The artist Petrit Halilaj has withdrawn from the Belgrade Biennial after the organizers of the exhibition dithered over how to present his nationality in accompanying materials.

Halilaj is from Kosovo, and the biennial is organized and hosted by the Cultural Centre of Belgrade in Serbia, a country that does not recognize Kosovo as an independent state. He pulled out of the show after he was unable to agree with the organizers about how his country of origin would be named in the list of participating artists.

Halilaj, who is based in Berlin, has written an open letter detailing his experience with the exhibition, which is officially called the 58th October Salon: Belgrade Biennial.

Kosovo declared independence from Serbia in 2008, and there is a fraught history between the two nations. During the Kosovo War of 199899, fought between the two nations,Halilaj himself was displaced and spent more than two years living in refugee camps. In his letter, Halilaj recalls how his and his familys passports were destroyed, and refers to the conflict as a genocide.

When I received the invitation to the Belgrade Biennial I was internally conflicted, but I also saw it as an opportunity to create a bridge, to open up a dialogue and to explore new paths of reconciliation through art, Halilaj writes.

Curated by Ilaria Marotta and Andrea Baccin, this iteration was called The Dreamers, and Halilaj had planned to show a video called Shkrepetima (Flash of Light) resulting from a theater performance he staged in his home city of Runik in Kosovo, inside the ruins of the citys House of Culture, which was destroyed during the conflict.

Organizers first omitted his country of origin from a document released in May. After he requested a correction, organizers introduced it with an asterisk, which Halilaj says reiterates the refusal of Serbia to recognize Kosovo as an independent country.

The asterisk does not even begin to repair a century of oppression and genocide that Serbia has inflicted on Kosovo and it is painful to witness in the context of an art institution that may have a different understanding of the issue, Halilaj writes.

Later, the institution ended up removing all mentions of the participating artists countries of origin, but Halilaj withdrew anyway out of fear that his work, which grapples with the plight of Kosovos multiethnic society, risked being miscommunicated and misinterpreted, or even politically instrumentalized.

The biennial is slated to open on October 16. Contacted by Artnet News, a spokesperson for the Cultural Center of Belgrade explained that as a public institution, it was obliged to follow Serbias official policy on Kosovo.

As you know the official policy of the Republic of Serbia doesnt recognize Kosovo as [an] independent country, so we as [a] public institution could not write [it] differently, the spokesperson said.

From the beginning of this unpleasant situation for Petrit Halilaj we were open for dialogue with the artist, the shows organizers said in a statement, adding that they hope he changes his mind and rejoins the exhibition.

They declined to elaborate on how they would deal with artists from Kosovo in the future.

Following Halilajs withdrawal, the organizers removed all cities and countries from the list of participating artists, which Halilaj says he hopes will be the biennials policy for future editions.

Read Halilajs open letter in full below.

GIVE US BACK OUR STARS

Petrit Halilajs withdrawal from The Dreamers, 58th Salon Belgrade Biennial

Open letter

In 2019 I was invited by Ilaria Marotta and Andrea Baccin to take part in the 58th Salon Belgrade Biennial, titled The Dreamers, organized and hosted by the Cultural Centre of Belgrade (KCB) and opening in October 2020. I was excited to collaborate with them and to travel to Belgrade for the first time as a Kosovar artist. I would exhibit the video resulting from Shkreptima, a theatre performance staged in Runik (the city where I grew up in Kosovo and the site of one of the earliest Neolithic settlements in the region) among the ruins of the Runiks House of Culturea symbol of the local multiethnic identity that has been closed down, emptied out and abandoned when the political situation with Serbia deteriorated in 1990s. When we started the project, the House of Culture was in a state of extreme abandonment and deterioration; trash had also been dumped there for years. We created a community of more than 80 people and cleaned up the space to give it back its life and cultural voice in Runik. Shkreptima is dedicated to the dreams of the citizens in Runik and it seemed to resonate with the aim of The Dreamers.

As many may know, Serbia does not recognize Kosovo as an independent country yet. After having silenced Kosovos cultural expression and cut education, in 19981999 Serbia undertook an armed invasion in Kosovo and violently repressed the Kosovar Albanian community which I am part of. This oppression has been referred to as a genocide, and it has urged other countries to take a side; it still does it today, when Kosovos unilateral Declaration of Independence (2008) is partly met with encouragement, partly neglected. During all these years, Serbia has officially treated the repression of Kosovo as if it were a matter of fiction. As if it never happened.

It did happen. In 19981999, I was one of the many people forced to live as a refugee and in camps for over two years after our houses had been burned to the ground. I consider myself lucky to have survived. My passport and that of all my family members were destroyed in front of us and we were suddenly neglected both our freedom of movement and our identity. So when I received the invitation to the Belgrade Biennial I was internally conflicted, but I also saw it as an opportunity to create a bridge, to open up a dialogue and to explore new paths of reconciliation through art. I wanted to overcome the dichotomy between us and them, between good and evil, to finally open up a shared space of discussion instead of broadening a division that has already forged so much hatred. I had the optimistic expectation that an art institution would be a space capable to represent a plurality of identities, eventually even taking a stand beyond the official politics around my country of origin, by just calling it by its name: Kosovo. The concept of The Dreamers, as well as the curators intention to transcend national divisions with this project supported my hope. Unfortunately I was confronted with a radically different reality.

With this letter I want to leave a trace of what I experienced in the past months, and what led to my withdrawal in June. This is my side of the story, of course, and I know that there are other viewpoints that should also be taken into account. On my side, I am making this public because a silent withdrawal would add another layer of impotence to the silencing I have experienced during this process, to the silencing and erasing of memories and experiences that runs through history. Instead, I hope to generate some discussion on the limits of political agency in government-funded art institutions located in countries that are still pursuing nationalistic and oppressive politics; on the potential of dreaming at all through art practices when the exhibition space becomes a frame that outlines the limits of the artists identity, and therefore of the dream itself; and more broadly, on the current political situation between Serbia and Kosovo.

The story begins in the second half of May, with the publication of the artists list.

Screenshot of KCB website, May 25th, 2020.

When the artist list of The Dreamers was made public, Ilaria Marotta noticed that my nationality, Kosovo, had been omitted from KCBs public communication. In the text, each artist was listed along with information regarding the year of birth, birthplace and country, as well as current living and working location. In my case, the name of the country was left blank after the comma, whichgiven the historic and current geopolitical contextI instinctively interpreted as an intentional omission of information. This omission had been decided by KCB independently from Ilaria and Andrea, with no previous notice, probably in the hope that no one would spot it or make a big deal about it.

As an artist, one imagines to be invited not because of nationality or place of birth, but rather for the ideas one aims to spread. This is why I would have agreed with this omission only if all the artists countries would have been omitted from the beginning, for example as a statement to explicitly transcend nation-state divides and to address their questionable relevance within an art project. On the contrary, like this, the omission of Kosovo from KCBs website acquired a much broader meaning and could only be read through the lenses of a wider and systematic political silencing. In my dream world, I wish that people could move freely with no exception beyond geographical boundaries and cultural barriers, as I like to imagine birds do. But we are still far, very far, from anything close to the realization of this dream and I believe such omissions shouldnt be left unnoticed, they have a political relevance that goes beyond my own experience, and speak of programmatic political and ideological interventions performed behind the scenes of art institutions.

This is not the first time that I have been invited to exhibit in a country that does not recognize Kosovos independence, but it is the first time that I feel the need to withdraw my work. My most recent project at the Palacio de Cristal, Museo Reina Sofa in Madrid, Spain, is also in a state-funded institution in a country that does not recognize Kosovo. However, in this case Kosovo appears. And even in the city of Belgrade, there are art spaces that write the name of Kosovo when a Kosovar artist is invited to exhibit their work.

I was aware that this omission did not respond to the curators direct will. I also understand that KCB may be actually composed of people with radically different political opinions, and that not all of them would agree with this state policy. But when do we have any agency? And if not, at what cost? For what cause? I discussed this with the curators to see this omission as an opportunity to open up a constructive dialogue around the issue of geopolitical recognition of countries that are still neglected zones on a global scale. The aim of The Dreamers is in fact to investigate the complexity of the current times, questioning not only the misleading nature of the real, but the space occupied by dreams, intended as the metaphorical embodiment of a space of freedom, which is able to challenge the certainty of the real world, of acquired knowledge and of our own beliefs. Accepting the omission of Kosovo, however, would have been a powerless surrender rather than the hopeful construction of a space of freedom. In the act of agreeing to this omission (which would have also meant to come to terms with being treated differently), I saw an indirect acceptance of the structural lack of free political opinion or agency in this art institution, which for me was in direct contrast with the initial aim of the show.

After my request to include Kosovo, KCB replied first by assuring that it had been a typo, then modifying it several times until adding Kosovo with an asterisk (*Kosovo.)

On KCBs website, the asterisk in *Kosovo seemed to be linked to the footnote In 2018, Board of the 57th October Salon made a decision to add the subtitle Belgrade Biennale to the name October Salon in the future. As an apparently harmless sign, it gives the impression of really being a typo; of having been wrongly slipped into the text and linked to something unrelated. It could have easily gone unnoticed.

Screenshot of KCB website, June 8th, 2020.

But the asterisk in *Kosovo is charged with strong political implications that were disguised on the website. * is the result of a 2012 agreement to allow Kosovo to represent its institutions without the authority of the UN Mission (until then, Kosovo was written as Kosovo-UNMIK). This asterisk only enables representatives from Kosovo to be referenced in regional meetings and in agreements with a footnote declaring that This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo Declaration of Independence. This asterisk is a declaration of status-neutrality and it reiterates the refusal of Serbia to recognize Kosovo as an independent country. The asterisk does not even begin to repair a century of oppression and genocide that Serbia has inflicted on Kosovo and it is painful to witness in the context of an art institution that may have a different understanding of the issue.

