knots, dedicated cameras have too. Modern bodies now have some superb, quality-of-life-improving features, from Eye AF to real-time generating long exposures and compositing. These all make capturing the desired shot easier in a way that wasn't possible some years back, and typically, they replace a skill within photography.

When digital photography more or less superseded film photography, there was the inevitable backlash of photographers who felt as if the skills necessary to be a good photographer were lessened. They were undoubtedly right in that there was no need to be hanging film in your bath anymore, but were they right with regards to the use of the camera too? If you can check your images as you go, you can adjust exposure and composition until it's perfect, something that wasn't possible with know-how and experience beforehand.

Now, digital photography hasn't quite had a pivotal moment of change like the transition from analog to digital, but it has had myriad smaller events. The most obvious and impactful for me is the aforementioned Eye AF. I assigned it to a back-button on my Sony and never missed nailing a portrait's focus on the subject's eye ever again. They even added it to work on animals! I used to have to work hard to nail focus, even with autofocus (in which there is another, similar discussion), but now, it's more or less free. You can get even more obscure with this line of questioning too: I used to have to exercise a marksman-taught breathing technique to take handheld shots in low light, but now, in-body image stabilization (IBIS) is so good I can get the shot while dancing if I fancied.

What does this mean for the photographer? Is photography easier? Well, yes, unambiguously in some regards. As a father and uncle of small children, I can confirm that Eye AF increased the number of keepers by a decent margin, though the shots, if taken without Eye AF and if successful, would have been identical. There are many examples of this, and so, there's no denying that capturing certain shots is objectively easier to do and requires less skill on the photographer's part. The argument that results is that photography is easier to do, and the bar has been lowered. This is where I disagree.

With the fundamentals easier in photography, the bar hasn't been lowered at all. The learning curve has been smoothed out, and beginners can get shots properly exposed and in-focus almost immediately, but that, in fact, raises the bar. The average becomes so much higher than it was just a few decades ago, as what was a skill and a hallmark of a good photographer is now simply the bare minimum. As a result, we expect more, particularly when not only are we taking more photographs than ever before by an enormous factor, but also viewing more photographs at the same increased rate. To have your photographs enjoyed by a good number of people has always been tricky, but now, it's tricky in a way that can feel insurmountable; you are a grain of sand in the Sahara.

Nevertheless, there are upsides to the many quality-of-life improvements for photographers. Whether you're shooting in auto mode on the highest-spec camera or in manual on an aging medium format body, the crutches (for want of a better word) allow you to concentrate on what really matters: capturing a memorable image. For the majority of photographers, the love of the craft isn't the mastery of the settings, but the results of them. There's satisfaction in becoming proficient at any skill, certainly, but knowing what settings to use is a vehicle to the destination. By having your mind untethered from desperately trying to focus on a moving eye, control the awkwardly wide dynamic range of a scene, or keep the camera still enough to shoot in low but beautifully ambient light, you can concentrate on everything else that goes into a great image: the composition, the light, the feel of the final photograph.

To me, the technology while admittedly making the creation of images properly exposed and in focus easier is liberating as a creative. I thoroughly enjoy the process of shooting on film and using manual focus and manual settings on digital bodies, but the modern conveniences of contemporary photography allow for that to be a choice. You can concentrate on getting the shot and being creative whenever you choose, and it's hard to imagine that could be a negative for the craft.

What do you think? Is the lowering of the barrier of entry to photography eroding the skill of our discipline or raising the standard? Is it doing both simultaneously? Share your thoughts in the comment section below.

Go here to read the rest:

Is Technology in Photography Lowering the Bar or Increasing Freedom? - Fstoppers

Freedom From Fear is a nationalnon-profit 501 (c) (3) mental health advocacy organization that was founded in 1984 by Mary Guardino on Staten Island at 308 Seaview Avenue, Staten Island New York, 10305. Freedom From Fear's mission is to positively impact the lives of all those affected by anxiety, depression, and related disorders through advocacy, education, research, and community support. On this website you will find comprehensive mental health information and resources.

For information regarding our affiliated treatment center, Clinical Management Consultants, please click the treatment tab. The treatment center specializes in the treatment of anxiety disorders, major depression, and bipolar disorder, in children and adolescents as well. There areno treatment servicesfor substance abuse, schizophrenia or other serious mental illnesses, butwe can help an individual in finding a facility that can address these problems.

Spring 2020 NewsletterWinter 2019/2020 NewsletterFall 2019 Newsletter

Follow Freedom From Fear on:

Real People. Real Treatments. Real Success Stories.

Freedom From Fear is a national not-for-profit mental health advocacy organization. Mary Guardino founded FFF in 1984as an outgrowth of her own personal experiences having suffered from anxiety and depressive illnesses for more than 25 years.

Read more from the original source:

Freedom From Fear: Anxiety and Depression Resource Organization

(Editors Note: The references to guns below is meant to illustrate a Constitutional right that could easily be stripped from citizens at the whimsy of the U.S. Supreme Court, depending upon its makeup. The hyperbole is meant to illustrate the deranged turn in our countrys politics and the threat of violence posed by it. The latest example being the likely decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and the near-certain conniption to follow.)

The Princess, er, publisher has made a decree: I shall not write an opinion piece regarding the recent leak from the Supreme Court of a draft opinion that, if made final, would overturn Roe v. Wade. Thats the landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case that first gave women the right to end a pregnancy without undo government interference. Overturning that decision will secure a long-sought victory for anti-abortion crusaders. But it would also strip away from millions of women a hard-fought, Constitutionally-protected right granted 50 years ago.

