New Zealand’s Path to Prosperity Began With Rejecting Democratic Socialism | Lawrence W. Reed – Foundation for Economic Education

(Editor's note: A shorter version of this article was recently published in both English and Spanish at ELAMERICAN.COM).

For producing both material goods and personal fulfillment, freedom makes all the difference in the world. One country that proved that convincingly in the last 40 years is New Zealand. It is a model from which nations the world over can learn a great deal.

Situated in the South Pacific midway between the equator and the South Pole, New Zealand is two-thirds the size of California. Its 5.1 million inhabitants live on two main islands and a scattering of tiny ones. From my multiple visits there, I can confidently claim it to be among the worlds most geologically diverse and beautiful destinations.

In 1950, New Zealand ranked as one of the 10 wealthiest countries on the planet, with a relatively free economy and strong protections for enterprise and property. Then, under the growing influence of welfare state ideas that were blossoming in Britain, the United States and most of the Western world as well, the country took a hard turn toward government control of economic life.

With economic ruin staring New Zealand in the face, the countrys leaders in 1984 embarked upon one of the most comprehensive economic liberalization programs ever.

The next two decades produced a harvest of big government and stagnation. Increasingly, New Zealanders found themselves victims of exorbitant tariffs, torturous regulations, massive farm subsidies, a huge public debt, chronic budget deficits, rising inflation, costly labor strife, a top marginal income tax rate of 66 percent, and a gold-plated, incentive-sapping welfare system.

The central government in those years established its own monopolies in the rail, telecommunications, and electric power businesses. About the only things that grew during the period from 1975 to 1983 were unemployment, taxes, and government spending. This was the democratic socialism that Bernie Sanders admires, but which New Zealanders eventually realized was a national calamity.

With an endless roster of failed government programs and economic ruin staring them in the face, the countrys leaders in 1984 embarked upon one of the most comprehensive economic liberalization programs ever undertaken in a developed nation. The two heroes most responsible for this radical redirection were Roger Douglas and Ruth Richardsona story told by Bill Frezza in this video.

From the mid 1980s into the 1990s, the New Zealand government sold off dozens of money-losing state enterprises.

Another hero of that day was economist Roger Kerr. His son Nicholas lives in Dallas, Texas and is an adjunct scholar with the Lone Star Policy Institute. Nicholas delivered a fascinating speech in January 2020 in which he explained his fathers pivotal role in saving New Zealand from socialism. He points out that among the maze of stupid regulations the socialists imposed, you needed a prescription from your doctor if you wanted margarine.

In another documentary narrated by Swedish author Johan Norberg, the New Zealand transformation is explained beautifully. It also does a fine job depicting the socialist nightmare that prompted the free market reforms. It ought to be mandatory viewing for any course in economic development.

All farm subsidies were ended in six months. Tariffs were cut by two-thirds almost immediately (today the average tariff is just 1.4 percent). Most imports enter the country completely freeor very nearly soof any quota, duty, or other restriction.

Taxes were slashed. The top rate was cut to 33 percent, half of what it was when the big government crowd was in charge. The books were finally opened so people could actually see what government elites in Wellington were spending their money on.

From the mid 1980s into the 1990s, the New Zealand government sold off dozens of money-losing state enterprises. The government workforce in 1984 stood at 88,000. In 1996, after the most radical downsizing anywhere in recent memory, its public sector workforce stood at less than 36,000a reduction of 59 percent.

Establishing a new business in New Zealand was made quick and easy, largely because the regulations that were not abolished were finally applied evenly and consistently. At the same time, compulsory union membership was abolished, as were union monopolies over various labor markets.

Both the Fraser Institutes Economic Freedom of the World Index and The Heritage Foundations Index of Economic Freedom rank New Zealand as the third freest economy in the world.

The dramatic changes paid handsome dividends. The national budget was balanced, inflation plummeted to negligible rates, and economic growth surged ahead at between 4 percent and 6 percent annually for years.

New Zealands national government bobs back and forth between the major political parties but the reforms of nearly four decades ago have remained largely intact. By some important indexes, the country is in a remarkable and enviable position.

Both the Fraser Institutes Economic Freedom of the World Index and The Heritage Foundations Index of Economic Freedom rank the country as the third freest economy in the world, producing steady GDP growth as one result.

The Heritage Foundations Index reveals in its analysis of New Zealand that Subsidies are the lowest among OECD countries, and this has spurred the development of a vibrant and diversified agricultural sector. It also points out that There are very few limitations on investment activity, and foreign investment has been actively encouraged. The top personal income tax rate, at 33 percent, is right where it was when it was slashed in half nearly 40 years ago.

The Fraser Institute also ranks countries in terms of overall Human Freedom and, separately, in terms of Personal Freedom; New Zealand comes in at #1 and #4, respectively.

Freedom Houses global tally of political rights and civil liberties gives New Zealand a score of 97 out of 100, placing the country in its top category for freedom.

Reporters Without Borders rates nations according to how much freedom of the press they allow. In its latest ranking, RTB puts New Zealand at #9 in the world. Only eight countries possess greater press freedoms.

The World Bank produces an annual Doing Business Index that measures the burden of government regulations on entrepreneurs. New Zealand scores the very top position#1 in the world for both starting a business and the ease of doing business. To open a business in the average country elsewhere in the world takes three to four times longer than it does in New Zealand.

With all this freedom, a socialist might expect New Zealand to be among the poorer countries of the world, perhaps even a cesspool of exploitation. But of course it is not.

Transparency International rates the world based on how corrupt each countrys public sector is perceived to be by experts and business executives. Once again, New Zealand is #1.

Writing in the New Zealand Herald, the University of Waikatos Alexander Gillespie notes additional measures of New Zealands status, some of which are exceptional while others are more modest:

The Economist says our internet (in terms of affordability and access) is also ranked 2nd best, behind Sweden. Conversely, the last Global Competitiveness Report has us fall a spot, to 19th place. Similarly, the Global Innovation Index, recorded New Zealand falling out of the top 25, to 26th position.

For peace, in terms of societal safety and security, the extent of ongoing domestic and international conflict, and the degree of militarization, Vision of Humanity says we are ranked 2nd best, behind Iceland.

The Democracy Index, which looks at considerations such as free and fair elections and influence of foreign powers, has us at 4th best in the world. Norway, Iceland and Sweden do better.

Our happiness remains steady, as the 8th most cheerful place on the planet, says the World Happiness Report.

Home schooling is legal in New Zealand, with minimal registration requirements. Parents may use the national curriculum or choose an alternative. Its popularity is growing.

With all this freedom, by one measure or another, a socialist might expect New Zealand to be among the poorer countries of the world, perhaps even a cesspool of exploitation. But of course it is not, as anyone who understands economics and human nature would predict. The International Monetary Fund reports that GDP per capita in the land of the Kiwis is the 22nd highest in the world, while the Legatum Institute puts New Zealand in the top 10 in global prosperity.

If the gap between rich and poor concerns you, you should be happy to know that New Zealand scores relatively well by that indicator too. The Gini Coefficient, crude though it may be, is the most often cited representation of a countrys wealth inequality. It ranges between 0 (everyone has the same income) and 1 (one resident earns everything, nobody else earns anything). World Population Review claims that New Zealands Gini is 0.672, better than the world average of 0.74. The same index reveals the country with the best Gini in the world is the U.S., at 0.480.

The World Banks calculation of the Gini Coefficient differs markedly from the above, and decisively in New Zealands favor. The World Bank says New Zealands Gini before taxes and transfers is 0.455, nearly identical to the 0.486 for the U.S. (Click here for a critique of the Gini Coefficient.)

New Zealands Labour Party Prime Minister is Jacinda Ardern, who is often regarded overseas as more leftist than she has governed at home. Though more sympathetic to public sector spending than the opposition ACT or National Parties, she earned the enmity of many progressives last year for ruling out new taxes on wealth or capital gains. But in the aftermath of the Christchurch mosque shootings in March 2019, she was cheered by many on the left for pursuing anti-free speech and anti-gun measures.

A businessman and friend of mine, Emile Phaneuf, moved from Arkansas to New Zealand a few years ago. He was attracted by its economic and personal freedom. He tells me that the country has mostly lived up to his high expectations but adds a caveat: Housing regulations are a mess.

New Zealands experience is one of numerous examples in which socialism caused ruin that capitalism then fixed.

In 2018, Arderns government banned foreigners from buying most residential property. Landlords face a myriad of rules that restrict rent increases and force them to provide services such as broadband. In time, the housing market may desperately need the same liberating forces that fixed the rest of a once over-regulated economy.

Meanwhile, here in the Americas, Venezuela sits at the opposite end of the spectrumdead last or close to it in every measure of freedom. The result? All the hot air from politicians there about We will help people has come to nothing but despair, misery, hunger, impoverishment, and tyranny. The one-way human traffic speaks volumes. It is a story of failure and human tragedy that socialism produces repeatedly.

New Zealands experience is one of numerous examples in which socialism caused ruin that capitalism then fixed. (Germany under Ludwig Erhard after World War II is an especially spectacular one). I know of no cases in history in which capitalism produced disaster that socialism then repaired. None. The only thing socialism does for poor people, it seems, is give them lots of company. What New Zealand did, central-planning disasters from Venezuela to Cuba to California must eventually imitate to recover.

What is the big-picture lesson here? Montesquieu, the French Enlightenment thinker, summed it up in 1748: Countries are well cultivated, not as they are fertile, but as they are free.

My Response to Time Magazines Cover Story on Capitalism by Lawrence W. Reed

New Zealand Farmers Break Free of Crippling Subsidies by Josh Siegel

New Zealands Remarkable Transformation by Daniel J. Mitchell

Tariffs Were Killing New Zealands Economy; Free Trade Turned It Around by Patrick Tyrrell

Greece Should Copy New Zealands Dramatic Policy Reform by Daniel J. Mitchell

The New Zealand Way (podcast) by Maurice P. McTigue

Rolling Back Government: Lessons from New Zealand by Maurice P. McTigue

A Virus Worse Than the One from Wuhan by Lawrence W. Reed

The XYZs of Socialism by Lawrence W. Reed

Eight Principles of Freedom by Lawrence W. Reed

Trailblazers: The New Zealand Story (video) narrated by Johan Norberg

How Business Leaders Helped Save New Zealand from Socialism by Nicholas Kerr

(Correction: This article was updated to reflect that the capital of New Zealand is Wellington.)

Read the original post:

New Zealand's Path to Prosperity Began With Rejecting Democratic Socialism | Lawrence W. Reed - Foundation for Economic Education

Springfield Party of Socialism and Liberations host Cancel the Rents caravan protest – Standard Online

Despite the afternoon showers, about 12 vehicles participated in a caravan protest which drove around low-income neighborhoods of Springfield Saturday afternoon.

Protesters, who gathered at Grant Beach Park, were in support of the national "Cancel the Rents" movement, created in response to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on renters and homeowners. The movement was initiated by the Party of Socialism and Liberations (PSL), a national socialist political party.

Caravans across the country showed their support of the movement for a weekend-long demonstration, held Jan. 29-31 in cities including Atlanta, Ga., Denver, Colo. and Los Angeles, Calif.

One-time stimulus checks of any amount are not sufficient, we need consistent replacement income for those who cannot work, the Cancel the Rents website states.

In March 2020, former President Donald Trump signed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act into law. The act responds to the pandemics impact on the economy, public health, state and local governments, individuals and businesses, according to the United States Congress.

Initially, the CARES Act provided $1,200 stimulus checks per individual within American households with incomes less than $99,000 with up to $500 per underage dependent, according to the U.S. Department of Treasury. The CARES Act of 2021 will pay individuals an additional $600 and up to $600 per qualifying dependents.

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, as of December 2020, despite the federal financial help, one of five renters were not caught up on rent payments due to the pandemic and 31% of renters living with children are twice as likely to not be caught up on payments.

We believe there is no way this country can come out of this crisis unless rents are canceled and mortgages are stopped, Gloria La Riva, co-founder of the PSL, said.

La Riva attended the caravan with her husband Richard Becker, who is also a member of the PSL. La Riva said the two spent four days driving from San Francisco, Calif. to Springfield for the protest.

La Riva said she and Becker love Springfield but are concerned for its residents.

Going through Springfield, it is shocking how many homes are boarded up, how many broken windows there are with people living in them and its a crisis of homelessness, poor housing, crowded housing and people who cant pay, La Riva said.

According to the Ozarks Alliance to End Homelessness 2020 Unsheltered Point-in-Time Report, a survey conducted in communities across the country on a given night in January counting the number of individuals experiencing homelessness, 238 Springfield community members were homeless on Jan. 30, 2020. 68% of the surveys participants reported sleeping on the streets or in a homeless camp the night prior.

In September 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention established a national eviction moratorium a temporary halt of residential evictions during the COVID-19 pandemic until Jan. 31, 2021, according to the CDC.

However, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky extended the moratorium to March 31, states a CDC media statement released on Wednesday, Jan. 20.

Members of the Cancel the Rents movement, including Springfield PSL member Ryan Minor, who participated in Saturdays caravan, dont believe the extension is enough.

These moratoriums are only a delay, Minor said. Once this moratorium ends, people wont be able to pay that back. I dont know of any regular working person who can do that. If theyre already suffering to the point where they cant pay rent, they certainly wont be able to later.

Minor, La Riva and Becker were only three of those who concluded the caravan at Westport Park to eat pizza and discuss the movement under the parks pavilion as rain continued to pour down.

For more information about Cancel the Rents, visit canceltherents.org

Follow Greta Cross on Twitter, @gretacrossphoto

Subscribe to The Standard's free weekly newsletter here.

Continue reading here:

Springfield Party of Socialism and Liberations host Cancel the Rents caravan protest - Standard Online

DILG says ‘no intention at present’ of scrapping 1992 accord with UP – ABS-CBN News

MANILA - The Department of the Interior and Local Government does not intend for now to abrogate its 1992 security agreement with the University of the Philippines, which prohibits police to operate on campus grounds without prior notice.

"We have no intention of abrogation at present. What we want is to have a healthy discussion with the officials of the University of the Philippines," Interior Undersecretary Jonathan Malaya told ANC.

The DILG and UP officials are expected to meet this week "in an atmosphere of mutual trust" to thresh out issues related to peace and order, he said.

The agency, which oversees the Philippine National Police, and premier state university signed an agreement in 1992 regulating the entry of police into UP campuses.

The 1992 UP-DILG agreement was signed by then UP President Jose Abueva and then Interior Secretary Rafael Alunan III following the enactment of Republic Act 6975, which effectively transferred the countrys police force from the Department of National Defense to the DILG. The Philippine Constabulary-Integrated National Police, now the PNP, was formerly under DND.

The 1992 UP-DILG agreement has the same content with the 1989 UP-DND agreement wherein prior notification shall be given by a commander of an Armed Forces of the Philippines or PNP unit intending to conduct any military or police operations in any of the UP campuses.