During this process I learned that the cultural centre had been negotiating with the Minister of Foreign Affairs for the addition of Kosovo and the modification of the total number of participating countries. The time in between these modifications gave me the opportunity to think and to observe how unprepared we all were to face issues like these, but also to reflect upon and learn how to deal with them.

I want to believe that art has a transformative potential. This belief is also among the reasons why I devoted my life to it. But this experience begs the questions: What is the actual ability to dream of art institutions and what is the space they are willing to give artists to dream? And if artists are given a specific frame for their dreams, a frame that is outlined and monitored by the dominant power and politics, then how far can we go?

In an attempt to find a neutral solution and facing the impossibility of adding Kosovo, KCB modified the website again by deleting all the countries of all the artists participating, and leaving the cities only. They said this was as far as they could go.

Screenshot of KCB website, June 12th, 2020.

Nevertheless, I felt that a withdrawal of Shkreptima was necessary, and that an open letter could potentially be a better tool for discussion in a context where an artwork undergoes the risk of being miscommunicated and misinterpreted, or even politically instrumentalized beyond the power and intentions of the curators of The Dreamers or the direction of KCB.

Only after my withdrawal, KCB and the curators of this edition of the Belgrade Biennial decided to delete from the public communication all the names of the cities and countries involved, leaving only the artists year of birth. This sign left by my withdrawal has created an antecedent for the next edition, and I hope it will have a resonance beyond the regional context of Serbia and Kosovo.

Screenshot of KCB website, June 24th, 2020.

This letter is the result of weeks of exchanges, brainstormings and discussions with collaborators, colleagues, peers and friends, all of whom I am very grateful to. I am especially grateful to David Horvitz who will take part in the Belgrade Biennial and has proposed to modify his work Give Us Back Our Stars after my withdrawal. In this gesture, I see an important sign of solidarity and healing. One of those signs that give hope, and make one dream.

See original here:

Artist Petrit Halilaj Has Pulled Out of the Belgrade Biennial After Its Organizers Refused to Recognize His Nationality - artnet News

A Sydney lawyer who went viral for telling Melbourne residents they did not need to wear masks is trying to take his battle against health orders to the High Court - but he wants you to pay for it.

Nathan Buckley has launched a GoFundMe campaign, seeking to raise $1 million so he can sue the nation's governments and "remove all lockdown restrictions immediately".

Mr Buckley named border restrictions against Victorians, mandatory quarantine for Queenslanders who visit a coronavirus hot spot, and guidelines around visiting aged-care facilities as just some of the rules he wanted to put an end to before taking aim at more specific health measures.

"People are being fired from their jobs for refusing to have a flu vaccination," he wrote.

"People are being told to wear masks when all the evidence clearly states that masks are useless. Masks represent oppression.

"Enough is enough. The purpose of this campaign is to raise enough money to challenge the states, territories and the Federal Government in the High Court of Australia. The challenge is to remove all lockdown restrictions immediately. We will end the lockdown laws."

Mr Buckley said his campaign would get millions of people back into work and "save Australia from the depths of despair of a deep recession".

"Like all Australians, I will forever be grateful to all contributors who free Australia from the chains of the Government's lockdown restrictions," he wrote.

Wearing masks or face coverings across Melbourne has become mandatory as the state of Victoria is gripped by a second wave of COVID-19. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Ian Currie

The lawyer, who says he is admitted to the roll of practitioners on the High Court of Australia, has already raised more than $12,500 towards his campaign, but if he does not raise enough money, he claims he will refund or redistribute the money to his other campaigns.

Mr Buckley's other campaigns include a $10 million bid to change laws in Australia around mandatory flu vaccinations for visits to aged care homes and some workplaces - which has since been updated to include a challenge to a health order in Victoria mandating masks be worn in public.

In the description, he explains the target is so high as to ensure he can pay in the event he loses in court and is ordered to pay costs.

Another fundraiser has been launched to fight the No Jab No Play laws in South Australia, which has raised nearly a quarter of its $200,000 target.

On July 24, Mr Buckley told supporters he was in discussions with "several high net-worth individuals" to try and get their financial support.

"I am positive that this will get off the ground," he wrote.

Nathan Buckley has also launched a $10 million bid against mandatory vaccinations for health workers. Picture: GoFundMe

Mr Buckley went viral earlier this month for telling Victorians: "Don't wear a mask."

"Get a $200 fine then elect to have it determined in court," he wrote on Facebook.

"Every single one of you 6.359 million Victorians can challenge the fines in court. The Victorian Government won't fight you in court. It is far too expensive for them to do so."

Mr Buckley has since taken the post down, noting on one of his GoFundMe accounts he acted "at the request of the NSW Law Society".

In June, he advised Victorians to avoid the lockdown, and the lawyer has also provided legal letters to healthcare workers who do not want a flu vaccination.

NCA NewsWire sent several questions to Mr Buckley about when his lawsuits might proceed, refunding the money if they didn't, who would be running the multiple High Court challenges, and what he believed was an acceptable alternative to the current health orders.

Mr Buckley said he was "not engaging with media" and declined to comment.

Originally published as Lawyer's bold bid to end the lockdown

More:

Lawyer's bold bid to end the lockdown - Daily Mercury

A Sydney lawyer who went viral for telling Melbourne residents they did not need to wear masks is trying to take his battle against health orders to the High Court - but he wants you to pay for it.

Nathan Buckley has launched a GoFundMe campaign, seeking to raise $1 million so he can sue the nation's governments and "remove all lockdown restrictions immediately".

Mr Buckley named border restrictions against Victorians, mandatory quarantine for Queenslanders who visit a coronavirus hot spot, and guidelines around visiting aged-care facilities as just some of the rules he wanted to put an end to before taking aim at more specific health measures.

"People are being fired from their jobs for refusing to have a flu vaccination," he wrote.

"People are being told to wear masks when all the evidence clearly states that masks are useless. Masks represent oppression.

"Enough is enough. The purpose of this campaign is to raise enough money to challenge the states, territories and the Federal Government in the High Court of Australia. The challenge is to remove all lockdown restrictions immediately. We will end the lockdown laws."

Mr Buckley said his campaign would get millions of people back into work and "save Australia from the depths of despair of a deep recession".

"Like all Australians, I will forever be grateful to all contributors who free Australia from the chains of the Government's lockdown restrictions," he wrote.

Wearing masks or face coverings across Melbourne has become mandatory as the state of Victoria is gripped by a second wave of COVID-19. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Ian Currie

The lawyer, who says he is admitted to the roll of practitioners on the High Court of Australia, has already raised more than $12,500 towards his campaign, but if he does not raise enough money, he claims he will refund or redistribute the money to his other campaigns.

Mr Buckley's other campaigns include a $10 million bid to change laws in Australia around mandatory flu vaccinations for visits to aged care homes and some workplaces - which has since been updated to include a challenge to a health order in Victoria mandating masks be worn in public.

In the description, he explains the target is so high as to ensure he can pay in the event he loses in court and is ordered to pay costs.

Another fundraiser has been launched to fight the No Jab No Play laws in South Australia, which has raised nearly a quarter of its $200,000 target.

On July 24, Mr Buckley told supporters he was in discussions with "several high net-worth individuals" to try and get their financial support.

"I am positive that this will get off the ground," he wrote.

Nathan Buckley has also launched a $10 million bid against mandatory vaccinations for health workers. Picture: GoFundMe

Mr Buckley went viral earlier this month for telling Victorians: "Don't wear a mask."

"Get a $200 fine then elect to have it determined in court," he wrote on Facebook.

"Every single one of you 6.359 million Victorians can challenge the fines in court. The Victorian Government won't fight you in court. It is far too expensive for them to do so."

Mr Buckley has since taken the post down, noting on one of his GoFundMe accounts he acted "at the request of the NSW Law Society".

In June, he advised Victorians to avoid the lockdown, and the lawyer has also provided legal letters to healthcare workers who do not want a flu vaccination.

NCA NewsWire sent several questions to Mr Buckley about when his lawsuits might proceed, refunding the money if they didn't, who would be running the multiple High Court challenges, and what he believed was an acceptable alternative to the current health orders.

Mr Buckley said he was "not engaging with media" and declined to comment.

Originally published as Lawyer's bold bid to end the lockdown

Read the original here:

Lawyer's bold bid to end the lockdown - Chronicle

Anger and concern over SAs R70bn IMF loan. Picture: Tim Sloan/AFP/Getty Images

NEWS

Saftu general secretary Zwelinzima Vavi said on Wednesday that the federation notes with deep concern and anger that the IMF issued communication confirming that it had lent South Africa $4.3 billion (R70 billion) following the acceptance by government of all conditions stipulated by the IMF.

In terms of alternative solutions to IMF funds, Saftu had looked at the possibility of quantitative easing, higher taxes on corporations and the rich, tighter exchange controls, a crackdown on illicit financial flows and other strategies to address the debt load.

Vavi said the IMF conditions were based mainly on so-called fiscal consolidation made in the supplementary budget in June 2020, including expenditure cuts of R230 billion over the next two years, a commitment to freeze public sector wages for 2020/21, and a plan to put an artificial ceiling on the debt-to-GDP ratio.

These were policies that the union federation had already rejected, he said, adding that this policy platform is exactly what has landed us where the country is today, at an economy that moves from years of stagnation to recession and now directly into a depression.

He said this included a record-breaking unemployment rate for any industrial society; shockingly high levels of poverty; a society that has become the most unequal in the whole world; structured racial and gender oppression; and ecologically catastrophic policies.

Vavi said those who celebrated the IMF loan and conditions were the beneficiaries of the status quo.

READ:G20 may now look beyond initial debt relief for poorest nations

They will not be affected by the massive cuts in state expenditure as they long ago contracted out of the chronically understaffed and underresourced public healthcare system, public education, public transport and even public policing, given that they have their own private security arrangements.