So, in lieu of that controversial subject, I will instead opine to you today aboutFREEDOM.

We Americans love our freedoms.

And it is true, compared to many nations, they are vast.

And they are palpable, substantial. You can hold them in your hands and in your hearts. Guns, for example. We love our guns, quite often more than life itself!

You want to hold your FREEDOM in your hand, really feel it? Press the cold, brushed steel of that pistol you own against your bare chest. Cock it. Aim it at the face in the mirror. So many people in lands faraway have never, and likely will never, feel such raw, visceral power in the palm of their hands.

Sexy, right?

Ok then. Caress that scoped rifle you used this winter to secure meat for your family. Thank it as you gaze longingly into the glass eyes of that horned head that once sat atop that God given natural bounty whose life you gloriously stole to fill your familys bellies. Not only did that little piece of American FREEDOM provide rustic decor for your living room, it also turned the rest of that carcass into rock hard steaks stacked neatly in your Second Amendment freezer.

Your freedom felled that beast as much as your selection of ammo and patient aim. And if the government wants to strip you of that right, theyll have to rip those guns from your cold, dead hands. Am I right? FREEDOM!

We have so much freedom in America, some of us dont even know what do with all of it.

Voting, for example.

Its election season. The right to vote is a big freedom. Its the freedom to select the candidate who you think will best serve your interests or your communitys interests in Washington, D.C., or in Salt Lake City or on the school board or the county commission.

The opposite is also true.

Your vote can signal your displeasure at an elected official, that they have disappointed you or failed to live up to their promise. You have the freedom to dispatch them with your ballot like an elk unlucky enough to stumble into your gun sights.

You can now proudly don that ubiquitous I Voted! sticker right on your bare chest, prance around, gun in hand, and gloat to any who will listen about how you helped send some dirty liberal hippie right into a private-sector lobbying gig thatll pay him or her six times what they earned as an elected official. Congratulations!

Of course, some choose to exercise this freedom in a very odd way, as an almost lazy protestation to NOT vote at all. Curious choice to be sure. But hey, thats American FREEDOM for you.

Better yet, given what we know about gerrymandering and the January 6 insurrection and the proliferation of 24/7 political propagandaright and left, but mostly rightyou have the freedom to support some candidate who is literally working to make sure your vote counts less and less and maybe even disappears altogether in the not too distant future.

Dont like Democracy? Want to overturn a free and fair election? Vote for Me, Im Mike Lee!

NOW THAT IS WHAT I CALL FREEDOM!!!

This paper you hold in your hands, this very opinion, which has you probably shaking your head right about now, is also the product of freedom. Better believe it!

The blood spilled to make it all possible has long since seeped into hallowed ground. But get it, freedom allows me to tell you how I feel, what I think, pick and choose which facts to lay out to you to support my case, maybe even flat out lie to you, just for fun and profit if I so choose.

And you have the freedom to disagree, call me an idiot or a liar, find your own facts to support your own opinion, write me an angry letter, or quietly inquire about my mental health in a discreet phone call to the Princess.

Now if that aint FREEDOM, I dont know what is.

But get this, too: FREEDOMS, once granted, are extremely difficult to take away.

You want to stifle my freedom to express myself, share my opinion, tell you or some loony anti-democratic senator what I really think of them? See the part above about guns, if thats your wish.

You want to water down my vote, or worse, start seriously threatening legitimate elections with nonsense about fraud and Chinese ballots and voting machines controlled by dead Venezuelans, huh? Well, then there might be a fight brewing. No, no, there IS a fight brewing.

And how about that forbidden subject mentioned at the beginning?

For 50 years American women have had a freedom. Love it or hate it, its theirs and theirs alone. They fought for it. A lot of them arguably died for it. And if you or your government representatives, or the judges who lied about it to win their lifetime seats, want to take it away, good luck with that. Youre gonna have one helluva fight on your hands.

Because thats how FREEDOM in America works.

See the part above about guns again if youre still confused about that.

Continued here:

FREEDOM: Is it just another 'F' word now? - Millard County Chronicle Progress

May 11, 2022 -The Department of Arts & Culture's Albuquerque Summerfest concert series and Freedom 4th will feature a variety of national touring groups and diverse local performers. The excitement kicks off with Heights Summerfest on Saturday, June 11 at North Domingo Baca Park with headliner Preservation Hall Jazz Band.

Other headliners include Las Cafeteras at Route 66 Summerfest on Saturday, July 23 and Yacht Rock Revue at Downtown Summerfest on Saturday, August 6. Westside Summerfest on Saturday, August 20 will be dedicated to promoting local talent and will feature Albuquerque bands on two stages. Each event will also feature local bands, local businesses with handcrafted products, food trucks, free activities for children, and libations created by breweries, wineries, and distilleries.

Shenandoah is set to headline Freedom 4th at Balloon Fiesta Park on Monday, July 4. Fueled by Marty Raybons distinctive vocals and the bands skilled musicianship, Shenandoah became well known for delivering such hits as Two Dozen Roses," Church on Cumberland Road, and Next to You, Next to Me. The band has left a potent legacy in country music with more than 300 million streams, over 8 million combined album sales, and 13 No. 1 radio singles over the course of more than three decades. Today that legacy continues as Shenandoah embarks on their 35th anniversary tour.

Freedom 4th will also feature the brightest fireworks show in the state, food, local beer, and free activities for kids.