During the interview, Malaya, also DILG's spokesperson, said they would want to assess the level of security, particularly in UP Diliman, following the proliferation of residential units, business establishments and informal settlers.

"We would like to find out if the UP Diliman police are up to par with the changes since 1992," he said.

Malaya said they also intend to raise the alleged continued clandestine recruitment by the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its front organizations of UP students.

"The concern of DILG is the continued recruitment of students to join the armed struggle. That's different from activism. That's different from teaching the principles of different types of ideologies from left to right," he said.

"Any UP student would know at least one, I know several, contemporaries that have been recruited by front organizations in the University of the Philippines and have went up to the mountains and were killed by encounters between the armed forces, PNP and New People's Army."

However, Malaya clarified that the DILG does not plan to deploy police in any UP campus to monitor students' activities as such action may infringe academic freedom.

"Academic freedom simply means that its the right of the school to determine what is to be studied, who will study and the manner of studying. These things are sacrosanct," he said.

"Meaning the Department of the Interior and Local Government and the Philippine National Police has no intention of prohibiting teachers from teaching communism. Thats part of the curriculum.

"I myself, when I was in the university, studied that in PolSci or types of ideologies, liberal democracy, national democracy, socialism, communist, Marxism. It's part of the curriculum. We will not interfere with that," he said.

On Jan 15, the DND unilaterally junked its 1989 accord over allegations UP had become "a safe haven for enemies of the state."

UP denied this and urged the defense minister to reconsider its decision.

ANC, Matters of Fact, DILG, Department of Interior and Local Government, Jonathan Malaya, 1992 UP-DILG agreement, UP, University of the Philippines, abrogation, pact, accord, agreement

Original post:

DILG says 'no intention at present' of scrapping 1992 accord with UP - ABS-CBN News

Public health and socialism – The Spokesman-Review

Kathleen Ochs letter (A perspective on socialism, Jan. 26) argues that West Virginias vaccination success proves There is no contest in the private sectors ability to meet the needs of the people (i.e., capitalism) vs. the governments ability to timely meet the needs of the people (i.e., socialism). But West Virginia demonstrates effective government action, not the market responding to a public health crisis. Their success rests on the following realities (NYT, Jan 24):

Instead of a patchwork of voluntary private enterprise actors, the state took control and paired independent pharmacies with 200 nursing homes.

They put the National Guard at the helm of vaccine operations. Direction of the program is under control of the National Guard working with state agencies hardly a private enterprise approach.

West Virginia University Medicine a state actor opened a mega-clinic in Morgantown.

West Virginia does not allow philosophical exemptions for opting out of immunizations required for school attendance, which has created a culture where acceptance of vaccinations may be more prevalent.

Rather than capitalism versus socialism, West Virginia is an example of a relatively small state in which the state government has aggressively taken central charge of COVID-19 vaccinations and relied on the National Guard to implement military-type organization and direction to assure the program is a success. It does partner with private sector entities, as do any reasonable governments.

Public health is almost always an essential government function, poorly served by private enterprise, because it takes a government to deal with the tragedy of the commons.

Bill Fassett

Spokane

Read more from the original source:

Public health and socialism - The Spokesman-Review

German Muslims shocking response to the Holocaust – Haaretz

As right-wing nativist and racist ideologies gain traction around the world, left-leaning and liberal intellectuals are turning to Germany, the Nazi WWII era and the countrys post-Holocaust project of national atonement and remembrance. They seek transposable lessons for challenging historic racism and crimes against humanity.

However, for activists and intellectuals seeking lessons for how to strengthen a culture of solidarity and collective memory in a multicultural society, Germany has its flaws.

Despite its opposition to hyper-nationalism, GermanysHolocaustmemory culture fails to include those members of its society who are not ethnically German. In particular, Germans of Muslim/immigrant background who were invited to rebuild the war-torn country after World War II, have until recently been considered external and irrelevant to the foundational German narrative of learning from past mistakes to strengthen the Federal Republics democratic character.

In the 2000s, Muslim-background Germans unexpectedly became central to the countrys Holocaust memory culture but as a target, not as welcome participants.

Since that pivotal period, Turkish and Arab background Germans went from being considered irrelevant to Germanys attempts to come to terms with its Nazi-era past, to being considered its prime obstacle, a status shared to a lesser extent by Germans from the former Communist state of East Germany (and now thestrongholdof the German far right).

Today, Germans of Muslim origin are commonly accused of being unable to relate to Holocaust history, incapable of establishing empathy with its Jewish victims, and of importing new forms of antisemitism to a country that is assumed to havedealt successfullywith its own anti-Jewish racism.

Newspapers run stories about how Muslim students refuse to attend concentration camp tours, and do not engage with the material in history classes devoted to the discussion of National Socialism. In a country where 90 percent of antisemitic crimes are committed by white right-wing Germans, fingers are still pointed at Muslims for being the major carriers of antisemitism in the country.

Accordingly, the government, NGOs, and Muslim-minority groups have begun to design Holocaust education and antisemitism prevention programs specifically tailored for Muslim-background immigrants and refugees, so they, too, can learn lessons from the Holocaust and thereby embrace Germanys most important post-war political values. Most strikingly, the government funds programs that teach about antisemitism through personal experience, by taking refugees who have recently escaped war zones themselves to visit Nazi death camps.

In my 15 years of fieldwork in Germany, I have found that, contrary to common perceptions, Muslim background Germans do engage passionately with the Holocaust. But there is a widespread feeling that Muslim minority Germans engage "wrongly" with the Holocaust.

Holocaust educators often complain to me and to others that Muslim Germans express "unsuitable" emotions in response to the Holocaust. What were these "inappropriate" responses? The most common complaints were that participants expressed fear that something like the Holocaust could happen to them too; that they were jealous of the "status" of Jewish victims, and that they felt pride in their own national backgrounds.

Juliana [all the names used here are pseudonyms to protect the subjects privacy] worked as a guide at a number of former concentration camps in Germany. I asked about her impressions of Muslim minority Germans visiting the camps. Her response was telling.

"Lots of immigrants [meaning Turkish and Arab-Germans]visited," shetoldme. "And I had a feeling that they were different from other visitors."

After stopping briefly, she added, "Now I do not know if they reallyweredifferent, but I could tell that I and other guides were irritated by them. There was a feeling that they did not belong there and that they should not be engaging with the German past. Somehow their presence at the camp did not fit."

When I pushed her further to explain what she meant, Juliana said, "For example, when they go to visit the camps, immigrants start to feel like they will be sent there next. They come out of the camp anxious and afraid. I do not like it at all when they do that, and [so] I do not even want to take them there."

I met Neshide, a petite and well-spoken woman in her forties of Turkish background, because I heard that she organized Holocaust education for immigrant women. Neshide told me that even though the immigrant women who she worked with learned a lot, the training was a very disturbing experience for all of them:

"We were all shocked. How could a society turn so fanatical? We started to ask if they could do such a thing to us as well. We spent a lot of time wondering whether we would find ourselves in the same position as the Jews."

This is exactly the position Juliana told me that German educators find so disturbing when they teach minorities about the Holocaust. Other Germans apparently found it even less tolerable, and reacted harshly when Neshide and her friends voiced their fear:

"A month later we were at a church as part of our training program. We told them about our project [to educate immigrants about the Holocaust] and then told them that we are ourselves afraid of being victims [one day].

"The people at the church became really angry at us. They told us to go back to our countries if this is how we think. I was really surprised at their reaction. I could not understand why this is not a legitimate question. Why should I not be concerned, personally, about the Nazis?"

During that heated conversation, Neshide repeated Holocaust survivor Primo Levis statement: It happened once, so it can happen again.

But this made the ladies in the church even more furious. Neshide and her friends were asked to leave the church. Neshides face reddened when she told me this story. She was reliving the shock and dismay she experienced when she was confronted with extreme anger instead of admiration for her empathy and identification with the history of the country of her new citizenship.

German philosopher Edmund Husserl tells us that establishing an intersubjective connection based on our own bodily experience is the core starting point of gaining a perspective about what other persons might be experiencing in their own bodies. Similarly, when we see a racialized, classed, or gendered individual, especially one who experiences discrimination, we are able to have insight into how they might feel because we each have standing in a society that ranks people in terms of such categories.

This empathy is why, when confronted with reminders of the Holocaust, some Turkish and Arab background Germans fear that they too might be victims if something like this were to happen again. Others feel into antisemitism through their experiences of Islamophobia and afterwards feel irritated that antisemitism in Germany is acknowledged, whereas Islamophobia is disregarded.

"Traditional" Holocaust education programs in Germany aim at triggering feelings of remorse and responsibility. What I found in my fieldwork is that Muslim-background Germans did not conform with this expectation: they responded, in many ways, in a more visceral way, relating the Holocaust to their own experiences, even when admitting that the scales of experiences are entirely different.

Muslims expressing feelings outside the "expected" range are judged to be lacking in the correct moral qualities and in the capacity to be good citizens. Yet empathic feelings triggered by standing in someone elses shoes start from and end in the shoes one already owns.

An inclusive Holocaust memory and education needs to create space to help us understand the specificity of the victims of the Holocaust.

But it should also be a space for recognizing that individuals who commemorate and empathize with the victims do not come from the same place: the spectrum of "correct," respectful and empathetic responses should be welcomed, not penalized, not least when those responses revivify Holocaust memory in such a sharp, thoughtful and contemporaneous way.

In this way, the responses of Germans with Muslim backgrounds are not content to consign the Holocaust to past history; they are, instead, modelling Primo Levis words: "Auschwitz is outside of us, but it is all around us, in the air."

Esrazyrekis theSultan Qaboos Professor of Abrahamic Faiths and Shared Values andthe academic director of Cambridge Interfaith Programmeat theFaculty of Divinity,University of Cambridge and author, most recently, of "Being German, Becoming Muslim: Race, Religion, and Conversion in the New Europe" (Princeton University Press, 2014). Twitter:@esragozyurek

Go here to read the rest:

German Muslims shocking response to the Holocaust - Haaretz

These Machines Wont Kill Fascism: Toward a Militant Progressive Vision for Tech – The Nation

Youth protests at Parliament Square against a new exam rating system which has been introduced in British education system in London, England. (Dominika Zarzycka / NurPhoto / Getty Images)

Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!

Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!

Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!

The modern fascist movement relies on Big Tech to reproduceand it knows it.

Before Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and even Pinterest banned Donald Trump, the then-president was taking aim at a wonkish target: Section 230, a 1996 provision of the Communications Decency Act that shields tech companies from being sued for the content they host. As he told his base in the lead-up to the fumbled coup attempt on January 6, We have to get rid of Section 230, or youre not going to have a country. Around the same time, Trump vetoed the annual defense spending bill because it didnt repeal 230, and pressured Republican thenSenate majority leader Mitch McConnell to make it a bargaining chip in the stimulus negotiations.

In pursuing their campaign against 230 at the same time that theyre seeking to protect corporations from worker lawsuits related to Covid-19, conservatives have made their agenda painfully clear: Corporate liability is permissible in the tech industry only if it helps them dominate the platforms and capture a sector that has long been the darling of liberals.

It was the so-called Atari Democrats who, deeming tech a source of growth during the economically stagnant 1980s, grew the industry through tax breaks, regulatory loopholes, and the privatization of the formerly public Internet. Today, computational infrastructure has crept into nearly every corner of our lives, enabling media curation, labor control, means testing, resource distribution, and much more. These systems generally employ AIpowerful algorithms that require surveillance and other data to train and inform them. The result is an unprecedented scale and granularity of tracking and control.

This ascent was part of an implicit bargain: Democrats relied on Big Tech for campaign contributions and the partisanship of its elite workforce; in exchange, they gave companies control over the infrastructure on which our civic institutions relied. Then came 2016. The industry that Democrats had spent decades boosting wasnt living up to its unspoken agreement to use its power responsibly. Rebuking tech executives for disseminating misinformation through engagement-driven algorithms, Democrats revisited the terms of their deal. The same Federal law that allowed your companies to grow and thrive, said Democratic Senator and Section 230 author Ron Wyden, gives you absolute legal protection to take action against those who abuse your platforms to damage our democracy. For some, the time had come to break them up.

The US right, meanwhile, was taking a different tack to gain influence over tech infrastructure. Conservatives, joined by some hawkish Democrats and tech titans like Alphabets Eric Schmidt, have been working to align the profit motives of these giant corporations with the interests of the police and US armed forces. At the same time, the global far right is using YouTube and other social media to radicalize people who follow algorithmic recommendations to hate speech and misinformation while countering grassroots efforts to deplatform such dangerous language.

The right in the United States has made a clever calculus. Just the threat of repealing Section 230 restrains tech companies from taking action against online fascists and hate speech. If they were to take incendiary speech off their platforms, not only would fascists troll the firms, but Republicans would push even harder to remove 230 under the banner of anti-conservative bias. And if the right were to go through with its threat and repeal 230, companies would still want to avoid lawsuits from well-funded and well-organized conservatives. In this scenario, tech companies would push their decisions about permissible content into the hands of their top lawyers. Afraid of Republican backlash, they would become de facto editors. In either case, companies would hesitate to expel fascists, especially given the revenue-generating potential of their contentwhich is substantial for engagement-driven platforms, as Harvards Joan Donovan points out.Current Issue

Subscribe today and Save up to $129.

For now, the far right in the United States has hit a road bump in its attempt to seize tech from the liberals. Not only have thousands of far-right accounts been banned by the most powerful social media platforms, but efforts to move its base to Parler have been contained after the alt social network (underwritten by the powerful Mercer family) was deplatformed by Apple, Google, and Amazon, which has so far successfully invoked Section 230 against Parlers legal claim that it should be reinstated on Amazons web-hosting services. Seeking a stable transfer of power during the violent dusk of the Trump presidency, the owners of US tech platforms have finally heeded the warnings of workers, researchers, and advocates. For years, Black feminist scholars like Sydette Harry and INasah Crockett have documented the way online ad-tech companies like Facebook and YouTube amplify and enable a fascist media ecosystem in which Black women in particular are often hounded off platforms.

That it took this long for Big Tech companies to take fascists seriously enough to remove some of them from social media should serve as a wake-up call: Elites tend to realize the dangers of fascism only when violent flash points hit close to home. It is workers and historically marginalized people who areand always have beenthe anti-fascist front line. If progressives are to ensure that technical systems arent yoked to a far-right agenda, theyll need to stop relying on legislative maneuvering or entreaties to corporations and, together with these frontline actors globally, vie for control over the infrastructure itself.

Reflecting on the dynamics of German National Socialism in 1941, exiled philosopher Herbert Marcuse saw a striking example of the ways in which a highly rationalized and mechanized economy with the utmost efficiency in production can also operate in the interest of totalitarian oppression. Industrial capitalisms tools of efficiency and profit, he argued, can easily serve authoritarian ends.Related Article

The history of IBMs work on the Nazi census presents a chilling lesson. In service of the Nazi regime, IBMs German subsidiary customized its Hollerith punch card systems to allow the government to classify, track, and sort people based on categories like Jewish. Without IBMs proto-computational technology, the Holocausts ghastly efficiency would not have been possible. Indeed, the numbers tattooed on the arms of many Nazi prisoners were their Hollerith codes, which allowed them to be neatly accounted for in the database.