They will certainly be directly and indirectly affected though because deindustrialisation, rising social anger and declining state sovereignty will heighten this countrys contradictions between classes, races and genders. If some right-wingers believe that the IMF will sort out this country via shrinking the state then this is a very short-term, self-destructive way of thinking.

He also said that governments economic stimulus package was wholly inadequate from the beginning. Government claimed that it had made available a R500 billion stimulus package when in reality it had only released R170 billion in new money, which Vavi says was a pathetic 3.4% of GDP.

The rest of the funding will come at the expense of other service delivery priorities, as well as deep cuts in state workers salaries. We have argued that government must at least put aside 15% of the GDP to intervene, which would be more than R1 trillion, Vavi said.

He said that government was advised against the policies adopted by even the most conservative governments including the UK and US.

Today government is unable to protect industries such as liquor, tobacco and tourism which had to be closed down to curb the spread of the virus as it simply has no resources to protect jobs and firms.

He cited the appalling and unprecedented economic and human catastrophe exposed by the Coronavirus Rapid Mobile Survey.

Vavi said the report, which was published on July 15, revealed a net loss of 3 million jobs between February and April.

One in three income earners in February did not earn an income in April, which translated into almost immediate job loss when lockdown was declared. 47% of respondents reported that their household ran out of money to buy food in April, the survey said.

Vavi said the IMF loan would not reverse but exacerbate the catastrophe.

Saftu called for full transparency regarding all the loans provided by international financial institutions.

We do not understand the rationale for hard-currency borrowing, which in 2020 is expected to total $7.5 billion from international financial institutions, including the World Bank, the New Development Bank and the African Development Bank.

The economy has achieved a current account surplus [it is usually 4%+ of GDP in deficit] thanks to the crash of imports and lack of profits flowing back to multinational corporations, Vavi said.

He said the $52 billion in current SA Reserve Bank foreign reserves suggested that South Africa was not short of dollars.

In other words, it is bizarre fiction for the IMF to argue that it must make this loan to South Africa to meet the urgent balance of payment needs stemming from the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic when even the top Treasury official responsible for international finance admitted to Goldman Sachs in a conference call [on April 26] that finding additional funding is not urgent.

He said the cost of a dollar loan was much higher than locally sourced credit from liquid financial markets since South Africa must repay the loan in dollars even though we can expect the rand to continue its decline in coming months and years, thus making the loan much more expensive in real terms.

Political Journalist

Continue reading here:

Anger and concern over SA's R70bn IMF loan | Citypress - News24

Twenty years ago, Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquistnot generally thought of as a radical liberalsaid: We can think of no better example of the police power, which the Founders denied the National Government and reposed in the States, than the suppression of violent crime and vindication of its victims. Last week Attorney General William Barr went full interventionist, telling the press that he was deploying federal law-enforcement officers to Chicago and Albuquerque, New Mexico (this coming after the previous weeks deployment to Portland), to combat violent criminal activity. President Trump said much the same thing as he rattled off cities his administration was eyeing for future interventionChicago, Philadelphia, Detroitbecause of gun violence and drugs.

How greatly have traditional conservative values of federalism and limited government been transformed. Today, a sitting Republican president invokes the power of the federal government to send militarized Department of Homeland Security agents (equipped with military-grade weapons, body armor, tear gas, and camouflage, like armed forces entering a war zone) to swarm American city streets under unwritten rules of engagement. If video evidence now circulating is to be credited, these agents are not merely protecting federal property; they have detained citizens who arent violating any law and used the power of their presence to chill civil protests and disobedience.

This is a complete corruption of conservative ideals. There is nothing conservative about unconstitutional police activity, and there is nothing conservative about unilateral federal intervention in state affairs. Those are the acts of an authoritarian.

Anne Applebaum: Trump is putting on a show in Portland

The consequences of this radical expansion of federal law-enforcement authority are enormousand none of them are likely to be good. This is what is keeping both of us awake at night. We are conservatives who are united in our love of the Constitution, the limited rule of law, effective government, individual rights, and civil discourse. We believe in checks and balances and the separation of powers.

And we are watching all of this crumble before our eyes, as the executive branch deploys unchecked power.

For starters, the events now unfolding will make Americas reckoning with the challenges in its criminal-justice and policing system even more difficult. After George Floyds killing, law enforcements tenuous role once again took center stage in Americas communities, particularly for communities of color and those in poverty. Now whatever progress might have been made through reforms at the state and local levels will be subsumed under the weight of federal intervention. If repairing the relationship between law enforcement and the communities they protect was difficult before, the presidents unilateral intervention into local affairs has made it impossible.

Of equal importance, the presidents actions have undermined the Constitution and transgressed norms of acceptable presidential behavior. Deploying a federal strike force when the local government does not want it is, as former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told The Washington Post, legally questionable. And Tom Ridge, who served as the first homeland-security secretary, under President George W. Bush, echoed that concern: DHS was not established to be the presidents personal militia. One of us, Paul Rosenzweig, served as the deputy assistant secretary for policy at DHS during the George W. Bush administration. But the reality is that a department created to protect the American people from external threats has now been transformed into a force against the very people it is supposed to serve.

How, then, can the nation repair the damage? We can think of several ways.

First, and most obvious, the other branches of government need to oppose and prevent this warlike activity. Specifically, for too long congressional oversight has atrophied. The Founders never imagined a supine Senate, willing to allow the president to exercise nearly limitless power in violation of every tenet of federalism.

Quinta Jurecic and Benjamin Wittes: Nothing can justify the attack in Portland

Now is the time for Congress to respond. Most immediate, the appropriations bill for Homeland Security is due for consideration on the floor of the House later this week. The representatives will be derelict in their duty if they do not adopt some type of funding limitations that restrict the ability of DHS to be deployed as the presidents personal militia. And the courts, while limited by the doctrines of standing and jurisdiction, should block these breaches of Americas most basic values and norms whenever a case is properly presented.

Second, America must address the original grievance that has prompted these demonstrations in the first place, and which has only been exacerbated by Trumps use of federal force. State and local governments must renew their efforts to reform local policing. When law enforcement is perceived as acting arbitrarily or oppressively, it loses a valuable tool in the cooperation and respect of the community. But it also gambles with something essential to police in a democracylegitimacy and the peoples consent to law enforcements use of force on their behalf. America is closer than most people realize to whole communities simply rejecting the idea that police departments (at least as currently conceived) have any legitimate role to play in securing their communities. This is why police officers themselves should welcome reforms that can help heal divisions between them and communities of color. The legitimacy of the exercise of authority in a democratic republic is always a fragile thing, and Americas current approach to policing poor and minority communities is straining it to the breaking point.

Resolving these differences starts by focusing on three Ts: training, transparency, and transforming police culture. Police training should move away from its current stress model, drawn from the military, which disproportionately focuses on weapons, tactics, investigations, and paperwork. Instead, training should be longer (most law-enforcement training programs last just a few months) and include more academic elements focused on constitutional norms, mental-health and addiction awareness, and de-escalation. Reforming transparency means changing rules, contracts, and laws that prevent the public from meaningful oversight of police. This includes rules that prohibit decertification of police who are found guilty or liable for serious breaches of use-of-force policies. Additional states and municipalities must establish review boards with significant civilian membership that have the power to investigate, compel testimony, and make findings. Both of these categories of reform flow into and are important elements of the third: transforming police culture.

Culture is the product of training, tactics, oversight, and internal procedures. It is shaped by such seemingly trivial matters as uniformsofficers feel different, and interacts with those around them differently, if they are wearing police blues and not battle dress uniforms and body armorand by such important factors as reducing the flow of cast-off military-grade equipment from the Pentagon to local police departments, which makes the local police look and, more important, act like an occupying force. Ultimately, the goal is to instill in police a sense that they are part of a profession, like medicine or law, that is marked by minimum entry requirements, continuing education, high professional standards, and external and internal accountability mechanisms.

Police cannot be alien to the communities in which they operate. The effective exercise of force in a democracy depends on the consent of the policed. Without that consent, the alternatives are oppression or anarchy, or both.

Tracey L. Meares and Tom R. Tyler: The first step is figuring out what police are for

Finally, and most important from our perspective, civil society must recognize and reaffirm the fundamental conservative values that animated much of the countrys constitutional structure. As conservatives, we find it somewhat ironic that todays defenders of state and local authority are frequent advocates for federal mandates. Meanwhile, those defending federal deployments today were supposedly devout federalists just a few years ago.

For ourselves, we prefer consistency. There is a reason that the federal government is one of limited powers. There is a reason that the Constitution identifies only three federal crimes. And there is a reason that, even today, federal criminal law is narrow and jurisdictionally constrained.

The Founders understood that policing authority should be closer to the citizenry and more directly responsive to local control. As James Madison put it in Federalist No. 45: The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. [They are] numerous and indefinite. By contrast, in order to prevent unaccountable authority from growing without limit, Madison assured us that the powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined.

Perhaps Madisons predictions have not proved completely accurate. But those concerns that animated him more than 200 years ago remain the same today. And that is why Americans should be gravely concerned with how President Trump has transformed federal authority. Forty years ago, President Ronald Reagan said that the nine most terrifying words in English language were Im from the government, and Im here to help.

Today he might revise that statement to, Were from the government, and were in chargeof everything.

This story is part of the project The Battle for the Constitution, in partnership with the National Constitution Center.

This story was originally published by The Atlantic. Sign upfortheirnewsletter.

Read more from the original source:

There Is Nothing Conservative About What Trump Is Doing in Portland - Defense One

An international NGO Alliance for Persecuted People Worldwide (APPWW) recently organised a panel discussion on Oppression of Pakistans Indigenous People. The discussion was held in the backdrop of COVID-19 pandemic. Eminent persons representing the many oppressed regions of Pakistan and their people through various political parties, organisations and institutions were invited to speak in the discussion. The views give a deep insight into the very critical state of affairs within Pakistan as aggravated by the COVID-19 crisis.