Albuquerque Summerfest and Freedom 4th are free and open to the public. More details on each specific event can be found at http://www.cultureabq.com. Sponsors include iHeart Radio and Lucky Boyz Limousine.

See original here:

Albuquerque Summerfest and Freedom 4th Headliners Announced - City of Albuquerque

It appears that the Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF) does not care about children. This a harsh statement, but it is undeniable.

From the mouth of the IFF Executive Director, Idaho public schools are grotesque, and public schools are the most virulent forms of socialism in our society. In fact, the IFF calls for the entire dismantling of our cherished public education system enshrined in the Idaho Constitution.

Who are these people?

It is one thing to want your children to attend private or parochial schools, but to entirely deny that opportunity to hundreds of thousands of children statewide whose parents work outside the home or simply cannot afford expensive private schools is clearly meanspirited.

The IFFs answer to their desired breakup of public schools is to send kids home and teach them online. COVID very clearly taught us that online learning comes with significant and often insurmountable hardships for parents and children. Online schooling is often too difficult for small children, and what could possibly go wrong with an unsupervised 15 year old teenager with a laptop?

The IFF shamefully wants our children to be divided into two categories; those who have opportunities for learning (wealthy and urban) and those who do not (poor and rural).

They dont care about kids who through no fault of their own come from poverty, speak a different language, or live in rural areas without the access to amenities enjoyed by the IFF preferred privileged class. The IFF worked hard to block funding for early childhood education services. Lets not forget the vast majority of Idahoans want these services for their children.

The IFF would yank all fiscal and medical support away from children with special needs or disabling conditions. They would deny these children an opportunity to learn important skills and become productive, educated members of society.

The IFF also attacks young adults who want to attend college. Year after year the IFF demands from their sycophantic legislators massive reductions in financial support to our local universities even as these institutions consistently provide excellent higher educational services for thousands of students.

The IFF is apparently against K-12 and all higher education.

But that is not all. They also scorn our teachers, support staff and administrators. They disrespect our Governor, disparage the State Board of Education, and endlessly ridicule the State Department of Education.

For years, the IFF has pushed their obsequious lawmakers to deny educators and support staff access to salaries, and desperately needed health care. This legislative session, they wanted to imprison librarians.

The IFF says that they want less government, and more parental involvement, but then stridently demand massive punitive governmental intrusion into the private lives of parents and their children, inserting themselves into the most sensitive private medical decisions best made by medical professional and families.

They say they are opposed to socialism, but then want to take your hard-earned tax dollars and frivolously redistribute your money with zero accountability to unaccredited parochial schools or private systems.

The IFF does not have a working plan for Idaho or Idahoans, they can only peddle their misguided accusations and slander. They have no solutions. They exist to tear down, never to build up.

The IFF militate against children, college students, K-16 educators, K-16 support staff, librarians and virtually everyone that does not slavishly adhere to their radical ideology. Their disdain for anyone outside their circle is alarming.

Their actions should serve as a wakeup call for us to sideline these conflict entrepreneurs and the legislators who support them for good by ignoring them and consigning their efforts to the ash heap of history.

See the original post:

The Freedom Foundation exists to tear down, not build up - Idaho EdNews

In early April four Russian student editors of a university website called DOXA were put on trial in Moscow. The students at the Higher School of Economics had been under house arrest for a year for encouraging minors to engage in life-threatening activities expressing their views at a protest rally. All the same, the newspaper kept working. In the weeks immediately after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the DOXA website was an important source of independent information about the war.

We have stopped taking responsibility for what is happening in our country, declared one of the DOXA editors, Volodya Metelkin, at the trial. One of his co-defendants, Alla Gutnikova, concluded her speech by describing freedom as a process through which people develop the habit of becoming resistent to enslavement.

Responsibility and freedom these words, important to these students, were also precious to the Soviet dissidents of the 1960s and 1970s. This was evident in the demonstration on Red Square in August 1968, following the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. The protestors there were just eight of them included Larisa Bogoraz, an outspoken activist, Pavel Litvinov, a grandson of one of Stalins foreign ministers, and Natalya Gorbanevskaya, founder of the samizdat journal, The Chronicle of Current Events. Most of them, Bogoraz and Litvinov included, were arrested and subjected to a show trial. Gorbanevskaya was arrested at the end of 1969 and then incarcerated in a psychiatric hospital.

In her final statement at the trial, Bogoraz declared that if she had not participated in the demonstration, she would have considered herself responsible for the actions of the government just as everyone bore responsibility for the Stalin-Beria labour camps. Her decision to demonstrate, she explained, was a way of taking responsibility for what had happened, even though she knew that the protest would likely prove ineffective. I decided that it was not a matter of effectiveness in so far as I was concerned, but of my responsibility, she declared.

In his final plea, Litvinov stated that he had felt obliged to express his disagreement with the government, while noting that it was vital for the country that its citizens should be truly free. At the demonstration itself, Litvinov had unfurled a banner bearing the phrase For your freedom and ours a slogan used by Polish insurgents protesting Russian rule in the 19th century.The implication was that taking responsibility for the events in Czechoslovakia was important for the fate of the Soviet Union itself.

Of course, the demonstration did not have any immediate effect. But in a letter to Western newspapers written just after it had taken place, Gorbanevskaya indicated that the demonstrators had succeeded in a moral if not a political way: they had broken through the torrent of unbridled lies and cowardly silence to show that not all Soviet citizens agreed with the violence being perpetrated in their name.