Nazi Germany isnt a historical anomaly in its use of such computational tools to discipline and oppress its population. South Africas apartheid government also relied on systems of technological efficiency to maintain brutal minority rule. In 1970, it contracted IBM to build the Book of Life, a computerized identity registry linked to the countrys hated passbooks. This system provided pretext for stop-and-frisk-style police domination and harassment and for managing an exploitable, racialized labor force. As one bureaucrat put it, The combination of [passbooks] and a central registry would permit total control of the black population, allowing Native Affairs bureaucrats to allocate the black labour force efficiently while permitting police to locate and identify any individual swiftly and positively.

Hollerith machines and the mainframe computers that powered the Book of Life are a far cry from the powerful computational infrastructure of today. But the modern systems are built on those foundations. They are still codifying and reproducing patterns of racialized and gendered inequality, and they are already use in high-stakes domainsapplied by insurance companies and hospitals to decide who gets health care, by landlords to select good tenants, by cops to predict who is a criminal, and by employers to determine whether or not someone will be a productive worker and then whom to surveil, control, and assess once they are hired.

Just as Big Techs command of the means of surveillance and coercion echoes authoritarian history, labors historical fight against mechanized and automated systems points a way forward, toward militant mass movements demanding ownership and agency over the infrastructure of social control.

In 1912, the Massachusetts state legislature passed a law that reduced weekly hours for women and children. But workers in the textile hub of Lawrence suspected a loophole, and their suspicions were confirmed when the mill corporations speeded up the machines and posted notices that, following January 1, the 54-hour work week would be maximum for both men and women operatives, as labor educator and historian Joyce Kornbluh recounts. In other words, while the mill owners honored the weekly-hour limit set by the legislature, they subverted its intent by speeding up the mechanical looms, which increased workloads and reduced workers take-home pay.

Organized through the Industrial Workers of the World, mill workers went on strike with banners that read, We want bread, and roses, tooa demand for more than subsistence. Reflecting on this bold political scope, labor reporter Mary Heaton Vorse commented at the time, It was the spirit of workers that was dangerous.

Those opposing the workers understood this as well. Militias made up of Harvard students attacked strikers; Congress called hearings; and strike leaders were imprisoned under false charges. Ultimately, the workers won increased wages and agreed to return to the mills. But they did not gain power over the mechanized infrastructure of worker control, which made them vulnerable to a counteroffensive. In addition to creating a spy network on the shop floor to identify and root out worker organizing, mill owners implemented additional speedups that displaced workers and nullified the wage increase won during their strike.

This is a lesson the US labor movement of the 1920s and 30s took to heart. It shaped labors demands for control over production technologies and linked them to questions of human dignity and political autonomy.

In Southeastern Michigan, workers challenged the terms of Henry Fords wage-effort bargain, in which a $5 wage and other material benefits came at the expense of domination on and off the clock. Fords sociology department would even make unannounced home visits to determine if workers were sufficiently clean and sober. Black workers, newly arrived through the Great Migration, were made especially vulnerable through usurious payment plans for homes that Ford built as industrial growth outpaced housing availability.

As the benefits that workers had traded for autonomy dried up with the Great Depressionduring which two-thirds of the sector was laid offDetroits working class began organizing through the Unemployed Councils, a national initiative of the Communist Party. This was particularly important for Black workers, who were usually the last hired, first fired. The councils shut down several plants and jump-started the first wave of strikes in the auto sector. They made economic and political demands that went well beyond the workplace: They wanted the reinstatement of unemployed workers, health insurance for them and their families, a halt to the Ford home foreclosures, an end to discrimination against Black workers, the abolition of Fords internal security agency, and even the release of the Scottsboro Boys, Black teens who had been framed for rape. These organizers understood that that worker power was a force that could achieve political ends toward justice and equity.

Get unlimited access: $9.50 for six months.

Inside the plants, workers began experimenting with a series of slowdowns that culminated in the famous 193637 Flint sit-down strike. They forced the auto industry to recognize their union after shutting down several mother plants, which were indispensable to production. But their fight didnt end there. The camaraderie that developed during the plant occupations emboldened them to make demands over the pace of work and the infrastructure of worker control. On an almost daily basis, they challenged managerial authority through shop steward representation, slowdowns, and strikes. The threat these workers posed to capital accumulation prompted employers, the state, and union bureaucrats to work together to undermine their power. The postwar Red scareand the wartime no-strike pledges that laid the ground for itsaw union leadership cutting deals with management and purging left-wing dissidents. As Walter Reuther, the president of the United Auto Workers (UAW) during this period, said, Labor is not fighting for a larger slice of the national pielabor is fighting for a larger pie. What was good for business was, in Reuthers view, good for workers.

This did not turn out to be true. The narrowing of organized labors focus took militant action off the table and reduced the site of worker struggle from politics and power to negotiating contracts around pay and benefitswith few ways to push back when these were violated. Carl Keithly, a Chevrolet factory worker under United Auto Workers at this time, summarized the cost: The company will cut your wages, knock out your seniority and your vacations, and there will be no way to protest outside of quitting your job. There will be nothing left at the plant but wage cuts and speedup.

In the face of increasing automation, this was a serious misstep for labor. As scholar and autoworker James Boggs stated, A new force had now entered the picture, a force which the union had given up its claim to control when in 1948 it yielded to management the sole right to run production as it saw fit. Management began introducing automation at a rapid rate. Boggs, writing in the early 1960s, went on to remark that today the workers are doing in eight hours the actual physical work they used to do in 12.

Automation was just one aspect of US employers reassertion of control. Sociologists Joshua Murray and Michael Schwartz show that after the UAWs conciliatory turn, US automakers decoupled their production process, stockpiling parts in every plant so that workers at one particular plant would be unable to fully disrupt operations again. Moreover, as a global economic crisis took hold in the 1970s, employers invested in systems of technical management and automation in order to recover profitability, further entrenching mechanisms of worker control and immiseration. This strategy didnt return the United States to manufacturing leadership. Instead, it helped elevate tech as a sector in its own right.

Today, the app-based precarity (or gig) economy, enabled by large-scale AI systems, has led to an increasingly dire situation, in which workers livelihoods are dictated by opaque algorithms calibrated to extract as much profit from them as possible. This is compounded by US-based gig companies self-serving legislative maneuvering and dissembling marketing, which, as legal scholar Veena Dubal argues, has already rolled back US labor protection to create a low-rights category of app-based workers who lack basic protections, like an hourly wage floor or health insurance. But this isnt confined to app-based workers. Across all job categories, workers are being hired, surveilled, controlled, and assessed by opaque algorithmic systems tuned to maximize employers objectives. A start-up called Argyle is even creating a kind of worker credit score by aggregating employment data across jobs. The company sells this information to businesses for use in hiring, along with other data that is also sold to insurers and lenders.Related Article

Its not surprising, then, that weve seen a surge of labor action, particularly among workers most subject to these systems. Amazon warehouse workers, whose labor is controlled by a punishing algorithmic productivity rate, have organized across Europe and the United States, carrying signs reading, We are not robots. Striking Instacart workers have also opposed the companys black box app, which sets workers pay via an unintelligible model that mathwashes their exploitation. In a similar vein, the All India Gig Workers Union recently demanded that app-based delivery company Swiggy stop algorithmic manipulation of ratings and incentives payout.

Those suffering under Big Tech know the source of their pain and are not fooled by marketing about flexibility and entrepreneurship. These workers have broadened the terrain of labor struggle to include the technical infrastructure that dictates their livelihoods, something that heralds a return to the militancy of the 1920s and 30s.

People outside of the workplace but whose tastes and opportunities are increasingly directed by algorithms have also registered dissent. These efforts often combine strategic litigation, protest, and legislative campaigns. Protesters have pushed forand in some cases wonbans and moratoriums on the use of facial recognition in the United States. Students in the United Kingdom rallied under the slogan fuck the algorithm and successfully sued the British government for using racist software that determined student rankings during Covid-19. And in Canada, after years of struggle, the Block Sidewalk campaign forced Google to abandon its plan to develop a smart surveillant city on the Toronto waterfront.

The growing worker uprisings and community-based opposition movements present an organic coalition that progressives would do well to acknowledge and support, especially when their demands involve issues of control and ownership of technical systems. Amazon warehouse workers in Poland, who are fighting not only for a reduction in the grueling pace of work but for access to the data and algorithms that set it, are making a claim to the conditions of their labor and to the systems that mediate it. Similarly, organized white-collar tech workers are fighting for the right to refuse unethical work and the ability to shape their companies decisions on issues like climate change or whether they should partner with the US military. Importantly, many of these efforts go beyond the scope of the workplace or workers immediate material conditions. Aims shared by tech workers and community organizers in the United States have animated the movement, putting those directly affected by technologies of social control, like people experiencing surveillance and tracking by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, in coalition with workers refusing to create such technologies.

Were not likely to get much help from the mainstream of the Democratic Party in claiming a tech infrastructure for the people. Failing to situate congressional reform efforts within a broader strategy for building power, establishment liberals have a record of losing even their piecemeal initiatives to the right.

In addition to leading the charge against Section 230, Republican members of Congress Jim Jordan, Tom Cotton, and Josh Hawley spent much of 2020 working to appropriate and warp progressives antitrust agenda to combat techs alleged anti-conservative bias. In reality, the far right has been using algorithmic targeting and social media to create a powerful propaganda arm that bypasses more responsible media. Indeed, the role that social media played in helping coordinate the recent coup attempt on the Capitol speaks to the centrality of these platforms to the fascist agenda and to Big Techs historical permissiveness and perverse business incentives. And its not just in the United States; Facebook was used to fan a genocide of the Muslim Rohingya minority in Myanmar, and similar dynamics are visible now in Ethiopia.

The US far right has fashioned a compelling if fatuous narrative for its growing base: The Big Tech oligarchs, as Cotton calls them, are liberal gatekeepers driving conservatives out of business and curbing their freedom of speech. The recent enforcement of terms of service for a handful of English-speaking accounts will further fuel this narrative, even if this move follows years of inaction on similar accounts around the globe, as scholar Jillian York points out.

Establishment Democrats remain unable to counter this narrative. Hamstrung by their allegiance to large corporate donors and reticent to reclaim the interests of the working class, they are easily neutralized in their legislative efforts to reform tech. And Bidens willingness to consider Big Tech insiders to key cabinet positions does not signal a change.

Facing the consequences of punitive technologies of social control, workers and social movements are beginning to reject meek unionism and the conciliatory reforms of the Democratic Party. In the process, they are building a progressive flank in the battle for control of algorithms, data, and the computational systems. These coalitions are also claiming ownership of the imaginative horizon, including the right to dismantle, reject, and rebuild technical infrastructures. And theyre recognizing themselves as political actors, pushing institutions to meet social obligations. This is something typified by progressive teachers unions, who have not only fought the use of tracking and ed-tech surveillance but are also bargaining for the common good.

Tech workers, too, are forming unions and coalitions that unite those building technologies of social controlor, refusing to build themwith the communities harmed by them. Adrienne Williams, an Amazon delivery driver and organizer, expressed this when she called on drivers and engineers to design the algorithmically generated driving routes together. As she told Vice, Our routes [in the San Francisco Bay Area] are designed by employees in Seattle. Theyre so dangerous and inefficient. You could fix this immediately if the drivers just had someone to talk to. Here we see the progressive wing fight to determine who gets to shape, or be shaped by, tech. It is one of our best hopes for combatting a fascist takeover of computational systems of control.Related Article

While Section 230 certainly needs improvement, reform alone will neither reduce concentrated platform power nor address the capitalist incentives that propelled Big Tech companies to provide propaganda tools for fascists around the world. Meanwhile, it is also clear that the fight against a brute repeal of Section 230, which would be disastrous for sex workers and other marginalized populations, will be won only as part of a broader and more militant fight. It will require the kind of nuanced understanding of techs unevenly distributed harms and consequences that does not come from the executive offices of tech companies or the halls of Congress.

The progressive tech agenda must be international, and will emerge through supporting and drawing connections between sex workers whove opposed the harmful effects of SESTA/FOSTA, the 2018 amendment to Section 230 that made online platforms liable for content promoting sex work; elite tech workers, like those at Kickstarter whove contested their employers capitulation to fascist trolls; low-paid tech workers objecting to algorithmic exploitation; frontline workers who, in the model of Los Angeles safety councils, are demanding access to data about their lives and health; Amazon workers whove formed international organizations; Coupang e-commerce workers in South Korea who sent messages of solidarity to e-commerce workers elsewhere; tenants whove fought landlords use of assessment and surveillance technologies; and other communities and organizers resisting carceral infrastructure of control and domination. These, among others, are the protagonists shaping a more socially just tech infrastructure, and it is their struggle that regulation efforts should work to bolster.

The neoliberal bargain is fraying, and if we dont vie for control over the algorithms, data, and infrastructure that are shaping our lives, we face a grim future. It is time to rally behind a militant strategy that recognizes the danger of leaving US tech capitalists at the helm of systems of social control while far-right authoritarians jockey for access. A new and historic bloc is possible. Militant workers, engaged social movements, progressive politicians, radical lawyers, and critical researchers will find that achieving their demands for control willindeed, mustradically change the tech ecosystem. Contesting for power against those who have it is never easy, but the path forward is clear: Fuck the algorithms, dismantle the tech monopolies, and build infrastructures of care and justice where these systems of social control once stood.

Read more from the original source:

These Machines Wont Kill Fascism: Toward a Militant Progressive Vision for Tech - The Nation

The Holocaust and freedom from racism The Manila Times – The Manila Times

Every year on January 27, the most horrific crimes of genocide and mass murder on an industrial scale by the criminal Nazi regime in Germany are remembered. As Spanish philosopher George Santayana said, They who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.These crimes must never be allowed to be repeated although they have been. In a premeditated planned genocide, 6 million Jews and other minorities and political prisoners were exterminated by individual and mass shooting. Hundreds of thousands were worked to death, killed by starvation, and millions more gassed to death and burnt in the ovens of the infamous concentration and extermination camps that the Nazis built around Europe.This happened during their vicious and brutal conquest of Europe from 1939 to 1945.

I have visited the extermination camp at Buchenwald near the City of Weimar. It was a terrible place of isolation, cruelty and mass murder. In the countryside, it was bitterly cold and forbidding. I saw a massive prison camp surrounded by an electrified fence. There was no escape for the hundreds of thousands of political prisoners, prisoners of war, Jewish people, Roma people, mixed race people and Afro-Germans. Anyone who disagreed with the Nazi regime was sent to the death camps where the SS death squads executed them.