The situation in Gilgit-Baltistan was explained by Senge Hasnan Sering, Director of Institute of Gilgit-Baltistan Studies and an international activist for the cause of freedom of his people from occupation and oppression by Pakistan. He said that since Gilgit-Baltistan is not a constitutional part of Pakistan there is a deeply embedded mindset of treating it as a colony. Now, the colonisation process has become two fold with China also getting involved in exploitation of the natural resources and the people of the region.

The situation created by the COVID-19 pandemic has given an opportunity to the exploitative forces to go for massive land grab. There has been a huge movement of troops in the region at a time when people need medicines and yet armed forces are being sent in. In fact, COVID-19 quarantine centres for Pakistan Army personnel have been set up in Gilgit-Baltistan to keep them away from the media glare in Punjab, and these facilities are not open to the locals.

As it is, the region is short of medical facilities like hospitals and medical institutions and is now grappling with critical shortage in supply of medicines. For cash strapped Pakistan, Gilgit-Baltistan holds no priority whatsoever, hence, the feeble infrastructure has been stretched to breaking point. Spread of Coronavirus through China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is also overwhelming the people. The Pakistan government is mulling over the feasibility of opening the region to tourists which will further enhance the risk factor. Senge Sering concluded with a demand for the justified amalgamation of the region with India.

The situation in Balochistan, another province forcefully amalgamated into Pakistan and witnessing a violent independence struggle as a consequence, was explained by Nabi Baksh Baloch, US Representative of the Baloch National Movement (BNM). He particularly emphasised the distressing lack of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for the doctors which leaves them very vulnerable to infection. Those from within the medical fraternity who agitated for PPE were jailed by the authorities. This insensitive act by the authorities is the only instance of its kind in the world where a government is arresting and harassing doctors during a medical emergency of such huge proportions.

As in the case of Gilgit-Baltistan, in Balochistan also, the Pakistan Army is leveraging the situation to strengthen its occupation of the region and suppress the legitimate aspirations of the people.

Zafar Sahito, representing Jeay Sindh Muttahida Mahaz (JSMM) spoke of the historical significance of Sindh in the context of overall Indian civilisation. In this ageless region the famed and legendary Saraswati River once flowed and the Vedas were written. It finds mention in both Ramayana and Mahabharta. In the modern context, Sindh was the first province to financially uplift Pakistan with its industrial and commercial expertise. Now the proud and civilised people of Sindh have been made subservient to the Pakistans Punjabi elite which has no regard for their economic potential or civilisational roots.

Rehan Ibadat, central organiser of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) a Sindh-based political party that represents the Mohajirs (Muslims from India who opted to go to Pakistan) said that his people are facing lack of education opportunities, lack of job opportunities and are being persecuted. Quite emotionally he said, this is not what the Mohajirs came to Pakistan for.

With regards to the COVID-19 situation both emphasised that the federal government has not shown any keenness to impose a lockdown on the cash cow region of the country which led to a rapid spread of the pandemic. Ultimately, it fell upon the provincial government to put its foot down and impose the lockdown. By then a lot of damage had been done; thousands of cases with a huge spike in deaths in the region have gone unreported.

Tarek Fatah, a Canada-based senior journalist of Pakistani origin opined in the webinar that Pakistan died as a nation in 1971 when 60% of its population and the complete eastern segment chose to seek independence, leading to the creation of Bangladesh. What is now left of Pakistan had nothing to do with the movement that led to the partition of the country, North-West Frontier Province, Sindh, Balochistan, and territories of Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir did not make any demands for a separate Muslim nation. The concept was thrust upon them by the partition. The aforementioned provinces do not subscribe to the concept even today and are agitating to break the shackles of West Punjab imposed over them through blatant use of military might.

The second catastrophe, according to Tarek Fatah, was the imposition of Urdu as an official language of the new country. The language came from central India and to an extent from Punjab, the remainder of so-called Pakistan has no affinity with the language. It has over time created a cultural schism in the entire region. Tarek Fatah concluded by saying that internal contradictions in Pakistan are so intense that a breakup of the so-called nation is inevitable; it is only a question of time.

The world has changed manifold but the problems in Pakistan do not change. It is so because all provinces of Pakistan should be separate nations in their own right but are being forcefully subjugated and exploited by the Punjabi rulers. Sadly, until the breakup foretold by Tarek Fatah does not become reality inhumane suppression accompanied by gross human rights violations will continue. The world leaders should step in to help free the people from the shackles of de-facto military rule, supported by terrorists and fundamentalist militant warlords.

Jaibans Singh is a Geo-Political Analyst, Columnist and Author. He is also associated with the Centre for Socio-Cultural Study, Punjab

Read the original post:

Pak's oppressed provinces disillusioned with ruling coterie and Pakistan Army - News Intervention

For the educated middle class, more often than not democracy means freedom of speech and freedom from government oppression. After all, it was members of this middle class who were responsible for kick-starting a democratic transition.

But for the majority of people, democracy is but a means to achieve a greater purpose, with economic prosperity being one of the primary objectives. For the majority of the working class, the basic question is whether or not a deliberative mode of governance can create more equitable wealth for a greater number of people.

Even in places where democracy has long matured and essentially become the only game in town, a decline in economic growth, which in the long run could adversely impact standards of living, has now led to the working class electing populist leaders politicians who they think have a quick fix to their economic woes.

In places where democratic traditions have deep roots, some of these populist leaders are beginning to take measures akin to those preferred by dictators and their banana republics.

For young democracies like Indonesia, the loss of faith in democracy could bring disastrous consequences.

There are just too many people here who dont think democracy is a good idea, although people from outside deem democracy is needed and can work in this plural nation.

Even when the economy is relatively stable and steady economic growth brings jobs and improves the quality of lives for millions as seen in the past 20 years in Indonesia under democratic governance many have continued to long for the stability and prosperity of Soeharto's 32-year-long New Order regime.

Look carefully and one can find graffiti or posters with the stenciled face of a smiling general Soeharto, next to the question:Enak jamanku tho? (It was better during my time, right?).

These people, who are pining for the good old days, are certainly disappointed that now a multiparty democratic system has worked against their interests. There are now too many centers of power and the presence of too many holders of veto power has made it difficult for the crafting of quick and effective policies that could solve bread-and-butter problems for the majority of people.

The fragmented nature of Indonesias political party system has also compromised the government's ability to make decisions during emergency situations like the COVID-19 pandemic. Fearing a political backlash from the House of Representatives, which is controlled by too many political factions, many key decision makers in the government are reluctant to make decisions over the disbursement of COVID-19 funds.

It is no wonder then that in May this year, at the height of the pandemic, only 49.5 percent of those surveyed by Indikator Politik Indonesia said they were satisfied with how democracy works in this country.

The question now is whether we, the people, and politicians still have the conviction to carry on with this democratic experiment. We should not take no for an answer.

Originally posted here:

It's the economy, stupid - The Jakarta Post - Jakarta Post

Published: 7/27/2020 8:23:46 AM

On the front page of The Greenfield Recorder we read about the mistreatment of people because of the color of their skin. I have to remind you that people arent just judged by the color of their skin, but also because of where they come from. The Jews are harassed also. That one I dont understand because Jesus was born Jewish. I know, the majority of pictures of Jesus you see are white, but he was born in Bethlehem to a Jewish woman.

Years ago the Irish were treated just as badly when they came to America. Why? Because of where they came from.

This country was formed to offer safety for any nationality who came here looking for freedom from oppression. So, who decided we should go against the laws of our land and look down on people? The Blacks, in the beginning, didnt come here by their own free will. They were stolen from their own country and sold into slavery.

Women have been brought here and either sold into slavery as housekeepers or for sexual satisfaction for men. At one time women could be accused of being witches and killed by town government.

When God created the world he did not do it to promote one nationality over another. I believe he did it for variety. Can you imagine looking down from above and seeing only one color? I believe variety is the reason for all the nationalities on this earth. We are all created equally. No matter our color, our nationality, our gender, our status, our religion we are all equal. NO ONE has the right to look down on anyone else. So, kindly knock it off. NO ONE is better than anyone else.

Gods blessings.

Darlene Clark

Greenfield

See the rest here:

'We are all equal' - The Recorder

Supporters raise blank white paper to avoid slogans banned under the national security law as they support an arrested anti-law protester outside Eastern court in Hong Kong, China, July 3, 2020.(Tyrone Siu/Reuters)Theyve switched up their tactics to outsmart their oppressors, whose tyranny is clearer by the day.

NRPLUS MEMBER ARTICLEIt has been almost a month since the Chinese Communist Party enacted its invasive security law better called the oppression law. If there had been any doubt before the laws taking effect that its purpose was not to protect the people of Hong Kong from instability but rather to subject an innocent populace to Beijings despotism, there can be none now even to the most optimistic onlooker.

After the oppression bill became law for Hong Kongers, a chilling effect spread throughout the commercial hub: Pro-democracy activists quieted down, faced with the once-unthinkable reality of being arrested for standing peacefully in public places and voicing their desire for freedom. Shopkeepers were compelled to remove customers protest artwork and pro-democracy sticky notes from their shops lest the government punish them for endorsing the democracy camps message. Protesters deleted their social-media accounts, as speech that had been legal just days previously was now a potential crime against the government. Members of the press in Hong Kong began to feel as though they could not write freely and objectively without punitive consequences; the New York Times, over the next year, will relocate a third of its staff to Seoul.