There was often an existential element in the activity of dissidents in that they wanted to free themselves from a feeling of being gripped by fear or entangled in lies. In his memoirs, human rights activist Vladimir Bukovsky called on people to throw off the excuses with which they justified complicity in crime. A small core of freedom existed in every person, he declared; this was a consciousness of personal responsibility, which meant inner freedom. Bukovsky played a crucial role in exposing the Soviet abuse of psychiatry in the early 1970s.

Another critic of Soviet communism, Nadezhda Mandelstam from an earlier generation of thinkers also had things to say about responsibility. In her view, people came to abdicate a sense of responsibility for the country in the 1920s as the Bolshevik dictatorship established itself. Everyone of us had a share in what happened, and there is no point in trying to disclaim responsibility, she wrote in her memoirs. In her view, inner freedom and memory were needed for anyone wanting to bring positive change to the world. Even the most ordinary person had the power to influence the course of events, she thought.

The dissidents generally did not like the word dissident: its use by the Soviet regime implied that they were effectively traitors to the motherland or figures of marginal importance. Today the Russian foreign agents law is a similar attempt to imply that such people are unpatriotic.

But these dissidents of the late 1960s were raising questions of national importance. The Soviet Union was desperately in need of new ideas. The invasion of Czechoslovakia was effectively a way of avoiding the challenge posed by the Czech reformers: the task of recovering a humane vision of life in a society still suffering the effects of Leninism and Stalinism. After he retired, the long-serving Soviet ambassador to Washington, Anatoly Dobrynin, wrote that while the Czechoslovak crisis gradually lost its intensity after the invasion, the military intervention cost the U.S.S.R. dearly politically and morally.

In her speech in early April, Alla Gutnikova remarked that even before her arrest, through her studies, she had joined the school of being able to talk about truly important things. Perhaps developing this art individually and collectively is in itself an act of responsibility. It is not easy to practice and can be costly for the participants: at their trial, Gutnikova and her co-defendants were sentenced to two years of corrective labor.But the failure to develop this capability, or the loss of it, can have bitter consequences, as the war in Ukraine shows.

Read this article:

Russian Dissent Then and Now: 'For Your Freedom and Ours' - The Moscow Times

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

More here:

Freedom Historical Society to present 'Mount Washington Carriage Road and The Glen House' program - Conway Daily Sun

There are many ways of getting freedom wrong. For ways of getting it right, my best advice is to turn to the mainline of American authors from the cusp of the Civil War through the turn of the century. For them, freedom is not the survivalists barren fortress-building, the hedonists plot to escape the world and its obligations, or the gunmans drive to violate that world. Its not the power to accumulate cash or cultural capital. So how did they define this most American of words?

Walt Whitman saw freedom as release, the oneness of death that unites us all. Here was a riposte to easy patriotism, since death precedes all politics, and lies much deeper in us. For Frederick Douglass freedom was a concrete goal, the escape from slavery. Henry James described the freedom that comes with an educated awareness. Mark Twain carved his way through a frontier freedom that was spirited and raw. Edith Wharton outlined the shallow conventional life that can prevent you from being free, turning you into one of lifes victims.

At the start Henry James hated Walt Whitman. Mr. Whitman is very fond of blowing his own trumpet, James snickered in his review of Drum-Taps, Whitmans book of Civil War poetry. Whitman, James charged, was aggressively careless, inelegant, and ignorant, and constantly preoccupied with [him]self.

But James changed his mind about Whitman. Edith Wharton describes him later in life reciting Whitmans Out of the Cradle Endlessly Rocking, crooning it in a mood of subdued ecstasy till the fivefold invocation to Death tolled out like the knocks in the opening bars of the Fifth Symphony.Hard as it is to imagine Henry James on his bike careening through the English countryside (yet its truehe was a fanatical cyclist), it might be harder still to imagine him intoning the plaintive words of Whitmans he-bird yearning after its mate in Out of the Cradle:

Unembarrassed as always, Whitman poured his soul into the he-birds chant, and James, with Wharton at his side, abandoned his usual high-starched quizzical manner to join in the poets throbbing.

Whitman charms us with his huzzahs and his many oddnesses. Hankering, gross, mystical, nudeso runs the poets self-portrait in Song of Myself. How is it I extract strength from the beef I eat? he asks. Nutrition, like all else under the sun, and like Walt himself, is a mystery, worth puzzling over.

When Whitman is somber, he haunts us. He notices a child wondering what is the grass? and muses an answer that channels Isaiahs astounding metaphor, all flesh is grass: And now it seems to me the beautiful uncut hair of graves. Song of Myself turns dim and reflective as Whitman speaks lines that could have come from his reluctant inheritor T.S. Eliot:

We live in a world of the dead, Whitman is saying. Through this gesture, he skews death toward life, making it the most capacious form of our existence, the beautiful secret word that releases us. The sea, he writes in Out of the Cradle (the climactic passage that Wharton refers to), lispd to me the low and delicious word death, / And again death, death, death, death, / Hissing melodious ... Since our being is not just ego and consciousness but something that thrums beneath us as a force of union, To die is, as Whitman wrote in Song of Myself, different from what any one supposed, and luckier.