I walked around the camp. The wooden huts where the prisoners slept were demolished. In a concrete building in the corner of the camp with a tall chimney, I saw the murder room.One by one, prisoners stood against the wall to have their height measured and they were shot dead through a hole in the wall. In the basement, there is a room with hooks fixed in the cement ceiling. The innocent prisoners with hands and legs tied and a wire around their necks were hung to slowly die by strangulation. Then, their bodies were placed in a large metal bin that was elevated to the extermination room where six large ovens were continually incinerating the bodies like rubbish. Outside, a greatly enlarged photograph showed a large pile of emaciated bodies of those who died of cruel starvation or firingsquad waiting to be delivered to the ovens. Prisoners were forced to do the dirty work.

Memorials of these crimes are held every year by a repentant German people and a new generation all over Germany. Many monuments honoring and remembering the victims have been built so that every German and people everywhere will mourn, be informed, be aware and strengthened in their resolve that such crimes and neo-Nazi hateful ideology and racism in any form are resisted, opposed and countered by peace initiatives. There have been genocides since in Rwanda, Bosnia, Darfur, Sudan, Iraq, Cambodia, Myanmar.And the list goes on and on. The Jewish people were the main target of hatred and racism by the Nazis. The Nazis arrested and deported everyone to the death camps, to be systematically beaten and gassed to death, six million in all, one million were childrenPeople everywhere have to take a stand against such arbitrary killings and atrocities and never stand by in silence and allow them to happen without protest. Such silence is to approve and give consent by inaction and be an accomplice to the crime. To stand against such killings, people need a conscience formed by the Gospel values of human rights and dignity to repudiate and condemn such murders, war crimes and genocide. Here, we condemn as evil and wrong all such killings.

The Nazi regime was built on a political party of national socialism that was racist and politically extreme right-wing. They believed themselves to be the white supremacists destined to conquer and rule by violence, if necessary. Adolf Hitler, an Austrian migrant, got German citizenship by astute political manipulation. The mainstream political parties compromised with his racist policies and ideology and paved his way to total power. He became chancellor and his cult-like fanatical followers started a fire in the parliament building, The Bundestag, and he blamed the communists and had them all arrested and thrown out of Parliament by presidential decree. Then, his Nazi party had a majority and he ruled Germany with an iron fist and worked to exterminate the Jews and the communists.

When we see the white supremacists and neo-Nazi extreme right-wing groups in Europe and in the United States marching with Nazi swastika flags and symbols, and a US president supporting them, we should think of Hitler and summon up the courage to stand and oppose by word and action this insidious racist political movement.

Everyone ought to support the freedoms and human dignity and freedom of true, fair democracy or for sure we will lose them. This white supremacist ideology has divided America, threatens parts of Europe as neo-Nazis proliferate once again, spreading hatred and violence against migrants.

Some member states of the European Union have right-wing populists in power, and they pass odious oppressive laws. The police and armed forces of America and Europe are reportedly infiltrated by racist neo-Nazi sympathizers, it seems.

Witness the killing and harassment and abuse of so many immigrants, asylum seekers and people of color in Europe and the United States. It is a poison affecting the police day by day, a dangerous trend of what is yet to come. Police brutality is inciting protests and demonstrations themselves. Witness the Black Lives Matter movement, demonstrations in Belarus, Lebanon, Tunisia and many more.

Complacency, ignorance, apathy, indifference and tolerance that give consent and support for such racism is participating in the politics of racism, hatred and violence. We should not be surprised that the US Capitol was attacked by these neo-Nazi groups trying to overthrow the democratic process egged on by former president Trump and blaming the progressive groups for its ransacking and desecration. It smacks of Hitler-like dirty tricks in burning the Bundestag.

The reluctance of the Republican members of the US Senate to convict Trump for this blatant attack on the Capitol, the heart of democratic processes, is shocking and disgusting. They are in effect condoning this criminal action by the Trump mob. The Trump followers have to throw off the mesmerization and worship of the Trump cult and admit they have been duped and lied to and reject all that hatred and racism that Trumpism promotes and encourages. They must resist and break free from the manipulation by social media. Freedom from racism and hatred is the freedom to love our neighbor in peace and with understanding.

Go here to read the rest:

The Holocaust and freedom from racism The Manila Times - The Manila Times

Words to be aware of – Winona Post

From: Steve Squires

Dakota

In 1959, Nikita Khruschev, former premier of the Soviet Union, ranted that, We [Russia] would bury you [America]. What Khruschev didnt disclose was his plan, and it was simple infiltrate the American education system with socialist principles and instructors and his plan has been extremely successful. Our universities are now centers for communist policies.

Chairman Mao founded the Chinese communist party on three principles: one atheism no god, two, materialism exploit fear and hunger, and three, struggle and fight for the party, regardless the cost.

Americans are being controlled like sheep: Wear a mask, dont open your business, big tech canceling your social media accounts and mainstream news suppression of anything harmful to socialists such as Hunter Bidens business dealings in China and Ukraine.

January 8, 2021, Joe Biden described Republican Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley as Nazis for their support of President Trump, Biden also stated his desire to destroy the National Rifle Association.

Goodbye, Second Amendment. Goodbye, freedom.

The socialism planned for America is not the capitalist type Sweden has. It is communism.

You can vote socialism in but, you cant vote it out.

Read the rest here:

Words to be aware of - Winona Post

Marjorie Taylor Greene Is on Her Way to Becoming a Household Name – Morning Consult

After an election year in which Republicans elevated progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York as part of an effort to paint the entire Democratic Party as socialist and outside the political mainstream, new polling suggests Democrats may have found their own shiny new foil in their quest to hold the House in 2022.

According to Morning Consult/Politico polling, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene the Georgia Republican known for her incendiary rhetoric and embrace of conspiracy theories is becoming increasingly recognizable to voters, akin to an increase in recognition measured for Ocasio-Cortez after she took her place in the House two years ago. The growing exposure provides Democrats with an emerging lightning rod as they try to brand the GOP as the party of conspiracy and QAnon.

The latest survey, conducted Jan. 29 to Feb. 1 among 1,986 registered voters nationwide, found 46 percent have an opinion about Greene up 21 percentage points since a poll conducted in August ahead of the Republican National Convention. It is slightly less than the share who had formed views about Ocasio-Cortez by this time two years ago, but a comparison of those respective August and January months reveals that awareness of Greene has grown more quickly as she draws attention following the Jan. 6 riot on Capitol Hill.

The increase in notoriety for Greene was driven by a 29-point surge in the share of Democrats who have formed opinions about her, marking a larger initial name ID boost than Ocasio-Cortez saw among Republicans by this time in 2019 though the New Yorkers national fame continued to grow throughout the 2020 campaign.

Democrats have already worked Greenes image into campaign ads against vulnerable Republicans, tying the GOP to QAnon and the likes of Greene just as Republicans tied the Democrats to socialism and AOC, but the comparison between the two lawmakers is imperfect.

The New York progressive, who scored a surprise primary victory over an establishment Democrat in 2018, was made famous as a proponent of a liberal policy agenda and was sought after by other candidates for her support as her tenure progressed. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) even participated in high-profile media appearances with the then-freshman lawmaker, though she kept some distance from parts of Ocasio-Cortezs policy agenda.

On the other hand, Greene has drawn attention for sometimes violent rhetoric and embracing conspiracy theories like QAnon and widespread voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election. She was dubbed the House GOPs frontwoman by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee after she introduced articles of impeachment against President Joe Biden on his first full day in office, and has been in the middle of an intraparty rift on Capitol Hill over House Republican Conference Chair Liz Cheney of Wyomings support for Trumps impeachment.

Greene, who is disliked by a third of the electorate and by more than 7 in 10 of those who have views about her is also divisive among Republican voters, with about 1 in 5 each expressing positive and negative views in the latest survey.

Greene elicits a muted response among GOP voters compared to better-known Republican leaders, such as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who on Monday issued statements condemning conspiracy theories within the GOPs ranks and aligning himself with Cheney. The lions share of Republican voters (47 percent) hold negative views about McConnell, up 23 points since August. Forty-two percent of the partys voters hold unfavorable opinions about Cheney, up 14 points since August, with most of the movement coming since the Jan. 6 riot.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who has been tasked with managing the internal GOP strife, is the only congressional Republican leader tested in the survey who has seen his intraparty standing improve: As more Republican voters have formed opinions about the Californian, the share with favorable views has increased by 6 points to 39 percent.

View post:

Marjorie Taylor Greene Is on Her Way to Becoming a Household Name - Morning Consult

VOX ATL Teen: MLK Was A Radical, And It’s Time That Our Schools Teach That | 90.1 FM WABE – WABE 90.1 FM

ByLauren Ashe

Every year for the past 12 years, I have learned about Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in school.

In elementary school, we celebrated MLK Day by watchingOur Friend, Martin. In middle school, we spent the day discussing his plea for nonviolence and his call for a better world. In high school, we briefly discussed the letter from the Birmingham Jail.

The common theme between these years was the story that was always told. It has always been the same tale MLK marched on Washington and fought for change using nonviolent methods.

It has never gone beyond the surface-level ideologies and methods that King practiced.

A few months ago, I remember seeing a meme that said something along the lines of, Schools really teach the development of racism like this: Lincoln freed the slaves, Jim Crow happened, MLK marched and then racism was fixed!

To me, this is the epitome of how racism and the civil rights movement is taught in schools.

It was up until my junior year of high school when I did my own research outside of school and found out that Dr. King was anti-capitalist, anti-war and often spoke out against white moderates.

It was then that I found out that MLK was reduced to a palatable and digestible character that could fit the narratives of those who opposed him in the 60s.

As a preacher and the son of a minister, King valued the idea that society should be a level playing field for all people.

He spent his life pushing forward a vision of society that aims to provide equality for people of all races and backgrounds while focusing on the well-being of others. In all, he believed that society could reach these goals through the system of socialism.

In 1952, he wrote a loveletterto Coretta Scott King that described his feelings toward his wife and Americas economic system.

In the letter, he stated, I am much more socialistic in my economic theory than capitalistic.

He then moves on to say that capitalism has outlived its usefulness and brought a system that takes necessities from the masses to give luxuries to the classes.

In many other instances, King shows his commitment to building a movement that overcomes capitalism and aims to achieve racial and economic equality for all people.

In his The Three Evils address in 1967, King stated, The time has come for America to face the inevitable choice between materialism and humanism We must also realize that the problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power.

In conjunction with this economic view, King was also heavily anti-war and often spoke out against the war in Vietnam. His views of equity extended beyond the United States and his movement for civil rights was global.

In his 1967Beyond Vietnamspeech, he urged the American people and government to consider their role within the war.

In the speech he noted, Our only hope today lies in our ability to recapture the revolutionary spirit and go out into a sometimes hostile world declaring eternal hostility to poverty, racism and militarism.

He was highly criticized for his take, which is not often taught in schools. Growing up, I was taught that most people did not oppose MLK and his ideas, which was far from the truth.

King was assassinated, and a 1966poll showed that almost two-thirds of Americans had an unfavorable opinion of him. This jump in disapproval was a 26% increase from 1963. Ultimately, this is because of the increase in anti-war and anti-capitalist sentiments that he continued to express.

In addition to this, many Americans believed that he was unpatriotic because of his anti-war beliefs. Ultimately, this reminds me of the wayColin Kaepernick was criticized for his protests in 2016 and perfectly shows the harm that is done when the message of King is watered down.

The version of Martin Luther King Jr. that is prevalent today does not accurately portray the story of a man who was considered to be radical by the government.

The story of King largely waters down his revolutionary methods, which make his methods of nonviolent protest seem nonthreatening to the majority of society.

To ignore the disdain toward King and his revolutionary ideas is to inflict harm onto the movements of change that are prevalent today.

Oftentimes, there is a parallel between Kings fight for change in the 60s and the fight for change today. But, people do not see this because of the way that his message was taught within schools. Ultimately, this leads the people of today to believe that the only way to achieve justice is to fight through nonviolence and be palatable to the majority, which could not be further from the truth.

King made large numbers of people uncomfortable. He pushed ideas that were unpopular and deemed as radical at the time. He was against conforming to the status quo and often fought against the norms of society.

Though today, we see figures who are doing the same getting criticized. Noting that their stances are too radical and do not appeal to the majority.

We watched as Republicans on state and national stages ran on the idea of their opponents being radical. Former Sen. Kelly Loeffler called Sen. Raphael Warnock a radical liberal 13 times during a debate and former President Donald Trump branded Joe Bidenas a radical throughout the election cycle.

If the message was correctly taught within schools, maybe people could understand the revolutionary ideas that King held and begin to understand the various ways that change can be achieved. Rather than criticizing and de-legitimizing methods of change that are prevalent today, we could potentially work to see how these events have worked in years past.

To celebrate his legacy, we must deconstruct the digestible version of him that was taught to us and move forward knowing that he promoted what were considered to be radical methods of change.

We must celebrate all aspects of Dr. King and learn from his methods of standing up for what is right despite what may be popular at the time.

Only through this can we progress as a society and create a world that values equity on all fronts.

Lauren Ashe, 17, is a senior at St. Pius X Catholic High School. She has a passion for social justice and politics. She enjoys taking photos for her photography business and reading books in her free time. She hopes to inform and empower readers through her voice and work.

This story was published atVOXATL.org, Atlantas home for uncensored teen publishing and self-expression. For more about the nonprofit VOX, visitwww.voxatl.org.

Continue reading here:

VOX ATL Teen: MLK Was A Radical, And It's Time That Our Schools Teach That | 90.1 FM WABE - WABE 90.1 FM

Op-Ed: COVID exposed the flaws in federalized education – The Center Square

I'm public enemy No 1 with the teachers and their unions. It is a badge of honor.

Chris Christie

When COVID-19 shut down classrooms from coast to coast, few districts had contingency plans to plug the hole it put in our childrens learning skills and plans for the next year. This impacted many of their SAT scores, scholarships, college entrance requirements and exams. It negatively skewed standardized tests taken in the spring. And those who needed extra help to keep up their grades fell further behind. It also made graduating a challenge for those who needed required classes.

With no strategic plans during a shutdown, and generous union contracts, school teachers across the U.S. collected full time checks while sitting home. States require schools to include 180 days of classroom instruction and teaching programs. But this was ignored around America. Teachers got paid if they worked or not and many children played with friends instead of doing lessons in quarantine. The only students schooled as usual were by home schooling parents.

In 1979, Jimmy Carter created the Department of Education to win support from teachers unions. With a 28% approval rating, he was desperate for votes. Neither the Senate nor voters supported it but he did it anyway. Upon signing the bill, he said, The Federal Government will be a vocal partner in American education. With a stroke of a pen, he nailed the coffin shut on local education.

For four decades, we havent seen any amelioration in education. The DOED has failed miserably to improve our schools. Every attempt to dissolve this bureaucratic quagmire has been filibustered by the National Education Association. In 2018, U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., introduced HR 899 to dismantle the DOED and the left frantically sent it to limbo.

Limbo is when you go from nowhere to nowhere.

Bob Dylan

According to a recent report from the GAO, all reform movements by the Department of Education have failed miserably. George Bushs No Child Left Behind, Barack Obamas Race to the Top, along with Bill Gates Common Core debacle have resulted in highway robbery at the expense of taxpayers.