These many fears are warranted: The oppression law outright bans any activity that the Chinese government arbitrarily deems subversive, secessionist, or terrorist, as well as what it deems collusion with foreign forces. Indeed, on the anniversary of Hong Kongs return to its status as a Chinese territory a day that would normally be marked by mass demonstrations only a few thousand brave souls took to the streets. Police wielding pepper spray and water cannons nevertheless promptly forced the small crowd to disperse. Almost 400 protesters were arrested, including a 15-year-old girl who was simply waving an independence flag. It is perhaps only a matter of time before the authorities start handing out life-imprisonment sentences for their political enemies such harsh punishments are permitted under the oppression law or even worse.

But if there is any silver lining to Hong Kongs terrifying condition, it is the resilience with which Hong Kongs democracy activists have met the restrictions of the CCP. Like true Darwinian specimens adapting to adverse conditions, Hong Kongs protesters have switched up their tactics, bending the measures of the oppression law without breaking them. Since colorful posters with pro-democracy slogans have become synonymous with subversion a big red target for authorities on the prowl activists have begun to display crafty signs that appear, when seen from afar, to convey pro-democracy messages, but that, on closer inspection, are nothing but squiggles and odd shapes. At least a few activists have already stumped police with such signs, evading arrest. Others have begun to hold up blank white signs, or to put up blank white sticky notes in their shops.

Perhaps such tactics, once they, too, have become synonymous with democracy, will likewise be banned by the CCP and its proxy government officials in Hong Kong. But if so, the activists will have won a significant moral victory: They will have shown to the world that the Chinese Communists under President Xi Jinping are so desperate for power that they are literally willing to ban people from displaying blank white pieces of paper.

The protesters symbolic measures are far from their only strong response to the oppression law. On July 10, authorities sent a sinister message to voters by raiding an independent polling station on the eve of an unofficial primary vote for the citys pro-democracy camp. The raid came only hours after the same station released a survey finding that 61 percent of Hong Kongers view their city as no longer being free. But over 600,000 voters showed up the next day to vote anyway, resoundingly nominating pro-democracy and pro-demonstration candidates. These voters were emboldened by the courage of the most visible activists, whose sustained efforts yielded one of the biggest victories to date for the pro-democracy camp.

Of course, as with many autocratic regimes, voters could find their choices invalidated in the general elections. In that case, though, the CCP, which normally prefers to operate in secrecy, would have its despotism unmasked for all to see.

Standing up for their beliefs against a superpower with no respect for individual rights and little regard for the essential preciousness of human lives, Hong Kongs protesters are an example of bravery, creativity, and resourcefulness in the face of adversity. For Americans long accustomed to having our freedoms safeguarded by our centuries-old Constitution this is a bracing reminder of whats at stake in the fight for liberty. Whatever actions the allies of freedom are willing or able to muster against Communist China, advocates for Hong Kongs autonomy should hope that the activists continue to resist to the point that Beijing finds the unrest so damaging to its global image that it decides that dominating Hong Kong is not worth the cost.

If you think there should be a corner of our journalistic and intellectual life that defends right reason and is an alternative to the unhinged mainstream media, and if you have been alarmed at the sound of the American mind slamming shut at so many institutions recently, please lend National Review your support.SUPPORT NR TODAY

Read the original:

Hong Kong Protesters Are Still Fighting the Good Fight - National Review

A strange and necessary ingredient of Americas descent towards fascism is that it will have little impact on the majority of people. As militarized federal agents are deployed into major cities to snatch protesters and charge them with harsh federal crimes for daring to deface the ruling partys monuments, most Americans will continue living their normal lives with no discernible changes, at least for the time being. People wake up and eat breakfast and spend their days doing mundane tasks in fascist countries, too.

If there was ever a tipping point, we are past it. Trying to stare hard at the daily news to determine the exact point at which we slip into fascism is like staring at a baby to see when it turns into an adult. By the time you perceive it, its already happened. It is important to understand that the crackdown phase that we are now in the unaccountable government forces, the riot police, the teargas, the targeted political prosecutions that will come next are not something new, but something old. This isnt about Donald Trump. This is about America, baby. This is what we do.

Trying to determine when we slip into fascism is like staring at a baby to see when it turns into an adult. Once you perceive it, its already happened

Trump, a fool ruled by impulse rather than strategy, did not build the fearsome machine of government oppression that is now being aimed at his political opponents. This machine was systematically assembled and lovingly tended to by generations of presidents before him Democratic, Republican, Whig. Trump is only broadening its aperture. All of these tools have been sharpened on the bones of Native Americans and Black people and immigrants and Muslims overseas. America has always needed someone to oppress. Mostly so that we could steal their stuff, but also so that the rest of us didnt turn against one another. This country has managed to avoid a class war by giving poor white people an array of minorities to abuse, a trick that has benefited rich white people for centuries. We have used injustice not just as a way to get ahead, but as a release valve. Our leaders have long calculated that it is safer to subjugate and mistreat a minority of the population than to risk dissatisfaction in the majority. In doing so, the government has become very adept at creating enemies and wielding power against them in flagrant shows of force.

These are trivial observations, basic facts that will only be disputed by those who are destined to land on the side of fascism anyhow. The question is what they mean for our present moment, which is distinguished not by the existence of government oppression but by its direction. We are finding out what happens when the war on terror is turned inward on ourselves. In addition to the federal agents already in Portland, more are coming to Chicago, Albuquerque, and Kansas City; that may well be just the beginning of a national rollout. Protecting federal property and maintaining law and order are twin fig leaves wafting in a cloud of teargas. The Department of Homeland Security has effectively become a White House-controlled paramilitary and domestic surveillance service unaccountable to anyone except Trump and his loyalists. (If were being honest, this moment has been inevitable since DHS was panic-created in the days after the September 11 attacks. If there is any more fascist word than homeland, I havent heard it.)

The basic logic behind gun control is that if there are a bunch of guns lying around, sooner or later someone will get shot. The same holds true for the security state. If you build it, it will eventually come for you. Cloaked in the banality of federal bureaucracy, we have tolerated the creation of a terrifying set of powers that now rest in the small hands of a man who has been waiting his entire life to take revenge on each and every enemy who has slighted him. Barack Obama sat in the White House for eight years and did nothing to dismantle this bureaucracy of soldier-cops. He was too busy using it in foreign drone wars. Its too seductive to have that power, when you are the one who controls it. Now a worse president has it, and it will be turned, at last, against a bigger chunk of us than ever before.

The trick now is convincing that tranquil majority that their interests are more aligned with the protesters than with the cops in fatigues

Every new outrage is a test of what we will tolerate. If the government can roll out troops to a large swath of major cities and shoot the eyes out of protesters with rubber bullets all under the guise of stopping some kids from spray-painting some courthouse, it is a fairly good indicator that the spirit of the broader American public will not rouse itself to stand in the way of fascisms tightening grip. In a nation this big, you can make 100 million people official Enemies of the State and still leave a comfortable majority blissfully unaffected. The trick now is convincing that tranquil, all-American majority that their interests are actually more aligned with the protesters wielding spray-paint outside the courthouse than with the militarized cops in fatigues.

That shouldnt be an impossible task. When there is actual justice being done inside the courthouses, the protesters and the storm troopers will both disappear.

Excerpt from:

This is what happens when the war on terror is turned inward, on America - The Guardian

GRAHAM Four people, including Alamance NAACP President Barrett Brown, were arrested Saturday morning at an NAACP speakers meeting.

Brown and Noah Read, who has been active in the NAACP and is a member of the county Board of Elections, were arrested along with NAACP members Amie "Trina" Harrison and the Rev. Walter Allison, according to police records. They were charged with misdemeanor resisting a public officer and impeding traffic, and released on written promises to appear in court, according to jail records.

The four were standing inside barricades around the Confederate monument in Court Square. They were there as part of Alamance NAACPs Call to Action speaker meeting Saturday morning at Sesquicentennial Park, across the street.

A series of speakers talked about removal of the monument, police reform and voting, while attendees held signs calling for equity. Brown was on the speakers list circulated before the event.

Ian Baltutis, mayor of Burlington, read from the open letter signed by a number of Alamance County government, business, education and healthcare leaders advocating removal of the monument.

"While this artifact is undeniably part of our history, for many in our community, it represents an ideology incompatible with equality," Baltutis read.

The letter originally had 50 signatures, but Baltutis said more than 300 people have signed it now.

Next, Mebane City Council member Sean Ewing spoke about removing the monument from his perspective as a veteran.

He said how being in the military required him to trust those serving with him and created a sense of unity. He called for that same unity now and for people to stand together and remove the monument. He emphasized that the NAACPs position is against violence, and that the call is for peaceful removal of the monument.

The arrests

During Ewings speech, arrests began of those standing next to the monument on the other side of the street, and the crowd shouted support for them.

Brown said later that he was the first to cross over to the monument. It wasnt planned, but he did it after seeing the flag at half staff for Congressman John Lewis, who died recently and was a leader during the Civil Rights Movement.

"It just struck me that it was so disrespectful to have this flag lowered at half staff for John Lewis right behind a monument memorializing the Confederacy and the Confederate creation and intentions to preserve slavery," Brown told the Times-News.

Brown said he was standing there peacefully, holding a sign to protest the monument. He was asked to move, but said he had a right to be there.

Brown said he was given multiple reasons for why he couldnt stand there, including that the courthouse was closed, and that he was obstructing traffic, although he was inside the barriers in front of the monument and on the curb.

The Sheriffs Office could not be reached for comment about why the protesters were not allowed to stand in front of the monument.

Deputies put Brown in a van to take him to the county jail, but Brown said as soon as they left, the deputies received a call to turn around and pick up more people. He was shocked, he said, that other people had followed him to that side of the street and also had been arrested.

Brown, Read and Allison all rode together, singing "We Shall Overcome" on the way to the jail, Brown said.

Read sent a statement to the Times-News calling for the removal of the Confederate monument and reiterating that it is a monument to an "exploitative power structure" in government and other institutions.