Whitman was a healer during the war, and he lovingly tended to wounded young soldiers as poignantly described by Mark Edmundson in his recent book on Whitman, Song of Ourselves. The poet was marked forever by his experience of the camps of the wounded, these butchers shambles, as he described them:

Whitman remembered too the darkest hour of the Union, the First Battle of Bull Run in 1861. Whitman was among the crowds in the streets of Washington, many despondent but others taking satisfaction in the Confederate victory. Half our lookers-on secesh of the most venomous kindthey say nothing; but the devil snickers in their faces, Whitman wrote, and he added:

Whitman saw in Lincoln the indispensable man, unswervingly dedicated to union, the foundation and tie of all, as Whitman called it. But for the ex-slave Frederick Douglass, who tried to sway Lincoln toward a more anti-slavery posture, the president was a less essential and prepossessing figure. In his address at the unveiling of the Freedmens Memorial in 1876, which depicts Lincoln freeing a slave, the lion-maned Douglass bluntly proclaimed,

Douglass in his speech then depicts Lincoln as a Moses who was slow coming down from Sinai, bound as he was by the iron laws of politics:

To Douglass, Lincoln was not a sacred symbol or a saint but a flawed if necessary leader. Instead of waiting for Lincoln to emancipate him, Douglass achieved his own freedom, not just by escaping to the North but by expunging all traces of the slave in his psyche. Each memory of slaverys scars was painful to him. In his 1845 autobiography Douglass, who was soon to become the most celebrated orator in America, recalls the singing of slaves making their way to the Great House Farm, their masters home plantation. While on their way, Douglass writes, they would make the dense old woods, for miles around, reverberate with their wild songs, revealing at once the highest joy and the deepest sadness ... These songs show the horrible character of slavery as nothing else can, Douglass sayspresumably including gory scenes at the whipping postbecause the slaves cannot completely reject the masters values. They too are proud of the Great House Farm.

If Douglass were to keep listening to the slaves music, his soul would be tarnished, his will made weak. His idea of freedom, wedded to a blunt Christian honesty, is not musical but moral. Here, Douglass turns his back on the blues, which comes out of the field songs he portrays. With hard-earned irony, the blues makes terms with misery and even finds exultation in pain. We admire Douglass heroic conceptionbut sometimes we still want to hear the blues.

William Dean Howells once asked Mark Twain, Why [do] we hate the past so? Twain responded, Its so humiliating. Twains Huckleberry Finn magically turns every humiliation into a game, from the threats Huck endures at the hands of his drunken murderous Pap to the ritual demeaning of Jim by Huck and Tom Sawyer at the books end, when they fool Jim into thinking he is not yet freehijinks that sour the conclusion for some readers.

Many of Huck Finns glories are hard-edged, like the feud between the Shepherdsons and the Grangerfords, a frightening piece of satire from Twain showcasing the brutal consequences of gentlemanly honor. And theres the cold-blooded killing of a reckless blowhard named Boggs, celebrated by townsfolk in the old-fashioned equivalent of a Twitter frenzy. Twain loves to dissect con men, like the Duke and the Dauphin, but their antics turn pathetic quickly. Stand up for the stupid and crazy, Whitman said, presaging the Beats, but in Twains work, the stupid and crazy tend to be scoundrels. The best part of Huck Finn is what everyone says it is, the scenes of Huck and Jim lying on their raft:

Its likely that soon Huck Finn, felled by the ideology of anti-freedom, which presents itself as a shield against harm, will no longer be taught in our schools. Yet it will always find readers, because of passages like the one Ive just quoted.

Henry James was Twains opposite number. Where Twain pretends to be rude and untamed, James is judicious and evasive in his manner. Both were great experimenters, forecasting the modernist adventures of the 1920s that I will talk about in my next article in this series.

James is our great novelist of renunciation, which is not usually considered an American virtue. In his most accessible masterpiece, A Portrait of a Lady, which, like Huck Finn, was first published in the 1880s, James seduces the reader into thinking that this will be a story about imagination and freedom, not renunciation, but in the end his heroine, the inimitable Isabel Archer, gives up romantic love.

All James novels feature an electric-wire sensibility. His characters are constantly alert, and at times quivering with alarm. James portrays an exhilarated awareness piqued by danger, whether the danger is the specter of social ruin, being tricked into or out of love, or being shown up in front of the internal jury that rules on the legitimacy of ones self-image. This darting psychomachia is a heightened form of life, a virtual reality. No one misses a move.

James knowing style, with its precision which may occasionally seem preening or archly tut-tutting, is easily parodied. But it allowed James to let loose his energies and be superbly creative. This style, oblique and cutting, was his invented personal signature, and astoundingly enough, it was the way James spoke, too.

The young lady of the Portrait, Isabel Archer, is drawn so that every reader will fall in love with her. She is quick, alive, and open, and above all free, with an Americans hunger for new experiences. The leisurely opening of James novel acquaints us with Isabels capacious and acute way of looking at the world. She had an immense curiosity about life and was constantly staring and wondering, James writes. Her deepest enjoyment was to feel the continuity between the movements of her own soul and the agitations of the world. Still more charmingly, Isabel, James remarks, had an unquenchable desire to think well of herself. She had a theory that it was only under this provision that life was worth living.

Isabel gives herself proper credit, the first prerequisite of freedom. But she steps into a trap. James, as usual, has something up his sleevea nightmare marriage.

The Portrait of a Lady contains a puzzle to thwart readers: Why does Isabel choose to marry the serpentlike connoisseur Gilbert Osmond, a louche American expat, instead of the most wholehearted and simpatico of her suitors, Caspar Goodwood? (A solid name, that, made for gripping firmly in hand.)

Goodwood is simply too plain, too much there, unlike the chiaroscuro Osmondhe gives Isabel nothing to figure out, no material to work on. As the critic Robert Pippin remarks, when Goodwood makes his final try for Isabel, after her marriage to Osmond has collapsed, he is the same earnest boy he always was, only more assertive. Pippin notes, There is something pathetic and paradigmatically American in Goodwoods claim: Why shouldnt we be happywhen its here before us. When its so easy?