The GAO identified three key shortcomings in the DOED: methodology, data quality, and oversight. The GAO found offices consistently failed to document activities. Over $21 million in grants could not be tracked where they went. A $170 million grant for Rural Education Achievement in 2016 had no data how funds were used. They concluded over half of DOEDs grants were either ineffective or results were unsatisfactory. They concluded this was a discernible coverup for mismanagement.

When this department was created, it federalized the teachers and the unions. Politicians make it impossible to track the success or failure of programs. School districts and unions have found the DOED a convenient vehicle to pass worthless expensive mandates for personal benefit. This is a coverup for wasting tax dollars on failed public school programs.

A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.

Thomas Paine

In its June 2018 ruling in Janus v. County and Municipal Employees, the high court shut down a crucial source of revenue for government and public unions. Teachers were no longer required to pay mandatory fees for collective bargaining. Unions had to represent all teachers even if they paid dues or not. What seemed like an opportunity to return control of education to the taxpayers was a paper tiger lacking fangs. The unions fought back the next election and took control of the House.

According to Lily Eskelsen Garca, president of the nations largest public employee union, the National Education Association (NEA), We sit here today having budgeted for what we thought might be a worst-case scenario, a drop of a couple hundred thousand members, and we are up several thousand! Since Janus, the NEA has been gaining members and increasing political power yearly.

Author Bruce Sterling wrote, Give a guy a license to steal, and he will use it. When Carter got in bed with the NEA, this gave them a license to abuse tax dollars. Not one local county commission meeting takes place without school districts begging for money. Each legislative calendar is filled with education bills to fund projects for failing schools. And every year education budgets increase even if enrolment drops.

Dont confront public-sector unions if you like your job.

Chris Christie

In 2020, Nancy Messonnier of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned school systems to prepare for a shutdown and make contingent plans. Yet school officials were caught with their pants down when it happened. Few had plans to teach online, yet students had laptops and access to Zoom and Google Classroom. Teachers scurried to prepare lessons for students to take home. Yet the DOED claims they sent bulletins to the state boards and the NEA to prepare for at home teaching.

Rahm Emanuel told Obama never let a crisis go to waste. And he didnt. He put the expansion of government on steroids. This is an ideal time for American parents and taxpayers to take back their school districts from local boards, state supported unions and politicians. They must react while the iron is hot. The incestual relationship between the NEA, the DOED and politicians has removed the taxpayer voice in the education system they pay for. Will they let this national crisis go to waste?

All government is local and so is education. Schools must be held accountable to the taxpayers, not federal directives or teacher unions. Each city, state and child has different needs. Education is not one size fits all. If the states controlled education and taxpayers made the decisions, it would insure they were prepared for a crisis like COVID-19, and local disasters that disrupt schooling. Taxpayers finance education and they should make the decisions how their local education dollars are spent.

The pandemic exposed many problems with the curriculum in our public schools. Virtual schools allowed students to continue classes and gave parents a chance to sit in the classrooms and see everything that was taught to their kids. And for most of them, this was a rude awakening. For the first time, they were exposed to the half truths and mistruths within the Common Core classrooms.

With federal budgets suffering from the pandemic, the time is ripe for Americans to strike back and rescue our schools from common core entrapment. Now parents have been exposed to teaching materials and books used in their schools, it is easy to see why the Millennials and Generation Z have turned to socialism. With less federal money available, parents have more influence with the states and boards for school choice, as well as public school curriculum for the first time in years.

The federalization of education turned classrooms into venues to teach the merits of federalism to our youth. We have a society of young adults who have never learned what makes America a truly great nation. We have it in our power to fix that now. We cant let this education crisis go to waste.

The teachers unions that block school reform have done serious damage to the union brand. The public no longer views unions as their friend, much less their champion.

Juan Williams

Read the original here:

Op-Ed: COVID exposed the flaws in federalized education - The Center Square

Shaping the Future of Work | The ILR School | Cornell University – Cornell University | ILR School

A new social contract is possible if workers, business, labor, education and government work together, Lee Dyer and Tom Kochan say in the new edition of their book.

A new edition of "Shaping the Future of Work: A Handbook for Action and a New Social Contract" by Lee Dyer, ILR emeritus professor of Human Resource Studies, and MIT Professor Thomas A. Kochan is a call to action to develop good jobs and strong business while overcoming social and economic divisions.

According to Routledge, which published the book in November, it provides a clear roadmap for the roles workers and leaders in business, labor, education, and government must play in building a new social contract for all to prosper.

Dyer taught at ILR for 45 years and is a research fellow at ILRs Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies. Kochan is the George M. Bunker Professor of Management at the MIT Sloan School of Management. He taught at ILR before joining MITs faculty.

Dyer recently discussed the book for this story:

How did the social contract between workers and employers evolve in the post-World War II years?

It evolved organically, thanks to the confluence of several favorable conditions: (1) U.S. corporations were dominant globally after the war and many of the bigger ones were highly regulated, so conditions werent as competitive as they are now, (2) executives had a greater sense of social responsibility than they do now (perhaps because of condition 1), (3) unions were powerful and negotiated very favorable contracts which other companies often adopted, and (4) New Deal labor laws and policies were in effect and effectively enforced, and for example, facilitated the large and powerful unions.

How and when did the social contract fall apart?

Starting in the mid- to late-70s, companies began facing more competitive conditions and became enamored with and empowered by Milton Friedmans admonition to pay attention to profits and stockholders and dont worry about any obligations to employees or other stakeholders. The labor movement steadily declined in membership and power, in part because of tougher anti-union stances by management, and thus found it tougher to resist the executive profit grab. Reagans mass firing of the countrys air traffic controllers in the early 80s jump-started this effort. From then until now, right-wing pressures for stockholder preeminence and less government regulation of business kept eating away at workers rights, while creating conditions favoring the flow of riches to the already rich. Do you see opportunity for a new social contract? Why?

Yes, when Im being optimistic. The Business Roundtable just came out with a new statement on the purpose of the corporations, which adopted a stakeholder, rather than pure stockholder, preeminence point of view. This was in the context of making the economy work for everyone including workers. President Biden certainly shares this view, as do union leaders, and other labor advocates. So, there is some commonality to work from. Of course, there are differences of opinion about the meaning of this phrase. Some question whether corporate types even really believe in it. But, if there is a common base to work from, negotiations are possible.

Has the pandemic opened the door to a shift in the workplace where there will be more focus on equality and more flexibility for workers?

Yes. It certainly has highlighted the ways in which the economy isnt working for everyone (to those who will pay attention). So, there is hope. But, again, unless there are forums for pursuing a new social contract, it will be easy for the major players to just talk or worse, endlessly and futilely argue with each other.

You and your co-author, Tom Kochan, say we have the ability to shape the work of the future by harnessing the power of new technologies. Who will lead that charge?

MIT has a good start on this with its university-wide Task Force on Work of the Future. The basic position is that technology is too important to be left entirely to the technologist, particularly when it comes to basic designs and workplace applications. The task force and others advocate partnerships between technologists and users, each to inform the other, so that by and large, we get technologies that augment work, rather than replace it.

What strategies will business have to adopt to create good jobs and what do you expect those good jobs to look like?

They have to take the Business Roundtable stakeholder view seriously, to learn to view workers as valuable resources to be used to their full capacities rather than simply as costs to be eliminated or at least minimized, and to get out from under Wall Streets relentless pressure for short-term profits.

Some define good jobs as those they pay a decent (e.g., living) wage. Others, including Tom and I, take a broader view also emphasizing the importance of interesting work, investments in workers skills and futures, fair treatment, diversity and inclusion, and the need for worker voice, such as input into important decisions and an unfettered right to protest injustices, at all levels, from the boardroom to the shop floor.

What can individual workers do to contribute to a new way of thinking about work?

Available evidence suggests that most workers are already there. We cite evidence from the students in our courses, for example, to show that they not only know the difference between good and bad jobs, but also fully expect to have good ones. Tom has gathered extensive data on the voice issue. The problem is that individual workers lack power; they need the power of unions and other worker advocacy groups behind them.

Life-long learning will be key if a new social contract is to be successful. Explain how learning will be driven.

Our entire educational infrastructure from pre-school to retirement needs to be rethought because its not working. The U.S. spends more and gets less from its educational system than any other advanced country. The weakest link in the process occurs after workers finish their formal education and begin working. Employers do far less training than they used to and much of what they do is concentrated on managers and potential executives. Efforts by universities and outfits like Coursera are hit and miss.

Technology and other forces are going to keep changing the nature of work. We need to figure out how to keep workers skills in line with the evolving demand. Tom and I advance a few thoughts on the matter, but certainly dont claim to have all the answers. Once again, though, if business leaders, labor leaders, educator and public policymakers started working on a new social contract, they could make some meaningful progress.

How can government support a better future for work?

Governments role over the past 40 years has mostly been in the opposite direction, but President Biden has a bunch of ideas for changing that. He cant go it alone, though. Thats why Tom and I keep coming back to the need for business leaders to work with, rather than against, him on this, along with labor leaders and educators.

What role will organized labor play?

It could play an important part, especially if it would work on a new social contract with the other key players taking a broader view of making the economy work for all workers and not just their members.

Also, it is essential to take a broader view of labor; much worker advocacy takes place outside traditional labor unions in what some refer to as alt-labor organizations. The ad hoc community organizations that have sprung up around the country in support of the $15 an hour minimum wage is just one example of this.

Building a better workplace is a complex undertaking. Where do you expect leaders to emerge? Are there certain sectors or nations that are already building a reimagined future? What can we learn from them?

There are actually quite a few experiments of various kinds going on at the community, sector and state levels. The most noticeable is around various versions of apprenticeship training involving community colleges, labor unions and employers. We cite quite a few of these in the book. But, there still needs to be an umbrella group at the national level involving all the key players to consolidate and push the best ideas that spring up from below. We could learn a lot from some of the Nordic and Scandinavian countries, but suggestions along this line often evoke knee-jerk cries of socialism.

A more equitably shared prosperity how long will it take to build that and what will it look like?

Well, its taken 40-plus years to tear down the last one. But, I like to think with a concerted effort in the other direction, a lot of what has been learned in the past few years could be put to good use to speed up the effort. But, its a complex world, so well see. It will be a situation in which the economy is creating the greatest good for the greatest number and no one is getting hurt.

Whats the most important thing you want people to learn from your book?

That the future of work isnt ordained by external forces (globalization, technology, financialization, etc.). We will get the future we decide to have. We can decide to continue on the current path that brought us the most unequal distribution of income and wealth in the developed world. Or, we can decide to turn things around. A good start would be for the key players in the system business leaders, labor leaders, educators and public policymakers to get to work on building a new social contract. Read the book and then get with it.

See original here:

Shaping the Future of Work | The ILR School | Cornell University - Cornell University | ILR School

COVID-19 vaccines and travel: The countries opening borders to vaccinated tourists – Traveller

About 65 per cent of the Seychelles' economy is derived from tourism.Photo: iStock

The Seychelles and Romaniahavereopened to visitors from anywhere in the world who have received two doses of an authorised vaccine for COVID-19.

Iceland also plans to waive quarantine rules for visitors with an international vaccine certificate (it already does so for travellers who can prove they previously had the virus). The country isdue to finalise a system for Icelanders who have beenfully vaccinated to obtain a COVID-19 vaccination certificate.

Theannouncementfrom the Seychelles followedthe start of itsvaccination roll-out:it plans to become the first countryto immunise more than 70 per cent of its population over 18. "From there we will be able to declare Seychelles as being COVID safe,"said President of the Republic of Seychelles, H E Wavel Ramkalawan.

International visitorsare vital to the economy of the Seychelles.The contribution of travel and tourism to the Seychelles' GDP is around65 per cent.

Indeed, Romania has also cited economic reasons for opening up to vaccinated visitors. The country'sNational Committee for Emergency Situations (CNSU) said that people coming from countries or areas of high risk, or who have come into direct contact with someone who's tested positive forCOVID, are exempt from quarantine measures if they are fully vaccinated. The CNSU said this decision was reached based on adownward trend in infections in Romania. It added that there is a"need to create the necessary socio-economic conditions"to benefit the national economy.

In December, Cyprus also announced a plan to waive testing requirements for arrivals who have been vaccinated, making it the first destination to specify that immunised travellers will not need to meet other COVID-related entry rules. However, the country's ministry of health is yet to confirm if this will go ahead, as planned, in March.

Other countries have also made steps towards allowing unrestricted, or less restricted, entry to those inoculated against the virus. European Union membersare lobbying for a "vaccination passport" and Brussels has givententative backingto the idea.Other nations, such as Israel, have firm plans to launch one.

Get the latest news and updates emailed straight to your inbox.

Meanwhile, holiday firmSagahas said that its customers will need to prove they have been inoculated against the virus to travel with the company.

It should be noted that no approved COVID-19 vaccine has yet been shown toprevent transmission of the virus.

But which countries might be among the next to re-open to immunised tourists? Based on vaccination roll-outs, economic dependence on tourism and support for vaccine passports, these could be in the running:

Tourists walk around the Parthenonat the Acropolis in Athens last year.Photo: AP

EU countries should adopt a "standardised"vaccination certificate in order to boost travel,Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis saidin a letter to European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, which was released by his office on January 12.

Mr Mitsotakis said people who have been vaccinated should be free to travel.

"It is urgent to adopt a common understanding on how a vaccination certificate should be structured so as to be accepted in all member states," he said, calling for a "standardised certificate, which will prove that a person has been successfully vaccinated".

Greece is quite far down the worldwide leader board of vaccine roll-outs with just 1.7doses delivered per 100 people.

However, mainland Greece and its islands, which remained one of a limited number of quarantine-free destinations for Britons for much of last summer, rely heavily on tourism: the contribution to its GDP is around 21.5 per cent.

The United Arab Emirates is at second place in the worldwide race to immunise populations; 25.9COVID jabs have been administered per 100 people.

Meanwhile, the UAE has licence for the Sinopharm vaccine, which it can produce itself rather than importing it. It has begun to donate doses to other, less developed countries: 50,000 were delivered to the Seychelles.

Dubai specifically was keen to welcome back tourists in 2020, opening up in July and allowing entry with a short quarantine and negative COVID test. This has since been changed to a negative COVID test taken no more than 96 hours before departure for UK travellers. The contribution of travel and tourism to the UAE's economy is 10 per cent.

Most recently, a UAE airline has launched a vaccine passport. In partnership with the International Air Transport Association, Emirates is one of the first airlines worldwide to trail the IATA Travel Pass, which comes in the form of a mobile app.

The pass will allow passengers to create a digital passport to verify their pre-travel COVID test or vaccination meets the requirements of their destination. It will also be used to share test and vaccination certificates with authorities and airlines. Emirates plans to start the first phase of this trial in Dubai, from April; customers travelling to Dubai will be able to share their COVID-19 test results with the airline prior to arriving at the airport.