"There is no greater symbol of mans inhumanity to humankind in this county, and the elected leaders of this county and their supporters have allowed it to remain for decades at the most conspicuous spot in our shared civic landscape," he wrote. "The wisdom of its removal should be unquestioned, but here we are. Take it down."

The speeches

After Ewing finished speaking, the Rev. Jay Kennett of Down Home N.C. and pastor of Hillsborough United Church of Christ spoke about justice from a Christian perspective.

"I follow a radical revolutionary rabbi named Jesus, whose political platform is justice and mercy, he said, quoting Rev. Tracy Blackman of the United Church of Christ.

Kennett spoke about how Jesus stood up for those who were oppressed, and dismantled symbols and systems of oppression. Kennett called for all, no matter their religion, to follow Jesus example and to fight not only for justice but also to build up a community focused on inclusion and love.

After Kennetts speech, Pam Scwingl of the Friends Committee on North Carolina Legislation, a Quaker organization, spoke about police violence.

She spoke about the Quaker beliefs rooted in nonviolence, and urged attendees to advocate regarding militarization of police and school resource officers role in the school-to-prison pipeline.

After her speech, the Rev. Kendall McBroom represented Alamance Agents for Change in calling for police reform.

His demands included sensitivity training for all members of law enforcement, enacting the open records act which would make police misconduct records public removing officers for discriminatory behavior, and banning no-knock warrants.

Juan Miranda of Siembra, a Latinx advocacy organization, next spoke about issues related to immigration and the intersection of immigration reform and the Black Lives Matter movement.

Last, Dorothy Yarborough, who serves on the Board of Elections, spoke about the importance of voting.

"A change is going to come," she said, "but its going to take all of us to make that change happen. If we dont vote, everything that we are doing now is for naught."

See more here:

Four arrested at NAACP event Saturday in Alamance County - Burlington Times News

Editor's note: All letters to the editor will be considered, but not every one will be published. Please allow 24 hours for a response regarding your submission.

Complacency benefits oppression, which I think makes Trevor Pope a beneficiary.

When I heard that Student Body President Trevor Pope was working to expand funding for the CARES Act to include students who previously couldnt receive it, I was pleased. It helps create an even playing field for our international and DACA students. But the more I read, the more dismayed I was.

Any effort to extend funding is important and should be recognized, but this new hope we can graciously thank Pope for was asking the staffer of a senator for more money. Despite being unsure who would get additional funding if it even came, it appeared that he was being lauded as a hero for something that hasnt even happened yet.

I have a problem with that narrative. Forty-one days ago I spoke in UF Student Government Senates public comment period about his nominee for Internal Affairs Agency Head using a homophobic slur to a personal friend of mine in the past.

Anxious and shaking, I repeated the phrase he used word for word, including the slur that is used against me and my community, to make sure everyone knew just how bigoted he was. The majority Gator Party caucus overwhelmingly approved him anyways.

So where was that hero when fellow senator Colin Solomon and I came forward about his Internal Affairs nominee using homophobic slurs? Well, he wasnt asking for his resignation.

Where was that hero when concerned students emailed him over his unwillingness to remove that nominee? Sending almost completely copied and pasted identical emails to those students claiming he heard their voice (of which I have attached screenshots).

Where was that hero when screenshots surfaced of that same nominee using racist slurs? Not apologizing or even giving a statement. Instead, he deleted the only post he made on the matter.

And where was that hero when he was asked to listen to Black Student Unions list of demands to make UF more inclusive and improve race relations in our own backyard? In a diversity and programming committee meeting saying that diversity is much more encompassing than just our Black population at UF.

Telling students with pronouns in your email signature that you hear their voice in nearly identical emails while not listening to the ones coming forward about the use of a homophobic slur is performative activism. I was asked to provide proof of a verbal altercation when I had nothing to gain by coming forward except anxiety and fear.

Not actively advocating for BSUs list of demands, and diminishing their importance in the process, is being complacent in their marginalization.

Why are we looking to him for hope when he did the bare minimum and cant even issue an apology to our Black, queer, and Latinx students for the pain his nominee caused?

Wheres the hope for these communities that Pope wont nominate another racist homophobe? Its been 41 days, and we cant even hope for a statement. In my opinion, its way too late.

This is why everyone needs to pay attention to politics, even on a scale as small as Student Government at UF. When people dont pay attention to who they vote for and dont advocate for marginalized communities, things like this happen and people get away with it. Theyre even branded as heroes.

Ryan Wilder isa Student Senator (Independent, District C) at UF as well as the LGBTQ+ caucus co-leader in Senate.

Read the rest here:

Letter to the editor: hypocrisy in Student Government - The Independent Florida Alligator

E.D.Mondain did not hold back his criticism of ongoing demonstrations in Portland.

In an opinion piece published in the Washington Post on Thursday, the president of Portland's NAACP chapterwrote recent demonstrations had in some ways become a theatrical display of "white privilege dancing vainly on a stage that was originally created to raise up the voices of my oppressed brothers and sisters."

And soMondain organized a "Stand on Portland" that opened the city's 57th straight night of demonstrations. Speaking from the steps of the Multnomah County Justice Center, the Portland pastor touched on what has become an increasing focus for some protesters: the presence of federal officers on city streets.

"I want you to know something Portland. We are at war,"Mondain said over a loud speaker. "Federal agents have descended upon our streets. Armed in camouflage clothing, and ready to do battle with anyone who stands in the voice of the opposition to oppression."

Federal officers have been in Portland throughout July and have regularly used so-called less lethal weapons on peaceful demonstrators when a small number of people have thrown objects orspray painted federal property.

Though the law enforcement response has been disproportionate and indiscriminate toward crowds,Mondain admonished protesters who have engaged in property damage or alleged criminal activity. He said those actions do little to achieve justice for Black Americans killed by police.

"The focus has been moved out from where it is supposed to be, and made to be a spectacle a debacle," he said.

As the NAACP event ended around 9 p.m., increasingly large crowds returned to Portland streets to hear speeches about racial justice.

Speakers at the Justice Center led the crowd in chants of "Black lives matter" and in calls for Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler to either take action to end police brutality or to resign. The night before, Wheeler joined the crowd and was tear gassed outside the federal courthouse. He did not return for Thursday night's demonstration.

Speaking to the crowd, Kinsey Smyth said she was proud to be a Black woman at this moment in time. She said the people who had gathered had a chance to "shift the narrative."

"This is as American as it gets," Smyth said. "This is scary. This is uncomfortable. ... Embrace it, let's change it."

Earlier Thursday, a federal judge ruled that officers from the Department of Homeland Security and other government agencies working in Portland could not use force against or arrest journalists and legal observers at protests. Previously, that restriction had only applied to the Portland police.

Around midnight, protesters continued to gather at the reassembled and reinforced fence surrounding the Mark O. Hatfield federal courthouse. The Federal Protective Serviceperiodically warned people when they began to shake or hit the fence, and around12:30 a.m. officers began firing pepper balls through the fence and into the crowd.

A little after1 a.m., officers used tear gas and impact munitions to disperse the crowd after a fewprotesters breached the fence.Protesters used umbrellas to shield each other from pepper balls while othersused leaf blowers to blowthe tear gas back towards the court house. Someone played The Imperial March over a loudspeaker.

By 3 a.m., protesters had regatheredat the fence and once again breached it, though few entered.

Originally posted here:

Night 57 of Portland protests brings 'refocus' and new limits on federal response - KLCC FM Public Radio

The current protests and uprisings across the country have elevated the term anti-racism and have prompted the question: What does it mean to be anti-racist?

We commonly reserve the term racist for those who actively discriminate based on the color of someones skin. Additionally, we refer to racism as an interpersonal display of prejudice toward Black, Indigenous, and People of Color.

The reality: Racism is not only about individuals and their actions. Racism is a system.

It is a system of oppression that is based in and upholds the superiority of White people and the inferiority of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color. Racism was created by and upheld through policies, practices, and procedures to create inequities between racial groups

Current leaders in positions of authority in government, private, and non-profit institutions have inherited and upheld racist institutions and structures. These leaders have historically diluted the term racism to reflect only overt interpersonal racist actions so that the full system of racism can continue to grow and persist, unseen and unchallenged.

With this definition of racism, what does it mean to be anti-racist? Is it the same as not racist?

Not racist often refers to a passive response to the generational trauma and pain inflicted on Black, Indigenous, and People of Color in the United States. It does not require action for example proactively challenging a system that has operated in this country since its founding.

To be not racist is to ignore 400 years of history that informs the root causes of inequities we see in all aspects of American life. These inequities in education, criminal justice, housing, healthcare, and all policy areas are the result of intentional and racist institutional policies, practices, and procedures. They exist on purpose.

Because racism is the foundation upon which our society and institutions stand, choosing to interact with these institutions in a neutral way allows them to thrive. Racism can result from racist action and/or inaction, which results in complicity that creates or maintains racial inequities.

Being not racist does not require active resistance to and dismantling of the system of racism. Being anti-racist does.

Anti-racism is also a system a system in which we create policies, practices, and procedures to promote racial equity. Anti-racism generates antiracist thoughts and ideas to justify the racial equity it creates by uplifting the innate humanity and individuality of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color.

Anti-racism recognizes that there are no traits inherent within a racial group solely because of the color of their skin. Anti-racism forces us to analyze the role that institutions and systems play in the racial inequities we see, rather than assign the blame to entire racial groups and their behavioral differences for those inequities.

When, as individuals, we contribute to racism and racial inequities, we are racist. If we push to dismantle racism and promote racial equity, we are anti-racist. These words are descriptive, not fixed.

We can be racist in one moment, anti-racist in the next, and racist once again. Anti-racism shifts our focus from the intent of our actions to the outcome of our actions whether we advance racial equity or uphold racial inequity.