When they embrace, Isabel senses Goodwoods hard manhood like a flash of lightning (James added this sensational phrase when he revised the novel for the New York edition of his works). Yet she rejects a relationship with him. She didnt and doesnt love Goodwood, but is merely excited by him, and excitement is not enough.

At the end of the Portrait Isabel narrows the circle of her interest, which has earlier been so ample and free-swinging. By facing her fate, instead of fleeing it with Goodwood, Isabel survives. She returns to Rome, the site of her marriage to Osmond, perhaps to confront him or to rescue Osmonds daughter Pansyonly the all-seeing author Henry James knows for sure, and hes not telling us.

James Isabel has her dark double in Edith Whartons Lily Bart from The House of Mirth. Where Isabel wants to see and experience beauty, Lily aspires to be a beautiful object, admired like a jewel in its setting. She could not figure herself as anywhere but in a drawing-room, diffusing elegance as a flower sheds perfume, Wharton writes. Yet despite the shallowness of her dream Lily does not seem at all trivial to usa miraculous achievement on Whartons part.

Lack of money haunts Lily and finally does her in, with a directness matched only in Dreiser. Her grand desperation and tragic death are set off against the fine sensitivity of Laurence Selden, the man who should have married her but who instead remains a mere observer of her career. Selden is kind to her, as is, surprisingly, the Jewish social climber Rosedale. Wharton began writing Rosedale as an antisemitic caricature, but then turned him into a mensch. But kindness is not enough. Lily is simply unequipped for life, shortsighted and full of wrong instincts. She had never learned to live with her own thoughts, Wharton notes piercingly about Lily.

James advised Wharton to do New Yorkand she did. Her unsparing account of the citys ruthless upper classes in The House of Mirth and an even more brutal novel, The Custom of the Country, shows how money, personal appearance, and sexual availability imprison young women. For Lily there is no way outbut Selden the aesthete memorializes her from the sidelines. In the end, disquietingly, Selden congratulates himself for having loved Lily, almost as if savoring the fact of her ruin.

For James Isabel, freedom meant conceiving the world so that doing what you like and doing what you ought become one and the same. Its the noblest combination imaginable, but there is something childlike about it. Lily Bart in The House of Mirth represents the crashing of such dreams into the hard reality of the American drive for success. Freedom is a way of shaping the self, which Isabel can achieve and Lily cannot.

See the article here:

American Freedom Is Greater Than Slavery and Ends in Death - Tablet Magazine

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

See the article here:

Guest column: GOP is out to limit voting and reproductive freedom - The Bulletin

Last week, newscame into the limelight that press freedom in India has decreased dramatically asIndia slid in the index of press freedom. This report was released by an organisation called Reporters Without Borders, a non-profit and non-governmental organisation without any accountability, with the World Press Freedom Index (WPFI).

This episode is not the first time and neither would it be the last time that such a report was released, and India was demoted from it. It started with a rank of 80 in the inaugural WPFI report in 2002: Indias position fell to 122 in 2010, 131 in 2012, 140 in 2019, and 142 in 2020, followed by 150 in 2022. This report aims to evaluate the level of freedom enjoyed by media in 180 countries.

During the UPA era, Indias ranking, according to this index, was falling consecutivelyand silence prevailed in most of the quarters which are vocal right now. Such reports are not even taken seriously in many countries right now.

Like all surveys, this survey also has some methodology to access the parameters, and in a nutshell, it is anything but faultless.

First, the organisation didnt mention the number of participants it surveyed before giving such a label. Although it would not be unfair to assume that the sample size would be tiny, typically consisting of an elite class ofjournalists, activists, and social scientists to decide how much freedom people enjoy. In the past, the entire WPFI 2020 report was prepared by questioning just 150 correspondents and 18 NGOs, with each one answering all 83 questions related to each country. The results prepared from this method will not surprise anyone about how much connection theywould have with reality.

Second, the questionnaire contains many questions that cant be directly associated with the fact that the government is suppressing the freedom of the press. For example, one question is, Is the news media able to achieve financial stability?" Now, the answer to this question can be anything but the reasons are multiple. It can also bethat the finance department of the media is facing some issues, or the media has taken a debt in expansion which cant be repaid because of the margins shrinking.

Another question is, Are journalists threatened or influenced by corruption?" The answer would be tricky in this case. It can also happen that the journalists are affected by corruption by big corporate to publish against the government. Or replace the big corporate with some non-accountable organisation or individual. The question can still be answered without the government being held responsible.

Also, there are questions like, Are journalists frequently convicted because of their work, whether for press offenses or for common law crimes?", Are laws against terrorism, separatism and/or extremism used against journalists?" and so on. This places journalists as the unquestionable people, particularly given that they can also be prone to be criminals but receive much more media coverage when taking action, increasing theavailability bias and triggering the elites to think theyre in danger.

Third, the bias of any organisation can be known from the issues on which it takes the stand. In February 2022, Rana Ayyub, whose book was dubbed as fiction by the apex court, was being investigated for purportedly committing financial fraud beneath afundraiser and the RWB wanted the investigations to be stopped. It was not the first time that the RWB showed this bias, though.

It is not the case with only this organisation that such blatantly shabby observations are published and taken seriously. A few years back, Thomson Reuters Foundation released a ranking of countries based on womens safety in which India was declared as the most dangerous country for women. The irony in the report was that Afghanistan and Somalia were safer than India when it came to womens safety! As usual, it was prepared by asking opinions from a small lot of feminists, humanists, activists (add some fancy ists here) across the globe.