Israel has been praisedfor launching what is, to date, the world's fastest vaccination programme. Some 44.8doses have been deployed per 100 people. This puts Israel's immunisation roll-out far ahead of that of the United Arab Emirates, which is currently second in the vaccine league table. Israel's health ministry aims to see 5.2 million of its eight million citizens vaccinated by March.

Last week, the ministry announced a "green booklet" as a form of vaccination certification. This document, effectively an immunity passport, will be given out to people who have received both doses. The country is mulling two forms of this booklet, effectively avaccine passport, one which will be valid for the 72 hours following a negative COVID test result and another which would be permanent for those who have received the first dose of the vaccine.

The ministry website says that those in possession of this document would be "eligible for relaxed restrictions in destinations around the world". For the moment though, Israel's borders are closed. The government announced on Sunday the country's only major airport would close for at least a week, effectively sealing itself off from international travel in a bid to vaccinate more of its population before new variants of the coronavirus take hold here.

Border restrictions for visitors is not so major an economic blow as for some countries on this list: in Israel, travel and tourism's contribution to GDP is around 6 per cent.

The Royal Palace in Madrid, normally crowded with tourists, is empty in August last year.Photo: AP

Another tourism-dependent country, Spain is among the EU members backing plans for a vaccine certificate.

According to Online newspaper El Diario, Spanish government sources said: "there must be an agreement on a mutual recognition mechanism because it is urgent to consolidate levels of mobility, which have an impact on the economy in general, not just tourism".

Last month, health minister Salvador Illa said Spain would create a vaccination registry that would track people who refuse a COVID-19 vaccine, which would create a document that could be shared with other countries in Europe.

"What we will have is a registry, that will also be shared with our European partners of those who have been offered it and rejected it," Illa told the broadcaster La Sexta. "The document will not be made public and it will be done with the utmost respect for the legislation on data protection."

Spain has so far delivered 2.6vaccine doses per 100 people, putting it on par, or ahead of, most other EU countries.

However, after its summer tourist numbers were ravaged in 2020, Spain's travel industry will be keen to find a route around the current complex testing and quarantine rules. Last week,Reyes Maroto, Spain's ministerof industry, trade and tourism, said in a statement onJanuary 22: "Our priority in 2021 is to reactivate tourism and resume safe mobility on a global scale as soon as possible. We are working to adopt a common framework of a series of planned actions to give confidence to tourists.

"We hope that at the end of spring and especially during the summer, international travel will resume and travellers will choose Spain as their destination."

The UK is Spain's largest single visitor group, and in summer 2020 there were just three weeks when Britons could visit all of Spain without facing quarantine on return. The country garners around 15 per cent of its GDP from tourism.

In October, Estonia signed an agreement with the World Health Organisation (WHO) to develop a digital immunisation certificate that would enable cross-border exchange of vaccination information. The Estonian Prime Minister Jri Ratas said on Twitter that he had invited Finland to take part in the scheme. Estonia has, thus far, administered 1.9 jabs per 100 people.

However, it is not clear that this trial is a precursor to a vaccine passport that could reopen international travel. In a meeting on January 14, the WHO committee said: "Being vaccinated should not exempt international travellers from complying with other travel risk reduction measures."

Denmark has said it will look at the development of a vaccine certificate in order to ease restrictions on travel and freedom of movement. It has delivered 3.6 doses of vaccine per 100 people.

Poland, where travel and tourism contributes around 4.5 per cent to GDP, recently announced the introduction of vaccine passports. The country's deputy health minister Anna Goawska said Polish nationals would be able to access certification in the form of a downloadable QR code once they received the second dose of a coronavirus vaccine. The code would allow the recipient to "use the rights to which vaccinated people are entitled". Thus far, Poland has administered 1.3 doses of the vaccine per 100 people.

Hungary's government said it could require visitors to prove their vaccination status to gain access to the country via an app showing immunity to COVID-19. "The need for citizens to provide proof that they have gained protection against the coronavirus is increasing all over the world," a government spokesperson said. In Hungary, 1.6doses of vaccine have been administered per 100 people. The country's foreign minister Pter Szijjrt has criticized the European Commission for "appallingly slow vaccine procedures".

He said: "In the wake of Brussels's pledges at the end of last year and at the beginning of 2021 it was expected that the EU would start vaccination with enormous speed, and restrictions in member countries could be eased it has not happened out of the EC's fault."Tourism contributes around 8.5 percent to Hungary's GDP.

While Belgium has administered 1.5doses per 100 people, the country's government said it supports a "verifiable COVID-19 vaccination certificate"that would be recognised across the EU, or even globally.

That said, the country's own regulator has advised against a vaccination database. It said that the given purpose for storing such data and how it would be shared are vague, and that authorities would hold onto the data for too long. The regulator said such a database "undoubtedly constitutes considerable interference in the right to protection of personal data." This echoed the EU's data protection chief Wojciech Wiewirowski who in 2020 said the idea of an immunity passport was "extreme".

The Telegraph, London

See also:Australia among world's top 10 countries worst-hit by drop in tourists

See also:Why the COVID-19 vaccine won't be like other travel vaccines

Emma Featherstone

Go here to read the rest:

COVID-19 vaccines and travel: The countries opening borders to vaccinated tourists - Traveller

President Ramkalawan announced first phase of Government restructuring – Office of the President of the Republic of Seychelles

01 February 2021 | State House

Following his State of the Nation Address, the President of the Republic, Mr Wavel Ramkalawan announced the first phase of the Government restructuring, this morning at State House. The speech which was broadcast live on SBC radio and television as well as Telesesel saw the first round of reforms of Boards, CEOs and Agencies. A second phase of restructuring will be made at a later stage.

Today is exactly 99 days since the new administration took office. During these times we have had the opportunity to look at the different structure of institutions in the country. This include in the public administration as well as all the different agencies and other organisations. As you will recall, I did mentioned about some changes that will need to take place during my SONA and todays announcements is a reflection of what the government has already decided based on competences, impartiality and efficiency, said the President.

In regards to different Boards, President Ramkalawan noted that the existing Boards was costing the government 36.2 million of rupees whereby with the elimination of some and restructuring there will be a reduction of 12.2 million rupees. The President further call on all those that will stay on these boards, including Public employees sitting on the budget dependent boards and committees as well as new members, to consider giving their services voluntarily for a year.

The post of special advisors to be abolished and those with expertise will be given new positions.

1. Vice-President Office;

2. Office of the Designated Minister

3. Ministry of Finance, Economic Planning and Trade

4. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Tourism

5. Ministry of Internal Affairs

6. Ministry of Transport

7. Ministry of Health

8. Ministry of Youth, Sports and Family

9. Ministry of Investment, Entrepreneurship and Industry

10. Ministry of Local Government and Community Affairs

11. Ministry of Agriculture, Climate Change and Environment

12. Ministry of Education

13. Ministry of Employment & Social Affairs

14. Independent Institutions

15. Boards

Seychelles Ports Authority

Mr. Gilbert Frichot Chairperson

Mr Nichol Elizabeth - Member Mr Brian Loveday - Member Ms Audrey Rose - Member Captain Philipe Hoareau Member

Seychelles Civil Aviation Authority (SCAA)

Mr. Marlon Orr - Chairperson

Mrs. Sherin Francis - Member Mrs Magalie Essack - Member Ms. Kelly Chetty - Member Mr. Garry Jupiter - Member Mr. Yannick Roucou Member

Financial Services Authority

Mr Patrick Payet - Chairperson

Ms Seylina Verghese

Mr David Esparon

Mr Robert Stravens

Mr Philip Moustache

Ms Samantha Esparon

Ms Cindy Vidot

Ms Wendy Pierre

Mr Richard Rampal

Postal Services Board

Mr Norman Weber - Chairperson

Mr Ayub Adam

Ms Audrina Dine

Ms Judeth Dodin

Ms Tessa Henderson

Seychelles Pension Fund Board

Mr Marc Hoareau - Chairperson

Mr Patrick Payet

Ms Elsie Morel

Ms Brenda Morin

Ms Jovinella Rath

Ms Shannon Jolicoeur

Ms Shella Mohideen

Mr Jos St Ange

Ms Sarah Lang

Ms Nisreen Abdul Majid - Chief Executive Officer of SPF

Seychelles Trading Company Board

Mr Imtiaz Umarji - Chairperson

Mr Ashik Hassan

Mr Jerry Adam

Mr Jamshed Pardiwalla

Mrs Siana Bistoquet

Ms Astride Tamatave

LUnion Estate Board

Mr Frank Hoareau - Chairperson

Mr Damien Thesee

Ms Nadine Maillet

Mr Vincent Cedras

Mrs Carline Jeannevol

Mr Carl Mills

Mr Melton Ernesta

National Bureau of Statistics

Ms Caroline Abel - Chairperson

Mrs Elizabeth Agathine

Ms Marquise David

Ms Shirley Adrienne

Mr Brian Commettant

Mr Gerard Adonis

Ms Raghavi Naidu

Ms Joelle Perreau

Mrs Jane Houareau

Industrial Estate Authority

Chief Executive Officer - Mr Roy Collie

The Boards of Seychelles International Mercantile Banking Company (Nouvobanq) and Development Bank of Seychelles will also be restructured once the proposed board of directors complete the due diligence process with the Central Bank of Seychelles.

Photo gallery Link:

https://www.facebook.com/StateHouseSey/

The rest is here:

President Ramkalawan announced first phase of Government restructuring - Office of the President of the Republic of Seychelles

Vaccination havens: the countries welcoming immunised travellers – The Independent

International travel may be off the menu for most of us during Englands third lockdown, but there is a glimmer of hope on the horizon.

For those lucky enough to have received an approved coronavirus vaccine, some tourism-hungry countries have announced that their borders will be flung wide to the immunised traveller.

The airline industry is getting in on the action too, and is pushing for the World Health Organization (WHO) to confirm that its safe for people to fly without quarantining if theyve had a Covid-19 vaccine. Getting the go-ahead from the WHO is a key step towards developing a global digital travel pass to enable safe international travel, according to the International Air Transport Association (Iata).

Vaccine or no, Britons are currently still banned from all leisure travel, whether domestic or international, while the UK struggles to reduce transmissions of Covid-19.

But once restrictions are lifted, here are the destinations welcoming vaccinated holidaymakers.

The Seychelles

The country will be welcoming fully vaccinated visitors from anywhere in the world with immediate effect, although they must still also present a negative Covid PCR test result taken with 72 hours of travel.

INDY/GO Weekly NewsletterTIME TO TRAVEL!

INDY/GO Weekly NewsletterTIME TO TRAVEL!

There will be no need for quarantine for vaccinated travellers up until now, visitors had to self-isolate at their hotel for 10 days on arrival.

To be considered as vaccinated, visitors must have received both doses of any of the four main vaccines Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna and Janssen and waited two weeks after the second dose for the inoculation to take effect.

As proof, visitors will need to submit an authentic certificate from their national health authority.

Romania

Romania has announced that travellers who have received both doses of the coronavirus vaccine will not need to quarantine on arrival, effective immediately.

In a document issued earlier this month, the countrys National Committee for Emergency Situations (CNSU) announced that people coming from countries or areas of high epidemiological risk, or who have come into direct contact with someone whos tested positive for Covid, are exempt from quarantine measures if they are fully vaccinated.

That means theyve had two doses of the vaccine, and at least 10 days have passed since the second dose was administered before arrival into Romania.

Piers Morgan confronts minister with Boris clip in awkward GMB interview

Incoming visitors will need to show proof of this through a document issued by the health unit which administered it, from Romania or from abroad. Theres no indication which of the vaccines will be acceptable.

The CNSU said that its made the decision based on the fact that theres been a downward trend in infections in Romania and that theres a need to create the necessary socio-economic conditions to benefit the national economy.

The changes will apply to visitors from the UK, who have up to now been required to quarantine 14 days as well as show evidence of a negative Covid test (either PCR or antigen test accepted) taken within 48 hours of travel.

Iceland

According to the Icelandic authorities, all those who present a valid international vaccination certificate for full vaccination with an approved vaccine against Covid-19 are exempt from the testing and quarantine requirements put in place for all other arrivals.

However, Iceland has stressed that having a vaccination doesnt override the current travel restrictions only individuals who are already authorised to travel to Iceland may enter the country. Icelands borders are only open to residents and citizens of EEA countries and Switzerland. Since the end of the Brexit transition period, the UK is considered a third country and therefore citizens cannot travel to Iceland whether vaccinated or not unless they have a valid exemption, such as having Icelandic family member.

Cyprus

In December, Cyprus became the first European Union Member State to announce it was planning to abolish entry requirements like testing and quarantine for travellers who get vaccinated against Covid-19.

However, the government plan is not set to come into force until March, when vaccinated travellers will not need to meet other Covid-related entry rules as part of a bid to restart tourism.

Cyprus Transport Minister Yiannis Karousos revealed the plan in the Cyprus Mail.

The amended action plan is expected to further boost the interest of airline companies to carry out additional flights to Cyprus, improve connectivity and increase passenger traffic, he said.

Those who have not been vaccinated must continue to meet testing and quarantine requirements to enter Cyprus.

Link:

Vaccination havens: the countries welcoming immunised travellers - The Independent

Dustin Diamond, Screech on ‘Saved by the Bell,’ Dies at 44 – Hollywood Reporter

Dustin Diamond, who spent 13 seasons as the goofy nerd Screech on the Saturday morning sitcom Saved by the Bell and its various iterations before his life and career took a turn for the worse, died Monday. He was 44.

The cause of death was carcinoma, his rep, Roger Paul, told The Hollywood Reporter. The actorwas diagnosed with stage 4 cancer three weeks ago and was receiving treatments at a Florida hospital.

"In that time, it managed to spread rapidly throughout his system; the only mercy it exhibited was its sharp and swift execution," Paul said in a statement. "Dustin did not suffer. He did not have to lie submerged in pain. For that, we are grateful."

When he was 11 and in the fifth grade, Diamond beat out 5,000 other hopefuls in 1988 to land the role of Samuel "Screech" Powers on the Disney Channel comedy Good Morning, Miss Bliss, the forerunner to Saved by the Bell.

Viewers watched Diamond grow up before their eyes as he continued as the chess-loving Screech on Saved by the Bell, which lasted four seasons (1989-93), Saved by the Bell: The College Years (one primetime season, 1993-94) and Saved by the Bell: The New Class (seven seasons, 1994-2000), all on NBC. When the last episode aired, Diamond was 23.

"The hardest thing about being a child star is giving up your childhood. You don't get a childhood, really," he said in a Where Are They Now? interview for OWN in 2013. "You're a performer, you have to know your lines and rehearse and practice, making sure you are the funniest and the best you can be. Because if you weren't funny, you could be replaced."