It is not enough to believe that being not racist will eliminate racism and racial inequities. Instead, we must work within ourselves, our networks, and our institutions to challenge racism with each decision we make. The practice of anti-racism is everyones ongoing work. How do we do that?

Anti-racism is a practice that people and institutions must continue to employ, moment by moment, to fight against the system of racism. Anti-racist policy creates systems that center the lived experiences of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, produce targeted strategies that account for the disparate harm caused these communities, and, in the end, improve outcomes for all.

About the Authors:

Jordan Carter is the Program Manager for the Race, Equity, and Leadership (REAL) department at NLC.

Ian Snyder is a Senior Program Specialist with NLCs Race, Equity, And Leadership (REAL) Initiative

Like Loading...

More here:

What Does It Mean to Be an Anti-racist? - CitiesSpeak

Internet was finally restored by the Ethiopian government on Thursday, following weeks of blanket shutdown as unrest punctured much of the East African nation.

According to Netblocks, a nongovernmental organization that tracks web access worldwide, the Internet was severed just after 9 a.m. local time on Tuesday, June 30, as national protests gained momentum following the shooting death of Hachalu Hundessa, a renowned singer and activist within the Oromo ethnic group, the previous night.

The blackout was deemed a vital national security measure by officials to quell mounting dissension, much to the chagrin of human rights organizations, journalistsand freedom of speech advocates whocondemned the crackdown.

First off, there is no legal ground for the government in Ethiopia to shut the Internet, one journalist tweeted. Threat to national security is usually the presumed excuse, but in no way can the violence of this month be near to that level of a threat.

Despite being Africa'ssecond-most populous country, with a population of around 109 million, only around 15 percent are reported to have Internet access.

The move into full restoration comes following more than three weeks of violence, its most significant spate of turmoil in three years, and amidhigh unemployment and hardship stemming from the coronavirus pandemic. It has also cast an uncomfortable spotlight on growing ethnic tensions within the country.

UN WARNS CORONAVIRUS FALLOUT WILL LEAD TO THE NEXT PANDEMIC GLOBAL STARVATION

The Oromo group, of which Hundessa belonged, comprises around 35 percent of the countrys population. Hundessa, 33 a former political prisoner himself amassed a large following especially among the youth, singing songs that often touched on encouraging fellow Oromos to resist government oppression.

In the aftermath of his death, EthiopiaAttorney GeneralAdanech Abiebie told the press that two men confessed to killing Hundessa as part of a coup plot against Prime MinisterAbiyAhmedsgovernment.

In this Thursday, Jan. 24, 2019 file photo, Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed at the European Council headquarters in Brussels. The 2019 Nobel Peace Prize was given to Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed on Friday Oct. 11, 2019. (AP)

Ahmed, the nations first Oromo leader, assumed office in 2018 and introduced a number of sweeping political and economic reforms, which entailed opening up publicly owned entities to private sector investors and reconstituting the military to limit its role in politics.

JOSEPH KONY SURVIVOR RECALLS HOW FAITH, GOD HELPED HER ENDURE 8 YEARS IN CAPTIVITY

Ahmed was additionally awarded the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize for his work in ending the 20-year post-war territorial stalemate between Ethiopia and Eritrea.

Nonetheless, over 230 people have lost their lives in the latest bout of rebellion, and some 10,000 Oromo people are reported to now be displaced. Nonethnic Oromos have also been brazenly attacked by mobs, according to anecdotes from inside the beleaguered country.

Just hours after Hundessas killing,protesters burnt two resorts that belonged to former Olympic runner Haile Gebrselassie in the towns of Ziway and Shashemene, in addition to setting a livestock farm he owned ablaze. More than 330 vehicles were set alight in Oromia, an area in the center of the country, as well as the capital Addis Ababa.

CLICK HERE FOR THE FOX NEWS APP

Religious authorities, including the archbishop of West Arsi, Abune Henok, have gone on to claim that some have exploited the moment to also assail Orthodox Christians, who make up just under 40 percent of the population.

Ethiopians have also taken to the streets across the U.S. in recent days, including in Washington, to call for peace in the country.

More than 5,000 people accused of participating in acts of violence have been detained by Ethiopian government authorities.

See the article here:

Ethiopian government restores Internet after weeks of blackout during deadly protests - Fox News

Protesters marched through downtown Portland Friday night to show solidarity with the citizens of Portland, Oregon, who have faced violent confrontations with federal agents for more than a week.

The event was organized by Ahmed Beshir, a 22-year-old accountant from Gorham. He said he was spurred to act after seeing video footage of federal agents, sent to Oregon by President Trump to quell protests, using tear gas, pepper spray and physical force against protesters. Protests there have been ongoing since George Floyd was killed by a former Minneapolis police officer two months ago. Trump has called the protesters in Oregon agitators and anarchists.

The march Friday began at Lincoln Park on Congress Street, where Beshir told people he had only begun organizing the event days earlier and wasnt sure how many people might turn out. The size of the crowd was not as important, he said, as the personal commitment each marcher has to change the racial and social injustice that exists in society. He told the crowd that they needed to protest the kind of government force being used in Oregon while we still have the chance.

It doesnt matter if we have 20 people or 20,000, were still making a statement, each of us, that I myself will be the change, Beshir said. We cant have the mindset thats its not really that serious yet, because soon it will be too late.

Beshir led the group, about 30 people at first, from Lincoln Park down Federal Street to the United States Courthouse, then up Congress Street past Congress Square, then back down Congress Street to City Hall. By then the group had grown to about 200 people, many with signs. They chanted Black Lives Matter, and No Justice, No Peace, among other things. They walked in the street, with one Portland police vehicle leading them and another following.

At City Hall, the marchers joined a camping protest over the citys homelessness problem, that was in its third day. Using a megaphone, Beshir addressed the crowd there and told them that the problems of homelessness and racial injustice were related, and had to be fought together.

The same system has failed us, Beshir told the group at City Hall.

Beshir planned to eventually lead the march to the Portland Police headquarters later Friday night.

Local officials in Oregon have called for federal agents to leave. On Wednesday Mayor Ted Wheeler was present at a protest when he was tear gassed by federal agents. The state of Oregon is seeking a legal order limiting federal agents arrest powers during the demonstrations. The Oregon Attorney General has sued multiple federal agencies, alleging agents in unmarked vehicles have grabbed people off the street without a warrant.

Beshir said he wanted to draw attention to the fact that people in Portland, Oregon, have been protesting police brutality and racial injustice for nearly two months, while other protests sparked by Floyds death have faded. Beshir thinks the Oregon protests have gotten stronger the more authorities have used violent force to stop them.

This isnt normal and this isnt right. We cant idly stand by sedated by the comforts of our lives and watch it unfold until its too late, Beshir wrote in a Facebook post announcing the event Friday. We must stand in solidarity against this authoritarian police state and fight back the tyranny and oppression that come with it.

Beshir, who was born in Sudan and came to the United States in 2005, said hes not part of any specific group. He said had not been involved in any protests until the death of Floyd and the launch of Black Lives Matter events that followed.

Some of the people who joined the march Friday they wanted to not only show solidarity with people in Oregon, but with people experiencing racism everywhere.

I need to use my white privilege and my voice to speak up for what is right, said Brooke Bolduc, 20, of Minot.

Anthony Fiori, 21 of Brunswick, said he was concerned that if people in Maine, and elsewhere, didnt stand up against what is happening in Oregon such use of government force to squelch protest will only spread.

When tyranny is rising, you have to stop it as soon as possible, you cant just say its not that bad yet, Fiori said.

Previous

Next

Read the original post:

Protesters gather downtown in solidarity with the other Portland - Press Herald

The mayor added: In fact, we want them to leave.

The situation in Oregons largest city has become part of the national debate over what represents appropriate protest and what constitutes government oppression. Footage of people being scooped up on the streets of Portland and placed in vans has been circulated widely on social media in recent days, often accompanied by expressions of either delight or anger.

The deployment of federal agents has also fit with the presidents efforts to draw a contrast with Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, who Trump has claimed is not interested in law and order.

The Radical Left Democrats, who totally control Biden, will destroy our Country as we know it, Trump tweeted Sunday. Unimaginably bad things would happen to America. Look at Portland, where the pols are just fine with 50 days of anarchy.

Protests in Portland have continued since the death of George Floyd in Minnesota on Memorial Day. According to The Oregonian, the focus of the unrest has been a 12-block area; protests in other parts of the city have been largely without incident, but the disorder within the 12-block zone has included repeated skirmishes with police, as well as fires and vandalism.

In June, Wheeler called the destruction a horrible, horrendous miscalculation. One longtime community activist, Ronnie Herndon, added: That is a tactic thats been used to destroy Black people, not help Black people. On Saturday, a fire was set at the Portland Police Association, and police used tear gas in an attempt to clear the area.

In recent days, federal forces have been detaining and arresting protesters, and reports indicate that they have sometimes done so without identifying themselves and that they are using unmarked vehicles. Wheeler said the governments actions were in violation of the law and a threat to the nations democratic values.

The tactics that the Trump administration are using on the streets of Portland are abhorrent, Wheeler said, adding that people were being deprived of due process and being detained without probable cause.

As far as I can see, this is completely unconstitutional, Wheeler said.

The state of Oregon has sought to get rid of the federal agents, with Oregons attorney general, Ellen Rosenblum, suing late Friday in federal court. The American Civil Liberties Union has also challenged the administrations actions.

Authoritarian governments, not democratic republics, send unmarked authorities after protesters, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) tweeted on Thursday. These Trump/Barr tactics designed to eliminate any accountability are absolutely unacceptable in America, and must end. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) added: We must get to the bottom of these abuses against Oregonians.

On Sunday, three House committee chairs demanded the administrations actions be investigated by internal Trump administration watchdogs. "The legal basis for this use of force has never been explained, wrote Reps. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.).