Coming back to the point, there may be political or economic attempts of intimidation that one cant ignore while analysing the whole picture and giving a conclusion, but the surveys using such an outdated methodology and blatant bias will not help the cause either.

Harshil Mehta is an analyst who writes on international relations, diplomacy and national issues. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the stand of this publication.

Read all the Latest News , Breaking News and IPL 2022 Live Updates here.

Excerpt from:

The Press Freedom Index is Prepared With Bias and a Flawed Methodology - News18

A defamation lawsuit against broadcaster RT by MEPs Mick Wallace and Clare Daly has been flagged on the Council of Europe platform as a potential threat to press freedom.

Media freedom NGOs Index on Censorship and International Press Institute issued an alert on the councils safety of journalists platform about the case, filing it under the category of harassment and intimidation of journalists, which includes the use of defamation cases.

The alert notes that the two MEPs filed separate defamation proceedings against RT on April 11th, and that the two are represented by the law firm Dore & Company Solicitors.

It is the second alert ever filed concerning Ireland on the platform since it was established seven years ago, adding to the flagging of a lawsuit against the Dublin Inquirer newspaper in 2020.

We are extremely alarmed at the legal actions that have been filed against RT by MEPs Clare Daly and Mick Wallace, especially as we believe that they are characteristic of strategic lawsuits against public participation also known as SLAPPs, Jessica N Mhainn, a policy and campaigns manager with Index on Censorship, said in a statement.

We identify SLAPPs through some key hallmarks, but fundamentally they involve powerful or wealthy people making legal threats or taking legal actions against public watchdogs such as media outlets in response to public-interest speech.

Mr Wallace and Ms Daly did not immediately respond to a request for comment but, in a statement, Robert Dore of Dore & Company Solicitors said: If individuals who make the case that they have been defamed by the national broadcaster institute proceedings to vindicate their good names and reputations, as is their lawful entitlement, I do not see how this can be considered as harassment and intimidation of journalists, or how any NGO can characterise their cases as strategic lawsuits.

One must balance press freedom against the rights of individuals to their good names and reputations.

More:

Daly and Wallace lawsuit flagged for press freedom concerns - The Irish Times

Law students and lawyers in Afghanistan are filing reports with JURIST on the situation there after the Taliban takeover. Here, a female Afghan law student shares her views on a strict new Taliban decree issued Saturday requiring Afghan women to wear full hijabs under threat of sanction against themselves or their male guardians. For privacy and security reasons, we are withholding our correspondents name. The text has only been lightly edited to respect the authors voice.

In the very first days after the fall of Afghanistan to the Taliban, they were saying that they had changed and they respected human rights and womens rights, but these days we are witnessing that words are not enough, and there is no change in this illiterate, cruel, bigoted and rough group.

The right to decide how to dress is the most important, fundamental and primary right of a woman. How can womens rights be respected while a large number of men decide on the way of dressing of women without considering their wants and opinions?

What kind of respect is it that I, as a woman, cant decide on my very own and personal part of my life, which is dressing?

There is no respect for womens rights in Afghanistan. Imposing black Hijab and veils by the Taliban is a clear violation of womens rights. The Taliban are the enemies of womens freedom, and they are always trying to suppress and imprison women and remove them from public life.

The Taliban make new restrictions on women and impose it through their families, because no father, brother or husband wants to be imprisoned and tortured by the Taliban.

The Taliban have taken awayfrom women the right to live freely with dignity, and this pressure is increasing day by day

BUT

Actually, who can suppress this generation? Who can silence this generation of strong Afghan women?

The answer is: NO ONE

We are fighting for a free Afghanistan where women can live freely with dignity.

We are breathing in the middle of a fire of bigotry, violence and restrictions against women, and still we are alive.

Yes, we are here. You (Taliban) cant ignore us.

You cant remove us.

You cant kill us.

More:

Afghanistan dispatch: 'The Taliban are the enemies of women's freedom' - JURIST

The media watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF) released the 20th edition of its World Press Freedom Index last week, in which it underscored a twofold increase in polarisation amplified by information chaos.

Media polarisation is emerging as one overarching hurdle inhibiting progress in conflict-marred regions of Africa, where it is also fast becoming an open threat to peace and security.

Few countries illustrate this gloomy trend better than Mali in the Sahel, and Ethiopia at the Horn of Africa.

In Mali, political uncertainty and tensions between the countrys government and former colonial power, France, have increased since a military coup led by Colonel Assimi Goita in August 2020 overthrew elected President Ibrahim Keta, who was supported by France.

Last week, the military government accused the two French broadcasters RFI and France24 of airing disinformation about reports of human rights violations by the Malian army around the town of Diabaly.

The Malian government accused France of spying after the French military released a video of what it said were mercenaries from the Kremlin-linked security firm Wagner burying bodies at a mass grave on 20 April.

NGOs including Human Rights Watch have accused the Malian junta of targeting innocent civilians with over 100 people said to have been killed since December. Mali said the reports that its army had carried out abuses contained false allegations aimed at destabilising the government.

Malis High Communication Authority has decided to ban RFI and France 24 from the Malian airwaves. UN rights office spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani warned that the current climate in Mali is one with a pervasive chilling effect on journalists.

As the space for free expression is severely curtailed in Mali, social media platforms are playing an increasingly important role. In a region already blighted by military coups in Guinea and Burkina Faso, the current social and political tensions in the west African nation are sustained by disinformation and inflammatory content, which have proven difficult to stamp out.