In the ensuing years, Diamond began a new career as a stand-up comic (he said he had been favorably compared to George Carlin); beat up a much older Ron Palillo (Arnold Horshack of Welcome Back, Kotter) on Celebrity Boxing 2; shed some pounds on Celebrity Fit Club; entered the ring with Dennis Rodman and Frank Stallone on Hulk Hogan's Celebrity Championship Wrestling; and appeared on World's Dumbest and Celebrity Big Brother.

In 2006, Diamond was behind Screeched Saved by the Smell, a 52-minute sex tape that involved him and two women. Later, he said that a "stunt person" stood in for him, with his face added during editing.

"It's the thing I'm most embarrassed about," he said. "The rumor that I think had been put on TV was that Paris Hilton had made $14 million off [her] sex tape. My buddy said, 'Fourteen million? Holy smokes! Where's the Screech sex tape? You've got to be worth at least a million.' I thought, 'Yeah, maybe.' I got some money off of it, but it wasn't worth the fallout."

Three years later, Diamond shared salacious behind-the-scenes tales about his TV show in the book Behind the Bell. After it came out, he said it was ghostwritten and he wasn't given a chance to remove some of the stories that were created from some "offhand" comments that he had made to the real author.

In 2015, Diamond was convicted of disorderly conduct after he stabbed another bar patron in the armpit with a switchblade on Christmas Day 2014 in an incident involving his then-fiancee. He served three months in jail before being released in April 2016.

When the Peacock streaming service unveiled a follow-up Saved by the Bell series in November, original stars including Mark-Paul Gosselaar, Elizabeth Berkley, Mario Lopez and Tiffani Thiessen were back, but Diamond was not. Screech, it was explained, was living on the International Space Station with Kevin, the robot pal that he built.

"We are aware that Dustin is not considered reputable by most. He's had a history of mishaps, of unfortunate events," Paul said. "We want the public to understand that he was not intentionally malevolent. He much like the rest of those who act out and behave poorly had undergone a great deal of turmoil and heartache. His actions, though rebukable, stemmed from loss and the lack of knowledge on how to process that pain properly. In actuality, Dustin was a humorous and high-spirited individual whose greatest passion was to make others laugh. He was able to sense and feel other peoples' emotions to such a length that he was able to feel them too a strength and a flaw, all in one."

Born on Jan. 7, 1977, in San Jose, California, Dustin Neil Diamond attended Zion Lutheran School in Anaheim. His folks worked in the computer industry.

After Gosselaar was hired to star as Zack Morris on Good Morning, Miss Bliss, he pushed for the blue-eyed Diamond to get the part of his best friend in junior high, Screech. (Diamond had appeared in 1987 on the syndicated TV comedy It's a Living and in 1988 in the film Big Top Pee-wee.)

"The thing is, I was 11 when we started, and [his castmates] were 14, 15 years old," he said. "I was kind of like the tag-along brother; when they were going into college, I was just going into high school. And at that age, it's a huge difference. I was wacky and I was wild and real hyper."

As he longed for Lisa Turtle (Lark Voorhies) and shared his first onscreen kiss with Violet Bickerstaff (Tori Spelling), Screech remained at the center of Saved by the Bell and its offshoots as the franchise moved to the fictional schools of Bayside High and California University and then back to Bayside, where Screech was now the assistant to bumbling Principal Belding (Dennis Haskins).

In 2006, it was reported that Diamond was selling T-shirts at $15 a pop in an attempt to stave off a foreclosure of his home in Port Washington, Wisconsin. He said he had filed for bankruptcy protection in California in 2001 and had gotten into a financial hole because his parents had spent money he had earned fromSaved by the Bell.

Diamond also showed up on the big screen in Made (2001), Pauly Shore Is Dead (2003), Dickie Roberts: Former Child Star (2003), Tetherball: The Movie (2010), All Wifed Out (2012) and College Fright Night(2014) and executive produced a 2014 Lifetime telefilm, The Unauthorized Saved by the Bell Story.

"I'm proud of the work that I've done when I've done it. It's just, how to you come off such a phenom role of this Screech character and break out of that mold and do something different?" he asked Lopez in a 2016 interview on Extra. "I'd audition, and every single time they'd say, 'Hey, we loved it, but we saw too much Screech in it.' Well, I can't change my bone structure, what do you want me to do?"

Continue reading here:

Dustin Diamond, Screech on 'Saved by the Bell,' Dies at 44 - Hollywood Reporter

Were the Capitol Rioters Really Libertarians? – Foundation for Economic Education

Editor's note: Dr. Payne has taught political science at Yale, Wesleyan, Johns Hopkins, and Texas A&M University, and is a research fellow at the Independent Institute. His book on libertarianism, The Big Government We Love to Hate, was released this month.

In the accounts about the Trump supporters who attacked the US Capitol, the media have sometimes alluded to supposed libertarian connections. The Wall St. Journal calls Parler, the social-media network which, it says, served as a hub for people who organized, participated in or celebrated the storming of the Capitol a libertarian-leaning social-media site.

In the same story it reported that one of the participants (Rosanne Boyland) joined at least two libertarian-leaning Facebook groups. A New York Times story reported that some people arrested in the riots have been linked to the Oath Keepers. This organization was founded by a man who, the Times noted, once worked as an aide to the former Representative Ron Paul, the Texas libertarianas if this fact helped explain his riot-inspiring role.

Of course, terms referring to political beliefs are rather broad, incorporating a range of views, but this connection is implausible. To call an ardent, violent Trump supporter a libertarian departs substantially from the traditional meaning of the term.

The confusion stems from two very different conceptions of what it means to be against government. In the typical partisan battle, the agitators are against the particular people in charge of the current government: they are challenging King George, Tsar Nicolas II, Nancy Pelosi. They do not question the idea of government itself. They believe that when controlled by people with good intentionsnamely themselvesthe government solves problems and improves the human condition. Once they displace the incumbents, the dissenters will set up their own government, giving it large, and growing, responsibilities.

The other conception of being against government is the position that government itself is not a moral, rational, and responsible problem-solving agency, no matter who tries to run it. Therefore, we shouldprudently and thoughtfullymove away from our dependence on it. This is the libertarian perspective.

Libertarian philosophers arrived at their skepticism from an examination of governments basis of power. This is its use of physical force, its use of policemen, jails and gallows to (try to) fix social problems. They asked, is force a healthy foundation for reform? Is the initiation of force a healthy way to deal with problems like economic inequality, substance abuse, or the lack of education?

Almost as soon as these early thinkers raised this point, they realized that a negative answer was indicated. As William Godwin, one of the first libertarians, put it in 1793, the calling in of force as the corrective of error is invidious. This led him to the observation that government, even in its best state, is an evil. This theme was echoed by a number of 19th-century libertarians including the English philosopher Auberon Herbert. Do you not see, said Herbert, that of all weapons that men can take into their hands force is the vainest, the weakest? In the long dark history of the world, what real, what permanent good has ever come from the force which men have never hesitated to use against each other?

Another 19th-century libertarian was Henry David Thoreau. The State, he said, is not armed with superior wit or honesty, but with superior physical strength. I was not born to be forced.

Over the past two centuries, the number of activists questioning government because of its basis in force has grown, leading, in recent times, to the formation of dozens of libertarian think tanks, and a Libertarian party in 1971. The partys Statement of Principles, adopted in 1974, incorporates this concern about force: We support the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others.

In a two-century tradition, then, libertarians have established themselves as singularly opposed to the initiation of force as a method of achieving social or political aims. Of all people, they would be the last to participate in, or approve of, any kind of violent attack for political purposes.

At bottom, libertarians are a patient community, all too aware of the myths and excitements that swirl the masses into each new wave of big government involvement. And aware, too, of the vast complexity of human society, a complexity that tends to make centralized, coercive approaches to social problems dysfunctional.

Quietly, thoughtfullyand of course, peacefullylibertarians are trying to persuade their friends and neighbors that the path to healthy social relationships cannot lie in any kind of march on the US Congress.

Read the original post:

Were the Capitol Rioters Really Libertarians? - Foundation for Economic Education

FINAN: Democrats must work together to break right wing factions apart – Daily Nebraskan

The American Right looks primed to splinter. In the next election cycle, progressives and leftists should run candidates in red districts to exploit the divisions on the right.

Early into Obamas first term, the Tea Party gained prominence in Republican politics, while liberals sat back and watched the American right fight amongst itself. The winners of that infighting consolidated power and brought us President Trump.

Over the course of my own lifetime, the Republican Party has changed dramatically. The first time I realized that there was a thing called a President, the man in the oval office was George W. Bush.

The Republican Party of my early childhood was that of neo-conservatism and the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. 2008 was the first presidential election I followed, and its what sparked my interest in politics. After 2008, neo-conservatism was more or less dead and buried, but a new movement began to grow.

In the wake of the election of our first black president and the financial crash of 2008, the Occupy movement took America by storm. It is important to note that Occupy was not specifically ideological; for many on both the left and the right Occupy was a catalyst for political action and development.

In the latter half of Obamas first term, a new faction within the Republican Party began to pick up steam. The Tea Party was, on its face, a populist, fiscal libertarian movement against the perceived socialism of the Obama administration. In point of fact, however, the activism of the Tea Party was less populist and more of a corporate front for lower taxes and fewer regulations on the oil industry.

This movement culminated in Ron Pauls failed 2012 bid for the presidency. It is important to note that while the goals of the movement were largely a corporate sham, the anger of the movements marchers was real. That anger was something that would come to be molded into a weapon of hatred by Donald Trump in 2015 and 2016.

This is where we need to backtrack and take a look at the American far right. In his audiobook The War on Everyone, Robert Evans outlines the evolution of the American far right from George Lincoln Rockwell to Donald Trump. Prior to 2016, the high point for American fascists was in the early to mid 1990s, when American conservatism was gripped with an intense anxiety and loss of direction after the Cold War.

Following Ruby Ridge and the siege of Waco, Texas, Timothy McVeigh bombed the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people and injuring more than 680. This act of terror, meant to inspire a right wing uprising against the federal government, largely ended what mainstream appeal the far right had.

In the wake of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, the threat posed by the fascism of our current day could hardly be clearer. Ever since the Unite the Right rally in 2017 in Charlottesville, Virginia, I have dedicated a sizable chunk of my free time to studying fascisms past and present and analyzing the best ways to defeat it.

A common through line in the study of fascism is the part that liberals and conservatives play in its rise. The part conservatism plays in the rise of fascism is plain enough the concept of socialism or even modest social democratic reforms scares them and their wealthy backers, and they fool themselves into believing that the fascists are the lesser evil.

The part played by liberals and liberalism is a bit more obscure, partially because American political terminology is so vastly different from the rest of the world. Liberals are, for the most part, socially permissive if not progressive and believe in free market capitalism with moderate restraints.

One of the core principles of liberalism is that of free speech, and in many cases, a near absolutist approach to freedom of speech. While in theory freedom of speech is great, when confronted with the challenge of fascism, that very virtue is used as a bludgeon by the fascist. By tolerating intolerance one perpetuates it.

Another key component to the rise of fascism is a growing leftist movement which causes the middle class to feel threatened. The majority of people who stormed the Capitol were undoubtedly middle class. We know this because they were there, from all over the country, on a Wednesday, in the middle of an economic crisis. These people were by and large economically comfortable. The middle class in America is made up of two primary groups: the small business owner and the educated professional. In the language of Marxists, these are the petty bourgeoisie and the labor aristocracy, respectively.

This is not to say that fascism does not find support amongst the white working class, simply that the core of fascist support is drawn from the middle class. The Nazi Party billed itself as the party of the middle class, staunch opponents of the left and big business. While big business was at first hesitant to support Hitler and the Nazi Party, preferring less radical nationalist parties, they eventually saw which way the wind was blowing and sided with the Nazis.

If American fascism is to outlive the Trump presidency, then it will adopt what is known as the Third Position. The Third Position blends the bigotry of fascism with the economic populism of socialism to form a grotesque chimera of an ideology that poses a serious danger to us all.

The fascist gang of Proud Boys has already begun to call for an embrace of the Third Position. As the caustic effects of neoliberalism further degrade our society, economic populism will only grow increasingly appealing to those left behind in an ever globalizing economy. Some will find socialism, but the results will be biased in favor of the Third Position.

Decades of anti-communist propaganda has brainwashed generations of Americans into believing that anyone left of liberal is an agent of the devil working to destroy the country. Most people born before the 90s have been culturally conditioned to outright reject socialism, and of that group, a number of them will simply accept the bigotry of the Third Position as the price of admission.

In order to defeat fascism, we must all work together to build a culture of anti-fascism. From a very young age, all Americans learn that the Nazis are the bad guys, and this simple fact is perhaps the greatest advantage that anti-fascists have in the struggle.

When David Duke ran for Senate and Governor in Louisiana in the early 90s, one of the most damaging things to his campaign was not that he had been the leader of the KKK the Klan was seen as a part of the Southern political tradition. Instead, the piece of Dukes past that harmed him the most was a photo of him wearing an SS uniform in college.

Likewise at Charlottesville, the flying of Nazi flags and chanting of Nazi slogans shattered any mainstream support the fascists had. Since 2017, the fascists seem to have somewhat learned to keep the swastikas at home. The attack on the capitol featured a noticeable absence of Swastika flags, although plenty of other Neo-Nazi imagery was proudly displayed. This adaptation to the broadly anti-Nazi cluture that already exists in America poses a challenge for anti-fascists as new symbols take the place of the swastika.

Fascism draws its name from the fasces, a bundle of sticks with an axe head. Alone, fascists are weak and pathetic, relying on race or ethnicity to define themselves rather than actual personality traits. When put together, they pose a grave danger to any who do not conform to their hateful ideology.

The American Left must go on the offensive. Allowing the right to fight amongst themselves may provide some smug sense of satisfaction, but the winner of this conflict will consolidate the party and be stronger for it if left to their own devices. When liberals and progressives fight amongst themselves, much of that fighting is encouraged and stoked by the right wing media, thus dividing the Democratic Party.

This divide and conquer strategy is crucial to Republican success. There are 12 million more registered Democrats than registered Republicans. When coupled with nearly half of all independents leaning towards the Democrats. The balance of power is roughly 48% Democrats or Democrat leaning, with only 39% Republican or Republican leaning. As the smaller of the two parties, the only way that the Republican Party can achieve power is through a divided Democratic Party.

I acknowledge that the term antifa is optically poisoned. Part of that is because it obfuscates the fa, fascism, this is why I much prefer the term Anti-Fascist, or Anti-Fascist activist. The opposition to Antifa'' comes out of the destruction of property that can happen during black bloc actions. The combination of being in a crowd of people, the majority of whom would describe themselves as anti-capitalist as well as anti-fascist, and the anonimity black bloc tactics provide can lead to participants becoming excited and damaging property.

While protecting ones identity is important, I believe that black bloc tactics ultimately do more harm to the cause of anti-fascism than good. When a group of leftists get into a street fight with a group of fascists, if the leftists are dressed in all black then the corporate media has a far easier time labeling the story as a simple partisan street brawl without analyzing the nuance of the anti-fascist position. If, however, you have a bunch of normal people defending themselves against a group of fascists, the narrative practically writes itself.