Here is the original post:

Portland mayor to Trump administration: We want you to leave - POLITICO

CHICAGO Black Lives Matter Chicago and other groups filed a lawsuit Thursday against the federal government, alleging the detailing of federal agents to the city is being done in an attempt to suppress free speech, while separately claiming in court that Chicago police are trampling on protesters rights.

President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that Chicago and other cities will see an influx of federal agents this week, in what he said is an effort to address rising violence. Additional Department of Homeland Security officers were already been deployed to Portland, Oregon, where reports of unidentified federal agents patrolling streets wearing camouflage uniforms have been denounced by local leaders and become a focus of national debate.

At a news conference Thursday in Federal Plaza announcing the lawsuit, activists pointed to ongoing unrest in Portland as evidence of what could come this weekend when federal agents are deployed to Chicago. But leaders say they will not be intimidated by these actions, calling on the community to continue to show up to protest.

We want to be clear that what is happening nationally is an attempt to stifle righteous rage and anger at the continued killing of Black people by police, said Aislinn Pulley, a co-founder of Black Lives Matter Chicago. We have been fighting back consistently for two months and we will not stop.

The Chicago Abolitionist Network, Chicago Democratic Socialists of America, Good Kids/ Mad City, #Let Us Breathe Collective, and South Siders Organized for Unity and Liberation were also listed as plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed Thursday.

The suit alleges Trump is sending agents to the city in an effort to intimidate and falsely arrest civilians who are exercising their constitutional right to speak and to assemble.

Also on Thursday, lawyers for a coalition of activist groups sent City Hall a letter threatening separate legal action under a consent decree, a court order that required broad changes to the way Chicago police treat people. The letter calls on the city to stop what the activists lawyers described as the Chicago Police Departments brutal, violent, and unconstitutional tactics that are clearly intended to silence protesters.

The letter, also filed in federal court, cited a litany of alleged physical abuses during protests that have erupted sporadically since late May, just after the death of George Floyd under the knee of a Minneapolis police officer.

The lawyers from groups including Black Lives Matter Chicago and the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois accused officers of abuses including knocking out the teeth of 18-year-old activist Miracle Boyd during a protest around a statue of Christopher Columbus in Grant Park.

Mayor Lori Lightfoot denounced the deployment of federal agents earlier in the week, but changed her tone after speaking with U.S. Attorney John Lausch, who told her additional law enforcement would work collaboratively with Chicago cops against violent crime.

Federal officials have argued a recent increase in shootings points to a need for more law enforcement, but at Thursdays news conference, activists from the South and West sides decried this claim, arguing investments in the community, not more policing, will bring an end to the violence.

With protests planned for this weekend, including a demonstration at the Homan Square police facility, Frank Chapman of the Chicago Alliance Against Racist and Political Oppression said everyone needs to be out in the streets.

Theres more of us than them, Chapman said. Weve got to put people in the streets. Weve got to keep this rebellion going.

Continued here:

Lawsuit against US government filed over move to bring feds to Chicago - The Courier-Express

ByMadison Allen

Public benefit programs are racist. They are also essential.

For decades, programs like Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) have provided essential support for families with low incomes. At the same time, these programs have reinforced structures of oppression. It is critical that we understand the history of the safety-net in the United States because, without recognition of past and present harm, we run the serious risk of complicity in upholding systems of white supremacy.

Many scholars have written at length about racism and the history of public benefit programs and welfare reform in America. From "mothers pensions" in the 1900s used to exclude Black women to Reagans "Welfare Queen" narrative in the 1980s to Clintons 1996 racialized welfare reform and workfare programs, false racist narratives have long been applied to people experiencing poverty. As Johnnie Tillmon noted in 1972, "we've been trained to believe that the only reason people are on welfare is because there's something wrong with their character." For decades, these narratives have served as dog whistles that are employed to garner support to cut funding and to restrict the eligibility for these programs with direct harms to both people of color and white people with low incomes.

Many of the white supremacist structures historically embedded in public benefit programs remain in place today. Disguised under terminology like "work requirements," "family caps," "drug testing," and "resource limits" these polices are fundamentally rooted in oppression, paternalism, and control of Black and Brown lives. The policies themselves reinforce misconceptions about beneficiaries, suggesting that individuals with low incomes must be coerced to work and avoid drug use. Although whites are the largest group of beneficiaries when it comes to government safety-net programs, policies which frame benefits access in terms of deserving versus undeserving rely upon and perpetuate false narratives about benefit recipients.

While many of these policies appear race neutral, in practice they discriminate by failing to acknowledge the skewed racial realities of the U.S. criminal justice system and labor market. For example, when racial discrimination in hiring prevails, work requirements necessarily place a disproportionate burden on people of color. When states agencies direct staff to consider an applicants criminal history as a basis for reasonable suspicion in drug testing, people of color suffer the consequences of disparate policing of drug use in their communities. And when agencies impose resource limits with exclusions for home ownership, again people of color experience compounded barriers due to historic and systemic racism that excluded Black people from home-buying opportunities.

With Black and Latinx people dying from COVID-19 at significantly higher rates than white people, public health data is manifesting generations of racial inequities. These disquieting statistics challenge the advocacy community to propose solutions which address the systemic and historic discrimination that have long driven policymaking and implementation of public benefit programs. Looking forward, we must ask ourselves: How do we not only reduce inequities but eliminate them?

At a time when systemic discrimination and a widening racial wealth gap make it increasingly difficult for families to thrive, now is the time for us to evaluate the ways in which our past efforts have failed, to think beyond incremental reform, and to actively dismantle racism in the safety-net. I hope that the advocacy community will consider all possibilities and continue these conversations in close partnership with people directly impacted by the outcomes. We must follow the direction of people with lived experience and affirmatively address the ways in which public benefit programs have been complicit in enabling suppression of Black people, Immigrants, and other communities of color. I look forward to the work ahead and to reimagining what is possible for the future of public benefit programs in our country.

Read more from the original source:

Racism in Public Benefit Programs: Where Do We Go from Here? - The Center for Law and Social Policy

Tod Lindberg, Opinion contributor Published 5:00 a.m. ET July 24, 2020

Before the Declaration, ideas were brewing along the lines of the 'unalienable rights' of all human beings, but the political world was the sport of kings and barons, chieftains and the strong.

Reports by government commissions arent generally known for their insight into basic questions about the human condition, nor can they typically be read for pleasure. The report of the State Departments Commission on Unalienable Rights, in circulation as of last week, is perhaps the exception that proves the rule: a lively and serious inquiry into the basic ideas that animated the founding of the United States and provided impetus to the global pursuit of human rights.

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo chartered his commission well before the tough six months America has just been going through, from pandemic to lockdown to protests, some of them violent. Yet current conditions make its message all the more timely.

Demonstrators demand justice and rail against past and present injustice. And whether they are aware of it historically or not, they mostly rely on claims introduced into the political world in the American Declaration of Independence. George Floyd had a right not to be slain by a police officer. Government is supposed to protect peoples lives and liberty. They should govern themselves as equals and be free to pursue happiness as they see it, without fear of capricious force under color of law.

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, that is: Before the Declaration, ideas were brewing along the lines of the unalienable rights of all human beings, but the political world was the sport of kings and barons, chieftains and the strong. To most of them, the idea that government should be of the people, by the people and for the people, as Lincoln described it 87 years later, had never occurred. Yet the idea of these rights was so powerful and so liberating that it became not only a global beacon against oppression, but also the means by which Americans began to free themselves from the constraints of the times in which it arose.

Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1776 painted by J. Trumbull and engraved by W.L. Ormsby, N.Y.(Photo: Library of Congress)

Thats because in saying all men are created equal, Jefferson and the other signers of the Declaration of Independence both meant it and did not mean it. Clearly, they didnt mean all men and women are created equal, a formulation that would come to the fore with the Declaration of Sentiments drafted by Elizabeth Cady Stanton at the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848. Nor did it apply to men, women and children who were slaves, including of some of the very signers. Nor did they mean it with regard to Native Americans being driven from their ancestral lands.

Nor did the all the abolitionists and early womens rights advocates themselves necessarily believe in universal human equality. Nevertheless, those five words formed the basis of 244 years worth and counting of demands for equality in the United States and beyond our own national borders.

The Founders did not finish the job of political equality with the Declaration and the Constitution, nor did Lincoln with the Civil War and Emancipation Proclamation, nor did Susan B. Anthony when she illegally cast a ballot in the 1872 presidential election, nor the Supreme Court in 1954 in Brown v. Board of Education by reversing its previous holding and declaring that the separate but equal justification for segregation was not equality.

July Fourth: Frederick Douglass found hope in our Declaration of Independence. So can we.

But the Founders did start the project of political equality by risking their necks on independence in the name of those five words. And the others mentioned here, and many more, continued the project against resistance, by relying on a history tracing back continuously and directly to all men are created equal as they demanded justice.

This is a story the Commission on Unalienable Rights tells with clarity and erudition. Likewise compelling is its account of the resonance of the principles of the American founding in the United Nations 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the little-remembered context in which other countries drew on their own national traditions in pursuit of the universal rights they delineated in UDHR.

My ancestors founded Brown University: Its connection to slavery isn't what you've heard.

The American story is woefully incomplete without an account of the injustice perpetrated here and the suffering it has caused. But it is also woefully incomplete in the absence of an account of how ideas about unalienable rights articulated at the time of the founding became an engine driving the pursuit of justice here and throughout the world.

Tod Lindberg is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and author most recently of "The Heroic Heart: Greatness Ancient and Modern." Follow him on Twitter: @todlindberg

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/07/24/state-department-commission-unalienable-rights-justice-column/5490297002/

See the original post here:

'Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness' these words set America on path to progress - USA TODAY