Mali is now placed 111 out of the 180 countries monitored in the latest World Press Freedom index, a 12-place drop from 2021.

In the eastern part of the continent, Ethiopian federal troops deployed by the prime minister, Abiy Ahmed, have been fighting the Tigray Peoples Liberation Front (TPLF) since November 2020.

Journalists and human rights groups have reported serious abuses in the country, mostly mass killings and violent atrocities. Victims blame federal Ethiopian soldiers, the Amhara regional militias and Eritrean forces.

The UN high commissioner for human rights, Michelle Bachelet, has said that serious violations of international law may have been committed by Ethiopia, Eritrea and the TPLF.

Ethiopia is ranked 114 in the latest press-freedom rankings, 13 places down from last year. Ahmed made a promising start when he took power in April 2018, but the Nobel peace prize-winners war in Tigray has meant a rapid reversal of positive developments, including in the area of press freedom.

This years index show that new freedoms are severely threatened. The Committee to Protect Journalists has reported on how erosion of media rights has seriously increased during the conflict. Several journalists and media workers accused of helping foreign media have been arrested.

Furthermore, Ethiopian news media have become dangerously divided along ethnic lines. Facebook and Twitter have come under fire over their roles in the conflict. Critics argue they are not doing enough to prevent the spread of hate speech and incitements to violence on their platforms. Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen has also stated that in places like Ethiopia social media is fanning ethnic violence, a claim the firms reject.

The RSF uses five indicators to compile the index: political context, legal framework, economic context, sociocultural context and security. Whereas the most worrying part for Mali is the political context, Ethiopia scores extremely low on the security indicator.

The Nobel committees decision to award the 2021 peace prize to journalists Maria Ressa from the Philippines and Dmitrij Muratov from Russia stressed the importance of quality journalism as a prerequisite for democracy and peace. Both countries continue to plunge on the RSF list.

After its invasion of Ukraine, and the ongoing information war, Russia is now ranked 155th, with the situation for press freedom described as very bad. Today, parts of the Nobel peace prize committees rationale can be read almost as a prelude to what was to come: A free, independent and fact-based journalism protects against abuse of power, lies and war propaganda.

Dr Kristin Skare Orgeret is a professor in journalism and media studies at Oslo Metropolitan University, with a particular focus on media in conflict

Dr Bruce Mutsvairo is associate professor at Utrecht University and is investigating the impact of disinformation in exacerbating political conflict in Mali and Ethiopia

Link:

Media polarisation risks press freedom and peace in conflict-hit Mali and Ethiopia - The Guardian

The inauguration ceremony was held at the National Assembly at 11 a.m. and had around 41,000 people in attendance, including former presidents and the family members of deceased former leaders, parliamentary and government officials, diplomatic envoys and the invited public.

It is our generations calling to build a nation that espouses liberal democracy and ensures a thriving market economy, a nation that fulfills its responsibility as a trusted member of the international community, and a nation that truly belongs to the people, Yoon said.

The new president said many countries, including South Korea, are faced with multiple crises, including fast-evolving trade regimes, armed conflicts and wars, record-low growth, rising unemployment, polarization, internal strife. He believes freedom is the most important core value to overcome the challenges.

Freedom is a universal value, he said. Every citizen and every member of society must be able to enjoy freedom. If ones freedom is infringed upon or left uncorrected, this is an assault on everyones freedom.

By the presidential offices count, he used the word freedom 35 times in his inaugural address, the most of any word mentioned, followed by citizens and the public 15 times, each.

Individual countries must do so, but global citizens must also come together in solidarity to address these injustices if and when they arise, he said.

Hunger, poverty, abuse of power and armed conflict strips away our individual freedom and robs us of our inalienable right to the pursuit of happiness, Yoon said. We, as global citizens who enjoy real freedom, must never turn a blind eye when freedom is attacked.

Yoon believes division and social conflict plaguing Korean society and threatening freedom and liberal democratic order can be overcome with rapid and sustainable growth.

Rapid growth will open up new opportunities, he said. It will improve social mobility, thereby helping us rid of the fundamental obstacles that are aggravating social divide and conflicts.

The president said it was critical that the nation achieved rapid growth and that it would only be possible through science, technology and innovation.

Science, technology and innovation -- they will protect our democracy, expand freedom and our inalienable rights to let our people enjoy a sustainable life of dignity.

He also called for the denuclearization of North Korea for peace on the Korean peninsula.

While North Koreas nuclear weapon programs are a threat not only to South Koreas security and that of Northeast Asia, the door to dialogue will remain open to peacefully resolve this threat, the president said.

If North Korea genuinely embarks on a process to complete denuclearization, we are prepared to work with the international community to present an audacious plan that will vastly strengthen North Koreas economy and improve the quality of life for its people.

Yoon believes North Koreas denuclearization will greatly contribute to bringing lasting peace and prosperity to the Korean Peninsula and beyond.

I solemnly pledge today that I will do my utmost to elevate Korea into a country that truly belongs to the people, he said. A country based on the pillars of freedom, human rights, fairness and solidarity; a country that is respected by others around the world. Let us embark on this journey together.

The new president began his presidential term midnight Monday by receiving a report from the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the situation room of the National Crisis Management Center located in the basement of the presidential office in Yongsan, central Seoul.

By Shin Ji-hye (shinjh@heraldcorp.com)

See more here:

Yoon stresses freedom, growth as he begins 5-year term - The Korea Herald