With Trump reportedly considering the formation of a third party, Leftists and Democrats should seize the opportunity to widen the gulf between the main-line Republicans and the more fascistic elements of the party. With a Patriot party splitting the vote the Democrats could seize a commanding majority in the House and the Senate to push forward an agenda that works for the many and not the few.

When campaigning, Democratic candidates should highlight the ideological distance between main-line Republicans and the Patriots. Anything that can be done to stoke resentment between these two factions will help splinter the American right and allow Democrats to gain a healthier majority in both houses of Congress.

Nick Finan is a junior political science major. Reach him at nickfinan@dailynebraskan.com

Go here to read the rest:

FINAN: Democrats must work together to break right wing factions apart - Daily Nebraskan

Anti-vaccine activists peddle theories that COVID-19 shots are deadly, undermining vaccination – The Bakersfield Californian

Anti-vaccine groups are exploiting the suffering and death of people who happen to fall ill after receiving a COVID-19 shot, threatening to undermine the largest vaccination campaign in U.S. history.

In some cases, anti-vaccine activists are fabricating stories of deaths that never occurred.

This is exactly what anti-vaccine groups do, said Dr. Peter Hotez, an infectious diseases specialist and author of Preventing the Next Pandemic: Vaccine Diplomacy in a Time of Anti-Science.

Anti-vaccine groups have falsely claimed for decades that childhood vaccines cause autism, weaving fantastic conspiracy theories involving government, Big Business and the media.

Now, the same groups are blaming patients coincidental medical problems on COVID-19 shots, even when its clear that age or underlying health conditions are to blame, Hotez said. They will sensationalize anything that happens after someone gets a vaccine and attribute it to the vaccine, Hotez said.

As more seniors receive their first COVID-19 shots, many will inevitably suffer from unrelated heart attacks, strokes and other serious medical problems not because of the vaccine but, rather, their age and declining health, said epidemiologist Michael Osterholm, director of the University of Minnesotas Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy.

For example, in a group of 10 million people about the number of Americans who have been vaccinated so far nearly 800 people ages 55 to 64 typically die of heart attacks or coronary disease in one week, Osterholm said. Public health officials are not ready for the onslaught of news and social media stories to come, he cautioned.

The media will write a story that John Doe got his vaccine at 8 a.m. and at 4 p.m. he had a heart attack, Osterholm said on his weekly podcast. They will make assumptions that its cause and effect.

Public health officials need to do a better job communicating the risks real and imagined from vaccines, said Osterholm, who has been advising President Joe Biden on the pandemic since his election.

You get one chance to make a first impression, Osterholm said. Even if we come back later and say, No, [the deaths] had nothing to do with vaccination, it was coronary artery disease, the damage has already been done.

Anti-vaccine groups such as the National Vaccine Information Center and Childrens Health Defense, founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., are already inflaming fears about a handful of deaths mostly in Europe that have followed the worldwide rollout of immunizations.

In a blog post, Kennedy scoffed at autopsy results that concluded a Portuguese womans death was unrelated to a vaccine. He cast doubt on statements by medical authorities in Denmark who said the deaths of two people there after vaccination were due to old age and chronic lung disease. In an interview, Kennedy said the post-vaccination deaths of some very frail and terminally ill nursing home patients in Norway are a danger sign. Norwegian officials have said the elderly patients died of their underlying illnesses, not from the vaccine.

Coincidence is turning out to be quite lethal to COVID vaccine recipients, Kennedy wrote. Kennedy described the deaths as suspicious, accusing medical officials of following an all-too-familiar vaccine propaganda playbook and strategic chicanery.

Here in the U.S., vaccine opponents have pounced on the tragedy of Dr. Gregory Michael, a 56-year-old Florida obstetrician-gynecologist, to sow doubts about vaccine safety and government oversight. Michael died Jan. 5 after suffering a catastrophic drop in platelets elements in the blood that control bleeding suggesting he may have developed immune thrombocytopenia..

According to a Facebook post by his wife, Heidi Neckelmann, doctors tried a variety of treatments to save her husband, but none worked.

A spokesperson for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said the agency is investigating Michaels death, as it does for all suspected vaccine-related health problems. California authorities have recommended pausing vaccinations with a particular batch of COVID-19 vaccines made by Moderna because of a high rate of allergic reactions.

Were going to see these events happen, and we have to follow up on every one of these cases, Osterholm said. I dont want people to think that were sweeping them under the rug.

Many Americans were already nervous about COVID-19 vaccines, with 27% saying they probably or definitely would not get a shot, even if the shots were free and deemed safe by scientists, according to a December survey by KFF. (KHN is an editorially independent program of KFF.)

These people may be particularly susceptible to vaccine misinformation, said Rory Smith, an investigator at First Draft News, a nonprofit that reports on misinformation online.

Seven experts in blood disorders interviewed by KHN said theres not enough information available to blame Michaels decline on a vaccine and that the demonstrated benefits of COVID-19 vaccinations vastly outweigh any potential risk of bleeding. Even if investigators conclude that Michaels vaccine caused his death, it would still be an incredibly rare event, given that more than 21.8 million doses have been administered.

It shouldnt give anyone pause about whether the vaccine is safe or not, said Dr. James Zehnder, a hematologist and director of clinical pathology at Stanford Medicine.

Michaels bleeding disorder could have been developing silently for some time, said Dr. Adam Cuker, director of the Penn Blood Disorders Center at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. It could be a coincidence that Michael started showing symptoms shortly after vaccination, he said. About 30 Americans are diagnosed with immune thrombocytopenia every day.

The timing of Michaels illness suggests it had another cause, doctors said. According to his wifes Facebook post, his bleeding problems began three days after his first COVID-19 shot. It takes the body 10 to 14 days after vaccination to generate antibodies, which would be needed to cause immune thrombocytopenia, said Dr. Cindy Neunert, a pediatric hematologist at the Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York City.

In most cases, the cause of thrombocytopenia is never known, said Dr. Deepak Bhatt, executive director of interventional cardiovascular programs at Brigham and Womens Hospital in Boston.

Immune thrombocytopenia is linked, rarely, to certain vaccines, with about 26 cases for every 1 million doses of measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.

But it can also be caused by viruses themselves, including measles and the novel coronavirus, said Dr. Sven Olson, an assistant professor of hematology-medical oncology at Oregon Health & Science Universitys school of medicine.

Many patients with immune thrombocytopenia are now wondering if they should be vaccinated against COVID-19, Cuker said. Cuker said he urges nervous patients to be vaccinated, noting that any problems could be managed by closely monitoring their platelet levels and adjusting medication if needed.

Even in patients with underlying bleeding conditions, its still safer to get vaccinated than to get COVID-19, Zehnder said.

If you give a vaccine to a large enough number of people, there are going to be rare adverse events but there are also going to be coincidental events unrelated to the vaccine, Cuker said. If an anti-vaccine group uses a single case, where no link has been proven, to discourage people from vaccination, thats terrible.

Barbara Loe Fisher, president of the National Vaccine Information Center, said her site provides balanced information from reputable news sources, including CNN, CBS and the Miami Herald, as well as Pfizer and the CDC.

In an interview with KHN, Kennedy said he questions why government officials have been so quick to dismiss connections between vaccinations and deaths. How in the world do they know if its a vaccine injury or not? he asked.

We dont discourage anybody from getting vaccinated, Kennedy said. All were doing is conveying the data, which is what the government should be doing. We print the truth, which is what the medical agencies ought to do.

Opponents of vaccination have belittled concerns about the novel coronavirus for months, opposing masks and fighting stay-at-home orders and contact tracing, said Richard Carpiano, a professor of public policy and sociology at the University of California-Riverside.

They have come out against every public health measure to control the pandemic, Carpiano said. They have said public health is public enemy No. 1.

Recently, anti-vaccine activists have been so eager to discredit immunizations that they have blamed COVID-19 for the deaths of people who are very much alive.

Social media users selectively edited a video of a Tennessee nurse, Tiffany Dover to make it appear as if she dropped dead after being vaccinated, when in fact she simply fainted, said Dorit Reiss, a professor at the UC Hastings College of Law in San Francisco. Although Dover quickly recovered, social media users posted a fake death certificate and obituary. Anti-vaccine activists also harassed Dover and her family online, said Reiss, who chronicled Dovers ordeal in a blog post.

Anti-vaccine activists are adept at manipulating video, Smith said.

They are notorious for using videos and images purportedly showing the adverse effects of vaccines, such as autism in children and seizures in other vaccine recipients, Smith said. The more emotive and graphic the videos and images irrespective of whether its actually linked at all to vaccines or not the better.

In December, multiple Facebook posts falsely claimed that an Alabama nurse died after receiving one of the states first COVID-19 vaccines. One Twitter user went so far as to identify the nurse as Jennifer McClung, who worked at Helen Keller Hospital in Sheffield, Alabama. In fact, McClung died of COVID-19. Social media posts spread so widely that Alabama health department officials contacted every hospital in the state to confirm that no vaccinated staff member had died.

Anti-vaccine groups often build fables around a tiny, tiny grain of truth, Smith said. This is why misinformation, specifically vaccine misinformation, can be so convincing. But this information is almost always taken completely out of context, creating claims that are either misleading or outright false.

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity twisted a news story about the deaths of 24 people at an upstate New York nursing home, incorrectly blaming their deaths on COVID-19 vaccinations. The original article noted, however, that a COVID-19 outbreak at the nursing home began in late December, before residents received any vaccines. Covid vaccines, which require two doses for full protection, did not arrive in time to save the residents lives.

Kennedy repeated the misinformation again incorrectly blaming the residents deaths on vaccines in his blog, although he linked to a local news station that reported the information correctly.

Distorting facts to discourage vaccination, Cuker said, is very irresponsible and damaging to public health.

(Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation which is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.)

2021 Kaiser Health News. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Read more from the original source:

Anti-vaccine activists peddle theories that COVID-19 shots are deadly, undermining vaccination - The Bakersfield Californian

World War 3 MAP: The SIX places where WW3 could break out …

World War 3 concerns were triggered around the globe following the death of Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani in a US airstrike in January 2020. Now as a killer infection spreads across the globe and riots over police brutality have sparked across the world, leading to World War 3 concerns again. Given the tense relations between countries around the world, Express.co.uk has compiled a guide for the flashpoints where World War 3 is most likely to erupt in 2020.

On Friday, January 3, the USA undertook a drone airstrike following a series of orchestrated attacks on coalition bases in Iraq over the past few months and attacks on the US Embassy in Baghdad, all of which was done on the orders of General Soleimani.

US President Donald Trump approved of the assault on General Soleimani claiming the action was undertaken to make the world a safer place.

In a statement, the Pentagon said: At the direction of the President, the US military has taken decisive defensive action to protect US personnel abroad by killing Qassem Soleimani.

It added: This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans.

The United States will continue to take all necessary action to protect our people and our interests wherever they are around the world.

Now Iran has sworn harsh revenge and promised to turn day into night.

This assassination has been dubbed by many high-ranking Iranians a declaration of war.

Donald Trump has warned the US could act disproportionately if Iran targets any American person or target in revenge for the killing of Major General Qassem Soleimani.

Since that time, Iran "unintentionally" shot down a Ukranian passenger jet which saw 176 people killed.

This week an Iranian prosecutor has issued an arrest warrant against Mr Trump and has asked for Interpol's support, however, the policing authority has refused to back the arrest warrant.

READ MORE:Iran attack: Ukranian plane shot down accidentally, says US

Tensions between the US and Turkey has heightened over the past year, initially as a result of the US providing authorisation to Turkey to clear the Syrian border of US-supported Kurds.

However, immediately afterwards, the US threatened Ankara with sanctions, causing tensions to rise.

Additionally, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan suggested he has aspirations for Turkey which could involve nuclear weapons.

As a result, the state of the US-Turkey relationship has worsened, causing fear about the subsequent impact on the NATO alliance.

President Erdogan is known for being passionate about his plan which could force Washington and Ankara to the very edge and have a result on Russia who is a neighbouring nation.

DON'T MISSIran on the brink: Ex-Trump aide exposes exactly why US[INSIGHT]World War 3: Missile strike kills eight pro-Iranian militia members[EXPLAINER]World War 3 outbreak: BBC expert stuns Newsnight in Iran crash claim[ANALYSIS]

Fundamental tensions at the heart of the US-North Korea relationship could result in combative action.

Tensions between the two countries now stand as high as at any time since 2017, and the impending US election could imperil relations further.

President Trumps administration appears to hold out hope a deal with North Korea could improve its electoral prospects in November.

But North Korea has little to no interest in Mr Trumps offering.

Recently, North Korea promised a Christmas present that many in the United States worried would be a nuclear or ballistic missile test.

However, this was not the case, but if the country did undertake a nuclear test, the US might be forced to intervene.

Last Thursday, the Hai Yang Di Zhi 8 left the port of Sanya, on China's Hainan Island and was joined by the CCG vessels this week.

These vessels were 92 nautical miles off the coast of Vietnams Binh Dinh province as of yesterday morning, deep into the 200-nautical mile EEZ, and were further accompanied two Chinese maritime militia ships, the Dongtongxiao00235 and the Min Xia Yu 00013, Radio Free Asia reported.

Gregory Poling, director of the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative in Washington, told the Foreign Correspondents Association of the Philippines in an online news conference: What is pretty obvious is Chinas not going to stop.

"If a global pandemic doesnt cause China to calm things down in the South China Sea, theres not much that will.

The number one thing that we should think to look into is international economic sanctions.

We have never had a discussion about sanctioning the actors behind the Chinese maritime militia."

"China admits it has a maritime militia, and its a clear violation of international law.

They are operating on the same policy framework which is to go out, assert rights, harass neighbours, do whatever you want."

The US-China relationship has been particularly tense in recent years.

A trade deal between the two countries would seem to alleviate some tensions but implementation remains in question.

Currently, the worlds two largest economies are locked in a bitter trade battle.

The dispute, which has simmered for nearly 18 months, has seen the US and China impose tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars worth of one anothers goods.

President Trump has long accused China of unfair trading practices and intellectual property theft, while in China, there is a perception that the US is endeavouring to curb its rise as a global economic power.

At the same time, China has worked defiantly to assure its relations with Russia, while the US has sparked controversies with both South Korea and Japan, its two closest allies in the region.

Donald Trump and President Xi have staked much of their political reputations on the trade situations in each country and therefore both have incentives for diplomatic and economic escalation.

If the situation were to escalate, it could lead to military confrontation in areas such as the South or East China Seas.

The tension has escalated amid the coronavirus pandemic, with Mr Trump accusing the country of engineering the fatal infection in a laboratory.

He claims to have seen evidence corroborating the development of coronavirus from a Chinese lab.

Mr Trumpannounced on Tuesday that the United States was devising a strict response to China's proposed national security legislation for Hong Kong and that the plans would be revealed by the end of the week.

Read the rest here:

World War 3 MAP: The SIX places where WW3 could break out ...

Posted in Ww3